Reading · for Viewpoints
Reading
Read the following article.

Vanishing Landmarks

The figures are sobering. Of the many thousands of buildings across Canada that were raised before the Second World War, a considerable proportion are demolished, gutted, or quietly left to crumble with every passing year. The rate at which recognizably historic structures disappear from the streetscape shows little sign of slowing. Advocates of architectural preservation, a movement that has lately acquired real institutional weight, contend that safeguarding even a single threatened landmark can anchor a community's sense of its own past. A handful of municipalities have already enacted sweeping protective by-laws, and planners are still cautiously assessing the consequences. The genuinely thorny question now confronting officials is how far public authorities ought reasonably to go in shielding aging buildings from the relentless pressures of a rapidly redeveloping city.

Premium practice

Already a member? Sign in

1Marchand is mainly concerned about
Adeciding which version of an altered building is the real one.
Bexaggerated claims about what preservation actually achieves.
Cpublicly funded schemes that protect buildings for profit.
Ddenials about how fast historic structures are disappearing.
2Devlin suggests that owners who let an old building go may be
Adestroying irreplaceable craftsmanship for good.
Banchoring the whole community's sense of its past.
Cresponding wisely to a changing economy.
Dpursuing their own commercial and political ends.
3The two people most skeptical about publicly funded preservation are
AMarchand and the CBHA.
BFraser and Marchand.
CFraser and Devlin.
DDevlin and Marchand.
4Devlin's view implies that some property owners
Acan gain by redeveloping their sites.
Blose irreplaceable heritage the moment they sell.
Cdeserve blanket protection for their whole district.
Dshare the collective memory bound up in the walls.
5Overall, the article presents heritage preservation as
Arejected because the public dislikes old buildings.
Ba hard question with no settled answer.
Cclearly justified by the rate of demolition.
Dessential to every single community's identity.
6Compared with Fraser, Devlin's stance toward publicly funded preservation is more
Aenthusiastic about the schemes.
Bindifferent to the demolitions.
Cuncertain about the buildings.
Dopenly doubtful.
0 of 6 completed