To run with you're airport example, the roundhouse would have more in common with a hangar than a terminal building. I have yet to see the heritage preservation crowd going ga-ga over those, and I don't expect them to. (who would?)
You'd be surprised...things like
this, or
this, or
this, or--closer to home--a lot of the nucleus of Downsview Park. Not to mention the fact that there was a genuine fuss--where even Heritage Mississauga was on-side--over the recent demolition of the A. V. Roe plant in Malton.
And, looky here among the National Trust for Historic Preservation's 2008 America's Eleven Most Endangered--
Hangar One, Moffett Field.
The reason why you have "yet to see", is that, as you've repeatedly demonstrated, the reality of the "heritage preservation crowd" is totally alien to you. You see, it's one thing to argue against the value of hangars. It's another thing to claim the "heritage preservation crowd" is not interested in hangars. It's the different between personal value judgment and abject ignorance. And there's nothing like the latter to undermine the former.
As a localized ignorance-breaker, my suggestion to you, Whoaccio, is to subscribe to
this. And scan the newsletter archive to get an idea of things, too.
That is the reason why "professional consensus" has decided it isn't worth preservation. The roundhouse is, as of yet, not a registered heritage building. Aside from a bill table in the HoC, nobody cares about it and no heritage committee task force has deemed it worthy of preservation. And why should it be?
Don't mistake heritage bureaucracy and various political go-arounds for "professional consensus". And remember that Riverdale Hospital, which you happen to have deemed worthy of interest, is not presently a "registered heritage building", either--indeed, that's a huge part of the controversy--but as you've seen, it's far from a "nobody cares about it" case, either.
That said, I agree that there is a naivety about lawsond's logic; but all things considered, it's forgiveable, and probably *does* hint as to where the "heritage awareness" grassroots thing is going in the long term. (I'm reserving judgment on power centres; but when it comes to classic Scarberian strip malls, the affection and motivation is already there, at least in utero. And remember: it's a more complex thing than slapping on a heritage designation and ordering the joint to be frozen in amber. More like, planting seeds to love what one has.)
As a reminder of the fallacy of "nobody cares about it" logic, bear in mind that Margie Zeidler's 401 Richmond complex wasn't even
listed, let along designated, until
2007!
More so than a dilapidated roundhouse, Parliament is worth preserving. Union station is worth preserving and rehabilitating.
Well, if it's all about simplistic sliding scales of worth, duh. But if either of the latter two are in decrepit suspended animation, blame the imponderables of bureaucracy and politics, don't blame the heritage community for fiddling with decrepit roundhouses while Rome is burning. And of course,
nobody in the pro-Riverdale Hospital camp was claiming that it was a holus bolus worthier piece of heritage than Don Jail, or that the latter should be ignored on behalf of the former. It was more of a mutually beneficial "both-and" argument.
And of course, re Union Station, there's debate over how much merits preservation/rehabilitation (think Bush Sheds).
Meanwhile, if you
really want to ramp up the argument, Parliament and Union Station are less, uh, "worthy" than
this...
