One of the things that bugs me about this whole debate, are the adjectives surrounding Shelly Bay. They usually include phrases like: “run down”, “derelict”, “degraded”.
These are interesting terms, that are in fact, part of a dance, I like to call the developer three step. The dance goes something like this:
Step 1: (Right foot) Acquire a right to some property you want to develop. It doesn’t matter that it is historic in nature. When acquiring the right to the land and property, make sure you make loud noises about renovating and rejuvenating the property, as it is.
Step 2: (Left foot) Let the buildings sit unmaintained for at least 5 years. 10 years is better.
Step 3: (Right foot) Start claiming the site is run down, the site is derelict, and that everything needs to be torn down and replaced with something else, something new, something ‘better.’
That my friends, is how you get folks to agree with your new concrete jungle. It takes a little time, and it helps that the City Council has (intentionally?) let their buildings in Shelly Bay also go unmaintained, but it is quite an effective technique. Erskine College anyone?
One wonders what people would be saying if the opposite were true, if a few licks of new paint had been applied at reasonable intervals – would the protest that is mounting against this proposed project, be even stronger?
P.S.: Don’t forget to put your submission in by 5PM August 14, 2017