Thanks to Daniel Bezalel Richardsen for sharing his letter sent to Mayor Watson and City Councillors, which he titled "An Immigrant's Perspective on Why You Should Support the Château Laurier Motion."

Dear Mayor Watson and City Councillors,

I was born in India and spent my early years there. Once, as a young boy of nine on a train journey south with my mother, I fell ill right before we reached Agra, home of the Taj Mahal. I missed seeing it then, and have yet to make up for it. It's one of my childhood's chief regrets.

I spent my adolescent years in Brunei. One of my graces of my time there was the magnificent view of the golden-domed Omar Ali Saifuddin Mosque, which I would pass by whenever my family and I walked between the market and home. Embedded below is a photo I took of it when I returned there a few years ago and drove around the area during an afternoon drizzle with a childhood friend.

I want to mention these two personal examples to illustrate the power of public buildings to offer visual solace from the drudgery of everyday. I grew up in a modest home, and this view visually elevated my spirits. Even though I am not a Muslim, I always received comfort from the architectural coherence of this beautiful mosque.

Which brings me to the Château Laurier.  In our city -- Ottawa is my adopted Canadian hometown -- there are a few undeniable architectural gems. The Château is one of them. Which is why I want to add my voice to the chorus of those wanting to stop the current proposed addition to the hotel. We are visual creatures. There is little doubt that the addition would mar the horizon and would be an act of architectural incoherence. I am fortunate to view the current building each weekday as I walk to and from work through Major's Hill Park. My wife and I were also lucky to spend our wedding night at the Château just a couple of months ago.

I want to ask you to support the motion put forward by Councillor Fleury to void the conditional Heritage Permit on Wednesday, July 10. I want to ask you to do so for two reasons.

First, to value the democratic process in allowing us to reconsider past decisions.

As a country, we have often failed to live up to our ideals. We have often failed to steward the land taken from the Indigenous peoples and honour our commitments. Part of belonging to a democracy is having the right, as a community, to reflect, deliberate and sometime change our minds. I was reminded of this recently through an episode on one of my favourite podcasts on the ancient Greek Mytilenaean Debate in BBC's In Our Time. To briefly recap this historical incident from the synopsis provided by the show: "In 427 BCE, the Athenians decided to send a fast ship to Lesbos rowing through the night to catch one they sent the day before. That earlier ship had instructions to kill all adult men in Mytilene, after their unsuccessful revolt against Athens, as a warning to others. The later ship had orders to save them, as news of their killing would make others fight to the death rather than surrender. Thucydides retells this in his History of the Peloponnesian War as an example of Athenian democracy in action, emphasising the right of Athenians to change their minds in their own interests, even when a demagogue argued they were bound by their first decision." (emphasis added). It has become very clear that whatever motivated earlier political decisions, the current public view is overwhelmingly against the current addition. Your support of this motion would honour the wishes of the majority of those who live here and call this community home.

Second, to offer the owners of the building another chance to right by themselves and the city.

Yes, the hotel is private property. But, it's not just private property. As a Catholic, the social teachings of my faith has something insightful to consider: "Christian tradition has never recognized the right to private property as absolute and untouchable: “On the contrary, it has always understood this right within the broader context of the right common to all to use the goods of the whole of creation: the right to private property is subordinated to the right to common use, to the fact that goods are meant for everyone.” (177 -- The Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church). I have no quarrel with owners attempting to make a legitimate profit through their work and assets, but it cannot subsume and strong-arm the good of the community. They have a responsibility to the community, and they shouldn't be villanized but offered a better opportunity to not commit such a generational debacle. As Heritage Ottawa has noted, better additions have been done elsewhere in Canada. Your responsibility as our elected municipal officials is to hold them to a better standard of accountability.

This is not a bourgeois issue or one that pits the architectural styles of yesteryear to today. This is simply an act of preserving a semblance of visual elegance in solidarity with all of us who call this place home, and our visitors. As our mayor and our elected municipal councillors, please help us press reset so that we can try again, and perhaps do better.

Sincerely,
Daniel Bezalel Richardsen

_____________________________________________

YOUR VOICE MATTERS!

Contact the Mayor and Ottawa City Councillors before July 10, 2019.

Click here for details: https://heritageottawa.org/chateau-laurier-addition