View Single Post
  #7  
Old Posted Feb 22, 2014, 8:56 PM
HillStreetBlues HillStreetBlues is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: KW/Hamilton, Ontario
Posts: 995
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainKirk View Post

“What I’m hearing consistently and consecutively is that demolition or collapse is imminent,” subcommittee member Joseph Zidanic said in October.
I think Mr. Zidanic is confused about the definition of the word "imminent." I've been in this building recently. The congregation was worshipping there within the last year. If he really believes collapse is "imminent," someone really ought to have condemned it and prevented occupancy.

What he really means to say is that the building, a heritage building of an advanced age as it is, needs preservation lest it fall into further disrepair. And that the remediation needed to keep it safe and standing is expensive. All of which the purchaser knew when he bought the building.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainKirk View Post

"Unfortunately, we can’t live in the past," Santaguida told them at the time. "Unfortunately, a lot of our committee members are living in the past. We’re developing the future."
I think this is a really unfortunate thing for Mr. Santaguida to say. I think it speaks volumes about his intents to preserve even the facade of the building.
Reply With Quote