The Connolly (98 James St S.) | 105.1 m | 31 fl | Planning

[Beedok]

Originally Posted by HillStreetBlues

I don’t think that’s what was meant, and I don’t think you need to be Christian to feel uneasy seeing a once-venerated place being demolished. Seeing an old temple or synagogue being torn down isn’t preferable, either.

If it's a sign of spirituality dying perhaps, but if it's a sign of demographic shifts (more christians in the suburbs, more folks of other faiths in the core) then it doesn't really bother me. A dying school is sad in my opinion as it says more about the health of the community, but even that can just be result of improved transit options.

Originally Posted by HillStreetBlues

But who cares really. It’s just our heritage.

No, it's just an old building. If you think that a cultural heritage is so weak that tearing a building down can damage it then you don't understand how good most cultures are at grasping on to history. Nomadic peoples who don't build permanent structures can manage rich and vivid cultures. A building is just a building.

Originally Posted by HillStreetBlues

If we really want to see old stuff, we can take a vacation in Europe.

Yeah, because they actually have old stuff. I said something about Detroit having a historic core to a European and they utterly confused by calling mid 19th to early 20th century historic.

[CaptainKirk]

Removal of window

[mattgrande]

From Ryan McGreal's twitter:



source

[CaptainKirk]

Lots of pictures here

http://www.raisethehammer.org/articl...on_in_pictures

[CaptainKirk]

And she's (mostly) gone.

[CaptainKirk]

[King&James]

Would be very nice if this developer took on the Vranich (sp?) tact and just moved directly into build mode from the demo phase. Last thing downtown needs is another parking lot.

[Beedok]

Looks like they've put proper weather protection on the interior there, so that's a hopeful sign.

[thomax]

urbanicity.com - An Interview With Developer Louie Santaguida

[thomax]

Facebook Link: facebook.com/connolly

Twitter Link: twitter.com/TheConnolly





Source

[Beedok]

If the official story is true it makes sense. It seems they were rushed by the building being in much worse of a state than they'd expected. When you're having to rush ahead on disassembly renders slide on to a back burner. Plus they had to check what elements actually saved properly.

[hammerton]

what a sacrilege.

[HillStreetBlues]

Originally Posted by Beedok

No, it's just an old building. If you think that a cultural heritage is so weak that tearing a building down can damage it then you don't understand how good most cultures are at grasping on to history. Nomadic peoples who don't build permanent structures can manage rich and vivid cultures. A building is just a building.

It’s a symbol of our heritage, then. Do you think the culture here is good at “grasping onto history”? You said most are; I wonder if you count ours among them. I would imagine that most nomadic cultures keep physical artifacts of the past.

Originally Posted by Beedok

Yeah, because they actually have old stuff. I said something about Detroit having a historic core to a European and they utterly confused by calling mid 19th to early 20th century historic.

Detroit does have an historic core; I wonder if that fellow has seen it. We North Americans go to Europe and visit sites like the Parliament Building in London and the Grand Palas on the Champs-Elysees, and imagine that they are extremely old and historic. I would have guessed they are, but maybe not if mid-19th century is somehow not historic. You can see older buildings in many cities in North America.

Maybe in fifty years something from the late 19th century will be considered definitively historic by everyone. But too bad, because we will have demolished much of what was built then because it all consisted of “just buildings.”

[thomax]

"Stanton Renaissance has hand selected 36 kinds of stones of various shapes and
sizes to be stored and reimplemented into The Connolly." - facebook.com/connolly


Source


Source


Source

[davidcappi]

Excited to see how they'll be used.

[Beedok]

Originally Posted by HillStreetBlues

It’s a symbol of our heritage, then. Do you think the culture here is good at “grasping onto history”? You said most are; I wonder if you count ours among them. I would imagine that most nomadic cultures keep physical artifacts of the past.

I'd say we're reasonably efficient, and if we're not going to hold on to it the buildings won't help.

Originally Posted by HillStreetBlues

Detroit does have an historic core; I wonder if that fellow has seen it. We North Americans go to Europe and visit sites like the Parliament Building in London and the Grand Palas on the Champs-Elysees, and imagine that they are extremely old and historic. I would have guessed they are, but maybe not if mid-19th century is somehow not historic. You can see older buildings in many cities in North America.

The European opinion would be that Roman ruins or Medieval castles are historic. Buildings like the UK Parliament or most of Paris being 19th Century are fairly common. I believe I heard that about 50% of all houses in the UK are Victorian aged so they aren't exactly remarkable. (And Paris was the result of tearing down huge chunks of the city in an urban renewal project.)

Originally Posted by HillStreetBlues

Maybe in fifty years something from the late 19th century will be considered definitively historic by everyone. But too bad, because we will have demolished much of what was built then because it all consisted of “just buildings.”

And what will we have lost? Some buildings that happened to be old. Maybe a few would attract tourists in say the 2500s when they became properly historic, if the Earth even has anyone living on it by then. Considering that in 50-100 years time the majority of people's families wouldn't have even been in Canada when the buildings were standing it seems no great loss of culture for them.

[thomax]

"The team is onsite!

We are moving quicker than expected. Look out for some renderings - coming soon!"


Source

- facebook.com/connolly

[ScreamingViking]

The Spec posted a photo blog article about this:
https://spectatorphotoblog.wordpress...-resurrection/

[drpgq]

Church developer has history of bankruptcies and receiverships
The Spec

http://www.thespec.com/news-story/46...receiverships/

The principal behind the controversial James Street Baptist Church development has had three associated companies go bankrupt and two others placed into receivership since 2011.

Bankruptcy filings show that the three bankrupt companies associated with Louie Santaguida had combined liabilities of nearly $21.5 million against combined assets of just $56, and a commercial credit specialist stated in a 2012 court affidavit that the books for one of the bankrupt companies were in "complete disarray."

United States court documents also show that one of Santaguida's American-based companies had been found liable in seven separate court judgments totalling $162,000 for unpaid employee benefits or unpaid subcontracted services.

A numbered company associated with Santaguida purchased the vacant church in June 2013. He has indicated he plans to turn the site into an $80-million 30-storey mixed-use development that will incorporate part of the church's facade, although no formal proposal has yet been presented to the city.

Three of the four sides of the 135-year-old church have already been demolished, leaving just the portion that fronts James Street South standing.

What I find annoying about this project is how many people working on it saying that is for sure a go. This Spec article is pretty disconcerting.

[urban_planner]

Originally Posted by drpgq

Church developer has history of bankruptcies and receiverships
The Spec

http://www.thespec.com/news-story/46...receiverships/

The principal behind the controversial James Street Baptist Church development has had three associated companies go bankrupt and two others placed into receivership since 2011.

Bankruptcy filings show that the three bankrupt companies associated with Louie Santaguida had combined liabilities of nearly $21.5 million against combined assets of just $56, and a commercial credit specialist stated in a 2012 court affidavit that the books for one of the bankrupt companies were in "complete disarray."

United States court documents also show that one of Santaguida's American-based companies had been found liable in seven separate court judgments totalling $162,000 for unpaid employee benefits or unpaid subcontracted services.

A numbered company associated with Santaguida purchased the vacant church in June 2013. He has indicated he plans to turn the site into an $80-million 30-storey mixed-use development that will incorporate part of the church's facade, although no formal proposal has yet been presented to the city.

Three of the four sides of the 135-year-old church have already been demolished, leaving just the portion that fronts James Street South standing.

What I find annoying about this project is how many people working on it saying that is for sure a go. This Spec article is pretty disconcerting.

I see your point. But for all we know the guy could also be involved with 100 other companies making millions. Not say he does but just making the point that The Spec usually just focuses on the negative.