Raise the Hammer

What disappoints me is how this has been handled so far by the church and Matthew Green. The congregation that is making the decision about St. Giles are not located in our community and they have not consulted any of us in the community as far as I know as to what we would like to see happen. Instead, last week we were greeted to a sign saying they were selling everything off that wasn't cemented to the building and now we learn the is plan is to demolish it. Furthermore, there is no plan as to what to do with the site after they tear it down.

I don't think the caring thing for the community is to tear this down and have the land sit vacant, fenced in and overgrown until the right buyer comes along. If they don't want to pay for the upkeep (which is completely understandable) I'm sure someone would buy it. Or, if it's not about making a profit, I'm sure they could come up with something creative with the city or a charity to make it a community space of some kind.

I don't think this issue has to be a for or against tearing the building down (and moralizing one side over the other is not helpful imo). I think the best method would be to have a kind dialogue in the community about what the space can be used for. If something can done to make it so the church be kept, great! It's a gorgeous piece of architecture with craftsmanship that can't be replicated and has a deep history with the community so we shouldn't rush to take it down and replace it with a building that won't last 70 years. If it's decided the land would be more useful if the church was demolished, it's sad but hopefully it's because something new and helpful to the community is being put in its place.

Either way, I hope this process starts to be more transparent and involves the community the church was built to care for in the first place.

Thanks to Adrienne for the good reporting.

Comment edited by Hamher on 2018-07-03 19:01:51