Browse polls by:
Poll Results
At the request of a citizen petition, Worcester City Council on May 9 asked the Hanover Insurance Group to delay demolition of the Notre Dame des Canadiens church as a preservation group seeks a willing developer to repurpose the building and a $6-million subsidy to make it financially viable.
At what point should historic buildings in Worcester be demolished?
Comments

05/23/18 AT 09:02 AM
The character of a city is often illustrated by its taste and appreciation of architecture. We have plenty of newer "boxes"

05/16/18 AT 03:56 PM
This parcel is such a prime location it is hard to justify locking it up without a patron or use case. It should not become a burden to the tax payers when it could be such an asset.

05/15/18 AT 02:57 PM
Its less about the amount of time, but with the process and mindset. it always takes more resources to rehab a building then to build over again. The question is what should be required in that 1-2 year timeframe. Reuse of these buildings requires creative thinking. Some buildings are too valuable to be lost and the city should recognize that and put restraints on their demolition. If Notre Dame is lost, Hanover isn't to blame, our political process is at fault. Elected officials have a responsibility to have vision and to make things happen. Support without any action is not support.

05/16/18 AT 03:56 PM
Way past the time to just move on---what a waste of time and money

05/16/18 AT 03:56 PM
Even though the costs to renovate these old buildings is substantial, I think the loss of such iconic landmarks and pieces of history destroys a piece of our cultural soul. Think of the men and women in our past who built it stone by stone, the babies christened there, the folks married there, loved ones mourned and souls prayed for. So much of today's architecture is without character - how can one stand by and watch something so beautiful be destroyed? I'd be happy to work with the preservationists to find funding and / or repurpose this beautiful building. Thanks!

05/16/18 AT 03:56 PM
This building is unique and has been sitting vacant and not being used by anyone. Why now is there an interest to perserve it?

05/16/18 AT 03:56 PM
If building MUST be demolished, I think the city should erect a plaque describing the significance of the area.

05/16/18 AT 03:56 PM
None of he above. The owners should have the right to do with it whatever they find appropriate, as long as it does not cause any safety issues or is against city building codes or other regulations. Much nonsense and harm has been done in the name of "history"

05/16/18 AT 03:56 PM
Historic buildings retain the character of a city. Would Boston attract any tourists if it didn't retain it's history with it's architecture? Probably not. There is a lot of value in historic buildings that go far beyond what some developers can imagine. People are proud of their hometown's history, it's a part of what keeps people there; it's an attachment to much more than just convenient amenities. Historic buildings maintain a richness that cannot be replicated with new construction. With the destruction of historic buildings, you remove part of that city's soul.

05/16/18 AT 03:56 PM
Credits and Incentives will be needed as well to make it viable.
ADVERTISEMENTS
Copyright 2017 New England Business Media