View Single Post
  #15369  
Old Posted Aug 14, 2019, 5:59 PM
Handro Handro is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,270
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrinChi View Post
The building is historically relevant precisely because it is old. To construct a building using the same methods and materials would be prohibitively expensive today. It's the reason most people sigh and roll their eyes when they see a Lucien LaGrange proposal. I realize this seems a bit extreme and I'd like to reiterate that I actually like the modern replacement building for 300N Michigan. I'm challenging the notion that just because a building isn't significant enough to merit landmark status we should automatically be ok trashing it. Facadectomy design can be bad, but it can be done well and we should push developers to do it whenever possible imho.

What seems ugly today could be appreciated in 60 years. If our building methodologies and materials completely change in the coming decades, AMLI River north could turn out to be something worth saving.
So never tear anything down?
Reply With Quote