Quote:
Originally Posted by Jjs5056
For everyone saying "it's better than nothing," you realize this was not an empty lot, correct? A historic 2-story building was sacrificed in order for the City to save the rest of the block. Is a generic 19-story box better than a rehabbed 2-story historic building with affordable lofts and small business/retail on the bottom? I don't think it is. With Barrister, Luhrs, the demolished Luhrs Building, and the demolished St. James and Madison, there was a great historic bridge between the WH District and downtown. A dual-branded Marriott would have been fine on any vacant lot downtown, but wasn't worth ridding the area of the structures needed for housing things for all these guests to visit/do.
|
I went inside the building a few months before it was demolished and the renovations through the years had completely wiped out the interior of any historic charm and elements. I know rehabbed historic buildings that are basically open with the interior stripped to the structural elements are quite popular, and maybe the Luhr's Building could have become that, but essentially the facade was the only thing left that had any historic look or value.
Saving that would be nice, like you talk about, but the reality is a developer/business came in and wanted to get a return on their investment. A 20 story hotel has a lot more value than a 2 story rehabbed building. It's frustrating that the empty parcels we have seem to be prime for development, but never seem to be. But, if they aren't for sale, or are for sale for so much money that a developer can't pencil anything out, then the empty lots will stay that way.
Threaded Mode