83°Partly Cloudy
  • Anon

    Anyone else now have Jay-Z stuck in their head?

    • Everyday

      I walk by this everyday and sing that song!

  • StatingTheObvious

    Originally, this project involved knocking the whole thing down and starting from scratch, but the WBJ is reporting now it’ll reuse much of the existing structure instead.

    • anon

      Really? That’s some great news.

  • shawguy

    Not a fan of the new building. While the existing one is kinda ugly, at least it has architecture to either like or dislike. Varied facade, balconies, an interesting approach to the corner, etc. The new one just looks like a big ice cube. It’s just a giant glass brick. Nothing interesting about it at all.

    • I agree with you to an extent, but unless they could retrofit those arcades…

      Ugh. Seriously, whoever decided arcades were a good idea on a dense urban street was out of their mind.

    • Anonymous

      Totally agree. Both structures are pretty objectionable, though I think my dislike of the glass ice cube design is stronger because there’s a building exactly like it a block away.

      I’m all for development and all that, but it seems like every new building being built in this town is one of maybe 4 designs. I’m no fan of the giant brown monoliths that characterize some of the structures built in the late-70’s/80’s, but that’s mostly because they’re EVERYWHERE. And now they’re being replaced with more modern buildings, which is good, but modern buildings that all look almost exactly the same. Zzzzzzzzzzzzz

  • I used to work in this building about 4 years ago. It was pretty nice then, I’m surprised they would be tearing it down.

    • Anonymous

      it is no longer “class A” so it gets torn down

  • Anonymous

    What a shame! The old building looks better (to me) than the new building. This is just so emblematic of such a throw away society we have become. Is there something horribly wrong with the old building that we do not know about??

    • jim_ed

      Yes, there’s something wrong with it currently – it’s only 8 stories and thus below its maximum height in an incredibly desirable part of town. So the building will be expanded with two additional floors to add additional density in the urban core, which is a good thing.

    • Anon

      I think it’s more emblematic of a profit driven society. The developer is not in the business of knocking down buildings and putting up new ones for fun; they are trying to maximize profits. They must have a compelling reason to spend this kind of money. The new building looks substantially bigger; perhaps there is an issue with the current building layout, maybe they have someone who will be taking the whole building and wants a particular setup or has clients they want to impress.

      • Duponter

        Exactly, I love the idea spending tens of millions to tear down a building and build a new one is emblematic of a throw away society, as if the decision to spend that money is made willy nilly. The new building is likely going to maximize space where this one clearly doesn’t and isn’t architecturally interesting enough to keep. Better to tear it down now than wait 30 more years and have the preservation folks scream about how we need to keep it because it is “unique” and “historically significant.”

        • Anonymous

          Financing is also ridiculously cheap right now. Better to lock in financing now at a low rate than wait 5 or 10 years when the building is truly decrepit.

  • Brian Kraft

    Geezes, that ugly pile was built AFTER I moved to DC. Now you’ll excuse me while I go find a hole to throw myself into.

  • giacomo

    oooo, i can use that granite.

  • Anonymous

    And I’m sure that in another 30 years, this new glass block will be torn down, too.

  • ClevelandDave

    Actually, compared to much of what is going up now (see City Center) I kind of like this building. BTW where are all the environmentalists decrying the enormous resources/energy that go into building a new structure as opposed to upgrading/renovating? Reuse is generally the most environmentally friendly approach to… well almost anything.

    • Duponter

      Not necessarily. Energy cost is only going to go up in the future and a newer, more energy efficient building over the course of 30 years may be far more environmentally wise than leaving some old building up and trying to make it work.

      • Sparta

        Retrofitting works.

  • Reality

    This building doesn’t look old or falling apart. Strange to tear it down. It looks unique, unlike the other box buildings throughout all of downtown.


Subscribe to our mailing list