[LaSalle.St.Station]

Originally Posted by Clarkkent2420

Setting aside the architecture, there are some practical realities at hand:
1. The head house has and will continue to fall further disrepair; Amtrak loses a billion a year and the only thing keeping the bills even close to paid in Chicago is their Metra lease - and Metra doesn’t use or care about the head house.

2. Understanding #1, the only way to get someone else to be responsible for maintaining the asset, which IS essential for Amtrak operations, is to monetize the retail and office areas of the existing building, along with any air rights.

3. Transferring development rights to the adjacent parcel gives Amtrak more money up front but far less whole dollars over time - think of the aggregate cost of an amortizing mortgage vs up front prepayment. Presumably the only way Amtrak can afford to cover the aggregate maintenance is if they book a high-dollar annuity.

4. None of the prior overbuild proposals have been remotely feasible, or else they would have been executed. I remember the LaGrange plan bifurcated Landmrked interior spaces with structural elements.

5. Given all above, and understanding how much ANY redevelopment would impact the existing building, it would seem the choices at hand are (a) Try to match beaux arts and cross your fingers, (b) Soldier Field-level contrast, or (c) “Different but compatible”.

6. Preservationists have vastly different opinions on how to approach this quandary across the world. Many think trying to replicate the original is a bigger insult than a completely different architectural language.

er.

Wasnt the head house the structure that used to exist between the north and south sheds ?