Werner, Very good observation - I missed it originally. My concern is that maybe it is intentional blight - as they did with the Casino - let it fall into horrible disrepair and not adress the small maintenance issues so that people forget how beautiful it once was and then a few years pass and no one is that concerned or questions the numbers when they say the building is a total loss and will not be able to be saved.... In a message dated 3/30/2007 1:45:32 AM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
When I posted the note about the demolition at the Paramount Theatre I intentionally left out my commentary to see what discussion would turn up. I fear that everyone has missed the point. Its not about whether it was the "real" entrance or not (it was not). Its not about building a better entrance either. The issue is, why spend resources - time, money, manpower, reconstruction, etc on something that was not needed. The ConHall needs serious attention, the windows, terra-cotta, structural steel, architectural metals, etc. The building is deteriorating and nothing is being done to halt that. Instead a functional, usable entrance is demolished. Doesn't that strike anyone as being irresponsible? Werner ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.
