Preliminary landmark status has been granted to 30 N. LaSalle St., a 44-story skyscraper in Chicago, after a contentious debate over its design and historic significance.
The Commission on Chicago Landmarks voted unanimously in favor of the designation, paving the way for a $47 million real estate tax reduction under Cook County's Class L program for the redevelopment of landmarked commercial properties. Developer Golub and Co.'s proposal to redevelop the site into new office and retail space, along with 349 apartments, has been hailed as a crucial part of the city's LaSalle Corridor Revitalization program.
However, not everyone is pleased with the decision. Landmarks Illinois, which was founded in 1971 in an effort to save the historic Chicago Stock Exchange Building, testified against granting preliminary landmark status to 30 N. LaSalle, arguing that the building lacks architectural merit.
The city's preservation movement was sparked by the demolition of the iconic Chicago Stock Exchange Building in 1972, and Richard Nickel's tragic death during the salvage operation. Critics argue that 30 N. LaSalle does not have the same level of civic value or historic significance as its predecessor.
Despite these concerns, preservation advocates argue that landmark designation is necessary to preserve the building's legacy and ensure its redevelopment aligns with the city's preservation goals. Ward Miller, Executive Director of Preservation Chicago, testified in favor of designating the building, citing its importance in the LaSalle Corridor Revitalization program.
Golub and Co.'s Managing Principal Lee Golub emphasized that the designation is crucial for resuscitating the LaSalle Street Financial District, the Loop, and the Central Business District. An ordinance seeking permanent designation for 30 N. LaSalle St. is expected to be heard by the City Council early next year.
The decision has been met with mixed reactions, reflecting the ongoing debate over Chicago's preservation policies and priorities. While some argue that landmark designation should prioritize historic significance over contemporary design, others believe it is essential for preserving the city's architectural heritage and promoting economic development.
The Commission on Chicago Landmarks voted unanimously in favor of the designation, paving the way for a $47 million real estate tax reduction under Cook County's Class L program for the redevelopment of landmarked commercial properties. Developer Golub and Co.'s proposal to redevelop the site into new office and retail space, along with 349 apartments, has been hailed as a crucial part of the city's LaSalle Corridor Revitalization program.
However, not everyone is pleased with the decision. Landmarks Illinois, which was founded in 1971 in an effort to save the historic Chicago Stock Exchange Building, testified against granting preliminary landmark status to 30 N. LaSalle, arguing that the building lacks architectural merit.
The city's preservation movement was sparked by the demolition of the iconic Chicago Stock Exchange Building in 1972, and Richard Nickel's tragic death during the salvage operation. Critics argue that 30 N. LaSalle does not have the same level of civic value or historic significance as its predecessor.
Despite these concerns, preservation advocates argue that landmark designation is necessary to preserve the building's legacy and ensure its redevelopment aligns with the city's preservation goals. Ward Miller, Executive Director of Preservation Chicago, testified in favor of designating the building, citing its importance in the LaSalle Corridor Revitalization program.
Golub and Co.'s Managing Principal Lee Golub emphasized that the designation is crucial for resuscitating the LaSalle Street Financial District, the Loop, and the Central Business District. An ordinance seeking permanent designation for 30 N. LaSalle St. is expected to be heard by the City Council early next year.
The decision has been met with mixed reactions, reflecting the ongoing debate over Chicago's preservation policies and priorities. While some argue that landmark designation should prioritize historic significance over contemporary design, others believe it is essential for preserving the city's architectural heritage and promoting economic development.
. I mean, sure Landmarks Illinois had some legit concerns about the building's design, but I think it's gonna be cool to see Golub and Co. bring new life to that spot. The $47 million tax reduction is huge for redevelopment, and we all know how much this city needs a little TLC. But at the same time, I can understand why some people are worried about preserving the building's original vibe. I think Ward Miller makes some solid points about its importance in the LaSalle Corridor Revitalization program 
. It's always a trade-off between progress and preservation, but this might just be the push we need to breathe some new energy into the Loop 
.
. The old Stock Exchange Building was a total game changer for this city, and losing it was a huge blow. But at least we can all agree that Golub and Co.'s plan is gonna breathe some new life into the LaSalle Corridor 
. Still, I think there's room for compromise here - maybe they could've found a way to incorporate more of that old Chicago charm without sacrificing the building's functionality? IDK, just my two cents 
. But on the other hand, critics are right that it may not be as historic or architecturally significant as the old Chicago Stock Exchange Building 
. I mean, can we really justify designating a building just because it's got a fancy new logo or 349 apartments? 
Not everyone agrees, but I think we need to have a more nuanced conversation about what preservation means and how we balance our love of history with the needs of the present. Maybe it's time for us to rethink what makes a building truly "civic"? 
. that being said, i do hope they can find a way to salvage some of the building's original charm... or at least not completely erase its history 
.
, you got your preservationists on one side and your developers on the other... like, what's the end goal here? saving historic buildings or making a quick buck? 
i think the city needs to find a middle ground that balances progress with preserving our cultural identity. meanwhile, this just goes to show how much power these commissions have - 30 N LaSalle St gets landmark status unanimously, but what about the people who actually live and work in the area? are we just gonna let them be displaced for the sake of 'preserving' a building? 
I mean, sure, it's part of the city's history, but so are all the other buildings on LaSalle Street... and they're not landmarks either. 
️ What's next, gonna put a plaque on every old office building in the city? It feels like we're just trying to save face for the sake of saving face. 
. I get where Landmarks Illinois is coming from, but at the same time, preserving our city's heritage is so important for future generations... and let's be real, who doesn't love a good redevelopment project? 
The LaSalle Corridor Revitalization program is gonna bring so much life to that area - it's gonna be epic! 
I just hope they dont tear it down or alter it too much if they do decide to redevelop the site.
. Of course, there are valid concerns about historic significance, but I think it's time to strike a balance between preserving our past and embracing the future 
. The City Council needs to weigh in on this soon so we can get some clarity on what's next 
!
.
.
. I mean, 44 stories of office space and apartments sounds like a sweet deal 
Still, I'm hyped to see it get a lil' recognition and maybe even get some sweet tax breaks