Doesn’t bother me as much as the monstrosity of a building behind it.

And that sir, is climate arson and simply a hyper capitalist ideal.

Cities are nothing without their architectural heritage, and preservation is not anti-housing as many people believe. The politics that favor the rich and prevent the building of affordable housing is directly responsible. Tearing down historical homes (specifically architecturally significant ones) does nothing for the city in the long-run except erase its cultural heritage and individuality.

We demolished lots of buildings in the 60s for “progress” only to end up regretting most of it (old penn station for example). Grand Central was even on the chopping block for a starchitect’s (I.M. Pei) new glass tower, had not Jackie Kennedy and preservationists fought to protect it.

Just saying that progress and preservation are not mutually exclusive.

And we’re infinitely richer, no excuse. Also, it wouldn’t cost any more than the cookie cutter glass buildings going up everywhere. Contemporary advancements in manufacturing have easily replaced skilled craftsmen used on historical classical buildings.

If Europe is busy rebuilding entire historic blitzed areas the way they were before WWII, I think rebuilding the most beautiful civic building in history warrants such a restoration.