All new. The Quinlan Terry buildings in Richmond are built the way they would have been 150 years ago but with modern plumbing, mechanical and electrical. They were built at the same cost per square foot as a London skyscraper, which they resemble in program (speculative office space), and bulk (a bit less than a million square feet). Tenants love them, and so does the public.Joe_Schmoe said:are the historic looking buildings here actually historic, or are the new construction built in an historic style?
Sounds like you're a member of the public. If you were an architect you would know that would be IMMORAL .The very people these buildings were built for love them. So what is the problem here? ... I personally would love to see some of this stuff being built in Boston. I'm not saying to build like this exclusively but in certain areas this would ease a lot of people's skepticism of replacing buildings especially in historical areas.
Hell hath no fury like a theory scorned.This is exactly the problem with a lot of architects ... I do not understand the resentment by certain people.
As construction costs soar generally, the price gap between standard construction and this kind is narrowing. Building really well is not as much more expensive as it used to be. See also Whitman College, Princeton in the Gothic Colleges thread.Amazing this is built at a similar cost per square foot as London skyscrapers. I thought construction of buildings like this was no longer feasible. These buildings seems to be of good quality. Many buildings that attempt to emulate old architecture seem to come out tacky but not this.