Several Chicago-area landmarks on Illinois endangered buildings...

More than half of these buildings are owned by, or threatened by, universities. It's becoming quite apparent to me that universities have absolutely no regard whatsoever for the preservation of architecturally significant buildings. Anyone else noticing this?

I was born at Prentice Hospital. Yes I think it is worth saving. Michael Reese should also be saved. My dad was born there and my late grandmother worked there as a nurse during WWII.

Rick A wrote:

More than half of these buildings are owned by, or threatened by, universities. It's becoming quite apparent to me that universities have absolutely no regard whatsoever for the preservation of architecturally significant buildings. Anyone else noticing this?

Actually, Rick, it is universities that have maintained these buildings for so long. In most cases, a private owner would have demolished them - either to put up a more profitable structure, or because upkeep and taxes would be too much.

In particular, the "Dawes House" in Evanston probably would have been demolished or subdivided into rental housing if NU had not been subsidizing it all these years. NU finally got tired of subsidizing the Evanston Historical Society, and is saying that the building should either be sold or used by NU.

I, too, was born at Prentice and also agree it is worth saving. It was always a thrill to come "downtown" and try to pick out the distinctive circular windows from amongst the gigantic skyscrapers.

Destroy them all!!!!! HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

No, seriously, most look like they're in good shape, but I think that gas station has to go. And they should restore that 1890's woman's home.

The problem with restoring historical sites is that historical commissions put so many restrictions on how the work can be done it becomes too costly to restore. They becaome their own worst enemies.

The YWCA on Michigan is in really bad shape. The roof is gone and the walls rain by rain storm will be gone too. There isn't much left to save unfortunately.

I am aware of some of the ridiculous analities of building codes designed to keep people "safe" should some one-in-a-million occurrence actually happen, and that many inspectors get such a power trip over such things. It's a shame to affect something like a former veep's well-kept vintage home, making those code updates too expensive to keep the home standing. ridiculous! the old people that used to live there got around fine without a railing on every wall!

actually, as someone with a master's degree in preservation, i can tell you that commissions aren't in place to make preservation more difficult. they're there to make sure that the restoration and preservation of historic resources in the community are done correctly, using appropriate materials and making sure historic fabric isn't uneccesarily removed. they don't use restrictions designed to up the cost of preservation, and they certainly don't dictate how much money you spend on restoration. really, they're just there to make sure the historic integrity of the home (in most cases, only the exterior of the house at that) remains.

How do you justify demolishing a 1920s hanger to build a multihanger struction, restaurant, office space, and EXHIBITION SPACE TO SHOWCASE THE AIRPORT'S HISTORY???? the other stuff I could understand but you're going to tear down history in order to build something to showcase history?????

Once again... Chicago.. "The City that Works"...for who though?

If the buildings in question are to be "saved" or refurbished, by all means do it the right way, and don't do the facade-ectomy, wherein they save the facade, while demolishing everything else...it looks ridiculous.

Oh, and if the taxpayer has to help defray the cost,(who thinks we won't) watch the dollars!

These lists aren't annual. They come out every couple of months.

It would be great to keep all these buildings around for historical significance, but at some point you do have to consider the cost of restoration and where that money is going to come from. Some of those buildings are in such advanced stages of disrepair, like the gas station and YWCA, that I just don't think they can be saved anymore.

Rick A wrote:

More than half of these buildings are owned by, or threatened by, universities. It's becoming quite apparent to me that universities have absolutely no regard whatsoever for the preservation of architecturally significant buildings. Anyone else noticing this?

Don't forget that UIC has preserved the Hull House. Universities protect landmarks.. look at Loyola University, they've preserved many of the historic art deco masterpieces in the City!

Jeff wrote:

<quoted text>
Don't forget that UIC has preserved the Hull House. Universities protect landmarks.. look at Loyola University, they've preserved many of the historic art deco masterpieces in the City!

Don't forget that UIC has destroyed far more than they've saved, especially Our Lady of Pompei neighborhood and the iconic Maxwell Street market and stores. Yes, I give them credit for Hull House.

So much of Chicago (and IL) architectural legacy has been squandered that I shudder at most demolitions. Universities, especially urban ones, seem to have done more than their fair sure of land grabs for new buildings. Sometimes it seems they would be happier to build a new campus every 50 years on the fringes of development, wherever that happens to be at the time. Washington Univ. and St. Louis University in StL are good cases in point. They are the 900-lb gorillas of the neighborhood, but need to consider their urban context.

Actually, that hanger is in Prospect Heights/Wheeling and not owned by Chicago. I would bet that Prospect Heights/Wheeling wants to tear it down because they seem to be doing that to just about every building up and down Milwaukee Avenue.

I believe it is a shame. Wheeling destroyed the old drive-in that was down the street just to extend the runways so the bigger jets could come in. Even though it isn't Chicago, it sure sounds like it.

Mr Who Knows wrote:

<quoted text>
Actually, Rick, it is universities that have maintained these buildings for so long. In most cases, a private owner would have demolished them - either to put up a more profitable structure, or because upkeep and taxes would be too much.
In particular, the "Dawes House" in Evanston probably would have been demolished or subdivided into rental housing if NU had not been subsidizing it all these years. NU finally got tired of subsidizing the Evanston Historical Society, and is saying that the building should either be sold or used by NU.

With all the tax breaks NU receives it can afford to continue to support this historical building.

Look at Europe, if they thought like us there would be no castles.

My grandparents lived in the Park and I grew up going to church in the Park. I love the place. I hope something can be done to save it and its unique character.

The caption for photo #12 has a misspelling. An airplane housing is a "hangar," not a hanger.