Just curious, was "stretch 1.75" announced? Seems odd even for a long stretch on these buildings which are right on the water and could have wind impacted fires.
Last I heard 212's house was still owned by the city. With the increase in construction over there, it seems re-opening 212 would make a lot of sense. I think many places we'd all love to see re-opened have lost their houses to private sale or other city agencies (IE. E36).
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.