why? I've seen this kind of thing all over D.C. and I just don't get it. If the front of the building is worth saving, isn't the whole building worth saving? And what's so great about a facade like this, anyway? You can nearly always tell that the rest of the building is new, so it's obvious that this is just a fake front. I assume the goal is to retain something from the past, to give the city a sort of patina of historical appreciation or something. I don't know. I mean, I really don't care, but it seems a lot of trouble to go to for what's really pretty small gain. And just to be different, the building I work in on K Street has entirely modern, angular, sheet metal sort of facade, behind which is a building built probably in the early 20th century. Everything inside is at least 50 years old, and much of it is much older, but the exterior front looks like it was built in the last 10-20 years. What does it say about a city that so many exteriors are fake or deceptive, concealing secrets?