The Chicago Boom (houses, move, buildings)

[via chicago]

Originally Posted by Skyline887

does any one have an image or seen an image of what the skyline will look like with all this skyscrapers.

i pulled these from another forum, and they're not professional, but gives a pretty good idea

[Lookout Kid]

I used to work at the architecture firm Skidmore Owings and Merrill, and they had a wonderful comprehensive city plan for the "Central District" that targeted specific areas for increased density. I believe it is pretty close to what DPD is actually pursuing, which basically includes increased density in River North, the West Loop, and the South Loop. if you are a NIMBY and opposed to density, don't move into any of these areas!

[via chicago]

found one more. the amazing thing is this dosent even show all the development taking place in the south loop:

[Steve-o]

Those are some amazing computer renditions, thanks for sharing!

[incognito]

These buildings are so tacky. They are sterile and plastic and lifeless. The are based on typical Dirty Capitalistic American greed. They dont add anything to an already ugly city. Bigger is NOT better. Taller is NOT better. BETTER is BETTER. Why dont these so called "architects" design something that actually has some some class instead of focusing on how much glass and steel they can fuse together to make as much money on as small a plot of land as possible. How repulsive.

[Steve-o]

Originally Posted by incognito

These buildings are so tacky. They are sterile and plastic.

"Plastic", huh? I sure hope theyre using some hardcore ABS plastic to withstand the wind velocity at those heights. And yes, I know what youre getting at, but you could have chosen a better word than "plastic", it just doesnt sound right when discussing architecture.

Originally Posted by incognito

They dont add anything to an already ugly city.

Have you considered getting your eyes checked? Sounds like youre borderline legally blind!

[via chicago]

Originally Posted by incognito

These buildings are so tacky. They are sterile and plastic and lifeless. The are based on typical Dirty Capitalistic American greed. They dont add anything to an already ugly city. Bigger is NOT better. Taller is NOT better. BETTER is BETTER. Why dont these so called "architects" design something that actually has some some class instead of focusing on how much glass and steel they can fuse together to make as much money on as small a plot of land as possible. How repulsive.

what, pray tell, is your definition of "better"?

you call it repulsive that developers build tall buildings on small plots of land....so whats your opinion of developers who build sprawl-marts and mcmansions 60-70 miles away from city centers? think about it, and tell me which form of living is more sustainable in the long run.

yes, skyscrapers are a product of capitalism. hate to break it to you, but so is every single other commodity in this country. and to be honest, we should consider ourselves lucky that developers even take the time and expense to hire world-renowned architects to design their buildings and try and make them aesthetically pleasing to the public. and while capitalism isnt perfect, i have a hard time believing you would prefer the "Commieblocks" alternative:





now tell me whats "ugly"

[via chicago]

Moderator cut: this quote is from a now deleted post

I hate most of the new uninspired concrete-slab development on the north side as well. What do you know, we agree on something!

[j33]

[quote=incognito;1978950][i]

Moderator cut: deleted- quote from personal attack QUOTE]

... I don't even know what this statement is supposed to mean.

[Drover]

Originally Posted by j33

... I don't even know what this statement is supposed to mean.

I think it means "let's see how long I last on this board." I've got my money on "doesn't make it to the end of November."