U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Illinois > Chicago
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 12-08-2020, 08:47 AM
 
1,054 posts, read 284,460 times
Reputation: 749

Advertisements

Always Debbie Downers in a thread aimed at a POSITIVE SIDE and the usual. You can bet if a Sunbelt city got this IT WOULD BE HYPED. As I noted. Cost in a Glory Tower is high and Profits $$$ like for the World's Tallest.... Burj Khalifa in Dubai are ZERO. The smaller Towers around it were where the Loses from No Profit from the Mega-Tall itself were found.

The USA is not prone to Glory Towers. Investors and Companies. Do so for a purpose AND FOR PROFIT. Some forget..... If not for the Crash of 07' 08'. Chicago WOULD HAVE a Mega-Tall today in the Chicago Spire. It had its foundation in before stopped and was financed by European Investment or would have been though completion and of course sale of condos it would have had.

Some are forgetting Chicago has Chicago Place rising by Holy Name Cathedral and it is a Super-Tall that will be Condos. Pricey ones of course. Just as the St Regis Chicago Tower are. Who thinks Trump Tower Condos are cheap?

One Chicago

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...cagoSquare.png

It has reached the half-way mark in construction. Yes scaled down to over 900ft. Still I believe it meets minimum SuperTall minimum. Still will be impressive if not ground-breaking and records some still want.

https://chicagoyimby.com/2020/10/con...ver-north.html

Still some will say it is just a glass tower. Well, it is FOR PROFIT and not designed as a GLORY TOWER. It will still be a great addition to the skyline. Will it win Architectural Awards? Probably not. Awards go the most energy efficient and EXTRA- GREEN Towers that COST MORE MONEY TO BUILD. At least Chicago has gotten plenty towers claimed to be Green and some green roof-tops.

The Dallas's, Houston's and Atlanta's.... still struggle to get a first real SuperTall. NYC still manged some great ones and those ULTRA-SKINNY Towers. They generally are not winning awards being so skinny. Pricey... for sure.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-08-2020, 07:28 PM
 
Location: sumter
11,228 posts, read 6,826,804 times
Reputation: 8217
Quote:
Originally Posted by IronWright View Post
Chicago hasn't been leading the way in height or design for a very long time now. Chicago firms are still very much in demand around the world however where there is actual innovation and new height thresholds taking place. Developers in Chicago have been demonstrably conservative and risk averse the last decade.

Chicago is stuck in the Miesian past where minimilism is king. Developers and architects are building blue-glass-boxes ad-nauseum which have dominated the city's landscpae the past 10 years. In the few years leading up to the 2008 recession Chicago was still the leader in world class designs and pushing boundaries for height. New York has ran away from Chicago in terms of innovation, materials and height.
Yes that is true, but NYC is pretty much in a class all by itself here in North America. It's like New York then everybody else. It may no longer be a place where people take big risks, in the development of the biggest and boldest, but in my opinion it still remains a leader of the modern skyscraper era. It's reputation and influence is still in tact. What's there today, still makes up one of the best skyline anywhere, it's in second place all by itself.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-08-2020, 07:38 PM
 
Location: sumter
11,228 posts, read 6,826,804 times
Reputation: 8217
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert9 View Post
Nice tower but still sad how much we have fallen. Other places around the globe including here in America with New York keep building the worlds tallest towers and we still have not even surpassed our own Sears Tower which goes all the way back to 1974!!
Could that be on purpose, as to pay homage or something, for it's 25 year run as the world's tallest.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-08-2020, 10:09 PM
 
330 posts, read 131,103 times
Reputation: 416
Quote:
Originally Posted by ipaper View Post
Yes that is true, but NYC is pretty much in a class all by itself here in North America. It's like New York then everybody else. It may no longer be a place where people take big risks, in the development of the biggest and boldest, but in my opinion it still remains a leader of the modern skyscraper era. It's reputation and influence is still in tact. What's there today, still makes up one of the best skyline anywhere, it's in second place all by itself.
Major commissions do not go to smaller creative/visionary firms in Chicago. The large corporate players have a stranglehold on signature developments. The same handful of budget-box-builders using efficient, recycled designs that maximize profits rule the cityscape. The majority of buildings are going to Goettsch, Hartshorne Plunkard, SCB, Lagrange, Pappageorge & Haymes etc.

Even residential mid & high-rises aren't handed to experimental designers. Take a look at buildings in the 15 to 30 story range going up in NY and around the world. They are light years beyond Chicago. Rubenstein Forum in Hyde Park is a great example of how just using some thoughtfulness can make all the difference. That building is more sculptural than just about anything going up in the downtown. You don't need multi-billion dollar investment to put forward creative and unique designs. You just need to build with more ambition than simply profit.

They should be awarding prominent buildings to firms like "SHoP," Bjarke Ingles, Foster, Zaha Hadid, etc. to add to our heritage with works from the world's most noted designers as we always have throughout history. Smith & Gill are not going to take the same risk/approach on Tribune Tower East that any of those afformentioned architects would for their introductory contribution to the renowned Chicago skyline.

David Child's delivered a brilliant masterpiece for the Spire Site and it was value-engineered beyond recognition. Terracotta removed, decorative crown removed, height decreased dramatically, set-backs lessened in number and proportion. These buildings would have been world-class, iconic statement towers to judge Chicago's future quality by for this century. As Hancock/Sears have been for so many decades.

Chicago isn't in the business of leading the architectual world anymore. Mies Van Der Rohe has forever influenced the city and you can see his fingerprints all over probably 95% of what gets built. He is a God among the academics in Chicago who teach their students to become his clones. Someone needs to revolutionize the city's unfortunate trends and return to boldand innovative structures with natural materials at heights that are progressive. Enough blending in with the neighbors.

Lincoln Yards, North Union, Riverline/South Bank, The 78, Bronzeville East etc...Not one building in the nearly $40 billion worth of mega-projects that are planned is memorable or ground-breaking..(pun intended) Not even one super-tall either. Chicago doesn't have to be in a tier below NY when it comes to innovation. Chicago always held it's own quite well in that arena and in fact arguably was the clear leader in design quality. Like I said, between 2004-2009 Chicago's designs/proposals were head and shoulders above New York's.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-08-2020, 10:29 PM
 
Location: sumter
11,228 posts, read 6,826,804 times
Reputation: 8217
Quote:
Originally Posted by IronWright View Post
Major commissions do not go to smaller creative/visionary firms in Chicago. The large corporate players have a stranglehold on signature developments. The same handful of budget-box-builders using efficient, recycled designs that maximize profits rule the cityscape. The majority of buildings are going to Goettsch, Hartshorne Plunkard, SCB, Lagrange, Pappageorge & Haymes etc.

Even residential mid & high-rises aren't handed to experimental designers. Take a look at buildings in the 15 to 30 story range going up in NY and around the world. They are light years beyond Chicago. Rubenstein Forum in Hyde Park is a great example of how just using some thoughtfulness can make all the difference. That building is more sculptural than just about anything going up in the downtown. You don't need multi-billion dollar investment to put forward creative and unique designs. You just need to build with more ambition than simply profit.

They should be awarding prominent buildings to firms like "SHoP," Bjarke Ingles, Foster, Zaha Hadid, etc. to add to our heritage with works from the world's most noted designers as we always have throughout history. Smith & Gill are not going to take the same risk/approach on Tribune Tower East that any of those afformentioned architects would for their introductory contribution to the renowned Chicago skyline.

David Child's delivered a brilliant masterpiece for the Spire Site and it was value-engineered beyond recognition. Terracotta removed, decorative crown removed, height decreased dramatically, set-backs lessened in number and proportion. These buildings would have been world-class, iconic statement towers to judge Chicago's future quality by for this century. As Hancock/Sears have been for so many decades.

Chicago isn't in the business of leading the architectual world anymore. Mies Van Der Rohe has forever influenced the city and you can see his fingerprints all over probably 95% of what gets built. He is a God among the academics in Chicago who teach their students to become his clones. Someone needs to revolutionize the city's unfortunate trends and return to boldand innovative structures with natural materials at heights that are progressive. Enough blending in with the neighbors.

Lincoln Yards, North Union, Riverline/South Bank, The 78, Bronzeville East etc...Not one building in the nearly $40 billion worth of mega-projects that are planned is memorable or ground-breaking..(pun intended) Not even one super-tall either. Chicago doesn't have to be in a tier below NY when it comes to innovation. Chicago always held it's own quite well in that arena and in fact arguably was the clear leader in design quality. Like I said, between 2004-2009 Chicago's designs/proposals were head and shoulders above New York's.
Would have been the new school or third school of Chicago architects.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-08-2020, 11:12 PM
 
1,054 posts, read 284,460 times
Reputation: 749
Default I think this all needs a new thread you can create to mock Chicago's Architects and new buildings. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Quote:
Originally Posted by IronWright View Post
Major commissions do not go to smaller creative/visionary firms in Chicago. The large corporate players have a stranglehold on signature developments. The same handful of budget-box-builders using efficient, recycled designs that maximize profits rule the cityscape. The majority of buildings are going to Goettsch, Hartshorne Plunkard, SCB, Lagrange, Pappageorge & Haymes etc.

Even residential mid & high-rises aren't handed to experimental designers. Take a look at buildings in the 15 to 30 story range going up in NY and around the world. They are light years beyond Chicago. Rubenstein Forum in Hyde Park is a great example of how just using some thoughtfulness can make all the difference. That building is more sculptural than just about anything going up in the downtown. You don't need multi-billion dollar investment to put forward creative and unique designs. You just need to build with more ambition than simply profit.

They should be awarding prominent buildings to firms like "SHoP," Bjarke Ingles, Foster, Zaha Hadid, etc. to add to our heritage with works from the world's most noted designers as we always have throughout history. Smith & Gill are not going to take the same risk/approach on Tribune Tower East that any of those afformentioned architects would for their introductory contribution to the renowned Chicago skyline.

David Child's delivered a brilliant masterpiece for the Spire Site and it was value-engineered beyond recognition. Terracotta removed, decorative crown removed, height decreased dramatically, set-backs lessened in number and proportion. These buildings would have been world-class, iconic statement towers to judge Chicago's future quality by for this century. As Hancock/Sears have been for so many decades.

Chicago isn't in the business of leading the architectual world anymore. Mies Van Der Rohe has forever influenced the city and you can see his fingerprints all over probably 95% of what gets built. He is a God among the academics in Chicago who teach their students to become his clones. Someone needs to revolutionize the city's unfortunate trends and return to boldand innovative structures with natural materials at heights that are progressive. Enough blending in with the neighbors.

Lincoln Yards, North Union, Riverline/South Bank, The 78, Bronzeville East etc...Not one building in the nearly $40 billion worth of mega-projects that are planned is memorable or ground-breaking..(pun intended) Not even one super-tall either. Chicago doesn't have to be in a tier below NY when it comes to innovation. Chicago always held it's own quite well in that arena and in fact arguably was the clear leader in design quality. Like I said, between 2004-2009 Chicago's designs/proposals were head and shoulders above New York's.
Stop the tier below NYC. So it is in its own Tier.... it is a much larger city too. It and London are the top cities in the World and it need not be rubbed in for this POSITIVE THREAD ON A CHICAGO SUPERTALL....
Also, Chicago SOM Architectural firm and Architect .... did design the Tallest Building in the world and I believe
Honestly, on the bold.... have you seen what Texas cities are building? I would add highrises in even Philadelphia besides a handful of glass towers with the pointed tops and Comcast building that are what even they all want more of. In that forum you get those complaining of their plain cubic boxes getting built. Then a decent one is coming and some good comments. I feel Chicago's infill is even a lot superior. I need not rub that in. Someone here will probably not like my Philly comment.... still I use is as a example as I did Texas cities.
STILL You are mocking the replacement towers for the Chicago Spire sight. I gave a link in a past thread that it was ALL ALONG TERRACOTTA ACCENTS on the towers not whole building clad in terracotta..... Maybe the podium would have been that was removed? They are still to go into the new buildings as accents. Yes it was scaled down by Nimbyism or just the Alderman. Still it will be a GREAT ASSET and I think it will be just as Spectacular. The Scale-down was because the PODIUM WAS REMOVED per the Alderman asking for the removal of the Hotel aspect of the building and less parking to be built in.

It is common across America to build at price-point and for profit simpler designs. Just to single out Chicago is not necessary as inferior at all. Do you really think those needle-towers in NYC are extra-special? They are for profit and skinny because of land values and less available. Sure I see some in the new Hudson Yards are special and great for NYC.

Still when someone creates a thread to COMPLIMENT CHICAGO and might be from a city of all glass boxes for high-rises and in its downtown..... There need not be those thinking that Chicago does not have some decent ones getting built. This thread was not create to pit Chicago against NYC and everyone say NYC is best and better and ..... well move there then.

No city builds all spectacular towers like price-point was no object. Maybe in Dubai where a Chicago Architect can design the tallest building and it make no profit and can even in China. A new in the planning stages mega-tall for Tokyo will be by some NYC Architects.... guess that will be a superior choice. The next one for Dubia will just pass the current one and by the same Spanish Architect that was to do the Chicago Spire. Still, you hear of blocks and blocks of boxes replicated in Chinese cities going up and elsewhere in Asia and think it is all like all glory towers some downtowns have gotten. Now China put a clamp on mega-talls. They have a supertall limit now and want Chinese designed towers not Westerners.

Sears is a grand building in scale and innovation of then. Still it is JUST a group of BLACK GLASS BOXES. So I do not know why you think it is some spectacular feature other then height vs others built today. No city is going to build every building as some stand-out architectural feat today. Maybe when Chicago and NYC were building early skyscrapers with new innovation of the time and Craftsman to do stone-work yet etc.

I still love the Sears for sure .... but acting like it isn't still a simple but extra-tall building or group of buildings glass boxes, bundled which is its style of construction with a name .... is kinda a double-standard.

No one seems to have even agreed with the OP on the former Vista Tower now St Regis Chicago.... has any value or architectural aspect to complement Chicago on . YOU'ALL are DOING WHAT THIS FORUM DOES BEST... all Just COMPLAINTS basically.

Chicago still has had some great additions and have some PRIDE or MOVE TO NYC or where you think its towers are much better then glass boxes elsewhere.

A thread created to complement the city and new SuperTall and - the complement goes to NEGATIVE on all its buildings Same as the one I created on PRIDE IN "WRIGLEY FIELD" NOW to be known as a New "USA NATIONAL LANDMARK". The few comments were it was just a ploy for tax breaks. Well Boston's Fenway got that status in 2012. Wrigley also deserved it no matter who owns it. The money they already put into it is as asset to the city and tourism that will come back.

In the Philly forum ------ They HATE when outsiders say anything not praising or NEGATIVE on their city.
In the Chicago forum --- They HATE when outsiders say anything POSITIVE and PRAISE on their city...

End of Rant .....

Last edited by NoHyping; 12-08-2020 at 11:35 PM..
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-09-2020, 11:45 AM
 
330 posts, read 131,103 times
Reputation: 416
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoHyping View Post
Stop the tier below NYC. So it is in its own Tier.... it is a much larger city too. It and London are the top cities in the World and it need not be rubbed in for this POSITIVE THREAD ON A CHICAGO SUPERTALL....
Also, Chicago SOM Architectural firm and Architect .... did design the Tallest Building in the world and I believe
Honestly, on the bold.... have you seen what Texas cities are building? I would add highrises in even Philadelphia besides a handful of glass towers with the pointed tops and Comcast building that are what even they all want more of. In that forum you get those complaining of their plain cubic boxes getting built. Then a decent one is coming and some good comments. I feel Chicago's infill is even a lot superior. I need not rub that in. Someone here will probably not like my Philly comment.... still I use is as a example as I did Texas cities.
STILL You are mocking the replacement towers for the Chicago Spire sight. I gave a link in a past thread that it was ALL ALONG TERRACOTTA ACCENTS on the towers not whole building clad in terracotta..... Maybe the podium would have been that was removed? They are still to go into the new buildings as accents. Yes it was scaled down by Nimbyism or just the Alderman. Still it will be a GREAT ASSET and I think it will be just as Spectacular. The Scale-down was because the PODIUM WAS REMOVED per the Alderman asking for the removal of the Hotel aspect of the building and less parking to be built in.

It is common across America to build at price-point and for profit simpler designs. Just to single out Chicago is not necessary as inferior at all. Do you really think those needle-towers in NYC are extra-special? They are for profit and skinny because of land values and less available. Sure I see some in the new Hudson Yards are special and great for NYC.

Still when someone creates a thread to COMPLIMENT CHICAGO and might be from a city of all glass boxes for high-rises and in its downtown..... There need not be those thinking that Chicago does not have some decent ones getting built. This thread was not create to pit Chicago against NYC and everyone say NYC is best and better and ..... well move there then.

No city builds all spectacular towers like price-point was no object. Maybe in Dubai where a Chicago Architect can design the tallest building and it make no profit and can even in China. A new in the planning stages mega-tall for Tokyo will be by some NYC Architects.... guess that will be a superior choice. The next one for Dubia will just pass the current one and by the same Spanish Architect that was to do the Chicago Spire. Still, you hear of blocks and blocks of boxes replicated in Chinese cities going up and elsewhere in Asia and think it is all like all glory towers some downtowns have gotten. Now China put a clamp on mega-talls. They have a supertall limit now and want Chinese designed towers not Westerners.

Sears is a grand building in scale and innovation of then. Still it is JUST a group of BLACK GLASS BOXES. So I do not know why you think it is some spectacular feature other then height vs others built today. No city is going to build every building as some stand-out architectural feat today. Maybe when Chicago and NYC were building early skyscrapers with new innovation of the time and Craftsman to do stone-work yet etc.

I still love the Sears for sure .... but acting like it isn't still a simple but extra-tall building or group of buildings glass boxes, bundled which is its style of construction with a name .... is kinda a double-standard.

No one seems to have even agreed with the OP on the former Vista Tower now St Regis Chicago.... has any value or architectural aspect to complement Chicago on . YOU'ALL are DOING WHAT THIS FORUM DOES BEST... all Just COMPLAINTS basically.

Chicago still has had some great additions and have some PRIDE or MOVE TO NYC or where you think its towers are much better then glass boxes elsewhere.

A thread created to complement the city and new SuperTall and - the complement goes to NEGATIVE on all its buildings Same as the one I created on PRIDE IN "WRIGLEY FIELD" NOW to be known as a New "USA NATIONAL LANDMARK". The few comments were it was just a ploy for tax breaks. Well Boston's Fenway got that status in 2012. Wrigley also deserved it no matter who owns it. The money they already put into it is as asset to the city and tourism that will come back.

In the Philly forum ------ They HATE when outsiders say anything not praising or NEGATIVE on their city.
In the Chicago forum --- They HATE when outsiders say anything POSITIVE and PRAISE on their city...

End of Rant .....
Are you familiar with Blair Kamin of the Chicago Tribune? Chicago's definitive architecture critic for the past 20+ years? He didn't blindly praise Vista or St. Regis Tower in his review either and offered many criticisms.

Just being happy to get this building or that shiny new tower isn't Chicago's historical role in architecture/engineering. Chicago is where many apsiring and established architects as well as structural engineers come to study and find inspiration. There isn't a single world-renowned designer or reputable urban planner that doesn't heap praise on Chicago for it's mythical status and contibutions to the global architecture, structural engineering, urban planning and constructuion industries. It is arguably the greatest structural museum on the planet, even if it isn't the largest.

Chicago has hundreds of examples that I could use as an example of my argument but I will focus on just one here. "Marina City," the design itself was radical and revolutionary for its period. At the time Bertrand Goldberg was not a renowned architect. He had never even designed a skyscraper. Of course Marina City are two of Chicago's most innovative and iconic buildings recognized globally. They were built being the tallest residential structures in the world.

They were also the first towers in history with parking podiums incorporated at the base which has become standard throughout the world. They were the tallest reinforced concrete structures ever built. Also, they created a new construction technology known as climbing tower cranes that is now an industry standard. Marina City is also credited with igniting the explosion of urban living nationally that helped reverse white-flight and returned interest back to living in cities and highly influenced future urban developments.

Today, Marina City isn't possible because an equivalent to Bertrand Goldberg, a visionary designer that hasn't proven himself on that scale would never get a commission with the magnitude of those circumstances. Look at 'Cirrus' and 'Cascade' under construction in Lakeshore East. They are simply filler, designed by BKL, a major institutional firm in Chicago that rinses and repeats designs like all the others. They are glass slabs like almsost everything built this past decade. They have no striking details or revolutionary elements. They are modest, safe, budget-conscious buildings from developers that aren't building to leave a landmark for future generations.

Finally, regarding Related's Spire site I gave you a link showing that ALL TERRACOTTA has been REMOVED!!! You had an old revision where at first they were going to LIMIT the TERRACOTTA. It is now gone ENTIRELY!
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-09-2020, 12:11 PM
 
330 posts, read 131,103 times
Reputation: 416
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoHyping View Post
.....
Here is the LATEST and most current proposal. Scroll to page 25 for the details of the facade:

https://www.chicago.gov/content/dam/...esentation.pdf

Glass curtain-wall with DECORATIVE METAL ACCENT PANELS

The terracotta is gone from the design and isn't coming back. It will be painted aluminum it will look cheap as usual.

The reason that these buildings were stunning was the terracotta lining the contours of the set-backs, the proportions of the set-backs, Chicago-windows framed with terracotta, a decorative crown and the height forming a "gateway" with Vista.

As we know from almost every other high profile tower built in Chicago this last cycle, aluminum and glass blend together and appears to be all glass. A giant blue wall effect. The white terracotta provides contrast to accentuate the details and contours of the building thus making it visually detailed and appealing from a distance and in all lighting conditions.

Scroll to page 16 for the before & after example of how drastically duller the facde is now. Page 12 will also illustrate this for you.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-09-2020, 12:35 PM
 
1,054 posts, read 284,460 times
Reputation: 749
Quote:
Originally Posted by IronWright View Post
a commission with the magnitude of those circumstances. Look at 'Cirrus' and 'Cascade' under construction in Lakeshore East. They are simply filler, designed by BKL, a major institutional firm in Chicago that rinses and repeats designs like all the others. They are glass slabs like almsost everything built this past decade. They have no striking details or revolutionary elements. They are modest, safe, budget-conscious buildings from developers that aren't building to leave a landmark for future generations.

Finally, regarding Related's Spire site I gave you a link showing that ALL TERRACOTTA has been REMOVED!!! You had an old revision where at first they were going to LIMIT the TERRACOTTA. It is now gone ENTIRELY!
Sure... I get you have this fetish that Chicago does not build fully new innovative towers that should be far more supertalls and megatalls. In a perfect world yes. Reality of price-points and limitations to what a Architect can spend in a design is the American-way.

Also I gave valid links on the revamped - Podium removed redesign of the towers that will look the same and CLEARLY SAY WITH "TERRACOTTA ACCENTS INTACT"

I think the Architects Newspaper link is a valid enough source for this re-do and podium removed no?

https://www.archpaper.com/2020/06/re...ncil-approval/

From the Link.

Related Midwest describes the sleek glass and stone towers, complete with terracotta accents and "Chicago windows," as being "reminiscent of a waterfall."

The cascading silhouette of each tower will form expansive outdoor terraces that extend individual residences beyond their walls, elaborated the developer. Placed at carefully proportioned intervals, these outdoor living areas will present a rare opportunity to enjoy sweeping, 180-degree views of the adjacent lakefront, river and cityscape.

Related Midwest, in addition to making various design concessions, will put $10 million in funding toward the completion of the DuSable Park, a new 3.3 green space located at an old industrial site across North Lake Shore Drive from the development site and just south of Chicago’s famed Navy Pier. NOT POSSIBLE IN NYC basically.

To DEBATE it is non-sense. We still have NO guaranty these impressive buildings .... will get built for sure. Now coming off this Pandemic will have be not surprised if the New Tribune tower and this Chicago Spire replacement .... will have a further delay till new and built rentals and condos do not present slower then expected sales and over-supply. It might take a good year or 2 to know.... Still the Chicago One two-tower at supertall yes I believe status is half-way up. Still glassy for sure. A asset and addition to River North/Gold Coast.... for sure.

I think it is best to just HOPE for the best and these towers WILL BE IMPRESSIVE PER the new design that is far more its base then tower parts.

I just see Chicago has the same limitations ALL our cities have. NYC has super-high price-points too. This endless linking Chicago to NYC and act as if it is some HICK CITY NOW.... gets old. We all know the city's and states problems and NYC and NY state does also.

I just still see a POSITIVE THREAD ON CHICAGO need not be brought into this DOWNPLAYING even Chicago a city that STILL CAN get SuperTalls built. Plenty of Towers even proposed as SuperTalls get downsized and why Sunbelt fast-rising cities do not have official ones yet. Ones that were to be were scaled down or never built. Houston was to get one a decade ago.... it would have been impressive by Helmut Jahn. It was scrapped sadly just by a downturn in Oil.

Others too. Not like NYC gets everyone proposed by far and nimbyism even there too.

- The Bank of the Southwest Tower was a proposed building located in Houston, Texas, at (1,404 ft tall) (Cancelled in 1982) It would have been the second tallest building in North America after the Willis Tower in Chicago
- The 510 m tall, 150 story, Helmut Jahn-designed tower proposed by Donald Trump in New York , United States was (cancelled in 1988) due to serious local opposition.
- Eaton's / John Maryon Tower: (1,650 ft) 1971 Toronto (cancelled 1972)

I am sure Toronto will get one.... still it did not. I think a proposed one is coming and maybe more ... That city's immigrant flow is mostly professionals as Canada has its merit based system to immigrate and Canada's premiere FAST GROWING CITY for decades non-stop.

Last edited by NoHyping; 12-09-2020 at 12:43 PM..
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-09-2020, 01:34 PM
 
330 posts, read 131,103 times
Reputation: 416
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoHyping View Post
Sure... I get you have this fetish that Chicago does not build fully new innovative towers that should be far more supertalls and megatalls. In a perfect world yes. Reality of price-points and limitations to what a Architect can spend in a design is the American-way.

Also I gave valid links on the revamped - Podium removed redesign of the towers that will look the same and CLEARLY SAY WITH "TERRACOTTA ACCENTS INTACT"

I think the Architects Newspaper link is a valid enough source for this re-do and podium removed no?

https://www.archpaper.com/2020/06/re...ncil-approval/

From the Link.

Related Midwest describes the sleek glass and stone towers, complete with terracotta accents and "Chicago windows," as being "reminiscent of a waterfall."

The cascading silhouette of each tower will form expansive outdoor terraces that extend individual residences beyond their walls, elaborated the developer. Placed at carefully proportioned intervals, these outdoor living areas will present a rare opportunity to enjoy sweeping, 180-degree views of the adjacent lakefront, river and cityscape.

Related Midwest, in addition to making various design concessions, will put $10 million in funding toward the completion of the DuSable Park, a new 3.3 green space located at an old industrial site across North Lake Shore Drive from the development site and just south of Chicago’s famed Navy Pier. NOT POSSIBLE IN NYC basically.

To DEBATE it is non-sense. We still have NO guaranty these impressive buildings .... will get built for sure. Now coming off this Pandemic will have be not surprised if the New Tribune tower and this Chicago Spire replacement .... will have a further delay till new and built rentals and condos do not present slower then expected sales and over-supply. It might take a good year or 2 to know.... Still the Chicago One two-tower at supertall yes I believe status is half-way up. Still glassy for sure. A asset and addition to River North/Gold Coast.... for sure.

I think it is best to just HOPE for the best and these towers WILL BE IMPRESSIVE PER the new design that is far more its base then tower parts.

I just see Chicago has the same limitations ALL our cities have. NYC has super-high price-points too. This endless linking Chicago to NYC and act as if it is some HICK CITY NOW.... gets old. We all know the city's and states problems and NYC and NY state does also.

I just still see a POSITIVE THREAD ON CHICAGO need not be brought into this DOWNPLAYING even Chicago a city that STILL CAN get SuperTalls built. Plenty of Towers even proposed as SuperTalls get downsized and why Sunbelt fast-rising cities do not have official ones yet. Ones that were to be were scaled down or never built. Houston was to get one a decade ago.... it would have been impressive by Helmut Jahn. It was scrapped sadly just by a downturn in Oil.

Others too. Not like NYC gets everyone proposed by far and nimbyism even there too.

- The Bank of the Southwest Tower was a proposed building located in Houston, Texas, at (1,404 ft tall) (Cancelled in 1982) It would have been the second tallest building in North America after the Willis Tower in Chicago
- The 510 m tall, 150 story, Helmut Jahn-designed tower proposed by Donald Trump in New York , United States was (cancelled in 1988) due to serious local opposition.
- Eaton's / John Maryon Tower: (1,650 ft) 1971 Toronto (cancelled 1972)

I am sure Toronto will get one.... still it did not. I think a proposed one is coming and maybe more ... That city's immigrant flow is mostly professionals as Canada has its merit based system to immigrate and Canada's premiere FAST GROWING CITY for decades non-stop.
You can't be serious? You link to a media outlet quoting a press release? I gave you the official presentation to the city of Chicago!

AGAIN! The terracotta has been eliminated in totality!

Link to the presentation:
https://www.chicago.gov/content/dam/...esentation.pdf

Really it doesn't matter if these buildings ever get built, the story of their process is what is shockingly sad about present day Chicago development. The fact that if they do get built they wouldn't be completed until 2029 is telling, this is pre-pandemic timelines.

One Chicago, AGAIN is not a SUPERTALL

The east tower is 971'...Thirteen feet short of being considered a "super-tall" officially.

Here's a link to the official agency that records heights, "The Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat." (Headquartered in Chicago)
https://www.skyscrapercenter.com/bui...st-tower/31296

To give you some perspective, Chicago is more than capable of building super-talls and has had ample opportunities to do so. The question is why have developers become so wary of trying to do so? Why are the same glass-slabs being recycled again and again at marquee locations? Also why does the city interfere with progress and ruin architecture, reduce scale and demand revisions which is not their job description or expertise?

The Chicago Spire was under construction and would have been the world's tallest building at 2,000' (MEGATALL)

Waterview was under construction and would have been another super-tall, 1,046'

One Chicago was approved to be a super-tall, 1,070'

1000M was proposed at 1,032' and the Landmark's Commission made them reduce the height to below 900'.

Waldorf Astoria was proposed before the 2008 recession and killed off due to the economy but was 1,200'

400 N. LSD was proposed at 1,100' and Alderman Reilly made them remove the hotel which ultimately shortened the building.

Tribune East is proposed at 1,422'

Vista was built as a supertall by a globally recognized architect but it took ambitious Chinese billionaires to actually execute. The reason is it was Wanda Group's first investment in American Real Estate development and a team from Chicago recruited them. Their AMBITION was directly to build a trophy tower with all the luxury and elegance that is Vsita's design. It is tall, innovative, expressive and unique while being all glass. It was glass done with experimenting as motive. This is the same ambition that a JDL, Related, Magellan, Hines, CA Ventures, Sterling Bay or Riverside could easily possess as well. However, they are all about simple designs on the cheap to maximize profit.

Trunp Tower was built and it took another billionaire in the media constantly as the face of a development team to come in and pull it off.

If Chicago wasn't able to withstand these heights then we wouldn't have seen so much activity in this area. Chicago is an architectual capital where many legendary designers have left their greatest work. Wolf Point, 110 N.Wacker and BMO are all major sites anchored by fortune 100 companies. The square footage is massive, more than 1 million. Yet these buildings are all configured in a way that makes them wide slabs with glass facades and various set-backs.

A hotel and luxury units could have pushed Wolf Point South to 1,200-1,300' and they would offer one-of-a-kind views. The proximity to the Loop, Mag Mile, River North night-life etc. would have made this easily one of the most desireabe buildings in the city. Instead, they build 815' and keep it all office rather than having some ambition and try to build a landmark type tower. Today it is all about short-term gain where Chicago used to have developers that were in it to build a legacy. The Kennedy family and Hines Development have extremely deep pockets and resources to build this type of development. They could have cut the 400'+ west tower and built two signature buildings. They said that they were going to build world-class buildings when they made the announcement. This is hardly that.

This isn't just about height though. I am talking all the way down to 8-12 stories too. Creative, innovative, expressive and experimental architects aren't defining the city anymore. It is institutional developers and design firms littering budget-buildings all over the city.

Fulton Market is a great example of how they are going above and beyond to build similar looking faux-warehouse buildings that have become stale. True individualistic expression is long gone. This point can't be refuted, the proof is in the skyline and streetscapes.

If you don't think that any of this matters then you are talking Chicago's history in design, engineering and construction is irrelevant. The architecturual masterpieces from single family homes to skyscrapers ranging in style from Victorian, Gilded Age, Neo-Gothic, Chicago-School, Beaux Arts, Art Deco, Mid Century Modern, etc. is Chicago's greatest contribution to the world. It is largely responsible for it never becoming some typical rust-belt has been and why people the world over travel here for tours and photographs. Chicago should be helping to innovate the trends that sweep across the globe as it has since the 1800's. We are in an era where between city officials, residents and developers this tradition has been lost, becoming some unimportant detail in our history as a city. I have more expectation and reverence than that.

Comparing Chicago to what Toronto, Dallas, Atlanta, Seattle or L.A. is building is ridiculous. We should be on another tier entirely. We held our own or bested New York until 2008 for architectual quality, diversity, creativity and height....How all of a sudden should New York be considered some neverland that Chicago can't match in quality, innovation or originality? We just need a new civic pride and motivated developers who quit relying Miesian clones to build the city.

Last edited by IronWright; 12-09-2020 at 02:09 PM..
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Illinois > Chicago

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2021, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top