PDA

You are viewing a trimmed-down version of the SkyscraperPage.com discussion forum.  For the full version follow the link below.

View Full Version : CHICAGO | 108 North State (Block 37)



Pages : 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

denizen467
Jul 25, 2008, 4:37 AM
Remember how the Reliance Building went up? The precedent is literally right across the street!
What was the story there?
Do you mean adding floors onto an existing low-rise?

ardecila
Jul 25, 2008, 4:57 AM
http://www.patsabin.com/illinois/columbus.jpg


The large building in the foreground is the Columbus Memorial Building, but the narrow building to the left, also demolished, was called the Venetian Building, a landmark in the development of steel cross-bracing. Both were demolished to make way for the eventual Old Navy building.

honte
Jul 25, 2008, 6:28 AM
What was the story there?
Do you mean adding floors onto an existing low-rise?

The Reliance building has a bizarre history. In brief: There was a four-story building there from the 1870s. In 1890, the new owner wanted a 15-story building, but the upper floors had leases several years out. So, they shored-up the upper floors and managed to excavate the ground floor and basement, add piers for a 15-story building, and build a new ground floor to the design of John Wellborn Root. This was going on while the upper floors were occupied! Carson Pirie Scott moved into the new department store, on the first floor and basement, when it was done.

Then, when it was time to expand vertically in 1894-5, they demolished the upper floors and added the rest of the skyscraper (I am not clear as to when the upper floors were actually demolished - it might have been before this time). The addition was designed by Charles Atwood because Root had died in the meantime. Again, the ground floor retail continued to operate while this was going on. New steel was erected in only two weeks and the cladding went up not long after.

It's not a direct comparison to Old Navy, but it's a good precedent and inspiration. Definitely there must be a way to keep them there if they want to be there, while giving us a respectable building on that site again.

denizen467
Jul 26, 2008, 5:47 AM
Wow, interesting.

(I knew there must be some good reason for giving the Atwood Cafe that name!)

honte
Jul 26, 2008, 5:51 AM
^ Reading your post I just saw that my first date was a typo. That should have read "In 1882, the new owner wanted a 15-story..." The first part of the building we see today was built from 1890-1891.

Nowhereman1280
Jul 26, 2008, 6:34 AM
Remember how the Reliance Building went up?

Oh yeah, I remember, those sure were the good ole days, eh honte?

wrab
Jul 26, 2008, 9:21 PM
Saturday 7/26:

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y150/wjcordier/20080726_3541d1.jpg

wrab
Jul 28, 2008, 1:16 AM
Sunday 7/27:

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y150/wjcordier/20080727_3646.jpg

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y150/wjcordier/20080727_3677-1.jpg

hdtvtechno
Jul 28, 2008, 5:43 AM
guess what ?
We have a actual date now for CBS2 News Studio broadcasting
September 22 2008 is the date.. :cheers:

wrab
Jul 28, 2008, 8:52 PM
^ Should be a good place (via Daley Plaza) to watch the November election returns.

spyguy
Jul 29, 2008, 4:19 PM
Am i missing something here ...but that obvsiouly is just the middle piece of the jumbotron...gonna place in the left and right portions...the screen is not just that middle piece?

http://featuresblogs.chicagotribune.com/theskyline/2008/07/post-1.html#more

Not seeing eye to eye at Block 37: A battle over CBS 2's broadcast screen
Blair Kamin

...Joe Ahern, CBS 2's president and general manager, defends the placement of the screen, saying it is more visible to people on the plaza and that the proportions of the sign work better for actual broadcasting than the conceptual superwide element in Johnson's drawings. "We didn't just plop it up there," he told me in an interview last week.

harryc
Jul 29, 2008, 4:41 PM
Modern
http://lh3.ggpht.com/harry.r.carmichael/SI9HemQR1II/AAAAAAAAuAs/WqktAeeV6LM/IMG_4552.JPG?imgmax=720

Classic
http://lh5.ggpht.com/harry.r.carmichael/SI9HfXpAzpI/AAAAAAAAuA4/o7uwhWuNIk4/IMG_4567.JPG?imgmax=720

http://lh3.ggpht.com/harry.r.carmichael/SI9HgPF3BuI/AAAAAAAAuBU/U2rfej7pmME/2008_07_28A.JPG?imgmax=800

Can't leave this corner without a shot of this one.
http://lh5.ggpht.com/harry.r.carmichael/SI9HfxfaVvI/AAAAAAAAuBI/7ihZAbp-7hA/IMG_4573.JPG?imgmax=720

Mr Roboto
Jul 29, 2008, 4:56 PM
...Joe Ahern, CBS 2's president and general manager: "We didn't just plop it up there," he told me in an interview last week.

Sure as hell looks like it. I agree with Kamin here. Im very dissapointed not only with the placement of the screen, but obviously the width. The renderings totally threw us off, I was expecting something much wider. But if thats all they got, thats all they got. Somehow Im not surprised.

chicubs111
Jul 29, 2008, 6:31 PM
yea...this is crap...what the hell is there renderings for if there gonna screw the whole things up...this was supposed to be a screen that wrapped around...i cant believe this !

left of center
Jul 29, 2008, 10:25 PM
The video screen, for me, was the one saving grace of this utter failure of a grand project. Looks like they fudged that up too. Ive been following this project from day 1 when they first annouced it (back when there was supposed to be a giant artistic video frieze all around the building, a huge atrium in the center with a giant video obelisk tying into the CTA station underneath, etc. etc. etc.) and over the course of its construction, each and every new bit of news has been a terrible dissapointment. They cut this. They downsized that. Blah blah blah. I say tear the whole thing down and bring back Skate on State. This building just pisses me off now.

wrab
Jul 29, 2008, 10:27 PM
HarryC, the reflections on the P&W tower are amazing, aren't they? At times, the building just melts away.

And the Reliance is still an astonishing building, even today, well after its centenary.

cbotnyse
Jul 29, 2008, 11:44 PM
Am i missing something here ...but that obvsiouly is just the middle piece of the jumbotron...gonna place in the left and right portions...the screen is not just that middle piece?no kidding. it looks very odd. It should fill that whole space.

does anyone have the render of the screen?

i_am_hydrogen
Jul 30, 2008, 12:18 AM
There's one included in Kamin's article.

http://featuresblogs.chicagotribune.com/theskyline/images/2008/07/29/cbs_overall_day_copy_4.jpg

cbotnyse
Jul 30, 2008, 12:48 AM
^^ thanks. I forgot about the article. duh.

after reading that, I agree. Its just another missed opportunity for something great, kind of like every aspect of this project.

pottebaum
Jul 30, 2008, 1:01 AM
Ugh. Jeebus. It looks so incomplete.

the urban politician
Jul 30, 2008, 3:29 AM
Just from the pics I can see why everybody is disappointed. WTF are they doing?

My only consolation is the fact that this screen blooper is a missed opportunity that can easily be rectified

harryc
Jul 30, 2008, 11:29 AM
Ugh. Jeebus. It looks so incomplete.

Just from the pics I can see why everybody is disappointed. WTF are they doing?

My only consolation is the fact that this screen blooper is a missed opportunity that can easily be rectified


July 28
http://lh3.ggpht.com/harry.r.carmichael/SJBQZBhac9I/AAAAAAAAuCg/-HeXTyyASN0/IMG_4559.JPG?imgmax=800
existing screen is behind traffic light on the left edge of the frame.

Alliance
Jul 30, 2008, 1:46 PM
^^^ NO matter how anyone spins this, that looks blatantly to be scaffolding for the flatscreens and NOT some part of the original building design that was unfortunately covered by the LED display.

Basically, CBS needs to install the other 3 screens as originally planned.

Taft
Jul 30, 2008, 3:40 PM
^^^ NO matter how anyone spins this, that looks blatantly to be scaffolding for the flatscreens and NOT some part of the original building design that was unfortunately covered by the LED display.

Basically, CBS needs to install the other 3 screens as originally planned.

Bingo! What a cop-out on what could have at least been an attractive bit of glitz. If you are going to go electronic (aka tacky), at least do it right. This is just half-a**ed.

Taft

i_am_hydrogen
Jul 30, 2008, 3:56 PM
We should all head down to B37 with picket signs and have us a protest.

honte
Jul 30, 2008, 4:19 PM
^ If I protest anything, it’s going to be for no more TV screens masquerading as architecture.

spyguy
Jul 30, 2008, 5:43 PM
We should all head down to B37 with picket signs and have us a protest.

And then CBS can broadcast the protest of the dinky screen on their dinky screen.

cbotnyse
Jul 30, 2008, 5:45 PM
^ If I protest anything, it’s going to be for no more TV screens masquerading as architecture.are you against a screen of any kind here?

sammyg
Jul 30, 2008, 6:08 PM
If they don't do anything to cover up the scaffolding, I'm pretty sure that the location next to City Hall and Daley Plaza will draw the attention of the Planning Department, etc. Something has to go up alongside, and if it doesn't, this is da Mayor's pet project, he won't like the incomplete look.

honte
Jul 30, 2008, 6:18 PM
are you against a screen of any kind here?

100% against. I was up in City Hall last week looking at it over Daley Plaza, and its impact is even worse than I was expecting.

However, I agree that the current screen looks far worse than the one shown in the renders, mostly because it isn't complementary in form to the architecture.

intrepidDesign
Jul 30, 2008, 6:19 PM
maybe the other screens havent been installed yet (wishful thinking)

simcityaustin
Jul 30, 2008, 6:32 PM
Let them know what you think...

http://cbs2chicago.com/contact

cbotnyse
Jul 30, 2008, 6:49 PM
100% against. I was up in City Hall last week looking at it over Daley Plaza, and its impact is even worse than I was expecting.

However, I agree that the current screen looks far worse than the one shown in the renders, mostly because it isn't complementary in form to the architecture.I'll have to disagree with you about the screen, but in its current form, its another missed opportunity.

I think outdoor LCD screens add life and character to the area, if done right.

Do you like the ABC screen? what is it you have against them exactly?

Alliance
Jul 30, 2008, 7:22 PM
^ If I protest anything, it’s going to be for no more TV screens masquerading as architecture.

Well, its not liek teh LED ribbon at ABC that everyone apparently thinks is cutting edge urban art. I don't think its architecture. Its no more part of the building than the awkward scaffolding behind it. The point is it should interact well with the building, and not take away from the architecture (which I agree with Kamin that it does.)

Abner
Jul 30, 2008, 7:55 PM
100% against. I was up in City Hall last week looking at it over Daley Plaza, and its impact is even worse than I was expecting.


I agree. I think the problem is that there's no possibility of the screen ever having company in that area. A street full of screens and bright lights isn't my cup of tea, but some people like it and it can work fine. But a street full of stately older architecture with one blaring screen is just heinous and intrusive. Since it would basically be architecturally criminal to stick video screens anywhere else facing Daley Plaza, I think none ever should have gone up. It would even be better just to have it facing Washington. (It would have been even better to have the studio facing Randolph where blaring lights would be welcome. Oh well.)

honte
Jul 30, 2008, 9:49 PM
^ Yep, that's a point I've argued before, but generally people don't seem to agree with me. I wonder what future generations will think, once the screen isn't much of a novelty any longer?

I think they only work in collections. I could see them working in Chinatown, on Randolph Street, River North, etc. The presence on State doesn't bother me as much due to the fact that the State / Lake building was a theatre and the Chicago Theatre is there, but I think it's quite a stretch to call that thing urban art.

wrab
Jul 30, 2008, 10:47 PM
Daley is a public plaza that sees a lot of different uses, among them rallys & protests; in that context, I think of a big screen as appropriate, like the jumbotron at a sports venue - a way of codifying & understanding the action around you. I can also imagine people gathering there to follow big news items, like they once did at Times Square. But the prospect of blatant commercial broadcasting is disturbing, I agree. It would cheapen what is otherwise a fantastic public space.

Taft
Jul 31, 2008, 1:35 AM
It would is cheapening what is otherwise a fantastic public space.

There. Fixed that for you. ;) snark...snark...

It is too dinky and oddly placed to be truly glitzy or inspiring. It looks like a misplaced window into a room you really don't want to be in. It is just insufficient.

Taft

[edited for redundancy]

the urban politician
Jul 31, 2008, 1:39 AM
You anti-screen guys should listen to yourselves. You sound like you're about 85 years old

Taft
Jul 31, 2008, 1:53 AM
The presence on State doesn't bother me as much due to the fact that the State / Lake building was a theatre and the Chicago Theatre is there, but I think it's quite a stretch to call that thing urban art.

I agree with you that clusters of electric signage are just about the only time such a thing works. I also agree with everyone who thinks that the screen is just misplaced: a corporate beacon in an otherwise artistic public square is just bad planning. Especially given the other, more commercial streets the development borders.

(Not that I expect ABC to do anything like this...but...)

I wonder though, if this thing could be salvaged. Let's say the screen looked much closer to the original screen. Same dimensions, etc. Extremely high quality screens. Then, ABC gives time to local video artists to display public art. Were it well executed, I think such a concept could really work. Not my first choice, but acceptable.

Let's just hope this isn't a harbinger of the quality and finish of the rest of the building...

Taft

honte
Jul 31, 2008, 5:13 AM
You anti-screen guys should listen to yourselves. You sound like you're about 85 years old

You pro-screen guys should listen to yourselves. You sound like a bunch of 8-year-olds who are just getting their first Nintendo.

I wonder though, if this thing could be salvaged. Let's say the screen looked much closer to the original screen. Same dimensions, etc. Extremely high quality screens. Then, ABC gives time to local video artists to display public art. Were it well executed, I think such a concept could really work. Not my first choice, but acceptable.

Yes, I think that would be the only acceptable solution.

ChiPsy
Jul 31, 2008, 8:26 AM
:previous:

Unless ABC wants to put money into its *own* place, rather than donating to the CBS site ;)

I like that idea, though -- but I'd also be 30% happier if CBS just moved the damned thing off to one side; as Kamin's piece pointed out, the asymmetry was an essential part of the design.

SkokieSwift
Jul 31, 2008, 4:18 PM
The Mistake on State.

intrepidDesign
Jul 31, 2008, 6:12 PM
i don' t thing there is anything wrong with screens as long as its done right. All an LED screen is, is the modern day equivalent to say, the Chicago theater sign. electric based promotion of the company/building. With that said, they really should finish off the LED screen like they originally planned.

honte
Jul 31, 2008, 10:34 PM
Passing the building today, it differs from the renders in the top as well. It does not appear that the graphic CBS logo pattern will be a part of the building (good or bad?).

the urban politician
Aug 1, 2008, 1:22 AM
i don' t thing there is anything wrong with screens as long as its done right. All an LED screen is, is the modern day equivalent to say, the Chicago theater sign. electric based promotion of the company/building. With that said, they really should finish off the LED screen like they originally planned.

Exactly. I don't see anything wrong with using different mediums to enhance the cityscape if done tastefully, and lights/videos are just one of those mediums. To imply that one particular medium doesn't "belong" in the city because it somehow "taints" the area's architectural integrity doesn't make any sense to me at all. To me, it's like saying that a modern, glassy building doesn't belong next to an ornamented, classic structure because it somehow destroys the "character" of the area.

honte
Aug 1, 2008, 2:10 AM
^ Good architecture is respectful of its surroundings. That's only one criterion, but it's a big one.

I'm not against digital media, or integration of such into architecture, in a philosophical sense. But I've never seen any buildings that are successful in this approach that are respectful of their surroundings, unless those surroundings are already bright-lights types of areas.

wrab
Aug 1, 2008, 2:17 AM
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y150/wjcordier/c42adfe1.jpg

Nowhereman1280
Aug 1, 2008, 3:18 AM
^ Good architecture is respectful of its surroundings. That's only one criterion, but it's a big one.

I'd be careful with that statement. Some of the best architecture has just said "fuck you" to every other building around it... JHC???

Norsider
Aug 1, 2008, 4:16 AM
I'd be careful with that statement. Some of the best architecture has just said "fuck you" to every other building around it... JHC???

Completely agree. Chicago isn't Paris. In the french capital, every last building (well, about 98%) is exactly the same. has a certain completeness and charm to it, but that's not how we do it here.

By the way, the way to get this fixed is to stand outside the glass studio holding a sign saying [ Your "jumbo" tron sucks ]. Just do that for a few weeks and maybe someone will get the message that their sorry excuse for a monitor needs buddies on either side.

Tom Servo
Aug 1, 2008, 6:13 AM
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y150/wjcordier/c42adfe1.jpg

i don't know honte. i might sound like i just got a nintendo, but i wanna see a japanese geisha on a big screen along our downtown streets, don't you? or maybe some mcdonalds ads? mmmmm, mcdonalds... see, the advertises is working already.

Minato Ku
Aug 1, 2008, 8:43 AM
Completely agree. Chicago isn't Paris. In the french capital, every last building (well, about 98%) is exactly the same.

Wrong. ;)

honte
Aug 1, 2008, 3:21 PM
I'd be careful with that statement. Some of the best architecture has just said "fuck you" to every other building around it... JHC???

No, I entirely disagree with your assessment. There is a massive difference between what is architecturally "respectful" and what a NIMBY thinks is respectful. Respectful does not mean copying something in style or in any other attribute. :pepper: Believe me, good architects spend a lot of time thinking about this.

JHC or the Seagram building were far more respectful to their surroundings than many other additions to their respective boulevards since then. Both of the architects were extremely careful about what they were doing. This is not the thread to discuss this, but I stand behind what I wrote. Unfortunately, those not trained in architecture think the success of these buildings is carte-blanche evidence that you can do absolutely anything anywhere and people will just "learn to live with it," but to think this misses the entire essence and greatness of those buildings.

Last, even if there was anything perceived as disrespectful about my two examples, they won with fabulous architecture. If you are going to try to insert something confrontational in any regard, your building had better be top-notch. :twoguns:

Tell me, when considering Daley Plaza as a whole, how does this succession make any sense to you: Picasso, Miro ... Television. Or, how about this one: Holarbird and Roche, D.H. Burnham, CF Murphy ... Television. :shrug: The television is the loudest, most distracting element in the whole scene, and yet it is the least refined and the least elegant. It lowers the IQ of the whole plaza and interferes with one's appreciation of the rest of the space.

Some people like to smoke while they eat, some people like to smoke in bed... but when you smoke around me, I have no choice but to breathe it. Did you notice how much harder it is to focus on the words I wrote with those dancing icons? The television is exactly the same.

cbotnyse
Aug 1, 2008, 3:44 PM
Tell me, when considering Daley Plaza as a whole, how does this succession make any sense to you: Picasso, Miro ... Television. Or, how about this one: Holarbird and Roche, D.H. Burnham, CF Murphy ... Television. :shrug: The television is the loudest, most distracting element in the whole scene, and yet it is the least refined and the least elegant. It lowers the IQ of the whole plaza and interferes with one's appreciation of the rest of the space.

Some people like to smoke while they eat, some people like to smoke in bed... but when you smoke around me, I have no choice but to breathe it. Did you notice how much harder it is to focus on the words I wrote with those dancing icons? The television is exactly the same.I respect your opinion but this is just too over the top. An LCD screen does not take away from the beauty of its surroundings. I think its adds life and character to the area.

Now one thing I greatly agree with you on is it is the least refined and least elegant, its simply hard to make an LCD screen do that. However, the renders look like a good effort to make it so. The screen that is currently there looks half-assed, cheap, out of place, and not what I want for a "world class" development.

wrab
Aug 1, 2008, 4:44 PM
.....Tell me, when considering Daley Plaza as a whole, how does this succession make any sense to you: Picasso, Miro ... Television. Or, how about this one: Holarbird and Roche, D.H. Burnham, CF Murphy ... Television. :shrug: The television is the loudest, most distracting element in the whole scene, and yet it is the least refined and the least elegant. It lowers the IQ of the whole plaza and interferes with one's appreciation of the rest of the space.....

I more or less agree with your dislike of this particular TV screen at this location, as executed to date, but...it isn't the medium, it's the message. Lots of interesting video installations out there.

.....(H)ow does this succession make any sense to you: Picasso, Miro ... Television.....

Maybe they could post some live feed of the Miro on the jumbotron, so that people could, like, actually see it LOL. I hate how Miss Chicago just sits there in the shadows, overlooked & unloved. Picasso gets all of the attention.

sammyg
Aug 1, 2008, 6:40 PM
Tell me, when considering Daley Plaza as a whole, how does this succession make any sense to you: Picasso, Miro ... Television.


It's actually - Picasso (cubist), Daley Center (modernist), City Hall (neoclassical), 1st United Methodist (neo-gothic), Miro, 69 W. Washington (ugly ass yellow concrete block), television. How is the TV any more dissonant from the other buildings than a Picasso being plopped in the plaza was? Or the "rusty" modernist Daley Center next to the columns of City Hall and the spire of 1st United Methodist?

BTW, I agree with wrabbit - I know people who've lived in Chicago for years that are surprised when I point out the Miro - they'd never noticed it before.

honte
Aug 1, 2008, 6:56 PM
^ I wasn't talking about things being similar, which is almost never of any importance. It's a question of quality of the space, degree of formality of the space, harmony of the space, amount of effort and attention to detail in the space. The works I listed are all very serious, very masterful works of art. A television screen in its current form is not, I'm sorry. And the television screen actually reduces the visual power of the other objects - hence, I consider it a detriment.

What is the point of Daley Plaza? What function does it serve in the cityscape? How do you build something across the street that makes that experience more powerful and completes the space? I see the television studio as being in opposition to what is there.

Like I've said many times before, having the station on either State or Randloph would have been much less objectionable and probably would have reinforced the character of those districts.

the urban politician
Aug 2, 2008, 2:07 AM
^ I wasn't talking about things being similar, which is almost never of any importance. It's a question of quality of the space, degree of formality of the space, harmony of the space, amount of effort and attention to detail in the space. The works I listed are all very serious, very masterful works of art. A television screen in its current form is not, I'm sorry. And the television screen actually reduces the visual power of the other objects - hence, I consider it a detriment.

What is the point of Daley Plaza? What function does it serve in the cityscape? How do you build something across the street that makes that experience more powerful and completes the space? I see the television studio as being in opposition to what is there.

Like I've said many times before, having the station on either State or Randloph would have been much less objectionable and probably would have reinforced the character of those districts.

^ Now that's an argument that makes a lot of sense to me, and I can see your point here

wrab
Aug 2, 2008, 2:46 AM
.....What is the point of Daley Plaza? What function does it serve in the cityscape? How do you build something across the street that makes that experience more powerful and completes the space? I see the television studio as being in opposition to what is there.

Like I've said many times before, having the station on either State or Randloph would have been much less objectionable and probably would have reinforced the character of those districts.

The TV station is the Fourth Estate, sitting adjacent to and looking out at two of the seats of government on which it reports - not a total disconnect. There is an historic and symbolic dialogue between these entities - that is why I don't mind the plain-view studio. But I agree that Daley Plaza is a very special space - the continent's greatest modern plaza? - and should be treated with a sure hand, especially when it comes to the jumbotron.

honte
Aug 2, 2008, 3:06 AM
^ Wow, that's a viewpoint I've never heard before. I'll think about that one for a while. But couldn't they have figured out a way to put the screen elsewhere and still serve this purpose? Furthermore, I highly doubt anyone considered it in this light, but it's a fair enough theory.

...thinking...

If they had put the station at Randolph and Dearborn, with the "loudscreen" facing Randolph, the station could have interacted with City, County, and State. That would achieve this lofty (highly theoretical) concept while keeping the signage away from the plaza. Sure, people couldn't gather in Daley Plaza and watch TV, but the designers could have come up with something to address this. Heck, you could cantilever the studio out over Randolph and put screens facing the DuBuffet plaza to the west and down Randolph Street to the east. They could have worked out a deal with the City to broadcast valuable information periodically in exchange for this unique privilege.

...

One final thought: If you believe (as I do) that Daley plaza is going to be messed up with this screen, isn't it curious that Daley II is tinkering with virtually everything that bears his father's name? Daley Bicentennial Plaza is going to be obliterated; Daley Plaza reworked... what's next, a casino in place of Daley College? :D

wrab
Aug 2, 2008, 3:22 AM
^ Oedipus Rex - Chicago is Queen Jocasta.

honte
Aug 2, 2008, 3:54 AM
^ :haha: I was wondering why they put up a commemorative street sign reading "Phocis" at 35th and Lowe.

i_am_hydrogen
Aug 2, 2008, 4:36 AM
If they had put the station at Randolph and Dearborn, with the "loudscreen" facing Randolph, the station could have interacted with City, County, and State.

Wouldn't State and Washington be better?

honte
Aug 2, 2008, 5:55 AM
^ Sorry, I don't follow that. Could you please explain? I meant the State of Illinois via the Thompson Center, not State Street, by the way.

jjk1103
Aug 4, 2008, 2:28 AM
.....you guys are all driving me nuts with this "jumbo-tron" stuff..........does anyone have any new pics ? :koko: :koko: :hell: :hell: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Norsider
Aug 4, 2008, 3:38 AM
.....you guys are all driving me nuts with this "jumbo-tron" stuff..........does anyone have any new pics ? :koko: :koko: :hell: :hell: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

We'll head right out and take those for ya, JJ.

jjk1103
Aug 4, 2008, 11:27 PM
We'll head right out and take those for ya, JJ.

...thanks !!!! :D :D :D :D :haha: :haha: :haha:

pottebaum
Aug 5, 2008, 8:11 PM
Let them know what you think...

http://cbs2chicago.com/contact

I did. Here's the response I got back:



"Thank you for taking the time to email us at CBS 2 Chicago. We always
appreciate hearing from our viewers.

We are in the process of finalizing plans for the rest of the space
surrounding our large outdoor video wall facing Daley Plaza. The video
screen is powered by some of our industry's most sophisticated and
powerful technology. The picture quality is virtually the clearest
resolution available allowing our station to serve and connect with the
public like never before. We recognize the significance of our location
in the heart of Chicago and what this video display means to the entire
area.

We appreciate your feedback and thank you for your interest in CBS 2."

Taft
Aug 5, 2008, 8:49 PM
I did. Here's the response I got back:



"Thank you for taking the time to email us at CBS 2 Chicago. We always
appreciate hearing from our viewers.

We are in the process of finalizing plans for the rest of the space
surrounding our large outdoor video wall facing Daley Plaza. The video
screen is powered by some of our industry's most sophisticated and
powerful technology. The picture quality is virtually the clearest
resolution available allowing our station to serve and connect with the
public like never before. We recognize the significance of our location
in the heart of Chicago and what this video display means to the entire
area.

We appreciate your feedback and thank you for your interest in CBS 2."

Typical corporate garbage: a whole lotta words and yet you come away with no relevant information. That crap practically writes itself.

Taft

cbotnyse
Aug 5, 2008, 8:52 PM
^^ You're right becuase I also wrote and got the same exact response. Hopefully their "finalized plans" are better than what we have now.

simcityaustin
Aug 6, 2008, 12:38 PM
At least you guys got a response. I never heard back. In then end or future I really hope that add to the rinky dink sign up there.

jjk1103
Aug 11, 2008, 1:08 AM
...I saw the sign in person today (bright sunshine) ....it certainly is bright and clear .....even in the bright sun

Breezyfingers
Aug 13, 2008, 11:58 PM
Last week:

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3257/2760540159_a6a3af73c6_o.jpg

It really does look stupid
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3292/2761449416_dac2c3d5a3_o.jpg

SolarWind
Aug 14, 2008, 1:16 AM
August 11, 2008

http://img239.imageshack.us/img239/3271/dsc0244hr1.jpg

harryc
Aug 15, 2008, 2:29 AM
:previous: Solar you nailed that one.

From today
http://lh3.ggpht.com/harry.r.carmichael/SKTpZ3ZzJbI/AAAAAAAAvU0/6Y-nrh2hxEk/P1000924.JPG?imgmax=800

http://lh3.ggpht.com/harry.r.carmichael/SKTpbxSD2LI/AAAAAAAAvVA/F0NiRrbzKGw/P1000926.JPG?imgmax=800

http://lh6.ggpht.com/harry.r.carmichael/SKTr67MWalI/AAAAAAAAvVg/OBRS7fthsws/P1000930_28_29.jpg?imgmax=720

Breezyfingers
Aug 16, 2008, 12:14 AM
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3157/2766812580_f80138e985_o.jpg

Northwest
Aug 17, 2008, 9:29 PM
It really does look stupid
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3292/2761449416_dac2c3d5a3_o.jpg

This really looks stupid :(

CBS cant possibly intend to leave it like this? Please tell me no.

chicubs111
Aug 17, 2008, 9:55 PM
^ Its so ridiculous too becuase you can obviously see this was inteneded to be a large jumbotron not just that middle piece...just freakin CBS cheapin out at the last minute...pisses me off :hell:

the urban politician
Aug 17, 2008, 10:20 PM
I hate to say this but something like this would never happen in Manhattan.

And Chicago shouldn't settle for this crap either. That thing just looks stupid

Tom Servo
Aug 18, 2008, 12:11 AM
I hate to say this but something like this would never happen in Manhattan.


so true... but remember this is chicago... so expectations shouldn't be very high.

the urban politician
Aug 18, 2008, 12:35 AM
so true... but remember this is chicago... so expectations shouldn't be very high.

That's bullshit, but I can sense the sarcasm so I hear ya.

I've been very very fair with this project, seeing the benefits as outweighing some of the architectual....miscomings, if you will. State St needs jumper cables pronto, and I'm NOT gonna freak about about Dairy Queen.

But damn it, this one really crosses the line for me. I mean, we're talking about Daley Plaza in the Loop, the heart and soul of Chicago, the essence of it all. I cannot get over how incomplete & cheap this looks.

Tom Servo
Aug 18, 2008, 1:33 AM
That's bullshit, but I can sense the sarcasm so I hear ya.

I've been very very fair with this project, seeing the benefits as outweighing some of the architectual....miscomings, if you will. State St needs jumper cables pronto, and I'm NOT gonna freak about about Dairy Queen.

But damn it, this one really crosses the line for me. I mean, we're talking about Daley Plaza in the Loop, the heart and soul of Chicago, the essence of it all. I cannot get over how incomplete & cheap this looks.

i wasn't being sarcastic... given this city's recent track recorded, i'm not surprised by any kind of mediocrity or econoarchitecture; i'd be surprised, however, by greatness.

Loopy
Aug 18, 2008, 1:54 AM
August 11, 2008

http://img239.imageshack.us/img239/3271/dsc0244hr1.jpg

I asked an architect friend at Gensler if they considered putting some kind of "fill" in the open segments of the woven stainless.

He said that the openings are "spill out" points for some kind of back lighting.

Has anyone seen this lighting turned on yet?

NYC2ATX
Aug 18, 2008, 5:18 AM
He said that the openings are "spill out" points for some kind of back lighting.


hmmm an exciting new development. :hmmm:

nomarandlee
Aug 18, 2008, 7:25 AM
You know if they want to cheap and half asse an original plan then fine but at least do that respectably. The least they could do is cover up the rest of the two sides of the screen with something. They have absolutely no self-respect or pride if they leave it bare as is and I almost feel that it just can't be their plan. If you not going to put up the full LED screen then at least make one of the empty slots a airline info board (which I think would be less expensive both upfront and to use then an LED screen) and make the other a business/stock ticker of something. If too cheap for that just put up a stainless steel blank facade or something, as is is just not acceptable.

Chicagoguy
Aug 18, 2008, 4:09 PM
You know if they want to cheap and half asse an original plan then fine but at least do that respectably. The least they could do is cover up the rest of the two sides of the screen with something. They have absolutely no self-respect or pride if they leave it bare as is and I almost feel that it just can't be their plan. If you not going to put up the full LED screen then at least make one of the empty slots a airline info board (which I think would be less expensive both upfront and to use then an LED screen) and make the other a business/stock ticker of something. If too cheap for that just put up a stainless steel blank facade or something, as is is just not acceptable.

I heard that they are going to be putting the other screens up on both sides. Maybe I heard wrong but that was what was going to happen to my knowledge? It just looks very uncomplete as is!

ChiPsy
Aug 19, 2008, 12:48 AM
i wasn't being sarcastic... given this city's recent track recorded, i'm not surprised by any kind of mediocrity or econoarchitecture; i'd be surprised, however, by greatness.

Adrian, you're judging against a standard that doesn't exist these days -- not in New York (read recent NYT articles about what's actually being built vs. proposed), not in London, and certainly not in any other US city. The issue is that 90% of what's built anywhere is mundane and you only hear -- if you don't live in the city in question -- about the 10% that rises above that mark. Living in Chicago, you're privy to both the mundane and the premier here, and while you're correctly upset about the mundane, you're perceiving (and painting) an unfortunately biased view about how we compare to norms.

(And I know you've spent time in Texas, so you know this VERY well if you've been back recently.)

Meanwhile, I didn't realize the "2" in our local CBS affiliate stood for "2nd rate."

spyguy
Aug 20, 2008, 2:05 PM
http://www.chicagorealestatedaily.com/cgi-bin/news.pl?id=30653

2 more retailers sign at Block 37
By Eddie Baeb, Aug. 20, 2008

Trendy U.K. fashion label Ben Sherman and Spanish retailer Zara have signed leases at Block 37, putting the shopping center that’s to open next spring at more than half full.

Ben Sherman, known for decades for its ties to the British rock scene, has agreed to lease a 2,600-square-foot store on the ground level at Block 37 along State Street. Zara is taking a two-level store along Randolph Street that’s about 12,000 square feet, sources say.

Chicagoguy
Aug 21, 2008, 6:26 PM
http://www.chicagorealestatedaily.com/cgi-bin/news.pl?id=30653

2 more retailers sign at Block 37
By Eddie Baeb, Aug. 20, 2008

Trendy U.K. fashion label Ben Sherman and Spanish retailer Zara have signed leases at Block 37, putting the shopping center that’s to open next spring at more than half full.

Ben Sherman, known for decades for its ties to the British rock scene, has agreed to lease a 2,600-square-foot store on the ground level at Block 37 along State Street. Zara is taking a two-level store along Randolph Street that’s about 12,000 square feet, sources say.


This is great news...so we are at about half full then? There is Puma, Ben Sherman, Zara...and then who else is signed on?

i_am_hydrogen
Aug 21, 2008, 7:10 PM
Apple (still in negotiations)

Others:
• Aveda, a manufacturer of plant-based hair and skin care products, has leased about 6,000 square feet.
• Lululemon Athletica, a seller of athletic and yoga wear, has leased 2,555 square feet.
• Steve Madden has leased 1,750 square feet.
• Godiva Chocolatier is to open a 1,000-square-foot boutique.
• Sabon, a bath and body products seller, has leased 811 square feet.

ardecila
Aug 22, 2008, 5:44 AM
Updated the list. I heard a rumor that Billabong, which had previously committed to Sullivan Center (Carson's building), has changed their minds and switched to Block 37.

Here's a list of known tenants for Block 37 that I compiled.

Confirmed Above Ground Tenants
Muvico Theaters
Rosa Mexicano
Lululemon Athletica
Aveda
Godiva
Sabon
Steve Madden
David Barton Gym
Puma
unknown Lettuce Entertain You restaurant
unknown Lettuce Entertain You coffee shop
Club Monaco
Ben Sherman
Zara

Confirmed Pedway Level Tenants
Au Bon Pain
Beard Papa's
Dairy Queen/Orange Julius
Freshii
Gateway News

Possible Tenants
Apple Store
Bebe
J. Crew
Coach
unknown small live theatre
Billabong

Chicagoguy
Aug 22, 2008, 7:16 AM
Updated the list. I heard a rumor that Billabong, which had previously committed to Sullivan Center (Carson's building), has changed their minds and switched to Block 37.

Great update...glad to see so many are moving into this building! Coach would be a nice addition I think, there isnt one anywhere on that side of the river and it would be great for them to expand! Are you sure Club Monaco is a for sure tenant? I heard they decided to open a store in Wicker Park instead...plus they already signed an agreement to move into the Michigan Avenue storefront of the new Ritz Residences once they open.

hdtvtechno
Aug 22, 2008, 10:08 AM
Well
T-30 days now till opening and broadcasting live from the CBS2 studios :)

can anyone grab a new pic of the inside of the studio ? or is it blocked out to the public

jjk1103
Aug 23, 2008, 3:10 AM
I heard that they are going to be putting the other screens up on both sides. Maybe I heard wrong but that was what was going to happen to my knowledge? It just looks very uncomplete as is!

....is that for real ? ...or just another crazy rumor ?

Chicagoguy
Aug 23, 2008, 3:15 AM
....is that for real ? ...or just another crazy rumor ?

Just what I had heard a while back...they could have decided against it or maybe it was just a rumor? Who knows anymore?

Hayward
Aug 23, 2008, 3:43 AM
I do not like the exposed louvers I see throughout.

pottebaum
Aug 23, 2008, 5:41 AM
Well, the email they sent in response to all the complaints mentioned that they're still considering what to do with the area around the screen, so it sounds like they plan to do at least something different.

I hope. :shrug:

ardecila
Aug 23, 2008, 6:36 AM
Are you sure Club Monaco is a for sure tenant? I heard they decided to open a store in Wicker Park instead...plus they already signed an agreement to move into the Michigan Avenue storefront of the new Ritz Residences once they open.

I'm not sure... I've never even been in a Club Monaco store (but I am psyched for Ben Sherman!) Spyguy told me awhile back that Club Monaco was a confirmed tenant, and I trust him.

Chicagoguy
Aug 23, 2008, 6:53 AM
I'm not sure... I've never even been in a Club Monaco store (but I am psyched for Ben Sherman!) Spyguy told me awhile back that Club Monaco was a confirmed tenant, and I trust him.

Alright thats still good to hear. I guess there business is booming with them opening so many new stores throughout the city. I think it will be a great addition to State Street shopping!

i_am_hydrogen
Aug 27, 2008, 9:45 PM
jjk1103 and headcase - Your posts re: Carson's have been moved here:

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?p=3762639