Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
Most forumers here seem to be assuming that Wanda is in some way the operating developer here. I've seen nothing actually that suggests that the arrangement is anything other than Magellan being the developer and Wanda being the majority equity partner, an extremely typical arrangement. There's always a chance it could be different I suppose - for example Magellan brought LR Development (now Related Midwest) to actually develop 340 on the Park........but I really tend to doubt that's the case here (who has more experience and expertise developing in Chicago - Magellan or Wanda?) - it seems much, much more likely to me that Wanda is just the foreign equity that's overwhelmingly backing this project. BTW, Wanda has indeed taken down the original press release that was linked to in this thread - surprise, surprise (well, not to me of course). Ooops, I suppose..... |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
^I agree, it's pretty safe to assume Gang didn't draw this up.
Here are your more typical Gang renderings: http://www.chicagoreader.com/binary/..._prentice.jpeg http://www.dailytonic.com/wp-content.../06/aqua_4.jpg |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
http://assets.inhabitat.com/wp-conte...the-park-2.jpg inhabitat.com This rendering is much much higher quality than the ones she first released for that project. |
Quote:
Also, when I was in SE Asia last year (Malaysia and Singapore) I saw some super unique stuff that was both high rise and low rise. I know that not every single one of these projects was done by American architects. Some of the stuff I saw was rather awesome (and some was just out there and rather experimental). I wouldn't mind some of what I saw there in Chicago to be honest. |
I'm pretty sure that is a Gang-sanctioned rendering. As far as details and refinement, there isn't much, huh? Particularly for a building that Gang's office has been working on for over a year...
|
Quote:
|
I've been withholding an opinion on this building, waiting to see how it felt after some time. I can't say I instantly loved it and I haven't really warmed to it. I appreciate the daring design, but there's just something about the balconies that kills it for me. To me, there's just too much balcony, I mean, they are on every side, and something bothers me about their non-uniform size (I know Aqua was the epitome of this). I'd like to see more uninterrupted glass to let the shape of the building "breath". I'm also not realy digging lighter blue glass flanking the balconies, kinda reminds me of the lapels of a cheap tux. I WANT to like this building, because I love Studio Gang, but...
|
Quote:
Again, my assumption here seems to be different than that of most - I think the developer is likely to still be Magellan, and the majority equity investor is Wanda (as well as possible other involvement with the hotel). The relationship between the developer and equity investor might not be all that different here from the typical case (in the vast majority of cases, it's only the developer itself that is dealing with the design stuff). Remember - some developers do, but the overwhelming majoirty do not build with anything but a mimimum amount of their own money, - on the equity side alone - and of course, when you add in the debt, it's even a much, much smaller proportion of the overall project cost. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
I worked at an (American) firm doing Chinese hotels and our renderings often looked like this - they were outsourced to a Chinese graphics team. These can range from awesome to mediocre, depending on how much you pay. http://www.china-render.com/exterior-works/ |
Quote:
Frankly, I was shocked that after a year of working on this building that these issues had not been addressed. I was also surprised that the programming of the project also didn't at least massage the form somewhat. Regardless, with any project that is to be built, a final verdict must wait. I guess I belong in the camp of most of the existing great towers of Chicago that ultimately were based upon Form Follows Function (Sears, Hancock, First National, Marina City). As some of these examples attest to, this doesn't have to mean a boring orthogonal internationalist box. The challenge with creating an unique form isn't to arbitrarily select it and force the program and structure into it, but create an unique form that is inherently tied to the function of the building and it's context. IMHO. |
I don't think the Gems school looks too tall. It is almost exactly the height of a two frustum unit in the new Gang design so it steps up perfectly almost like it is a part of the new tower. This is going to be an excellently modern stretch of the riverwall between Swisshotel, Coast, Gems, and this new tower.
|
My only gripe is the car ramp on the east side, just seems like it is thrown on as an afterthought and not really incorporated into the overall design well.
|
Quote:
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 6:49 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.