- New Classical Architecture -

[The North One]

Originally Posted by jg6544

Just a bit too much marble on the exterior and the portions aren't quite right. The interiors are garish.

It's a total f*@king mess. The preportions are horrible, it's insanely overdone, the windows don't match the style at all. Honestly what a shame, if you have that much money at least build a home with some taste.

[spyguy]

550 West Dickens, Chicago

Flickr/ Chicajogian

[Hed Kandi]

.

[Hed Kandi]

New Townhouses - Chicago, USA









Source: http://www.bbaworld.com

[Hed Kandi]

New Townhouse - Chicago, USA









Source: http://www.bbaworld.com




Dai Lai Conference Hall - Vietnam








Source: http://www.designboom.com/architectu...ia-architects/

[jg6544]

Originally Posted by Hed Kandi

You obviously haven't spent a minute in an art history class. Firstly, that isn't marble but rather imported French limestone. Secondly, the massing is 100% correct to reflect the Second Empire period, as are the interior details which are all hand crafted on site by artisans guided by period historians.

It's a horror show and an embarrassment to the neighborhood. That is the opinion of a friend who lives nearby.

[jg6544]

Originally Posted by The North One

It's a total f*@king mess. The preportions are horrible, it's insanely overdone, the windows don't match the style at all. Honestly what a shame, if you have that much money at least build a home with some taste.

Agree.

The history of this place is interesting. It sits on half of the site of an even larger house that was purchased by a middle-eastern wealthy buyer (Saudi royalty?), who promptly surrounded the entire lot with a fence topped at intervals by very cheap copies of Graeco-Roman statuary. For some odd reason, he had the pubic hair painted black. The house burned down sometime in the 1980s, I think it was, and the lot sat vacant for years. Then, sometime in the early 2000s, a developer of expensive "spec" homes bought the lot; subdivided it, and proceeded to build two homes (the other one is even larger and more hideous than this one). The building process took years, punctuated by extensive halts. Usually, such halts occur when the developer can't pay his bills. I wondered fiver or so years back why the city of Beverly Hills didn't condemn both buildings and knock them down, since neither was an improvement over a vacant lot. Both were eventually completed and sold (although this one at least was sold for ca. $20 million less than the initial asking price). There are many beautiful examples of contemporary buildings built in traditional styles, many of which are on this thread. There are also many examples of not-so-successful efforts. This house, and its neighbor, fall into the latter category. They are not built to celebrate or remember earlier styles of building as much as they are built for buyers with more money than taste.

[RLS_rls]

Hed Kandi where are all these Chicago townhouses being built? Is this infill or a new development?

edit: I should say what's the story behind these? Do people in Chicago just like historicist townhouses or is this part of some greater plan?

[Busy Bee]

Of the infill type, in most cases there is already a structure on sight that is "obsolete" ( i.e. old and undersized, many times of frame construction v. masonry, but more importantly undervalued for their sites) and is torn down to be replaced with the luxury envelope that you see that maxes out allowable ft² (even though they sometimes replace properties w/ more than 1 unit, essentially replacing multiple units ft² for ft² dedicated to single family use). They seem to radiate out of the choicest areas like Lincoln Park and Lakeview, but also in the past 10 years have spread into adjoining areas. Most developments of this caliber are in fact one-off builds, either spec or client custom homes. New multi unit developments that are designed in a tradition style are rarely as well executed in terms of authentic high quality construction as these, although there are a few examples.

If in Chicago and new traditional architecture is your thing (which it probably is if you are perusing this thread) a walk down a street like Burling, Orchard or Willow in Lincoln Park will blow your socks off. Even more so if you saw the condition of these neighborhoods a mere 30 years ago.

[vandelay]

Two projects currently under construction in the Boston area:

Chevron on Tremont (Art Deco):



http://www.flickr.com/photos/beelinebos/8647241294


Warren Green, Charlestown (New England Colonial):



http://www.flickr.com/photos/beelinebos/8598490497/

[vandelay]

University of Georgia just broke ground on Correll Hall:

[CGII]

A fine example of traditional use of aluminum stud wall construction.



An even finer example of traditional Tyvek application in keeping with construction methods authentic to the 18th century Federal style.



At last. A traditional skyscraper! Just like the 1500s. A clear reference to Brunelleschi's airport Hyatt proposal for Florence.

[vandelay]

^ I don't get what your point is. It's not "traditional" enough for you? Would it satisfy you if they only used hand forged nails, hand hewn lumber, mixed plaster with dung and horse hair, etc.? How about a nice reindeer skin hut?

Even the Woolworth building is made of steel, not load bearing masonry, even though it's in a Gothic style.

Traditional styles will continue to grow and adapt with contemporary construction methods. Even if fanatical traditionalists, or indeed fanatical modernists, scoff at traditional buildings not petrified in time.

[The North One]

Originally Posted by jg6544

Agree.

The history of this place is interesting. It sits on half of the site of an even larger house that was purchased by a middle-eastern wealthy buyer (Saudi royalty?), who promptly surrounded the entire lot with a fence topped at intervals by very cheap copies of Graeco-Roman statuary. For some odd reason, he had the pubic hair painted black. The house burned down sometime in the 1980s, I think it was, and the lot sat vacant for years. Then, sometime in the early 2000s, a developer of expensive "spec" homes bought the lot; subdivided it, and proceeded to build two homes (the other one is even larger and more hideous than this one). The building process took years, punctuated by extensive halts. Usually, such halts occur when the developer can't pay his bills. I wondered fiver or so years back why the city of Beverly Hills didn't condemn both buildings and knock them down, since neither was an improvement over a vacant lot. Both were eventually completed and sold (although this one at least was sold for ca. $20 million less than the initial asking price). There are many beautiful examples of contemporary buildings built in traditional styles, many of which are on this thread. There are also many examples of not-so-successful efforts. This house, and its neighbor, fall into the latter category. They are not built to celebrate or remember earlier styles of building as much as they are built for buyers with more money than taste.

Are there pics of the larger one?

[jg6544]

Originally Posted by The North One

Are there pics of the larger one?

You can get glimpses of both houses on Googlemaps streetview; cor. Sunset Blvd. and Alpine in Beverly Hills. I've never seen pictures of the house they replaced.

[vandelay]

Chapman Cultural Center, Spartanburg, SC
2007

[vandelay]

Tarrant County Jail, Ft. Worth, TX
2005

[vandelay]

Tarrant County Family Court, Ft. Worth, TX
2005

[vandelay]

The Chase Building, Ft. Worth, TX
2003

[vandelay]

The Carnegie Building, Ft. Worth, TX
2009