CHICAGO | OneEleven - 111 West Wacker | 630 FT | 59 FLOORS | COM

[RobertWalpole]

Originally Posted by untitledreality

Boy, seeing those two side by side really makes me want to punch someone at Related in the dick.

Hilarious.

[Venom]

I like both equally.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by Patrick

Literally, Lol. Just because I prefer the new more conservative design does not mean I prefer boring architecture.

when i did i ever equate conservative design with "boring architecture"?

you made that part up in your own mind.

persecution complex?

[takascar]

Originally Posted by Nowhereman1280

OK, so if a developer want's to build a smog factory on this site then we have no right to control what they do? That's bullshit. There is a long tradition of the city getting some say in what gets built because it affects everyone. Same applies to piss poor design that ruins the cityscape.

Those are two different things. A "smog factory" will cause physical harm to people's health. What we are talking about here is someone's opinion that some building looks like a "turd" and so, they should have the right to impose their viewpoint on people.

Again, its only someone's "opinion" that it isn't pretty enough for them. I happen to think it looks just fine. Besides, who should decide if a design is "nice enough" for a city? An "aesthetics board". And why would their opinion be any better than anyone else's opinions?

In the meantime, developers would take their cash elsewhere after doing the cost-benefit profitability analysis and determining that the grand project would not be profitable. Then nothing would get built.

[Nowhereman1280]

^^^ Because whether something is innovative or not is not a matter of opinion. The second design is half assed and just a "finish it part way and slap a facade on it" type design. Meanwhile the first design actually used architecture to solve a unique problem and contributed something to a field. That is not an opinion, but a fact. I don't have a problem with developers building whatever they want from an aesthetic perspective in most places, but I do have a problem with them trashing important sites with boring, uninspired crap.

Finally, the fact is we can and do have the right to influence the aesthetics of a building. I'm not suggesting we create some panel, but I am expressing my opinion that this is a shit design and it should either be refined or redesigned. We have every right as citizens to say "no, that podium is ugly" or "sorry, that blank wall against the street is unacceptable", we don't have the right to make outrageous demands like "you aren't allowed to build anything here" or "make it shorter so I can preserve my views". There is absolutely nothing wrong with demanding and expecting better from developers, there is something wrong with demanding developers stop developing.

[jdcpamba]

Chicago influences the aesthetics of a building all the time. I believe One Museum Park was redesigned with more floors than the initial plan because the City wanted a stronger presence to book-end Grant Park. And Trump had to spend a few million more on his building because Daley wanted a spire.

[Patrick]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

when i did i ever equate conservative design with "boring architecture"?

you made that part up in your own mind.

persecution complex?

You are literally looking way too far into my statements. Stop.

[Steely Dan]

^ i can only respond to what you write in your post. i'm not a mind reader.

[Zapatan]

I like the new design better, the other one just didn't work. If it were taller it would be perfect.

[Alliance]

Blandy McBland. Related needs to stop trying to build this sort of mediocre carp. I know right now from all their other gems that the materials on the building are just begging for their classic plastic-wrapped box treatment. Also the glass wont be clear, but some obnoxious generic blue-silver.

[Tom Servo]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

^ i can only respond to what you write in your post. i'm not a mind reader.

Bro, you take the internet WAY too seriously.

...

In any event... whereas OBVIOUSLY the last design ruled, this new is totally fine. All this talk about "taller" and such is trite and boring. Also, Nowhereman, I fully disagree with your commentary. There is nothing wrong with this building. It's glass and has right angles. It's clean and simple and therefore is good.

I feel like I said this already.

Why would my post get deleted? I swear, some moderators on this forum are way too trigger happy and bizarrely involved with interneting.

[SamInTheLoop]

Although I'm not surprised that Related seems to have opted for something more conservative and perhaps 'conventional', the relatively low level of design 'risk-taking' among developers in this town is still a bit disappointing.

However, one thing that is already really annoying me is that my guess based on the design - and who they worked with at 500 N. LSD - is that this is once again SCB. If so, I've absoluely had it with inexcusably high market share for towers in development downtown right now (even considering the majority are their 'sweet spot' in rental apartment towers). This is major evidence of severe risk aversion when it comes to design on the part of developers. The amount of design talent in this town is extraordinary, really - and yes, many of these design firms have good business sense, proven track record, can deliver efficiences, etc in addition to innovative design. Although I like many/most of the designs they produce - and some are very good to excellent - enough already! We currently need a lot more diversity among design talent being represented on new additions to the skyline, and developers really need to step up here........for Related to just dial it in like this, select SCB (if I'm right), for a pretty ordinary design for such a noteworthy site is a bit nauseating.....

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by Tom Servo

Bro, you take the internet WAY too seriously.

Bro? WTF? Where are you from?






anyway, i have no knowledge of any posts of yours being deleted from this thread. if such occurred, it must have been another moderator. the normal protocol is for a mod to send a PM to the person in question when a post is deleted containing the reason for doing so or to leave a post in the thread in question explaining the same. check your PM inbox.

[Nowhereman1280]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

Bro? WTF? Where are you from?

He's from the internet... Bro...

[harryc]

And they're off ....
Early Morning


Still at it this afternoon

[RockfordSoxFan]

All I see when I look at the redesign is a big question mark. Anyone else see that right away? I can see it now.... The Jokers world headquarters in the next Batman movie.

[ChiPhi]

Originally Posted by RockfordSoxFan

All I see when I look at the redesign is a big question mark. Anyone else see that right away? I can see it now.... The Jokers world headquarters in the next Batman movie.

This whole thing was actually a ploy to get the next Batman movie to film in Chicago instead of Pittsburgh...

Actually though, I would be incredibly happy if they revealed a new design that isn't the one we've seen leaked. A man can hope, huh?

[ardecila]

^^ You mean the Riddler?

[Tom Servo]

Originally Posted by steely dan

bro? Wtf? Where are you from?

you're cool!






In any event... if that's is the case, perhaps I THOUGHT about responding but never did. Oh well.

[Tom Servo]

Originally Posted by RockfordSoxFan

All I see when I look at the redesign is a big question mark. Anyone else see that right away? I can see it now.... The Jokers world headquarters in the next Batman movie.

Haha, that's funny... yeah, it is kind of noticeable. But that's only because you're looking at a small, static pic where the entire building is viewable. This isn't the case of a building when experienced from the ground. This will be huge, and the ? won't be noticeable at all. Especially not from other angles and such... Anyway, pretty funny. Now I see it toO!