HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Buildings & Architecture

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #21  
Old Posted Jun 2, 2011, 5:25 PM
i_am_hydrogen i_am_hydrogen is offline
tilted & shifted
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 4,589
I don't see the point in potentially extending a building protection if the party adverse to such a move can simply ask that the building be removed from the permit process and then demolish it at a later date. How can the process be so easily circumvented? Would a Joe Schmo-type without the clout of Northwestern University be permitted to engage in this maneuver?
__________________
flickr
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #22  
Old Posted Jun 2, 2011, 7:38 PM
Nowhereman1280 Nowhereman1280 is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Pungent Onion, Illinois
Posts: 8,492
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Dan View Post
^ yep. no doubt there's some nefarious backroom meeting taking place right now between NW and the city to have prentice sit vacant and unmaintained for some prescribed amount of time until an outside party engineer can come in and deem that it is "too far gone to save", thus paving the way for NW to destroy an unqualified landmark of 20th century genius while saving face in the PR game. we'll get some BS line about how "we made a good faith effort to try and save this important building, but it's just too old and unsafe to reuse".

"the city that works (underhandedly)"
Yes I have the same concerns, but I also think that every day that passes increases the chance Prentice will become more widely appreciated. Especially as the days count down until the Goldberg retrospective. I'd like to see the outrage if NW applied for a permit to demolish something that is currently the highlight exhibit and one of the great Art Museums of the world, just blocks away.

Also, I don't think Prentice is anywhere near having major structural or maintenance issues. My friend is working in the remaining operations there and tells me the place is actually in very good shape. I would bet Prentice could stand vacant for 5-10 years without suffering major damage. Also, its going to be pretty hard to argue that a structure so beefy and strong is unsavable. It take many many winters of raw exposure to cause significant damage to the bunker like shell of this building.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #23  
Old Posted Jun 2, 2011, 7:40 PM
Nowhereman1280 Nowhereman1280 is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Pungent Onion, Illinois
Posts: 8,492
PS All of you who were going to go to the meeting today should sign up to go to Bowling For Prentice at 10 Pin in the basement of Marina City this Monday. I am making plans to attend. It's $35 for two hours of unlimited bowling and the proceeds go to Landmark Illinois' "Save Prentice" campaign. Reserve tickets here:

http://www.brownpapertickets.com/event/175412
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #24  
Old Posted Jun 2, 2011, 7:51 PM
harryc's Avatar
harryc harryc is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Oak Park, Il
Posts: 11,865
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nowhereman1280 View Post
Yes I have the same concerns, but I also think that every day that passes increases the chance Prentice will become more widely appreciated. Especially as the days count down until the Goldberg retrospective. I'd like to see the outrage if NW applied for a permit to demolish something that is currently the highlight exhibit and one of the great Art Museums of the world, just blocks away.

Also, I don't think Prentice is anywhere near having major structural or maintenance issues. My friend is working in the remaining operations there and tells me the place is actually in very good shape. I would bet Prentice could stand vacant for 5-10 years without suffering major damage. Also, its going to be pretty hard to argue that a structure so beefy and strong is unsavable. It take many many winters of raw exposure to cause significant damage to the bunker like shell of this building.
I can attest to that - had to drill through the floors back in the 90s (installing Token Ring !) and they were very very solid. This was one of the big problems with Prentace, even more so with Passavant (gone) and Wesley (gone), back then every year brought more cables and more networks, the old dumbwaiters in Wesley were just big wiring runs. Now Fiber is coming to the rescue, as we increase the capacity we now drastically decrease the space required.
__________________
Harry C --- Chicago rep for SkyRise Cities ---- My Flickr stream HRC_OakPark
The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either. B Franklin.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #25  
Old Posted Jun 6, 2011, 11:23 PM
ChicagoHiRiser ChicagoHiRiser is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Dan View Post
^ yep. no doubt there's some nefarious backroom meeting taking place right now between NW and the city to have prentice sit vacant and unmaintained for some prescribed amount of time until an outside party engineer can come in and deem that it is "too far gone to save", thus paving the way for NW to destroy an unqualified landmark of 20th century genius while saving face in the PR game. we'll get some BS line about how "we made a good faith effort to try and save this important building, but it's just too old and unsafe to reuse".

"the city that works (underhandedly)"
I think this kind or architecture is disgusting and don't like it. Whether it be this, Marina City, River City or those senior housing hive-looking places on the near S Side I think they all look repugnant and I'm not a fan of the movement. I think there is obviously historical significance in Marina City but that's IT.

Why should they be preserved if there is widespread divergence of opinion regarding their aesthetics? I'll be happy if they demolish that fugly prentice hospital and replace it with anything other than a parking lot.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #26  
Old Posted Jun 7, 2011, 4:53 AM
Alliance's Avatar
Alliance Alliance is offline
NEW YORK | CHICAGO
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: NYC
Posts: 3,532
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChicagoHiRiser View Post
I think this kind or architecture is disgusting and don't like it. Whether it be this, Marina City, River City or those senior housing hive-looking places on the near S Side I think they all look repugnant and I'm not a fan of the movement. I think there is obviously historical significance in Marina City but that's IT.

Why should they be preserved if there is widespread divergence of opinion regarding their aesthetics? I'll be happy if they demolish that fugly prentice hospital and replace it with anything other than a parking lot.
Because there ISN'T much divergence of opinion amongst architects and historicists.
__________________
My: Skyscraper Art - Diagrams - Diagram Thread
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #27  
Old Posted Jun 7, 2011, 7:18 AM
gttx's Avatar
gttx gttx is offline
Urban Explorer
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: New York, New York
Posts: 2,052
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChicagoHiRiser View Post
I think this kind or architecture is disgusting and don't like it. Whether it be this, Marina City, River City or those senior housing hive-looking places on the near S Side I think they all look repugnant and I'm not a fan of the movement. I think there is obviously historical significance in Marina City but that's IT.

Why should they be preserved if there is widespread divergence of opinion regarding their aesthetics? I'll be happy if they demolish that fugly prentice hospital and replace it with anything other than a parking lot.
Because the way something looks isn't the only thing that determines its historical value.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #28  
Old Posted Jun 7, 2011, 8:55 AM
denizen467 denizen467 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,212
^ While we're back on this Prentice discussion, how crucial do people think the black international style (-ish) base to the building is? In other words, if NW agrees to spare/use the building only on the condition that it can rebuild/refurbish the bottom several floors, how less unpalatable would that be?

Incidentally, Lynn Becker's blog has something that faintly looks like it might be a recladding (or is this just how that render came out)?



http://arcchicago.blogspot.com/2011/...goldbergs.html
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #29  
Old Posted Jun 7, 2011, 1:19 PM
Mr Downtown's Avatar
Mr Downtown Mr Downtown is offline
Urbane observer
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,065
^That's from the Landmarks Illinois reuse plan. One of the things that makes SOAR so lukewarm about preservation is that they hate the dark glass base. It isn't integral to the design, and probably needs to be replaced for energy savings anyway.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30  
Old Posted Jun 7, 2011, 2:12 PM
Steely Dan's Avatar
Steely Dan Steely Dan is online now
devout Pizzatarian
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Lincoln Square, Chicago
Posts: 20,901
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChicagoHiRiser View Post
Why should they be preserved if there is widespread divergence of opinion regarding their aesthetics?
that's precisely WHY it should be saved. any work of art that can produce such profound and deep division of opinion between love and hate, leaving very little middle ground, is absolutely worth saving. if we only saved the safe "pretty" buildings that everyone agrees on, then we wouldn't be saving much of anything at all.

it's posible to hate a work of art yet realize that it's important to save. case in point for me, the R.R. Donnelley building. i hate it. to me, it's a pastiche monstrosity that looks like a greek temple that was pumped full of steroids and then vomited all over itself. YET, even i realize that it is a very important work of architecture, perhaps the pinnacle of 80s po-mo caricature architecture at its most garish excess. i may disagree with the aesthetic results that particular line of design philosophy ended up with when pushed to its extreme, but i would never wish to see such a building demolished merely because i find it "repugnant". it has significance beyond what i, one lone single peon of a human being, thinks is beautiful or ugly.

historical preservation is about so much more than just saving what you or me or joe six pack thinks is "pretty". the fact that you don't even know that doesn't encourage me to place much stock in your opinion. yes, you are entitled to your opinion, as is every individual, but not all opinions are created equal. i'll place for more faith in the profoundly more informed opinions of scores and scores of architects and historical preservationists who study these works of art for a living, than i will in the opinion of some random dude who points at building and says "hey, that thing is fugly, let's blow that shit up".



Quote:
Originally Posted by denizen467 View Post
^ While we're back on this Prentice discussion, how crucial do people think the black international style (-ish) base to the building is? In other words, if NW agrees to spare/use the building only on the condition that it can rebuild/refurbish the bottom several floors, how less unpalatable would that be?
it wouldn't be my first choice, but i could certainly live with a recladding of the base if that's the compromise that has to be made to save that glorious floating tower.

concrete that floats, how magical! bertrand was a serious wizard.
__________________
He has to go.

Last edited by Steely Dan; Jun 7, 2011 at 9:19 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31  
Old Posted Jun 8, 2011, 9:38 PM
Chicago Shawn's Avatar
Chicago Shawn Chicago Shawn is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,789
Prentice...

While I cannot reveal my sources, I have been told that a demolition permit was in fact already applied for. The only thing holding this up is (was) landmarks, and now that landmarking is off the table, this building is in serious danger of being lost very, very soon. I would not hold Northwestern to their word.

NW's long term plan for the site to expand the research labs farther east. These research labs are very lucrative assets when leveraging federal funding for the University's hospital system.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #32  
Old Posted Jun 9, 2011, 4:05 AM
J_M_Tungsten's Avatar
J_M_Tungsten J_M_Tungsten is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,375
^^^I don't understand. I'm not a huge fan of prentice, but doesn't northwestern own VACANT land? Wouldn't it be cheaper to build on that, rather than demolish a building, and THEN build something else?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #33  
Old Posted Jun 9, 2011, 10:49 AM
ChicagoHiRiser ChicagoHiRiser is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alliance View Post
Because there ISN'T much divergence of opinion amongst architects and historicists.
Yeah and they were also opposed to the demolition of a Mies van der Rohe test cell near the UIC campus, which was basically a concrete building of bricks that looked like a transformer/phone switch/fallout shelter.

http://www.planetizen.com/node/38929

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #34  
Old Posted Jun 9, 2011, 10:53 AM
ChicagoHiRiser ChicagoHiRiser is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Dan View Post
historical preservation is about so much more than just saving what you or me or joe six pack thinks is "pretty". the fact that you don't even know that doesn't encourage me to place much stock in your opinion. yes, you are entitled to your opinion, as is every individual, but not all opinions are created equal. i'll place for more faith in the profoundly more informed opinions of scores and scores of architects and historical preservationists who study these works of art for a living, than i will in the opinion of some random dude who points at building and says "hey, that thing is fugly, let's blow that shit up".
For similar reasons see my above post why I don't hold the esteem of "historicists" and "artists" in very high regard.

Yeah, I think that thing looks fugly alright. And can't wait for that shit to get blown up!!

And fortunately, those who share my opinion tend to be the decision makers regarding blowing that shit up!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Dan View Post
i'll place for more faith in the profoundly more informed opinions of scores and scores of architects and historical preservationists who study these works of art for a living
"profoundly more informed" is entirely subjective. Sure, objectively, they may study these works of art (abomination to me) for a living--that doesn't equate to "profoundly more informed" than me or "joe sixpack" to me.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #35  
Old Posted Jun 9, 2011, 2:06 PM
Nowhereman1280 Nowhereman1280 is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Pungent Onion, Illinois
Posts: 8,492
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChicagoHiRiser View Post
For similar reasons see my above post why I don't hold the esteem of "historicists" and "artists" in very high regard.

Yeah, I think that thing looks fugly alright. And can't wait for that shit to get blown up!!

And fortunately, those who share my opinion tend to be the decision makers regarding blowing that shit up!
And the decision makers regarding blowing shit up also agreed with the uninformed asshats like you of their time regarding the blowing up of this:


thestranger.com


theatrehistoricalsociety.files.wordpress.com

Just to give you a good look at how stupid your line of thought is, this is a piece that was saved:


wikipedia.com

If Prentice is torn down history will not view its destructor favorably it is an act of barbarism on the behalf of the most disgusting "organization" in the city. Fuck you Northwestern, if you can't respect our history, then get the hell out of our city...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #36  
Old Posted Jun 9, 2011, 3:30 PM
10023's Avatar
10023 10023 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: London
Posts: 17,827
I was in Chicago with my girlfriend last weekend, and knowing absolutely nothing about architecture she pointed the Prentice building out and asked me if it was something significant.

I don't see how they can justify tearing it down to build another glass and painted concrete box.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #37  
Old Posted Jun 9, 2011, 3:35 PM
Steely Dan's Avatar
Steely Dan Steely Dan is online now
devout Pizzatarian
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Lincoln Square, Chicago
Posts: 20,901
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChicagoHiRiser View Post
"profoundly more informed" is entirely subjective. Sure, objectively, they may study these works of art (abomination to me) for a living--that doesn't equate to "profoundly more informed" than me or "joe sixpack" to me.
as i said before, not all opinions are created equal. the opinions of experts hold far more sway than some dude on the internet. historic preservation is not about what's pretty or ugly, it's about what is important.

shawn, i'm disheartened to hear your news, but I suspected as much anyway. NW simply doesn't care about chicago's history. it's a shame. and the same old myopia that has destroyed countless wonders of chicago's past repeats itself yet again. the powers that be never learn a damn thing.
__________________
He has to go.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #38  
Old Posted Jun 9, 2011, 3:38 PM
10023's Avatar
10023 10023 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: London
Posts: 17,827
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChicagoHiRiser View Post
"profoundly more informed" is entirely subjective. Sure, objectively, they may study these works of art (abomination to me) for a living--that doesn't equate to "profoundly more informed" than me or "joe sixpack" to me.
I find that this idea that everyone's opinion is equal, and that of "Joe Sixpack" is just as important as those of experts (be they policy wonks, scientists, etc), to be one of the most unfortunate themes in American discourse today.

But I guess that's what happens when people take an obviously false notion like "all men are created equal" literally. Equal under the law, perhaps (and this is what the founders meant), but certainly not equal.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #39  
Old Posted Jun 9, 2011, 4:38 PM
Nowhereman1280 Nowhereman1280 is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Pungent Onion, Illinois
Posts: 8,492
Everyone it is time to start sending outraged letters to the alderman and mayor demanding it immediately be put on the landmarks agenda and be shoved down NW's slimy throat.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #40  
Old Posted Jun 9, 2011, 5:53 PM
Rizzo Rizzo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 6,895
Even if I hated the building, I'd still advocate it being saved. It's an integral piece of Chicago's architectural continuum. Without it, it's a missing piece of history. If Chicago was full of these buildings, then sacrificing a few wouldn't be so much of a mistake, but that's not the case.

Think of it like music or art. Just because you may not like a certain genre doesn't mean it should be kept out of music stores or concert halls.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Buildings & Architecture
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 9:44 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.