CHICAGO | Beitler Telecom Tower | 2,000 FT / 610 M | NEVER BUILT - Page 4

Stu · #61 Posted **Oct 25, 2005, 9:46 PM**

Whoa... amazing. I can see Lake Point Tower residents bitching about this though.

Pandemonious · #62 Posted **Oct 25, 2005, 9:51 PM**

^It wont really be blocking their view of anything...

Chase Unperson · #63 Posted **Oct 25, 2005, 9:56 PM**

I like Lynn Becker and I think she has some thoughtful comments on the tower.

I agree with her. Put it out in the sticks or bring back a mixed use project like 7sd.

Stu · #64 Posted **Oct 25, 2005, 9:59 PM**

Tower of Sorrow would be an amusing name for it.

jcchii · #65 Posted **Oct 25, 2005, 10:16 PM**

It looks alot like 7SD in that axonometric rendering up there^

the urban politician · #66 Posted **Oct 25, 2005, 10:21 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

i, however, am more interested in this tower for its malevolent soul, than i am in its height. it's been decades since chicago has maliciously erected anything with a straightforward aura of evil and doom, and as a fan of the dark side, i say it's high time we change our current track record of "pleasantness".

^That would make its placement next to the Fordham Spire even more powerful, since Fordham Spire is the polar opposite--bright, shiny, and voluptiously beautiful.

It's almost as if the Fordham Spire is the soft-spoken good girl and the TV Tower is her bad-ass boyfriend

STR · #67 Posted **Oct 25, 2005, 10:24 PM**

No sir, I don't like it.

It's okay (just okay, not great not awful) right up to the top of the observation area. Then, it loses me in some knock-off-of-the LotW-style antenna farm.

EDDYC · #68 Posted **Oct 25, 2005, 10:33 PM**

Design: seems promising enough so far.

Location in skyline: needs another site, maybe somewhere on the South Side.

Tom In Chicago · #69 Posted **Oct 25, 2005, 10:42 PM**

i, however, am more interested in this tower for its malevolent soul, than i am in its height.

I'm with Steely on this one. . . it's looks pretty fuckin' evil. . . and, therefore, should be built. . .

canucklehead2 · #70 Posted **Oct 25, 2005, 10:47 PM**

I looks like Chicago will continue to be THE Skyscraper Capital of America. Good on ya! I hope it gets built, as with the other unbuilt or dormant proposals. Could someone please compile a list of every unbuilt and proposed Chicago building over 1000 feet? There has to be at least 2 dozen.

Personally I would love to see the tower from I, Robot, realized. Anyone gotta pic of that one?

spyguy · #71 Posted **Oct 25, 2005, 10:51 PM**

Go to Emporis for those unbuilts.

emoney · #72 Posted **Oct 25, 2005, 11:08 PM**

Am I the only one who just doesnt like this tower based on the fact that the only purpose is to transmit it seems like that such a great location should be a place to live or work the design seems fine its just that the center should be filled with offices or condos. Like the design like i said but wish more people could enjoy the whole structure.

(waste of space)

LMich · #73 Posted **Oct 25, 2005, 11:16 PM**

I don't mind that at all. In fact, it would be great to see Chicago get an architecturally distinct piece of vertical infastructure instead of everything going up having to be a high-rise office or residential tower.

NYguy · #74 Posted **Oct 25, 2005, 11:20 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

2,000-foot TV tower may pierce skyline

"We are not out to have the tallest building in the world, or the tallest anything," Beitler said. "That's simply silly because somebody will come along and build something taller. There have been a lot of tombstones put up for people who proposed the `tallest.' The problem has always been financeability, and we have financing."

The project would be driven by agreements, not yet signed, with local television stations, which are preparing for a shift to exclusively high-definition broadcasting, expected to be required in 2009.

Seems the 2 major differences between this proposal and 7SD are the financing and city approval, only reversed. It also seems like more of a possibility than the Fordham.

However, the Fordham Spire together with this broadcast tower just looks silly. If approved, the broadcast tower needs to be redesigned. Bring back the Hancock and Sears towers. Those buildings look more impressive.

FlyersFan118 · #75 Posted **Oct 25, 2005, 11:30 PM**

you bastards are getting too many big towers.

We're all happy to find a 400 footer (Which we have many of, mind you) and you've got like all these towers proposed over 1000 feet...and TWO at 2000 feet.

Our tallest is gonna be 975 feet! WTF!?! lol

lucky bastards...it's not too bad I guess...

Ecker · #76 Posted **Oct 25, 2005, 11:34 PM**

I think a conspicuous tower whose main purpose is to house TV antennae just trashes up the place. It'd be like having one of those big ass satellite dishes on the front lawn of a stately North Shore home. I'd like to see a tower that contributes to the density and urbanity of the city. I don't want a 2,000' gimmick/tourist trap on Chicago's shore.

By the way, Lynn Becker is a male (or at least refers to herself using masculine pronouns).

iamrobk · #77 Posted **Oct 25, 2005, 11:55 PM**

Wow, I personally really like this design. Actually, I like it better than the Fordham Spire.

Chase Unperson · #78 Posted **Oct 25, 2005, 11:55 PM**

^Didn't know that.

NYguy · #79 Posted **Oct 26, 2005, 12:04 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ErkU3

I think a conspicuous tower whose main purpose is to house TV antennae just trashes up the place. It'd be like having one of those big ass satellite dishes on the front lawn of stately North Shore home. I'd like to see a tower that contributes to the density and urbanity of the city. I don't want a 2,000' gimmick/tourist trap on Chicago's shore.

I'm surprised the people in Chicago think this is an improvement:

Maybe it works if you take out the Fordham Spire.

spyguy · #80 Posted **Oct 26, 2005, 12:17 AM**

Or maybe it works with them both.