Quote:
Originally Posted by BVictor1
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/c...30-column.html
Proposed South Michigan Avenue towers appealing but need to strike balance
10/30/15
The Helmut Jahn-designed tower proposed for 1000 South Michigan would be Chicago’s seventh-tallest at 1,001 feet if another planned for East Wacker Drive also is built. (Jahn Architects)
BY: Blair KaminContact Reporter
Cityscapes
|
Quote:
Residents are right to ask city officials and the local alderman, William Burns, 4th, to assess the cumulative impact of the planned skyscrapers on everything from traffic to shadows.
|
I see that fucking ass-clown, NIMBY-elite, Blair (out-of-touch) Kamin hard at work being an idiot again...
Quote:
If there's a problem here, it's the lack of a graceful transition between the tower's finely grained base, which echoes the historic district's gridded facades, and its skyline-scaled top. Unlike with another building that grows outward as it rises, Walter Netsch's University Hall at the University of Illinois at Chicago, they resemble two separate structures, one stacked awkwardly on the other. With the design at an early stage, that shortcoming can be fixed.
|
Jesus. The arrogance of this guy is limitless.
Quote:
Yet there are potential negatives. According to architect Jim Plunkard, landmarks officials want the architects to de-emphasize the expressed bracing, which represents a marked departure from the historic district's more delicately scaled facades. More parking also would help. Neighbors howled Thursday night at the prospect of just 155 spots for the 454 apartments.
|
This city is so fucking stuck in the past and stupid it sometimes makes me wonder if we're living in some kind of sick Twilight Zone nightmare. It shouldn't be any wonder why New Yorkers and LAers view Chicago as fly-over territory. This bizarrely traditionalist, anti-modern, anti-sophisticated design mindset seems so deeply entrenched within the zeitgeist of this city, it's as if
actually noteworthy architecture returning to Chicago is nothing more than a far-fetched fantasy.
Fucking shame.
I bet if the John Hancock Center were proposed today it'd be roll over by stupid... which is what I assume will happen with these two (potential gem) towers.
Quote:
No one is being a NIMBY in insisting that roads, public transit and other infrastructure keep pace with the new projects. City officials should independently assess everything from the shadows the towers will cast to their effect on traffic. Another issue: Will these towers open the floodgates for developers to erect even more high-rises behind preserved facades of small Streetwall buildings.
|
Oh, jeez. God forbid!
Quote:
Density alone is not the issue. The issue is how to make density livable.
|
No Blair, you idiot. Density alone is exactly the single issue that has nimby idiots like you so uptight about new development. Don't kid yourself into thinking otherwise you delusional hack.
Traffic is an issue concerning our failing infrastructure and the boorish ineptitude of cdot; it has nothing to do with tall buildings.