HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > Highrise Construction

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #61  
Old Posted Jul 18, 2014, 7:29 PM
Chi-Sky21 Chi-Sky21 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Chicago
Posts: 608
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Servo View Post
I'll take quality over diversity everyday, all day. And besides, we don't need diversity in architecture; we need only good, high quality design and nothing less. And we especially don't need MORE postmodern horse manure polluting our city's landscape.

EDIT

And what do you mean we don't "have much of this style of architecture in this area"???!! Are you fucking kidding me? How about 900 N Michigan? One of the worst buildings in the city. Or that piece of shit on LSD, just east of the museum. Or those horrid apartments on the river just to the south? Or the building just down the street on Grand and LSD? Or the NBC tower? Or the god damn Ritz?! Jesus man... the list of Pomo trash between the river and North is fucking endless.
Wow, most of Chicago is trash in your opinion. I wonder why people design ALL this trash?!? You would think if it is all trash nobody would design such things.....hmmmmm....MAYBE...some people are ok with these designs. just maybe.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #62  
Old Posted Jul 18, 2014, 7:30 PM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is offline
atomic
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: the city o'wind
Posts: 12,563
Quote:
Originally Posted by sentinel View Post
Wait, what about the park??
The upside: Michael Van Valkenburgh has been tapped to do the new park, making for an all-NY design team.

The downside:

Quote:
A 70,000-square-foot public park, also owned by Related, would be redesigned. The park made its debut in 2008 when the 48-story ParkView Condominiums opened to its immediate west. Reilly called the park a "failure" and said the new one would include landscaped berms, mature trees, a dog walk and a small playground.
__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #63  
Old Posted Jul 18, 2014, 8:11 PM
rgolch's Avatar
rgolch rgolch is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 765
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chi-Sky21 View Post
Wow, most of Chicago is trash in your opinion. I wonder why people design ALL this trash?!? You would think if it is all trash nobody would design such things.....hmmmmm....MAYBE...some people are ok with these designs. just maybe.
As of late, our fellow Chicago forumers have become completely unrealistic in terms their expectations for proposed projects. To expect that every planned building be a masterpiece is beyond crazy, especially in Chicago, where real estate prices are not astronomical.

Is this building a home run? Of course not. But to call it a Turd and a skyline ruiner (with one cartoony, water-colored rendering) is beyond hyperbolic. No one is asking you guys not to have high standards. Your not expected to love everything. But when you have loathing hatred for every project (many of which are just average), it's kinda hard to take your opinions seriously.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #64  
Old Posted Jul 18, 2014, 8:30 PM
Tom Servo's Avatar
Tom Servo Tom Servo is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,649
I'm just hoping the neighborhood org can successfully get this thing downsized to under 500' so as to minimize its impact.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #65  
Old Posted Jul 18, 2014, 9:01 PM
BVictor1's Avatar
BVictor1 BVictor1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 8,879
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Servo View Post
I'm just hoping the neighborhood org can successfully get this thing downsized to under 500' so as to minimize its impact.
That's kind of silly. I actually hope the complete opposite.


Just got off the phone with a representative from Related. I was trying to get the exact foot height of the tower, but they wouldn't comment on that just yet as they told me they haven't settled on the floor-to-ceiling heights just yet.
__________________
titanic1
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #66  
Old Posted Jul 18, 2014, 9:18 PM
LouisVanDerWright LouisVanDerWright is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 3,559
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zapatan View Post
Good to see Chi Town back on track
Don't call Chicago Chi Town, that's the Lucien LaGrange of Chicago nicknames: one used and inhabited by only the worst nouveau riche bros.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Servo View Post
I'm down. This kind of shit has gone on for too long. The countless number of SHIT being built north of the river needs. to. end.

I was hoping we'd weathered the worst of it with AMLI or that Lincoln Park pile of shit and it was slowly getting better...

Guess not.

It's fucking 2014 for god's sake!
Yeah, I'm down too. When is the meeting again? I'd like to go berate the alderman for meddling in urban planning. Since when is it his job to design parks? Based upon prior experience we are probably going to end up with a piece of shit design that will be planted once and never maintained again after completion just like Reillys masterpiece: Green Blank Concrete Wall 2014 at 500 N LSD.

I also want to tell Stern to go pound sand and take his shit designs back to NYC. There never was a history of this trash in Chicago, our history is only that of modern design. If it weren't for tasteless aldermen, out of towners, and well intentioned, but tasteless, folks like Daniel Burnham this city would be orders of magnitude more attractive.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiTownWonder View Post
I think it looks fine honestly. nothing amazing, but nothing horrid either. Chicago doesn't have much of this style of architecture in this area, and if it increases the architectural diversity of the city, I'm all for it.
400 E Randolph increases the architectural diversity of Chicago, are you all for that shit stack? If I built a hut out of buffalo chips on Lower Wacker that would increase the architectural diversity of the area as well, are you in favor of literal stacks of shit too?

Quote:
Originally Posted by rgolch View Post
As of late, our fellow Chicago forumers have become completely unrealistic in terms their expectations for proposed projects. To expect that every planned building be a masterpiece is beyond crazy, especially in Chicago, where real estate prices are not astronomical.

Is this building a home run? Of course not. But to call it a Turd and a skyline ruiner (with one cartoony, water-colored rendering) is beyond hyperbolic. No one is asking you guys not to have high standards. Your not expected to love everything. But when you have loathing hatred for every project (many of which are just average), it's kinda hard to take your opinions seriously.
Completely ridiculous. The beef with this design has NOTHING to do with economics. The fact is this design is going to be precast trash. You know it. I know it. We all know it. That is the only economic function here. As such, we can deduce that building in this style is NEVER a good idea. We are not getting a 15 CPW here period, for the very same economic reason you listed. What I expect is for developers from other cities not to come here and drop a heaping load of shit in our city and set it ablaze. Everyone knows this design is just going to turn out like another Elysian with classy materials like corrugated tin apparently salvaged from a slum in Haiti and what essentially amounts to freeway retaining wall components for a curtain wall.

The richest part of this whole design is that this is what Related thinks is "stepping up their design game" or whatever ridiculous quote we saw a while back was. How such culturally vapid people rise to the top of massive companies like Related is completely beyond me. What they think they are building is a 1926 Dusenburg, what they are really building is a 1996 Caddilac Deville, and what we are debating over is whether we want our shitty mid 90's GM product to come with a false fabric top or just hardshell.

Edit: Look I just found an HQ render of this classy new tower:



Looks a little bigger now, maybe it is 800' now...

Last edited by LouisVanDerWright; Jul 18, 2014 at 9:35 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #67  
Old Posted Jul 18, 2014, 9:19 PM
rlw777 rlw777 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 1,330
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Servo View Post
I'll take quality over diversity everyday, all day. And besides, we don't need diversity in architecture; we need only good, high quality design and nothing less. And we especially don't need MORE postmodern horse manure polluting our city's landscape.

EDIT

And what do you mean we don't "have much of this style of architecture in this area"???!! Are you fucking kidding me? How about 900 N Michigan? One of the worst buildings in the city. Or that piece of shit on LSD, just east of the museum. Or those horrid apartments on the river just to the south? Or the building just down the street on Grand and LSD? Or the NBC tower? Or the god damn Ritz?! Jesus man... the list of Pomo trash between the river and North is fucking endless.
I wouldn't lump NBC tower in with the other PoMo in Chicago. It doesn't heavily lean on conflicting styles like other examples of PoMo.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #68  
Old Posted Jul 18, 2014, 9:30 PM
ChiTownWonder's Avatar
ChiTownWonder ChiTownWonder is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Orland Park
Posts: 481
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Servo View Post
I'll take quality over diversity everyday, all day. And besides, we don't need diversity in architecture; we need only good, high quality design and nothing less. And we especially don't need MORE postmodern horse manure polluting our city's landscape.

EDIT

And what do you mean we don't "have much of this style of architecture in this area"???!! Are you fucking kidding me? How about 900 N Michigan? One of the worst buildings in the city. Or that piece of shit on LSD, just east of the museum. Or those horrid apartments on the river just to the south? Or the building just down the street on Grand and LSD? Or the NBC tower? Or the god damn Ritz?! Jesus man... the list of Pomo trash between the river and North is fucking endless.
OK so 900 north Michigan is one and honestly i like that building except for the bigass base, and what building on LSD? there's a lot of them, and i don't think there is any building east of any museum whichever museum you are talking about, and yes River City looks shitty (accidental rhyme ) Grand and LSD looks fine and the NBC tower is more Art-Deco, and i have no problem with the ritz. it seems to me that Post Modern architecture comes in alot of diffrent styles, like Modern, art-deco influence, and so on. i dont get why people trash pomo architecture? not everything in the city can be like 500 LSD or the IBM tower. There are good examples and bad, and so far this one looks good to me.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #69  
Old Posted Jul 18, 2014, 9:35 PM
rlw777 rlw777 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 1,330
Quote:
Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright View Post
Don't call Chicago Chi Town, that's the Lucien LaGrange of Chicago nicknames: one used and inhabited by only the worst nouveau riche bros.



Yeah, I'm down too. When is the meeting again? I'd like to go berate the alderman for meddling in urban planning. Since when is it his job to design parks? Based upon prior experience we are probably going to end up with a piece of shit design that will be planted once and never maintained again after completion just like Reillys masterpiece: Green Blank Concrete Wall 2014 at 500 N LSD.

I also want to tell Stern to go pound sand and take his shit designs back to NYC. There never was a history of this trash in Chicago, our history is only that of modern design. If it weren't for tasteless aldermen, out of towners, and well intentioned, but tasteless, folks like Daniel Burnham this city would be orders of magnitude more attractive.



400 E Randolph increases the architectural diversity of Chicago, are you all for that shit stack? If I built a hut out of buffalo chips on Lower Wacker that would increase the architectural diversity of the area as well, are you in favor of literal stacks of shit too?



Completely ridiculous. The beef with this design has NOTHING to do with economics. The fact is this design is going to be precast trash. You know it. I know it. We all know it. That is the only economic function here. As such, we can deduce that building in this style is NEVER a good idea. We are not getting a 15 CPW here period, for the very same economic reason you listed. What I expect is for developers from other cities not to come here and drop a heaping load of shit in our city and set it ablaze. Everyone knows this design is just going to turn out like another Elysian with classy materials like corrugated tin apparently salvaged from a slum in Haiti and what essentially amounts to freeway retaining wall components for a curtain wall.

The richest part of this whole design is that this is what Related thinks is "stepping up their design game" or whatever ridiculous quote we saw a while back was. How such culturally vapid people rise to the top of massive companies like Related is completely beyond me. What they think they are building is a 1926 Dusenburg, what they are really building is a 1996 Caddilac Deville, and what we are debating over is whether we want our shitty mid 90's GM product to come with a false fabric top or just hardshell.
Tell us how you really feel. lol
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #70  
Old Posted Jul 18, 2014, 9:40 PM
LouisVanDerWright LouisVanDerWright is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 3,559
Quote:
Originally Posted by rlw777 View Post
Tell us how you really feel. lol
I'm saving that for the Alderman at whatever public meeting they have. I am going to tell him point blank that the only urban planning failure in his ward is him, not this park.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #71  
Old Posted Jul 18, 2014, 9:42 PM
ChiTownWonder's Avatar
ChiTownWonder ChiTownWonder is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Orland Park
Posts: 481
Quote:
Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright View Post
400 E Randolph increases the architectural diversity of Chicago, are you all for that shit stack? If I built a hut out of buffalo chips on Lower Wacker that would increase the architectural diversity of the area as well, are you in favor of literal stacks of shit too?
Im pretty sure that a lareg pile of poo would not classify as a building, and if you hallowed it out or something, good luck getting that approved by the alderman

The tower looks fine! not great like other buildings in Chi-Town(deal with it) but just a normal building. i must be a fan of post modern architecture.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #72  
Old Posted Jul 18, 2014, 9:54 PM
Pilton Pilton is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 281
The economy is improving. Happy about that. But such a dated design. Sad about that.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #73  
Old Posted Jul 18, 2014, 10:10 PM
rgolch's Avatar
rgolch rgolch is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 765
Gosh.

First, some of you need to dramatically decrease the length of your posts. Do you really think most people read word for word posts that take up half a page in a thread? Especially when its a common, rather than ocassional occurrence for some forumers.

Second, don't rush to judgement on a building where we don't even have a acceptable rendering.

Look, it's obvious many of you are very knowledgable about architecture and urban planning. But it gets tiresome reading constant negativaty. I feel like Fox news took over the Chicago threads.

Last edited by rgolch; Jul 18, 2014 at 10:21 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #74  
Old Posted Jul 18, 2014, 11:31 PM
Notyrview's Avatar
Notyrview Notyrview is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: New York City
Posts: 964
Turdmageddon

It is NOT hyperbolic to call this a turd. It's the worst of faux classicism for the nouveau riche and it will set the precedent for extending beigelandia along the lakefront. Maybe they can adorn the spire with big fancy bow because this is most definitely the prize pig at the county fair. Blue ribbon STURD.

Last edited by Notyrview; Jul 19, 2014 at 12:57 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #75  
Old Posted Jul 18, 2014, 11:32 PM
UPChicago's Avatar
UPChicago UPChicago is offline
Vote for me for Mayor!
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Chicago
Posts: 594
Quote:
Originally Posted by ardecila View Post
The tower is okay I guess. Kinda reminds me of 333 North Michigan crossed with Stern's 15 Central Park West. The rendering is too fuzzy to make out any real details other than the most general massing. Obviously Stern is aided here by the pre-existing underground garage so he doesn't have to grapple with designing a podium, and he can do something with really elegant proportions.

I'm more upset that Related is redesigning the park. What exactly is wrong with the current park? It's a breath of fresh air in a city that's full of crappy, boring little traditional parks.
I doubt if they are re-doing the park its actually a very nice park....unless they are using a large portion of the park as a staging area.

I really think you guys are exaggerating, this will not be like AMLI this is a condo building it will be more inline with Park Tower or Lincoln Park 2520 both are fine additions. Postmodern is certainly not my favorite but there are good examples and there are bad. This tower gets a 7 out of 10 in my opinion. I find it hilarious for people to bash this tower and praise the LSE project which is an actual turd and would be more impactful in the skyline. This tower will not even impact the skyline significantly.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #76  
Old Posted Jul 19, 2014, 12:28 AM
headcase's Avatar
headcase headcase is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: East Village, Chicago
Posts: 453
Quote:
Originally Posted by rgolch View Post
Gosh.

First, some of you need to dramatically decrease the length of your posts. Do you really think most people read word for word posts that take up half a page in a thread? Especially when its a common, rather than ocassional occurrence for some forumers.
WHY? If the point of a forum is to have a discussion someone needs to actually say something, don't they? Some people are just more verbose than others, it happens in writing as well as speech. You don't like it? Do read it, move on, those of us interested in reading will continue to do so.

Quote:
Second, don't rush to judgement on a building where we don't even have a acceptable rendering.
Why not? He has a, obviously strong, opinion. It is obvious from the post that no matter what the final product is, he won't like it...it is just a matter of how bad it sucks....and I agree with that point. In all likelyhood this is another lagrange POS with a NYC pedigree.

Quote:
Look, it's obvious many of you are very knowledgable about architecture and urban planning. But it gets tiresome reading constant negativaty. I feel like Fox news took over the Chicago threads.
Like all art, architecture is no good at all if it doesn't stirup emotion, and for any opinion to be worth something both sides of the argument should be heard.

Oh, and congrats for pulling me out of a two year posting hiatus.

SSDD
__________________
He was constantly reminded of how startlingly different a place the world was when viewed from a point only three feet to the left.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #77  
Old Posted Jul 19, 2014, 1:10 AM
the urban politician the urban politician is offline
The City
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Libertyville, IL
Posts: 13,278
Quote:
Originally Posted by rgolch View Post
Is this building a home run? Of course not. But to call it a Turd and a skyline ruiner (with one cartoony, water-colored rendering) is beyond hyperbolic. No one is asking you guys not to have high standards. Your not expected to love everything. But when you have loathing hatred for every project (many of which are just average), it's kinda hard to take your opinions seriously.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #78  
Old Posted Jul 19, 2014, 1:13 AM
the urban politician the urban politician is offline
The City
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Libertyville, IL
Posts: 13,278
I kind of agree that the Parkview East park isn't all that impressive, not to go on a tangent or anything. I think it lacks enclosure and intimacy, something I have long valued in well designed parks.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #79  
Old Posted Jul 19, 2014, 1:35 AM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is offline
atomic
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: the city o'wind
Posts: 12,563
Quote:
Originally Posted by UPChicago View Post
I doubt if they are re-doing the park its actually a very nice park....unless they are using a large portion of the park as a staging area.

I really think you guys are exaggerating, this will not be like AMLI this is a condo building it will be more inline with Park Tower or Lincoln Park 2520 both are fine additions. Postmodern is certainly not my favorite but there are good examples and there are bad. This tower gets a 7 out of 10 in my opinion. I find it hilarious for people to bash this tower and praise the LSE project which is an actual turd and would be more impactful in the skyline. This tower will not even impact the skyline significantly.
No, read the article. Reilly point-blank called the park "a failure" and said it needed to be replaced. I don't even know if Related was intending to redesign the park before Reilly stuck his tasteless greasy meddling fingers into the project. Developers don't generally go around spending money they don't need to.

I'm torn on MVVA doing the re-design... on the one hand, his team can be undeniably talented and creative, but the firm itself is stuck in Olmsted's shadow. Maggie Daley Park might be nicer than the old Daley Bi, but it looks like a chunk of Central Park or Lincoln Park... we were designing that crap 100 years ago. It's 2014, we can do something fresh and innovative.

Now MVVA is fixing to tear up one of the few nice, fresh modern parks we have downtown, by a world-renowed firm (not just some local hacks) just so the wealthy new residents can get a swingset and a place for their dogs to crap. It's like when Trump ripped out all the nice grasses in his riverfront plaza, except worse - and that plaza had the same original designer as Parkview West! Hargreaves can't get no love around here.
__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...

Last edited by ardecila; Jul 19, 2014 at 1:49 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #80  
Old Posted Jul 19, 2014, 1:56 AM
rlw777 rlw777 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 1,330
Personally I think pomo designs get both too much praise and too much criticism. I think the ratio of good designs vs bad designs is probably about the same as any other style. I just think people that are really into architecture flip out when they see folks who don't know a lot about architecture drooling over a bad design that is vaguely reminiscent of art deco. Stern is probably the best at this style at the moment so I'm not excited about it but im also not bothered by the design.
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 > Global Projects & Construction > Highrise Construction
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:30 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.