HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > Proposals

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #161  
Old Posted May 27, 2017, 1:51 PM
pilsenarch pilsenarch is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 659
Quote:
Originally Posted by denizen467 View Post
This. Eloquently stated. Including Ned B's comment. The selection was about developers and economics, with designs being placeholders. Keep in mind architecture firms are willing to spend only so much time when donating proposals for free, especially when the "jury" isn't even going to be judging on design.

People need to inhale some burgers and beers over the Memorial Day weekend and forget about this for several months, until real designs come out. The thread could even be locked for a while, except that discussion of the massing and overall program and other things is legitimate (though as someone said, the new transit center will be kept).
There is never an excuse for bad design.

You might *hope* that the current designs are only 'placeholders', but there does not appear to be any basis to assume this...

Regardless, the worst part of this scheme, the suburban towers sprouting atop the waiting room, appear to have the 'Landmarks' department influence all over it... those frustrated architects love to do everything they can to 'blend' everything in... anything that tries to enhance the historical context by contrasting with it immediately gets shot down...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #162  
Old Posted May 27, 2017, 4:15 PM
Clarkkent2420 Clarkkent2420 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 215
Sounds to me like there is an understanding of the significance of it all:

https://www.bisnow.com/chicago/news/...ional_bank#ath
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #163  
Old Posted May 27, 2017, 5:32 PM
denizen467 denizen467 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,212
Quote:
Originally Posted by pilsenarch View Post
You might *hope* that the current designs are only 'placeholders', but there does not appear to be any basis to assume this...
Generally. But not in this case, in which it happens I have factual basis, though unfortunately one I am prevented from elaborating on.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #164  
Old Posted May 27, 2017, 5:47 PM
emathias's Avatar
emathias emathias is offline
Adoptive Chicagoan
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: River North, Chicago, Illinois
Posts: 4,455
It'd be interesting to see a gigantic onion dome planted on top of Union Station, with the top portion being gathering glass to full illuminate the Great Hall, but with the bulk of the onion being usable space. Absurdist? Quite possibly. But pretty dramatic, to be sure!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #165  
Old Posted May 28, 2017, 4:02 AM
The Pimp's Avatar
The Pimp The Pimp is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Lincoln Park/Mokena
Posts: 286
Wow! This really sucks.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #166  
Old Posted May 30, 2017, 12:01 AM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is offline
atomic
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: the city o'wind
Posts: 12,856
Quote:
Originally Posted by denizen467 View Post
This. Eloquently stated. Including Ned B's comment. The selection was about developers and economics, with designs being placeholders. Keep in mind architecture firms are willing to spend only so much time when donating proposals for free, especially when the "jury" isn't even going to be judging on design.

People need to inhale some burgers and beers over the Memorial Day weekend and forget about this for several months, until real designs come out. The thread could even be locked for a while, except that discussion of the massing and overall program and other things is legitimate (though as someone said, the new transit center will be kept).
As much as I like the aesthetic and the detailing of the transit center, the urban design sucks. It's a huge swath of concrete at one of the city's most bustling intersections. It offers no landscaping, no retail, and almost nothing else to engage pedestrians. From the neighborhood standpoint, it's about as engaging as a Jewel parking lot. Is it better than the parking lot it replaced? Sure. Is it ideal? Hell no.

It would be a breath of fresh air if they built something like that at Woodfield Mall (and Canadian/European cities DO build similar stuff in their suburbs) but in the heart of the city it just seems inappropriate, so I always hoped and kinda expected it to be temporary.

As for the "millions" spent building it - a big chunk of that was spent on underground construction to build the Pedway connection, which will continue to be useful even after the block is redeveloped.

The Goettsch proposal as shown leaves a lot to be desired, but I like that they plan to do away with the transit center and wrap the bus loading into a building podium that is at least semi-urban, with tighter curb cuts, plenty of retail and a green wall/plaza-ramp.
__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #167  
Old Posted May 30, 2017, 5:05 PM
BVictor1's Avatar
BVictor1 BVictor1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 9,122
Chicagoarchitecture.org

__________________
titanic1
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #168  
Old Posted May 30, 2017, 5:20 PM
Notyrview's Avatar
Notyrview Notyrview is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: New York City
Posts: 1,131
lawl 'concept'
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #169  
Old Posted May 30, 2017, 6:45 PM
LouisVanDerWright LouisVanDerWright is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 3,979
Quote:
Originally Posted by Notyrview View Post
lawl 'concept'
Clearly it's a concept, the text clearly states that the transit center will remain while all of the "renderings" show a huge office tower in it's place. Both cannot be accurate.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #170  
Old Posted May 30, 2017, 7:26 PM
10023's Avatar
10023 10023 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: London
Posts: 15,540
Someone call Norman Foster, or anyone that knows how to contextualize contemporary architecture with older landmarks.
__________________
There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there always has been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge." - Isaac Asimov
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #171  
Old Posted May 30, 2017, 7:26 PM
Mr Downtown's Avatar
Mr Downtown Mr Downtown is offline
Urbane observer
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 3,701
In its place—or atop the transit center, as often is seen in other cities around the globe?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #172  
Old Posted May 30, 2017, 8:09 PM
emathias's Avatar
emathias emathias is offline
Adoptive Chicagoan
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: River North, Chicago, Illinois
Posts: 4,455
Quote:
Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright View Post
Clearly it's a concept, the text clearly states that the transit center will remain while all of the "renderings" show a huge office tower in it's place. Both cannot be accurate.
It appears to be in the base, maybe even slightly below grade. But I agree, it's definitely not very visible what their concept for it actually is.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #173  
Old Posted Sep 9, 2017, 7:24 AM
ChickeNES's Avatar
ChickeNES ChickeNES is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 388
Is it possible they go bigger here if Amazon selects the Post Office for HQ2?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #174  
Old Posted Sep 9, 2017, 2:42 PM
Ned.B Ned.B is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 411
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChickeNES View Post
Is it possible they go bigger here if Amazon selects the Post Office for HQ2?
Phase 1, the headhouse expansion, is unlikely to get any larger, because there are limits to what the historic building can hold. Similarly, the apartment building over the tracks is limited by it's slender site and the structural acrobatics it is undergoing in order to rest on only 2 rows of 5 columns in the track platforms. The parcel with the office towers is a few years down the road, and is unencumbered by existing conditions, so it seems there is some good possibility for growth there if the demand for office space in the direct vicinity makes a big leap.
Reply With Quote
     
     
End
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > Proposals
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 8:18 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.