CHICAGO | One Bennett Park | 837 FT | 68 FLOORS

[r18tdi]

Originally Posted by sentinel

He's not deluding himself; rather you, TUP and others who only discuss architectural design in absolutist terms are deluding yourselves in thinking that only ONE type of architecture is appropriate for a massive metropolis like Chicago.

Sam, as much as I appreciate your input and opinions on lots of items within the forum (in addition to that of others, such as TUP), sometimes your are not served well by taking on immutable positions related to design. I have to remind myself of this oftentimes as well, and I work in this silly profession, but variety is the spice of life...and in this instance, I personally would rather see a RAMSA design than a PoMo/Lucien LaGrange shlockfest because Stern DOES have the credibility and the know-how (he's the f**king Dean at Yale, for Chrissake!! Get over it), and he knows his clients and market extremely well.

Whereas his most recent building a la Defense in Paris is kind of amazing and very contemporary (Exhibit A in showing that he CAN design contemporary architectural statements), his residential projects, most notably his high-rises in Manhattan tend to be more of what we see for this massive phallus planned for Chicago, because he was hired to cater to a very specific clientele that the developer wants to attract: wealthy, most likely late 30s - early 50s, Waspy transplants (either outside of Illinois or from the suburbs), moving to the City for the first time for work, social needs/desires; more importantly, catering to clients who really don't care about argument of pioneering contemporary vs. historist neo-traditional pastiches, because frankly, IT DOESN'T MATTER.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, many in these forums cannot see the forest through the trees when it comes to high-rise construction. AMLI's river north tower design sucks, but it's providing housing for hundreds of new residents who can afford it and more importantly WANT to live there and are bringing in countless new dollars to the immediate surrounding economy. And the same thing goes for this RAMSA-designed tower: considering that it's a seemingly well-designed highrise that will potentially command sizable rents and sales figures, in addition to expanding the core-City population and the attached wealth that comes with that, isn't it still a win-win, regardless of it not being a 'modern masterpiece' of glass, steel and concrete?

A lot of intelligent, sophisticated and worldly people who can afford to live in any type of building/unit/house they want are turned off by avant-garde contemporary design; it can be seen as cold, unforgiving and at times very unlivable. And if that's all that you are designing or your developer/client is trying to market, you're unnecessarily diminishing you're pool of potential buyers because of a fetishistic mentality that only ONE type of design is appropriate for a high-end market.

TLDR: Skyscrapers are generally good. Therefore it shouldn't matter if they look like utter dog shit.

[sentinel]

Originally Posted by r18tdi

TLDR: Skyscrapers are generally good. Therefore it shouldn't matter if they look like utter dog shit.

Sigh..considering this design isn't 'utter dog shit', I don't understand you're statement.

[LouisVanDerWright]

Originally Posted by sentinel

Sigh..considering this design isn't 'utter dog shit', I don't understand you're statement.

Please read my post with the pictures of 99 Church St and tell me how that doesn't look like the world's tallest pillbox? I'm honestly curious as to how you would respond and defend that design as anything else but "utter dog shit". Also, I'm not really impressed by his title as the Dean of Yale. If that's the kind of tower the Dean of Yale designs, then Yale must not be a very good school anymore...

[LouisVanDerWright]

Originally Posted by Mr Downtown

Look more closely. From Architectural Record April 1990: "NBC's curtainwall comprises small pieces of sawcut Indiana limestone affixed to larger precast-concrete panels. Spandrels are deeply patterned dark-green precast concrete, finished with a semigloss coating reminiscent of terra cotta."

That's what he said "limestone veneer". Thin slabs of Indiana Limestone affixed to precast panels sure sounds like "limestone veneer" to me...

[SamInTheLoop]

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

^^^ Maestro Stern probably just forgot to add one to the design, he was too busy studiously perfecting the perfect historicist precast facade!



Come now, don't you know that Chicago would have no skyscrapers at all if it weren't for NYC. We should be thankful they've allowed us to even have one building.

(This is purely sarcastic and not meant to be city vs city).



Yeah, his buildings in NYC also suck. How is this even remotely reminiscent of prewar Deco? It's just another 432 Park but decorated in faux deco precast:



Seriously, it's just a stick with some very sickly little setbacks, it's nothing like the prewar deco spires with REAL grace and proportion like Chrysler or 70 Pine Street or the neo-classical towers like 40 Wall and Woolworth. To even suggest that something 99 Church is even REMOTELY close to being in the same league as those classic towers is heresy. It's just pathetically bad when you actually compare it to its "peers" (if you can even call it that) in lower Manhattan. How does Stern have a "mastery" of the classic styles when what he produces is basically a featureless rod adorned with low grade materials that doesn't come within a mile of the true masterpieces.

99 Church is worse than Elysian in my opinion. At least Elysian has some setbacks before the top and attempts a crown (which ended up being corrugated warehouse siding). Look at how finely detailed this bunker is:



Photos from Nyguy

Conclusion: Stern is a total hack.

Conclusion confirmed.

Thanks for posting these photos (this is game - set, and match), although now let me disinfect my eyes.

[Mr Downtown]

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

That's what he said "limestone veneer". Thin slabs of Indiana Limestone affixed to precast panels sure sounds like "limestone veneer" to me...

That isn't what he said, and it isn't what's on the NBC Tower. All the tan cladding you see is precast, which has some small ornamental limestone protrusions affixed. Small bits of limestone affixed to big pieces of precast, not thin slabs of limestone affixed to thick precast backing—something that wouldn't make any sense structurally or financially. Precast implies concrete that's finished to a high enough degree that it's meant to be seen.

[LouisVanDerWright]

Originally Posted by Mr Downtown

That isn't what he said, and it isn't what's on the NBC Tower. All the tan cladding you see is precast, which has some small ornamental limestone protrusions affixed. Small bits of limestone affixed to big pieces of precast, not thin slabs of limestone affixed to thick precast backing—something that wouldn't make any sense structurally or financially. Precast implies concrete that's finished to a high enough degree that it's meant to be seen.

It literally is what he said, that's why I used quotes around it. It might not be what you said. Also, "precast" does not refer to "concrete that's finished to a high enough degree that it's meant to be seen"... Precast refers to, well, concrete that has be pre-cast and installed and implies nothing more. Precast doesn't have to have any visual interest at all and can be ass ugly and just for structural purposes (say an interior wall on a tilt-up factory). That said, precast can also have other materials cast into it like limestone or brick. I'm 90% certain that this is what the NBC tower is clad in: precast with limestone insets:


From Flickr

That ain't no precast you are seeing with those color variations... I googled "NBC Tower Facade" and literally every source I can find says "Limestone and Granite Facade"

[Jibba]

NBC Tower isn't all that great... The proportions are horrible.

[Perklol]

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

Seriously, it's just a stick with some very sickly little setbacks, it's nothing like the prewar deco spires with REAL grace and proportion like Chrysler or 70 Pine Street or the neo-classical towers like 40 Wall and Woolworth. To even suggest that something 99 Church is even REMOTELY close to being in the same league as those classic towers is heresy. It's just pathetically bad when you actually compare it to its "peers" (if you can even call it that) in lower Manhattan.

I agree about that part.

But anyway, shouldn't every architect from his firm be blamed for it? Not just him but the whole team involved. 1 person doing everything from interiors/facade/everything in the building in the 21st century would be too much....

[LouisVanDerWright]

Originally Posted by Eveningsong

I agree about that part.

But anyway, shouldn't every architect from his firm be blamed for it? Not just him but the whole team involved. 1 person doing everything from interiors/facade/everything in the building in the 21st century would be too much....

Yes and no, the creative direction is undoubtedly mostly Stern himself. However, just for good measure I think we should round up everyone at his firm and send them to a desert island where they can never practice architecture again.

[NYC2ATX]

I can acknowledge that 99 Church/30 Park Place is not looking impressive yet but I believe that it will...and the reason I suggest examining 15 Central Park West is that it's his only project in this style that's both completed and now established within the New York real estate portfolio. It has been widely lauded as both a design success and a real estate bombshell. In the last few years since the recession, any unit in the building gone up for sale has commanded one of the highest final sale prices of that calendar year. Its record is exemplary.

I grant that Chicago's architectural heritage differs from New York's in that several of our most iconic towers are prewar, where as Chicago's are more postwar, and that could be a major factor in the different responses to such a design. Anything that attempts to even come close to the Empire State or the Chrysler (not that those could ever be contested) will get fast praise from most back east, but Chicago has Sears and John Hancock, and the Mies heritage. It makes sense.

However I would not call contemporary Stern PoMo by any stretch of the imagination, if anything it's something of a new neo-deco genre we've not seen much of yet, and a movement isn't really a movement when it's driven by one architect. All I can say is don't knock it til you try it. I can say without much doubt this should turn out to be a gem.

[Mr Downtown]

Stern used the term Modern Classicism back in the 90s.

[chris08876]

I find it interesting how most of the hate for Stern are members from Chicago whereas those who keep tabs on NYC developments and live near NYC seem to like it (along with other stern projects). Hmm.....

Originally Posted by ChiTownWonder

Wtf, New York gets all the good proposals!! I'm glad that lower manhattan is getting some ore supertalls, considering they had none after 9/11. Sleek looking tower too, I think it would improve the look of the WTC complex.

I suspect there's a lot of closet NYC lovers around here. Come out!

[BVictor1]

Originally Posted by Mr Downtown

That isn't what he said, and it isn't what's on the NBC Tower. All the tan cladding you see is precast, which has some small ornamental limestone protrusions affixed. Small bits of limestone affixed to big pieces of precast, not thin slabs of limestone affixed to thick precast backing—something that wouldn't make any sense structurally or financially. Precast implies concrete that's finished to a high enough degree that it's meant to be seen.

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1...-tribune-tower

Limestone comprises most of the structure`s skin, with the notable exception of the dark colored spandrels made of precast, patterned concrete stained dark green.

[ChiTownWonder]

Originally Posted by chris08876

I find it interesting how most of the hate for Stern are members from Chicago whereas those who keep tabs on NYC developments and live near NYC seem to like it (along with other stern projects). Hmm.....



I suspect there's a lot of closet NYC lovers around here. Come out!

you caught me! And of course i love New York! i love most american cities. but honestly i think that this tower would go well in New York, not Chicago. The impact on the streeterville skyline will be impressive though. i hope we get a diagram drawing soon.

[ardecila]

Related is looking at 15 CPW and its crazy success. They think it will sell equally well in Chicago. Maybe they're right. They're even aping the condo-apartment mix.

I've seen 15CPW up close, and I liked it. Unlike Lucien LaGrange, I will give RAMSA the benefit of the doubt.

[Notyrview]

I was so charmed with downtown yesterday (hadn't seen it in 2 years) that I think this tower can be absorbed by Streeterville without ruining it. It might complement all the new glass ok. When Gang's tower is built, it definitely won't matter.

[Mr Downtown]

^OK, after a morning of research, I think I understand. NBC Tower has small tiles of real limestone—the ones whose joint lines we see—attached to big (125 square-foot) panels of precast. So it’s like panelized brick, but with limestone. I misunderstood what LouisVanDerWright was describing.

Adrian Smith made another clever money-saving substitution a couple of years later on AT&T/USG Center, now called Franklin Center. On the bottom couple of floors, the spandrel has actual three-dimensional ornament, built up from various machined metal pieces. Above that, where no one can get close enough to tell, it's a trompe l'oeil of the same pattern, screen-printed onto flat metal spandrels.

Looking through my 30-year-old files on Cityfront Center (which includes both NBC Tower and this site), I was reminded that the internal (but mandatory) design standards said buildings must have tripartite division (distinctive base-shaft-top) and be clad in natural stone, masonry, or precast concrete, in naturally occurring colors. Buildings with façades predominantly of glass are discouraged, and there’s a 40% limit on glass on building bases. I'm not sure why Park View at the west end of the park didn't observe those guidelines; perhaps they no longer apply for some reason.

[F1 Tommy]

Look at the pages of interesting ideas from around the world and this is the best this developer can come up for a building?? This is a boring retirement home for people over 80!!


http://www.designboom.com/architectu...ago-calatrava/

[chris08876]

Originally Posted by F1 Tommy

Look at the pages of interesting ideas from around the world and this is the best this developer can come up for a building?? This is a boring retirement home for people over 80!!


http://www.designboom.com/architectu...ago-calatrava/

To be fair, many of these luxury towers (In general) are geared towards older people. Maybe not 80, but definitely those that are well established. Could somebody below 30 live in them, of course, but it generally requires somebody that has a good income stream, and finances. In this towers case, its the 1% or really, like many of the uber luxury towers in NYC for example, the .001%. They key with the luxury market is location. Could you get something just as good city wise, of course, but it might not necessarily have awesome views or be in the part of the city such as this tower.

In terms of the design, I think patience will be the key factor to deciding if this becomes an esthetically pleasing project. Watercolor renderings are really not a good indication of how it will look.