CHICAGO | 150 North Riverside | 752 FT | 54 FLOORS

[Clarkkent2420]

#

[harryc]

Originally Posted by Clarkkent2420

What's the alternative?

Across the river .....

[Clarkkent2420]

#

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by Chi-Sky21

I did not realize there was going to be a transparent barrier along the entire river frontage. Not sure i like that.

The glass balustrade is only 42" high, per code. The tall poles are for lighting. I guess they could use stone or precast to build the balustrade instead of glass, but you need to have it regardless.

The zig-zag appearance of the balustrade is sorta strange, but the renderings show some kind of amphitheatre in this area so it has to step down and then back up.

[Halsted & Villagio]

Originally Posted by Chi-Sky21

I did not realize there was going to be a transparent barrier along the entire river frontage. Not sure i like that.

Liability issues abound without some type of barrier. The distance between building and river from that side is very small. But at the same time that side of the building is attractive to people who want to stand underneath the building to take in that very unique view. That side of the building will attract lookers, gawkers, thrill steekers and those inebriated from restaurants/bars nearby. Inevitably too many people would end up in the river without a barrier.

Other buildings/stairs/sidewalks and attractions such as the river walk may abut the river but they don't offer a view that is spatially capable of (leading?) someone to fall in the river. I am a little reluctant to use the word "lead" but that is practically what it is. I mean, when you stand underneath the building and walk towards the river trying to see the curvature of building along with the fins leading up to the top of the building, that walk would inevitably lead some to fall in the river -- if there is no barrier.

Even for those not standing directly underneath the building but for those standing in park/relaxation area, on that side of the building there is enticement to get as close to water as possible in order to see the curvature of the building (over water), fins, etc. Once again, leading some to lose balance and fall in the river.

Without a barrier lawsuits will ask the question, was it foreseeable that someone could fall into the river from that vantage point? Yes it is. Moreover, should a child become involved, the question will arise, was it an "attractive nuisance" to build such a building and not include a barrier. The answer to that question could also be "yes".

Bottom line, given the unique characteristics of this structure, some type of barrier has to be built. I prefer a clear one so as to not obstruct the river view.
.

[Chi-Sky21]

The height of the poles was throwing me off.. I thought it was going to be glass or some other transparent screen all the way to the top of the poles.

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by Halsted & Villagio

Liability issues abound without some type of barrier. The distance between building and river from that side is very small. But at the same time that side of the building is attractive to people who want to stand underneath the building to take in that very unique view. That side of the building will attract lookers, gawkers, thrill steekers and those inebriated from restaurants/bars nearby. Inevitably too many people would end up in the river without a barrier.

Other buildings/stairs/sidewalks and attractions such as the river walk may abut the river but they don't offer a view that is spatially capable of (leading?) someone to fall in the river. I am a little reluctant to use the word "lead" but that is practically what it is. I mean, when you stand underneath the building and walk towards the river trying to see the curvature of building along with the fins leading up to the top of the building, that walk would inevitably lead some to fall in the river -- if there is no barrier.

Even for those not standing directly underneath the building but for those standing in park/relaxation area, on that side of the building there is enticement to get as close to water as possible in order to see the curvature of the building (over water), fins, etc. Once again, leading some to lose balance and fall in the river.

Without a barrier lawsuits will ask the question, was it foreseeable that someone could fall into the river from that vantage point? Yes it is. Moreover, should a child become involved, the question will arise, was it an "attractive nuisance" to build such a building and not include a barrier. The answer to that question could also be "yes".

Bottom line, given the unique characteristics of this structure, some type of barrier has to be built. I prefer a clear one so as to not obstruct the river view.
.

The river walk doesn't have barriers. Why isn't there a liability issue there?

[Northwest]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

The river walk doesn't have barriers. Why isn't there a liability issue there?

The fall into the water is much shorter at the riverwalk, and one can be easily rescued or pull themselves out? Life rings are everywhere there. A fall from here looks to be at least 30 feet. Also this is more "private property" than the riverwalk is, so probably insurance/potential lawsuit issues.

I wouldn't expect them to leave a sharp cliff. But I'd rather have some kind of open air fence rather than hockey arena glass, but then it might look like a prison or the electric fence from Jurassic Park. I wish it could be limited to shoulder height to give clear views, but that looks extremely tall.

Edit: realize now question has already been answered, 42" fence, seems reasonable

[Skyguy_7]

A little OT; but I was speaking with the Riverwalk's lead designer at Ross Barney recently and thanked him for having faith in Chicagoans in entrusting us with enough personal responsibility to not fall into the river while enjoying the way the Riverwalk interacts beautifully with the river itself. I expressed that the era of caution signs and lawsuits, this was a nice change of pace. If you're dumb enough to fall into the river, you're gonna get wet, but take it as a learning experience for next time.

[Clarkkent2420]

#

[KWILLSKYLINE]

Seinfeld reference:

Kramer: C'mon Larry, you know me.

Larry: It bothers people, and it's against the law

Jerry: You can make all the laws you want but he's still going to bother people.

[Skyguy_7]

^^ Of course. The guardrails are essential here, at this height. Especially considering the dangerous conditions once there's ice on the river.

^Seinfeld reference is not lost on me. Giddyup.

[KWILLSKYLINE]

I just noticed they moved the camera on OxBlue back down to ground level so you can see them working on the east plaza and restaurant.

https://app.oxblue.com/open/clarkcon.../150nriverside

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by Skyguy_7

A little OT; but I was speaking with the Riverwalk's lead designer at Ross Barney recently and thanked him for having faith in Chicagoans in entrusting us with enough personal responsibility to not fall into the river while enjoying the way the Riverwalk interacts beautifully with the river itself. I expressed that the era of caution signs and lawsuits, this was a nice change of pace. If you're dumb enough to fall into the river, you're gonna get wet, but take it as a learning experience for next time.

I think this is only allowable because the Riverwalk is considered to be a dock structure like the lakefront marinas.

The mega-yachts tied up there are obnoxious, but they're the reason we don't have ugly railings like the older riverwalk sections!

[LouisVanDerWright]

I don't think the yachts are obnoxious at all. In fact, I was just at City Winery last night and was thinking how fantastic it is that the river walk encourages the boaters to come into the river and interact with the city. Its almost egalitarian to have the huge 60' yachts full of rich people hitching right up to the walk and unloading into the general population instead of always being behind a fence or out on the lake.

Plus there was a pristine 50' all wood Chris Craft yacht that was straight class docked there all night. Honestly all the activity makes the space, I can't wait for the new sections to open up amd for the 150 and River Point plaza restaurants to open up. Hopefully the action will extend all the way past the confluence next summer.

[Clarkkent2420]

#

[marothisu]

I actually like the yachts that dock there. I think it adds to the entire experience as long as the people on the yachts aren't annoying. I mean it's pretty cool that if you have a boat that can dock there, you can basically park it and get something to eat/drink or just relax. That lends to a little uniqueness at least outside of a few places in America.

[Pcharnkov]

Also, it is hilarious to watch the police boats cruise up and down waiting to issue tickets.

[Clarkkent2420]

#

[KWILLSKYLINE]

Pictures please? ^^^