CHICAGO: ORD & MDW discussion

[2PRUROCKS!]

Originally Posted by woodrow

If you can, GO TO THE CAC AND LOOK AT THE MODELS!



Foster, Fentress, and SOM all have concourses separate from the main terminal, while Studio ORD and Calatrava incorporate that concourse into the main building. This is very striking when viewing the models. Some HKS architects were there (on the Calatrava team) and mentioned that they and Studio's plan are actually 70,000+ sq. ft. smaller, though they appear much more open.

Also, Studio and Cala... both connect to terminals 1 and 3 in a much smoother fashion.

I agree the Foster, Fentress, and SOM proposals all have a concourse jutting off of the main terminal like an awkward appendage. Calatrava's and Studio ORD's designs incorporated the concourses in the main terminal building giving a more unified design. I think for the Calatrava proposal in particular this will give a more spectacular arrival experience as travelers disembarking from their planes will be greeted with a breathtaking open area that will also make way finding easier. In the Gang design this won't be as dramatic and way finding may be more of a challenge with the "Y" shaped design creating almost three separate wings.

I think studio ORD did the best job with the satellite terminals. They basically look like slightly smaller versions of the main terminal. The more I think about this the more I am convinced that Calatrava would be the ideal number one because it would keep the best elements of his design (the main terminal) as well as allow for the potential future redevelopment of the hotel and parking area according to his vision. Studio ORD would be the ideal number two since they have the best satellite terminal design and that would retain the best elements of their proposal.

It really seems to me that the Calatrava team is going above and beyond the other teams so far to try to win this. The evidence I have seen to suggest this so far:
-Added the extra (but not necessary) concept to redevelop the hotel/parking into a mixed use space that according to the woman I spoke with from HKS is intended to compete with Rosemont and keep people in O'Hare/Chicago spending money.
-The Calatrava team went much more in depth into cost breakdown and projections than the other teams.
-Calatrava did an interview with Crain's about the project. I don't believe any of the other teams have done this.
-Members of the Calatrava team (HKS) seem to be regularly at the CAC to discuss the model and answer questions. I am unaware of any of the other teams doing this.

[k1052]

Calatrava is putting in more effort because they have to. Even as massively attractive as I find his design for this I just can't shake the feeling that doing it would be irresponsible given his history.

I'll go with Studio ORD. My only worry would be that Gang has never done something like this but their JV partners certainly do have a lot of aviation experience.

[SIGSEGV]

Today's the last day to vote I think!

[jc5680]

Originally Posted by sentinel

For those of us that cannot make it to the CAC, would anyone be able to provide photos of the models? Do they allow taking photos?

Rahm's official twitter had a video the other day that scoots around them all. Not the most detailed, but the added context flipped my 1st and 2nd preferences.

[OhioGuy]

Blair Kamin just made known his opinion, he says the Foster design is the clear winner.

https://twitter.com/blairkamin/statu...624160257?s=21

I found this extended video regarding the Foster design.

• Video Link

https://www.designboom.com/architect...no-01-24-2019/

[SFBruin]

I am wondering how many jobs this is expected to generate.

[cozy]

Originally Posted by SFBruin

I am wondering how many jobs this is expected to generate.

Well one thing is for sure if Foster's proposal gets built, that enormous glass wall will need regular cleaning!

[SFBruin]

Originally Posted by cozy

Well one thing is for sure if Foster's proposal gets built, that enormous glass wall will need regular cleaning!

Yeah, how big is that? It is enormously hard to tell the size of that from the perspective in the rendering, but it looks like 400' tall.

[Chicagoguy]

Ethiopian Airlines Is Making Huge Advances In The US

Chicago Increased Frequency

"The airline currently runs the route three times a week but will increase to five times a week in summer 2019. The route flies non-stop eastbound but makes a fuel stop (with no pickup, but passengers can get off) in Dublin on the way back to the USA."

https://simpleflying.com/ethiopian-airlines-expansion/

[chiphile]

This is why I can't stand Calatrava. He wants to do his art project so doesn't think of basic shit that is painfully obvious. How do the planes on the right side even get there? You'd have to eliminate the entirety of concourse G to make those gates work. Foster all the way. The column-less design would be an engineering marvel that Chicago deserves. It's the closest design where the form follows the function in my opinion.

[kbud]

Originally Posted by OhioGuy

Blair Kamin just made known his opinion, he says the Foster design is the clear winner.

https://twitter.com/blairkamin/statu...624160257?s=21

I found this extended video regarding the Foster design.

• Video Link

https://www.designboom.com/architect...no-01-24-2019/

Beautiful design. I know it's early, but it looks like they have wide bodies parked at the "G" concourse. What will American do with all their Eagle flights? They can't fit all of them in the L concourse. I wonder if this assumes they will build another satellite? They'd certainly have to bulldoze G to give it the size for int'l wide body gates.

[wchicity]

Originally Posted by kbud

Beautiful design. I know it's early, but it looks like they have wide bodies parked at the "G" concourse. What will American do with all their Eagle flights? They can't fit all of them in the L concourse. I wonder if this assumes they will build another satellite? They'd certainly have to bulldoze G to give it the size for int'l wide body gates.

I would have to guess that this is an error with the rendering.

[chiphile]

Originally Posted by kbud

Beautiful design. I know it's early, but it looks like they have wide bodies parked at the "G" concourse. What will American do with all their Eagle flights? They can't fit all of them in the L concourse. I wonder if this assumes they will build another satellite? They'd certainly have to bulldoze G to give it the size for int'l wide body gates.

I hope Foster is selected but the design is tweaked so the large arch is not angled, but faces directly south to the active runways, and that concourse G is rebuilt as an international concourse for American/One World, and AA's regionals go somewhere else, maybe entirely to L.

The whole thing still has the problems that bothered me during the initial conceptual rendering. At any given moment, AA and its partners (British, Japan, Iberia) have usually 8-10 jumbos parked somewhere at O'Hare. If this is truly an expansion, we would want at least 12-15 gates for AA/One World International Ops. Where would they get the 12-15 gates other than the entire global terminal? which would piss off United. I just don't see how this works as a shared concept. Would've made more sense to give terminal 5 to AA and One World with a people mover directly to Terminal 3 past security.

[kbud]

Originally Posted by chiphile

I hope Foster is selected but the design is tweaked so the large arch is not angled, but faces directly south to the active runways, and that concourse G is rebuilt as an international concourse for American/One World, and AA's regionals go somewhere else, maybe entirely to L.

The whole thing still has the problems that bothered me during the initial conceptual rendering. At any given moment, AA and its partners (British, Japan, Iberia) have usually 8-10 jumbos parked somewhere at O'Hare. If this is truly an expansion, we would want at least 12-15 gates for AA/One World International Ops. Where would they get the 12-15 gates other than the entire global terminal? which would piss off United. I just don't see how this works as a shared concept. Would've made more sense to give terminal 5 to AA and One World with a people mover directly to Terminal 3 past security.

Yes, they need to plan for future growth. My hunch is that the new satellite terminal (concourse “c” extender) would be capable of handling intl ops. Hopefully the next satellite concourse would have future int’l capability. Even if they build a new concourse G, I just don’t know how multiple wide bodies would be able to fit between the new G and existing concourss H/ K. I don’t believe all of Eagle’s flight won’t be able to fit in L.

[k1052]

Originally Posted by kbud

Yes, they need to plan for future growth. My hunch is that the new satellite terminal (concourse “c” extender) would be capable of handling intl ops. Hopefully the next satellite concourse would have future int’l capability. Even if they build a new concourse G, I just don’t know how multiple wide bodies would be able to fit between the new G and existing concourss H/ K. I don’t believe all of Eagle’s flight won’t be able to fit in L.

This is correct to my knowledge, the tunnels to the new terminal from the satellite concourses will include sterile corridors to deliver arriving international passengers to the new CBP facility. United will gain a lot of international capacity.

[SFBruin]

I have to say that the Foster design is growing on me. And this is coming from a Calatrava fan.

The only drawback I see to the Foster proposal is that it looks a little wonky from the air, but tbh I don't really look at airports that much from the air when I am on a plane.

[sentinel]

The Foster design looks nice, but I wonder how functional it is to have one single, massive, open room...and not just from a design standpoint but more importantly how it functions, is heated, cooled, how loud/noisy it gets, how the massive 'theater' windows are cleaned, maintained, etc. Same for the Calatrava proposal, even though that has more discreet areas/zones that may be easier to control, from an MEP perspective....maybe.

Edit: The more I thought about it, the more I realized you could potentially say the same thing about all of the 5 finalist designs. I don't know why the Foster one strikes me as potentially problematic; perhaps just because of the scale of the main space being so massive..

[ardecila]

^ Well, if you wanna get technical, it's pretty clear to me the Foster proposal can't be built quite as shown in the renderings.

Where is the support for the enormous glass wall facing the airfield? Looks like 8-10 stories of unsupported glass. Even in the best case scenario there will be huge glass fins to back the curtain wall, more likely some kind of tensile system with cables and rods. I will admit that even this could be spectacular, if Foster uses glass sheets as big as he used for the Michigan Ave Apple Store.

Also, what is the roof? It appears to be a steel monocoque like a stadium roof, but the geometry is far more complex than a simple dome or paraboloid. How are those thousands of little skylights waterproofed, there must be literal miles of perimeter and countless areas of potential failure.

Blair Kamin mentioned the building would use radiant floors heavily for heating, and presumably some kind of stack ventilation for cooling.

[sentinel]

I think on the surface and without looking at any numbers right now, the Studio Gang/Team ORD seems the most buildable....but the more I look at the Calatrava proposal, the more I love it, because it's so all-encompassing, and completely changes the entire airport into a destination that you seemingly WANT to visit and experience, not solely because you have to travel through to and from there.

[cozy]

Originally Posted by ardecila

^ Well, if you wanna get technical, it's pretty clear to me the Foster proposal can't be built quite as shown in the renderings.

I know this is pretty common with renderings, but in my opinion as a simple consumer, that is completely unacceptable and constitutes false advertising. If you win a contract based on a rendering, you need to build it the way you claimed you would.

Glad I typed that out though, because it made me realize the decision makers aren't simply looking at renderings..