HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     
Welcome to the SkyscraperPage Forum

Since 1999, the SkyscraperPage Forum has been one of the most active skyscraper enthusiast communities on the web. The global membership discusses development news and construction activity on projects from around the world, alongside discussions on urban design, architecture, transportation and many other topics. Welcome!

You are currently browsing as a guest. Register with the SkyscraperPage Forum and join this growing community of skyscraper enthusiasts. Registering has benefits such as fewer ads, the ability to post messages, private messaging and more.

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Buildings & Architecture



Mid-Continental Plaza in the SkyscraperPage Database

Building Data Page   • Comparison Diagram   • Chicago Skyscraper Diagram
Chicago Projects & Construction Forum
            
View Full Map

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1  
Old Posted Oct 19, 2008, 1:23 AM
JMO_0121 JMO_0121 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Miami
Posts: 159
Cool CHICAGO | Mid-Continental Plaza | 538 FT / 178 M | 49 FLOORS | 1972

Mid-Continental plaza was completed in 1972 as an office tower. It is currently undergoing a major renovation in which the top 15 floors will be transformed into residential units and recladed in glass. Please feel free to add pictures of the progress as I do not live in Chicago and therefore, its impossible for me.






Pictures from Chicagoarchitecture.info and Falconliving.com
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2  
Old Posted Oct 19, 2008, 1:36 AM
jcchii's Avatar
jcchii jcchii is offline
Content provider
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: city on the take
Posts: 2,945
booooooooooo
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3  
Old Posted Oct 19, 2008, 2:05 AM
wrab's Avatar
wrab wrab is offline
Deerhoof Evangelist
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,585
From Lynn Becker's blog. Didn't realize that Goettsch was doing this:
_____

ARCHITECTURECHICAGO PLUS
LYNN BECKER

THURSDAY, OCTOBER 16, 2008
Deconstructing 55 East Monroe


.....(S)eeking to cash in on the renewed popularity of the east Loop with the advent of Millennium Park, the top 15 stories of the building are now being transformed into the "Park Monroe", ultimately projected to include almost 350 condo units.

As documented in these photographs by our intrepid photo correspondent Bob Johnson, Goettsch Partners is in the process of opening up the Mid-Continental's monolithic facade.....



(Photo courtesy Bob Johnson/ArchitectureChicago PLUS)
_____

Read the whole article at http://arcchicago.blogspot.com/

Last edited by wrab; Oct 19, 2008 at 2:23 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4  
Old Posted Oct 19, 2008, 2:34 AM
jcchii's Avatar
jcchii jcchii is offline
Content provider
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: city on the take
Posts: 2,945
double boooooo
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5  
Old Posted Oct 19, 2008, 2:59 AM
JMO_0121 JMO_0121 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Miami
Posts: 159
Talking

Quote:
Originally Posted by jcchii View Post
double boooooo
Please stop being so inmature about this. I created this thread so that people like you dont get heart attacks everytime updates are shown on the boom rundown. Get a life, and if you hate this so much, why are coming to this thread? double get a life!!!!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6  
Old Posted Oct 19, 2008, 4:09 AM
Thundertubs's Avatar
Thundertubs Thundertubs is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Jersey City, NJ
Posts: 2,910
A building of this shape and size just won't look good with a sleek modern facade. It's like puting a tiara and tutu on a hippopotomus.
__________________
Be magically whisked away to
Pacific NW | Montana | Vancouver, BC | Seattle, WA | Jersey City, NJ | Newark, NJ | Birmingham, AL | Butte, MT | Rockford, IL | Hoboken, NJ
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7  
Old Posted Oct 19, 2008, 2:22 PM
SolarWind's Avatar
SolarWind SolarWind is offline
Chicago
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,652
October 14, 2008







__________________
My Chicago Pictures
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8  
Old Posted Oct 19, 2008, 4:48 PM
CGII's Avatar
CGII CGII is offline
illwaukee/crooklyn
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: rome
Posts: 8,481
Quote:
Originally Posted by JMO_0121 View Post
Please stop being so inmature about this. I created this thread so that people like you dont get heart attacks everytime updates are shown on the boom rundown. Get a life, and if you hate this so much, why are coming to this thread? double get a life!!!!
triple boo.

this is a bad renovation of a perfectly fine and attractive building into horrible and disproportioned modern kondokrap. if you created this thread just to have a party with people that like this project (virtually none, i believe and should hope) then i recommend you go start a thread at daquan's forum than waste our time.
__________________
disregard women. acquire finances.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9  
Old Posted Oct 19, 2008, 5:54 PM
Nowhereman1280 Nowhereman1280 is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Pungent Onion, Illinois
Posts: 8,538
^^^ Quadruple Boo

Actually though, the glass that they are putting on it right now is rather intriguing. It doesn't look quite as crappy as I'd feared. However, I still hate it because only half the building is going to have that renovation which will probably look extremely awkward.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10  
Old Posted Oct 19, 2008, 6:29 PM
Buckman821's Avatar
Buckman821 Buckman821 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 379
got this from yochicago.com



I think it's interesting that the only rendering of this project seems to be this water coloring. It certainly leaves a lot up to the imagination. I have to wonder if that's because the developers know how awful this is going to look.

How cost prohibitive is an entire re-cladding? Is there anyway they could eventually be pressured into doing it?

P.S. I'm not techno savvy otherwise I would have tried to make that smaller.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11  
Old Posted Oct 19, 2008, 6:50 PM
wrab's Avatar
wrab wrab is offline
Deerhoof Evangelist
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,585
10/19:


Last edited by wrab; Oct 19, 2008 at 10:31 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12  
Old Posted Oct 19, 2008, 7:05 PM
JMO_0121 JMO_0121 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Miami
Posts: 159
Wrabbit, I must congratulate and appreciate your pictures, they are awesome. I would love to give you homework, and that would be to keep this thread alive with your awesome pictures. Nice angle on that one!! never seen anything like it. Nowhereman is right about how "different" a half and half building might look, but we need to appreciate that the glass they are installing is not very "imposing" or a "look at me" glass. It sort of gives it a smooth transition, from the glass to the other material.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13  
Old Posted Oct 19, 2008, 7:12 PM
Patrick's Avatar
Patrick Patrick is offline
Senior Editor
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Mesa, Arizona
Posts: 4,541
I never had a problem with the building, I'm not sure about the renovation.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14  
Old Posted Oct 19, 2008, 8:38 PM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is offline
vertical
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: unconventionally bicoastal
Posts: 10,535
One can make a structural justification for what they're doing. I don't know if those mullions/dividers are load-bearing or not. However, if they are, then they don't need to be quite so dense at the upper levels, since they have less weight to support (less floors above).

I've seen several buildings do this, where the column spacing gets wider as you go up the building.

However, I think I'd be in favor of a much-less abrupt ending to those columns. A protruding ledge where the columns end, extending across the building, would look quite attractive, and would be in keeping with the rectilinear aesthetic of the original Shaw & Associates design. It would also provide a place to mount spotlights and cast a dramatic pattern onto the building.
__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #15  
Old Posted Oct 20, 2008, 12:32 AM
Dr. Taco Dr. Taco is offline
...
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: 92626
Posts: 3,753
Someday they might do the top 15 floors. For now, they didn't sell enough units, so they are doing this in "phases", with the top 8 floors being phase one
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #16  
Old Posted Oct 20, 2008, 12:35 AM
Dr. Taco Dr. Taco is offline
...
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: 92626
Posts: 3,753
Quote:
Originally Posted by ardecila View Post
One can make a structural justification for what they're doing. I don't know if those mullions/dividers are load-bearing or not. However, if they are, then they don't need to be quite so dense at the upper levels, since they have less weight to support (less floors above).

I've seen several buildings do this, where the column spacing gets wider as you go up the building.

However, I think I'd be in favor of a much-less abrupt ending to those columns. A protruding ledge where the columns end, extending across the building, would look quite attractive, and would be in keeping with the rectilinear aesthetic of the original Shaw & Associates design. It would also provide a place to mount spotlights and cast a dramatic pattern onto the building.
half of the exterior columns we see are load-bearing. The one's they cut out are not load-bearing

But yeah, had it been designed for what they are doing, then during construction, sure, they wouldn't need columns to be as closely spaced. But the way they designed it (small, puny windows), they didn't need columns to be spaced better, so why even design that way? I think it would be harder to design
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #17  
Old Posted Oct 20, 2008, 1:34 AM
plinko's Avatar
plinko plinko is online now
them bones
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Santa Barbara adjacent
Posts: 6,632
My GF and I wandered into this building in February and went up to the sales office. I will say this...the condos in this building will have sick lake views (and likely to never be impeded)...

__________________
Even if you are 1 in a million, there are still 7,000 people just like you...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #18  
Old Posted Oct 20, 2008, 4:28 AM
Dr. Taco Dr. Taco is offline
...
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: 92626
Posts: 3,753
^ us global NIMC's don't care! we don't want to have to see the outside of the building!! haha

recent Solarwind pic:



The significance of this photo being, I am no longer worried about how this thing will look when completed! I think it is gonna look fine. PHEW! To see what I'm seeing, just pretend like the new part is how the building was originally designed, and that the building was designed to have a rather large crown that people can live in.

yeah, john, whatever you need to say to make yourself feel better. especially if it works
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #19  
Old Posted Oct 20, 2008, 4:47 AM
VivaLFuego's Avatar
VivaLFuego VivaLFuego is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: 42nd Ward
Posts: 6,419
I liked the building before.

I'd be totally fine with the recladding if:
1) it entailed the entire building
2) it didn't have the very visible inset balconies.

I'd even be willing to give a little on #2. Hey, they gotta sell units... but of course somehow Smith and Calatrava managed to design high-end units without balconies, so it's possible.

The lack of #1 emphatically ruins it. This is being turned into a total eyesore, and a highly visible one on one of Chicago's postcard skyline views.

Hey, at least Goettsch apparently of rid of the ridiculous pompadour that capped the mechanical penthouse in their earlier renderings.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20  
Old Posted Oct 20, 2008, 5:10 PM
X-fib2 X-fib2 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: NE Wisconsin
Posts: 45
Well, I have to say that I never cared for this building when it was built and my feelings havn't changed a bit since. It is one of the poorer designs to come out of the late 1960s/early 70s and the fact that it is in such a visible location makes this architectual mediocity standout even more. Had it been burried in the density of the west loop it would have gone unoticed and we wouldn't give a crap what they did to it. Its only salvation might be with the coming of Legacy, and maybe someday some other nearby taller buildings, making this megalyth less of an abomination as your eye will be drawn to the more impressive buildings.
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 > Discussion Forums > Buildings & Architecture
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 9:56 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.