CHICAGO | Fordham Spire | NEVER BUILT | Former proposal for the Chicago Spire site - Page 3

M II A II R II K · #41 Posted **Apr 2, 2007, 2:53 AM**

But then that would mean that the old name and the old design is dead, not the project itself.

honte · #42 Posted **Apr 2, 2007, 3:03 AM**

^ Yeah, the title of this thread should probably be "Dead Design," not "Dead Proposal." Or, "Former Version of the Chicago Spire."

volguus zildrohar · #43 Posted **Apr 2, 2007, 3:22 AM**

I'm personally....just not ready for this building but it would've been something special, indeed, for the womb of the skyscraper.

Visiteur · #44 Posted **Apr 2, 2007, 4:45 AM**

That is a bad choice for a title for this thread. 75% of people will see that and think that the building is cancelled, not just a former design. People don't usually read in to the thread titles. It works to the effect of a hospital nurse saying "he's gone" when he's only checked out of the hopsital. It will be misconstrued.

Steely Dan · #45 Posted **Apr 2, 2007, 2:59 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by M II A II R II K

But then that would mean that the old name and the old design is dead, not the project itself.

the fordham spire and chicago spire developments are two entirely different and seperate projects, with different development teams. the only constants are calatrava and the site. rest assured that the fordham spire project is a dead-as-a-dodo "never built" skyscraper project, just like the miglin-bietler skyneedle or scott toberman's 7 south dearborn project.

we were getting way too many people in the chicago spire threaed bitching and moaning about how upset they are that some so-called "A" or "B" version of the project wasn't gonna get built. i created this thread to reinforce the fact that "A" and "B" are not early discarded design shemes of the chicago spire project, they are in fact the design schemes for a now defunct skyscraper development project called the fordham spire.

they're two different projects:

the fordham company's "Fordham Spire" = extremely dead

shelborne development's "Chicago Spire" = still alive

M II A II R II K · #46 Posted **Apr 2, 2007, 3:55 PM**

Oh.

Yea with it being on the same site and having a similar design was a bit of a throw off.

pico44 · #47 Posted **Apr 2, 2007, 6:47 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by M II A II R II K

Oh.

Yea with it being on the same site and having a similar design was a bit of a throw off.

The designs are similar in that they both twist, the same way that foie gras and chicken livers are similar in that they come from the same part of a bird. Too bad Chicago has to settle for the Chicago Spire and fried chicken innards.

ChicagotoRoanoke · #48 Posted **Apr 2, 2007, 7:28 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by pico44

The designs are similar in that they both twist, the same way that foie gras and chicken livers are similar in that they come from the same part of a bird. Too bad Chicago has to settle for the Chicago Spire and fried chicken innards.

This building was a lovely concept. You think someone can make it work anywhere else.... go for it, give 'em the call and let them know the big news! Chicago isn't settling in my opinion. They are going to get something someone says he can actually build. In other words, something that actually works..... impressively. That's Chicago. Try not to get hung up on what can't be done. It keeps you from figuring out what can.

Additionally, the attention CS is getting would point to you as being in the great minority that it is an unworthy building. It's just not FS. Get over it.

Master Shake · #49 Posted **Apr 3, 2007, 12:41 AM**

Never really thought this one was in the cards. Every five years Chicago puts forth an insane supertall to test the limits of logic. They could build this in Dubai, probably nowhere else. Lovely design.

Things are slowing real estate wise in Chicago, not the right time to throw this on the market. Only so many bazillionaires out there.

kalmia · #50 Posted **Apr 5, 2007, 6:20 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Master Shake

Never really thought this one was in the cards. Every five years Chicago puts forth an insane supertall to test the limits of logic. They could build this in Dubai, probably nowhere else. Lovely design.

Things are slowing real estate wise in Chicago, not the right time to throw this on the market. Only so many bazillionaires out there.

What about Brazilianaires?

bnk · #51 Posted **Apr 17, 2007, 5:51 AM**

Bump.

I have noticed a few posts about version A B and D in the Chicago Spire thread.

Your comments would greatly be appreciated in this great thread also.

Grumpy · #52 Posted **Apr 18, 2007, 6:59 AM**

Another super tall that didn't make in Chicago...

LMich · #53 Posted **Apr 18, 2007, 8:15 AM**

Grumpy, in case you missed it, this is simply a design of a project that was never constructed. The Chicago Spire is still a proposal.

honte · #54 Posted **Apr 18, 2007, 12:29 PM**

This thread title is still causing a lot of confusion, and it's giving Chicago a fake black eye. If you guys really want to keep it alive, I think we should change it.

Why can't it simply be "Fordham Spire: Old Versions of Chicago Spire"?

Grumpy · #55 Posted **Apr 18, 2007, 1:40 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by LMich

Grumpy, in case you missed it, this is simply a design of a project that was never constructed. The Chicago Spire is still a proposal.

Oops , I thought is was cancelled

Steely Dan · #56 Posted **Apr 18, 2007, 2:25 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by honte

This thread title is still causing a lot of confusion, and it's giving Chicago a fake black eye. If you guys really want to keep it alive, I think we should change it.

Why can't it simply be "Fordham Spire: Old Versions of Chicago Spire"?

i've changed the title. the reason it was worded that way was to reinforce the fact that the fordham spire and chicago spire are two different projects. we had so many whiners in the chicago spire thread complaining "why can't they build version B" "version B is so beautiful, hopefully it will be built somehwere else" "blah, blah, balh, blah, blah". i finally got so fed up with the fact that many people didn't realize that the beloved version B was an entirely different project that i created this thread to shock people into the reality that the fordham spire project is dead, dead, dead.................. and it ain't coming back.

honte · #57 Posted **Apr 18, 2007, 3:10 PM**

^ Steely, I think the new name addresses all concerns. Thanks. Of course, I supported the creation of this thread 100%.

pico44 · #58 Posted **Apr 18, 2007, 4:40 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by honte

This thread title is still causing a lot of confusion, and it's giving Chicago a fake black eye. If you guys really want to keep it alive, I think we should change it.

On the contrary, the black eye is quite real. And it isn't just Chicago's, it belongs to the entire world until this structure is built. This would qualify as one of our generation's greatest errors of omission.

Thankfully Calatrava saw to it that Chicago didn't subsequently make an error of comission--with version B's hugely inferior succesor, but still good version F(?)--but that doesn't make it any less tragic.

Latoso · #59 Posted **Apr 18, 2007, 10:02 PM**

I agree with pico! I can't wait for him to secure financing and get this project off the ground.

Magnus1 · #60 Posted **Feb 27, 2008, 2:33 AM**

at one time this was a beautiful project.