HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Buildings & Architecture > Never Built & Visionary Projects > Cancelled Project Threads Archive

About The Ads  This week the ad company used in the forum will be monitoring activity and doing some tests to identify any problems which users may be experiencing. If at any time this week you get pop-ups, redirects, etc. as a result of ads please let us know by sending an email to forum@skyscraperpage.com or post in the ads complaint thread. Thank you for your participation.


    Beitler Telecom Tower in the SkyscraperPage Database

Building Data Page   • Comparison Diagram   • Chicago Skyscraper Diagram

Map Location
Chicago Projects & Construction Forum

 

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #81  
Old Posted Oct 26, 2005, 12:42 AM
M II A II R II K's Avatar
M II A II R II K M II A II R II K is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 47,426
Hopefully at least odds are that at least one of them shall materialize.
__________________
ASDFGHJK
     
     
  #82  
Old Posted Oct 26, 2005, 12:42 AM
Jularc's Avatar
Jularc Jularc is offline
Time/Space
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: New York City
Posts: 5,363
WOW!!!

I like this new tall one!!! I am not sure if thats a good location... maybe if it was setback somewhere in the middle from that location with of all the other buildings around it.

But what that hell... Built the thing!!!
     
     
  #83  
Old Posted Oct 26, 2005, 1:18 AM
STERNyc's Avatar
STERNyc STERNyc is offline
Landmark Restored
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,407
Im pretty sure the design people are praising or bashing isnt the design that will be built, am I correct in thinking the actual structure is yet to be designed?
__________________
Somewhere between Child's clarity and Libeskind's dazzle lies the future.
     
     
  #84  
Old Posted Oct 26, 2005, 1:18 AM
spyguy's Avatar
spyguy spyguy is offline
THAT Guy
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 5,853
SSC brought up the good point that the current location of this tower would get rid of 500 LSD lot. Man, I really want to see what that tower looks like!
     
     
  #85  
Old Posted Oct 26, 2005, 1:27 AM
LMich's Avatar
LMich LMich is offline
Midwest Moderator - Editor
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Big Mitten
Posts: 31,744
Quote:
Originally Posted by STERNyc
Im pretty sure the design people are praising or bashing isnt the design that will be built, am I correct in thinking the actual structure is yet to be designed?
Almost any building looks differently from it's prelim, released design. That's a given. But, obviously the concept shows a few guidelines and general massing. It's not going to change thaat much.
__________________
Where the trees are the right height
     
     
  #86  
Old Posted Oct 26, 2005, 2:07 AM
Chicago2020's Avatar
Chicago2020 Chicago2020 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: AZ
Posts: 1,324
If they are planning to build this thing, it will be taller than the CN Tower in Toronto.

With Navy Pier nearby, and the possibility of the Fordham Spire being built, this whole area will be congested with traffic, security and tourists.

Maybe they should build it next to the new Suntimes building
     
     
  #87  
Old Posted Oct 26, 2005, 2:11 AM
Crazy Ivan Crazy Ivan is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 175
What interests me is the depreciated cash flow for this investment. Is there that large of a revenue stream from signal broadcasting that they can justify the expense of such a massive structure? It seems to me that it would make more sense to build something under it (such as the Fordham) that generates revenue, and then just put a few antennae on top.
     
     
  #88  
Old Posted Oct 26, 2005, 2:12 AM
STERNyc's Avatar
STERNyc STERNyc is offline
Landmark Restored
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,407
Quote:
Originally Posted by LMich
Quote:
Originally Posted by STERNyc
Im pretty sure the design people are praising or bashing isnt the design that will be built, am I correct in thinking the actual structure is yet to be designed?
Almost any building looks differently from it's prelim, released design. That's a given. But, obviously the concept shows a few guidelines and general massing. It's not going to change thaat much.
Im under the impression that this isn't Cesar Pelli's design rather a design created by the paper that released it.
__________________
Somewhere between Child's clarity and Libeskind's dazzle lies the future.
     
     
  #89  
Old Posted Oct 26, 2005, 2:21 AM
Chicago2020's Avatar
Chicago2020 Chicago2020 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: AZ
Posts: 1,324
Isengard has been Unleashed
     
     
  #90  
Old Posted Oct 26, 2005, 2:21 AM
Lecom's Avatar
Lecom Lecom is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: the Mid-Atlantic
Posts: 12,703
Looks like the guys in Chicago decided to recreate the city the way it was in I, Robot.

Well, you know all those buildings in "the future"? Well someone's gotta start building them, right?
     
     
  #91  
Old Posted Oct 26, 2005, 2:34 AM
northface's Avatar
northface northface is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: seattle area
Posts: 2,503
i like it!
__________________
GO HUSKIES!
H-U-S-K-I-E-S!
BOW DOWN TO WASHINGTON
     
     
  #92  
Old Posted Oct 26, 2005, 2:38 AM
spyguy's Avatar
spyguy spyguy is offline
THAT Guy
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 5,853
Quote:
Originally Posted by STERNyc
Quote:
Originally Posted by LMich
Quote:
Originally Posted by STERNyc
Im pretty sure the design people are praising or bashing isnt the design that will be built, am I correct in thinking the actual structure is yet to be designed?
Almost any building looks differently from it's prelim, released design. That's a given. But, obviously the concept shows a few guidelines and general massing. It's not going to change thaat much.
Im under the impression that this isn't Cesar Pelli's design rather a design created by the paper that released it.
You could be correct. I'm not sure if this is a Pelli design or what. Perhaps they (like Tom) had old renderings of the same kind of building and used those.
     
     
  #93  
Old Posted Oct 26, 2005, 2:39 AM
Beyond 1000's Avatar
Beyond 1000 Beyond 1000 is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: vancouver, bc
Posts: 720
Nice! I like it but it might look wierd by Fordham.

Nice to be able to view higher than Sears' roof (if built).

About the newspaper articles, those guys are morons.

As a built thing it IS a building just like CN. I don't honestly care about the multi-floor dumb-ass rule. They don't even call CN a "skyscraper" as if it doesn't qualify to appear to "scrape the sky."

This new tower will look splendid on the Chicago skyline and it will be that city's tallest skyscraper. I would take that over that glorified candy cane proposed nearby.
     
     
  #94  
Old Posted Oct 26, 2005, 2:51 AM
Chad's Avatar
Chad Chad is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 412
I think 2 slim spires located to close to eachother...maybe move on to Museum Park might make a surplus to Chicago skyline instead of lowing the beauty down.
__________________
"Bangkok".......more than you think.
     
     
  #95  
Old Posted Oct 26, 2005, 2:55 AM
Jasonhouse Jasonhouse is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 23,744
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pandemonious
Wow, If Trump and Waterview were added to that above image, it would frame out the river awesomely.

Throw in the Mandarin Oriental and the LSE at build out, and that's a sick ass build up in the middle of the skyline. NYC and HK, eat your heart out.


However, if this project really does get built, and built where it's proposed, then it had well better NOT look like it does. Nothing would suck more than 1300ft of bare, industrial looking concrete, with a couple pods of cutesy glass thrown on at either end, and 3 massive, blinking antennas on top. It would look like a fricking concrete bridge, cantilevered out of the ground.

It would be much, much more attractive to at least hang some occupabale space in regular intervals all the way up the structure, kinda sorta like a cross between the defunct 7SD and Calatrava's proposal for 80 South St in NYC.
     
     
  #96  
Old Posted Oct 26, 2005, 3:05 AM
M II A II R II K's Avatar
M II A II R II K M II A II R II K is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 47,426
Catching Dubai is another story....

But at least this shows this side is not dead.
__________________
ASDFGHJK
     
     
  #97  
Old Posted Oct 26, 2005, 3:10 AM
Jasonhouse Jasonhouse is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 23,744
^Dubai's skyline is going to have way too much of the "tower in the park", resort style open space thing going on IMO. That city will have tall towers, but numerous other global cities will have true arbanity.


but NEways.
     
     
  #98  
Old Posted Oct 26, 2005, 3:10 AM
LA21st LA21st is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 3,604
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jasonhouse
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pandemonious
Wow, If Trump and Waterview were added to that above image, it would frame out the river awesomely.

Throw in the Mandarin Oriental and the LSE at build out, and that's a sick ass build up in the middle of the skyline. NYC and HK, eat your heart out.


However, if this project really does get built, and built where it's proposed, then it had well better NOT look like it does. Nothing would suck more than 1300ft of bare, industrial looking concrete, with a couple pods of cutesy glass thrown on at either end, and 3 massive, blinking antennas on top. It would look like a fricking concrete bridge, cantilevered out of the ground.

It would be much, much more attractive to at least hang some occupabale space in regular intervals all the way up the structure, kinda sorta like a cross between the defunct 7SD and Calatrava's proposal for 80 South St in NYC.
Not to mention the unlimited potential of new skyscrapers that will rise on Wabash Avenue for the next few decades and beyond. There is a proposal for 80 and 70 at the moment, and it is just begining.

Oh yea, there is a 80 story building proposed for LSE too.:nuts:
     
     
  #99  
Old Posted Oct 26, 2005, 3:24 AM
spyguy's Avatar
spyguy spyguy is offline
THAT Guy
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 5,853
If Fordham and this Tall Tower are built, the only one that can be moved is the Tall Tower really. Once you change the location of Fordham to something on the south side it's won't happen at all. One of Calatrava's sticking points was that Carley find a waterfront property.
     
     
  #100  
Old Posted Oct 26, 2005, 6:02 AM
LMich's Avatar
LMich LMich is offline
Midwest Moderator - Editor
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Big Mitten
Posts: 31,744
Man, I'd love if they'd go with painted, black metal (a la the Eiffel Tower), or clad it in black granite. Both ideas are far too expensive for modern architecture, though. lol
__________________
Where the trees are the right height
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
 

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Buildings & Architecture > Never Built & Visionary Projects > Cancelled Project Threads Archive
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 5:59 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.