HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Buildings & Architecture > Never Built & Visionary Projects


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #61  
Old Posted Feb 27, 2008, 2:59 AM
rgolch's Avatar
rgolch rgolch is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 873
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magnus1 View Post

at one time this was a beautiful project.
Those old renders are nice, but that spire was far too large for that building. I much prefer the current design.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #62  
Old Posted Feb 27, 2008, 7:31 AM
Patrick's Avatar
Patrick Patrick is offline
Desert Dweller
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 4,610
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magnus1 View Post





at one time this was a beautiful project.
Oh what a sad sad loss. I'd take an empty lot over the current Chicago Spire. The Fortham Spire worked much more with the Chicago Skyline.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #63  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2008, 2:22 AM
BVictor1's Avatar
BVictor1 BVictor1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 9,488
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrick View Post
Oh what a sad sad loss. I'd take an empty lot over the current Chicago Spire. The Fortham Spire worked much more with the Chicago Skyline.
Not really.

We already have 2 flat top supertall buildings with poles on top, with one on the way (Trump Tower). We didn't need another.
__________________
titanic1
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #64  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2008, 2:31 AM
CGII's Avatar
CGII CGII is offline
illwaukee/crooklyn
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: rome
Posts: 8,518
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrick View Post
Oh what a sad sad loss. I'd take an empty lot over the current Chicago Spire. The Fortham Spire worked much more with the Chicago Skyline.
I find it laughable how many times you bring up the subject of how the Chicago Spire destroys the Chicago skyline and whatnot, when the big three that comprise the current skyline in Chicago have all respectively 'destroyed' their part of the skyline by totally dominating it in the same sense that Chicago Spire will. Considering the tremendous infill going on in Streeterville (like the Waldorf Astoria) to the North and the ridiculously tall Lakeshore East plan the entire area of downtown that Chicago Spire sits in will be inundated with new buildings. LSE is going to be one of the densest areas in North America, and the height of the buildings there (including Aqua, the BCBS vertical expansion, 340 On The Park and the unnamed Arquitectonica building) will make Aon just a meager peak in that area. If Chicago Spire wasn't built, that area would just lump out in terms of the skyline. Chicago's skyline is going to fill up a lot faster and a lot more pronounced than I think you realize.

Judge for yrself (renderings by Ryan81)




Seriously, if you think Chicago Spire is going to destroy the Chicago skyline you must be flipping shit about all the other tall stuff being built around there.
__________________
disregard women. acquire finances.

Last edited by CGII; Feb 28, 2008 at 2:43 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #65  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2008, 2:35 AM
Magnus1's Avatar
Magnus1 Magnus1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 351
i liked A too.

Does anyone have the different proposals saved? i would like to see them again.
Finding them amongst the thousands of Chi Spire posts is just too much of a headache right now.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #66  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2008, 4:55 AM
Patrick's Avatar
Patrick Patrick is offline
Desert Dweller
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 4,610
Quote:
Originally Posted by CGII View Post
I find it laughable how many times you bring up the subject of how the Chicago Spire destroys the Chicago skyline and whatnot, when the big three that comprise the current skyline in Chicago have all respectively 'destroyed' their part of the skyline by totally dominating it in the same sense that Chicago Spire will. Considering the tremendous infill going on in Streeterville (like the Waldorf Astoria) to the North and the ridiculously tall Lakeshore East plan the entire area of downtown that Chicago Spire sits in will be inundated with new buildings. LSE is going to be one of the densest areas in North America, and the height of the buildings there (including Aqua, the BCBS vertical expansion, 340 On The Park and the unnamed Arquitectonica building) will make Aon just a meager peak in that area. If Chicago Spire wasn't built, that area would just lump out in terms of the skyline. Chicago's skyline is going to fill up a lot faster and a lot more pronounced than I think you realize.

Seriously, if you think Chicago Spire is going to destroy the Chicago skyline you must be flipping shit about all the other tall stuff being built around there.
I DO like the Fordham Spire, I hate the Chicago Spire's fugly shape and height. I DO like the idea of a Supertall in that location but not like the Chicago Spire. Bleh! The Fordham Spire would have made a perfect addition to the skyline, the Chicago Spire is just too tall and oddly shaped for my taste. Jeeeese we all have our own opinions?

Last edited by Patrick; Aug 3, 2009 at 8:52 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #67  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2008, 5:11 AM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is offline
TL;DR
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: the city o'wind
Posts: 13,886
Architecture is not just about the broad strokes, but also about the little things. "God is in the details" was an important axiom for Mies van der Rohe and, by extension, the entire Second Chicago School of architecture.

Santiago Calatrava has produced a work of absolute GENIUS on all scales. The shape of the tower was pretty much dictated by Kelleher and the economics on the project, which demanded enough sellable floor space to balance out the superdiculous costs of the extensive foundation. The lobby design, Calatrava's signature designs that extend down to the doorknobs, and the breathtaking curtain wall designed for the building more than balance out the shape, which I admit is not quite as inspiring as the Fordham original.
__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #68  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2008, 6:09 PM
JDRCRASH JDRCRASH is offline
Skyscraper Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: San Gabriel Valley
Posts: 7,926
With the new version, shouldn't it come close to the top floor with the Burj?
__________________
Revelation 21:4
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #69  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2008, 8:00 PM
i_am_hydrogen i_am_hydrogen is offline
tilted & shifted
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 4,597
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magnus1 View Post
Does anyone have the different proposals saved? i would like to see them again.
Previous designs, starting with the most recent:
Version E:


Version D:


Version C:


Version B: (my favorite)


Version A:
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #70  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2008, 8:09 PM
cbotnyse cbotnyse is offline
Chicago Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: River North, Chicago
Posts: 1,620
Vesion C is so awful.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #71  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2008, 9:11 PM
arlekin_m's Avatar
arlekin_m arlekin_m is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: mexico city
Posts: 271
^some people felt really strongly about it, believe it or not
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #72  
Old Posted Feb 29, 2008, 5:55 AM
Lecom's Avatar
Lecom Lecom is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: the Mid-Atlantic
Posts: 12,703
Never liked it. Subsequent versions were much better. Version C was probably my favorite of the four.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #73  
Old Posted Feb 29, 2008, 7:23 PM
JDRCRASH JDRCRASH is offline
Skyscraper Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: San Gabriel Valley
Posts: 7,926
Quote:
Originally Posted by CGII View Post
I find it laughable how many times you bring up the subject of how the Chicago Spire destroys the Chicago skyline and whatnot, when the big three that comprise the current skyline in Chicago have all respectively 'destroyed' their part of the skyline by totally dominating it in the same sense that Chicago Spire will. Considering the tremendous infill going on in Streeterville (like the Waldorf Astoria) to the North and the ridiculously tall Lakeshore East plan the entire area of downtown that Chicago Spire sits in will be inundated with new buildings. LSE is going to be one of the densest areas in North America, and the height of the buildings there (including Aqua, the BCBS vertical expansion, 340 On The Park and the unnamed Arquitectonica building) will make Aon just a meager peak in that area. If Chicago Spire wasn't built, that area would just lump out in terms of the skyline. Chicago's skyline is going to fill up a lot faster and a lot more pronounced than I think you realize.

Judge for yrself (renderings by Ryan81)




Seriously, if you think Chicago Spire is going to destroy the Chicago skyline you must be flipping shit about all the other tall stuff being built around there.
Oh don't worry; Patrick isn't a SoCal troll, he's just likes to do this period, wherever he is.
__________________
Revelation 21:4
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #74  
Old Posted Mar 1, 2008, 12:09 AM
CGII's Avatar
CGII CGII is offline
illwaukee/crooklyn
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: rome
Posts: 8,518
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrick View Post
Ohh Boyy, CGII, one hella annoying smartass. I DO like the Fordham Spire, I hate the Chicago Spire's fugly shape and height. I DO like the idea of a Supertall in that location but not like the Chicago Spire. Bleh! The Fordham Spire would have made a perfect addition to the skyline, the Chicago Spire is just too tall and oddly shaped for my taste. Jeeeese we all have our own opinions, so really now, hush.
Fine if you like or don't like it, but you're reasoning on the basis of 'zomg it'll totally destroy Chicago' is just ludicrous, when other buildings in Chi that you love are far more guilty of this.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JDRCRASH
Oh don't worry; Patrick isn't a SoCal troll, he's just likes to do this period, wherever he is.
First of all, I have no idea what you're trying to say, second of all, it was totally uncalled for.
__________________
disregard women. acquire finances.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #75  
Old Posted Mar 1, 2008, 1:51 AM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is offline
TL;DR
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: the city o'wind
Posts: 13,886
Quote:
Originally Posted by cbotnyse View Post
Version C is so awful.
Actually, although I hated it at the time, I'm starting to warm up to it. The world's largest, most beautiful smokestack for the City That Works....

The only previous version I still don't like is Version E, which got the curvature totally wrong and looks even more dildo-like than the current design.
__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #76  
Old Posted Mar 1, 2008, 2:34 AM
Tom Servo's Avatar
Tom Servo Tom Servo is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,647
Quote:
Originally Posted by cbotnyse View Post
Vesion C is so awful.
not that i disagree, but i always thought D was plain awful. C was so weird it was almost good.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #77  
Old Posted Mar 1, 2008, 9:05 PM
pico44 pico44 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,313
I believe the current version is very very good. It will be the icon Chicago's skyline has always needed, even if it will intitially be ridiculed for looking like a sex toy. In the end it will be loved by the general public. Most people won't even know other renderings ever existed, which is a good thing because version B is so frickin fantastic that it makes the current design look positively silly. I won't ever be ever to look at it without sighing about what could have been.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #78  
Old Posted Mar 2, 2008, 4:08 AM
JDRCRASH JDRCRASH is offline
Skyscraper Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: San Gabriel Valley
Posts: 7,926
Quote:
Originally Posted by CGII View Post
Fine if you like or don't like it, but you're reasoning on the basis of 'zomg it'll totally destroy Chicago' is just ludicrous, when other buildings in Chi that you love are far more guilty of this.



First of all, I have no idea what you're trying to say, second of all, it was totally uncalled for.
__________________
Revelation 21:4
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #79  
Old Posted Mar 2, 2008, 5:19 AM
StethJeff's Avatar
StethJeff StethJeff is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 2,068
Quote:
Originally Posted by cbotnyse View Post
Vesion C is so awful.
Version C is probably the one that I prefer - the lesser of 5 evils.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #80  
Old Posted Mar 2, 2008, 7:08 AM
honte honte is offline
Registered
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Chicago - every nook and cranny
Posts: 4,628
^ Wow, that's what I call a minority opinion! Bravo.
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 > Never Built & Visionary Projects
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 9:59 AM.

     

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