CHICAGO | Beitler Telecom Tower | 2,000 FT / 610 M | NEVER BUILT

[HK Chicago]

My 1st reaction was that it was horrendous, but it really all comes down to the treatment on the legs... please no unpainted concrete.

Also, tweak the antenna so it appears less top-heavy and there's potential, I'll wait for additional renderings on it.

[Chase Unperson]

I'm with Lynn becker. Put this thing in the burbs or in a NW/SW neighborhood where it would be an engineering wonder. Save that plot of land for the next Lake Point Tower.

Let me print what he has to say about it.



In this morning's Trib, architecture critic Blair Kamin and real estate columnist Thomas Corfmann reveal plans for a $300,000,000, 2,000 foot-high HDTV broadcast tower to be constructed by a partnership of J. Paul Beitler and LR Development along Chicago's lakeshore, not from another 2,000 structure, the Santiago Calatrava designed Fordham Spire. Unlike the Spire, however, the Beitler project, other than a 400-car parking garage at the bottom and restaurants at the top, would be an empty tripod, three huge concrete legs, joined by beams every 10 to 15 stories, that would support three tall antennas at the top.

The designer is Cesar Pelli, the usually reliable architect who recently completed the striking Ratner Athletic Center on the University of Chicago campus. At Beitler Tower, however, most of his better instincts seemed to have abandoned him. If the developers had really meant to do this right, they would have simply gone to Adrian Smith of Skidmore, Owings Merrill and resurrected his unbuilt design for 7 South Dearborn, a HDTV tower that's everything the Pelli is not: slim, soaring, graceful and elegant.

Simply put, this project is an atrocity.

More to the point, it could also quickly become the world's biggest white elephant. The impetus for the tower is Congress's mandate that broadcasters switch to digital-only transmission, probably by 2009. Stations are therefore staking out locations for their high-def antennas. However, currently only about 20% of all viewers receive their signals "over-the-air", and it's a fair bet that by the time the Beitler tower would be completed, that number will be even more dramatically lower.

There are about 3,400,000 TV households in the Chicago market. That means the tower would cost over $400 per over-the-air household at 20%, or nearly $1,000 at 10%. Today, having a television is considered a necessity for even the poorest families - 98.2% of U.S. households have at least one TV. It's not hard to envision how over just the next few years, access to basic cable or direct TV over a dish will become another basic necessity, and over-the-air transmission will all but wither away. And what will we stuck with? A parking garage and some restaurants, stuck in a giant wishbone of a structure that no longer serves a purpose.

The Beitler tower is less a building than a gargatuan piece of infrastructure. Placed amidst the railyards in a city or a suburb, it would be a marvel of engineering. Placed in the heart of Chicago's downtown, it's merely an eyesore. It's a throwback to the days when cities trashed their downtowns by stuffing them beneath the dark shadows of elevated expressways. It's hard to see the general public embracing this proposal. Even on an architecture forum like skyscraperpage.com, where there's usually unbridled enthusiasm for anything tall, discussion over the Beitler tower has been markedly cool.

According to Kamin and Corfmann, nothing is really real on this project. The developers are "negotiating" with the city's TV stations. The proposal has been "presented" to Chicago's Department of Planning - no formal approval process has begun. If they have any sense for public relations, Chicago's major TV outlets will distance themselve from this project without delay, and, if that doesn't work, the mayor and his new planning commissioner Lori Healey should telegraph the city's disapproval quickly. Or do we really want to turn into Toronto?

[oshkeoto]

Yeah, I'm not a fan of this. I don't think it looks particularly evil, unless you count the malevolence required to put something that ugly on the lakefront. Chicago has a history of pragmatic architecture, it's true, but we also have a certain level of elegance downtown, ESPECIALLY along the lake, which this tower would trash mightily. Plus I'm really not keen on having one of the largest structures in the city be completely useless above the eighth floor or whatever.

[Swede]

Haven't read the whole thread, but here goes...

I like the design. Looks powerful and just a tad evil. The location is wack tho, just a block from the Fordham Spire... Would look much better if it was on the other side of the skyline, away from the lake.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by spyguy

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.

no, stern would not be correct. the design everyone has seen so far is the very same cesar pelli design tom and i first saw over 3 years ago. this was not a newspaper concocted design, but rather the same cesar pelli design for a chicago telecom tower that has been on the table for years now and has been shopped for various sites.

[Steely Dan]

^ with that said, though, the timing and proposed location for this tower just seems very suspicious to me. it's got to be some kind of posturing move to strong arm carley and/or calatrava into a better deal and/or allowing broadcast capabilites at fordham spire. why would you have two 2,000' structures a stone's throw away from each other, one with sigifcant use up to the 1500' level then nothing, the other with no use until the 1500' level.

the fact that it would be so easy to combine the functionality of this bietler telecom tower into the fordham spire's program leads me to believe that something fishy is going on with this whole "announcement". the fact that LR is involved with both property sites just raises the old eyebrows even further.

[LostInTheZone]

well, what do you all think of the CN tower? would you have opposed building that? it's basically got three legs, an observation deck, is made of exposed concrete, and serves mainly as a broadcast antenna...



those are some majorly unflattering pictures, but hey, that's what it looks like up close...



...yet it's loved as a major landmark. it works in the larger skyline.

think of how this Pelli thing could be lit at night:


so i ask again: if you lived in toronto in the 70s, would you have opposed building the CN tower?

[emoney]

Cant say I know the city of chicago and this seems to impracitical and i bet you are right they are just trying to be in a better negotiating position with carley

[LostInTheZone]

everything doesnt have to be 100% practical though. when the eiffel tower was built, it had zero practical purpose (radio transmission didnt come till decades after it was built). sometimes it's cool to have a little whimsy. if this thing was built, i would definitely make a point of visiting the deck when i came to see Chicago.

[STR]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

^ with that said, though, the timing and proposed location for this tower just seems very suspicious to me. it's got to be some kind of posturing move to strong arm carley and/or calatrava into a better deal and/or allowing broadcast capabilites at fordham spire. why would you have two 2,000' structures a stone's throw away from each other, one with sigifcant use up to the 1500' level then nothing, the other with no use until the 1500' level.

the fact that it would be so easy to combine the functionality of this bietler telecom tower into the fordham spire's program leads me to believe that something fishy is going on with this whole "announcement". the fact that LR is involved with both property sites just raises the old eyebrows even further.

I'd have to agree. I see several possibilities, some more likely than others.

1) It's a hedge against Fordham, if FS fails, Tall Tower (TT) is the alternative to get the broadcasting and tourist $$$.

2) It some kind of sideways scheme to get TV facilitices plus (possibly...well...hopefully) obs. deck or restaurant into FS while still making the idiot NIMBY's think they're getting a good deal (at least a better one than two towers).

3) It's a way of getting a real skyscraper into the door. They first propose a TV mast, then tack on condos/commercial use once everyone's used to the idea.

4) It's posturing to get a better deal out of another landowner, which owns another plot somewhere else. This entire announcement is a stunt.

5) The entire thing is a shameless stunt, like Trump's WTC campaign.

6) What we're seeing is true. Beitler really intends to build a TV tower 2 blocks north of Fordham, regardless of whether or not FS is built.

That's all the conspiracies I can think of now, I'm still recovering from some kind of booze a friend brought back from eastern Europe. That stuff is just 30 proof away from being rubbing alcohol, so that should give you an idea of how I feel right now.

[Chi-town]

Is it absinthe? That shit'll fuck you over if it's the real deal. But it's probably no the real Czech stuff or you'd be hallucinating slightly right now...

[oshkeoto]

"everything doesnt have to be 100% practical though. when the eiffel tower was built, it had zero practical purpose (radio transmission didnt come till decades after it was built). sometimes it's cool to have a little whimsy. if this thing was built, i would definitely make a point of visiting the deck when i came to see Chicago."

But the Eiffel Tower is so much better-looking than this. Solid, unadorned concrete does not a good-looking building make. Steel, a different story.

[STR]

Originally Posted by Chi-town

Is it absinthe? That shit'll fuck you over if it's the real deal. But it's probably no the real Czech stuff or you'd be hallucinating slightly right now...

Not quite sure what it was, but I drink in relative moderation and have a high tolerance to pretty much everything, but I was still the most messed up I can remember being. Fortunately this is the last day of a rare 5 day weekend for me, so it's no biggie. But it's difficult to concentrate on anything.

EDIT: After googling, I'm pretty sure that stuff was absinthe. The 160 proof and green color stand out. No hallucinations or anything, but I as soon as I'm done with my homework I'm going to lie down for a while.

[LostInTheZone]

Originally Posted by oshkeoto

"everything doesnt have to be 100% practical though. when the eiffel tower was built, it had zero practical purpose (radio transmission didnt come till decades after it was built). sometimes it's cool to have a little whimsy. if this thing was built, i would definitely make a point of visiting the deck when i came to see Chicago."

But the Eiffel Tower is so much better-looking than this. Solid, unadorned concrete does not a good-looking building make. Steel, a different story.

im actually inclined to agree with you that steel lattice usually looks better than concrete, but it is a completely subjective opinion. and anyway, almost everyone at the time thought that the eiffel tower was hideous. same with the bridge over the Firth of Forth. people said they were ugly and detracted from views of their surroundings. now they get almost universal praise.

but 1880s paris is a poor comparison for 21st century chicago. the CN tower is much more appropriate model. what were feelings on that at the time it was was built? how do you all feel about it now, given your opinions on this structure?

[Steely Dan]

^ well, the john hancock center in chicago was villified when it was first built, for what it's worth.

[trvlr70]

I want to like it, but I just don't. I guess I don't want a CN Tower or Sky Needle in the Chicago skyline. I don't like how it fits in relation to the other buildings. Both observation towers mentioned look kinda run down, dirty now.

[jcchii]

first, I hate CN tower

second, STR is correct on points 1 & 2, imo

espcially since one firm is involved in some way in both sites

[Chi-town]

Originally Posted by STR

EDIT: After googling, I'm pretty sure that stuff was absinthe. The 160 proof and green color stand out. No hallucinations or anything, but I as soon as I'm done with my homework I'm going to lie down for a while.

Ahh... see, the real stuff has something called wormwood oil in it, which is a mild hallucinagen. Kinda like those worms in the bottom of Mescal tequila sometimes are (hence the drug mescaline). But most absinthe has that taken out.

Apparently absinthe is what Vincent Van Gogh was drinking when he decided it would be a good idea to cut his own ear off...



As for this building... has there been any reaction from Carley?

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by trvlr70

Both observation towers mentioned look kinda run down, dirty now.

huh? the last time i was in seattle (2002), the space needle was looking fantastic! it had just been given a thorough cleaning/repainting and boy was she was sparkling.

the CN tower, yeah, from pics i've seen it is looking a bit grimey, but the space needle is still wicked cool and looking great all these many decades later.

[CTroyMathis]

The Space Needle is quite clean. Old school, but, prim.