|
Quote:
|
Quote:
the interior reminds me of the old "goofy working out, crazyness ensures" series of disney cartoons. |
More on Hancock changes
http://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local...296632381.html
http://i60.tinypic.com/200752u.jpg http://i58.tinypic.com/jzu1ec.jpg http://i58.tinypic.com/97k8bt.jpg http://i57.tinypic.com/iyeg7p.jpg I really don't know what they are thinking with these changes...and the glass recording studio in the plaza - why? |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
The biggest issue I have on the interior design is the gaping disparity between the exterior and the interior - the outside of the hotel is gorgeous and so finely detailed that I would have hope that some of that neo-Gothic framing would have found it's way inside....and instead we get a 'boxcar Billy/Mable the 16th Street Madam, circa 1934' hybrid that is a bit jarring. No likey. |
yeah if we're talking young/budget conscious, you're probably looking for something more like the Ace
http://nadaad.com/wp-content/uploads...-1-595x400.jpg is not fancy, but its a step above a hostel and gets the job done. more importantly the price is right |
Quote:
Now if we could just deal with the idiot aldermen: Quote:
Of course I'm sure it will end well, Burnett just wants to make sure he get's his legal bribe in the form of campaign contributions from O'Donnell and Tribune. Quote:
|
Quote:
Bruce Graham is spinning in his grave. What a fucking joke. This actually makes me angry. :hell::hell::hell: It's bad enough that stupid "Tilt" gimmick, Best Buy, and Shit Cake Factory were all allowed to ruin the building, oh and that shitty plaza overhaul they did back in the 90s... but this just crosses the line. The extent to which Modern architecture is shit on in this city is baffling. |
Personally I find the inside of the hotel quite appealing. Not that it matters, but I do fall into the millennial category. :shrug:
But that Hancock plaza "redevelopment".... absolutely unacceptable. |
Quote:
http://chicago.suntimes.com/chicago-...-block-changes This feeling of agreeing with Reilly. I'm so...:???::???: |
Quote:
|
how do developers even justify that to themselves? how would that change possibly make the building more attractive...its just a pointless giant sheet of glass that dosent even attempt to match the existing architecture
|
Quote:
|
^ but that's the weird thing. I don't think there is anybody out there right now with a cringe-inducing office proposal. All of the legitimate competitors have top-notch, talented architects on their team - Goettsch, Krueck+Sexton, Pickard Chilton, John Ronan, Cesar Pelli. I wouldn't necessarily give Hines the edge over O'Donnell on design.
Residential is where we see the local hacks come out to play, partly because there is and will always be a segment of the market demanding "traditional" design and there are precious few firms on a national level who do that (AM Stern being one). |
Quote:
|
Quote:
It is hard to see, but if you look close at the support piers, you'll see that it is standing on jacks. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 11:00 PM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.