Don't worry i'm not offended.

I'm not even sure what the criticism is. I'm saying the first design was more cerebral because it challenges you to think about what a building should look like, or the limits of structural engineering. Commodities don't do that. They rely on provoking impulse, like "wow, i want that shiny sports car'. I'm okay with sports cars btw.

Also, can a moderator change the rendering that represents 1000 South Michigan Avenue?

Plan Commission agenda (April 21, 2016) meeting 10:00AM

Because Kamin is an idiot NIMBY, posing as an architectural critic. His opinion is useless. He's only calling it a successful redesign because it's 200 feet shorter, and NIMBY morons are notoriously afraid of tall buildings.

It looks like a confused, sloppy mess. The design is horrible. Just horrible.

I almost feel like it's a collective "fuck you" from the Jahn office to the clowns that opposed the original, brilliant, design.

They're all probably sitting back laughing, making jokes about how fucking stupid developers and community groups in this city are.

The original design would have been groundbreaking and an instant icon.

Haven't you heard? Instant icons are bad.

Chicago is a city defined by its old icons and knee-jerk mass hang-wringings over any sign of change.

Huh?

For once, you are spot on. This is terrible architecture.

Sorry, but I've had no contact at all with the developer. The only meeting about this has been the one convened on March 31 by a developer organization. Without a Fourth Ward alderman, community groups are left just whistling in the dark, not sure what to do.

I honestly wish they could just lop off the base and push the rest of the building down, I don't care if it would be about 200' shorter; quality over quantity.

For real. this new design is actually sad. i almost wish we hadn't seen the original design to spare us from the disappointment of this generic MESS. the original fit chicago so well :hell:

ditto on Kamin is a hack, nimby tool, and Jahn either handed this off or is going senile

^^^ He designed metal curves, he designed a metal box. Then he put curves on top of a box. About what passes for modern design these days. Unless of course we're being punked.

If you make something amorphous because people were reacting to architecture with a statement, then it just becomes meaningless noise. This is exactly what the neighborhood wanted, something that doesn't stand out. It screams code and community based design. Now to see if people buying into an expensive price point image will to pluck down big bills to be inside Moby Dick standing on his tail above Spongebob Squarepants. I would rather buy into Crescent Heights or Wanda.

The problem is the owner has set a budget for the exterior facade that won't work for anything they design. The budget will get the owner window wall, not a fancy unitized curtain wall skin. Cheap, cheap, cheap.

The design obviously needs some work and the base currently looks like an afterthought. I won't be surprised to see that change before any construction begins.

Fingers crossed. The transition between the tower and base is currently a hot, wet mess. :yuck:

There've been two meetings on 1000 S. Michigan. One for the previous design and one for the current design.

Those were merely presentations. At a meeting, there would be some sort of meaningful discussion. No one from any city department, nor from the alderman's office, was even at the March 31 meeting.

Just a heads up.
I was parked at the landmarks PRC meeting yesterday on another matter and Jahn's 1000m tower got the go ahead from landmarks.

What alderman's office. Has a replacement been named? I remember you getting a chance to ask questions. I know that I had a chance to speak. Anyone with a mouth and voice could have gotten up and stood behind the microphone to express their views. People (those with the time) could have gone to the landmarks meeting a few months ago like you did and I did and spoke, so...:shrug:

Good...