CHICAGO | Boom rundown - everything over 12 floors. v5

[aaron38]

Great shots Tom, nice work.

[Alliance]

Originally Posted by BVictor1

ARCHITECTURE
http://www.chicagotribune.com/features/a...1,5216283.story?coll=chi-leisurearts-hed

ARCHITECTURE
Tower twirls and debate starts to swirl

Originally Posted by BVictor1

"These are little jerky things that detract from the continuous development of the city."

Originally Posted by High Sky Zephyr

To hand the Chicago skyline over to a relative novice, the Florence, Italy-based architect David Fisher, who is pushing the idea of a condominium, hotel and office tower here as well as in Dubai, would be akin to turning over the hallowed walls of the Art Institute to a high school art class.

I say hell NO. 90 stories would be superb, but sorry...Chicago has class.

[TransitEngr]

museumparktom, great photos!

My God.... I almost cannot get over The South Loop... its only high-rise construction peer is Streeterville.

WHAT A TIME WE LIVE IN.... WHAT A TIME....

[Via Chicago]

Originally Posted by VivaLFuego

What's wrong with that? The difference between Chicago and Dubai is that here, they have to consider whether the numbers work, whereas Dubai is just a playland for architects and planners. So if the numbers work out and it gets built here, what's wrong with that?

are you saying that if the financials work, you'll support any architectural design whatsoever? would you have a problem with vegas-style monstrosities up and down michigan ave? just because somethings tall and the financials work dosent mean i somehow blindly support it. now, its not fair to really judge it since no renderings have even been made, but if it looks anything like this:
, theres no way in hell im somehow going to be thrilled about it.

and you're exactly right. dubai is a playground. theres some decent stuff going up there, and a whole lot of ugly stuff. chicago is a mature and architecturally significant city and deserves better than that.

[SamInTheLoop]

^ Something like this would be far from economically justifiable in Chicago, so any discussion of it seems more than a little pointless imo...

[Alliance]

two words for you Sam ..."chicago spire"

[SamInTheLoop]

Originally Posted by honte

Right on the money! I am so glad the DPD has gotten wiser about development and urban planning issues. Enough with the PoMo junk - it doesn't do itself or its surrounding any good.

Exactly...I know the DPD has been moving in this direction (getting away from cheap imitation and moving toward respectfully mixing new and innovative with historic and established), but it's great to hear them finally say it so directly! These PDNA malcontents are grabbing at lots of straws, but at the end of the day it boils down to this: people like Ayersman and Feldstein don't like or appreciate modern architecture invading their quaint little bs historic district, which is overrun with their own ugly retro-trash townhomes. The city needs to combat (regardless of any aldermanic political issues) these types of nonsensical positions head-on, but at the same time engage in more neighborhood education on issues of design, density, etc. I say get Assefa out there leading such an effort.

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by chicubs111

yea...that tower by jupiter will have no problem going up since it is a rental and mixes with retail and parking. I emailed the developer about the height of the building and they told me it would 495 ft... i was hoping it would break 500ft but oh well...cant win them all. There is actuall a few 50 story rental towers that will popping up in the loop...i remember there is one on lake street.

Wow.. I'm better at guessing heights than I thought. From the rendering, my guess was 490'.

[SamInTheLoop]

Originally Posted by Alliance

two words for you Sam ..."chicago spire"

Completely different project, different economics, and oh by the way currently doesn't exist

[Eventually...Chicago]

i took a little bike ride through streeterville & south loop today. a few questions:

Did 600 north fairbanks catch on fire sometime? I was looking at the north side of that building and there is smoke stain on a few windows about half way up.

What is going on between erie and ohio to the east of mcclurg? there is a crappy little 2 story building next to the hospital that has scaffolding up around it.

and a few comments:

blair kamin is an architecture snob. all art/music/architecture critics are. the only way they can maintain their relevance without actually practicing the profession they critique is to put themselves on a pedestal as some sort of all-knowing authority. It is easy to critique when you don't have to risk expressing your dreams yourself.
Even his headline shows his ridiculous stupidity "extreme is no equal for excellence" That must beg the question "why isn't extreme excellent?"

Considering that the motivation to build the most outrageously detailed, largest spanning, tallest reaching building is a motivation that has been common for thousands of years of architecture, what is really wrong with this building idea? In fact, considering the ultimate access/instant gratification culture we live in today, i actually think this design is responding quite well to cultural & site conditions(site conditions as wanted to look different directions from the same unit). The idea being able to experience both a sunrise and a sunset from the same room is extremely provocative. Blair Kamin's general dislike for the idea is the same reason why many critics dislike frank gehry, pelli or calatrava and flock to generally crappy name architects like eisenmann, stephan holl, or zaha hadid, who have well verse theoretical foundations to their designs. Critics dislike the notion that one could have form for forms sake. Critics and architectural high-brows (career academics) need to fill the void they see in designing "cool" "technical" buildings with a lot of theoretical BS. Anyone who has read Peter Frampton's writings on Mies knows what i am talking about.

So, if you hadn't guessed, from a design standpoint, i say build it! (now about the energy consumption and economic feasibility, you'll have to talk to someone else!)

[SamInTheLoop]

The design of this one is awful. Go to www.eco18.com to see for yourself. Damn shame they couldn't make such a supposedly environmentally advanced building also slightly aesthetically advanced....also I'm not sure of the official floor count - looks like either 11 or 12 to me...

[SamInTheLoop]

Just curious if anyone knows any details of these two South Loop residential developments - they've both been advertised in the Trib. I'm not even sure if they are high-rises or not...

[SamInTheLoop]

Originally Posted by aaron38

I've got vacation and the weather looks great for tomorrow, so I'm making another one of those Cermak to Divison walking photo tours.

Anyone have any photo requests, something that's been overlooked for a while?

- maybe 1555 Wabash to see if site work has begun...
- also I was wondering about that Azure Tower project planned for 1330 S. Michigan - is that one still in the works?...
- and has work resumed at 235 W. Van Buren??...

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by SamInTheLoop

Just curious if anyone knows any details of these two South Loop residential developments - they've both been advertised in the Trib. I'm not even sure if they are high-rises or not...

HOM Chicago is just Aristocrat Tower with a different name and (hopefully) a different design. Since the name has a different connotation (mostly involving the odd spelling + capitalization) I'm assuming they're going modern this time. I'm a fan of traditional styles but this was HORRIBLE. Search Aristocrat Tower to find the old renderings. No new ones have been released yet.

No word on Terrazio, but the very limited website mentions an "Aria Rooftop Lounge" so it doesn't sound like a shorty to me. I'd probably guess in the 10-15 story range.

[hoju]

In the United States, he said, he is pushing the rotating tower concept in New York City and Miami as well as Chicago. In each city, he said, he would likely join forces with local developers

I dont like the idea that this guy is shopping around this same idea to a bunch of cities. It seems like it is being marketed like it is some new fashionable trend that everyone is rushing to do in order to be considered cool. I guess I have to wait to see the design, but I don't feel good about embracing some flashy but unsubstantial idea just to "fit in", even if it is 90 stories. Lets maintain the originality and ingenuity that has always been responsible for Chicago's uniqueness.

[Alliance]

Originally Posted by hoju

I dont like the idea that this guy is shopping around this same idea to a bunch of cities. It seems like it is being marketed like it is some new fashionable trend that everyone is rushing to do in order to be considered cool. I guess I have to wait to see the design, but I don't feel good about embracing some flashy but unsubstantial idea just to "fit in", even if it is 90 stories. Lets maintain the originality and ingenuity that has always been responsible for Chicago's uniqueness.

Honestly, the asbractoin is great, but PLEASE, no stupid Dubai gimmicks.

[VivaLFuego]

Originally Posted by Eventually...Chicago

i took a little bike ride through streeterville & south loop today. a few questions:

Did 600 north fairbanks catch on fire sometime? I was looking at the north side of that building and there is smoke stain on a few windows about half way up.

What is going on between erie and ohio to the east of mcclurg? there is a crappy little 2 story building next to the hospital that has scaffolding up around it.

and a few comments:

blair kamin is an architecture snob. all art/music/architecture critics are. the only way they can maintain their relevance without actually practicing the profession they critique is to put themselves on a pedestal as some sort of all-knowing authority. It is easy to critique when you don't have to risk expressing your dreams yourself.
Even his headline shows his ridiculous stupidity "extreme is no equal for excellence" That must beg the question "why isn't extreme excellent?"

Considering that the motivation to build the most outrageously detailed, largest spanning, tallest reaching building is a motivation that has been common for thousands of years of architecture, what is really wrong with this building idea? In fact, considering the ultimate access/instant gratification culture we live in today, i actually think this design is responding quite well to cultural & site conditions(site conditions as wanted to look different directions from the same unit). The idea being able to experience both a sunrise and a sunset from the same room is extremely provocative. Blair Kamin's general dislike for the idea is the same reason why many critics dislike frank gehry, pelli or calatrava and flock to generally crappy name architects like eisenmann, stephan holl, or zaha hadid, who have well verse theoretical foundations to their designs. Critics dislike the notion that one could have form for forms sake. Critics and architectural high-brows (career academics) need to fill the void they see in designing "cool" "technical" buildings with a lot of theoretical BS. Anyone who has read Peter Frampton's writings on Mies knows what i am talking about.

So, if you hadn't guessed, from a design standpoint, i say build it! (now about the energy consumption and economic feasibility, you'll have to talk to someone else!)

1. Agree with you on the building and on Kamin! Why all the negativity?

2. Speaking of snobbiness, I have to point out: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beg_the_question

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by Via Chicago

are you saying that if the financials work, you'll support any architectural design whatsoever? would you have a problem with vegas-style monstrosities up and down michigan ave? just because somethings tall and the financials work dosent mean i somehow blindly support it. now, its not fair to really judge it since no renderings have even been made, but if it looks anything like this:
, theres no way in hell im somehow going to be thrilled about it.

and you're exactly right. dubai is a playground. theres some decent stuff going up there, and a whole lot of ugly stuff. chicago is a mature and architecturally significant city and deserves better than that.

^ Oh, HOGWASH! This kind of mentality is exactly Chicago's greatest problem. The trendsetter 50 years ago, now it seems as if Chicago has to catch the tail of every new trend after it nearly passes us by.

So the hell what if an experimental building gets built? This kind of attitude only contributes to the Chicago's image as a conservative city. You all criticize PoMo highrises, yet it seems like some of you want your modernism on a platter--controlled, comprehensible, something you're familiar and comfortable with.

If Chicago's really gotten its "architectural nerve" back then perhaps you guys should open your minds up to this new idea and at least give it a chance instead of closing the door on it. A legacy in architecture is not all about having the best of the best (the best of Calatrava, the best of Gehry, etc) but also about having something that was just plain novel, if not necessarily a success. Even if it turns out ugly, at least Chicago can be a place where zany ideas such as this one still have a place.

All of you with your "Chicago's architectural environment is already matured and deserves better" really just make me sick to my stomach. You almost remind me of those Prarie District NIMBY's with their "modernism has no place here" garbage.

And Kamin needs to just stick his conceited head in a bucket of water for a change. Not everything has to be an established masterpiece--how about trying new ideas because, gee, you never know Blair, perhaps in your infinite wisdom you just judged this one wrong.

[i_am_hydrogen]

Originally Posted by Eventually...Chicago

Did 600 north fairbanks catch on fire sometime? I was looking at the north side of that building and there is smoke stain on a few windows about half way up.

Yes.

Originally Posted by geoff_diamond

Fire at project by noted Chicago architect

By Mary Owen
Tribune staff reporter
Published April 30, 2007, 2:30 PM CDT

Chicago firefighters responded this afternoon to a report of a blaze at a Helmut Jahn-designed condominium complex under construction in the Streeterville neighborhood just off North Michigan Avenue, fire officials said.

Firefighters were called to the building, 600 North Fairbanks Court, after a fire broke out at about 1 p.m. on the 18th floor of the building, said Kevin MacGregor, a spokesman for the Chicago Fire Department. No injuries were reported. The fire was put out by 1:35 p.m., MacGregor said.

600 North Fairbanks is being developed by Chicago-based Schatz Development and was designed by Jahn, an internationally-known architect based in Chicago.

One of the fire engines en route to the fire collided with a vehicle at Clybourn Avenue and Halsted Street on the North Side around 1:15 p.m., said Chicago Police Department spokeswoman Eve Rodriguez. She said one civilian from the vehicle was taken to Advocate Illinois Masonic Medical Center in serious condition.

No firefighters were injured, she said. Circumstances of the crash were not immediately known.

* * *
museumparktom: great updates.

[Alliance]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

^ Oh, HOGWASH! This kind of mentality is exactly Chicago's greatest problem. The trendsetter 50 years ago, now it seems as if Chicago has to catch the tail of every new trend after it nearly passes us by.

First, that presumes this is a trend.

Secondly, I think post people have criticised the rotation of the skyscraper, whcih is undobtedly a stupid gimmick, a Dubaian "LOOK AT ME!!!!!" piece of bs that really has no place in any skyline.

I don't recall anyone criticising the form. Chicago needs to be MUCH more aggressive in architecture. However, building gimmicks is not being progressive.