how do you figure? if a 1,000 footer can be built on the waterview site, then a 2,000+ footer could easily ft on the far larger wolf point property.
Well I ment in my opinion, I know the actual lot size for wolfs point is actually bigger than that of the spire but the building would have to be almost shoulder to shoulder with the suntimes building....it could be done I just don't think its the best spot for it. I love height on buildings don't get me wrong, I just like the idea of height being a function of design not vise versa.
A 3000' tower with a slenderness ratio similar to CS's could fit on Wolf Point(although it would be cramped). You could build a football field on Wolf Point site, and have ample space left over, to give an idea of the size.. I agree that Wolf Point would be better suited for a ~1,500'-2,250' tower, that way the site could also contain maybe a Marina to the west and a good sized sloping public park on the east, leading down to a riverwalk, and the tower wouldn't feel crammed in.
I would rather see a gigantor tower (4000'+) like that built over on Wabash somewhere along (straddling?) the el tracks where all those empty lots are going south of the Loop tracks. Thats where my fantasy tower (Windy City Tower in my diagram) is at, straddling the el tracks near Harrison.
1500' @ effing Wolf Point? Are you guys lower-case nimbys? 2500' min.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DHamp
As long as al Burj is on the table, even 4000 feet isn't really enough if you want to ensure it will be the tallest for a long time. I say go for the mile mark (5280 ft) if you're going to do it. But minimizing sway is going to be a big headache.
Al Burj is apparently off the Table.
however, WTB for a lifetime? NO WAY. There hasn't been a lifetime WTB in industrial society.
A 3000' tower with a slenderness ratio similar to CS's could fit on Wolf Point(although it would be cramped). You could build a football field on Wolf Point site, and have ample space left over, to give an idea of the size.. I agree that Wolf Point would be better suited for a ~1,500'-2,250' tower, that way the site could also contain maybe a Marina to the west and a good sized sloping public park on the east, leading down to a riverwalk, and the tower wouldn't feel crammed in.
I would rather see a gigantor tower (4000'+) like that built over on Wabash somewhere along (straddling?) the el tracks where all those empty lots are going south of the Loop tracks. Thats where my fantasy tower (Windy City Tower in my diagram) is at, straddling the el tracks near Harrison.
Thanks Pandemonious thats pretty much what I was trying to say... I wasn't trying to say that it couldn't be done, but that just because it can be done doesn't mean it should...IMO
however, WTB for a lifetime? NO WAY. There hasn't been a lifetime WTB in industrial society.
well, he just wants it to be the WTB for the rest of his lifetime, and he's 40-something. It could be possible. I'd say 3000 feet could possibly keep it for 25-or-so years. possibly
I've always hoped that whoever built something spectacular at WP would knock down that god-awful Apparel Mart next door while they're at it. That'd give them plenty of room to build as big as they wanted as well as good street frontage on Orleans and Kinzie. But it sure as hell better be a killer design.
But back to the aforementioned pseudo-proposal. I'd like to be patient and wait until if and when it becomes a real proposal (with a city, a site, and some renderings) before I cast judgment one way or the other. It could be a 3000-footer that would loathe or a 700 footer that I couldn't live without and I wouldn't know until I saw an impression of it. It's not all about height, but WP is one of the places where some serious height would be welcome if done right.
^ you know, thats nice and all, but I'd prefer him setting his sites on something more realistic, but equally awesome, like a 1500' building. I definitely don't want a mile-high building any time soon in chicago (does that make me a....NIMBY??), but in order for it to the tallest, it had better be an awe-inspiring design. plain old height just doesn't do it for me
with that said, does anyone have any positive information on this guy? I've never even heard of him before, but apparently 20% of his portfolio is in the chicagoland area. has he done anything good in chicago?
and i seriously doubt he'd pick LA for this thing, what with the added complication of consistent earthquakes...
No - nothing terribly positive. As the article mentioned, he is known in commercial real estate circles for his enormous ego and for his insatiable need for self-publicity. Also, he's not really a developer - he buys and operates existing office buildings. I don't take this worlds tallest talk from him seriously at all and won't until there is an actual real proposal for an actual site, and even then it would be with a heavy grain of salt. I think he just wants to get himself some press here...
__________________
It's simple, really - try not to design or build trash.
I've always hoped that whoever built something spectacular at WP would knock down that god-awful Apparel Mart next door while they're at it. That'd give them plenty of room to build as big as they wanted as well as good street frontage on Orleans and Kinzie. But it sure as hell better be a killer design.
But back to the aforementioned pseudo-proposal. I'd like to be patient and wait until if and when it becomes a real proposal (with a city, a site, and some renderings) before I cast judgment one way or the other. It could be a 3000-footer that would loathe or a 700 footer that I couldn't live without and I wouldn't know until I saw an impression of it. It's not all about height, but WP is one of the places where some serious height would be welcome if done right.
.....and I don't think the Gang project has a chance of being shot down
it is a progressive design, and proven quality architect
and it is not replacing a well designed building with a larger taller POS
like some of the less sensitive proposals for Hyde Park
Indeed - assuming that the developer plays up the building's green attributes (perhaps a community presentation with Jeanne Gang, a la Calatrava & Kelleher's Spire presentation for SOAR), this project might well be very appealing to progressive Hyde Park types.
Whether or not this WTB proposal goes anywhere, we should all consider how awesome it is that Chicago attracts talk of a new 2000'+ proposal on at least a yearly basis. For the last 10 years +, there has been a pretty substantial proposal for one on the table at all times.
The fact that the city continues to inspire people to dream big dreams is an incredible compliment, and verification of everyone's hard work.
how do you figure? if a 1,000 footer can be built on the waterview site, then a 2,000+ footer could easily fit on the far larger wolf point property.
Exactly,
What if though, the Apparel Center was demolished? I'd almost rather see that happen and a monster building be built on that site and have Wolf Point be landscaped and open.
^ I thought that it just required more paperwork because you have to get approval from the FCC. Besides, there are several TV/Radio antennae in the rural US that are over 2000 feet.
(c) A proposed structure or an alteration to an existing structure that exceeds 2,000 feet in height above the ground will be presumed to be a hazard to air navigation and to result in an inefficient utilization of airspace and the applicant has the burden of overcoming that presumption. Each notice submitted under the pertinent provisions of this part 77 proposing a structure in excess of 2,000 feet above ground, or an alteration that will make an existing structure exceed that height, must contain a detailed showing, directed to meeting this burden. Only in exceptional cases, where the FAA concludes that a clear and compelling showing has been made that it would not result in an inefficient utilization of the airspace and would not result in a hazard to air navigation, will a determination of no hazard be issued.
Prev
Linear Mode
