CHICAGO | 400 N Lake Shore Drive | 851 FT & 765 FT | 73 & ? FLOORS

[nomarandlee]

Originally Posted by nomarandlee

Would someone mind lifting the renders we have and putting them on page 1?

Obrigado Spyguy


........For those that were at the presentation

Was there talk or in-depth description of what the function inside the crowns or lightening of the crowns would consist of?

When I take a closer look the crowns have the potential to be rather awesome. It looks as if the top is open air sheathed by clear glass on the sides.

[Sky88]

The best solution for 400 LSD new project is to increase the height of the two towers at 1,250ft and 1,000ft.

[Freefall]

Are we allowed to talk about how the park is underwhelming?

[trvlr70]

Originally Posted by Freefall

Are we allowed to talk about how the park is underwhelming?

Why do you think? I'd love for it just be a natural area with grass and trees. No gimmicks necessary. A simple spot to picnic or walk your pup. And don't forget the new park that will open soon just blocks away at OBP.

[HomrQT]

Originally Posted by NYguy

Both 111 W. 57th and One Vanderbilt, along with other towers are using it in NY.

I think this is a nice design that finally brings some closure to this site.

Anyone know what style of architecture this would fall under?

[rgarri4]

A lot of change is coming to this side of the skyline!

[KWillChicago]

Originally Posted by trvlr70

Why do you think? I'd love for it just be a natural area with grass and trees. No gimmicks necessary. A simply spot to picnic or walk you pup. And don't forget the new park that will open soon just blocks away at OBP.

A nice piece of public art that isnt too overwhelming would be nice.

[Khantilever]

Originally Posted by HomrQT

Anyone know what style of architecture this would fall under?

I’ve been wondering the same thing for a while now. Like the terra-cotta or bronze skinny supertalls going up in NYC, it doesn’t feel quite right to call these postmodern or neo-classical. But they’re also distinct from the new Tribune which, while also utilizing bronze, still follows a somewhat neo-futuristic form.

I’ve heard references to neo-deco which sounds appropriate for the NYC towers, especially 111 W 57th, and might be adaptable to this. 400 N LSD also has a somewhat New York style but not as much; it’s less wedding cake and more bundled tubes. But the neo-deco name fails when it comes to others, like Brooklyn’s [gorgeous] 9 DeKalb that has a somewhat gothic (like Tribune) feel, even though I feel like these are all part of the same movement.

[Jibba]

Post Modern describes these best, though they haven't been conceived in the original era of that movement.

These are fine, but a bit fussy with the details. They could use two or three more rounds of editing. The BKL site I tower will likely outshine these, for me, design-wise.

[harryc]

Originally Posted by Freefall

Are we allowed to talk about how the park is underwhelming?

Since the park is part of the project - definitely.

[Mr Downtown]

I'm sure it didn't come up at the meeting, but as a building geek I was curious about how these towers related to the foundation work already in place. I'm surprised at just how unrelated they seem to be, though I guess at least half the piers of the north tower could use the Spire's circle of caissons:

[Fvn]

Originally Posted by Mr Downtown

I'm sure it didn't come up at the meeting, but as a building geek I was curious about how these towers related to the foundation work already in place. I'm surprised at just how utterly unrelated they seem to be:

That is interesting, isn't it. If they aren't gonna be doing top-down construction for their parking garage the hole isn't of any need anymore but it still has all the caissons. However, I feel like they're gonna have to add a few caissons anyways, maybe not, IDK.

[Jibba]

Originally Posted by ardecila

Love these towers. IMO, far better than the generic East Asian thing proposed for the Tribune site. The cascade of setbacks and terraces mark it as a distinctively American skyscraper.

Admittedly, it does feel a little more New York than Chicago. Our classic skyscrapers were mostly Sullivanian boxes, with a soaring vertical shaft and proud cornice. Other classic Chicago buildings had a tall boxy base with a skinny tower rising above. We didn't really have the same wedding-cake buildings that New York architects produced to comply with their 1916 zoning code. On the other hand, our classic skyscrapers were all commercial. Residential skyscrapers are a relatively new thing, there is no design language for them that is uniquely Chicago so I don't mind borrowing from another great American city, especially if it resolves the balcony problem that so many residential towers struggle with.

As for the planning concerns - I'm not too disappointed that they're planning to dead-end North Water Street. The Riverwalk and the paths along Ogden Slip are, or should be, the primary pedestrian corridors and the locus of any retail/dining in this area. North Water Street is mostly about vehicular access and loading docks. By blocking off the street in this way, it caps the vista down the street and buffers noise from LSD in a way that should make neighbors happy. With that being said, I'm sure the Fire Dept will insist on some kind of vehicular access to DuSable Park in case of emergency, either they will demand that the street be restored or the Riverwalk be designed as a fire lane.

I'm also curious to see what happens to the ramps off Lower LSD that Kelleher paid for. Will they just go directly into 400LSD's parking garage with no public purpose? (Those could also provide emergency access to the park for ambulance/fire apparatus.)

Yes, way too New York for my taste. Which is why I'm happy that the height is below our iconic, Chicago-bred supertalls. I'm still irked that Related keeps rebuffing Chicago firms for their designs (provided those firms have solicited)--it's been feeling like NYC architectural imperialism. The 1-2 of Vista and BKL's Site I tower (if built) will be a good antidote to the 30s retrograde of the Childs towers.

[HomrQT]

Originally Posted by Khantilever

I’ve been wondering the same thing for a while now. Like the terra-cotta or bronze skinny supertalls going up in NYC, it doesn’t feel quite right to call these postmodern or neo-classical. But they’re also distinct from the new Tribune which, while also utilizing bronze, still follows a somewhat neo-futuristic form.

I’ve heard references to neo-deco which sounds appropriate for the NYC towers, especially 111 W 57th, and might be adaptable to this. 400 N LSD also has a somewhat New York style but not as much; it’s less wedding cake and more bundled tubes. But the neo-deco name fails when it comes to others, like Brooklyn’s [gorgeous] 9 DeKalb that has a somewhat gothic (like Tribune) feel, even though I feel like these are all part of the same movement.

Originally Posted by Jibba

Post Modern describes these best, though they haven't been conceived in the original era of that movement.

These are fine, but a bit fussy with the details. They could use two or three more rounds of editing. The BKL site I tower will likely outshine these, for me, design-wise.

Has the setbacks and possibly the overall massing to fit into the neo deco category but so many other features that keep them out of it. The towers don't seem to be recalling distinct features openly enough from other styles for me to call it true post modern, even if that's the designation that probably most closely fits right now. I agree with the comparison to the stuff going up in NY. Maybe we're seeing the formation of a new movement? A highly blended style that doesn't belong neatly into any current category.

[KevinFromTexas]

Wow. Holy smokes. I really like these a lot. And here's the thing, I'm usually not a fan of twins. I always think of it as throwing away a site for another possible good design whenever you double one design. And I have to confess, I'm not usually a fan of modern architecture, especially for supertalls since their facades usually suffer without much interesting detail. These look great though. They really did it right and it's perfect for that site. The one location I do like to see twins is against a waterfront. The taller one might just be the best looking supertall to go up in many years. By the way, with these buildings, the Vista Tower, Chicago Tribune and the "Site I LSE" towers, Chicago's skyline is looking really futuristic here.



This right here is why I love twins against a waterfront. I learned how great they look positioned like this after visiting Corpus Christi many times with their Shoreline Plaza towers. They're just a great way of placing a development as a way of greeting you. It's like they're looking over the city.

[Steely Dan]

i think these bay windows are pretty clearly a shout-out to the "chicago window", so childs did some homework.






and while the myriad setbacks recall new york deco, these still seem a touch awkwardly inelegant in a chicago kind of way.

[Barney Greengrass]

^My oh my, those are just such a nice addition! The skyline looks vaguely Asian from this vantage point, tropical like if Singapore was building supertalls, which is meant as a compliment.

[Shwayze1994]

Originally Posted by HomrQT

Anyone know what style of architecture this would fall under?

I like to think of it as like neo art deco mixed with post modern.

[Steely Dan]

if the podium has 3 above grade floors, then counting the floors in this rendering i get 76 & 65 floors respectively.

does anyone have better floor count info yet?

[Hudson11]

a supertall, postmodern take on the Chicago school. It doesn't quite have the symmetry of art deco, but the setbacks make it reminiscent. Burj Khalifa came to my mind earlier, and well, that was designed by architects who were heavily influenced by this style.