CHICAGO | NEMA Chicago | 896 FT | 81 FLOORS - Page 8

wierdaaron · #**141** Posted **Sep 23, 2015, 4:59 PM**

Here's all of the slides:

Please read this post at Curbed so people can't say I'm leeching traffic: 76-Story Rafael Viñoly Tower Would Be Tallest in South Loop

Ch.G, Ch.G · #**142** Posted **Sep 23, 2015, 5:14 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2PRUROCKS!

I guess I will be the first contrarian. I don't care for the design all that much. I don't care for most of Vinoly's work. Phase 1 is ok and I hope it gets built but it is nothing earth shattering like some posting here seem to imply. I don't usually like twin towers and I hope phase 2 is completely redesigned by a different architect. This design seems too bulky and boxy (especially with the twin) and lacks elegance while also braking no new ground in architecture. I much prefer the Spire (rip), Wanda Vista and even the SCB tower also presented today for 1300 S. Michigan.

I think most people here would agree that "bulky and boxy" are complimentary qualities for Chicago architecture. And how many buildings can truly be characterized as "ground-breaking"? Like, made a noticeable impact on all architecture to follow? Among everything ever built-- even among only the buildings we praise? Not many. Much more often than not, in any field, progress occurs incrementally, and the contribution of a single actor is minimal. I don't think that's a bad thing. Not that we shouldn't all, you know, shoot for the stars (or whatever hackneyed metaphor you want to use), but I think too often, and especially in architecture, saying that something is "ground-breaking" is really just another way of saying that it's novel, which is itself often just shorthand for "look at all those zany shapes!"

So that doesn't bother me much.

I'm with you on twins, though. I hate twin towers. The only exceptions I can think of are Mies' LSD apartments. But like others have said I doubt that one will get built anytime soon, and, when it does, I'm sure the design will have changed.

Steely Dan · #**143** Posted **Sep 23, 2015, 5:16 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ch.G, Ch.G

I hate twin towers. The only exceptions I can think of are Mies' LSD apartments.

what, no love for goldberg's masterful marina city twins?

Ch.G, Ch.G · #**144** Posted **Sep 23, 2015, 5:18 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by BVictor1

Oh man... this side-by-side is just embarrassing.

Steely Dan · #**145** Posted **Sep 23, 2015, 5:21 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ch.G, Ch.G

Oh man... this side-by-side is just embarrassing.

yeah, talk about a dodged bullet.

we were very fortunate that the great recession stopped P/H from having exclusive design control of the entire south wall.

Ch.G, Ch.G · #**146** Posted **Sep 23, 2015, 5:27 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

what, no love for goldberg's masterful marina city twins?

Of course I'd forget the even more obvious example...

Tom Servo · #**147** Posted **Sep 23, 2015, 5:57 PM**

Anyone with concerns about this tower's design looking "70s" or whatever needs to go take a look at 432 Park Avenue in New York City. It's really beautiful. Or go take a look at the buildings they've done down in Hyde Park at the University.

Vinoly does solid work.

www.rvapc.com

That being said, I'm looking at this gigantic twin tower design and thinking, no way. No fucking way. I just don't see it ever happening. Not in Chicago. Not in the South Loop with all those NIMBY blowhards that will kill this thing... but here's to hoping!

wierdaaron · #**148** Posted **Sep 23, 2015, 6:01 PM**

I'd bet they get the first one done and then the market conditions will change and phase 2 will get delayed for another 10 years and then taken on by some other group with a different design. Phase 2s have a way of not happening.

F1 Tommy · #**149** Posted **Sep 23, 2015, 6:03 PM**

Not a bad design. The details will really make or break, but the impact will be amazing no matter what.

How dare someone build a big skyscraper in downtown Chicago. Think of all the traffic problems it will cause for it's neighbors

And it will block the lakefront view from the south on Michigan Avenue.

the urban politician · #**150** Posted **Sep 23, 2015, 6:27 PM**

If the project fails it won't be due to NIMBYism

ithakas · #**151** Posted **Sep 23, 2015, 7:08 PM**

I'd be interested in seeing one of the twins flipped on the N-S axis to reveal more of the bundled tubes to the north and provide more depth on the Roosevelt street wall, as well as more variation in the base.

Jim in Chicago · #**152** Posted **Sep 23, 2015, 7:12 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom Servo

Anyone with concerns about this tower's design looking "70s" or whatever needs to go take a look at 432 Park Avenue in New York City. It's really beautiful. Or go take a look at the buildings they've done down in Hyde Park at the University.

Vinoly does solid work.

www.rvapc.com

That being said, I'm looking at this gigantic twin tower design and thinking, no way. No fucking way. I just don't see it ever happening. Not in Chicago. Not in the South Loop with all those NIMBY blowhards that will kill this thing... but here's to hoping!

Given the address on Park Avenue and the prices units get in NYC, there's no way anything that looks like that will be built in Chicago. The PPSQ must be through the roof.

ChiTownWonder · #**153** Posted **Sep 23, 2015, 7:24 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom Servo

Anyone with concerns about this tower's design looking "70s" or whatever needs to go take a look at 432 Park Avenue in New York City. It's really beautiful. Or go take a look at the buildings they've done down in Hyde Park at the University.

Vinoly does solid work.

www.rvapc.com

That being said, I'm looking at this gigantic twin tower design and thinking, no way. No fucking way. I just don't see it ever happening. Not in Chicago. Not in the South Loop with all those NIMBY blowhards that will kill this thing... but here's to hoping!

Very cool design here, looks like 60-80s style boxes that have been modernized

spyguy · #**154** Posted **Sep 23, 2015, 7:36 PM**

I don't know what's going to happen with Phase 2, but let's also keep in mind that Crescent Heights isn't a small, inexperienced developer.

Quote:

Originally Posted by the urban politician

The south wall of Grant Park just told the world to go blow itself. But I'm worried about the shadows over the park. Mr. D, can you wipe that dust off your shadow study software and show us some diagrams?

Not going to be a problem with Vinoly: Exhibits A and B

And yes we definitely dodged a bullet with that gimmicky P/H design.

Jibba · #**155** Posted **Sep 23, 2015, 7:37 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom Servo

Anyone with concerns about this tower's design looking "70s" or whatever needs to go take a look at 432 Park Avenue in New York City. It's really beautiful. Or go take a look at the buildings they've done down in Hyde Park at the University.

Vinoly does solid work.

That being said, I'm looking at this gigantic twin tower design and thinking, no way. No fucking way. I just don't see it ever happening. Not in Chicago. Not in the South Loop with all those NIMBY blowhards that will kill this thing... but here's to hoping!

Those office towers look kinda hack to me. A bunch of design gizmos thrown onto otherwise ordinary boxes with Lego block proportions. Not a lot of harmony there. The facade treatment of the tower in the foreground is nice enough. Wish it wasn't broken up so coarsely with those reveals. Makes me wary of the treatment of the terraces and parking garage for the Grant Park towers.

The U of C business school is great, though. And it's a nice nod to Robie House, intentionally or not.

But good riddance to that P/H pile of nonsense.

wierdaaron · #**156** Posted **Sep 23, 2015, 7:55 PM**

I don't think shadows over the park will be an issue. The sun would be north of it for most of the year.

Tom Servo · #**157** Posted **Sep 23, 2015, 7:59 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by spyguy

And yes we definitely dodged a bullet with that gimmicky P/H design.

God. No fucking shit.

Oh, I just noticed: more bars in more places?

lol

DCReid · #**158** Posted **Sep 23, 2015, 9:07 PM**

The design is certianly interesting. However, I have mixed feeling with Chicago adding all of those tall buildings along the lakefront. I especially think the view to the north coming from the south has been messed up with the addition of the BlueCross Blue Shield and the apartment buildings built in the early 2000's.

intrepidDesign · #**159** Posted **Sep 23, 2015, 9:18 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCReid

The design is certianly interesting. However, I have mixed feeling with Chicago adding all of those tall buildings along the lakefront. I especially think the view to the north coming from the south has been messed up with the addition of the BlueCross Blue Shield and the apartment buildings built in the early 2000's.

Views aren't guaranteed, how many times must it be said?? I swear sometimes I think people just want the city to be frozen in time at the absolute moment they bought their condo.

VKChaz · #**160** Posted **Sep 23, 2015, 9:59 PM**

I suppose any tower on Grant Park is prominent, but it feels to me like a twin tower would work better asthetically alongside the Park rather than at a corner - somewhat like The Eldorado on Central Park West feels 'centered.' It might be better if the second tower was build first to ensure that the corner of the park is 'anchored' with an important building.