The State of Chicago Architecture.

[X-fib]

I like OMP and 340. Not only are they solid designs but also for their impact on the slyline. For 600-700 range buildings they are very visible, obviously due to their location. Each could have been MUCH WORSE. Legacy could be equalliy satisfying but I will have to reserve judgment until I can see it ot photos after completion (or at least near completion). Ditto for Aqua, Waterview and 300NS which are impressive in diagrams. As I have said before, Trump is conservative but a good compromise for its location. Its shear size will impact the skyline, I think, in a positive way. Perhaps the most important buildings in the pipeline are W=A and Wolf Point. It is critical that given its proposed height somewhere around that of Trump and strategic location, that whatever is eventual built at Wolf Point be nothing short of phenominal.

[honte]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

I realize that we already have a parking podium thread, but I don't think we can have a discussion about architectural firms RUINING whole downtown neighborhoods without discussing the podium effect. I honestly believe that without those butt-nasty crap-a-toriums of despair overlooking the street, much of this discussion about recent highrises "ruining" the near north side would be moot.

Yeah TUP, you're right about needing to discuss this. I suppose we could carry on a conversation about just the Chicago ones here, and it wouldn't clutter the Podium thread with Chicago-specific things that not many out-of-towners would know.

My opinion on above-grade parking podia is that they are not necessarily a bad thing. Certainly, mandating that they go underground is not going to happen. So, barring huge sites that can accommodate parking within the building and with units at the sides, architects need to discover better ways of integrating the base of the building with the tower.

Do buildings like Waterview count as "Parking Podium" buildings? In your mind, are these acceptable - ie, is it the huge, rectilinear base with a tower on top that is the problem? If that's what you're getting at, I agree 100%. It's very hard to design parking in other shapes than squares, but obviously designers need to come up with more creative ways to handle the situation. It either needs to be disguised better and integrated better (Waterview), or made into something exciting and sculptural (Marina City, Contemporaine).

As far as deadening the sidewalk, as long as there is retail below, I don't really mind. Having some residents grilling on the deck on the 2nd or 3rd floor above me while I walk down the sidewalk isn't really that important to me, personally. Commercial space above would be a plus, but I don't think it's realistic in many situations - developers make a killing on the retail space, so I'm sure they would be throwing 2nd floor retail into the mix already if they could.

[Tom Servo]

Originally Posted by honte

^ Wow, you and I have very different taste. However, at the bottom of the barrel, I think we agree about the worst SCB projects. I also agree that their work is far too repetitive and there are far too many of their works in the same area.

But the worst firm doing the worst things? Please. What happened to Loewenberg, LaGrange, Antunovich, etc? Even the old DeStefano buildings were clunkier and crappier than SCB's work.

I give them a lot more credit than you do. I think the Streeter is among the very best residential high-rises in America I've seen in the last 15 or so years. Parkview is lovely. 340 is classy, although I think the design overall is bizarre. And you have to admit, of all the painted concrete buildings in the city, SCB produced some of the nicest ones.

Meanwhile, I think Sky55 sucks, and I don't see much hope for projects like 200 West Lake.

The heights and materials of these buildings were probably not chosen by the architects. The only reason we're seeing buildings like the Streeter with better facades is due to the newer energy codes. SCB faced the classic dilemma as a firm - do we pass on a bad job, or do our best knowing that if someone else takes it, it might be even worse?

if you ask me, the worst loewenberg projects BLOW away the worst SCB.
and as BAD as most of the lagrange work is, they're actually great planners. their buildings always work really well with the area, and they flow really nicely from the street and the neighboring buildings. and even though they put out LAME designs, excluding erie and kingsbury on the park and maybe even the intercontinental, lagrange's work is usually really good and never really UGLY, just weak and lack any value.

[Tom Servo]

Originally Posted by honte

Yeah TUP, you're right about needing to discuss this. I suppose we could carry on a conversation about just the Chicago ones here, and it wouldn't clutter the Podium thread with Chicago-specific things that not many out-of-towners would know.

My opinion on above-grade parking podia is that they are not necessarily a bad thing. Certainly, mandating that they go underground is not going to happen. So, barring huge sites that can accommodate parking within the building and with units at the sides, architects need to discover better ways of integrating the base of the building with the tower.

Do buildings like Waterview count as "Parking Podium" buildings? In your mind, are these acceptable - ie, is it the huge, rectilinear base with a tower on top that is the problem? If that's what you're getting at, I agree 100%. It's very hard to design parking in other shapes than squares, but obviously designers need to come up with more creative ways to handle the situation. It either needs to be disguised better and integrated better (Waterview), or made into something exciting and sculptural (Marina City, Contemporaine).

As far as deadening the sidewalk, as long as there is retail below, I don't really mind. Having some residents grilling on the deck on the 2nd or 3rd floor above me while I walk down the sidewalk isn't really that important to me, personally. Commercial space above would be a plus, but I don't think it's realistic in many situations - developers make a killing on the retail space, so I'm sure they would be throwing 2nd floor retail into the mix already if they could.

what's wrong with parking podiums? nothing. the simple fact is, BAD architecture is the real problem here. a great architect will design a great podium. you see, architecture isn't just about design nice looking towers. it's about planning. good planning = good architecture = parking solutions that work, function, and look good. putting parking underground is REALLY expensive and largely impractical. just look at the parking podiums on any CMK buildings, gang's, jahn's, johnson's... even destefano tends to have good parking solutions. there are a lot of architects in the city who do parking right. and the bottom line is, chicago zoning code requires off street parking.

imo, this very pronouced podium is a great example of a design that works very well.

[Go7SD]

Does anyone have a list of all the top Chicago architects? I'm curious to see who's working on what and where.

[Tom Servo]

Originally Posted by Roy McDowell

Does anyone have a list of all the top Chicago architects? I'm curious to see who's working on what and where.

jeanne gang, adrian smith, mark schendel, helmut jahn, james goettsch, gordon gill, james destefano, scott sarver, laurence booth, lucien lagrange, the garofalo architects, the loebl schlossman and hackl group, ronald krueck, mark sexton, ralph johnson, SOM, joe valerio, mark dewalt, gary beyerl, STL architects, john lahey... what other big names in chicago am i forgetting about? anyway, chicago is home to a LOT of firms, and there are TONS of other less well known names out there.

[Tom Servo]

that gets me thinking. what is everyone's favorite local firm? second, your favorite local architect? third, all time favorite local architect? and last, opinions on what are our most important or your favorite current projects (u/c, built, never-built, whatever)?
we've all kinda beat to death the negative aspects of chicago architecture. now let's talk about this city's moments of great architecture.

>>>>

my favorite firm right now is either gang studio, goettsch, garofalo, or booth|hansen. these four firms are creating a very cohesive and distinct new school of design that echoes the traditions, concepts, and principles of the chicago school and 2nd school in a way that adapts to 21st century chicago. hopefully a real third school isn't too far off.

my favorite chicago architect is either jahn or ralph johnson. they've shown us a capability for producing VERY powerful architecture. and their style is distictly chicago. *side note* i'd like to see more skyscrapers from jahn. after 600//I WANT MORE!

my all time favorite chicago architect is equally mies, burnham, and sullivan: the holy trinity of chicago architecture.

the calatrava spire, to me, is the most significant project right now. i generally don't like really tall buildings. but it seems to be representative of a bright future in chicago architecture. let's hope i'm right in thinking this.
with that, here is a list of what i think is the greatest architecture in chicago and what i think is worthy of all the hype that architecture in chicago gets.

JHC
inland steel
35 e wacker
860-880 LSD
the brewster (coolest building ever?)
chapin and gore
crown hall
IBM
delay center
civic opera (how is such a HUGE building so graceful?)
the cortland st bridge
courthouse place
marshall field's wholesale store
the delaware building
fine arts building
schoenhofen brewery
reid, murdoch and co. building
pittsfield building
glessner house
page brothers building
1 n lasalle building
old dearborn bank
1 prudential
spertus
near north apartments
IIT dorms
156 w superior
plymouth building
111 s wacker
CNA north
1 s dearborn
boeing world headquarters
bankers building
federal plaza
300 n lasalle
155 n wacker
the metropolitan tower
600 n fairbanks
AMA
chase tower
aqua
2 first national plaza
joffrey tower
191 n wacker
33 n dearborn
55 West Monroe
mather tower
powhatan apartments
london guarantee building
cityfront center plaza (great design never-built)

all the great chicago school blocks: washington block, printer's row, block 37, monadnock block, ashland block, etc...

all the great masterpiece houses: robie house, turzak house, farnsworth house, charnley house, emil bach house, etc...

all the great old row homes, apartment buildings, and districts: fisher studio houses, thalia hall, hotel st. benedict flats, the cable house, etc...

everything henry ives cobb building ever did in chicago
everything sullivan building ever did in chicago
everything holabird and roche building ever did in chicago
everything burnham building ever did in chicago
everything jenny building ever did in chicago
everything root ever did in chicago
everything adler ever did in chicago
everything wright ever did in chicago
everything boyington ever did in chicago

to me, whether destroyed or still standing, this is the great chicago architecture.

[honte]

^ Well, there are too many Chicagoans to list. Many phenomenal designers working under the larger nameplates. Definitely missing from Adrian's list are John Ronan, Schipporeit, Ross-Barney (sometimes good), Zola, TENG, Hartray Nagle and Co., Landon Bone Baker (often good), Dan Wheeler, etc. And all the preservation folks too.

I like your list of great works, but too many are missing. I'd try to supplement it, but my list is so long, it would fill several pages that no one would want to read. However, JHC is at the top of my high-rise list too. In fact, it's the greatest high-rise of all time in my book.

[Tom Servo]

Originally Posted by honte

^ Well, there are too many Chicagoans to list. Many phenomenal designers working under the larger nameplates. Definitely missing from Adrian's list are John Ronan, Schipporeit, Ross-Barney (sometimes good), Zola, TENG, Hartray Nagle and Co., Landon Bone Baker (often good), Dan Wheeler, etc. And all the preservation folks too.

oooh yeah TENG... waterview might be really great; i can't tell yet. but the model is awesome, that's for sure. and john ronan architects is an awesome firm, i wish they were more prominent in chicago because they would be among the other ELITE firms.

i don't know zola too well, but don't they do some really awesome green design?

[honte]

^ Trying to... She's just getting her feet wet here, but definitely could be one of the new breed when she hits her stride, if she sticks with it. They have been entering a lot of green design competitions lately, with some promising ideas coming out of the office, it seems.

Ronan is young and motivated. He's attracting a lot of top talent to his firm too. I think it's only a matter of time for him.

[Tom Servo]

more thoughts about the state of architecture in chicago:

i would LOVE to see a few krueck+sexton skyscrapers. their 'crystal tower' concept is SICK. and their WTC concept was even SICKER. a supertall in LSE would be perfect for them. i think that they and studio gang would be an AMAZING two hit combo that would put the cutting-edge back in chicago.




oh and... WOW:

[Tom Servo]

Originally Posted by honte

I like your list of great works, but too many are missing. I'd try to supplement it, but my list is so long, it would fill several pages that no one would want to read. However, JHC is at the top of my high-rise list too. In fact, it's the greatest high-rise of all time in my book.

i'd like to see your top 20 of great chicago architecture.

also, what do you see missing?


*we forgot the guajardo partners and lohan anderson too.

[wrab]

Originally Posted by Roy McDowell

Does anyone have a list of all the top Chicago architects? I'm curious to see who's working on what and where.

AIA Chicago has a good hyperlist of Chicago firms: http://www.aiachicago.org/resources_..._architect.asp

Originally Posted by AdrianXSands

.....
civic opera (how is such a HUGE building so graceful?).....

I often ask myself this same question re Merchandise Mart.

Originally Posted by honte

.....However, JHC is at the top of my high-rise list too. In fact, it's the greatest high-rise of all time in my book.

Yep - JHC is awesome.

[honte]

Originally Posted by AdrianXSands

i'd like to see your top 20 of great chicago architecture.

also, what do you see missing?


*we forgot the guajardo partners and lohan anderson too.

Thanks, but I am afraid it's just not possible. I have literally thousands of favorite Chicago-area buildings, and I really hate to rank one above the next. I might be able to put together something if I had some criteria.

We left John Vinci's office out of our list of good firms.

Anyway, if this thread is going to live up to its name, we should be discussing the problems and plusses of the scene right now, and policy/planning/organizing issues that can make the situation better, don't you think? So far, the thread has been mostly a chat about the state of the matter.

[Tom Servo]

Originally Posted by honte

Thanks, but I am afraid it's just not possible. I have literally thousands of favorite Chicago-area buildings, and I really hate to rank one above the next. I might be able to put together something if I had some criteria.



Anyway, if this thread is going to live up to its name, we should be discussing the problems and plusses of the scene right now, and policy/planning/organizing issues that can make the situation better, don't you think? So far, the thread has been mostly a chat about the state of the matter.

i think this thread should be for all opinions on architecture in chicago in general, with an over-all focus on, 'where are we headed'. that is, why not explore the ups and the downs of the past? it helps us better understand and evaluate what's happening now or in the future.

We left John Vinci's office out of our list of good firms.

oh, that was a list of chicago's good firms? i thought it was a list of all the prominent architects in chicago?

[honte]

^ Well, yes, of course. He asked what were the "top" firms - you included people like STL Architects but left out Pappageorge/Haymes, DeStefano, and all of the suburban firms who pump out things (including some good ones, like Legat). So I figured you were selecting people who you liked - at least somewhat.

In any case, I would consider Vinci/Hamp to be good and prominent. They are actually very high-profile, just selective in their work. And by the way, we also left out Studio Dwell.

If he needs a list of all the firms, I don't need to mention any. As wrabbit said, they are listed elsewhere, and also are in the phone book.

This thread can be about opinions, sure. But if it's just a giant bitchfest with no purpose, I think its appeal will be slim and its life will be short-lived.

[Alliance]

Originally Posted by AdrianXSands

more thoughts about the state of architecture in chicago:

i would LOVE to see a few krueck+sexton skyscrapers. their 'crystal tower' concept is SICK. and their WTC concept was even SICKER. a supertall in LSE would be perfect for them. i think that they and studio gang would be an AMAZING two hit combo that would put the cutting-edge back in chicago.




oh and... WOW:

Spertus is classy, but their other scrapers could use some moderation in color so some kid doesn't look back in 20 years and say "who let them build that?" However, the forms are amazing, and they would make a GREAT Lakshore East supertall.

Maybe we should contact Lowenberg?

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by AdrianXSands

what's wrong with parking podiums? nothing. the simple fact is, BAD architecture is the real problem here. a great architect will design a great podium...........imo, this very pronouced podium is a great example of a design that works very well.

^ Adrian, my problem with this view is that sure, in isolation this is a well designed building that does a good job with the podium.

But when you group a lot of buildings like this together, you end up with a dead zone that even the best design will fail to cover up.

The only solution to the podium problem (given that podiums are inevitable) is what 1720 S Michigan and Astoria Tower did, or to perhaps front the podium with townhomes. I just don't think the "modernist" or CMK solution (as you are suggesting) is a good across-the-board solution.

[honte]

^ Yes, you're right, it doesn't work when every corner has a podium on it. That's why wholesale demolition of neighborhoods is a bad idea, always. The best area in the city with parking podia are the parts of River North and Streeterville that have a lot of older buildings mixed it.

[Nowhereman1280]

Hancock has a parking podium, yet no one knows it. If you put 100 buildings like Hancock next to each other, it would not generate a dead zone. I think Waterview addresses the problem just as well. So if you mixed 50 WV's and 50 Hancocks together () I think you still wouldn't notice.

So really I think you are wrong in saying that even the best design will cover it up. Hancock is (IMO) the best design and it does cover it up. I had no idea there was parking in there until I started reading on this forum and noticed the double helix.

New buildings where the living spaces are seperated from the street by 5-10 floors of parking don't give you that warm fuzzy feeling like the old buildings with perfect integration to the street, but that is what modernist designs do in general. However, a good modernist design will draw you in and you'll never notice that there is parking at all. (a la Hancock)