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

spyguy · #1 Posted **Oct 22, 2015, 5:43 PM**

current design:

older schemes:

Steely Dan · #2 Posted **Oct 22, 2015, 5:44 PM**

^ interesting.

i mean, BIG > Stern, am i right?

Related promised something "architecturally significant".

this sounds like a step in the right direction.

BVictor1 · #3 Posted **Oct 22, 2015, 6:03 PM**

Is this worthy of starting a new thread for yet?

ithakas · #4 Posted **Oct 22, 2015, 6:04 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by spyguy

http://blog.archpaper.com/2015/10/ea.../#.VikfsRCrSL8

Very interesting news. A few years ago I would have salivated at the prospect of Chicago getting a BIG building, but now I'm cautiously optimistic about him handling this site – his work seems to be best suited for mid-rise/institutional uses, at least after the disappointing WTC2 design.

Steely Dan · #5 Posted **Oct 22, 2015, 6:07 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by BVictor1

Is this worthy of starting a new thread for yet?

Yes. Absolutely yes.

we have to discuss this juicy rumor, and we need a place to do it.

and something BIG (get it?) will eventually be built on this site, so let's discuss the possibilities.

munchymunch · #6 Posted **Oct 22, 2015, 6:20 PM**

BIG wow hopefully it won't be extremely tacky. Still good news best architect they've ever chosen.

intrepidDesign · #7 Posted **Oct 22, 2015, 6:29 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ithakas

Very interesting news. A few years ago I would have salivated at the prospect of Chicago getting a BIG building, but now I'm cautiously optimistic about him handling this site – his work seems to be best suited for mid-rise/institutional uses, at least after the disappointing WTC2 design.

I dunno, i kinda like WTC2, I like all the WTC buildings, both built an proposed. Yeah some are more avant garde than others, but over all they are all very tasteful. The building I like least in the WTC complex, coincidentally enough, is the Calatrava train station, I'm over the bone fish aesthetic. I'm reasonably certain we'll get something nice.

Jibba · #8 Posted **Oct 22, 2015, 6:40 PM**

Hmmm... would rather have Smith & Gil, Herzog, or Richard Rogers than the contrivance I'm afraid BIG will propose, but I'll wait and see, obviously.

I still haven't fully mourned the loss of the Spire. Sigh...

SamInTheLoop · #9 Posted **Oct 22, 2015, 6:42 PM**

Wooaaahhh. Hello. This is indeed BIG news.....

Exciting intel here......despite the fact that I, as many seem to, think their design is a downgrade from Foster's at 2 WTC, and disappointing in some ways in its own right, this is still exciting and I'm optimistic that they will come up with something compelling for the spire site if Related has in fact handed its design to them.....

Randomguy34 · #10 Posted **Oct 22, 2015, 7:45 PM**

Looks like the "to" in "a possible Spire part to" is the Danish word for "two". Don't know why they chose to use the Danish word instead of the American one, other than to be punny, because it looks as though it were a typo and it gets confusing with the American word "to" (I think I'm confused after re-reading this sentence). Linguistics aside, the idea of a Chicago Spire 2.0 makes me wonder how similar it will be to the previous design.

BVictor1 · #11 Posted **Oct 22, 2015, 7:52 PM**

I asked someone from Related about this and I was asked where I heard this info and I said I read a little blurb that had no verifying information.

When i delved deeper and asked if they could throw me a bone, I was shot down.

That act almost makes me believe that there's more truth to some of this than not...

Skyguy_7 · #12 Posted **Oct 22, 2015, 8:10 PM**

BIG; "Your Supertall Foundation-adaptation Specialists"

rlw777 · #13 Posted **Oct 22, 2015, 8:23 PM**

Great lets hope we get the BIG that designed 625 w 57th st. and not the BIG that designed 2WTC.

Ch.G, Ch.G · #14 Posted **Oct 22, 2015, 8:31 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ithakas

Very interesting news. A few years ago I would have salivated at the prospect of Chicago getting a BIG building, but now I'm cautiously optimistic about him handling this site – his work seems to be best suited for mid-rise/institutional uses, at least after the disappointing WTC2 design.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jibba

Hmmm... would rather have Smith & Gil, Herzog, or Richard Rogers than the contrivance I'm afraid BIG will propose, but I'll wait and see, obviously.

I still haven't fully mourned the loss of the Spire. Sigh...

Yeah, I kinda agree with you guys. I think Richard Rogers would be well-suited for Chicago; there's a muscular expressiveness in his work. I like Renzo Piano's forays into skyscraper design, too. The NYT building is way underrated. I wouldn't trust Smith and Gill not to do something safe/staid, and color me unimpressed by the execution of HdeM's Jenga tower. BIG would have a few tall buildings under their belt by the time this thing'd break ground, so maybe that would help.

Also very much agreed about the loss of the Spire. It was perfect for this site.

Ch.G, Ch.G · #15 Posted **Oct 22, 2015, 8:42 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by rlw777

Great lets hope we get the BIG that designed 625 w 57th st. and not the BIG that designed 2WTC.

I like parts of their proposal for Calgary:

...reminds me of this weird little gem on Sheridan:

(photo by my hero, Lynn Becker)

BVictor1 · #16 Posted **Oct 22, 2015, 9:07 PM**

^That building on Sheridan isn't a gem, it's a total pile.

Steely Dan · #17 Posted **Oct 22, 2015, 9:14 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by BVictor1

^That building on Sheridan isn't a gem, it's a total pile.

INCAPABLE OF DISAGREEING MORE STRONGLY.

granville tower is one hell of a cool little odd-ball gem.

i was at my cousin's wedding in the park kitty-corner to it over the summer and my brother-in-law (a high school teacher with no specific interest in architecture) looked up at granville tower and said, without any provocation from me, "that sure is a strange looking building. i don't know if i like it or not, but it's so weird it's actually kinda cool".

i smiled benignly.

LouisVanDerWright · #18 Posted **Oct 22, 2015, 9:23 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by BVictor1

^That building on Sheridan isn't a gem, it's a total pile.

You're right, i'ts not A gem, it's a pile of them. I love the faceted facade of that tower. You have to give it credit just for the size of the architects balls alone.

PS, I wish they'd paint the concrete another color, it would greatly improve people's general opinions of the tower. Paint it cream, it would look so sick with that brown brick.

Also, the best part isn't even the crazy facade massing or duplex construction, but the sick treatment of the base. It's a pool deck, a parking deck, and a lobby with absolutely nothing else. No extra hallways, no blank walls hiding the cars, no fortress walls around the pool. Just entirely open and honest.

chris08876 · #19 Posted **Oct 22, 2015, 10:23 PM**

I wish they could just build this. Maybe make a 1600-1700' version, carve an wide rectangular opening around the 1500' mark, add an observation deck with restaurant, make it mixed used, and call it the CWFC. Chicago World Finacial Center.

One of my favorite proposals in the country that didn't happen.

While I liked the spire, it wasn't anything special except for its height (IMO). Now this proposal, this was a bummer to not have.

Whatever rises, this location, with impeccable views, needs to be great and something that stands out on the national level. Yes, I'd like it to be a super tall that exceeds all. To wishful thinking

. Here Here...

Credit: http://themanonfive.com/page/125?rou...page%2F%3Apage

This in that location, and thats a wrap for the day.

Zapatan · #20 Posted **Oct 22, 2015, 10:51 PM**

I hope something big (no pun intended really) rises here but I can't say I'm normally a huge fan of his work. 2WTC has grown on me but only from some angles, from others it still looks like a 400+ meter pile of garbage.

Something simple that tops 400+ meters would be awesome here, I can't imagine with such valuable real estate they wouldn't try to top Wanda Vista.