CHICAGO | The Elysian | 686 FT / 209 M | 60 FLOORS | COM

[Alliance]

Or just Park Tower Jr.

[James2390]

Yeah, I guess that works just as well.

[gct13]

March 8, 2008:

[JV_325i]

Today

[CGII]

Ugh. The facade looks AWFUL.

[Chicago3rd]

Originally Posted by JV_325i

Today

I am the only human on earth who likes the pre-cast concrete. Love love the Park Hyatt. And this one too....so far.

[F1 Tommy]

I sort of like this building now. It looks like a huge old building.
It might even end up having some class.

[Dalton]

I think the facade looks fine. What's wrong with a little "classic" beaux arts style for variety? Even if it's faux, it's better than yet another wavy blue glass and stainless steel wonder, like almost everything else going up in the city now.

[JV_325i]

Chicago3rd I agree: Park Tower is the shit, and if this thing comes out even 70% as good I will be happy.

[Alliance]

As MANY people have repeatedly clarified on this thread:

1. No one is arguing against the use of precast.
2. No one is arguing against architectural variety.

What are we ACTUALLY arguing against?

1. The use of precast to imitate other architectural materials (limestone, brick, etc) Why? Because the facade looses a whole sense of depth and color that concrete, especially painted concrete does not have. If they want a limestone facade...GREAT! Give us one, not an imitation of one.

2. If Elysian was a real adapatation of architecture, it might qualify as variety. Its not. Variety for the sake of variety is a bad thing (same goes for wavy-blue glass buildings). And certainly, Elysian, in THIS location, is not bringing a lot (if any) of architectural variety to the area. If this was the south loop, maybe it'd be different. This is the same-old same-old. Ontop of that, if you want variety, lets get some real variety. There is Area inbetween Aqua and Elysian that can be explored whithout resorting to faux-facaded faux-Victorian SKYSCRAPER with a tacky Mansard cap. Repeatedly imitating fake architectural styles shouldn't be one of the "variety of choices when there are many real and inspired varieties of scraper that we should be envisioning for this location.

[samoen313]

Hear hear.

That was very well put Alliance.

If developers are going to keep putting this crap up (because in my opinion, this is pretty shoddy execution) and Lagrange is going to keep doing it. They've GOT to take a page from Robert Stern's book and use legitimate limestone. Look at 15 Central Park West. Pioneering it ain't, but it is a quality construction and a solid design that serves a specific purpose of being an inconspicuous context-defined building in an appropriate setting.

I personally question whether there is that much context to dictate what would be an appropriate "blending in" building would be. There seems to be enough pre-war and post-war architecture to put this style into question, but whatever. People like it and that's that. It's mediocre and another wasted opportunity, but you take the good with the bad and the good is that this is another addition to the momentum downtown.

[Michi]

Originally Posted by Alliance

If they want a limestone facade...GREAT! Give us one, not an imitation of one.

Maybe they don't want a limestone facade, though. They probably don't want a shiny, glass balcony-less one either.

[honte]

^ Yeah, I personally would rather see this precast than a Stern-style limestone facade. I've already said that I think Stern's building is equally ugly, it's just dolled-up in Lord and Taylor instead of Target. So, why waste the natural resources and money- and the upper-end buyers who should go somewhere else like the Spire - on a distinguishing element that 99% of people won't notice anyway?

[ardecila]

Is limestone really that expensive?

I've heard several stories where limestone actually came out CHEAPER than precast concrete, but these were all on small projects. Perhaps the economies of scale make precast cheaper in large quantities?

Also, what about attachment systems and the labor of installation? I can't imagine that precast is much lighter than limestone.

[honte]

^ Of course, the primary aggregate in most concretes is limestone. But that is crushed limestone. Factor in the precision cutting, transportation, and labor to install it, and you're talking about some serious cash. Believe me, if it were cheaper or comparable, I am sure LaGrange would be using it. Remember 65 E. Goethe? You can make the case that this precast system has fewer joints, and hence fewer repairs and higher reliability, but I truly doubt that is on his mind.

[Brian.]

Originally Posted by Chicago3rd

I am the only human on earth who likes the pre-cast concrete.

Nope...I'm all in for using precast. People generally don't have a clue about precast or how it works so any exposure we get is all the better

Originally Posted by Alliance

1. The use of precast to imitate other architectural materials (limestone, brick, etc) Why? Because the facade looses a whole sense of depth and color that concrete, especially painted concrete does not have. If they want a limestone facade...GREAT! Give us one, not an imitation of one.

That's real easy to say when you are not the one paying the bill.

Ok then let’s clear this project up then. This project appears to be fabricated out of what we call architectural precast. That means no gray concrete is used in the visible exterior. So we are talking colored concrete that will not be painted at anytime. I also suspect that an acid etching has been applied to the surface of the panels to give it some texture when you touch it.

So far what I see from these pictures is absolutely master craftsmanship of the work. To build the forms with such deep relief and moldings takes a true quality producer. You guys really need to educate yourself about the precast used in this project. There is NOTHING cheap about what you have seen so far. You may not like the style but it looks like high quality work and I can certainly give it some respect.

Originally Posted by ardecila

Is limestone really that expensive?

I've heard several stories where limestone actually came out CHEAPER than precast concrete, but these were all on small projects. Perhaps the economies of scale make precast cheaper in large quantities?

Yes....it really is that expensive. Natural stone is tremendously labor intensive. I can't imagine any project that puts limestone cheaper then precast. We have in the past attached granite to the face of our projects to get the best of both worlds.

Also, what about attachment systems and the labor of installation? I can't imagine that precast is much lighter than limestone.

Precast is still better here because you just can't haul a 10x40ft piece of limestone around on a truck without the likelyhood of it breaking. Precast is also used as a structural member in lots of cases. In this day and age limestone would only be used as a skin and would not carry any loads of the building.

[Mojava]

edit

[Mojava]

Originally Posted by samoen313

Hear hear.

Look at 15 Central Park West. Pioneering it ain't, but it is a quality construction and a solid design that serves a specific purpose of being an inconspicuous context-defined building in an appropriate setting.

Hard to use 15 CPW as an example as it's one of the most successful projects in a very long time. Every unit is sold and the total sellout is over $2Billion

[samoen313]

^ Indeed. You build in New York on land as desirable as a plot bordering Central Park and you will get clients who will pay the premium in the total cost for the limestone. But I think this is an instance where, as I perceive it, the developer recognized limestone as a superior material and that his clients might also (who knows if they did) recognize it as such.

They can do a lot with pre-cast these days but I don't think too many people would be fooled by faux-brick relief panels being substituted for brick. I'm not saying everyone out there is as gaga for quality, but there are non-architects who recognize stone as the material composing the statelier structures that have gone up in this nation's history while precast is what they use to clad outlet malls. There is a demand for quality in materials out there, but the developers didn't find it to be strong enough to merit forking over the extra (EXTRA extra) cash for limestone.

And to be totally honest I don't blame them. But I try to offer buildings criticism that isn't just "it's ugly." I think that to build in this style, one has to truly draw upon EVERYTHING that makes a lot of pre-war architecture great and I believe that it is as much the detail as it is the materials. This building fails on that front as I see it.

Lagrange designs seem aimed at the Kimora Lee Simmons sect of moneyed America. They exist en masse so there isn't going to be much to stop these projects for the time being. I always ask for more, but am resigned to the fact that these projects will persist. At least we are getting projects like Aqua built. That is a milestone.

[SolarWind]

March 24, 2008