CHICAGO | General Developments

[Jim in Chicago]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

totally disagree.

university hall and the science & engineering offices are two of the finest works of brutalism to be found anywhere in chicago, IMO.

The problem from the beginning was that the State approved construction of a high-maintenance campus in an environment was ongoing upkeep is not properly budgeted. I was there for 5 years in the early years, and the campus was already falling to pieces.

I agree that it looks like someone handed the architect a picture of the Gang residence saying "this is really cool, but do it on the cheap."

[sentinel]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

totally disagree.

university hall and the science & engineering offices are two of the finest works of brutalism to be found anywhere in chicago, IMO.

Gag - UH is one of the ugliest buildings in Chicago; very much NOT a prime example of Brutalism in Chicago. The Regenstein Library is to me personally the finest example of Netsch's hardlined designs in the City.

[LouisVanDerWright]

How on Earth can you hate UH? It's beautiful, both as brutalism and structural expressionism. The way the columns drop off with the load. The way it subtly steps out as it rises...

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by sentinel

UH is one of the ugliest buildings in Chicago; very much NOT a prime example of Brutalism in Chicago.

i would EASILY place UH on any top 5 list of brutalism in chicago.

structural expression at its best.

1 billion percent chicago.

[marothisu]

There were 2 new construction building permits issued yesterday for 2 buildings, 4 stories each and 42 units each (84 total units) with first floor retail at 4424-4434 S Cottage Grove Ave (Cottage Grove between 44th St and 45th St). AKA 4400 Grove. It's supposed to have a public plaza element too. 21 units will be for CHA, 34 will be affordable housing, and the remaining 29 units will be market rate.

I believe this is the first of 2 phases which should deliver 164 units total to that big vacant lot.

Renderings courtesy of Brinshore (http://brinshore.com/dev/45th-cottage-grove/)

[intrepidDesign]

Can any explain in detail why the flyover is taking so long? Is it a bureaucracy thing? Engineering? Site specific challenges? Funding? All of, none of? I feel like we've seen $300 million dollar high rises go up in the time it's taken this to get to where it is. I'm neither an architect nor an engineer, but I'm sort of blown away by how long this is taking to complete. Can someone shed light onto the process and the challenges?

[harryc]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

totally disagree.

university hall and the science & engineering offices are two of the finest works of brutalism to be found anywhere in chicago, IMO.

UICC - SEO by Harry Carmichael, on Flickr

UICC - University Hall by Harry Carmichael, on Flickr

click on link for larger version

[woodrow]

^^Basically 2 reasons. The funds had to be parceled out over a couple years (something with the Federal monies), and then according to Rahm, state mismanagement of their part. 2. Repair to 1938 LSD Bridge, which is delaying that portion.

I read that the completed portions may open before 2019 or 1st Qtr 2019.

[gebs]

Originally Posted by intrepidDesign

Can any explain in detail why the flyover is taking so long? Is it a bureaucracy thing? Engineering? Site specific challenges? Funding? All of, none of? I feel like we've seen $300 million dollar high rises go up in the time it's taken this to get to where it is. I'm neither an architect nor an engineer, but I'm sort of blown away by how long this is taking to complete. Can someone shed light onto the process and the challenges?

I feel like this question has been understandably asked once every six months or so. From what I can remember, the long duration is due to all of the above. It's a complicated path that runs alongside a very busy highway, traverses over two active waterways and two main roads, skirts a luxury building, and runs over a former industrial site that was recently found to have radioactive materials.

That, plus the state likely distributing the cost of the project across several years, and boom, you have a project that slogs interminably.

[sentinel]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

i would EASILY place UH on any top 5 list of brutalism in chicago.

structural expression at its best.

1 billion percent chicago.

Wha? How? Explain.

Chicago architecture is many things, many designs, multiple icons. It isn't just defined by one style or icon...and UH is most certainly the last thing that I would use to define it as 'Chicago.' I have many fond memories of my undergrad years at UIC, but the dated, thoughtless architecture of the campus (ESPECIALLY the A&A building *shudder*) is not part of any of those memories. Blame the state government at that time; blame the architect; blame whomever you chose, the fact of the matter remains, all of the old Water Netsch buildings should be razed. They are reliquary of a bygone time when perceived confinement in state higher education in order to suppress any thought that was outside the status quo was considered elan. Oppressive, confusing, dark, foreboding - this what comes to mind when I think of the UH, BSB, the Physical Sciences classrooms. *more shudders*.

Walter Netsch was a visionary architect - I met him and his wife once when I was 16, and thought he was one of the most amazing men I'd ever encountered. But even visionaries can sometimes have problems executing their designs, especially when their clients are cheapskate idiot government entities.

Even in Brutalism, there can be grace, refinement, attention to detail and the ability to create special and beautiful spaces that stand the test of time. The original UIC campus design is the antithesis of Brutalism done right.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by sentinel

Wha? How? Explain.

uhhhh, the entire tower is nothing but structural expression.


source: https://hiveminer.com/Tags/brutalism%2Cuic


how can you not see that?




in any event it's one of my favorite towers anywhere in the world.

i think we're just gonna have to agree to disagree on this one.

[Baronvonellis]

Sorry, but those things look like prisons and ugly! I wouldn't care if they are torn down.

[the urban politician]

I for one understand why people may not like them, but they are a UNIQUE style from a particular period that I frankly think will never get built again, and thus they deserve to be kept around for historic interest.

[chrisvfr800i]

Originally Posted by Baronvonellis

Sorry, but those things look like prisons and ugly! I wouldn't care if they are torn down.

Shouldn't any building or facility that calls itself "Architecture" be successful in it's intent? I remember almost the entirety of the UIC campus to be a dank, miserable place, especially, UH, BSB, and SE/SES. It always felt like a place where its intended function was forced to conform to its lousy design.

Just my opinion...don't care if anyone agrees or disagrees.


Harrison Hall, on the other hand, is at least inoffensive, and looks like it will serve its purposes as well as any institutional learning facility jammed up against an eight lane expressway and railroad tracks can be.

[harryc]

Originally Posted by chrisvfr800i

Shouldn't any building or facility that calls itself "Architecture" be successful in it's intent? I remember almost the entirety of the UIC campus to be a dank, miserable place, especially, UH, BSB, and SE/SES. It always felt like a place where its intended function was forced to conform to its lousy design.

Just my opinion...don't care if anyone agrees or disagrees.


Harrison Hall, on the other hand, is at least inoffensive, and looks like it will serve its purposes as well as any institutional learning facility jammed up against an eight lane expressway and railroad tracks can be.

It was VE'd to death - if the walkways had been covered (original design ) the environment would have been quite different.

[LouisVanDerWright]

Uh guys, look closer. The colmns per floor drop off with the reduced structural load. The building also gets wider as it rises and needs to carry less load. It's literally one of the most structurally expressive buildings in they city along with Hancock and Onterie Center. I suppose you think the JHC is an ugly oil Derrick too.

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by Baronvonellis

Sorry, but those things look like prisons and ugly! I wouldn't care if they are torn down.

Agreed. Most brutalism doesn't do it for me at all - only seen a handful of buildings that I thought were cool examples of it.

[left of center]

I've always had a love/hate relationship with the UIC campus. I absolutely love UH and BSB (the crazy stairwells, while unfortunately horribly inefficient in between periods when students jammed their way through to the next class, always looked so visually pleasing to me), but then other buildings came off as very gloomy and dark, like the A&A building as well as the smaller halls, such as Douglas, Lincoln, Grant halls, etc. (although a lot of these are thankfully getting/have gotten remodeled). If there was one thing I could change about the design of the campus, it would be to remove the "arrow slit" windows that literally every building has. The glass is an ugly beige color, and coupled with the narrow opening leads to very little sunlight getting into the classrooms, making class time feel even duller and almost prison like. I think they should do away with them on all buildings (including UH) and replace them with larger untinted glass windows.

My $0.02

[lakeshoredrive]

Originally Posted by left of center

I've always had a love/hate relationship with the UIC campus. I absolutely love UH and BSB (the crazy stairwells, while unfortunately horribly inefficient in between periods when students jammed their way through to the next class, always looked so visually pleasing to me), but then other buildings came off as very gloomy and dark, like the A&A building as well as the smaller halls, such as Douglas, Lincoln, Grant halls, etc. (although a lot of these are thankfully getting/have gotten remodeled). If there was one thing I could change about the design of the campus, it would be to remove the "arrow slit" windows that literally every building has. The glass is an ugly beige color, and coupled with the narrow opening leads to very little sunlight getting into the classrooms, making class time feel even duller and almost prison like. I think they should do away with them on all buildings (including UH) and replace them with larger untinted glass windows.

My $0.02

Have you read the UIC's 2018 master plan? It was just recently updated after getting feedback from community meeting. The UIC campus will look so nice in 10 years if all goes according to plan!

[petey2428]

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

Uh guys, look closer. The colmns per floor drop off with the reduced structural load. The building also gets wider as it rises and needs to carry less load. It's literally one of the most structurally expressive buildings in they city along with Hancock and Onterie Center. I suppose you think the JHC is an ugly oil Derrick too.

I like that building, but that is absolutely not how structural engineering works. Those intermediate columns are strictly architectural. The load on a slab doesn't increase as it goes up/down the building as long as the floor usage is the same. It's awfully inefficient to add more columns instead of increasing the column size. If those columns are only used for the lateral system, I find it strange that they would be on the long side of the building but not on the short side of the building.

But at the same time, I could be wrong and have no idea what I"m talking about.