daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > World Development News Forums > General Urban Developments > DN Archives



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old December 13th, 2006, 06:06 PM   #181
rider_of_rohan
Savior of Gondor
 
rider_of_rohan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 1,505
Likes (Received): 410

I have to go along with some of the others. I dont like how it looks. Who wouldnt like the height though. Thats a great location as well. I guess I would just "settle" for a regular run of the mill 100 story building
__________________
Reform is affirmative, conservatism negative; conservatism goes for comfort, reform for truth.
Ralph Waldo Emerson
rider_of_rohan no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old December 13th, 2006, 06:59 PM   #182
forumly_chgoman
BANNED
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 757
Likes (Received): 10

Quote:
Originally Posted by i_am_hydrogen View Post
December 13, 2006
BY DAVID ROEDER Sun-Times Columnist


How do you say chutzpah in Gaelic? Or bait and switch? Those are the terms that come to mind with Irish developer Garrett Kelleher's new version of the Santiago Calatrava building just west of Lake Shore Drive near Navy Pier. With zoning for the site in place and City Hall's taste for a Calatrava building whetted, the developer uncorks a plan to almost triple the building's size.

If the influential Streeterville Organization of Active Residents has any gumption, it will come out against the changes in terms so strong as to force the local alderman to oppose them. Then Kelleher and Calatrava would have to get real. Otherwise, there's a good chance this project will fail later on, and the construction site will be tied up in bankruptcy and litigation.

As currently fashioned, the building cannot succeed. The finances don't add up for a project that appeals to such a limited, super-rich segment of condo buyers. I suppose that's good news. We won't have to look at Calatrava's sellout of his own building. I wasn't as enamored of the original as some, but it had a grace missing in the revision. The new building is an overweight and mummified version of the first design. But it is proof that Calatrava has turned into a leech, sucking paydays from a developer who's enraptured with an international vanity project.
...how is one both mummified and overweight ... I though the wizening process post-mortem would lead to weight loss
....a yes the mixed metaphor, gotta luv sloppy writing
__________________

Zefire liked this post
forumly_chgoman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 13th, 2006, 07:39 PM   #183
geoff_diamond
Live from the Loop
 
geoff_diamond's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,578
Likes (Received): 2

I think everyone needs to put this in perspective. We would all be fawning over this tower had we never seen the original. So, if it boils down to this tower or no tower, I'm going to choose this one. It's still better than 99% of the towers in the World.

That said, I do still think the apex could use some additional thought - some sort of mediation between building and sky. It's very abrupt.
__________________
Straight from Michigan and Monroe in downtown Chicago!
geoff_diamond no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 13th, 2006, 07:49 PM   #184
geoff_diamond
Live from the Loop
 
geoff_diamond's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,578
Likes (Received): 2

Been studying the renderings since my last post. I will be the first to go on record with this:

I LIKE IT. ALOT.

Judge it on its own merits, not on those of a previous proposal. Although, even when I compare it to the old one, I still like it. Alot.
__________________
Straight from Michigan and Monroe in downtown Chicago!
geoff_diamond no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 13th, 2006, 09:51 PM   #185
MWR
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 155
Likes (Received): 0

My Opinion

Initially, I looked at the new Spire and I was disappointed, but later I looked at it side by side with the prior versions. Afterwards, I changed my opinion and decided I liked it better. I would only suggest that the top have a crown of lights.
MWR no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 13th, 2006, 11:36 PM   #186
Chi649
Registered User
 
Chi649's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Chicagoland
Posts: 1,156
Likes (Received): 12

Quote:
Originally Posted by geoff_diamond View Post
I think everyone needs to put this in perspective. We would all be fawning over this tower had we never seen the original. So, if it boils down to this tower or no tower, I'm going to choose this one. It's still better than 99% of the towers in the World.

That said, I do still think the apex could use some additional thought - some sort of mediation between building and sky. It's very abrupt.
I agree with what you said 100%. And I wish these so called architecture critics would get over the fact that it is three times the size, big F*ckin deal. Haven't they ever heard of the phrase "make no little plans" in this city? Would it not especially pertain to the most prominent site in the city?
Chi649 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 13th, 2006, 11:52 PM   #187
harvesterofsorrows
BANNED
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 642
Likes (Received): 113

Build.
__________________

Zefire liked this post
harvesterofsorrows no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 14th, 2006, 05:49 AM   #188
geoff_diamond
Live from the Loop
 
geoff_diamond's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,578
Likes (Received): 2

This version looks more like a building than a work of art. Chicago is about buildings.
__________________
Straight from Michigan and Monroe in downtown Chicago!
geoff_diamond no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 14th, 2006, 09:11 PM   #189
i_am_hydrogen
muted
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 7,080
Likes (Received): 203

******* SOAR, ******* Natarus

More ire at the spire
Streeterville group aims to topple proposed revision

December 14, 2006
BY DAVID ROEDER AND FRAN SPIELMAN Staff Reporters
The leading civic organization in Streeterville slammed the revisions to architect Santiago Calatrava's 2,000-foot-tall lakefront building Wednesday, adding political obstacles to the project's immense economic challenges.

The enlarged building, containing three times the space but no taller than the original proposal, brings too many new residents and traffic to the hard-to-reach neighborhood of Lake Shore Drive and North Water Street, said Gail Spreen, president of the Streeterville Organization of Active Residents.

She said the decision was based on planning issues, but also was partly an architectural critique. "The current design lacks the elegance, the gracefulness and the beauty of the approved version," Spreen said, referring to the slimmer version that cleared city zoning reviews last spring.

Ald. Burton Natarus (42nd) expressed grave reservations about the redesign and said city authorities "will give this thing all the scrutiny it deserves." City Hall's review could culminate in a Chicago Plan Commission hearing as early as January.

Natarus focused on traffic issues, and on the developer's new scheme to provide five levels of underground parking beneath the 160-story building's plaza. So close to the lake, the site could be flooded, which was a problem for construction crews at the John Hancock Center in the 1960s, Natarus said.

********

Natarus has questions on new design for twisting tower

By Gary Washburn
Tribune staff reporter
Published December 14, 2006

Ald. Burton Natarus (42nd) voiced concern Wednesday over the redesign of a distinctive tower by renowned architect Santiago Calatrava proposed for a prime lakefront spot in Natarus' downtown ward.

"It's an altogether different project" than a version proposed earlier, Natarus said. "It's a huge building. It is 65 feet wider ... My concerns are size, my concerns are traffic. I am concerned about the fact they are going to have over a thousand apartments."

The redesign seeks to make the project financially feasible. Planned by developer Garrett Kelleher on a site on the Chicago River's north bank at Lake Shore Drive, the twisting skyscraper would have 160 stories, 45 more floors than the original design unveiled last year by the project's initial developer.

A 150-room hotel component has been eliminated, and the number of condominiums would rise to 1,300 from about 450 proposed previously.

A 400-foot broadcast tower in the original design also has been eliminated, but the skyscraper still would be the nation's tallest building.

"If Calatrava thinks it is a nice design, who am I to debate with Calatrava?" Natarus asked.

"But I am interested in the practical aspects of it."

The cost of the project once was estimated at $1.2 billion, but Kelleher's Dublin-based Shelbourne Development has not provided an updated figure.

The new proposal will be scrutinized by the city's Planning and Development and Transportation Departments. It must win City Hall's approval before going forward. Local aldermen traditionally also have a strong voice on major projects in their wards.
i_am_hydrogen no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 14th, 2006, 09:14 PM   #190
i_am_hydrogen
muted
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 7,080
Likes (Received): 203

Since when is a small group of small-minded people entitled to decide what's best for the ENTIRE city of 3 million people?
i_am_hydrogen no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 14th, 2006, 09:35 PM   #191
xrl
Registered User
 
xrl's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 172
Likes (Received): 2

Here we go again...
xrl no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 14th, 2006, 10:11 PM   #192
creil
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Chicago
Posts: 343
Likes (Received): 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by i_am_hydrogen View Post
Since when is a small group of small-minded people entitled to decide what's best for the ENTIRE city of 3 million people?

When somebody wants to plop down a 2000 foot building next to you, I think you should have a bit of a say in it. The Streeterville residents will have to look at this thing everyday. It will have a significant impact on their lifestyle. I would say that their opinions have to carry more weight then those who live in other neighborhoods.

They're not happy with the design change and I don't blame them. You hear the same words associated with the old design no matter if it's journalists, neighborhood residents or the people in these forums; grace, beauty, elegance. Funny how you don't hear those descriptors for the new building. Big , bulky, overweght are now the words associated with this building. It's disappointing to see such an inspiring design sacrificed in order to expand the square footage. The "Make no little plans" motto, doesn't just refer to size, it refers to imagination. The first plan followed that golden rule that so many of us like to quote from time to time, but the new plan has scaled down that imaginative aspect.

Let me be the first to go on record and say:

I'm disappointed
creil no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 14th, 2006, 11:30 PM   #193
Chi649
Registered User
 
Chi649's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Chicagoland
Posts: 1,156
Likes (Received): 12

Grace and elegance were sacrificed for more square footage but it seems like this was only way to make this project economically feasible. If the old design was unpractical, then why even use it as a comparison as to what we could have had? If this new design does not get approved, I'm afraid we will be stuck with some mediocre 40 storey building which has a base just as large. If that happens, it will be a terrible shame.
Chi649 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 15th, 2006, 12:54 AM   #194
creil
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Chicago
Posts: 343
Likes (Received): 1

Then the question becomes, "Is it worth it?". In my opinion, no. I do not like this design for a building of this height. If necessary, scrap the twisting torso idea and come up with something that captures the imagination, as the previous design did, and is economically feasable.

Here's an idea, scale down the size. I would prefer a smaller version of the previous design to a 2000 foot version of this one. Truth be told, the current design wouldn't bother me nearly as much if it were scaled down to say, 1000ft. If we're gonna put a 2000ft tower on the lakefront, I don't want to settle for this.

Quote:
This version looks more like a building than a work of art. Chicago is about buildings.
Chicago is about architecture, which, in addition to it's practical use, is a form of art. If you just want tall buildings, then build a 2000ft rectangle with even more square footage and be done with it.
creil no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 15th, 2006, 03:13 AM   #195
Open Road
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 53
Likes (Received): 0

Wow. Seriously. The rotation to vertical is fantastic to draw your eye upward. It will look seriously huge to anyone on the lake, first because it is seriously huge, and second because it is in front of everything else.

Bravo and such...

(and yes I know I'm like 4 pages late in saying anything)
__________________
- GDP would be easy to measure if all we consumed was pie... Unfortunately, life is beer and skittles

- Life is what happens when you’re making other plans
Open Road no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 15th, 2006, 03:46 AM   #196
wheelingman
Pittsburgh rocks!!
 
wheelingman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Wheeling, West Virginia
Posts: 899
Likes (Received): 9

If they are worried it will create too much traffic then they shouldn't live in a big city like Chicago. These people make me sick.
__________________
Chicago rules!
I love Pittsburgh
Toronto is great!!
Montreal is unique!!
wheelingman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 15th, 2006, 04:12 AM   #197
prelude91
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Chicago...Soon to be Washington D.C.
Posts: 1,240
Likes (Received): 2

I dont even think the traffic in Streeterville is bad...anyways, Streeterville has one of the most dense collections of residential highrises in the city, of course there will be some traffic.
Anyways, Density is a good thing
prelude91 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 15th, 2006, 09:52 AM   #198
forumly_chgoman
BANNED
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 757
Likes (Received): 10

eggs..fuggin.sactly

it downtown, th traffic even at rush hour aint that bad.....I mean I usually bike DT ot take the metra but sometimes I do drive and park near the sear...I get off at jackson and take adams...you know what I live in RP and most times I am DT in about 35-45 minutes including parking ....that is hardly bas traffice for the second busiest DT in the nation



you know who thinks the traffic is bad is all the shmucks who drive in from the burbs and then bitch they actually have to have there pasty, doughy asses walk a whole 2 blocks.....


jeezus mary end jozef......take the fuggin train
__________________

Zefire liked this post
forumly_chgoman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 15th, 2006, 06:54 PM   #199
Latoso
C.B.P.
 
Latoso's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,189
Likes (Received): 3

Quote:
Originally Posted by creil View Post
When somebody wants to plop down a 2000 foot building next to you, I think you should have a bit of a say in it.
Not if you live downtown. EVER!
__________________
LATOSO
C.B.P. - Citizens for Better Planning

Make no little plans; they have no magic to stir men's blood and probably will themselves not be realized. Make big plans; aim high in hope and work, remembering that a noble, logical diagram once recorded will not die. - Daniel Burnham
Latoso no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 15th, 2006, 07:34 PM   #200
creil
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Chicago
Posts: 343
Likes (Received): 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by Latoso View Post
Not if you live downtown. EVER!
It's still a neighborhood. You can't just silence the public voice.
creil no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
chicago, santiago calatrava, spire, tallest, tower

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 05:23 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

Hosted by Blacksun, dedicated to this site too!
Forum server management by DaiTengu