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 February 10th, 2007, 04:01 PM   #521
Indyman
Registered User
 
Indyman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Bloomington
Posts: 836
Likes (Received): 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brendan View Post
Wow big deal, I guess it makes you feel good and superior inside huh Megatower?

Who cares if your stepdad knows the architect, it's not like you are going to get more information than us. You're a member of the public, like everyone else.

and we all know that "knows the architect" is a relative term. How well he actually knows him is questionable.
__________________
Envy is the ulcer of the soul- Socrates
Indyman no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old February 10th, 2007, 04:20 PM   #522
BorisMolotov
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 376
Likes (Received): 9

ABout the guyed masts over 2000 ft, there's at least one in north dakota at 2024 ft, and there might be a couple more at 2000 ft or like 2 ft taller.

SO the FAA does approve over 2000 ft, in the middle of nowhere.
BorisMolotov no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 10th, 2007, 08:31 PM   #523
OhioTodd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Columbus Ohio
Posts: 1,114
Likes (Received): 66

Quote:
Originally Posted by BorisMolotov View Post
ABout the guyed masts over 2000 ft, there's at least one in north dakota at 2024 ft, and there might be a couple more at 2000 ft or like 2 ft taller.

SO the FAA does approve over 2000 ft, in the middle of nowhere.
There is at least 1 in ND(and possibly others) but they were built before the FAA enacted that policy. Nothing over 2000 feet has been built since the policy was adopted. That being said I don't see why they don't at least try for approval of something taller than 2000 feet once , say, construction has started. The worst that could happen is they could get a 'no'. Who knows, maybe they will have an alternative plan feasible for the tower once it starts construction that would allow for a spire?

and I seriously doubt that 'Megatower' knows anything or anyone associated with this tower. His step-daddy knows the architect, yet he has kept quiet all this time about this information until now? yeah right! He would not have been able to keep his trap shut about that. He knows nothing.
OhioTodd no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 10th, 2007, 08:38 PM   #524
thryve
같같같같같
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Toronto
Posts: 5,346
Likes (Received): 22

It's interesting how this tower has gone from something that to me was remotely deconstructivist to something very sensual and organic.

The new design is quite different for Chicago. I'm excited to see the podium/base design of the tower... is this something we won't see for awhile, perhaps?
thryve no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 12th, 2007, 08:34 AM   #525
A r c h i
Render Monkey
 
A r c h i's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 5,832
Likes (Received): 81

I'd say it was far from being remotely deconstructivist.
__________________
Check out Urban Melbourne for your Melbourne Development fix.
A r c h i no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 12th, 2007, 09:50 AM   #526
Brendan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Wollongong, NSW
Posts: 2,219
Likes (Received): 23

Quote:
Originally Posted by Indyman View Post
and we all know that "knows the architect" is a relative term. How well he actually knows him is questionable.
Yeah you're right. It's amazing how much people exaggerate certain facts to make them look superior.

A classic example of this is megatower.
Brendan no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 14th, 2007, 01:48 AM   #527
thryve
같같같같같
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Toronto
Posts: 5,346
Likes (Received): 22

Quote:
Originally Posted by Archibomber View Post
I'd say it was far from being remotely deconstructivist.
I know, I said "through my eyes". There were elements of it. I used that term to describe how different that design was from the very organic current design.
thryve no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 15th, 2007, 05:04 AM   #528
A r c h i
Render Monkey
 
A r c h i's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 5,832
Likes (Received): 81

I was actually going to withdraw my comment because I didn't see the "to me" upon reading it at first, but when I posted it the forum was stuffed so it was taking ages to edit so I just left it.
__________________
Check out Urban Melbourne for your Melbourne Development fix.
A r c h i no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 15th, 2007, 05:40 AM   #529
Avatar
Galactic Ruler
 
Avatar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Sydney
Posts: 6,697
Likes (Received): 507

Bring back version B please. I agree this design is a bastardisation of the original more elegant concept.
__________________
$5 fun time.
Avatar no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 15th, 2007, 06:06 AM   #530
BorisMolotov
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 376
Likes (Received): 9

Quote:
Bring back version B please. I agree this design is a bastardisation of the original more elegant concept.
This is getting really irritating. Version B is, or A, or C, is not coming back. The first two are economically unfeasible, which means they're not going to get built in their current forms ever. While I agree with you that, yes, both A and B are very elegant and graceful, Version D or a slight tweaking of Version D is what is getting built.
BorisMolotov no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 15th, 2007, 06:27 AM   #531
Avatar
Galactic Ruler
 
Avatar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Sydney
Posts: 6,697
Likes (Received): 507

That's if it get's built at all? this whole tower has gone from inspiring to disappointing really. I understand the your frustrations, it does get a bit tired I guess. People are human and like to express their dissatisfaction. Unfortunately sometimes it gets rededitive. This world is economically driven and aethetics and beauty are sometimes sacrificed for the mighty dollar. It's still elegant but just has not the same presence or graceful integration that the earlier designs embodied. I don't much like the exposed dick at the top, it's just too phallic. It would certainly suit a tapering spire or flat roof with spire much more IMO.

I guess we should focus on the positives, it's still thin and different and will add something to the Chicago skyline. Still I think there are other cities it may suit more. I have always thought the slenderness at odds with the masculinity of the context and especially the bulk of towers like Sears and John Hancock.
__________________
$5 fun time.
Avatar no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 15th, 2007, 06:35 AM   #532
BorisMolotov
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 376
Likes (Received): 9

On the contrary, I believe that it will fit in well with the Hancock and Sears, because of its femininity. You also have to remember, if and when this building is completed, Trump Tower (regarded as a more "feminine" tower) and Waterview Tower (Which IMO is somewhat of a more "neutral" tower) will already have an enormous impact on the skyline. So when all is said and done, the Chicago Spire will not be the lone standout "Feminine Out-of-Place" tower that people keep claiming it to be.
BorisMolotov no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 15th, 2007, 07:03 AM   #533
Dale
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 9,177
Likes (Received): 5505

Wow. I can't believe some of you are still pining for the drill bit. That spire was wildly disproportionate.
Dale no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 15th, 2007, 09:57 PM   #534
thryve
같같같같같
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Toronto
Posts: 5,346
Likes (Received): 22

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dale View Post
Wow. I can't believe some of you are still pining for the drill bit. That spire was wildly disproportionate.
That was a large part of it's appeal, my friend. haha
thryve no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 15th, 2007, 11:38 PM   #535
Indyman
Registered User
 
Indyman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Bloomington
Posts: 836
Likes (Received): 4

mmm only to some was it appealing. I really cant wait for this tower. Things just cant move fast enough, can they? lol Bt as soon as this baby is built itll be time to take a little weekend drive over to Chitown to visit this beauty.
__________________
Envy is the ulcer of the soul- Socrates
Indyman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 18th, 2007, 04:06 PM   #536
Chi_Coruscant
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 879
Likes (Received): 0

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/l...,5544026.story

Spire plans raise hopes for neglected park space


By Noreen S. Ahmed-Ullah
Tribune staff reporter

February 18, 2007

The proposed Chicago Spire has drawn attention because it could be the tallest building in the U.S. It has raised eyebrows as a test of how far the city's condo boom can go.

Design buffs have followed every twist, literally, of the changing drawings by renowned architect Santiago Calatrava.

But one group of open-space advocates sees plans for a spiraling skyscraper from a different angle--for them, the wheeling and dealing accompanying a premier development could be the best chance yet to secure money for long-delayed DuSable Park.

For two decades, the land for the park--to be named in honor of Jean Baptiste Pointe DuSable, an African-American pioneer considered to be one of the city's founders--has sat fallow at the mouth of the Chicago River as a mound of weeds, rubble and wild-growing trees.

Now Grant Park Conservancy President Bob O'Neill hopes that plans to build the Spire on the other side of Lake Shore Drive, near Navy Pier, could generate momentum to build DuSable Park, complete with a sculpture of DuSable, murals of his trading post and an outdoor classroom.

"This may be our opportunity to get that project funded," said O'Neill, who leads one of the civic organizations that helped create a development plan for DuSable Park.

He says he's talked with the developer about contributing to the completion of the nearly $12 million park.

"It's in the developer's best interest to get this done," O'Neill said. "When you look out the window, you don't want to see a pile of weeds."

Plans have languished
In 1985, the city approved a plan for the area north of the Chicago River. The plan called for three open space sites, but DuSable was never completed.

In 1987, then-Mayor Harold Washington named the park site after the first non-native settler of Chicago, a Haitian of French and African descent.

Since then, despite sporadic efforts, plans for the park have languished.

"I just don't know why it's taken so long," said Bessie Neal, president of the Chicago DuSable League, which is dedicated to preserving and disseminating information about DuSable. "They're still pussyfooting around. It looks to me like they're making tracks and not getting anyplace."

Over the years, DuSable Park was overshadowed by flashier projects such as Northerly Island and Soldier Field.

The site suffered from soil contamination and disputes arose over how best to represent DuSable. Some were concerned that artist Martin Puryear's abstract sculptures would not realistically depict DuSable.

A solution eventually was reached--Puryear's sculpture would go in an elevated part of the park that would provide views of DuSable Harbor and the lake. A more lifelike statue would be placed at DuSable Harbor.

Two years ago, the DuSable Founders Way was dedicated, but the brown honorary street sign sits largely hidden along the riverwalk.

The DuSable Park committee in August unveiled a development plan for the more than 3-acre park. So far, $6 million has been raised by the city and the Chicago Park District. Nearly $6 million more is needed.

Park officials are seeking state and federal funds to cover part of that cost because the site's seawall needs to be replaced.

But O'Neill believes the developer should be tapped too.

O'Neill said he's talked with representatives of the Spire developer, Dublin-based Garrett Kelleher, along with the Park District and the city, encouraging all parties to draw a financial connection between the 2,000-foot skyscraper on the west side of Lake Shore Drive and the park east of the drive.

Developers of residential buildings pay impact fees that go toward open space, said Connie Buscemi, spokeswoman for the city's Planning Department.

Developers of the Lakeshore East complex, for instance, built a 6-acre park before starting construction on its high-rises just south of the river. Trump Tower paid the city $18 million in impact fees, a portion of which will go toward the development of a nearby park.

Park to be considered
The current version of the Spire, projected to have 1,000 to 1,350 condo units, has yet to receive city approval. As city officials review new proposals for the building, they will consider many components including DuSable Park, Buscemi said.

Tom Murphy, spokesman for the Spire project, said he recognizes the success of the skyscraper is tied to the completion of DuSable Park. He said the developer will need to work out with the city "the optimum plan" that would include the Spire, a plaza in front of it and DuSable Park.

"We intend to support in every way possible whatever enhancements may be required," Murphy said.

But some who helped fashion plans for DuSable Park worry that a developer's money could come with strings attached, at the expense of the current plan.

"We just want to make sure the park will be developed according to the framework plan," said Erma Tranter, president of Friends of the Parks, "not according to the developer's own vision."
Chi_Coruscant no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 22nd, 2007, 07:28 PM   #537
elliot42
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: St Louis
Posts: 124
Likes (Received): 50

build this beast

--I liked the initial design: there was something about the off-center antenna spire that appealed to me. That being said, if they can build this beast as modified, I'll be ecstatic . I am concerned about two things: 1) will the market bear this building with all the rest? and 2) There is not nearly enough rapid transit to support all these new buildings. CTA (and USDOT) are you listening???
elliot42 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 22nd, 2007, 08:16 PM   #538
ZZ-II
I love Skyscrapers
 
ZZ-II's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Near Ingolstadt in Bavaria
Posts: 33,504
Likes (Received): 6525

welcome elliot42
ZZ-II no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 22nd, 2007, 11:27 PM   #539
NittanyBLUE2002
JoePa4Eva
 
NittanyBLUE2002's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Lower Manhattan
Posts: 254
Likes (Received): 4

Quote:
There is not nearly enough rapid transit to support all these new buildings. CTA (and USDOT) are you listening???
Well, if we win the Olympics, that'll take care of the problem and accelerate the solution. Hopefully.

When should we expect to hear something new about the Spire? I check this site practically every single day waiting to hear something big. Just build it already - and make it magnificent.
NittanyBLUE2002 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 23rd, 2007, 02:10 AM   #540
Nat76
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 130
Likes (Received): 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by elliot42 View Post
2) There is not nearly enough rapid transit to support all these new buildings. CTA (and USDOT) are you listening???
I've kind of changed my thinking on that in the last few months. If anyone feels the pain of no transit over there, it's me. I've worked at Columbus and Wacker for 7 years. I live on the west side and use transit to 1-work 2-get to the lakefront 3- visit others. Getting from Clark/Lake to work is a pain.

People who live in streeterville have the lake down the street, and presumably they live pretty close to work. Close enough to walk, bus, or even take transit. Presumably a lot of them have cash and are taking $5 cab rides to work anyway. If they want to go north or south, it's not that far to the LakeShore buses or the Red Line on State. A lot of us probably walk a half mile or so for the train anway--State is no further.

The one thing public transit would be really good for is getting people in this area to your run of the mill errand places--hardware store, cleaners, barber, grocery store. There's a lack of that over there right now. I'd like to see more of a commercial presence on Fairbanks, and I think keeping it a little bit isolated will help attract those types of businesses. Help encourage the neighborhood to be self-sufficent, avoid Disneyification, and push the transit dollars to things with more direct social and economic benefits--like the circle line for other neighborhoods and better Airport/McCormick service to draw in the tourist $$$.
Nat76 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 02:56 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