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 May 26th, 2007, 05:53 AM   #1501
Green Jello
Registered User
 
Green Jello's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Chicago, IL U.S.A.
Posts: 356
Likes (Received): 23

I can't believe the thread on the Chicago Spire was just flooded with 900 pictures of the Taj Mahal
Green Jello no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old May 26th, 2007, 06:04 AM   #1502
graham
BANNED
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Toronto
Posts: 121
Likes (Received): 34

Quote:
Originally Posted by dwalden View Post
I can't believe the thread on the Chicago Spire was just flooded with 900 pictures of the Taj Mahal
Seeing as the ChiSpire does not exist yet, photos of it are hard to come by.
Plus what's posted relates to the discussion at hand. You would only know that if you read the text though. sigh.
And 23 is not 900.
__________________

Zefire liked this post

Last edited by graham; May 26th, 2007 at 07:34 AM.
graham no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 26th, 2007, 06:08 AM   #1503
spyguy
Expert
 
spyguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 6,916
Likes (Received): 97

This discussion has veered off topic once again. Talk about the building at hand instead of comparing dead and living architects or century old buildings and a proposal's renderings.
spyguy no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 26th, 2007, 06:22 AM   #1504
graham
BANNED
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Toronto
Posts: 121
Likes (Received): 34

Yes, we veered a bit, but I think it provided for a more focused discussion of the "building at hand" from here on in.
So, back on topic now...
Is this building a quality piece of architecture that suits Chicago?
And if so, what are the elements of the design that make it worthy.
I can only think of one. It's awesomely tall and that's exciting.
But I'd like to hear from others about what else they like about it.
__________________

Zefire liked this post
graham no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 26th, 2007, 06:29 AM   #1505
graham
BANNED
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Toronto
Posts: 121
Likes (Received): 34

Quote:
Originally Posted by spyguy View Post
This discussion has veered off topic once again. Talk about the building at hand instead of comparing dead and living architects or century old buildings and a proposal's renderings.
You say "we should talk about the building at hand". Fine.
I suggested previously to "take a look at the base of the ChiSpire and tell us what you feel about it" and you said nothing.
Seems like your not taking your own advice.
__________________

Zefire liked this post

Last edited by graham; May 26th, 2007 at 07:46 AM.
graham no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 26th, 2007, 07:25 AM   #1506
i_am_hydrogen
muted
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 7,080
Likes (Received): 203

Quote:
Originally Posted by dwalden View Post
I can't believe the thread on the Chicago Spire was just flooded with 900 pictures of the Taj Mahal
It's related to a discussion about architecture, and we're here to discuss architecture.
__________________
flickrgallery
i_am_hydrogen no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 26th, 2007, 07:43 AM   #1507
bnk
In the brig
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Chicagoland
Posts: 1,157
Likes (Received): 734

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chi649 View Post
I
My first reaction was that the spire was in the wrong spot because it won't have the impact on the skyline that I would have liked. But now I have come to realize that this is the perfect spot for a supertower. The spire is an architectural gem IMO and this location will allow it to been seen in all its glory without any chance of impedement.

.

I was in the same boat but now I realize the potential of the location.

Unobstucted views forever. see the ancient demolished Alexandria light house.

I once was afraid now I am sure.

bnk
bnk no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 26th, 2007, 08:41 AM   #1508
Latoso
C.B.P.
 
Latoso's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,188
Likes (Received): 3

Quote:
Originally Posted by graham View Post
Eww! That is horrible. Don't get me wrong, I think the Taj Majal can work, but the location is all wrong. Also, I think it would look better and more imposing in dark stone, perhaps a rainbow granite. I would suspect that if you asked your average Indian who has nothing to gain from the building due to tourism or otherwise and they would agree with me that this building in its current state is god awful.
__________________
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 May 26th, 2007, 08:55 AM   #1509
The-Real-Link
The-Real-Link!!
 
The-Real-Link's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 767
Likes (Received): 332

Quote:
Originally Posted by graham View Post
Just look at Franks work.
Frank used thick walls.
He used earth tone colours with black for contrast.
His buildings exuded strength of structure. Solidity and permanence.
They inspired confidence and a sense of security.
The proportions were beautiful and meaningful.
The materials, textures and colors pay homage to the local environment.
The strong lines lead and please the eye.
Any architect will know what I'm talking about.

All these things are missing in Calatravas drill bit.
I wonder if Calatrava even went to architect school.

I dont need to contact the dead.
Just look for yourself to see Frank would be annoyed.

Look at all the triangles at the base area. What is this?
How does this relate to the rest of the building?? It doesn't.
What? did he just pull the idea of triangles from thin air??

Look at the horizontal lines along the bottom and top edges of the white areas. ( White with baby blue? geez.)
what is this?? how do these lines relate to all the other curved and angled lines?? it does not.
It's a cacaphony of unrelated lines and shapes. A disaster.

Where is the tone contrast? Colorwise it's bland and boring.
The Buckminster Fuller thing with the glass in triangular frames theme from the 1967 Montreal, Canada World's Fair - the USA pavillion.

http://www.greatbuildings.com/buildi...t_Expo_67.html

It's so unbelievably outdated and un-unique.

There is no way anybody who has an appreciation of good design is going to buy there.
Kinda jumped into this discussion late but it sounds like somehow the city's at fault because a suddenly new tower has not followed Wright's ethos on design and permissible forms. It's all form and architecture sure, but you're comparing two completely different architectural styles anywhere from 100 to 50 years apart from each other so *of course* they're not going to be perfectly harmonious.

Not denying the amazingness that is Wright, just observing here that to suddenly claim that anything that doesn't fit his style in the entire city should be shunned is a bit extreme.

What's wrong with pristine blue and white soaring to the sky? Though there may be better choices, there are far more worse ones that a building of this scale can take! Besides, look at the trends of skyscrapers - What are most ultra-tall buildings clad in when it comes to color alone regardless of material properties? Black, silver, white / off-white, and various shades of blue, and with some exceptions and older buildings, tan or light brown bricks.

Sorry but I just don't follow the concerns entirely. Chicago has always been very experimental and at the forefront of engineering during numerous eras, whether in masonary load-bearing or in the "Supertall Era". Who's to say it can't strike again with something new and fresh?

About the base. Never been a concern of mine really in terms of it's perceived stability. I mean, I'm sure tons of people thought at one time too that the Eifel Tower was unstable and scary because it's only a skeleton, yet we flock to it today.

I guess because this is a private residence, really the only people who should have confidence are those living in it.

I mean sure the project isn't without fault but you act like it's horrible enough to not even be built and offer no constructive approaches to what would make it better other than a more solid-appearing base like the BD. Again, sorry but I'm all for this project and although the tower will probably look better than the renderings show, the models are still amazing!

Hope there's no offense Graham. Not wronging you at all for helping add greatly to staying on topic and suggesting great ideas to discuss while we wait for the project to move forward. But true as you said the height is great... and there's something I think everyone here can be happy about.

Last edited by The-Real-Link; May 26th, 2007 at 09:07 AM.
The-Real-Link no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 26th, 2007, 09:18 AM   #1510
Hanshin-Tigress
BANNED
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: 和歌山市(Wakayama);Orlando
Posts: 1,737
Likes (Received): 110

What the hell does the taj mahal have to do with the chicago spire? Isnt this thread supposed to be about getting updates on the building?
__________________

Zefire liked this post
Hanshin-Tigress no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 26th, 2007, 09:31 AM   #1511
EnDleSsWaLtZ
Registered User
 
EnDleSsWaLtZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Chicago, La Grange IL
Posts: 457
Likes (Received): 22

Ok this crap has got to stop already. This is just useless bickering thats just going 360 degrees. Where the hell are our moderators and why the hell are there 20 pictures of the Taj Mahal? Close the Thread and lock it and open it up when there's only new legit information ABOUT THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE CHICAGO SPIRE.
EnDleSsWaLtZ no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 26th, 2007, 10:10 AM   #1512
giovani kun
====(^.^)====
 
giovani kun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: 世界 に
Posts: 2,902
Likes (Received): 559

The thread will be closed and we'll have a new one next month ..... named Chicago Spire U/C so the days of this thread are counted down
giovani kun no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 26th, 2007, 12:33 PM   #1513
ZZ-II
I love Skyscrapers
 
ZZ-II's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Near Ingolstadt in Bavaria
Posts: 33,530
Likes (Received): 6560

we won't have a new , the title will be changed!
ZZ-II no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 26th, 2007, 02:45 PM   #1514
Ted Ward
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 248
Likes (Received): 0

Gah - we get some intelligent respectful discussion going and people ask for the thread to be closed - ridiculous.

I've enjoyed reading the discussion on the last few pages, and as for the design of the chicago spire - i quite like it, its certainly grown on me since i first saw it.
Ted Ward no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 26th, 2007, 03:01 PM   #1515
taboe
taboe
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: antwerp
Posts: 1,896
Likes (Received): 380

Quote:
Originally Posted by EnDleSsWaLtZ View Post
Ok this crap has got to stop already. This is just useless bickering thats just going 360 degrees. Where the hell are our moderators and why the hell are there 20 pictures of the Taj Mahal? Close the Thread and lock it and open it up when there's only new legit information ABOUT THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE CHICAGO SPIRE.
This is not a promotion website for the chicago spire, if there's any update to be posted, you can be sure it will be. meanwhile, this is a discussion forum, if you don't care for the current discussion, stay out of it and wait for new updates. What's the harm of discussing architecture in general in order to form a better judgement of the spire?
taboe no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 26th, 2007, 03:18 PM   #1516
taboe
taboe
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: antwerp
Posts: 1,896
Likes (Received): 380

First of all, Graham, Nobody denies that the Taj is beautiful, but check these for example:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi..._Ali_Imran.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...Jamamasjid.JPG
I posted these two, because they are comparable Mogul buildings of the same style and era, that are different, but no less magnificent than the Taj.

To get back on topic,

I think the main thing the spire lacks is a more innovative design, along with a more sober cladding (although it might look better in real life off course). It's the first time such a tall building has this spiral running from base to top, but there are already a lot of 'spiral' buildings, that work better. It's too tall and too thin to pull this off. Take the Turning Torso in Malm÷, it has a similar idea of a spiral, but looks much more elegant and in proportion.
Furthermore, I don't feel it fits in to the skyline of Chicago, nor does it make way for a new cluster of supertalls (I don't see it fitting in in between more robust buildings...).
To improve the design , I would opt for a more subtle outer coating, maybe something white and black, lower it a bit, making it wider and break the boring symmetry by letting it end into one side, maybe into a spire or something.
taboe no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 26th, 2007, 06:44 PM   #1517
graham
BANNED
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Toronto
Posts: 121
Likes (Received): 34

Quote:
Originally Posted by Latoso View Post
Eww! That is horrible. Don't get me wrong, I think the Taj Majal can work, but the location is all wrong. Also, I think it would look better and more imposing in dark stone, perhaps a rainbow granite. I would suspect that if you asked your average Indian who has nothing to gain from the building due to tourism or otherwise and they would agree with me that this building in its current state is god awful.
I generally like good sarcasm. But you failed to add anything thought provoking or positive to balance it out. Also, mocking is not becoming of anybody who claims to be on a planning board.
Rather than your sarcasm, why not actually join in the exchange by attempting the discuss the questions I posed....

1) After looking at the Taj, look at the base of the ChiSpire and tell me what you feel or think.
2) What design elements of the ChiSpire do you like besides the tallness.

I see you made no attempt to contribute anything on those pertinent questions. Being on a planning board I would think you could provide stimulating answers. Am I expecting too much?

Please understand. I only posted those pics of a man made wonder of the world as a referece point on beauty in architecture that we could all draw from when deciding if the ChiSpire is worthy for the great city of Chicago.
Some times in our busy lives we only focus on our local geographic areas and we can loose our frame of reference on truley international things like architecture.
This phenomena may account for some of those who think the ChiSpire is beautiful.
If ChiSpire really is beautiful, no worries becaause what detractors say will have no bearing in the end. So no anger necessary. Right?.
__________________

Zefire liked this post
graham no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 26th, 2007, 06:59 PM   #1518
graham
BANNED
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Toronto
Posts: 121
Likes (Received): 34

Quote:
Originally Posted by The-Real-Link View Post
Kinda jumped into this discussion late but it sounds like somehow the city's at fault because a suddenly new tower has not followed Wright's ethos on design and permissible forms. It's all form and architecture sure, but you're comparing two completely different architectural styles anywhere from 100 to 50 years apart from each other so *of course* they're not going to be perfectly harmonious.

Not denying the amazingness that is Wright, just observing here that to suddenly claim that anything that doesn't fit his style in the entire city should be shunned is a bit extreme.

What's wrong with pristine blue and white soaring to the sky? Though there may be better choices, there are far more worse ones that a building of this scale can take! Besides, look at the trends of skyscrapers - What are most ultra-tall buildings clad in when it comes to color alone regardless of material properties? Black, silver, white / off-white, and various shades of blue, and with some exceptions and older buildings, tan or light brown bricks.

Sorry but I just don't follow the concerns entirely. Chicago has always been very experimental and at the forefront of engineering during numerous eras, whether in masonary load-bearing or in the "Supertall Era". Who's to say it can't strike again with something new and fresh?

About the base. Never been a concern of mine really in terms of it's perceived stability. I mean, I'm sure tons of people thought at one time too that the Eifel Tower was unstable and scary because it's only a skeleton, yet we flock to it today.

I guess because this is a private residence, really the only people who should have confidence are those living in it.

I mean sure the project isn't without fault but you act like it's horrible enough to not even be built and offer no constructive approaches to what would make it better other than a more solid-appearing base like the BD. Again, sorry but I'm all for this project and although the tower will probably look better than the renderings show, the models are still amazing!

Hope there's no offense Graham. Not wronging you at all for helping add greatly to staying on topic and suggesting great ideas to discuss while we wait for the project to move forward. But true as you said the height is great... and there's something I think everyone here can be happy about.
Yes - you are absolutely right. The city is at fault for approving a lackluster piece of architecture. Nobody else is at fault.
I'm not saying that Calatrave needs to do anything like what Wright did.
Of course not. He's Calatrava. He does his own thing of course.
But that does not mean he is exempt from producing good design.
I'm saying that Wrights work , as does so many other great designers, contains a harmonious combination of design elements that result in great architecture. I'm claiming that the ChiSpire shows no evidence of being great architecture. I explain why....his design elements are discordant and the ideas are old. The materials look cheap and the colours are femenine. I could go on but I said it all before already.

You say Chicago wants new and fresh - right, why not? But I provided a link that shows his theme for the lobby is 40 years old!!

You also say "Who's to say it can't strike again with something new and fresh?" I say, yes, something fresh. Strike away.
But the lobby is stale.
You asked for constructive approaches on what would make it better.
Although this does nothing to offer a sense of stability and security for the base, and just as an example, since I am not a designer or an architect, I'll describe something that he could have done with the lobby area that is ultra new and fresh and yet still is respectful of the city and it's great traditions.......
When I was in Chicago, the architecture jumped out and hit me over the head. It was stunning and beautiful. One of the things was wood.
All sorts of georgous dark wood trim incorporated in the older designs. Traditional, local materials, beautiful colours, great craftsmanship. This is an element of Chicago design that had been done better than anywhere else in North America.
Ok, having said that... there is a brand new technology wherby natural wood is compressed with extrememly high pressure and it results in a material that is extremely strong ( almost as strong as steel!), variable in colour, durable and beautiful. It looks a bit different than normal wood but it's still a beautiful, superior strength material at the edge of materials technology. Here is a great opportunity for a choice at the Chispire. This could pay homage to all the great works that form the bed and the very possiblity for the ChiSpire to exist. This material could provide nice tone and colour contrast against the light colour theme he seems to prefer.
Just my idea. But if a nobody like me can come up with an idea that provides an improved design element for this Chicago building, as we see it in the render, but the great Calatrava could only regurgitate a beleagured Buckminster Fuller idea, well then, something seems amiss.
What? Was Buckminster Fuller born and raised in Chicago or something?
__________________

Zefire liked this post

Last edited by graham; May 27th, 2007 at 01:01 AM.
graham no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 26th, 2007, 07:37 PM   #1519
graham
BANNED
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Toronto
Posts: 121
Likes (Received): 34

Quote:
Originally Posted by taboe View Post
First of all, Graham, Nobody denies that the Taj is beautiful, but check these for example: see pics above
I posted these two, because they are comparable Mogul buildings of the same style and era, that are different, but no less magnificent than the Taj.
To get back on topic,

I think the main thing the spire lacks is a more innovative design, along with a more sober cladding (although it might look better in real life off course). It's the first time such a tall building has this spiral running from base to top, but there are already a lot of 'spiral' buildings, that work better. It's too tall and too thin to pull this off. Take the Turning Torso in Malm÷, it has a similar idea of a spiral, but looks much more elegant and in proportion.
Furthermore, I don't feel it fits in to the skyline of Chicago, nor does it make way for a new cluster of supertalls (I don't see it fitting in in between more robust buildings...).
To improve the design , I would opt for a more subtle outer coating, maybe something white and black, lower it a bit, making it wider and break the boring symmetry by letting it end into one side, maybe into a spire or something.
Thanks for the pics, taboe!
Yes, beauties like the Taj.
Thanks for delving into some meaty issues on the building.
You hit on some crucial points, like the cladding, elegance and proportion, and discordance with the environment. Thankyou for noticing. I was beginning to think I was the only one.
I like your ideas for improvement too.
__________________

Zefire liked this post
graham no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 26th, 2007, 09:16 PM   #1520
graham
BANNED
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Toronto
Posts: 121
Likes (Received): 34

Turns out B. Fuller has some connection with Chicago.
He was born in New England and went to Harvard.
He became destitute and lived in poverty at one time in Chicago.
Then he turned it around and became a sucessful designer among other things. Inventor of the geodesic dome.
Then Fuller taught from 1959 at Southern Illinois University Carbondale as an assistant professor, receiving full professorship in 1968 in the School of Art and Design through 1970. Working as a designer, scientist, developer, and writer, for many years he lectured around the world on design.

So he does have some connection with Chicago!
Is this why Calatrava chose to use one of his ideas?
Maybe he even taught Calatrava!
Seems a rather slim justification though.
What do you think?
__________________

Zefire liked this post

Last edited by graham; May 27th, 2007 at 01:04 AM.
graham 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 07:10 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

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

tech management by Sysprosium