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 August 22nd, 2007, 12:19 AM   #21
Danillo
National Parks Artist
 
Danillo's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Green Bay, WI
Posts: 981
Likes (Received): 220

I don't mind it, but if they even move further along towards developing it, I'd hope they would find a more elegant way to do the antennae on top. But as observation/tranmission towers go... not too bad.
Danillo no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old August 22nd, 2007, 12:51 AM   #22
chukchi
Registered User
 
chukchi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Orlando/Chicago
Posts: 2,726
Likes (Received): 17

It would be nice to do a render with Spire , Trump Tower, etc. It is interesting to see how it would look with those buildings.
And personally to me it is not that bad. Actually, I quite like it
chukchi no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 22nd, 2007, 12:57 AM   #23
Dale
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 9,177
Likes (Received): 5505

Quote:
Originally Posted by rgolch View Post
LOL. This will never be an Eiffel Tower.

Personally, I don't think it's hideous, but it's also certainly not gorgeous. I haven't made up my mind if I think it would be a good addition, or not. It's certainly worlds above the CN Tower, which basically looks like a filthy pole in person.
The CN Tower looked dated 20 years ago. How can something 1,815' feet tall look so clunky ?
Dale está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old August 22nd, 2007, 01:08 AM   #24
Flubnut
4th Level of Hades
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Chicago
Posts: 709
Likes (Received): 5

Quote:
Originally Posted by cbotnyse View Post
sole purpose? I can think of at least 3 more functions this building would have that are of far greater importance. Saying this is built solely for tourists is foolish.
It can be used for many things, I'm sure. But even based on those uses and it's location, it still leans towards 'tourist trap' to me. I guess I'm just spoiled with the Sears and JHB. They pull off much of the same stuff, while also remaining an integrated part of real city life. Just my opinion, of course.

As for the actual design: eh. I would hope for something a little more unique and striking, but it's not terrible either. For the sake of discussion, are there tower designs that people think are better? I happen to like buildings much more than obs/comm towers, but perhaps I just haven't seen any really good ones?
Flubnut no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 22nd, 2007, 02:36 AM   #25
cbotnyse
Chicago Enthusiast
 
cbotnyse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Chicago IL
Posts: 2,560
Likes (Received): 26

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flubnut View Post
It can be used for many things, I'm sure. But even based on those uses and it's location, it still leans towards 'tourist trap' to me. I guess I'm just spoiled with the Sears and JHB. They pull off much of the same stuff, while also remaining an integrated part of real city life. Just my opinion, of course.
I understand what you're saying but it would have a much more important function than just an observation deck. And "tourist trap" is such a negative word. I encourage anything that promotes tourism to our city.
cbotnyse no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 22nd, 2007, 02:47 AM   #26
vancouverite/to'er
Registered User
 
vancouverite/to'er's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Toronto
Posts: 2,015
Likes (Received): 24

Quote:
Originally Posted by rgolch View Post
LOL. This will never be an Eiffel Tower.

Personally, I don't think it's hideous, but it's also certainly not gorgeous. I haven't made up my mind if I think it would be a good addition, or not. It's certainly worlds above the CN Tower, which basically looks like a filthy pole in person.

I know we're all entitled to our own opinions but I don't think yours is a well educated one... that mediocre observation tower looking better than the CN tower?, c'mon...have you seen the CN tower with the new LED lighting system....thats undoubtedly something you should take into consideration when making this judgment
IMO this tower will be good in providing a public observation deck to view the whole city however it looks revolting compared to other projects in Chicago and I believe if built it will cheapen the look of the (Fordham?) Spire.
vancouverite/to'er no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 22nd, 2007, 03:11 AM   #27
Luvin it in 60660
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 19
Likes (Received): 0

This thing as currently "designed" looks like an air traffic control tower on steroids. For that matter, it looks like it was designed by a concrete salesman and certainly not by anyone who has a clue about design. The proportions are way off. These type of towers are tricky at best: all structure with very little habitable space. Since it was already mentioned, the Eiffel Tower does it best, the CN Tower at least has some grace to it. The ridiculously small base looks squashed as if by a giant cattle prod; in addition, the location is simply out of the question. I'm not sure this would look good anywhere but least of all on the lakefront.
Luvin it in 60660 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 22nd, 2007, 05:27 AM   #28
Azn_chi_boi
BANNED
 
Azn_chi_boi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Bridgeport + Chinatown, Chicago
Posts: 4,218
Likes (Received): 12

We should get a giant Chicago Flag to be put on the pole!

Looks simplisitc (but a little too simplistic). Look like, not effort is put in for this design. And this thing will be on the Lakefront? At Least turn this into a tall wind mill and put it at Navy Pier.
Azn_chi_boi no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 22nd, 2007, 05:52 AM   #29
PrintersRowBoiler
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 650
Likes (Received): 1

Is this even permitted along the lake (east of LSD)? I don't hate this, but it does not belong on the lakefront. After rejecting this, the city should also consider taking out the "original" McCormick Place.
PrintersRowBoiler no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 22nd, 2007, 06:11 AM   #30
Dale
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 9,177
Likes (Received): 5505

Quote:
Originally Posted by vancouverite/to'er View Post
I know we're all entitled to our own opinions but I don't think yours is a well educated one... that mediocre observation tower looking better than the CN tower?, c'mon...have you seen the CN tower with the new LED lighting system....thats undoubtedly something you should take into consideration when making this judgment
IMO this tower will be good in providing a public observation deck to view the whole city however it looks revolting compared to other projects in Chicago and I believe if built it will cheapen the look of the (Fordham?) Spire.
Consider me among the Great Unwashed. LED or no, CN Tower is mediocre and ungainly. It was even mildewed (the radome) last tiem I was in TO.
Dale está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old August 22nd, 2007, 08:21 AM   #31
rgolch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 518
Likes (Received): 73

Quote:
Originally Posted by vancouverite/to'er View Post
I know we're all entitled to our own opinions but I don't think yours is a well educated one... that mediocre observation tower looking better than the CN tower?, c'mon...have you seen the CN tower with the new LED lighting system....thats undoubtedly something you should take into consideration when making this judgment
IMO this tower will be good in providing a public observation deck to view the whole city however it looks revolting compared to other projects in Chicago and I believe if built it will cheapen the look of the (Fordham?) Spire.
I don't know what you mean by uneducated. I was in TO in 2005, and personally thought the CN tower was an eyesore. Obviously, there are those who would disagree with me. It's a mater of personal taste.

I've been thinking about it, and have wondered why they wouldn't have tried to create a more interesting shape. Obviously, certain non-highrise towers can really make a wonderful impact. Notable examples do include the Space Needle, and obviously the Eiffel Tower. Even the stratosphere in Vegas is not terrible.
rgolch no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 22nd, 2007, 09:29 AM   #32
edsg25
BANNED
 
edsg25's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 9,195
Likes (Received): 105

Quote:
Originally Posted by PrintersRowBoiler View Post
Is this even permitted along the lake (east of LSD)? I don't hate this, but it does not belong on the lakefront. After rejecting this, the city should also consider taking out the "original" McCormick Place.
wouldn't that also warrant the destruction of the LSD-Stevenson interchange for similiar reasons???
edsg25 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 22nd, 2007, 09:36 AM   #33
xXFallenXx
Registered User
 
xXFallenXx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Temecula, CA
Posts: 3,859
Likes (Received): 170

hell, i think its ok. nothing wrong with another 2000 footer.
(although i dont live in chicago so i dont have to look at it everyday)
xXFallenXx no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 22nd, 2007, 07:28 PM   #34
GuitarAce
Turn it WHAT?!
 
GuitarAce's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Clinton, Iowa
Posts: 37
Likes (Received): 0

A few things:

Necessity - Since this is the second "proposed" broadcast tower to pop up recently, it would lead me to believe that this is something that is going to happen eventually.

Design - I think this design looks pretty good, and I like the straight lines to contrast with the tapering appearance of CS. Since the heights are similar, I like seeing something with a different silhouette.

Location - At first I didn't like the location, because it kind of sticks out like a sore thumb in that area. However, (being a skyscraper purist) after further thought I like the fact that it is detached from the "real" skyscrapers. It's as if the Chicago skyline is saying to the world - "There's a difference between skyscrapers, and skyscrapers with spires, and broadcast towers". Also, it will inevitably attract tourists; so it'll be good to have this down around the museum campus area, at a vantage point where they can get a full view of the most magnificent skyline in the world.

Certainty - If the developer can crunch its numbers and end up making a profit, it WILL happen (in some form, at some location); so this one looks like a pretty good option to me.
GuitarAce no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 22nd, 2007, 07:57 PM   #35
Loopy
Chicago, USA
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 777
Likes (Received): 0

..

Last edited by Loopy; May 18th, 2010 at 08:43 PM.
Loopy no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 22nd, 2007, 08:49 PM   #36
Chicagophotoshop
Chicago Photographer
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Chicago, IL USA
Posts: 2,832
Likes (Received): 14

Quote:
Originally Posted by GuitarAce View Post
A few things:

Necessity - Since this is the second "proposed" broadcast tower to pop up recently, it would lead me to believe that this is something that is going to happen eventually.

Design - I think this design looks pretty good, and I like the straight lines to contrast with the tapering appearance of CS. Since the heights are similar, I like seeing something with a different silhouette.

Location - At first I didn't like the location, because it kind of sticks out like a sore thumb in that area. However, (being a skyscraper purist) after further thought I like the fact that it is detached from the "real" skyscrapers. It's as if the Chicago skyline is saying to the world - "There's a difference between skyscrapers, and skyscrapers with spires, and broadcast towers". Also, it will inevitably attract tourists; so it'll be good to have this down around the museum campus area, at a vantage point where they can get a full view of the most magnificent skyline in the world.

Certainty - If the developer can crunch its numbers and end up making a profit, it WILL happen (in some form, at some location); so this one looks like a pretty good option to me.
what he said
__________________
Portfolio | Twitter | Facebook | Flickr | Gear
| SmugMugPro
Chicagophotoshop no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 24th, 2007, 11:58 PM   #37
wierdo_and_me
BANNED
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 62
Likes (Received): 2

wait this building is way too ugly to be built here in Chicago. Don't build it!
wierdo_and_me no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 25th, 2007, 02:16 AM   #38
PrintersRowBoiler
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 650
Likes (Received): 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by edsg25 View Post
wouldn't that also warrant the destruction of the LSD-Stevenson interchange for similiar reasons???
Plus Lake Shore Drive going through Jackson Park, The Water Reclamation Plant, and Soldier Field.

I don't mind any of these in the area that should be preserved for parkland because they all serve a purpose for the people, just like the parks. It was unfeasible to relocate any of these away from the lakefront. There is no good reason why a private firm should get to build a tower for profit in the people's land when it could be shifted west onto a surface parking lot.

I just never have liked McCormick because it leaves such a narrow strip of land between it and the lake for such a long distance and the building is so boring and dark from the lake side. Now, if they were to develop Northerly Island to a nice park and built a nice pedestrian bridge to it, that would help, but still wouldnt make me satisfied. I think Daley has always expressed his desire to take it out. In fact (correct me if I am wrong) it is considered in the Central Area Plan.
PrintersRowBoiler no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 25th, 2007, 02:21 AM   #39
harvesterofsorrows
BANNED
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 642
Likes (Received): 113

Oh man...
harvesterofsorrows no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 25th, 2007, 05:19 PM   #40
cheeps
BANNED
 
cheeps's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Chicago
Posts: 282
Likes (Received): 112

If and that's a big IF this thing needs to be built on the lake front, then why not make it an artistic beauty??? Why not have a noted architect/artist design it, such Gehry or Calatrava and many more.
cheeps no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

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 04:51 PM.


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