Really? Because what you've shared isn't much, certainly not enough to justify your animosity. And the way you've written about Gang honestly makes it sound like you've got some kind of vendetta against her.

^^, and ^... obviously, you guys are not architects. Yes, Jeanne has the most influence over the 'decorating' and the massing, and the bustle...

My critique on the previous page speaks clearly for itself. I have juried competitions and thesis projects at the GSD at Harvard, UIC, and IIT and have also taught at all 3 of those schools among others - I think I can state with confidence that I know how to give a valid critique. If you all want to defend Ms. Gang's proposed tower, that's fine, but I would suggest you focus on the actual work, the shortcomings I have pointed out, and not on accusing me on being on some sort of silly vendetta...

^^^ THIS. It's not the critique itself, but the somewhat condescending tone.

ok. fair enough. but you are proving my point... can you please repost my "somewhat condescending tone" remarks regarding the design?

I am less concerned with the massing and more concerned with the way the building meets the street. A 'green' rationale for the frustum design is admittedly a poor justification but aesthetically speaking it is certainly an interesting and cohesive way to approach the site constraints. Creating some visual separation along the north and south face I think is essential due to the size of the site. The frustum columns create that separation quite well while still presenting as a unified whole with a logical progression both in the shifting of those columns and in their stepped variation. However it's quite obvious that all those odd angles and the shifting of each column is going to cause some odd spaces at the street and it will be interesting to see if some of that is resolved over the next year or so.

Haven't they start construction yet?

no.

not even close.

construction isn't anticipated to start until october '16, according to the developer's timeline.

It's not zero-lot-line? Certainly looks like it. But to the contrary, when an existing building has a blank wall on the lot line, it's the duty of the next building to crowd it and steal the blank wall's sunlight.

And not a flaw of the building itself, just a failure to fully relate to it's surroundings. I still haven't seen the relation to LSE park, lower Wacker, or how pedestrian access from lower LSE to upper Wacker will be handled. That could end up being the least of the issues.

i see what you mean about "duty"..but this is not a fatal flaw...easy enough to fix after review, but we're really not talking about THAT much SF of blank wall remaining.

it's like blaming your grandfather for your bald spot. at some point, just have to accept it as not that big of a deal.

Happily. With added subtext.

SUBTEXT: I don't know why it looks like this, but I'm sure there's not a good reason for it.

SUBTEXT: (To be honest, I'm not entirely sure what you're trying to say here. I don't think most people take issue with the base, so to assert that it's the "worst thing about it" is "saying a lot" because it means there's really not much wrong with it. Call me crazy, but I doubt that's what your implying. Semantically, though, the alternative doesn't make much sense, so we're left with what comes across as a vague but ill-expressed dig.)

SUBTEXT: Finally, someone else with a valid opinion because it is like mine.

SUBTEXT: Claiming that only unfavorable critiques of the design are objective allows me to cast its supporters as irrational and sycophantic.

SUBTEXT: I am basing my opinions on assumptions, hearsay, and/or unrecorded presentations you must trust I am accurately and objectively recalling. I am trying to hide the fact that I don't know what her justification is for the form, but it doesn't matter because it's probably "another one-liner."

Your critique doesn't speak for itself. That's the problem. Also:

http://media2.giphy.com/media/pgcVG1K7YZG9O/giphy.gif

I've witnessed architects far more highly regarded than you participate in the masturbatory shitshow known as the "architecture critique," so don't try to trot out your pedigree as though it confers upon you a cloak of immunity. Take your own advice and allow your critique to speak for itself.

Oh damn. ^^^
:stunned:
:whip:

seriously, no architectural work is beyond criticism, (I usually tell my students that the most damning critique of all is to say a project is beyond criticism)...

when you tire of attacking me personally, maybe you can take another look at this tower's design and find a justification other then it's cool and develop a dialogue on the concept (or lack thereof)...

One forumer mentioned that the interlocking frustums were successful in 'breaking-up' the wide lengths of the north and south elevations (one of the few critiques with some sort of rational), but the desire of this is debatable, and, of course, there are infinite ways of doing this if so desired.

So, why can't we have cool tower with unusual form making that somehow references something like:

structure
program
context
history
'green' design
or something else entirely, but something

this has nothing to do with Studio Gang or Jeanne personally, it has to do with architecture that has substance, validity, and as Venturi so clearly explained, complexity and contradiction...

(Ch.G., I eagerly await your subtext translation!)

I hear she got the idea by holding some cigarettes in her hand on a table.

only if she was sitting in bKL's offices at the time...

LOL! nice one.

i heard it was a late night at the studio gang offices during a deadline crunch and they ordered a whole mess of chinese food.

after the meal, someone started playing around with the empty food cartons.........

look more like three white castle fries bitten at different lengths

(reference)

ahh, yes, LOL ^ sorry, I missed the reference... (everyone should click on this link who's interested in the design of Wanda)

Looks like wanda vista is up on bidclerk

I'll bid one dollar!

http://i.imgur.com/EGSveFZ.jpg

^Ha.. Bidclerk is relatively useless. The majority of their information seems to come from SSP. Rarely do they have actual bid documents for projects of this size. Remember, Bidclerk had a file on the Spire...

Peace on earth and goodwill to men! Way too much testosterone for this time of year on this thread.😊

Agreed. Merry Christmas, everyone. Thanks for all the effort you guys put into this forum. :cheers:

It requires a certain amount of arrogance to conclude that because I reject your criticism of a particular building, I must reject all criticism of that building. In fact, unless you breeze past my posts--and, hey, it's okay if you do; animated reaction gifs aren't for everyone--it's pretty clear that, as a frequent producer of it, I really have no problem with criticism. What I do have a problem with is lazy criticism, ill-informed criticism, and snark or prejudice masquerading as criticism.

The funny thing is I haven't even really expressed my opinion of the design one way or the other. I don't think free association in the absence of drawings, more renderings, and some literature from the architect carries much weight. Obviously, you disagree. If your opinion is so weighty, then, surely you can expect (and hopefully withstand!) treatment similar to that which you yourself are dispensing, because, in doing so, you--unlike Ms. Gang--have provided more than enough fodder for me to confidently stake a position and take aim.

Now, concerning personal attacks, I suggest that you shouldn't invite me to consider your credentials if you cry foul when I find them wanting.

Exactly... We have so little to base a critique on.

If an undergraduate came to you with a handful of glossy renderings and little else, I think you'd have to tell them it was unacceptable to present that way. Elevations, floorplans, sections, and usually simplified diagrams are necessary to tell the story of a building visually, supplemented by the designer's own explanation.

You have a very Chicago School/Miesian perspective on architecture that everything must have a rationale. I agree with this to some extent, but it sounds like we've heard the beginnings of a rationale from Gang. The elevator core can't sit in the center of the building. There are also very different programs in the building, residential and hotel. From there, I can see the genesis of a three tower scheme. We also don't know the patterns of room sizes from Wanda. The typical hotel plan is to repeat the the same floorplan ad nauseam, but maybe Wanda wanted a greater number of luxury suites or something that necessitated a variety of floorplate sizes. I'm obviously filling in here, but I am confident that Gang will be explaining this scheme a great deal in the coming months.

Ch.G., you amuse me...

i should add, that your encouragement for the fans of these threads to wait for more info before making a judgement is very, very laudable...

ardecila, I'm eager to hear what beginnings of Jeanne's "rationale" you heard?

Bummer we have to wait that long, hopefully another supertall project pops up in the mean time.

Got to see some early plans recently. The landscape concepts are very impressive... Magellan is considering improvements to the riverwalk, a link back to the LSE park and improvements to the Upper Wacker "stub". The Field Blvd "pass thru" will be a very cool space.

Since this is an early stage, it's not clear to what extent CDOT will go along with the landscape plans that involve the public way... like the awkward basic streetlights that are installed around the edge of the LSE park.

Also: the fourth "short frustum" on the east that everyone is criticizing actually holds long-span ballroom spaces and other hotel amenities, including a roof deck with pool. Because of the long span, it's inefficient to bury those spaces inside of a tower.

The curtain wall on this thing will be a delight, with a lot of overlapping, honeycomb patterns, etc.

^ that all sounds promising, thanks for the insider info.

^^If this plan somehow better tied together the most upper wacker with the riverwalk, then they could build a tower out of macaroni noodles and glue and I would call it a masterpiece. Maybe cut away from the many lanes of highway...

I once heard about a plan, maybe by SOM...maybe by Gange, to reclaim the space on the lowest wacker at the river walk level, enclose it, and make it a farmers market, or artisan market (think SF ferry building) along the river. Does anyone remember that?

^ Was Gensler. Magellan's plan is not as ambitious but would still be a huge improvement over the status quo.

Forgot to mention... Per the original SOM master plan for Lakeshore East, Upper Wacker would be linked THROUGH Wanda to Waterside Drive behind The Regatta to finally allow for an upper-level roadway loop (wait til the NIMBYs find out!). Pedestrians would also be allowed through, and to the walkway behind Tides.

Ardecila, thanks for the teasers!

Exciting indeed to think about East Wacker being dressed up. Its often hurt my eyes as well as my brain to think about how and when there could be attempts to rectify the concrete ramps that make up the roadway. Maybe it will just be lipstick on a pig at best but anything that lessens the contrast between it and the dignified West Wacker would be very welcome so that the contrast wouldn't be so glaring.

That's just wacky.

It would be pretty great if they could fix up the river walk east of Michigan. If the mayor wants to put the city's full weight behind this project, they'll need to make it more accessible. That would be good for all of LSE.

Some interior renderings

http://i2.wp.com/aasarchitecture.com...size=474%2C266

http://i0.wp.com/aasarchitecture.com...size=474%2C266

http://aasarchitecture.com/2014/12/w...udio-gang.html

Well , that's true. For example, how to get to Navy pier form LSE? There is no direct access to LSD, LSE needs to be more accessible.

You go down under Wacker at ground level across to the river, and you are on the river walk - pretty easy. (you go under LSD)

The river walk, of course, that is easy. Can somebody tell me what are they planning to do with the empty north/ east lot just by lake shore dirve? After Wanda Visat this is going to be the only empty lot left in LSE.

It'll be developed just like all the other lots have been developed. That space is large enough for several buildings. You'll just have to be patient for the next few years and wait and see what's proposed.

Someone on ssc made a sketch up of this project. Feel free to download this on google earth, and see it at different angles. :tup:

https://3dwarehouse.sketchup.com/mod...c-a376d2480ce1

Cool, I might 3D print this.

I hear that there might be some serious budget issues with this design (shock)...

New AT&T bars advertisement? :P

Translation is that Jim Loewenberg is having some issues of course. I hope the Chinese gang (see what I did there?) can talk him down from any severe VE......

Hey, any word on "O", btw? Still up for a spring groundbreaking? I'd heard there was yet more shifting around of the hotel flags...........

Chicago seems to fail to build half the cool projects that are proposed. It would be really sad if this didn't go through or got shortened/made into a box.

Fingers crossed that doesn't happen.

Well, it's not even anywhere near VE yet.... what I heard was it had a specific budget (somewhat generous, I think) and the current design came in somewhere in the neighborhood of 90% (!) over with structure being the biggest overage...

as far as "O", you are correct, sir... all I know is they are still trying to nail down the flags...

90% over 900 million dollers?! :sly:

Quick, someone send them the Waldorf Astoria plans I'm sure that will fit their budget!