SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum//index.php)
-   Skyscraper & Highrise Construction (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum//forumdisplay.php?f=103)
-   -   CHICAGO | BMO Tower | 727 FT | 50 FLOORS (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum//showthread.php?t=224752)

SpireGuy May 26, 2017 12:34 AM

If developers want to build in Chicago, they should be forced at times to innovate. If we banded together and learned to influence policy, we could require developers to be more proactive in designing skyscrapers in Chicago. Enough with the blue-green glass boxes with silver mullions/screens. One day this boom will be over and hopefully we'll have something interesting go up at Union Station and around the city before it ends. Meet for drinks in the loop afterwork, anyone?::cheers:

marothisu May 26, 2017 12:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SpireGuy (Post 7815630)
If developers want to build in Chicago, they should be forced at times to innovate. If we banded together and learned to influence policy, we could require developers to be more proactive in designing skyscrapers in Chicago. Enough with the blue-green glass boxes with silver mullions/screens. One day this boom will be over and hopefully we'll have something interesting go up at Union Station and around the city before it ends.

You must not have passed your entry level business courses. But in a perfect world, sure. But we don't live in a perfect world.

left of center May 26, 2017 2:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright (Post 7815393)
THIS.

You all are freaking out over nothing, this isn't even close to a real design at this point. This is something slapped together by interns to submit with a proposal to demonstrate the massing and program of the site. None of these buildings will look like they do in this "design" once Jim gets his hands on it.

With that in mind, the program is far superior to anything else I've seen proposed for the site. The original union station design is totally outmoded today and any attempt to complete a building with that kind of light court massing would end disastrously. The two tower scheme is much much better and, with a creative flair and quality materials, could turn out on Par with Hearst tower in NYC. If anything the beige towers shown in the rendering are intentionally boring and understated in order to avoid ruffling feathers during the bidding process. I have a feeling that what we will actually see is something much more adventurous that will contrast with the original design rather than attempt to awkwardly blend with it.

Chill out.

I certainly hope you are right. Union Station is a Chicago icon. To build those twin beige turds on it would be an utter disgrace.

I know the building was originally built to accommodate a tower above it, but do they really need to do that in this case? Why not just leave Union Station as is, and just add 10 more stories to the residential tower on Canal?

Anyone got any ideas on floor count/heights of these towers?

Notyrview May 26, 2017 3:22 AM

Unbelievably shitty

OhioGuy May 26, 2017 12:10 PM

Union Station plans fail to live up to lofty rhetoric

By Blair Kamin Contact Reporter
Chicago Tribune
May 25, 2017, 8:03 PM


Quote:

Almost apologetically, backers of the just-announced plans for redeveloping Chicago's Union Station are characterizing their proposals as preliminary and conceptual. Apologies are indeed in order. The drawings fail to live up to the lofty rhetoric that Amtrak executives and Mayor Rahm Emanuel mouthed Thursday about turning the historic station and its surroundings into a vibrant urban center, complete with "new and dynamic" additions to Chicago's skyline.

The problem is not a lack of architectural refinement. It's a lack of strong concepts. There's no bold idea to signal Union Station's transformation from a workaday rail hub to a festive gathering place.

A planned food hall with the station is dull with a capital "D." The high-rises as presented are mere placeholders. Raised plazas and terraces — the obligatory package of public green space, supposedly easily accessible — are unlikely to lure people from the sidewalks.

To be sure, there are promising kernels in the designs prepared by Chicago's Goettsch Partners for Riverside Investment & Development, the hometown developer Amtrak chose to carry out this $1 billion-plus project. But what we are seeing suggests that the financially struggling railroad, which has tried before to redevelop Union Station, put a premium on getting things done rather than getting them done right.

sentinel May 26, 2017 12:39 PM

Awful.

scalziand May 26, 2017 11:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HomrQT (Post 7814996)
What the fuck are these bastards trying to do to Union Station!?!?
:hell::hell::hell::hell::hell::hell::hell::hell::hell::hell::hell::hell::hell::hell:

Trying to Pan-Am it on a smaller scale.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-B-fiHnubNG...0/pan+am+1.jpg

BVictor1 May 27, 2017 12:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by scalziand (Post 7816548)
Trying to Pan-Am it on a smaller scale.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-B-fiHnubNG...0/pan+am+1.jpg

This is fucking awesome though.

denizen467 May 27, 2017 4:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright (Post 7815393)
THIS.

You all are freaking out over nothing, this isn't even close to a real design at this point. This is something slapped together by interns to submit with a proposal to demonstrate the massing and program of the site. None of these buildings will look like they do in this "design" once Jim gets his hands on it.

With that in mind, the program is far superior to anything else I've seen proposed for the site. The original union station design is totally outmoded today and any attempt to complete a building with that kind of light court massing would end disastrously. The two tower scheme is much much better and, with a creative flair and quality materials, could turn out on Par with Hearst tower in NYC. If anything the beige towers shown in the rendering are intentionally boring and understated in order to avoid ruffling feathers during the bidding process. I have a feeling that what we will actually see is something much more adventurous that will contrast with the original design rather than attempt to awkwardly blend with it.

Chill out.

This. Eloquently stated. Including Ned B's comment. The selection was about developers and economics, with designs being placeholders. Keep in mind architecture firms are willing to spend only so much time when donating proposals for free, especially when the "jury" isn't even going to be judging on design.

People need to inhale some burgers and beers over the Memorial Day weekend and forget about this for several months, until real designs come out. The thread could even be locked for a while, except that discussion of the massing and overall program and other things is legitimate (though as someone said, the new transit center will be kept).

tm30 May 27, 2017 12:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by denizen467 (Post 7816726)
This. Eloquently stated. Including Ned B's comment. The selection was about developers and economics, with designs being placeholders. Keep in mind architecture firms are willing to spend only so much time when donating proposals for free, especially when the "jury" isn't even going to be judging on design.

People need to inhale some burgers and beers over the Memorial Day weekend and forget about this for several months, until real designs come out. The thread could even be locked for a while, except that discussion of the massing and overall program and other things is legitimate (though as someone said, the new transit center will be kept).


So if the selection was based on economics, what makes you think the final designs aren't going to be based on economics? And SOM didn't exactly phone in their proposal. Not sure I'm as sanguine as others about this.

pilsenarch May 27, 2017 1:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by denizen467 (Post 7816726)
This. Eloquently stated. Including Ned B's comment. The selection was about developers and economics, with designs being placeholders. Keep in mind architecture firms are willing to spend only so much time when donating proposals for free, especially when the "jury" isn't even going to be judging on design.

People need to inhale some burgers and beers over the Memorial Day weekend and forget about this for several months, until real designs come out. The thread could even be locked for a while, except that discussion of the massing and overall program and other things is legitimate (though as someone said, the new transit center will be kept).

There is never an excuse for bad design.

You might *hope* that the current designs are only 'placeholders', but there does not appear to be any basis to assume this...

Regardless, the worst part of this scheme, the suburban towers sprouting atop the waiting room, appear to have the 'Landmarks' department influence all over it... those frustrated architects love to do everything they can to 'blend' everything in... anything that tries to enhance the historical context by contrasting with it immediately gets shot down...

Clarkkent2420 May 27, 2017 4:15 PM

#

denizen467 May 27, 2017 5:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pilsenarch (Post 7816868)
You might *hope* that the current designs are only 'placeholders', but there does not appear to be any basis to assume this...

Generally. But not in this case, in which it happens I have factual basis, though unfortunately one I am prevented from elaborating on.

emathias May 27, 2017 5:47 PM

It'd be interesting to see a gigantic onion dome planted on top of Union Station, with the top portion being gathering glass to full illuminate the Great Hall, but with the bulk of the onion being usable space. Absurdist? Quite possibly. But pretty dramatic, to be sure!

The Pimp May 28, 2017 4:02 AM

Wow! This really sucks.

ardecila May 30, 2017 12:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by denizen467 (Post 7816726)
This. Eloquently stated. Including Ned B's comment. The selection was about developers and economics, with designs being placeholders. Keep in mind architecture firms are willing to spend only so much time when donating proposals for free, especially when the "jury" isn't even going to be judging on design.

People need to inhale some burgers and beers over the Memorial Day weekend and forget about this for several months, until real designs come out. The thread could even be locked for a while, except that discussion of the massing and overall program and other things is legitimate (though as someone said, the new transit center will be kept).

As much as I like the aesthetic and the detailing of the transit center, the urban design sucks. It's a huge swath of concrete at one of the city's most bustling intersections. It offers no landscaping, no retail, and almost nothing else to engage pedestrians. From the neighborhood standpoint, it's about as engaging as a Jewel parking lot. Is it better than the parking lot it replaced? Sure. Is it ideal? Hell no.

It would be a breath of fresh air if they built something like that at Woodfield Mall (and Canadian/European cities DO build similar stuff in their suburbs) but in the heart of the city it just seems inappropriate, so I always hoped and kinda expected it to be temporary.

As for the "millions" spent building it - a big chunk of that was spent on underground construction to build the Pedway connection, which will continue to be useful even after the block is redeveloped.

The Goettsch proposal as shown leaves a lot to be desired, but I like that they plan to do away with the transit center and wrap the bus loading into a building podium that is at least semi-urban, with tighter curb cuts, plenty of retail and a green wall/plaza-ramp.

BVictor1 May 30, 2017 5:05 PM

Chicagoarchitecture.org

https://www.chicagoarchitecture.org/...3-658x1000.jpg

Notyrview May 30, 2017 5:20 PM

lawl 'concept'

LouisVanDerWright May 30, 2017 6:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Notyrview (Post 7819531)
lawl 'concept'

Clearly it's a concept, the text clearly states that the transit center will remain while all of the "renderings" show a huge office tower in it's place. Both cannot be accurate.

10023 May 30, 2017 7:26 PM

Someone call Norman Foster, or anyone that knows how to contextualize contemporary architecture with older landmarks.

Mr Downtown May 30, 2017 7:26 PM

In its place—or atop the transit center, as often is seen in other cities around the globe?

emathias May 30, 2017 8:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright (Post 7819648)
Clearly it's a concept, the text clearly states that the transit center will remain while all of the "renderings" show a huge office tower in it's place. Both cannot be accurate.

It appears to be in the base, maybe even slightly below grade. But I agree, it's definitely not very visible what their concept for it actually is.

ChickeNES Sep 9, 2017 7:24 AM

Is it possible they go bigger here if Amazon selects the Post Office for HQ2?

Ned.B Sep 9, 2017 2:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChickeNES (Post 7916756)
Is it possible they go bigger here if Amazon selects the Post Office for HQ2?

Phase 1, the headhouse expansion, is unlikely to get any larger, because there are limits to what the historic building can hold. Similarly, the apartment building over the tracks is limited by it's slender site and the structural acrobatics it is undergoing in order to rest on only 2 rows of 5 columns in the track platforms. The parcel with the office towers is a few years down the road, and is unencumbered by existing conditions, so it seems there is some good possibility for growth there if the demand for office space in the direct vicinity makes a big leap.

gebs Jun 18, 2018 6:06 PM

Mark your calendars for another community meeting, this time to discuss Riverside's proposal for Union Station:

Union Station developer to detail plans
Greg Hinz, Crain's Chicago Business

"O'Donnell's Riverside Development & Investment is about to present plans for 330 hotel rooms and 404 residential units atop the historic rail depot, as well as an office tower on what now is a parking garage on the block bound by Clinton, Van Buren, Canal and a Chicago Transit Authority bus facility, according to a constituent newsletter emailed over the weekend by the local alderman, Brendan Reilly, 42nd.

Reilly and city officials failed to respond to requests for comment and elaboration. O'Donnell emailed that he's travelling in Europe but will answer questions after Reilly's meeting, which is set for 6 p.m. June 25 in Union Station's Burlington Room."

jpIllInoIs Jun 18, 2018 8:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Downtown (Post 7819704)
In its place—or atop the transit center, as often is seen in other cities around the globe?

This would explain the skimpy canopy coverage of the transit center, I always thought that looked under designed for Chicago's climate...

nomarandlee Jun 19, 2018 1:02 AM

Old Post Office - Check
Cook County Hosp - Check
Union Station - Almost check
....Plus major changes/improvements to Sears and Congress Theater.

Nice to see all these historical Chicago institutions get these upgrades at the same time.

BVictor1 Jun 25, 2018 11:52 PM

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/apps/...20180625175729


http://www.chicagobusiness.com/artic...emake-unveiled

June 25, 2018
Union Station remake unveiled

Quote:

Imagine a light-filled glass box placed on top of a classic structure of stone and concrete.

In essence, that's the proposal a Chicago development group is laying out for the first phase of the redevelopment of Union Station, the city's historic, underused and overly crowded central train terminal.

In a presentation to local Ald. Brendan Reilly, 42nd, and community residents, Chicago developer John O'Donnell and partners are proposing to to renovate the station's mostly unused headhouse building and crown it with a new seven-story structure. Like what's underneath, the new area would have a glass skylight and an open light court above, allowing daylight to stream into the station's existing Great Hall below. The appearance, as depicted in an artist's rendition, takes some getting used to, but original plans back in the World War I era by Daniel Burnham and other designers called for up to a 20-story building.

The current headhouse and new structure combined would comprise 1.1 million square feet of space that would be used for a 330-room hotel and, on the higher floors, 404 residential units.

Hudson11 Jun 25, 2018 11:57 PM

oof

Quote:

[...]
The appearance, as depicted in an artist's rendition, takes some getting used to
no kidding

k1052 Jun 26, 2018 12:00 AM

fuck

UPChicago Jun 26, 2018 12:10 AM

disrespectful

jpIllInoIs Jun 26, 2018 12:21 AM

stop this now! abomination.

Ricochet48 Jun 26, 2018 12:31 AM

Are you kitten me, that's horrid!

Blahshead Jun 26, 2018 12:40 AM

This is very bad. I liked the cheese grater.

Randomguy34 Jun 26, 2018 12:47 AM

If only... :(

https://chicagology.com/wp-content/t...urnham1925.jpg
Source: Chicagology

spyguy Jun 26, 2018 12:55 AM

This is really bad. SCB should not be designing such a sensitive addition.

left of center Jun 26, 2018 12:59 AM

Ugly ugly ugly.


Please let this not happen.

Busy Bee Jun 26, 2018 1:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BVictor1 (Post 8232670)

Clearly the product of a great civilization.

Eh hmm.... Jesus just kill me.


At this point I'd be happy with them just leaving the station house alone. And remove that terrible 90's letter signage while they're at it.

tm30 Jun 26, 2018 1:04 AM

Words fail me.

bnk Jun 26, 2018 1:16 AM

Why is this glass box the only option?

From what I was lead to belive the foundation could take more stone mass than this glass box.

Is this just a cheap out, only profit drive vs what would really the site deserves

This is one rare example of me wishing to reject this

Design


Poorly placed and almost impossible to replace once it’s up

Why is this building not designated as a historical building


I understand change can be difficult

But ‘‘tis is on the order of the ufo planted on soldier field

That one is also impossible to replace and fix and we are stuck with that ufo for 50 decades at least


If it was a true stadium like the dallas cowboys have

I would have no problem with a new retractable down town stadium and leave solder field as it was and could be used for any many other uses, the World Cup, to music fests, to anything outside in reality


If Chicago has what Dallas had we would have had the 2016 olympics


‘‘Tis is more myoptic than the “ better rate field “ that was the old Sox park

marothisu Jun 26, 2018 1:23 AM

LOL! What the actual fuck?

left of center Jun 26, 2018 1:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bnk (Post 8232766)
Why is this building not designated as a historical building

Union Station was designated a Chicago landmark in 2002.

Mister Uptempo Jun 26, 2018 1:33 AM

Larger image-
https://i.imgur.com/43mzmZ2.jpg
img src - crain's

left of center Jun 26, 2018 2:00 AM

Ugh, even uglier up close.

Getting a real serious 70's vibe from this... 2001 S Michigan comes to mind...

http://images4.loopnet.com/i2/Nkn-Lm.../112/image.jpg
Source: Loopnet.com

Rizzo Jun 26, 2018 2:02 AM

Had a hunch this design would be a train wreck

left of center Jun 26, 2018 2:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rizzo (Post 8232810)
Had a hunch this design would be a train wreck

I see what you did there. :haha:

Busy Bee Jun 26, 2018 2:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by left of center (Post 8232807)
Ugh, even uglier up close.

Getting a real serious 70's vibe from this... 2001 S Michigan comes to mind...

Apparel Mart comes to mind:

https://imageserver-bisnow1.netdna-s...oint-large.jpg
_

Oh yeah baby!!!:cheers:

nomarandlee Jun 26, 2018 2:23 AM

Nope. Just nope. Looks awkward. I'm all going to modern on top and in fact, encourage it but this will not do.

Mister Uptempo Jun 26, 2018 2:36 AM

Sad to think that Detroit is going to have Michigan Central Station restored to its former glory, and possibly someday see the return of trains, and we get, well, this.

It looks like someone dropped a cookie cutter West Loop midrise on top of venerable Union Station. I'd imagine that if they could have figured out a way to slip a parking podium up there, they would have.

Randomguy34 Jun 26, 2018 2:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mister Uptempo (Post 8232838)
It looks like someone dropped a cookie cutter West Loop midrise on top of venerable Union Station. I'd imagine that if they could have figured out a way to slip a parking podium up there, they would have.

But wait, I thought midrises would be the saviors of the West Loop


All times are GMT. The time now is 3:01 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.