Remember to keep hydrated

A woodlam/timber highrise would have been a good fit here.

Just make sure to spary and wrap asbestos on the wood in case of fire.


pics in link


https://chicago.curbed.com/2018/6/27...itter-reaction

Twitter isn’t loving the new Union Station design

The vertical expansion of the historic 1925 headhouse has not been well received

By Jay Koziarz Jun 27, 2018, 12:32pm CDT

#

More insult to injury


http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/c...628-story.html

Ah, right. I didn't consider the politician angle. I guess if something were bad enough and got enough people to not like it, a politician might step in. If the developer doesn't know how to grease the palm a little.

^ I don't really want to live in a world where the public has veto power over architecture of private buildings through the political process. The public has terrible taste in most cases. I've lived in New Orleans where they let bureaucrats in charge of design, and the result is formulaic. No room for creativity, they enforce conventional urbanist wisdom and the results are conventional. No room for innovative designs like 150 N Riverside (ick, it's a tower in a park!) or a Thompson Center.

That being said... Amtrak is the station owner and they voluntarily submitted to city landmarking, so the city should be able to exercise some control over this design through the Landmarks Committee. Too bad the committee is such a rubber stamp right now.

It's so good to see that major news outlets (at least in this example) are on the side of the proposal critics. This is nothing but good news, at least for now. The insult to injury will come when they revise it and further banal the design.

No disagreement here - that's how we wound up with the paste on fake stone pastiche that is the Chicago Public Library main building. There were several quite interesting modern designs, but the public voted for "Oh, it looks like a library." We got a turd, Seattle got amazing.

That having been said, the post office building is just fugly.

Um, assuming you're talking about the Harold Washington Library Center, exactly the opposite. The reason the public vote totals were never released was that the modern entry by Helmut Jahn was the popular favorite. It was the jury—made up of much wiser architectural elites—who chose the Hammond Beeby Babka postmodernist design.

^ And the Jahn design was the only one remotely worthy of being built...

Are you saying you don't like the current Harold Washington Library design? If so why not?

And is this what Helmut Jahn designed instead???

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-ZK9Ifmw2LF...lwjahnwide.jpg

I get what you're saying, and I agree, but I guess my questioning was leaning towards - is there some sort of existing fail safe in case some developer is going to do something that is truly terrible? Most of the public hates this design and I think most experts would agree as well.

Ew. Makes me think of Detroit at moments where the People Mover goes through a building.:yuck:

No.

I like the L passing underneath. As for the rest of it, I'd say we dodged a bullet. That's from a Jahn fan.

I think the library as built is beautiful. It is what it is, and that's great. I've never really understood how anyone could viscerally dislike such an impeccably constructed work of civic architecture. I think Chicago is lucky to have it.

I agree. I’m down with the HWL

^same

^Putting aside the aesthetics of the exterior, have any of you been inside the HWL? It has got to be some of the most disappointing public interiors ever to be built in this city.

The entry sequence? It's just a very bad joke.

Yeah, the grandeur of the exterior does not continue when you enter the building.

Perhaps that can be corrected in a future remodeling?