SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/index.php)
-   Proposals (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=361)
-   -   CHICAGO | 400 N Lake Shore Drive | 875 FT & 765 FT | ? & ? FLOORS (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=219306)

harryc Oct 22, 2015 11:45 PM

Last August
 

Randomguy34 Oct 22, 2015 11:53 PM

Wow, to think it's been a year since we hoped that Garrett Kelleher and Atlas would pay off the initial spire debt so that the plan would be back on. If Related is being as secretive as they are on the project, they better have a design that will stun us

chris11 Oct 23, 2015 12:11 AM

What are the odds Kelleher ever tries to build again? I know hes a native and seemed to really have a passion for the spire/helping with the 2016 bid. Not saying any investors would take him on another 2000 ft project but nonetheless is he out of the game?

BVictor1 Oct 23, 2015 1:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chris11 (Post 7208449)
What are the odds Kelleher ever tries to build again? I know hes a native and seemed to really have a passion for the spire/helping with the 2016 bid. Not saying any investors would take him on another 2000 ft project but nonetheless is he out of the game?

It's not his land, so there's n chance.

spyguy Oct 23, 2015 1:37 AM

2WTC is commercial office; Spire going to be residential (maybe with a hotel?). Given his other residential/mixed-use towers in Canada & Miami, it would be safer to expect something twisty for this proposal.

munchymunch Oct 23, 2015 1:54 AM

I have a feeling this could be sls.

Notyrview Oct 23, 2015 9:28 AM

^^^^ Waldorf Astoria was a nice design but too safe for 2015. We need something new and exciting, something that breaks the mold, like Gang and Jahn's proposals.

Tom Servo Oct 23, 2015 11:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jibba (Post 7207965)
Hmmm... would rather have Smith & Gil, Herzog, or Richard Rogers than the contrivance I'm afraid BIG will propose, but I'll wait and see, obviously.

Smith & Gill? Uh, no thanks. Adrian Smith was the head architect behind the tower of shit that is Trump Tower. Again, pass.

Herzog + De Meuron might be the greatest architecture firm in the world. One step at a time. But I like your thinking. :cheers:

Agreed on Richard Rogers too. He kicks ass. Puts BIG and their silly digram-heavy design gimmicks to shame.

That being said, I still really like pretty much everything coming out of the BIG office. And anything BIG [potentially] dreams up for this site would likely be visually stunning as their work tends to be better than great. They're like the world-class version of Studio Gang.

http://www.newcondosinvancouver.com/...ouverHouse.jpg
newcondosinvancouver.com
http://www.designboom.com/wp-content...ignboom-02.jpg
designboom.com
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2015/...4030940427.jpg
dailymail.co.uk
http://static.dezeen.com/uploads/201...s-by-BIG_1.jpg
http://static.dezeen.com/uploads/201...s-by-BIG_2.jpg
http://static.dezeen.com/uploads/201...s-by-BIG_3.jpg
dezeen.com
http://cdn3.greendiary.com/wp-conten...oVg8_11446.jpg
greendiary.com


...yeah, let's not forget how exceptionally good they are at designing tall buildings. :cheers:


Quote:

I still haven't fully mourned the loss of the Spire. Sigh...
Meh, it was awkwardly tall anyway. Whatever. Would've been nice because Calatrava and all, but the thing looked like a giant unicorn horn. Was never 100% sold on it to be honest.

chris11 Oct 23, 2015 2:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BVictor1 (Post 7208543)
It's not his land, so there's n chance.

Not speaking of the spire site, just as a developer in general.

Steely Dan Oct 23, 2015 2:40 PM

thanks, tom, for that visual compilation of BIG's previous and current tower work. it looks like we can expect something interesting. it may be good, it may be shit, but at the very least i don't think BIG will give us boring at this supremely high profile site.




Quote:

Originally Posted by chris11 (Post 7208449)
What are the odds Kelleher ever tries to build again?

ever tries to build a 2,000' tall 2 billion dollar skyscraper? i'd say zero.

ever tries to build anything at all? who knows.



Quote:

Originally Posted by chris11 (Post 7208449)
I know hes a native.

kelleher is not a native chicagoan, he's an immigrant from ireland.

Jibba Oct 23, 2015 2:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom Servo (Post 7208910)
Smith & Gill? Uh, no thanks. Adrian Smith was the head architect behind the tower of shit that is Trump Tower. Again, pass.

Let's be fair, now. S&G is arguably a very talented firm that consistently delivers. Their buildings are high-quality and high-performance. And they know how to use materials beautifully.

rgolch Oct 23, 2015 3:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steely Dan (Post 7208193)
INCAPABLE OF DISAGREEING MORE STRONGLY.

granville tower is one hell of a cool little odd-ball gem.

i was at my cousin's wedding in the park kitty-corner to it over the summer and my brother-in-law (a high school teacher with no specific interest in architecture) looked up at granville tower and said, without any provocation from me, "that sure is a strange looking building. i don't know if i like it or not, but it's so weird it's actually kinda cool".

i smiled benignly.

I used to live in Granville Tower as a college student at Loyola back in the 90's. They weren't bad at all. Duplexes with balconies and great views.

UPChicago Oct 23, 2015 3:33 PM

Chicago could have had something like this had both the Spire and Waldorf been constructed.
http://du.gensler.com/vol6/shanghai-...8.jpg?55b10f80

Yesh222 Oct 23, 2015 4:39 PM

Why not just build the Spire on the site? Seriously. It was a unique design, it was huge, and it would look really cool from dozens of miles away. There was nothing wrong with the plan, just the funding. If Related has the money for it, why not just build it?

Steely Dan Oct 23, 2015 4:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yesh222 (Post 7209267)
Why not just build the Spire on the site? Seriously. It was a unique design, it was huge, and it would look really cool from dozens of miles away. There was nothing wrong with the plan, just the funding. If Related has the money for it, why not just build it?

buildings don't get built because they are unique, huge, or "look really cool from dozens of miles away". they get built to make money.

my guess is that related does not believe that they can get a positive ROI on this particular piece of property by building a 2+ billion dollar calatrava* mega tower.

they're probably right.



(*) calatrava projects are notorious for going WAY over budget. another strike.

Yesh222 Oct 23, 2015 5:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steely Dan (Post 7209282)
buildings don't get built because they are unique, huge, or "look really cool from dozens of miles away". they get built to make money.

my guess is that related does not believe that they can get a positive ROI on this particular piece of property by building a 2+ billion dollar calatrava* mega tower.

they're probably right.



(*) calatrava projects are notorious for going WAY over budget. another strike.

Interesting. I mean, whatever they build here will be huge and will probably go well over $1B in budget. So they think they can get a good ROI anyway. And it's not like the Spire failed because it wouldn't have made money. It was because the original developer couldn't afford to try.

Steely Dan Oct 23, 2015 5:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yesh222 (Post 7209409)
And it's not like the Spire failed because it wouldn't have made money.

in a sense that's EXACTLY why it failed. no one was willing to loan kelleher the 2 billion dollars because every single lender who could have afforded to shell out that kind of dinero saw it as a bad investment.




but seriously. the old chicago spire project is dead.

dead.

DEAD.

DEAD.

DEAD.

DEAD.

DEAD.

DEAD.

DEAD.



it's not coming back. and this thread is not about the old chicago spire project anyway.

it's about what comes next. (and it won't be the spire because it's still very dead, in case you haven't heard)

if you want to continue discussing the very, very dead chicago spire project, you can do so here: http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=153494

Yesh222 Oct 23, 2015 7:02 PM

I get that it's dead. I was just curious why something very similar to that project wouldn't be done on this site.

Steely Dan Oct 23, 2015 7:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yesh222 (Post 7209512)
I was just curious why something very similar to that project wouldn't be done on this site.

because it was too expensive.

Related will build something with a more tenable budget.

now, enough of the spire talk.

ardecila Oct 23, 2015 7:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ithakas (Post 7207905)
Very interesting news. A few years ago I would have salivated at the prospect of Chicago getting a BIG building, but now I'm cautiously optimistic about him handling this site – his work seems to be best suited for mid-rise/institutional uses, at least after the disappointing WTC2 design.

Exactly. BIG evolved out of Rem Koolhaas/OMA - the really revolutionary aspect of their design practice is the way they add logical pieces to the program of the building so they become little microcosms of the city. This is a really great way to design civic and institutional projects - the buildings aren't intended to make money, and the fundraising often happens after the architect gets involved so there are opportunities to increase the budget accordingly. After the building opens, you wonder how your city functioned without it.

Unfortunately, this doesn't work so well for the private sector. Related no doubt has an exact dollar figure on this project, and they will push BIG so that they come in at that amount and not a cent higher. That reduces BIG to the role of "form-maker", which they're not so great at.

If I were King of Chicago, I would much rather have BIG design something for the Thompson Center site. They would knock it out of the park there.


All times are GMT. The time now is 9:57 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.