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)

the urban politician May 16, 2018 7:05 PM

Looking at all of these renderings, I think this thing is breathtaking.

This could be my new favorite of the boom, if it gets built and they don't cheap out.

I'm still rooting more for OCS though, just because that parking lot badly needs to be developed.

maru2501 May 16, 2018 7:07 PM

OCS wins for urban fabric and this wins for visibility, probably

and Tribune wins for hotel need by location

Randomguy34 May 16, 2018 7:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BVictor1 (Post 8189469)
I hear SOAR sent a letter of support for this proposal.

Also heard they'd like to go to plan commission in June or July.

Fantastic! This gives a lot of confidence of 400 LSD being approved

rgarri4 May 16, 2018 7:20 PM

Modeling these buildings really made me appreciate it's forms. I didn't even get into the details but man are they beautiful!

https://images2.imgbox.com/6c/76/E0JgT2Ic_o.jpg

rlw777 May 16, 2018 7:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila (Post 8189784)
Love these towers. IMO, far better than the generic East Asian thing proposed for the Tribune site. The cascade of setbacks and terraces mark it as a distinctively American skyscraper.

Just a general comment but the more I think about it the more the whole description of designs like the Tribune design as "East Asian" bugs me. I get the reference but the style is not an East Asian vernacular and the use of the description seems meant to express a negative connotation in lieu of real criticism.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila (Post 8189784)
Admittedly, it does feel a little more New York than Chicago. Our classic skyscrapers were mostly Sullivanian boxes, with a soaring vertical shaft and proud cornice. Other classic Chicago buildings had a tall boxy base with a skinny tower rising above. We didn't really have the same wedding-cake buildings that New York architects produced to comply with their 1916 zoning code. On the other hand, our classic skyscrapers were all commercial. Residential skyscrapers are a relatively new thing, there is no design language for them that is uniquely Chicago so I don't mind borrowing from another great American city, especially if it resolves the balcony problem that so many residential towers struggle with.

As for the planning concerns - I'm not too disappointed that they're planning to dead-end North Water Street. The Riverwalk and the paths along Ogden Slip are, or should be, the primary pedestrian corridors and the locus of any retail/dining in this area. North Water Street is mostly about vehicular access and loading docks. By blocking off the street in this way, it caps the vista down the street and buffers noise from LSD in a way that should make neighbors happy. With that being said, I'm sure the Fire Dept will insist on some kind of vehicular access to DuSable Park in case of emergency, either they will demand that the street be restored or the Riverwalk be designed as a fire lane.

I'm also curious to see what happens to the ramps off Lower LSD that Kelleher paid for. Will they just go directly into 400LSD's parking garage with no public purpose? (Those could also provide emergency access to the park for ambulance/fire apparatus.)

I see more of a reference to the tapered form of Hancock and the setbacks of Sears than old NYC wedding-cake buildings myself. In terms of massing at this scale they are much better reference points than the classic Chicago styles you're referring to. I honestly hadn't thought about the comparison with NYC wedding-cake buildings before now. I think that's because the setbacks of those old NYC buildings their rhythm and spacing were largely dictated zoning whereas these setbacks their rhythm and spacing are more about massing and a unified whole.

patriotizzy May 16, 2018 7:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rgarri4 (Post 8190182)
Modeling these buildings really made me appreciate it's forms. I didn't even get into the details but man are they beautiful!

https://images2.imgbox.com/6c/76/E0JgT2Ic_o.jpg

The apple to my eye is when a building has imitations of nature, whether that be decor or shape, this design has it in her shape. The staggering setbacks encompassing almost the entirety of the facade reminds me of a pine tree. Nature is beautiful for a reason. Thank you Father! :cheers:

Zerton May 16, 2018 7:46 PM

I think I'm in love :skyhighmind:

vandelay May 16, 2018 8:05 PM

Sooner or later an architect is going to realize that he or she doesn't have to make a tower asymmetrical or deconstructed, and just put on the art deco detail and material with a symmetrical, set-backed tower. I'm betting the results will be handsome.

I see a lot of Foster's 50 UN Plaza in this design. That was a contemporary Chicago Style skyscraper.

JK47 May 16, 2018 8:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rlw777 (Post 8190201)
Just a general comment but the more I think about it the more the whole description of designs like the Tribune design as "East Asian" bugs me. I get the reference but the style is not an East Asian vernacular and the use of the description seems meant to express a negative connotation in lieu of real criticism.


Yeah that's been bugging me too. It definitely sounds like it's supposed to be a negative...as if East Asia is lesser in some fashion.

Odd thing is that so many of those buildings being referred to in East Asia are designed by the same firm that designed these buildings.

gramsjdg May 16, 2018 8:13 PM

Nice design but too short by at least 250' :shrug:

vandelay May 16, 2018 8:14 PM

Not to mention a lot of these US firms do better work in Asia than the US. But in fairness to the Chicago people, calling something New York style is also a slur to them.

maru2501 May 16, 2018 8:29 PM

rgarri4 - where will you post all of of the modeling?

trvlr70 May 16, 2018 8:35 PM

It's been so long and I can no longer remember, but what was on this site before the Spire construction started?

Steely Dan May 16, 2018 8:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by trvlr70 (Post 8190294)
It's been so long and I can no longer remember, but what was on this site before the Spire construction started?

nothing?

the site has been vacant for my entire life, at least.

i think they used to pile-up gravel or something there back in the day.

mr. downtown will know more.



EDIT:

this pic from 1970 shows some kind of industrial/warehouse building on the site

https://assets.dnainfo.com/chicago_p...1457983860.jpg
source: https://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/2016...-for-30-years/

vexxed82 May 16, 2018 8:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rgarri4 (Post 8189996)
A lot of change is coming to this side of the skyline!

https://images2.imgbox.com/95/41/8GgZdgNs_o.jpg

Quote:

Originally Posted by gramsjdg (Post 8190256)
Nice design but too short by at least 250' :shrug:

I think the height will balance the skyline well - particularly as seen from the north or south side. If it were too tall, I worry it might create a visual wall between the city and the lake.

On the other hand, the shorter version creates a natural slope in towards the center of the city where we'll hopefully have a new focal point in the Tribune addition.

Could be wrong, but trying to visualize how I'd want to compose a photo with the new building(s) in frame and I don't think I'd want a monster here.

10023 May 16, 2018 8:54 PM

I’m definitely getting a Miami vibe from these buildings.

Also, I think they look good together from the southeast, but not from directly east, in which case the gap between them is too wide relative to the buildings themselves and takes the whole ensemble out of proportion.

Quote:

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas (Post 8190099)

In Kevin’s post above, the second photo looks great but the first looks awkward.

What they should do, if you ask me, is move the smaller tower slightly farther south, narrowing the gap AND, at the same time, giving more space between that tower and Ogden Slip, which would widen the protected view corridor toward the Tribune Tower.

Plus, looking at Mr Downtown’s early post, they might be able to use the Spire’s caissons?

Busy Bee May 16, 2018 8:57 PM

You've come a long way Baby:

https://portal-ccc.s3.amazonaws.com/...59/4f1mk7q.jpg
_


Also, here's a history page all about Ogden Slip: http://industrialscenery.blogspot.co...babe-ruth.html

trvlr70 May 16, 2018 9:00 PM

It's as if Lake Point Tower was built at the same time as the Great Pyramids!!

10023 May 16, 2018 9:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Randomguy34 (Post 8190179)
Fantastic! This gives a lot of confidence of 400 LSD being approved

I can’t imagine why anyone would oppose that proposal, when it’s basically out in the lake, next to an expressway, and what would have been the tallest building in North America was previously approved for the site.

Busy Bee May 16, 2018 9:04 PM

Way ahead of it's time, that's for sure. It remains one of my favorite res highrises anywhere.


All times are GMT. The time now is 9:54 PM.

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