GOETTSCH Please Read!
 

It would be GREAT if they could carry the X-bracing at the plaza throughout the tower. Like Hearst, Hancock, 3WTC. Even if it was just through only the center X, from top to bottom. Would take this design from a 5 to a 9/10

Good news for those who prefered the 3-tier design of 110 N. Wacker, we might be getting it after all. God damn. 2019 Could be another big year for construction starts.

—-

Why are they keeping the park as part of the design? Seems like a waste of space. Its next to a busy bus station, it doesn't seem likely that people will find much peace listening to all the bus engines, squeaky brakes and inhaling all the diesel fumes.

Yes! Something like that would definitely jazz up the design. :yes:

So Sneed was spot on with the rumor and graphic few weeks ago... problem is he stated that the the tenant would bring several thousand jobs to the city?...which made us assume it was new jobs to the city and not a relocation from other downtown offices...:hell:

^ We don’t know if this will be new jobs yet, do we?

From Tribune... still not 100% of if there new or relocated from other buildings but recent article seems to assume that it could be moves possibly ...

"BMO Harris currently leases more than 800,000 square feet combined in three downtown buildings — at 115 S. LaSalle St., 111 W. Monroe St. and 200 W. Adams St. Some or all of those workers could be consolidated into the new Union Station space."

http://www.chicagotribune.com/busine...910-story.html

Haha, I want guess I can't complain about it when I look at it that way. I loved the three tier design. I'm wondering if the park will eventually turn into another tower down the line. The first plan for this site had that block with two large office towers and a revamped bus depot

500,000 sq ft is a lot of space - probably anywhere between 3500 and 4000 employees if not more. I can't tell what's what. The Sun Times article says they would bring thousands of new jobs to the city. Does BMO have corporate locations in the suburbs they are looking at consolidating?

I think perhaps some of these articles are confusing BMO Harris with BMO. BMO (Bank of Montreal) has divisions like BMO Capital Markets, BMO Wealth Management, BMO Asset Management, etc. These are all in Chicago as well - and not necessarily "BMO Harris". They are part of Bank of Montreal, the parent of BMO Harris.

BMO is a $16.5B USD company - they could go on a big hiring spree I guess, but I would be really surprised if they wouldn't move some of their other people to this building. They could hire a few thousand people but I somehow doubt 90% of their space in this building would be new hires. But hey, even at 50% that would be a few thousand people.

Kind of confusing though to determine how many people they are looking to hire, if any.

There still remains some work to do on the design said a source close to this project.

X-Bracing carried up the tower would be awesome. While we are wish-listing, I would like to see this bump to 800Ft.

They do have a large operations center in Naperville... Banks are so cheap, though, and I'd be surprised if they were planning to move those employees to more expensive space downtown.

Reilly. Tacking suboptimal quasi-public open space onto projects is his thing.

BMO Harris has an operations center out in naperville. They could consolidate those jobs into this new tower as well. So technically, it is an addition of jobs to the city itself, just not the metropolitan area.

Well, I guess that's one good thing about him.

Where is this forum's rage against "that panderhack" Reilly for not approving the residential addition on top of the Great Hall? Where are the demands for an end to aldermanic prerogative?

Or—when comparing this to the discussions over the Esquire Theater and Giordano's sites—does it turn out that tall shiny objects are more important to some of you guys than principles of planning and urban design?

Lol everyone on here despises him. It's just sort of pointless unless you actually put it to good use and try to unseat him.

..

#pay2play

Having a park to go to while waiting for something at Union station would be a plus. And if all the buses keep shifting to electrical the noise and smell would be toned down.

Depends on the bank. There have been some banks lately to actually spend more on office space. I know from first hand experience on this.

So is anybody at this meeting?

Anyone go to the meeting? Anything new/different than what we've already seen?

Only addition to CUS headhouse will be a new penthouse level on the existing roof, set back so it isn't visible from immediately surrounding streets. Improvements to Clinton side, new retail, restored entries will all be done as previously discussed. The 400 hotel keys will be divided between two hotel operations, one entered from Adams with about 60 percent of each floor, and another entered from Jackson. All hotel valet operations to use the original taxi entry/exits.

Office tower not yet fully designed, but very much about trying to integrate with the landscaping at the base. That's why piers on 30-foot centers will be tied together into diagonals on ~90-foot centers. At ground level, building lobby is pulled in to be tight around the elevator core, giving a sort of enormous arcade into which the landscaping continues.

A direct entry from the transit (bus) center and a primary path through the landscaping from northeast to southwest will offer—in good weather—a nicer way to go from CUS to the Blue Line. The 400 parking stalls will be entirely below the grade of Canal St. A passageway through the garage will be open to the public, offering all-weather access to Clinton & Van Buren. Won't quite get you to the Blue Line, but doesn't foreclose a future connection that might be done by CDOT or others.

Even a broken clock is right twice a day. It's not hypocritical to think a public planning body with, you know, actual experts in urban planning, design, and preservation could both resist destructive proposals like the union addition while also eliminating the wanton desire for limitless private plazas.

I'm not really sure where you are going with this. We don't dislike perogative because bit prevents "shiny new skyscrapers" we dislike it because amature armchair architects like Reilly have no business being involved in the urban planning and design choices of a world class metro. That isn't any different because he occasionally shoots down the mutilation of a historic building or allows a supertall.

#

BORING

COPY, CUT, PASTE, REPEAT...!

https://crain-platform-ccb-prod.s3.a...17.04%20PM.png

https://crain-platform-ccb-prod.s3.a...16.56%20PM.png

was there anything about a floor count mentioned at the meeting?

Garbage.

I'm for open space in this development but...yeesh that park.

Tower is real meh but you're never going to get the kind of top rent paying tenants here that will pay for something distinctive like you might right on the river.

Best news is the head house IMO.

And to think that proposed sloping tower a while back could have added some real muscle and excitement to that area of the skyline.

I think floor count was 50-something, but the architect may have been vague because the design isn't yet finished. The slides should go up on Reilly's website by tonight.

I don't understand the bitching. Not only will the historic headhouse not be marred by an incompatible addition, and 1700 parking stalls reduced to 400 invisible ones, but the new tower is integrated with street level and plaza in a very promising way. From an urban design perspective, it's doing lots of good things.

I see your point but i just wonder how many of these bland office towers we’re going to see until finally someone with vision and a sense of stewardship to the city’s arch legacy says let’s do something bold. Wolf Point is a step in the right direction.

No bitching from me. I of course agree it's not some sort of stellar design, but there is so much good that comes out of this project that there's really very little to complain about...

That's true.

I can imagine them moving their "front office" jobs to the new building and maintaining some space at the existing complex at Monroe / LaSalle for operations, including jobs coming in from the suburbs, which would align with the claim in the Sun-Times that this will result in new jobs for the city. The building on Monroe is Harris Bank's original home and literally has its name and logo in stone on front, so they could want to maintain a presence there.

In the initial GP proposal wasn't there an office or residential tower across from the Old Main Post Office? Is that still a thing?

Yeah, there was a residential tower planned as well. A little disappointed that all of the residential has been removed from the plan. It would have been nice to see this area evolve into one with a bit more of a mixed-use feel...

...

im all in favor of more green space in the areas surrounding the loop but this park looks awful. reminds me of Pritzker where you have all these pointless lawns on raised cement beds that no one realistically wants to sit on. combined with the traffic and diesel exhaust, no one is going to want to linger in this spot.

building is one big nothing.

I don't think there was any chance that the bus terminal would ever get 'whacked'. What would have been a superior design would have been to build over the bust terminal which is what I thought an earlier proposal had suggested...

Completely agree with you guys.

Did they say anything at the meeting about the design being a place holder? I mean this thing is even facing the same direction as 110 N Wacker.
Of course it wouldn't be the first time Goettsch did a copy paste design.

http://images.skyscrapercenter.com/b...astructure.jpg

https://img.archilovers.com/projects...23034983fd.jpg

But if you're going to copy paste at least do it in a different country. Not down the street.

Right

The architect described the design as "evolving," and specifically mentioned the fins visible on the columns of the main volume. I think the big idea, though, is one they're pretty committed to: instead of bringing piers to grade on 30-foot centers that would create a psychological separation between the public open space and the area under the building, they gather them together to make the ground level all flow together as a 50,000 sf area open to the public.

But yes, exactly like many of Goettsch's other buildings, this one is expected to obey the law of gravity.

You can make non-rectangle buildings, while maintaining the integrity of the tenant's needs. You make it seem like the modern tenant can only rely on rectangles to work in. Your argument for this banal design does not make sense.

looks like 110 N. Wacker was the first of twins.

You're just trolling now. One minute you're pedantic about materials and in another you can't tell why this might be seen as more derivative of 110 Wacker than Trump tower is of Burj. :rolleyes:

The design is plainly derivative and the critique that it may be overly so is a valid one.

[IMG]https://i.imgur.com/iL8jf51.png[/IMG]

I remember this as well. I thought it was a very efficient use of space, certainly more so that this current proposal. If they wanted to make a park, go bold and make an actual usable park. Place the building on piers over the big bus station, in order to open up over half the block to park space. A tiny quarter block park is basically a glorified lunch spot for office workers who are in a hurry.

The site plan is extremely unimpressive.

First, get rid of the fucking bus depot. Put it under the tower or underground. Then have the open space/park face Union Station, so that it can be a proper public space.

And then yeah, the tower itself is derivative and underwhelming. But I’m sorry to say that Chicago hasn’t produced much interesting architecture in some time.

#