Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
https://s29.postimg.org/zbdxwpcc7/image.png
In its current state (which I'm sure could change drastically over time), I say this is junk. Not only are they throwing a suburban office tower-looking addition on top of Union Station, but the new towers also look pretty lacking. |
The complexity of this site provides an extraordinary opportunity for structural exploration and expression. It shouldn't be wasted like this.
With all the promising images we saw in the competition, how pedestrian. |
I could care less if we get a supertall. Im sure many on this forum would agree that 5 shorter towers with good density are better than a supertall but this is just boring and underwhelming. And why the twins? Whats the purpose of copying a poor design? I'm hoping this is a really reallllly rough draft. Frankly I expect more from Goettsch.
|
This just ruined my day. I thought there was a design competition for this? How in the actual fuck do we end up with such an uninspired POS. The people in this city's architectural community have lost their will to take risks, to innovate and inspire. I hope that this is just a placeholder massing but I think not. So sick of being disappointed by all the banality. I thought we had learned from the mistake of all the shitty pomo we had gotten in the 90's to early 2000's but it's baaaaaack. Oh but wait, there are two squat blue glass towers on the lot next door, so it's modern too then.
|
Quote:
I'm looking for the newer taller larger massing of sears tower class office structure. |
Quote:
|
Xxxcx
|
Quote:
|
Not sure if there's a link, NBC 5 has a bunch more photos of the new proposal I saw on the news this morning. Still dissapointed.
|
wow. after so many proposals over the years... we get this shit...
what a fucking disaster. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
i want to see all of the other entrants so i can properly know how deep my disappointment should be. |
|
so are they just tearing down the new transit center / bus terminal they built on Jackson across from Union Station?
|
I don't outright hate the towers/plaza on the parking structure parcel but jesus christ on the towers sprouting from the head house.
|
Wow! What a let down! Now I'm terrified to think what the City's plans are for the new terminals at ORD!:yuck:
|
Quote:
I don't really like the office towers at all – just feels like an anonymous block of Franklin or Wacker. But I really like that they're incorporating a significant amount of residential/hotel, despite the shortcomings of the designs. |
If ANYTHING, I wish they would tie an underground walkway from Union straight into the Clinton blue line mezz level.
|
this is hot garbage.
the insult to injury is NEITHER the great hall, nor the other proposals are attractive in the least. actually, i think im most mad about the half assed attempt at the head house even more. this is actually going to detract from its beauty rather than enhance it in any way. and it looks so obviously tacked on as an afterthought. |
"A high-rise above Union Station is an excellent idea"
Expectation: http://i.imgur.com/opAqMFP.jpg Reality: https://assets.dnainfo.com/photo/201...extralarge.png |
Quote:
I have no problem with the program, the execution is my issue. |
I hope everyone involved with this project are reading these comments and head back to the drawing tables. The more I look at these pictures the more pissed off I get. What a terrible waste of prime land with the parking structure replacement.
|
What a joke....This is the best design they could come up with??? Taking value engineering to a whole new level. Compared to some of the other stuff going up in Chicago and especially in NYC this is about as aesthetically pleasing as a dog turd:(
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
We are really on a roll in Chicago with bad designs compared to NYC wich is becoming much more innovative. Then you leave the USA and you see even more innovation. Wanda and a few others are great, but in general Chicago deserves better. |
Quote:
There are legitimate criticisms of this proposal, but that's all it is for now, a proposal. The city just dumped millions into a transit center that this proposal seems all too happy to pretend doesn't exist. I assume that the city will push back on that decision. Who knows, maybe Riverside Development and Goettsch Partners will respond to limits to development space imposed by the city and Amtrak by going taller. Dropping that much money on a development only pays off if you can bring the rentable space to the market, after all. This is a $1 Billion proposal over 3 years that probably will go through several iterations before it becomes reality. To me, it's just like Wolf Point. What we see at first is not what we'll get. Hopefully, it will be much better. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
:hell::hell::hell::hell::hell::hell::hell::hell::hell::hell::hell::hell::hell::hell: |
They didn't even bother to organize the facade and windows to have any sort of logical relationship with the station below. Unbelievable.
Fuck it, it doesn't bother me all that much what is proposed on the lot next door. No supertall, a little dull, whatever. But the addition to the station. Just NO. Give a job like this to Norman Foster... |
It's so cool to see Oklahoma City getting a makeover
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
http://i.imgur.com/nSFqT6P.jpg src - dnainfo.com http://i.imgur.com/A59FGQK.jpg src - amtrak.com |
I would like to point out that this was not a design competition, but rather a developer proposal, and each developer came to the table with their own architect. The elements shown in the renderings here are purely massing studies to determine a developer pro-forma, and the developer was selected based upon their offer price and their ability to work with the complex train operations going on below these 3 sites. The large portion of design has yet to be done, and everything shown here is subject to change. I can say with confidence that no more than a few weeks of design work has gone into what is presented here.
|
What we see with Parcel 2 has some interesting features, the rising terraces are cool in the renderings. But are likely to be empty and sterile in reality. Maybe I'm wrong.
But the headhouse towers are just going to be River North beige schlock. "They're high enough up that no one can tell", the developer will say. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
http://i.imgur.com/A6YBSJt.png I have my doubts about significant revision. There was a time when I couldn't imagine Landmarks approving this. But now that they're merely a branch of the mayor's development initiative, they seem unlikely to stand in the way. I don't think anybody would proceed to this level of proposal and rendering if they hadn't already talked with Landmarks. And once they've done that, they don't tell the architects to go back to the drawing board on the parti. Maybe the cladding. |
looks like a pipedream anyway
|
Somewhere I have the drawings for LaGrange's tower addition. Of course, no surprise it was clad in precast and detailing wasn't nearly as refined as the rendering would lead one to believe.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
One thing to keep in mind with the Headhouse addition is that the economics most likely do not work for replicating the limestone exterior. The types of uses here are just not going to be big enough money makers. Luxury condos or apartments don't work because the addition is structurally limited to 12-15 floors. The views aren't all that spectacular and the entrances aren't exclusive enough. Office is a no go because of how shallow the lease spans are and complications with elevatoring, etc. Therefore a developer is limited to either precast or cast in place facsimile, or substituting a less expensive modern aesthetic. It's a very complex problem.
Part of the reason that we haven't been seeing the same daring architecture as New York and Europe is that it isn't economically feasible. There, people will pay big bucks for unique residences and office space. Here: not so much. |
Quote:
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. |
As many have expressed this is such a disappointment even if this isn't exactly how it looks, the two tower office design instead of the single larger tower is a let down... I feel Chicago should become the capital of the wasted opportunity!...Weather its the developer or architect behind the design choices we are consistently getting more banal and repetitive designs...even for the most prime of locations in this city.
|
Quote:
|
Amtrak taps developer for $1 billion-plus redevelopment of Union Station
Amtrak taps developer for $1 billion-plus redevelopment of Union Station
http://www.trbimg.com/img-5926d262/t...25/750/750x422 Amtrak has chosen Riverside Investment & Development to lead a more than 3 million-square-foot real estate redevelopment of Union Station and surrounding land, a project expected to take about six years to complete and cost more than $1 billion. (Image courtesy of the Chicago Tribune) By Ryan Ori Chicago Tribune May 25, 2017 "Ammtrak has chosen a Chicago development firm to lead a more than 3 million-square-foot real estate redevelopment of Union Station and surrounding land, a project expected to take about six years to complete and cost more than $1 billion. Riverside Investment & Development, led by John O'Donnell, will lead the redevelopment team, according to a news release on the project. More details are expected to be announced Thursday by the developer, Amtrak and Mayor Rahm Emanuel. The total development will be about 3.1 million square feet..." http://www.chicagotribune.com/busine...24-column.html |
All times are GMT. The time now is 2:15 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.