SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/index.php)
-   Transportation (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=25)
-   -   CHICAGO: ORD & MDW discussion (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=87889)

jc5680 Mar 27, 2019 5:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by k1052 (Post 8520317)
I was actually hoping they would have picked Gang for the new satellite concourses instead. Still hoping they did since I don't see any mention yet.

Not sure about the trib article, but in Crains they say:

Quote:

Officials said only, “In the coming months, a second team will be selected from the remaining four finalists” for that work.
They also rather cryptically point out:

Quote:

Though Studio ORD has been tapped as the winner of the design competition, it is not yet guaranteed the project. Says the statement, the city “will now enter into contract negotiations with Studio ORD,” and only after that process is done will work begin.

trvlr70 Mar 27, 2019 5:48 PM

This is a solid choice. Gang has truly done no wrong in Chicago. The look is very Gang = very Chicago.

woodrow Mar 27, 2019 5:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jc5680 (Post 8520465)
Not sure about the trib article, but in Crains they say:



They also rather cryptically point out:

I remember that being discussed earlier in the processs. The satellite concourses were always going to be picked from the remaining 4 finalists. That must be a $1 billion+ contract itself. As to it not being "guaranteed," being selected as the winner is the first step, signing a contract is the next step. Time for the lawyers.

woodrow Mar 27, 2019 5:52 PM

As for the pick, Gang went from my 3rd choice, to my 1st choice, to settling in at 2nd, after Foster.

jc5680 Mar 27, 2019 6:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by woodrow (Post 8520478)
I remember that being discussed earlier in the processs. The satellite concourses were always going to be picked from the remaining 4 finalists. That must be a $1 billion+ contract itself. As to it not being "guaranteed," being selected as the winner is the first step, signing a contract is the next step. Time for the lawyers.

Right, I was replying to someone who thought the choice of a second finalist for the concourse might not still be the plan.

galleyfox Mar 27, 2019 6:44 PM

http://www.ord21.com/About/Pages/Survey-Results.aspx

Oh good, the survey results are available. Calatrava and Foster were more or less tied for the lead, and Studo ORD in third nipping at their heels.

Clearly, a lot of Chicagoans were rooting for a hometown architect, and Studio Gang was their choice.

the urban politician Mar 27, 2019 6:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by galleyfox (Post 8520559)
http://www.ord21.com/About/Pages/Survey-Results.aspx

Oh good, the survey results are available. Calatrava and Foster were more or less tied for the lead, and Studo ORD in third nipping at their heels.

How did you go from the above....

Quote:

Clearly, a lot of Chicagoans were rooting for a hometown architect, and Studio Gang was their choice.
To this conclusion?

Third place doesn't suggest that Gang was "Chicagoan's choice"

Via Chicago Mar 27, 2019 6:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by galleyfox (Post 8520559)
http://www.ord21.com/About/Pages/Survey-Results.aspx

Oh good, the survey results are available. Calatrava and Foster were more or less tied for the lead, and Studo ORD in third nipping at their heels.

Clearly, a lot of Chicagoans were rooting for a hometown architect, and Studio Gang was their choice.

i mean, clearly the poll had little impact on the actual decision. if it did, Foster or Calatrava would have won.

kbud Mar 27, 2019 7:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the urban politician (Post 8520420)
Project not to start till 2023? Wow, seems so far away timewise

4 years to break ground, that is insane. China builds entire new airports in less time. Are they waiting for T5 to be done? There has to be work they can do in parallel, like starting on the satellites.

Via Chicago Mar 27, 2019 7:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kbud (Post 8520586)
China builds entire new airports in less time.

China is a centrally planned economy growing at 7% GDP, also completely lacking in worker safety/construction regulations, environmental considerations, human rights concerns etc. I think we can agree there are fundamental differences that will prevent such construction timelines in the US in 2019.

Jim in Chicago Mar 27, 2019 7:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kbud (Post 8520586)
4 years to break ground, that is insane. China builds entire new airports in less time. Are they waiting for T5 to be done? There has to be work they can do in parallel, like starting on the satellites.

They're destroying a bunch of gates - there has to be somewhere for those planes to go, so the satellites come first.

r18tdi Mar 27, 2019 7:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the urban politician (Post 8520569)

Third place doesn't suggest that Gang was "Chicagoan's choice"

It may not be the winner, but it had the biggest bump in Chicago votes compared to non-Chicago based voters? :shrug:

galleyfox Mar 27, 2019 7:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the urban politician (Post 8520569)
How did you go from the above'....



To this conclusion?

Third place doesn't suggest that Gang was "Chicagoan's choice"

I didn't say it was Chicago's choice, I said Studio ORD was a favorite among Chicagoans who wanted a hometown architect.

When you compare the overall vote preference vs. Chicago voters' preference, the Studio ORD proposal is much more competitive against the Calatrava and Foster proposals.

NikolasM Mar 27, 2019 8:09 PM

I had not seen the image showing Studio Gang's satellite terminals. They look really good. I think O'Hare should stick with a cohesive design for this project, not try to starchitect it up the wazoo.

galleyfox Mar 27, 2019 8:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Via Chicago (Post 8520576)
i mean, clearly the poll had little impact on the actual decision. if it did, Foster or Calatrava would have won.

The poll by itself had little impact, of course. It would be dumb to choose an airport design just based off of architect popularity or the public looking at pretty renders. But it was probably an important factor used to eliminate Fentress and SOM from the running.

And since neither Calatrava nor Foster had a huge mandate, the committee felt more comfortable going with a local group.

Kngkyle Mar 27, 2019 8:59 PM

On one hand I'd like a cohesive design for the whole airport, but on the other hand it's unique, and very Chicago, to have a diverse group of architects:

T1: Jahn
T2: Studio Gang
T2S: Foster (or whoever)
T3: (? forgot)
T5: Perkins + Will

Steely Dan Mar 27, 2019 9:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kngkyle (Post 8520774)
On one hand I'd like a cohesive design for the whole airport, but on the other hand it's unique, and very Chicago, to have a diverse group of architects:

T1: Jahn
T2: Studio Gang
T2S: Foster (or whoever)
T3: (? forgot)
T5: Perkins + Will

T3 (and the current T2) were originally designed by C.F. Murphy, but they've gone through lots of changes over the decades.


good news on the studio gang win. let's hope they knock it out of the park.

nomarandlee Mar 27, 2019 11:30 PM

Through I wanted Foster to win I'm really good with any of the designs that were not SOM.

I'd love to know why Foster wasn't chosen though

Via Chicago Mar 28, 2019 12:04 AM

honestly when i look at Gang's it just looks more....realistic for lack of a better word.

when you watch those videos Foster had super generous public space set aside, but Gang made a point to show all the unsexy stuff like kiosks and food stall locations etc etc which inevitably the city is going to want for revenue. you can tell she thought about where that stuff is going to go, and how to fit it into the bigger picture. im sure theres a lot more technical and budget related things behind the scenes as well, aside from the big "statement" designs, but that stood out to me...looks far easier to execute and build in the real world.

LouisVanDerWright Mar 28, 2019 1:00 AM

Another interesting aspect of Gang's design is that they plan to use so much wood. Given the huge amount of "serration" on the ceilings and the material, it's going to be very quiet for such a huge public space. Should have very nice acoustics if they don't VE the wood out.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Via Chicago (Post 8520594)
China is a centrally planned economy growing at 7% GDP, also completely lacking in worker safety/construction regulations, environmental considerations, human rights concerns etc. I think we can agree there are fundamental differences that will prevent such construction timelines in the US in 2019.

Absolutely, China has also been building infrastructure from the ground up in greenfields. Not exactly as easy as re configuring the central terminal of the busiest airport on earth.

ardecila Mar 28, 2019 4:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Via Chicago (Post 8521050)
honestly when i look at Gang's it just looks more....realistic for lack of a better word.

when you watch those videos Foster had super generous public space set aside, but Gang made a point to show all the unsexy stuff like kiosks and food stall locations etc etc which inevitably the city is going to want for revenue. you can tell she thought about where that stuff is going to go, and how to fit it into the bigger picture. im sure theres a lot more technical and budget related things behind the scenes as well, aside from the big "statement" designs, but that stood out to me...looks far easier to execute and build in the real world.

Foster had retailers too, they were just tucked into curvilinear freestanding pavilions (Foster called them "pebbles") instead of terraced like Woodfield Mall. IMO the Gang plan shows too much retail, it literally looks like half of Woodfield Mall was dropped into an airport concourse. I'd rather the city built too little retail and have to carefully curate the vendors, than have them build too much and end up with gloomy empty storefronts.

Style wise, I do like the Gang proposal and it definitely feels very "ecological" in a way that the other proposals did not... hopefully Gang follows through on their commitment to sustainability. LEED certification would be amazing, maybe a green roof?

galleyfox Mar 28, 2019 6:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nomarandlee (Post 8521022)
Through I wanted Foster to win I'm really good with any of the designs that were not SOM.

I'd love to know why Foster wasn't chosen though

Two solid reasons I can think of:

The diagrid structure looks very expensive to build vs. the other designs that just use columns.

Also, now that I've seen the images showing how the Studio design connects to the other terminals, I see that it's really intuitive when traveling between terminals. Just follow the wooden spine to your gate.

The Foster design screws everybody who's connecting from Terminal 3, because it's on the far side of Terminal 2.

MayorOfChicago Mar 28, 2019 2:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kbud (Post 8520586)
4 years to break ground, that is insane. China builds entire new airports in less time. Are they waiting for T5 to be done? There has to be work they can do in parallel, like starting on the satellites.

That's for the Terminal 2 replacement. They have to build the new satellite concourses first to get those replacement gates for tearing down Terminal 2.

Terminal 5: 2019-2021
New Satellite: 2020-2023
New Conc C Ext: 2021-2024
New Terminal 2: 2024-2028
3 new gates to Concourse L: 2022
New transport to satellites: 2024

Only thing that doesn't make sense here is the transport needs to be up and running when the new satellite terminal opens in 2023.

Via Chicago Mar 28, 2019 2:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila (Post 8521360)
Foster had retailers too, they were just tucked into curvilinear freestanding pavilions (Foster called them "pebbles") instead of terraced like Woodfield Mall. IMO the Gang plan shows too much retail, it literally looks like half of Woodfield Mall was dropped into an airport concourse. I'd rather the city built too little retail and have to carefully curate the vendors, than have them build too much and end up with gloomy empty storefronts.

Style wise, I do like the Gang proposal and it definitely feels very "ecological" in a way that the other proposals did not... hopefully Gang follows through on their commitment to sustainability. LEED certification would be amazing, maybe a green roof?


Oh, I agree with you. But airports are the new malls...

i also wonder how much potential heating/cooling costs played a role in not choosing Fosters design. you look at that enormous open space and those huge panes of glass, and one has to wonder how well insulated all of that would be, and how much energy it would take to keep it comfortable. especially seeing as we're going through all this hand-wringing now with the Thompson Center, which most acknowledge as a "cool" design but not practical. HVAC is conspicuously absent in any of those renderings.

jc5680 Mar 28, 2019 5:22 PM

I am more happy about the choice the more I think about it. I have spent a lot of hours in airports over the last couple years and there is a sterile sameness to a lot of the newer terminals and concourses (at least domestically). The warmth of the wooden structural elements and inclusion of the trees go a long way to soften the experience and add some distinction without going full log cabin like you see in small airports like Jackson.

I had originally preferred Foster, but shared similar concerns about heating/cooling. If you have lined up at one of the newer United gates in Houston with a full exposure an afternoon summer sun, soaring clear glass walls lose their appeal pretty quick.

Not everyone is happy, naturally:

Via Blair Kamin—Jahn isn't so happy with the Studio ORD choice, or the process at least:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D2wS7l4XcAopJ_J.jpg:small

LouisVanDerWright Mar 28, 2019 5:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila (Post 8521360)
Foster had retailers too, they were just tucked into curvilinear freestanding pavilions (Foster called them "pebbles") instead of terraced like Woodfield Mall. IMO the Gang plan shows too much retail, it literally looks like half of Woodfield Mall was dropped into an airport concourse. I'd rather the city built too little retail and have to carefully curate the vendors, than have them build too much and end up with gloomy empty storefronts.

I doubt those storefronts will go unused. My understanding from a buddy of mine who helps run vendors for the department of aviation is that they have a massive waiting list of people who want to get into O'Hare, but can't because of space constraints. I'm all for it, make it a giant mall, like a reverse duty free shop as we strip all of the layovers of their cash via our vampiric 10.25% sales tax.

Quote:

Originally Posted by galleyfox (Post 8521422)
T

Also, now that I've seen the images showing how the Studio design connects to the other terminals, I see that it's really intuitive when traveling between terminals. Just follow the wooden spine to your gate.

Watch her video about it, she talks about how the "Y" shape is inspired by the confluence so it makes perfect sense that her design is optimized to channel crowds to their destinations like water. I really like the six point star occulus at the center too.

bnk Mar 28, 2019 6:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright (Post 8521965)
I doubt those storefronts will go unused. My understanding from a buddy of mine who helps run vendors for the department of aviation is that they have a massive waiting list of people who want to get into O'Hare, but can't because of space constraints. I'm all for it, make it a giant mall, like a reverse duty free shop as we strip all of the layovers of their cash via our vampiric 10.25% sales tax.



Watch her video about it, she talks about how the "Y" shape is inspired by the confluence so it makes perfect sense that her design is optimized to channel crowds to their destinations like water. I really like the six point star occulus at the center too.


Which video is that? do you have a link


Video Link


http://studiogang.com/img/ZUw3ZUxMOE...studio-ord.jpg

k1052 Mar 28, 2019 6:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jc5680 (Post 8521945)

Not everyone is happy, naturally:

Via Blair Kamin—Jahn isn't so happy with the Studio ORD choice, or the process at least:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D2wS7l4XcAopJ_J.jpg:small

Respectfully, Jahn can fuck off.

the urban politician Mar 28, 2019 7:27 PM

I'm quite excited about the Gang choice. I think the wooden aesthetic will be unique and make O'Hare stand out around the world.

Of course, that's unless somebody else does a wooden interior within the 4 year timeframe before construction even begins.

When doing novel things, execute them quickly, I say, lest somebody else steal your idea and beat you to it....

Steely Dan Mar 28, 2019 7:36 PM

^ it's like you're not even reading this thread.

several other forumers have tried informing you, but you apparently refuse to listen/comprehend.

- construction on the new global terminal can't begin until the current T2 is demolished.

- the current T2 can't be demolished until all of its 30 gates can be accommodated in a new satellite concourse that has to be designed and built first.

- the new satellite concourses aren't going to start until the T5 expansion that just started last week is finished.


what are you not understanding about the timeline of how this project has to be phased?

the urban politician Mar 28, 2019 7:47 PM

^ Yes, I realize why it has to wait 4 years.

But it's still a bummer that we have to wait so long

glowrock Mar 28, 2019 8:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steely Dan (Post 8522173)
^ it's like you're not even reading this thread.

several other forumers have tried informing you, but you apparently refuse to listen/comprehend.

- construction on the new global terminal can't begin until the current T2 is demolished.

- the current T2 can't be demolished until all of its 30 gates can be accommodated in a new satellite concourse that has to be designed and built first.

- the new satellite concourses aren't going to start until the T5 expansion that just started last week is finished.


what are you not understanding about the timeline of how this project has to be phased?

Kinda sucks when you've got to tear down existing terminals/concourses in order to have enough space for new ones. Even worse when you've got to first add satellite concourses before you can tear down terminals in order to build new ones!

Alas, O'Hare's not like Denver, where all they need to do is continue to add to their existing concourses, and eventually build another one parallel to the current three. The luxury of having unlimited room, eh? ;)

Aaron (Glowrock)

ardecila Mar 28, 2019 9:01 PM

^ Well, O’Hare will have that flexibility once the new T2 is done. Plans call for up to 3 more satellite concourses to suit future growth, and the underground train will be in place.

Re staging, I don’t see how they can possibly start building T2 in 4 years if they need to wait on the T5 expansion AND the satellite concourse to happen in succession. I assume it will take around 18 months to finish design on the satellite concourse and probably another three months to mobilize a contractor. A design-build process could speed up the timeline, but I’m not sure if it’s legal under FAA and city procurement rules.

F1 Tommy Mar 28, 2019 9:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by glowrock (Post 8522290)
Kinda sucks when you've got to tear down existing terminals/concourses in order to have enough space for new ones. Even worse when you've got to first add satellite concourses before you can tear down terminals in order to build new ones!

Alas, O'Hare's not like Denver, where all they need to do is continue to add to their existing concourses, and eventually build another one parallel to the current three. The luxury of having unlimited room, eh? ;)

Aaron (Glowrock)

O'Hare's older T2 and T3 terminals are way to close together and because of that they cause a lot of ramp congestion and need an update. Denver is not that busy so not a good comparison but ATL like DEN also has a lot of space between its terminals and that helps limit ramp traffic congestion.

glowrock Mar 28, 2019 11:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by F1 Tommy (Post 8522391)
O'Hare's older T2 and T3 terminals are way to close together and because of that they cause a lot of ramp congestion and need an update. Denver is not that busy so not a good comparison but ATL like DEN also has a lot of space between its terminals and that helps limit ramp traffic congestion.

That was kind of my point... ;) It's not like there's enough space at O'Hare to just build a new terminal next to the current ones. Same would be true for most of the major airports in the U.S., I would imagine. Only a few have the room to build new terminals/concourses without tearing down existing ones, and Denver's one of those.

As for traffic, while of course O'Hare's busier, it's not like Denver's exactly small. Believe it was something like 63,000,000 passenger count for 2018?

At any rate, it is obvious my somewhat facetious original comment must not have worked very well, anyhow... Heh

Aaron (Glowrock)

2PRUROCKS! Mar 29, 2019 12:07 AM

I will admit that I am a little disappointed that the Calatrava team wasn't selected for T2. However Studio ORD was my second choice. I do find this competition a bit odd. I understand selecting a winner but why have the runner up design the satellites? What if a team came in 2nd based on their T2 design but their satellite design wasn't as good as others. I think the designer of the satellites should be the team that did the best design on that portion of the design not the overall runner up. I thought Calatrava had the best T2 design and Studio ORD had the best satellites design but now it would appear Studio ORD can't do the satellites. I guess I am rooting for Calatrava to do the satellites. I don't remember the satellite designs very well other than Studio ORD's and Calatrava's.

donnie Mar 29, 2019 3:32 AM

Somebody having a hard time finding work in da Chi?

https://chicago.curbed.com/2019/3/28...-note#comments

Kenmore Mar 29, 2019 10:48 AM

gang design looks good and lol @ jahn, what an idiot

glowrock Mar 29, 2019 12:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by donnie (Post 8522778)
Somebody having a hard time finding work in da Chi?

https://chicago.curbed.com/2019/3/28...-note#comments

Methinks Jahn needs a Snickers, it appears he's quite hangry. ;)

Aaron (Glowrock)

Steely Dan Mar 29, 2019 1:37 PM

* posts deleted *


we're NOT doing culture war stupidity in this thread.

take that shit somewhere else!

k1052 Mar 29, 2019 1:44 PM

n/m

F1 Tommy Mar 29, 2019 2:21 PM

Great news on Air New Zealand!!

Maybe this will push Qantas and Singapore to start direct flights to ORD faster. Singapore does have cargo 747 flights and did fly the 1 stop service via Europe with a 777 a few years ago but nothing direct. Qantas has never had direct service other than blocked seats on AA. Little by little this will eat away at the west coast hubs. The 787 and A350 are international east and west coast hub busters due to their range on Asian and African routes.

" Air New Zealand Taipei and Chicago services, which both operate thrice weekly, will be upgraded to five weekly due to significant success on the routes. The upgrades will take place from the Winter. "

https://airwaysmag.com/airlines/air-...seoul-flights/

Jim in Chicago Mar 29, 2019 2:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by glowrock (Post 8522995)
Methinks Jahn needs a Snickers, it appears he's quite hangry. ;)

Aaron (Glowrock)

Beyond the general hissy fit, he seems focused on how closed the process was. Are competitive processes like these ever fully open? Or, do they typically get a "thank you for your submission, we'll let you know", and then at the end of the process "thank you again, we've selected someone else"?

Steely Dan Mar 29, 2019 2:57 PM

studio gang wasn't my 1st choice, but i can certainly get on board with this.

https://images.adsttc.com/media/imag...jpg?1553785040
source: https://www.archdaily.com/913991/stu...port-expansion

https://images.adsttc.com/media/imag...jpg?1553784924
source: https://www.archdaily.com/913991/stu...port-expansion

https://images.adsttc.com/media/imag...jpg?1553784981
source: https://www.archdaily.com/913991/stu...port-expansion

https://images.adsttc.com/media/imag...jpg?1553784951
source: https://www.archdaily.com/913991/stu...port-expansion

k1052 Mar 29, 2019 3:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim in Chicago (Post 8523156)
Beyond the general hissy fit, he seems focused on how closed the process was. Are competitive processes like these ever fully open? Or, do they typically get a "thank you for your submission, we'll let you know", and then at the end of the process "thank you again, we've selected someone else"?

A closed process is of course the rule, not the exception. I am entirely unsympathetic to his complaint. Really just reads like he's pissed that Gang gets to build something next to his building instead of someone HE regards as a peer.

Baronvonellis Mar 29, 2019 3:20 PM

Well that looks alot better than the video. I havn't seen those renderings before, I would have like to see more detail from the others as well. I'd also like to see what the actual gate areas look like. I don't think any of the teams showed the actual gates. They just showed soaring lobby areas. I don't know if I really like that soaring giant lobby with 100 foot ceilings. It just makes you feel small and unimportant. I'd rather have a bit more intimate feel frankly.

Why don't any of them just copy famous industrial era train station designs? Everyone loves old train stations, and that would be an instant Chicago feel, something to match the L tracks downtown. Any of these designs look like they could be in any international city, and they don't say anything about being in Chicago other than the Y municipal device which is a subtle thing which most people don't know about unless your from Chicago.

Actually this reminds me of a giant mall. I just googled trees in malls and found a mall in Joliet that looks almost the same! With wood ceilings even.

http://iciinc.com/portfolio/retail/d...s-joliet-mall/

galleyfox Mar 29, 2019 5:01 PM

The image that convinced me on the Studio ORD terminal is the one below when it transitions from T1 to T2. If I'm a new visitor trying to find my connecting flight and moving between terminals, this is the yellow brick road (or brown wooden ceiling) of airport navigation.

More than aesthetics or even price, wayfinding and proximity to amenities is the mark of a fine terminal.

https://mobile.twitter.com/airportar...104512/photo/1

woodrow Mar 29, 2019 5:16 PM

^^WOW! Now let's see interior of T2 to T3!!! I know they are keeping the Rotunda, but I haven't seen how they will make a clean connection, a la T1 to T2

LouisVanDerWright Mar 29, 2019 5:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by galleyfox (Post 8523379)
The image that convinced me on the Studio ORD terminal is the one below when it transitions from T1 to T2. If I'm a new visitor trying to find my connecting flight and moving between terminals, this is the yellow brick road (or brown wooden ceiling) of airport navigation.

More than aesthetics or even price, wayfinding and proximity to amenities is the mark of a fine terminal.

https://mobile.twitter.com/airportar...104512/photo/1

That's probably what Jahn is really pissed about, Gang's terminal is going to upstage his own work...

sentinel Mar 29, 2019 6:13 PM

Some more photos from the twitter:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D2xxMeSUcAA3fv6.jpg

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D2xxMd_VYAEUcWR.jpg

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D2xxMb_XQAUWFBA.jpg

https://twitter.com/fly2ohare

I am personally happy as my firm is part of the winning team, and we can hopefully contribute something of significance for this project...assuming that the contract is finalized with the overall A/E team.

As for Jahn, fuck that guy. I've heard numerous horror stories about him over the years from people who've worked for him, and he's nothing but a self-absorbed, misogynistic, homophobic anti-semite. And fuck Blair Kamin for giving him a platform. I've worked with Studio Gang as a partner firm in the past and Jeannie Gange is gracious, thoughtful, extremely talented and able to provide alternative solutions to issues right on the spot. I strongly believe any backlash to her TEAM winning the competition is a perpetuation of gross, systemic misogyny in my profession.


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:13 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2023, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.