Absolutely. Usually I would blame the lack of innovation of design due to financial constraints, but obviously this project has the money to do basically whatever it wanted design-wise.

they don't need to "officially announce" it because it's so blindingly obvious to anyone with an architecture background.

will the general public pick-up on it? probably not, but that's why it's fun.

You shouldn't consider it as "copying" China. Most of the towers out there were designed by US firms. I'm proud of that. China, of late, just has the money, incentive, and albeit short-sightedness to go big the way they have. Here in the US, we build towers to make a profit. Glass boxes are profitable.

In the Tribune article the architects said they had an alternative proposal that took off more of the flying buttresses from the original tower, but they didn't want to make something like a taller version of the smaller tower. It'd be interesting to see it.

Now place this at the spire site and we should be good to go!
https://images.adsttc.com/media/imag...jpg?1441303649
Source

My immediate reaction to the building was “ooo, looks evil”. I didn’t consciously recognize that the top referenced a Gothic arch, which tells me that it succeeded beautifully.

My only complaint is the color. I wish the bronze were darker and the glass more grey. That would also help it look less like an office building from the north and south, as well as reinforce the stylistic references to the Tribune Tower.

As for similarity to East Asian skyscrapers, I think that’s unfair. I haven’t seen the bronze and such interesting crowns on those buildings, nor are they usually as slender as this tower will be. This is most definitely breaking new ground for Chicago.

Yeah that was the alternate design that I saw and massed in my Chicago 3d model. It looked so much better!

Curbed Chicago has another rendering of the base showing the Tribune Tower in the background.

Image link to larger version:
https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chor...9.25.25_AM.png

-

Article:

https://chicago.curbed.com/2018/4/17...yscraper-hotel

At the end of the day it may look like a Super-tall from China. But there is one difference, this Tower has neighbors! Vista, Trump, Spire Site, and Tribune Addition. Will no doubt all complement each other (we have not seen the renderings for 400 N LSD but you can imagine). Does this fit in Chicago? YES. Does this represent Chicago Architecture? NO. Not everything in Chicago has to have the same old design (big, bulky, and scary).

Any casual person will still think of the John Hancock and Sears Towers when Chicago is brought up, and that's not going to change until the next generation of humanity. Same thing with NYC. Any casual person thinks of 1 WTC, Empire State, Chrysler, instead of thew newer stuff going up.

People need to calm down with the "Chinese Tower" criticism. It fits in with the Chicago skyline. Although visually I don't think there's anything special other then the crown. The rest of the tower is mediocre.

Dang. Do you remember any other details? Colors, materials, etc?

I wonder if they'll ever release the alternate design.

I think the critiquing is because alot of people expected more architecturally from this building...Yes its super-tall so for the most part we all still want it built..but with the respect of being so close to Tribune tower at least me i thought it would be something special with its design...I really would like to see there version of the Giant tribune tower alternate proposal they decided not to pick...again its a very nice design..obviously the height is amazing and wouldn't change anything about that... just wanted some more interesting design elements added to pay homage to such a magnificent structure that is tribune tower.

The detailing of the gold lines on the sides of the building are quite beautiful, now that I've spent more time looking at it. And admittedly, you'll see that angle from a lot of vantage points in the city.

This looks like it will have a great chance of being built. Sometime in 2019 is quite an aggressive time table. Add that to the mixed used nature of it ( I love the rental functionality being included). In other words, its not purely condos and I think the other functionalities will aid its success or probability in happening. The question I wonder is why the hell can't they shoot for a new tallest to the roof or to the architectural element (crown)? Maybe its to pay homage to the great Sears tower, as a sign of respect... but in hindsight, this is no time for respect!

Thanks :)

Location would of been impeccable, I just looked up the area around Loews Hotel. I see that Wacker is on the other side of the river, woops. :facepalm:

Seeing the base in context with the existing low rise portion of the Tribune complex really makes you appreciate how the architects respectfully imitate the art deco styling with the new addition. Really cool! :cool:

Lots of wealthy and well connected NIMBYs in the surrounding area. It would give them all a unifying banner of protest if this was to be the tallest building in Chicago. Being 2nd tallest somewhat shields the developers a bit from the unbridled idiot masses.

Can't really understand any NIMBY complains for this location. Who's really gonna be that impacted? People think it'll cause Michigan Avenue to be too congested, as if it's some sleepy area right now? LOL

NIMBY's barely have enough brain matter to formulate the primitive caveman-esque grunts they use to cry about whatever new development they happen to come across. It's a miracle they show up to community meetings with their pants on.

LOL! made my day :tup:

Well there are these folk - serves them right for covering up the Whales !

^ Lol! I had completely forgotten about that mural. I remember there being some pretty vocal feedback about that, especially for the artist. Never thought it was particularly good though, so I wasn't all that sad to see it go... unlike the 6 story red brick warehouse they ended up demoing for that condo. Would've been nice to at least preserve the facade, seeing that there isn't much of the old warehouse stock left in Streeterville.

Ah the whale mural. Totally forgot about that saga. Those owners are screwed anyway if Reilly allows redevelopment of the Optimus building.


Yes, this perplexes me as well. One of the articles quoted the developers as saying they didn't have that much of an ego, but that's nonsense. The marketing value of saying you have the tallest building in the city is totally worth it. The only logical explanation I see is they expect Related to go even higher on the Spire site.

If that's the case, developers must have confidence in the Chicago market. Common sense would say we're on the verge of being overbuilt. But you'd think developers would have a more sophisticated view of the market than most of us. And I doubt they'd be tossing out these proposals just for shits and giggles.

It occurred to me that it's worth pointing out while we are comparing this design to arch shaped supertalls "from China" that most of those designs are from America. Almost all of them were designed by either SOM, Smith Gill or KPF. Perhaps it should be noted as well that while these other arch shaped supertalls were going up with the rise of China America was going through a recession during which nobody in the US was building supertalls. In fact if it weren't for that recession we may have had two similarly formed supertalls already in Chicago the Waldorf and the Spire.

Yeah, but they're gonna get their views blocked whether it's 1,400 feet or 400 feet.

The base on this is really phenomenal. I like the depth and articulation of the glass... how it looks concaved or fluted. I also like how the tower portion seems somewhat concaved on the east and west sides. I feel this project has really gone in the right direction. I think aping Tribune Tower so that this would be a Tribune Tower on steroids would have been an utter mistake. That would have taken away from Tribune Tower. The architects needed to walk a delicate balance with this project. They needed it to make an emphatic impact without overshadowing or overwhelming Tribune Tower and I think they succeeded. I think they did many thing to give reverence and respect to Tribune Tower while also designing a spectacular new tower. I really like how the base integrates the original Tribune Tower with the new tower.

Maybe the downtown isn't the right place for you if you're scared your views will be interrupted, especially when you're literally right across the street from an empty lot like that... I mean views east from that building already in the first place probably aren't that good... and the south views are uninterrupted... unless that is you live there just to stare at 401 N Michigan all day...


Lol so true...

Here is a quote from Curbed by Gordon Gill that I think gives a good idea of the architects mindset in designing this project.

https://chicago.curbed.com/2018/4/17...yscraper-hotel

“As we explored various early concepts, we found we were either becoming the oversized parent of the Tribune or even being offensive to the existing building,” architect Gordon Gill told Curbed Chicago.

“The solution came down to striking a balance: speaking to the ethos of the gothic architecture—its verticality, the lace-like tracery of the details—while creating this ‘singular moment’ on the skyline,” Gill continued. “We tried something a little more simple and when we saw it we almost felt this sense of relief. The design no longer felt forced.”

No saving these whales
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2006-07-18/features/0607180234_1_mural-wyland-navy-pier

September 1, 2006



Bonus picture - Trump Tower that same day back in '06

https://i.imgur.com/Tq8eyOb.jpg

April 17, 2018





In order to stay more on topic, here are some pictures of the site from today.

OPINION
A whole lot of 'meh': Proposed Tribune tower
http://www.chicagobusiness.com/artic...cago-critiqued

ooph.

^ A stupid opinion, this proposal is nothing short of stunning.

I agree with the article, this proposal is 'meh' and for many of the reasons they stated, but they could have used a better quality image of the proposal on their site.

The access to a two level street is a real bonus here as with Vista. That shipping and receiving and similar services can happen on the lower level allows for the building's base to be right up flush with its neighbors creating a better street wall and pedestrian environment.

I hope this gets built (and they keep the color.) Its going be quite the postcard view with the Bridge, Tribune and new tower all together.

I think the success of this building, architecturally speaking, will depend on what the building looks like after construction. If they stick with the same materials, colors, etc. we could be looking at quite a cool building. If they don't, this building could end up being "meh". For some reason, I feel like the opinion I have now will be markedly different from the opinion I will have when (or if) this building is ever completed. I know opinions change, but this one is going to have a lot of people switching sides back and forth.

Did we read the same "article" (barely four paragraphs long and sloppy)? There were, at most, maybe two reasons stated with one being lame and the other being nonsensical.

Post rationalization. Its forced. Its an off the shelf trophy tower from 15 years ago. Am I the only one who thinks this proposal stinks? Living above the 20 floors is a chore. The location is rather blah, i lived there, never again without better transit to streeterville. And the design is played out, i mean how many greazy streaked glass walls can we take? And frankly a supertall office function is one thing, residences dont count for bragging rights about demand. Sorry for typos, angrily typing on phone.

Yea, it could be a little cooler, but I still like it.

Is this even a real proposal though? I'm taking it with a grain of salt in any case.

The tower itself is fine in and of itself, regardless of the similarity to other marquee towers in other cities. It's an ostensibly good design with some interesting subtleties.

But consider its neighbor and complement, McCormick's ego boost, the Tribune Tower. Love or hate the gothicism, it took a stand. Moreover, the competition surrounding its design fleshed out the vanguard of the architecture world, inspired future generations so strongly that the Biennial dedicated a fantastic exhibition last year to the competition's influence. http://chicagoarchitecturebiennial.o...th-revisiting/
Does anyone feel the same energy towards the design process or the final design of this tower? Will kids doodle this design in the same fashion that I drew the Sears Tower and JHC as a kid? I doubt it. It's too safe, reflective of the times rather than pushing forward.

I've refrained from commenting for now, but I can't bite my tongue any longer. What I see here is all I needed to see to disregard the opinions of many people in the future and save my breath. From what I can see, many of you are quite literally impossible to please. This building is tall, elegant, uses good materials, doesn't try to outshine or use obnoxious mimicry in relation to the Tribune tower(something I know you would complain about if it had done this, despite many of you being mad it didn't do this exact thing), and has an amazing base.

If you can find a reason to shit on this building and call it meh, you will hate everything that gets built in this city. If the Sears Tower had not been built half a century ago and was getting built today you would all call it monolithic(in a bad way), boring and disrespectful. Enjoy being saddened by every proposal for the remainder of your lives, because it will not get better than this in Chicago.

I for one think that while it isn't quite perfect(there are admittedly a few tweaks to be made and still can be), it is still a stunner and should be applauded. I could keep ranting, but I'll keep it to this

This article is literal garbage and should be put in the internet shredder lol

Kind of embarrassing the writer took time to type this out, read it, and go, "yeah I want to put my name on this jumbled mess of illogical contridictions". Oof indeed :uhh:

It's an elegant design and if she's built she will only add to our skyline!



Opinions are like assholes every has one, and all i see here are are a bunch of opinions......

You say as you give your opinion... :uhh:

I don't think the building is a bad building. The design in itself is quality enough, it's just boring and safe and it looks like they pulled a concept proposal out of the bin meant for Tianjin instead of a partner building to the Tribune Tower here in Chicago.

Sounds like you just disagree with the author on the subject. It's not going to win any penmanship awards but the article was fine and detailed some of my feelings on this proposal.

It looks like an old person's vision of the future, kind of retro. It literally is a 1990s design which found it's audience in Asia and Dubai in the early 2000s. You may think Chicago cant do better and should settle but I dont, I think the old guard who is still obsessed with height for heights sake and shiny glass should let a young buck take a swing. The new era is about making the comprehensive whole better, complimenting neighbors and street scapes, not eye candy. The Sears tower managed to do all of it, relate to the miesian boxes of Chicago, be articulated and tall due to economic necessity of the client, this proposal and sadly many like it around the globe, are pure hype. I feared the day Dubai pimp bling towers would land in Chicago but alas, here they come.

Whats funny is the original Tribune Tower, while still beautiful, stole and recycled it's designs from European architecture. A trend that was popular at the time for skyscrapers. There were proposals way more contemporary and forward thinking proposed for the site that lost out.

Maybe this addition is a modern day version of that. A recycling of designs going on in Asia and bringing them to America. This move is in no way bland to me and if built will be crazy impactful. I just wish they went with the modern big brother to Tribune design. It would of been iconic while still feeling right at home in Chicago.

How the hell did Sears Tower complement it’s neighbors and streetscapes?

Sears overwhelmed everything around it and was surrounded by bunkers, basically. Only now is the rehab of its base going to make it more of an appealing and vibrant part of the cityscape

Guys this design is pretty great, all the criticism being lobbed is boorish nonsense.

First of all "it's boring", no it's not, it's huge and we'll detailed and a unified form. My concern here was that AS GG were going to shit out one of their eco turds with like seven blow through with turbines or some shit. Ick. Instead we got restrained classical AS design. If this gets build you will all shut up when it becomes apparent that it's a fantastic design. It makes Vista look low res and like a gimmick. I was worried we were going to get something busy like that or something like the alternative design that tried to ape Tribune. This is the best outcome.

Second of all, it's typical AS genius, I really like AS the more I see of his designs. He is a master at referincing nearby buildings without overpowering them. This reminds me of how Trump Tower looks over Wrigley completely complementing its massing and adding to the view, not stealing the show. This will ultimately look over Tribune in a similarly complementary way. It also reflects Tribuned monolithic massing and crown in much the same way as Trump does that to Wrigleys wedding cake and crown.

Finally, and here's Adrian Smith being a genius again, he goes back to 1989 and references himself. The east and West faces of this building draw directly from NBC Towers center stripe. It's literally just like he extracted that gold verticle mullion pattern and applied it to this building. Again, freaking awesome. He's doing what he did with Trump drawing the facade of IBM in to further contextualize the building.

At the end of the day this tower does something none of the supposed Asian clones do, it fits right into an old school urban built environment. This location on cityfront plaza is beautiful and this tower fits right it. The base locks right into Tribune like a key. This is quality design and anyone who says otherwise is just looking for a gimmick. Heres a hint, Sears and Hancock weren't radical because people set out to make something crazy and flashy, they were radical in their restraint sourcing their design from their structure. There isn't potential anymore to make a classic design by being crazy, that ship has sailed because, as others have pointed out, it's all been done before now. So you need to win with theory and details which this building does.


These are all chodes compared to this tower, fat and ill proportioned. Just because a building tapers to a point doesn't mean it's the same design.

These developers are living my dream, I want to build a building some day that's literally one foot short of setting some record just to piss all the skyscraper nerds off. If I were building a 1400' building I'd be pretty damn happy with myself regardless of whether or not it's taller than Sears. I'd be concerning myself with not bankrupting myself by going too big.

Wow. Someone is carrying a grudge against Ms. Gang...

For the most part, America is of European heritage and culture. A huge portion of the buildings in this country are European inspired. We didn't "steal" European architectural influence as much as inherited it.