HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > Proposals


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
     
     
  #1  
Old Posted Oct 22, 2015, 5:43 PM
spyguy's Avatar
spyguy spyguy is offline
THAT Guy
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 5,949
Cool CHICAGO | 400 N Lake Shore Drive | 875 FT & 765 FT | ? & ? FLOORS

current design:







older schemes:






















Last edited by Steely Dan; Jan 6, 2022 at 7:18 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2  
Old Posted Oct 22, 2015, 5:44 PM
Steely Dan's Avatar
Steely Dan Steely Dan is offline
devout Pizzatarian
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Lincoln Square, Chicago
Posts: 26,462
^ interesting.

i mean, BIG > Stern, am i right?

Related promised something "architecturally significant".

this sounds like a step in the right direction.
__________________
"every time a strip mall dies, an angel gets its wings"
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3  
Old Posted Oct 22, 2015, 6:03 PM
BVictor1's Avatar
BVictor1 BVictor1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 9,971
Is this worthy of starting a new thread for yet?
__________________
titanic1
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4  
Old Posted Oct 22, 2015, 6:07 PM
Steely Dan's Avatar
Steely Dan Steely Dan is offline
devout Pizzatarian
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Lincoln Square, Chicago
Posts: 26,462
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVictor1 View Post
Is this worthy of starting a new thread for yet?
Yes. Absolutely yes.

we have to discuss this juicy rumor, and we need a place to do it.

and something BIG (get it?) will eventually be built on this site, so let's discuss the possibilities.
__________________
"every time a strip mall dies, an angel gets its wings"

Last edited by Steely Dan; Oct 22, 2015 at 6:30 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5  
Old Posted Oct 22, 2015, 6:04 PM
ithakas's Avatar
ithakas ithakas is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 871
Quote:
Originally Posted by spyguy View Post
Very interesting news. A few years ago I would have salivated at the prospect of Chicago getting a BIG building, but now I'm cautiously optimistic about him handling this site – his work seems to be best suited for mid-rise/institutional uses, at least after the disappointing WTC2 design.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6  
Old Posted Oct 22, 2015, 6:29 PM
intrepidDesign's Avatar
intrepidDesign intrepidDesign is offline
Windy City Dan
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Chicago
Posts: 483
Quote:
Originally Posted by ithakas View Post
Very interesting news. A few years ago I would have salivated at the prospect of Chicago getting a BIG building, but now I'm cautiously optimistic about him handling this site – his work seems to be best suited for mid-rise/institutional uses, at least after the disappointing WTC2 design.
I dunno, i kinda like WTC2, I like all the WTC buildings, both built an proposed. Yeah some are more avant garde than others, but over all they are all very tasteful. The building I like least in the WTC complex, coincidentally enough, is the Calatrava train station, I'm over the bone fish aesthetic. I'm reasonably certain we'll get something nice.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7  
Old Posted Oct 22, 2015, 6:42 PM
SamInTheLoop SamInTheLoop is offline
you know where I'll be
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,378
Wooaaahhh. Hello. This is indeed BIG news.....


Exciting intel here......despite the fact that I, as many seem to, think their design is a downgrade from Foster's at 2 WTC, and disappointing in some ways in its own right, this is still exciting and I'm optimistic that they will come up with something compelling for the spire site if Related has in fact handed its design to them.....
__________________
It's simple, really - try not to design or build trash.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8  
Old Posted Oct 23, 2015, 7:51 PM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is offline
TL;DR
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: the city o'wind
Posts: 15,671
Quote:
Originally Posted by ithakas View Post
Very interesting news. A few years ago I would have salivated at the prospect of Chicago getting a BIG building, but now I'm cautiously optimistic about him handling this site – his work seems to be best suited for mid-rise/institutional uses, at least after the disappointing WTC2 design.
Exactly. BIG evolved out of Rem Koolhaas/OMA - the really revolutionary aspect of their design practice is the way they add logical pieces to the program of the building so they become little microcosms of the city. This is a really great way to design civic and institutional projects - the buildings aren't intended to make money, and the fundraising often happens after the architect gets involved so there are opportunities to increase the budget accordingly. After the building opens, you wonder how your city functioned without it.

Unfortunately, this doesn't work so well for the private sector. Related no doubt has an exact dollar figure on this project, and they will push BIG so that they come in at that amount and not a cent higher. That reduces BIG to the role of "form-maker", which they're not so great at.

If I were King of Chicago, I would much rather have BIG design something for the Thompson Center site. They would knock it out of the park there.
__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9  
Old Posted Oct 23, 2015, 9:07 PM
VKChaz VKChaz is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: California
Posts: 515
Quote:
Originally Posted by ardecila View Post
....This is a really great way to design civic and institutional projects - the buildings aren't intended to make money
....
Unfortunately, this doesn't work so well for the private sector. Related no doubt has an exact dollar figure on this project, and they will push BIG so that they come in at that amount and not a cent higher. ....

If I were King of Chicago, I would much rather have BIG design something for the Thompson Center site. They would knock it out of the park there.
Why would that or any other site be different from the Spire site? BIG would still be constrained by a budget.....
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10  
Old Posted Oct 23, 2015, 9:31 PM
emathias emathias is offline
Adoptive Chicagoan
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: River North, Chicago, Illinois
Posts: 5,157
Quote:
Originally Posted by VKChaz View Post
Why would that or any other site be different from the Spire site? BIG would still be constrained by a budget.....
He past talked about how BIG designs things to integrate community functions, so I think he assumes that they would do a better-than-average job enabling cross functions between the existing link to the pedway system, City Hall, the subway and the 'L'.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11  
Old Posted Oct 23, 2015, 9:55 PM
VKChaz VKChaz is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: California
Posts: 515
Quote:
Originally Posted by emathias View Post
He past talked about how BIG designs things to integrate community functions, so I think he assumes that they would do a better-than-average job enabling cross functions between the existing link to the pedway system, City Hall, the subway and the 'L'.
I see. Sounds like that might be BIG's forte. Though if that particular building is replaced, it won't be by a public building. For some developers, the functions mentioned may pose constraints they simply want no part of.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12  
Old Posted Oct 22, 2015, 6:20 PM
munchymunch's Avatar
munchymunch munchymunch is offline
MPLSXCHI
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Omicron Persei 8
Posts: 1,070
BIG wow hopefully it won't be extremely tacky. Still good news best architect they've ever chosen.
__________________
"I don't want to be interesting. I want to be good." -Ludwig Mies van der Rohe
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13  
Old Posted Oct 22, 2015, 6:40 PM
Jibba's Avatar
Jibba Jibba is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,776
Hmmm... would rather have Smith & Gil, Herzog, or Richard Rogers than the contrivance I'm afraid BIG will propose, but I'll wait and see, obviously.

I still haven't fully mourned the loss of the Spire. Sigh...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14  
Old Posted Oct 22, 2015, 8:31 PM
Ch.G, Ch.G's Avatar
Ch.G, Ch.G Ch.G, Ch.G is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,138
Quote:
Originally Posted by ithakas View Post
Very interesting news. A few years ago I would have salivated at the prospect of Chicago getting a BIG building, but now I'm cautiously optimistic about him handling this site – his work seems to be best suited for mid-rise/institutional uses, at least after the disappointing WTC2 design.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jibba View Post
Hmmm... would rather have Smith & Gil, Herzog, or Richard Rogers than the contrivance I'm afraid BIG will propose, but I'll wait and see, obviously.

I still haven't fully mourned the loss of the Spire. Sigh...
Yeah, I kinda agree with you guys. I think Richard Rogers would be well-suited for Chicago; there's a muscular expressiveness in his work. I like Renzo Piano's forays into skyscraper design, too. The NYT building is way underrated. I wouldn't trust Smith and Gill not to do something safe/staid, and color me unimpressed by the execution of HdeM's Jenga tower. BIG would have a few tall buildings under their belt by the time this thing'd break ground, so maybe that would help.

Also very much agreed about the loss of the Spire. It was perfect for this site.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #15  
Old Posted May 17, 2018, 1:05 AM
wrab's Avatar
wrab wrab is offline
Deerhoof Evangelist
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,668
(del)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #16  
Old Posted Oct 23, 2015, 11:59 AM
Tom Servo's Avatar
Tom Servo Tom Servo is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,647
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jibba View Post
Hmmm... would rather have Smith & Gil, Herzog, or Richard Rogers than the contrivance I'm afraid BIG will propose, but I'll wait and see, obviously.
Smith & Gill? Uh, no thanks. Adrian Smith was the head architect behind the tower of shit that is Trump Tower. Again, pass.

Herzog + De Meuron might be the greatest architecture firm in the world. One step at a time. But I like your thinking.

Agreed on Richard Rogers too. He kicks ass. Puts BIG and their silly digram-heavy design gimmicks to shame.

That being said, I still really like pretty much everything coming out of the BIG office. And anything BIG [potentially] dreams up for this site would likely be visually stunning as their work tends to be better than great. They're like the world-class version of Studio Gang.


newcondosinvancouver.com

designboom.com

dailymail.co.uk



dezeen.com

greendiary.com


...yeah, let's not forget how exceptionally good they are at designing tall buildings.


Quote:
I still haven't fully mourned the loss of the Spire. Sigh...
Meh, it was awkwardly tall anyway. Whatever. Would've been nice because Calatrava and all, but the thing looked like a giant unicorn horn. Was never 100% sold on it to be honest.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #17  
Old Posted Oct 23, 2015, 2:49 PM
Jibba's Avatar
Jibba Jibba is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,776
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Servo View Post
Smith & Gill? Uh, no thanks. Adrian Smith was the head architect behind the tower of shit that is Trump Tower. Again, pass.
Let's be fair, now. S&G is arguably a very talented firm that consistently delivers. Their buildings are high-quality and high-performance. And they know how to use materials beautifully.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #18  
Old Posted Oct 22, 2015, 7:45 PM
Randomguy34's Avatar
Randomguy34 Randomguy34 is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Chicago & Philly
Posts: 1,714
Looks like the "to" in "a possible Spire part to" is the Danish word for "two". Don't know why they chose to use the Danish word instead of the American one, other than to be punny, because it looks as though it were a typo and it gets confusing with the American word "to" (I think I'm confused after re-reading this sentence). Linguistics aside, the idea of a Chicago Spire 2.0 makes me wonder how similar it will be to the previous design.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #19  
Old Posted Oct 22, 2015, 7:52 PM
BVictor1's Avatar
BVictor1 BVictor1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 9,971
I asked someone from Related about this and I was asked where I heard this info and I said I read a little blurb that had no verifying information.

When i delved deeper and asked if they could throw me a bone, I was shot down.

That act almost makes me believe that there's more truth to some of this than not...
__________________
titanic1
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20  
Old Posted Oct 22, 2015, 8:10 PM
Skyguy_7 Skyguy_7 is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,657
BIG; "Your Supertall Foundation-adaptation Specialists"

Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > Proposals
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 5:15 AM.

     

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