HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > Proposals


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #261  
Old Posted Feb 24, 2017, 5:58 AM
TimeAgain TimeAgain is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 204
At this point, I'm just hoping this thing is as tall as Vista.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #262  
Old Posted Feb 24, 2017, 11:43 PM
gramsjdg's Avatar
gramsjdg gramsjdg is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 747
Quote:
Originally Posted by HomrQT View Post
Chicago has been looking forward to this site redefining our skyline for 12 years. Hopefully the wait is worth the payoff. As far as our place in the "tallest buildings in the world" department, we're getting edged out of even being in the top 15 since apparently post design antennas don't count for whatever bs reason.
Couldn't agree more. How the Sears Tower's cladded antennas don't count but WTC-1's un-cladded (and uncompleted) cable-guyed skeleton counts is beyond ridiculous.

CTBUH likely caved to 911 sentimentality pressure, at least that's what my money is on.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #263  
Old Posted Mar 11, 2017, 6:11 PM
pianowizard pianowizard is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: SE Michigan, US
Posts: 758
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Saturn64 View Post
The Gateway Tower (seen in post 268) is magnificent, isn't it?
OMG yes! If built, this would be by far the most magnificient skyscraper in North America, not just in terms of sheer height but of design as well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by HomrQT View Post
Chicago has been looking forward to this site redefining our skyline for 12 years. Hopefully the wait is worth the payoff. As far as our place in the "tallest buildings in the world" department, we're getting edged out of even being in the top 15 since apparently post design antennas don't count for whatever bs reason.
I was in Chicago earlier this week and was surprised that the Sears/Willis Tower no longer looked very tall; it used to seem taller to me. I have seen the 2074-foot Shanghai Tower in person and it appeared much, much taller. Even the 1588-foot International Commerce Center in Hong Kong looked obviously taller than Sears. Chicago deserves this 2000-footer. This height would qualify it as a "megatall", wouldn't it? I think 600 m is usually used as the threshold for megatalls.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #264  
Old Posted Mar 11, 2017, 9:33 PM
HomrQT's Avatar
HomrQT HomrQT is offline
All-American City Boy
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Hinsdale / Uptown, Chicago
Posts: 1,879
Quote:
Originally Posted by pianowizard View Post
OMG yes! If built, this would be by far the most magnificient skyscraper in North America, not just in terms of sheer height but of design as well.



I was in Chicago earlier this week and was surprised that the Sears/Willis Tower no longer looked very tall; it used to seem taller to me. I have seen the 2074-foot Shanghai Tower in person and it appeared much, much taller. Even the 1588-foot International Commerce Center in Hong Kong looked obviously taller than Sears. Chicago deserves this 2000-footer. This height would qualify it as a "megatall", wouldn't it? I think 600 m is usually used as the threshold for megatalls.
I absolutely agree. There is a healthy global competition in skyscraper development and Chicago is losing ground. A nice 2000 footer would put us back in the ballpark.
__________________
1. 111 W 57 - Manhattan, New York - SHoP Architects - Photo
2. The Smith Center - Las Vegas, Nevada - David M. Schwarz Architects - Photo
3. One Chicago Square - Chicago - HPA and Goettsch Partners - Photo
4. Chicago Board of Trade - Chicago - Holabird & Root - Photo
5. Cathedral of Learning - Pittsburgh - Charles Klauder - Photo
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #265  
Old Posted Mar 11, 2017, 9:53 PM
denizen467 denizen467 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,212
Quote:
Originally Posted by gramsjdg View Post
Couldn't agree more. How the Sears Tower's cladded antennas don't count but WTC-1's un-cladded (and uncompleted) cable-guyed skeleton counts is beyond ridiculous.

CTBUH likely caved to 911 sentimentality pressure, at least that's what my money is on.
This is correct; CTBUH members who voted even privately cited (subtle) pressure in approving the uncompleted skeleton as being architectural. One person said he didn't want to be the one guy denying it, especially after all the complication and delay getting the building up. It didn't help that the CTBUH is based in Chicago and they would look very biased if they denied it, thereby keeping the record-holder in Chicago, in what would be viewed as borderline situation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SolarWind View Post
Those trees kind of look like they're gathered for a funeral...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #266  
Old Posted Mar 15, 2017, 1:57 PM
lu9 lu9 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Chicago
Posts: 213
^^ such a good call. Or to put a positive spin on it...

gathered for a ground-breaking ceremony? for NA's tallest tower
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #267  
Old Posted Mar 15, 2017, 2:10 PM
UPChicago's Avatar
UPChicago UPChicago is offline
Vote for me for Mayor!
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Chicago
Posts: 786
Can we lock this thread, so depressing....
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #268  
Old Posted Mar 16, 2017, 1:59 PM
lu9 lu9 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Chicago
Posts: 213
^^ I would hope so. Jeez! Can you imagine the carrying cost on this thing? I'd imagine Related would want to get going ASAP. They may have missed the boat already. I'm guessing there is a lot going on behind the scenes at the moment including some wooing of Chinese money like their competitor across the river.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #269  
Old Posted Mar 16, 2017, 4:02 PM
JK47 JK47 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 355
Quote:
Originally Posted by lu9 View Post
^^ I would hope so. Jeez! Can you imagine the carrying cost on this thing? I'd imagine Related would want to get going ASAP. They may have missed the boat already. I'm guessing there is a lot going on behind the scenes at the moment including some wooing of Chinese money like their competitor across the river.

That's going to get a lot harder going forward, at least for projects with big price tags, as Chinese regulators are starting to really step up enforcement of the strict capital controls.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #270  
Old Posted Mar 23, 2017, 3:26 PM
Reinsdorf Sucks's Avatar
Reinsdorf Sucks Reinsdorf Sucks is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Chicago
Posts: 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright View Post
The question being weren't we supposed to hear something in the first half of this year about the new project for this site? Wonder if Related solicited visionary proposals in a little mini competition. Perhaps this was Gensler's submission?
They did have a mini competition this time last year for at least a supertall, but didn't go with any of the submissions.

Quote:
Originally Posted by KWILLSKYLINE View Post
No way^^^ I could see Magellan keeping theirs under 900' but I dont think Related is stupid enough to keep the spire site anything less than Vista.
I believe it's the opposite. As soon as Vista broke ground the vision for this site was scaled back, and now it's likely to be 2 shorter towers.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #271  
Old Posted Mar 23, 2017, 3:45 PM
FrankLloydWrong FrankLloydWrong is offline
Constantly Sketching
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Chicago
Posts: 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reinsdorf Sucks View Post
They did have a mini competition this time last year for at least a supertall, but didn't go with any of the submissions.



I believe it's the opposite. As soon as Vista broke ground the vision for this site was scaled back, and now it's likely to be 2 shorter towers.
This is what I've heard as well. Two towers, SOM design.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #272  
Old Posted Mar 23, 2017, 3:47 PM
ithakas's Avatar
ithakas ithakas is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 871
Quote:
Originally Posted by FrankLloydWrong View Post
This is what I've heard as well. Two towers, SOM design.
Hopefully the design on Rush happened because the top Chicago talent's been working on this...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #273  
Old Posted Mar 23, 2017, 4:01 PM
JK47 JK47 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 355
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reinsdorf Sucks View Post
I believe it's the opposite. As soon as Vista broke ground the vision for this site was scaled back, and now it's likely to be 2 shorter towers.

That ticks me off so much. Frankly if they decide to go smaller I hope that site gets downzoned to a parking lot.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #274  
Old Posted Mar 23, 2017, 4:21 PM
HomrQT's Avatar
HomrQT HomrQT is offline
All-American City Boy
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Hinsdale / Uptown, Chicago
Posts: 1,879
Quote:
Originally Posted by JK47 View Post
That ticks me off so much. Frankly if they decide to go smaller I hope that site gets downzoned to a parking lot.
Woah, let's not go crazy here.
__________________
1. 111 W 57 - Manhattan, New York - SHoP Architects - Photo
2. The Smith Center - Las Vegas, Nevada - David M. Schwarz Architects - Photo
3. One Chicago Square - Chicago - HPA and Goettsch Partners - Photo
4. Chicago Board of Trade - Chicago - Holabird & Root - Photo
5. Cathedral of Learning - Pittsburgh - Charles Klauder - Photo
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #275  
Old Posted Mar 23, 2017, 11:30 PM
chicubs111 chicubs111 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,222
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reinsdorf Sucks View Post
They did have a mini competition this time last year for at least a supertall, but didn't go with any of the submissions.



I believe it's the opposite. As soon as Vista broke ground the vision for this site was scaled back, and now it's likely to be 2 shorter towers.
and may I ask where are you getting your information from?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #276  
Old Posted Mar 24, 2017, 12:03 AM
chicubs111 chicubs111 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,222
This was the most recent article of substance regarding the spire site...

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/reale...uth-loop-sites
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #277  
Old Posted Mar 24, 2017, 12:09 AM
TimeAgain TimeAgain is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 204
Quote:
Originally Posted by FrankLloydWrong View Post
This is what I've heard as well. Two towers, SOM design.
Twin Towers design by SOM is what Related submitted for the site 15 years ago, before the Spire won. It may still be a Twin Towers design that they go with, but I think people are reporting old info.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #278  
Old Posted Mar 24, 2017, 1:06 AM
FrankLloydWrong FrankLloydWrong is offline
Constantly Sketching
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Chicago
Posts: 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by TimeAgain View Post
Twin Towers design by SOM is what Related submitted for the site 15 years ago, before the Spire won. It may still be a Twin Towers design that they go with, but I think people are reporting old info.
I heard this recently from someone in the know. I have no reason to doubt the information I was given.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #279  
Old Posted Mar 24, 2017, 2:24 AM
Reinsdorf Sucks's Avatar
Reinsdorf Sucks Reinsdorf Sucks is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Chicago
Posts: 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by FrankLloydWrong View Post
I heard this recently from someone in the know. I have no reason to doubt the information I was given.
Same here.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #280  
Old Posted Mar 24, 2017, 2:31 AM
chicubs111 chicubs111 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,222
^ .. I think your both the same person trolling....I mean what are odds you both only have 19 posts on this forum ...lol...
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 5:19 AM.

     

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