CHICAGO | Tribune Tower Addition | 1,442 FT | 113 FLOORS

[donnie]

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......

[HomrQT]

Originally Posted by donnie

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...

[HomrQT]

Originally Posted by mark0

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.

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.

[HomrQT]

Originally Posted by JK47

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.

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.

[mark0]

Originally Posted by Kumdogmillionaire

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

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.

[rgarri4]

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.

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by mark0

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.

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

[LouisVanDerWright]

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.

Originally Posted by HomrQT

https://i.imgur.com/nC7mCGg.jpg

Had South Korean Lotte Tower in the mix by mistake. Not that South Korea is terribly far from China.

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.

Originally Posted by spyguy

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.

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.

[pilsenarch]

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

It makes Vista look low res and like a gimmick. I was worried we were going to get something busy like that...

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

[HomrQT]

Originally Posted by rgarri4

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.

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.

[UPChicago]

I'm so confused with all of the negative opinions of this design, I wonder what most of you actually think is a good design....

[OhioGuy]

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

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

I’m 99% with you on everything you said (except the brief mention of Vista, which I like too).

Originally Posted by vandelay

Having said that, look at Salesforce in San Francisco. It's boring, it's generic, but it still adds a lot to the skyline. Better a team player than a showboater.

I too thought of SF’s Salesforce Tower, though I don’t find it boring. I love the look in context to the overall skyline, which you noted it adds a lot to the skyline. I think the same will happen with Tribune Tower. Some may find it boring, while others like myself find it appealing. But at the end of the day I’m pretty confident it will end up having a very positive impact to the overall aesthetic of Chicago’s skyline, just as the somewhat alienating design of Salesforce Tower has done for the SF skyline.

[OhioGuy]

Btw are there any renderings from the south, perhaps showing Grant/Millennium Parks in the foreground with the skyline in the background? I’m curious to see how much of an impact this Tower would have when viewed from the south. Maybe a skyline shot from the Museum Campus looking north-northwest across the lakefront and Grant Park which includes Streeterville?

[gebs]

Originally Posted by OhioGuy

Btw are there any renderings from the south, perhaps showing Grant/Millennium Parks in the foreground with the skyline in the background? I’m curious to see how much of an impact this Tower would have when viewed from the south. Maybe a skyline shot from the Museum Campus looking north-northwest across the lakefront and Grant Park which includes Streeterville?

No, but it should only be a matter of time before rgarri shows us his SKetchUp model of Chicago with the Smith+Gill design and its proper height / massing. I know a lot of us are patiently waiting to see how it would look from Grant Park and the West Loop because the renderings showed during Monday's meeting were mostly up close or from the immediately surrounding area.

[k1052]

Don't really appreciate all the hate for this. Looks fine, if not groundbreaking, to me. Plan for the reuse of the existing buildings looks good and using the lower level for a bunch of access helps neuter the "traffic" or "infrastructure" arguments from people who are really just worried about their views.

[cannedairspray]

Originally Posted by mark0

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.

Say whatever about the building, but I have to admit that I just laughed hard at the "1990s and 2000s old people" thing. Is that what passes as "old" now?

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by k1052

Don't really appreciate all the hate for this .

"all of the hate" is like 2 guys.

don't mistake volume for numbers.

[left of center]

Originally Posted by Kumdogmillionaire

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

Pretty much in agreement with this comment. This is a solid design that will add to Chicago's architectural diversity and legacy. It pays homage to the Tribune tower without overdoing it and risking being a gaudy imitation of it. The choice in materials is great as well, with the gold vertical fins contrasting well with the light blue glass.

It might not be edgy or ground breaking, but it's still a well designed building. And quite frankly, Chicago doesn't have this specific type of international style in its collection as of now, so it will be a welcome addition to the city's portfolio.

[Patrick]

Originally Posted by 2PRUROCKS!

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.”

When the design was first revealed I was a tad disappointed, I expected something that would resemble the Tribune Tower more and not an Asian supertall. However, upon closer inspection it really started to grow on me. After reading the architect's mindset I can't help but feel this design is almost perfect for this location.

Had it been designed to resemble the Tribune Tower it would have most likely came off as tacky or overbearing to the original building. I love how the design has very subtle gothic elements and a strong verticality to it. The vertical lines draw your eye straight to the top which prevents the design from competing with its smaller counterpart, despite being three times taller. Not to mention its position in the skyline is damn near perfect, adding a nice focal point to the center of the skyline when viewed from the east or west, which happen to be its best sides.

I'm rooting for this tower and hope it gets built as is, it's definitely worthy of standing alongside the city's tallest (I'm sorry but this screams Chicago way more than that ill-proportioned Vista mess) I'm sure once it's done the naysayers will be pleasantly surprised by how well it fits the area.

[Rocket49]

Originally Posted by left of center

It might not be edgy or ground breaking, but it's still a well designed building. And quite frankly, Chicago doesn't have this specific type of international style in its collection as of now, so it will be a welcome addition to the city's portfolio.

Totally agree.

I think the building complements the Tribune Tower nicely and fits in well with the Mag Mile & Streeterville neighborhoods.

On the other hand, it would be a shame if something iconic wasn't built at 400 N LSD.