CHICAGO: ORD & MDW discussion - Page 122

spyguy · #**2421** Posted **Jan 17, 2019, 5:13 AM**

Remember, first prize designs the main global terminal and runner-up gets the remote concourses.

While I like Gang's design, I would be nervous picking a firm that has never completed an infrastructure project.

I really like Calatrava's terminal but the whole scheme seems a bit ambitious and beyond what the city asked for (and willing to pay).

Fentress and SOM are fine too, though a little on the safer side.

So I'd go Foster for the terminal + Calatrava for the concourses.

Edit: also can we at least get some glass jet bridges in these visions?

LouisVanDerWright · #**2422** Posted **Jan 17, 2019, 5:18 AM**

Holy shit if they could build that calatrava as rendered...

SIGSEGV · #**2423** Posted **Jan 17, 2019, 5:22 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

Holy shit if they could build that calatrava as rendered...

Then I would be taking the Blue Line to O'Hare to take walks through that park...

sentinel · #**2424** Posted **Jan 17, 2019, 5:40 AM**

FUCK SOM, the most boring and least innovative of all of the proposals....even though (full disclosure) I have a professional stake in the Team ORD (Gang) team proposal. So...vote for Pedro, er, Studio Gang!

nomarandlee · #**2425** Posted **Jan 17, 2019, 5:42 AM**

Go to go with Foster as well. Very nice both inside and out.

2nd would be Gang. Like Calatrava it also looks like it would maybe have office/retail components across current terminal 1 and 3.

Santigao's looks very nice but it looks like the potential to be a solar room and at first look twice as expensive as nearly any of the other proposals.

Fentress on the inside looks nice but on the outside it is relatively ho-hum compared to the first three.

SOM while it would be a BIG upgrade looks rather meh to me compared to the rest. It seems like it can't decide if it wants to hark back to its International school roots or reject it in parts. Kind of wish they would have gone with a Miessian aesthetic on steroids. Big, black, hard corners, modern industrial.

Any of the five would be rather an awesome upgrade and would make ORD one of the best airports in the nation IMO. It is a matter of relative scale which is more impressive.

Speculator · #**2426** Posted **Jan 17, 2019, 7:18 AM**

Wow. If the actual product is close to any of these then this will be by far the best in the US and rival some of the world's best. I'll believe it when I see it but so far so good. Well done (so far), Chicago!

Skyguy_7 · #**2427** Posted **Jan 17, 2019, 1:20 PM**

RE: Ohare proposals

"..the new Ground Zero transportation center.." ...GROUND ZERO...What in the f'ing F? Do these journalistas not have access to Google? Pitiful.

Calatrava has my vote regardless of the issues his structures have. The design is gorgeous. And they age so well. I don't know when the Milwaukee museum will appear obsolete or dated. I also like how the terminal has a diamond shape with many many straight lines and angles. The other proposals look more or less like a blanket draped over structural beams and columns. Not very Chicago.

the urban politician · #**2428** Posted **Jan 17, 2019, 3:11 PM**

I like the Calatrava design the best, but he should ditch the outdoor gardens, I think. Won’t be used for much of the year.

Runner up is the Gang design. Love the wood aesthetic.

The SOM design is lame as hell.

F1 Tommy · #**2429** Posted **Jan 17, 2019, 3:26 PM**

Calatrava, although the roof might leak and it will be over budget. It would look nice next to the UAL terminal.

Via Chicago · #**2430** Posted **Jan 17, 2019, 3:54 PM**

the big thing that is difficult to parse from these images is the nitty gritty. how does each handle traffic flow and potential bottlenecks? can it accommodate mass delays efficiently? are restrooms located in convenient places? what kind of food offerings will be there? how clear is signage? big spaces are nice, but what about heating/cooling all of that? how well does it mitigate food smells? its kind of ironic to me how we are at the stage that everyone is bashing the Thompson Center atrium for its flaws, but are suddenly on board once again with big cavernous spaces because its new and sexy.

but yea IMO gang would be untested on a project of this magnitude and a skyscraper is different than a piece of vital transportation infrastructure. we know Calatrava can be hit or miss with his design complexity and execution...his accepted proposal with DIA turned out to be a disaster and was eventually withdrawn, and thats to say nothing of all the headaches at WTC and other locations. for those reasons alone i doubt either gets the pick.

i really think it comes down to SOM and Foster. honestly its easy to bash the SOM design for being safe, but i bet more than any other firm they have all their ducks in a row and know what the officials are looking for, rather than just a piece of whiz bang sculpture

Buckman821 · #**2431** Posted **Jan 17, 2019, 3:56 PM**

My #1 would be the Foster design. This just looks awesome.
My #2 would be the Gang design.

Calatrava design is cool - but it's kinda like looking at a concept car. I mean it's cool but it's never going to end up like this so why even bother.

SOM design seems not ambitious enough to me personally.

All of them will be such a gigantic improvement over what is there now though. I just cant wait for any of this to be reality. O'hare is such an embarrassment today.

Via Chicago · #**2432** Posted **Jan 17, 2019, 4:02 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Buckman821

All of them will be such a gigantic improvement over what is there now though. I just cant wait for any of this to be reality. O'hare is such an embarrassment today.

i think this is a kind of unfair. ohare is actually very functional and compared to other airports, pretty easy to navigate. its not "sexy" or ultra modern at the current time, but it does its thing well. obviously it needs upgrades over the next 20 years but i honestly dont have many complaints when i fly out of there.

stand in the un-air conditioned customs line deep in the bowels Mexico City's airport staffed by 2 attendants and get back to me about embarrassments.

Buckman821 · #**2433** Posted **Jan 17, 2019, 4:06 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Via Chicago

i think this is a kind of unfair. ohare is actually very functional and compared to other airports, pretty easy to navigate. its not "sexy" or ultra modern at the current time, but it does its thing well. obviously it needs upgrades over the next 20 years but i honestly dont have many complaints when i fly out of there.

go to Mexico City's airport and get back to me about embarrassments.

Ha. How timely - I'm going there for the first time in 7 days.

Your points are well taken but still - we really need this. Chicago is punching below it's weight currently.

Via Chicago · #**2434** Posted **Jan 17, 2019, 4:17 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Buckman821

Ha. How timely - I'm going there for the first time in 7 days.

Your points are well taken but still - we really need this. Chicago is punching below it's weight currently.

its a fantastic city. enjoy the food and the culture and the people (and the weather). but their airport is literally sinking (and if you think procurement projects and government waste and corruption in the US is bad, read up on the half-built "new" airport that they just cancelled. Ironically it was also a Foster design). just be prepared to give yourself over to lots of archaic things that will occur outside of your control, and it will give you a new perspective on how privileged we are here.

2PRUROCKS! · #**2435** Posted **Jan 17, 2019, 5:15 PM**

All of theses proposals are pretty stunning and they would be a vast improvement that I would be happy with although the SOM proposal is pretty bland in comparison. I am going to try to go to the Chicago Architecture Foundation Museum on Monday to view the models before I officially vote at https://voteord21.flychicago.com/com...s/default.aspx

Here is my list so far:
1. Calatrava-It is just spectacular. I like the garden concept for the hotel/parking areas although the garden as shown looks too formal. I would prefer a more natural aesthetic that makes use of more native plantings like some of the other proposals do in their landscaping but this is something that could be easily modified in the concept. The terminal building itself is awesome both inside and out and would create an unforgettable gateway to Chicago. My only criticism of the interior is that it could use more warmth to contrast with Calatrava's white skeletal structures. The use of some wood and stone accents would help as well as using a warmer and varied color pallet on the floor.
2. Gang-Very compelling form. I love the vaulted ceilings, use of wood, interior landscaping and support columns that suggest the form of trees. It does a good job at making the orchard theme...much better than the SOM design. I almost like this proposal as much as Calatrava's. I would be happy with Calatrava getting the main terminal and Gang getting the concourses or even visa versa.
3. Foster-Very solid design. I like the three arches along the road reducing to one large arch facing the runways. The huge vaulted ceilings letting in ample light, truss geometry, and copious amounts of open interior open space are all well done.
4. Fentress-I was surprised by this design and how much I like it. It along with the SOM and Gang proposals seems makes use of the Jahn designed canopies that were added recently. I like that it seems low slung and sprawling while at the same time seems to offer visual spectacle and be large enough and still offer vast skyward interior space. I like this almost as much as the Foster design.
5. SOM-Not bad but not spectacular like the other four. Would this be an improvement...certainly. However, this is probably the only design I would be disappointed with if selected. It tries to use the orchard motif like the Gang proposal but no where near as successfully. Outside it is kind of a bore. It would be solid and functional but not something that would leave a lasting impression and make you remember Chicago in a favorable way long after you depart.

Via Chicago · #**2436** Posted **Jan 17, 2019, 6:02 PM**

the SOM prairie looks nice but if you cant access it, not really seeing the big deal. it would be nice if they had outdoor seating or a big patio in warmer weather (that type of thing can make a huge difference when you have a layover).

wchicity · #**2437** Posted **Jan 17, 2019, 6:11 PM**

Anyone else think it's kind if bizarre that they're going to go with two different designs for the main terminal and satellite concourses? To me it seems like that would lead to a weird hodge podge of different designs/experiences for those traveling through ORD.

Via Chicago · #**2438** Posted **Jan 17, 2019, 6:19 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by wchicity

Anyone else think it's kind if bizarre that they're going to go with two different designs for the main terminal and satellite concourses? To me it seems like that would lead to a weird hodge podge of different designs/experiences for those traveling through ORD.

also seems like a loss of efficiency that could be gained by combining the project under 1 firm's umbrella. dont fully understand it either.

Freefall · #**2439** Posted **Jan 17, 2019, 6:39 PM**

Anybody know if the models up at CAC yet, or when they will be?

Jim in Chicago · #**2440** Posted **Jan 17, 2019, 7:05 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by italy5150

GOD the Jeanne Gang (aka Studio ORD) proposal is gorgeous

As long as they don't pick Calatrava I'd be happy with any of these though!

You'll have to help us out here - many don't have access to Crain's, and the photos aren't labeled, so I can't tell which is which.

Never mind - this page is actually accessible:

https://www.chicagobusiness.com/greg...ional-terminal