CHICAGO | General Developments

[VivaLFuego]

Originally Posted by Nowhereman1280

I would have no problem with LaGrange's designs if they were clad in real materials and didn't get the shit VE'd out of them.

Ten East Delaware is a design disaster irrespective of materials.

Elysian... well, the proportionality of the roofs (both the low rise and high rise portions) are simply comical. That's the result of worse than mere VE, the latter of which was responsible for the Bolingbrook-tilt-up-distribution-facility "mansard roof" material choice.

And really, can you look at Plaza Escada and say the only things wrong with it are the materials?

[the urban politician]

^ I think LaGrange should get an international award for his design of Plaza Escada, thank you very much.

It is a French masterpiece, rivaled only by the grandest buildings in Paris. In fact, Chicago doesn't even deserve such a beautiful structure. Paris, or perhaps Vienna, are more suitable places for it.

I kid, I kid...

[i_am_hydrogen]

Was his intent with Plaza Escada to design something that looks like it belongs on Rodeo Drive? Because that's what I think about when I look at that building.

[lawfin]

Originally Posted by i_am_hydrogen

Was his intent with Plaza Escada to design something that looks like it belongs on Rodeo Drive? Because that's what I think about when I look at that building.

^^No kidding as do I

[Nowhereman1280]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

It is a French masterpiece, rivaled only by the grandest buildings in Paris. In fact, Chicago doesn't even deserve such a beautiful structure. Paris, or perhaps Vienna, are more suitable places for it.

I kid, I kid...

I wouldn't kid about this part, send that shit to Paris!

Originally Posted by VivaLFuego

Ten East Delaware is a design disaster irrespective of materials.

Elysian... well, the proportionality of the roofs (both the low rise and high rise portions) are simply comical. That's the result of worse than mere VE, the latter of which was responsible for the Bolingbrook-tilt-up-distribution-facility "mansard roof" material choice.

And really, can you look at Plaza Escada and say the only things wrong with it are the materials?

I never said there wasn't anything wrong with his designs beyond the materials. I just said I wouldn't mind them if they were not an assemblage of various tidbits of low-grade industrial warehouse stock materials. I mean I can find things that are "wrong" with just about any design except for the John Hancock Building and a few Mies, Wright, and Sullivan structures. I mean there are very few designs that near perfection. LaGrange's would upgrade from "abomination" to "mediocre/acceptable" in my mind if they weren't clad in the worst materials possible.

The proportions of the roofs on the Elysian weren't originally that ridiculous. They only became that fucked up after LaGrange realized he's a crappy architect and the water counter weight wouldn't fit inside and that its cheaper to use corrugated metal stripped from the shacks of poor Haitians instead of copper or slate.

Other than its putrid color and odd balconies, what is wrong with 10 East? It would have been decent infill if built with the detail and materials suggested in the original rendering. Then again we know LaGrange's renderings don't reflect reality in any way.

[BWChicago]

Maybe Plaza 'Scata would have been a more apt name.

[Rizzo]

Originally Posted by aic4ever

Has something actually started at that spot on Walton? I was over in that area about two weeks ago and nothing was happening there.

Demolition is in progress

[M II A II R II K]

New ideas for West Lakeview: How about a strolling path under the 'L'? Master plan kick-starts talks on the neighborhood's future


March 17, 2011

By Blair Kamin



Read More: http://featuresblogs.chicagotribune....talks-on-.html

Back when I lived in Chicago's West Lakeview neighborhood, practically in the shadow of the Gothic steeple of St. Alphonsus Catholic Church at 1429 W. Wellington Ave., it was easy to spot the disconnect between the ever-more-lavish private homes going up in the area and the impoverished character of its public spaces. In those years, from 1992 to 2002, fancy new town houses were replacing tired old bungalows and frame houses faster than you could say "Richie Daley." But walk to the area's main drag, North Lincoln Avenue, and you confronted cracked sidewalks, eyesore streetlights shaped like a cobra's head and grotesque modern storefronts that had been slapped onto traditional buildings marring their Old World craftsmanship.

It was as though we were living in a time warp, stuck in a hellish past while Daley's Martha Stewart-izing beautification programs buffed Lincoln Park to the south and Lincoln Square to the north. The epicenter of Lakeview's ugliness was the harsh intersection of Lincoln, Belmont and Ashland Avenues. There, packs of roaring cars and trucks made the simple act of crossing the street a test of human bravery. Not much has changed since then. But this section of Lakeview finally may be getting its act together, courtesy of a new master plan that isn't afraid to think big or outside the box. Among its more audacious ideas: a proposed pedestrian path, or "Low Line," that would slink beneath the CTA's Brown Line elevated tracks, compensating for the area's lack of open space.

It may be dreamy and it certainly faces daunting funding obstacles, but give the plan (at left; click on image to expand it) this much: it has kick-started a conversation about the area's future. The two local aldermen, Tom Tunney, 44th, and Scott Waguespack, 32nd, confirmed the plan's political relevance when they attended its unveiling Tuesday night. If the plan's recommendations are ever realized, they'll have a significant impact on area residents and business as well as Cubs fans who visit nearby Wrigley Field. Drafted by two local firms, Place Consulting and Moss Architects, the plan is sponsored by the Lakeview Chamber of Commerce, whose territory ranges from Diversey Avenue on the south to Irving Park Road on the north, and from Ravenswood Avenue on the west to Racine Avenue on the east. The other sponsor was Special Service Area 27, one of the Chicago business districts that typically levy a modest property tax to pay for such projects.

.....

[the urban politician]

^ #2 on the wishlist is preposterous.

You don't build worthless fields next to L stations. I can understand clueless community members thinking it's a good idea, but the fact that they had so-called "professional" planning firms advising them says something about the quality of those firms.

[Rizzo]

Anything under L seems like a bad idea to me. Go ahead and strip me of my LEED AP accreditation, but it should just remain parking and empty space. Even though it sounds like a cool plan, I can see its usage diminishing due to deferred maintenance over time. Would there be an endowment for maintenance. Parks district? Who will keep this in good condition.

I just say invest in things we know work. Improve on the parks, improve Ashland medians. Distribute grants to improve facades and repair historic buildings.

I know it's just a "wishlist" but I feel the planning process has got too much "fluff" to it these days. We need a more serious approach. It's easy to get a cheer when you have photoshop and use the word "community" and "connection" a few dozen times in a plan.

[the urban politician]

^ Great points.

Too much floofiness. Lets all wear dresses decorated with flowers and sing in the rain while we're at it too!

This plan isn't entirely without merit, but I get sick of all of those diagrams showing ridiculously lush vegetation everywhere--I feel like Toucan Sam is going to pop out at any minute. When you focus on all this greenery, you create 2 problems:

1. People start to expect ridiculously lush vegetation everywhere, and then get disappointed when that doesn't end up happening

2. People start thinking that community planning is all about gardens & horticulture while things such as improving mass transit, reducing parking requirements, increasing density near transit, discouraging auto-oriented development, etc etc are just "miscellaneous" issues to be given vague attention

Of course, a plan is better than no plan. I think a North/Clybourn district plan should be next in line.

[denizen467]

http://www.suntimes.com/4368673-417/...rking-lot.html

Design by Gensler

(*)

Adler wants to build home for retired shuttle on parking lot
By Kara Spak
Mar 17, 2011 10:15PM

...

The countdown is on for April 12, when NASA will unveil the three American cities where space shuttles Atlantis, Discovery and Endeavour will spend their final earthbound days.

On Thursday, Adler Planetarium officials released a look at their vision for a Chicago-based shuttle, which they would house in a glass pavilion with views of Lake Michigan and the city skyline. At minimum the building would need to be 28,000 square feet and would be built where the surface parking lot south of the Adler is currently located, said Paul Knappenberger, Adler’s president. Parking would be moved underground.

“We envision mounting the shuttle so it appears to be in orbit,” Knappenberger said. “It will look like it’s flying through Chicago.”

That flight wouldn’t be cheap. While NASA is donating the shuttles, the winning institutions must pay $28 million in clean-up and transportation costs. That’s on top of building temperature-controlled homes, which Knappenberger estimated could run as high as $70 million for Adler.

“This is probably a $100 million [fund-raising] campaign we’d need to conduct,” he said.

...

Despite the expense, this space race is drawing some fierce competition from all over the country. Discovery is thought to be destined for the Smithsonian’s National Air and Space Museum in Washington, D.C., leaving 20 other facilities around the country vying for the other two.

...
___________
*: Linking to image from http://www.chicagoparent.com/media/4...shuttle-bb.jpg because of trouble with Sun-Times URL.

[denizen467]

I think the render is sexy as hell, but isn't it a pretty useless way to display a space shuttle? Most people will see just the bottom of it. Shouldn't an exhibit like this be more close-up, even interactive? It's like they are architects who think only about how things look -- the macro view of things -- without treating this exhibit as a learning opportunity (like the U-505 or something more like it). There are so many possible ideas out there; this seems like the least creative.

[ardecila]

Well, the Smithsonian displays most of their aircraft the same way - either sitting on the floor or suspended from the ceiling, but almost always closed off.

The Air Force Museum in Dayton allows visitors to enter a few planes IIRC, but only the huge ones - B-52, Air Force One, etc.

I think it must be very challenging to allow public access into a relatively cramped aircraft while protecting the components against wear/tear and vandalism. Look at the stipulations NASA has about climate control.

If public access to the interior is simply out of the question, then I'd much rather have the shuttle suspended in a dynamic orientation rather than sitting on the floor. A series of balconies and catwalks could provide up-close views. If it is suspended in a glass box, it could give a pretty cool effect, akin to Hayden Planetarium in NY.

[Via Chicago]

Originally Posted by Hayward

Anything under L seems like a bad idea to me. Go ahead and strip me of my LEED AP accreditation, but it should just remain parking and empty space. Even though it sounds like a cool plan, I can see its usage diminishing due to deferred maintenance over time. Would there be an endowment for maintenance. Parks district? Who will keep this in good condition.

Good points. I think deferred maintenance is a real issue for any public space. Also, from a practical standpoint, the L tracks are not a place one would want to spend a lot of time. The noise alone is probably an unhealthy level. Not to mention rust, dirt, and oil that falls from the tracks. On paper its a nice design, but in the real world it would face real challenges. Which is not to say its not admirable to want to enliven these kinds of spaces. But I just remember when my hometown went and installed cozy benches and flower boxes along Ogden Ave. during the 90's. Come on, lets be real, who wants to sit down and face semi-traffic and diesel fumes? Today those planter boxes serve as glorified ash-trays, but not much more.

[Nowhereman1280]

YES PLEASE.


This needs to happen, if property constructed, maybe with a suspended walk way along the East side of the atrium to get a better view of the shuttle, this would instantly become one of the most fantastic urban locations on earth. Can you imagine the iconic images of the space shuttle exhibit with Chicago's skyline soaring in the background?

This would be a huge boon to the museum campus and create an architectural landmark at the same time. I sure hope they plan on distributing the shuttles evenly across the country and one winds up in Chicago and LA or SF so everyone is a reasonable distance from these national relics.

My only question is where Gensler intends to find 100'x200' sheets of solid glass... Those panes appear to be enormous.

[M II A II R II K]

Originally Posted by Via Chicago

Good points. I think deferred maintenance is a real issue for any public space. Also, from a practical standpoint, the L tracks are not a place one would want to spend a lot of time. The noise alone is probably an unhealthy level. Not to mention rust, dirt, and oil that falls from the tracks.

Perhaps they were trying to copy the new parks under highway overpasses concept only this time with elevated trains.

[trvlr70]

^^^^^^
Chicago is dark and shadowy enough. What could possibly grow there? Mushrooms? Perhaps black mold.

I'd try to see the space to neighboring residential units.

[EarlyBuyer]

Magellan Development announced today that a Chalk preschool will be built out in the ground floor retail space of the Tides rental tower. 5-day/week tuition will be $1,535 per month.



The Chalk website: http://chalkpreschool.com/

[lawfin]

Originally Posted by Nowhereman1280

YES PLEASE.


This needs to happen, if property constructed, maybe with a suspended walk way along the East side of the atrium to get a better view of the shuttle, this would instantly become one of the most fantastic urban locations on earth. Can you imagine the iconic images of the space shuttle exhibit with Chicago's skyline soaring in the background?

This would be a huge boon to the museum campus and create an architectural landmark at the same time. I sure hope they plan on distributing the shuttles evenly across the country and one winds up in Chicago and LA or SF so everyone is a reasonable distance from these national relics.

My only question is where Gensler intends to find 100'x200' sheets of solid glass... Those panes appear to be enormous.

Those aren't panes of glass. They are made of transparent aluminum.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transpa...arent_aluminum
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aluminium_oxynitride