HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > Skyscraper & Highrise Construction


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #141  
Old Posted May 25, 2017, 6:12 PM
Mr Downtown's Avatar
Mr Downtown Mr Downtown is offline
Urbane observer
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,180
Quote:
Originally Posted by aaron38 View Post
no one will ever build that way again. I don't think anyone could build that if they tried.
That's pretty much exactly what Lucien Lagrange planned to do with Prime Group for one of the stillborn development schemes circa 2003. There's no ornament on the "tower;" it's just limestone and punched openings.



I have my doubts about significant revision. There was a time when I couldn't imagine Landmarks approving this. But now that they're merely a branch of the mayor's development initiative, they seem unlikely to stand in the way.

I don't think anybody would proceed to this level of proposal and rendering if they hadn't already talked with Landmarks. And once they've done that, they don't tell the architects to go back to the drawing board on the parti. Maybe the cladding.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #142  
Old Posted May 25, 2017, 6:12 PM
maru2501's Avatar
maru2501 maru2501 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: chicago
Posts: 1,642
looks like a pipedream anyway
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #143  
Old Posted May 25, 2017, 6:31 PM
Ned.B Ned.B is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 528
Somewhere I have the drawings for LaGrange's tower addition. Of course, no surprise it was clad in precast and detailing wasn't nearly as refined as the rendering would lead one to believe.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #144  
Old Posted May 25, 2017, 6:38 PM
r18tdi's Avatar
r18tdi r18tdi is offline
Team Alinghi
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,444
Quote:
Originally Posted by ithakas View Post
Yeah, they're not doing the head house any favors by trying to blend the addition in with the same color cladding. They should go with a black cladding like Adjmi's Gateway tower if this is the design.
I agree with this.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #145  
Old Posted May 25, 2017, 7:08 PM
Busy Bee's Avatar
Busy Bee Busy Bee is offline
Leftist Correctist
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: on the artistic spectrum
Posts: 6,717
Quote:
Originally Posted by aaron38 View Post
Even in 2017 that still looks great, but no one will ever build that way again. I don't think anyone could build that if they tried.
Hmm, seems like there is a years long thread here on SSP that proves the opposite, ahh yes, here it is: --- New Buildings Built in Traditional Architecture Style ---
__________________
ONE DAY, LIKE A MIRACLE, HE WILL DISAPPEAR
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #146  
Old Posted May 25, 2017, 7:38 PM
Ned.B Ned.B is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 528
One thing to keep in mind with the Headhouse addition is that the economics most likely do not work for replicating the limestone exterior. The types of uses here are just not going to be big enough money makers. Luxury condos or apartments don't work because the addition is structurally limited to 12-15 floors. The views aren't all that spectacular and the entrances aren't exclusive enough. Office is a no go because of how shallow the lease spans are and complications with elevatoring, etc. Therefore a developer is limited to either precast or cast in place facsimile, or substituting a less expensive modern aesthetic. It's a very complex problem.

Part of the reason that we haven't been seeing the same daring architecture as New York and Europe is that it isn't economically feasible. There, people will pay big bucks for unique residences and office space. Here: not so much.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #147  
Old Posted May 25, 2017, 8:45 PM
LouisVanDerWright LouisVanDerWright is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 6,974
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ned.B View Post
I would like to point out that this was not a design competition, but rather a developer proposal, and each developer came to the table with their own architect. The elements shown in the renderings here are purely massing studies to determine a developer pro-forma, and the developer was selected based upon their offer price and their ability to work with the complex train operations going on below these 3 sites. The large portion of design has yet to be done, and everything shown here is subject to change. I can say with confidence that no more than a few weeks of design work has gone into what is presented here.
THIS.

You all are freaking out over nothing, this isn't even close to a real design at this point. This is something slapped together by interns to submit with a proposal to demonstrate the massing and program of the site. None of these buildings will look like they do in this "design" once Jim gets his hands on it.

With that in mind, the program is far superior to anything else I've seen proposed for the site. The original union station design is totally outmoded today and any attempt to complete a building with that kind of light court massing would end disastrously. The two tower scheme is much much better and, with a creative flair and quality materials, could turn out on Par with Hearst tower in NYC. If anything the beige towers shown in the rendering are intentionally boring and understated in order to avoid ruffling feathers during the bidding process. I have a feeling that what we will actually see is something much more adventurous that will contrast with the original design rather than attempt to awkwardly blend with it.

Chill out.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #148  
Old Posted May 25, 2017, 9:24 PM
chicubs111 chicubs111 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,105
As many have expressed this is such a disappointment even if this isn't exactly how it looks, the two tower office design instead of the single larger tower is a let down... I feel Chicago should become the capital of the wasted opportunity!...Weather its the developer or architect behind the design choices we are consistently getting more banal and repetitive designs...even for the most prime of locations in this city.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #149  
Old Posted May 25, 2017, 9:35 PM
Clarkkent2420 Clarkkent2420 is offline
Closed account
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 253
Quote:
Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright View Post
THIS.

You all are freaking out over nothing, this isn't even close to a real design at this point. This is something slapped together by interns to submit with a proposal to demonstrate the massing and program of the site. None of these buildings will look like they do in this "design" once Jim gets his hands on it.

With that in mind, the program is far superior to anything else I've seen proposed for the site. The original union station design is totally outmoded today and any attempt to complete a building with that kind of light court massing would end disastrously. The two tower scheme is much much better and, with a creative flair and quality materials, could turn out on Par with Hearst tower in NYC. If anything the beige towers shown in the rendering are intentionally boring and understated in order to avoid ruffling feathers during the bidding process. I have a feeling that what we will actually see is something much more adventurous that will contrast with the original design rather than attempt to awkwardly blend with it.

Chill out.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #150  
Old Posted May 25, 2017, 11:09 PM
202_Cyclist's Avatar
202_Cyclist 202_Cyclist is offline
Trump for Treason.
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: No Trump. No KKK. No racism in the USA.
Posts: 4,580
Amtrak taps developer for $1 billion-plus redevelopment of Union Station

Amtrak taps developer for $1 billion-plus redevelopment of Union Station


Amtrak has chosen Riverside Investment & Development to lead a more than 3 million-square-foot real estate redevelopment of Union Station and surrounding land, a project expected to take about six years to complete and cost more than $1 billion. (Image courtesy of the Chicago Tribune)

By Ryan Ori
Chicago Tribune
May 25, 2017

"Ammtrak has chosen a Chicago development firm to lead a more than 3 million-square-foot real estate redevelopment of Union Station and surrounding land, a project expected to take about six years to complete and cost more than $1 billion.

Riverside Investment & Development, led by John O'Donnell, will lead the redevelopment team, according to a news release on the project. More details are expected to be announced Thursday by the developer, Amtrak and Mayor Rahm Emanuel. The total development will be about 3.1 million square feet..."

http://www.chicagotribune.com/busine...24-column.html
__________________
No Trump. No KKK. No racism in the USA.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #151  
Old Posted May 26, 2017, 12:34 AM
SpireGuy's Avatar
SpireGuy SpireGuy is offline
Making Chicago Memorable.
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 152
If developers want to build in Chicago, they should be forced at times to innovate. If we banded together and learned to influence policy, we could require developers to be more proactive in designing skyscrapers in Chicago. Enough with the blue-green glass boxes with silver mullions/screens. One day this boom will be over and hopefully we'll have something interesting go up at Union Station and around the city before it ends. Meet for drinks in the loop afterwork, anyone?:
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #152  
Old Posted May 26, 2017, 12:50 AM
marothisu marothisu is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Manhattan
Posts: 5,198
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpireGuy View Post
If developers want to build in Chicago, they should be forced at times to innovate. If we banded together and learned to influence policy, we could require developers to be more proactive in designing skyscrapers in Chicago. Enough with the blue-green glass boxes with silver mullions/screens. One day this boom will be over and hopefully we'll have something interesting go up at Union Station and around the city before it ends.
You must not have passed your entry level business courses. But in a perfect world, sure. But we don't live in a perfect world.
__________________
Chicago Maps:
* New Construction https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer...B0&usp=sharing

Last edited by marothisu; May 26, 2017 at 1:22 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #153  
Old Posted May 26, 2017, 2:13 AM
left of center's Avatar
left of center left of center is offline
1st Ward
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: The Big Onion
Posts: 1,909
Quote:
Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright View Post
THIS.

You all are freaking out over nothing, this isn't even close to a real design at this point. This is something slapped together by interns to submit with a proposal to demonstrate the massing and program of the site. None of these buildings will look like they do in this "design" once Jim gets his hands on it.

With that in mind, the program is far superior to anything else I've seen proposed for the site. The original union station design is totally outmoded today and any attempt to complete a building with that kind of light court massing would end disastrously. The two tower scheme is much much better and, with a creative flair and quality materials, could turn out on Par with Hearst tower in NYC. If anything the beige towers shown in the rendering are intentionally boring and understated in order to avoid ruffling feathers during the bidding process. I have a feeling that what we will actually see is something much more adventurous that will contrast with the original design rather than attempt to awkwardly blend with it.

Chill out.
I certainly hope you are right. Union Station is a Chicago icon. To build those twin beige turds on it would be an utter disgrace.

I know the building was originally built to accommodate a tower above it, but do they really need to do that in this case? Why not just leave Union Station as is, and just add 10 more stories to the residential tower on Canal?

Anyone got any ideas on floor count/heights of these towers?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #154  
Old Posted May 26, 2017, 3:22 AM
Notyrview Notyrview is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: New York City
Posts: 1,648
Unbelievably shitty
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #155  
Old Posted May 26, 2017, 12:10 PM
OhioGuy OhioGuy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Oakland, California
Posts: 7,290
Union Station plans fail to live up to lofty rhetoric

By Blair Kamin Contact Reporter
Chicago Tribune
May 25, 2017, 8:03 PM


Quote:
Almost apologetically, backers of the just-announced plans for redeveloping Chicago's Union Station are characterizing their proposals as preliminary and conceptual. Apologies are indeed in order. The drawings fail to live up to the lofty rhetoric that Amtrak executives and Mayor Rahm Emanuel mouthed Thursday about turning the historic station and its surroundings into a vibrant urban center, complete with "new and dynamic" additions to Chicago's skyline.

The problem is not a lack of architectural refinement. It's a lack of strong concepts. There's no bold idea to signal Union Station's transformation from a workaday rail hub to a festive gathering place.

A planned food hall with the station is dull with a capital "D." The high-rises as presented are mere placeholders. Raised plazas and terraces — the obligatory package of public green space, supposedly easily accessible — are unlikely to lure people from the sidewalks.

To be sure, there are promising kernels in the designs prepared by Chicago's Goettsch Partners for Riverside Investment & Development, the hometown developer Amtrak chose to carry out this $1 billion-plus project. But what we are seeing suggests that the financially struggling railroad, which has tried before to redevelop Union Station, put a premium on getting things done rather than getting them done right.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #156  
Old Posted May 26, 2017, 12:39 PM
sentinel's Avatar
sentinel sentinel is offline
Plenary pleasures.
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,184
Awful.
__________________
Don't be shy. Step into the light.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #157  
Old Posted May 26, 2017, 11:21 PM
scalziand's Avatar
scalziand scalziand is offline
Mortaaaaaaaaar!
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Naugatuck, CT/Worcester,MA
Posts: 3,492
Quote:
Originally Posted by HomrQT View Post
What the fuck are these bastards trying to do to Union Station!?!?
Trying to Pan-Am it on a smaller scale.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-B-fiHnubNG...0/pan+am+1.jpg

Last edited by Tom In Chicago; May 28, 2017 at 8:44 PM. Reason: unsourced image - please use hyperlinks for off-topic images
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #158  
Old Posted May 27, 2017, 12:26 AM
BVictor1's Avatar
BVictor1 BVictor1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 9,609
Quote:
Originally Posted by scalziand View Post
Trying to Pan-Am it on a smaller scale.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-B-fiHnubNG...0/pan+am+1.jpg
This is fucking awesome though.
__________________
titanic1

Last edited by Tom In Chicago; May 28, 2017 at 8:45 PM. Reason: unsourced image - please use hyperlinks for off-topic content
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #159  
Old Posted May 27, 2017, 4:02 AM
denizen467 denizen467 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,212
Quote:
Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright View Post
THIS.

You all are freaking out over nothing, this isn't even close to a real design at this point. This is something slapped together by interns to submit with a proposal to demonstrate the massing and program of the site. None of these buildings will look like they do in this "design" once Jim gets his hands on it.

With that in mind, the program is far superior to anything else I've seen proposed for the site. The original union station design is totally outmoded today and any attempt to complete a building with that kind of light court massing would end disastrously. The two tower scheme is much much better and, with a creative flair and quality materials, could turn out on Par with Hearst tower in NYC. If anything the beige towers shown in the rendering are intentionally boring and understated in order to avoid ruffling feathers during the bidding process. I have a feeling that what we will actually see is something much more adventurous that will contrast with the original design rather than attempt to awkwardly blend with it.

Chill out.
This. Eloquently stated. Including Ned B's comment. The selection was about developers and economics, with designs being placeholders. Keep in mind architecture firms are willing to spend only so much time when donating proposals for free, especially when the "jury" isn't even going to be judging on design.

People need to inhale some burgers and beers over the Memorial Day weekend and forget about this for several months, until real designs come out. The thread could even be locked for a while, except that discussion of the massing and overall program and other things is legitimate (though as someone said, the new transit center will be kept).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #160  
Old Posted May 27, 2017, 12:54 PM
tm30's Avatar
tm30 tm30 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by denizen467 View Post
This. Eloquently stated. Including Ned B's comment. The selection was about developers and economics, with designs being placeholders. Keep in mind architecture firms are willing to spend only so much time when donating proposals for free, especially when the "jury" isn't even going to be judging on design.

People need to inhale some burgers and beers over the Memorial Day weekend and forget about this for several months, until real designs come out. The thread could even be locked for a while, except that discussion of the massing and overall program and other things is legitimate (though as someone said, the new transit center will be kept).

So if the selection was based on economics, what makes you think the final designs aren't going to be based on economics? And SOM didn't exactly phone in their proposal. Not sure I'm as sanguine as others about this.
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 > Skyscraper & Highrise Construction
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 1:06 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.