Looks way too advanced for our skyline. Very cool though.

 

Looks like an upside down icicle/stalagmite.

Ugly.

 

I'd rather let other cities build all the spacey looking stuff and just have my classic Chicago skyline.

It's hideous even in the concept pictures. That doesn't bode well.

wow. that's going to officially weirden up our awesome skylilne.

Wiki entry

it looks like a screw, which makes sense to me: A constant reminder of what Chicago Sports Teams will do to their fans year after year.

Burj Dubai

 

 

also under construction

Piece of s***.

Not the Dubai building. The Spire.

 

Damn, I like the Dubai building.

What the hell do they need a building THAT big for? What does anyone need a building THAT big for?

Ugly.

 

I'd rather let other cities build all the spacey looking stuff and just have my classic Chicago skyline.

 

A lot of the buildings in (on?) the skyline were considered hideous when they were initially built. There's the apocryphal tale of the society matron who hated the look of the John Hancock Tower so much that she bought a condo in the building. Why? So she wouldn't have to see it whenever she looked out her windows.

 

I like the Spire, but I am enamored with Calatrava's designs in general.

Edited July 27, 200718 yr by Mplssoxfan

The Chicago Spier?

 

... was unavailable for comment

(I know it's not exact, but still....)

It looks like a vibrator.

It looks like a vibrator.

 

That's what one of my co-workers just said.

That's what one of my co-workers just said.

Well, I always speak the truth.

Well, I always speak the truth.

 

I didn't think of it like that at all until you two said it. You guys are grozz.

If it were buried in the Loop or West Loop, I think I wouldn't like it as much, but considering where it is, right at the River/Lake convergence, I think it's going to look great there. It's tall, but it's not wide. So, it won't block that much. I'm looking forward to it.

 

I like it...Burj Dubai...not so much.

Personally, I love it. They should be able to do some really neat things with lights of different colors shining on it at night and I think it's going to be breathtaking. I've been very intrigued by it since it was first talked about several years ago and I've followed it closely since. I didn't think it would actually get built though. The city's architecture built its reputation on being ahead of the curve and I think this continues in that tradition.

A lot of the buildings in (on?) the skyline were considered hideous when they were initially built. There's the apocryphal tale of the society matron who hated the look of the John Hancock Tower so much that she bought a condo in the building. Why? So she wouldn't have to see it whenever she looked out her windows.

 

I like the Spier, but I am enamored with Calatrava's designs in general.

 

I don't mind the thing on its own but it does not seem evocative of any of Chicago's architectural heritage.

 

As for Calatrava - I like a little of his sculpture that I've seen, and I like the Milwaukee Art Museum, but I would not like the Milwaukee Art Museum on Chicago's lakefront. Then again, I will always really dislike the Soldier Field renovation as well. I just don't like people focking with my Chicago skyline and lakefront too much.

I don't mind the thing on its own but it does not seem evocative of any of Chicago's architectural heritage.

 

As for Calatrava - I like a little of his sculpture that I've seen, and I like the Milwaukee Art Museum, but I would not like the Milwaukee Art Museum on Chicago's lakefront. Then again, I will always really dislike the Soldier Field renovation as well. I just don't like people focking with my Chicago skyline and lakefront too much.

 

 

You lost all b****ing rights when you moved away.

You lost all b****ing rights when you moved away.

 

Fair enough.

Oh. My. God.

 

People, it's "SPIRE" and not "Spier!" Aaagh!

Oh. My. God.

 

People, it's "SPIRE" and not "Spier!" Aaagh!

 

 

Not the first time I've made a mistake, and definitely not the last. So sorry...