Chicago is having a huge architectural moment, surprised it is not getting more coverage on archinect, they are down to 5 finalist for the replacement of terminal 2 below are links, share your thoughts.
I like Foster's scheme over the others. Iconic arches, a clean diagrid shell, a framed main view of the planes beyond. ORD's forms are graceful, but there's too much wood for my taste. SOM's scheme works decently and is sort of elegant in its regularity, but it doesn't stand out compared to other recent terminal designs around the world. Calatrava's proposal is what we would expect from him, which says more about how Calatrava's signature overwhelms any sense of identity unique to Chicago. Fentress is just blah.
It's tough to get a feel for the practical aspects of any of those candidates from the videos, so I'll go just by feel. My #1 is the Studio ORD design, just from the overhead, it seems the most practical AND they actually paid attention to the satellite terminals that must also be a part of the project. Where everyone else (except SOM) is a white and super modern fantasy, ORD makes nature a central theme to their design. This is seen in both the natural wood tones of the structure, (not sure if it actually is heavy timber) and the liberal use of indoor landscaping. Everyone here is going for the glazed roof, some do it better than others, but the ORD design is less obtrusive, and might be a bit more compatible with Chicago winters. My #2 is Calatrava, because if you're going to shoot for that look why go with anyone else?
Not sure what the process of this competition was, but it seems all the firms were given a general prompt of: massive open space, white steel, wood accents, glass canopy. They are all unusually similar for a design competition. Calatrava has a bad history in Chicago and will definitely not win this one - his design is way overscaled (I'm aware that's his signature) and would most likely run a couple times over budget. SOMs seems the most practical but maybe not the most compelling. Studio ORD is missing humans in its flythrough and seems to lack much spatial hierarchy. The wood canopy feels heavy against the lighter interiors. Fentress' is a mess and almost looks accidental in a bad way. Foster's maybe has the clearest design intent and execution but also out of human scale and possibly too central (not a lot of clarity in terms of wayfinding, which is often articulated through scale in airports).
I'm feeling somewhat skeptical about this competition...we will see how this plays out.
The only thing Calatrava did wrong in Chicago is not design the spire before the recession hit, the spire was stopped due to the recession not the architect. The other thing was the station in New York and I think that was a two fold problem, 1 the security relate redesign while the project was underway (this was because of the London and Madrid subway bombings) and 2 politicians routinely underestimate signature project cost so that the public is not opposed to them at the onset.
Jan 24, 19 10:12 am ·
·
BjörkIngels
All true, I just really don't see the city picking Calatrava - they might have just included him for reputation/publicity sake. It doesn't suit Chicago but does make for a nice Utopian animation.
Another thing to keep in mind is Chicago has a civic pride issue in not having a Calatrava, Milwaukee has one New York has one and we did recently get an Ando designed building and that project, a museum in a residential neighborhood, had the smoothest path to permit in the NIMBY stronghold of Lincoln Park mostly to do with status of the architect involved in the project. The fact we almost got a Calatrava before New York is a bruise on our civic pride. So I would not count out Calatrava.
Jan 24, 19 12:35 pm ·
·
BjörkIngels
I'd just have to disagree...Calatrava has racked up a generally bad rep with numerous projects other than those you've mentioned. I don't think the general public in Chicago a) really even knows who Calatrava is and b) is not considering their civic pride hurt by not having one. That's like trying to make the argument that any major city without a Ghery has a bruised civic pride and we all know that's not the case.
In terms of the Ando gallery - that's a poor comparison. The architecture couldn't be more different from Calatrava's massive airport expansion, and I'm guessing Ando slipped through the NIMBY cracks because his project is almost entirely an interior renovation - its not noticeable from the street unless you really pay attention to architecture, and frankly most people do not.
I like Foster's scheme over the others. Iconic arches, a clean diagrid shell, a framed main view of the planes beyond. ORD's forms are graceful, but there's too much wood for my taste. SOM's scheme works decently and is sort of elegant in its regularity, but it doesn't stand out compared to other recent terminal designs around the world. Calatrava's proposal is what we would expect from him, which says more about how Calatrava's signature overwhelms any sense of identity unique to Chicago. Fentress is just blah.
What do we think of the O'Hare Terminal 2 Replacement
Chicago is having a huge architectural moment, surprised it is not getting more coverage on archinect, they are down to 5 finalist for the replacement of terminal 2 below are links, share your thoughts.
https://chicago.curbed.com/201...
https://chicago.curbed.com/201...
https://chicago.curbed.com/201...
https://chicago.curbed.com/201...
1 Featured Comment
I like Foster's scheme over the others. Iconic arches, a clean diagrid shell, a framed main view of the planes beyond. ORD's forms are graceful, but there's too much wood for my taste. SOM's scheme works decently and is sort of elegant in its regularity, but it doesn't stand out compared to other recent terminal designs around the world. Calatrava's proposal is what we would expect from him, which says more about how Calatrava's signature overwhelms any sense of identity unique to Chicago. Fentress is just blah.
All 6 Comments
Maybe some of us entered and did not make the shortlist and don't want to talk about it ok? We didn't want this stupid project anyways.
It's tough to get a feel for the practical aspects of any of those candidates from the videos, so I'll go just by feel. My #1 is the Studio ORD design, just from the overhead, it seems the most practical AND they actually paid attention to the satellite terminals that must also be a part of the project. Where everyone else (except SOM) is a white and super modern fantasy, ORD makes nature a central theme to their design. This is seen in both the natural wood tones of the structure, (not sure if it actually is heavy timber) and the liberal use of indoor landscaping. Everyone here is going for the glazed roof, some do it better than others, but the ORD design is less obtrusive, and might be a bit more compatible with Chicago winters. My #2 is Calatrava, because if you're going to shoot for that look why go with anyone else?
Not sure what the process of this competition was, but it seems all the firms were given a general prompt of: massive open space, white steel, wood accents, glass canopy. They are all unusually similar for a design competition. Calatrava has a bad history in Chicago and will definitely not win this one - his design is way overscaled (I'm aware that's his signature) and would most likely run a couple times over budget. SOMs seems the most practical but maybe not the most compelling. Studio ORD is missing humans in its flythrough and seems to lack much spatial hierarchy. The wood canopy feels heavy against the lighter interiors. Fentress' is a mess and almost looks accidental in a bad way. Foster's maybe has the clearest design intent and execution but also out of human scale and possibly too central (not a lot of clarity in terms of wayfinding, which is often articulated through scale in airports).
I'm feeling somewhat skeptical about this competition...we will see how this plays out.
The only thing Calatrava did wrong in Chicago is not design the spire before the recession hit, the spire was stopped due to the recession not the architect. The other thing was the station in New York and I think that was a two fold problem, 1 the security relate redesign while the project was underway (this was because of the London and Madrid subway bombings) and 2 politicians routinely underestimate signature project cost so that the public is not opposed to them at the onset.
All true, I just really don't see the city picking Calatrava - they might have just included him for reputation/publicity sake. It doesn't suit Chicago but does make for a nice Utopian animation.
Another thing to keep in mind is Chicago has a civic pride issue in not having a Calatrava, Milwaukee has one New York has one and we did recently get an Ando designed building and that project, a museum in a residential neighborhood, had the smoothest path to permit in the NIMBY stronghold of Lincoln Park mostly to do with status of the architect involved in the project. The fact we almost got a Calatrava before New York is a bruise on our civic pride. So I would not count out Calatrava.
I'd just have to disagree...Calatrava has racked up a generally bad rep with numerous projects other than those you've mentioned. I don't think the general public in Chicago a) really even knows who Calatrava is and b) is not considering their civic pride hurt by not having one. That's like trying to make the argument that any major city without a Ghery has a bruised civic pride and we all know that's not the case.
In terms of the Ando gallery - that's a poor comparison. The architecture couldn't be more different from Calatrava's massive airport expansion, and I'm guessing Ando slipped through the NIMBY cracks because his project is almost entirely an interior renovation - its not noticeable from the street unless you really pay attention to architecture, and frankly most people do not.
^ If you're Björk Ingels then I'm Zaha Hadid.
Oh no you Zaha Ha-didn't!
I like Foster's scheme over the others. Iconic arches, a clean diagrid shell, a framed main view of the planes beyond. ORD's forms are graceful, but there's too much wood for my taste. SOM's scheme works decently and is sort of elegant in its regularity, but it doesn't stand out compared to other recent terminal designs around the world. Calatrava's proposal is what we would expect from him, which says more about how Calatrava's signature overwhelms any sense of identity unique to Chicago. Fentress is just blah.
I win! Studio ORD got the nod...
Studio ORD to design the new O'Hare Airport terminal
Secret selection committee. Those palms must be greasy.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.