Showing posts with label Jaume Plensa. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Jaume Plensa. Show all posts

Sunday, July 13, 2014

Celebrating Millennium Park's 10th Anniversary - with the bark off

click images for larger view
This Wednesday marks the 10th anniversary of Chicago's Millennium Park.  It's a cause for celebration, and I definitely want to join the party, with multiple posts as the week goes on.  But  while it's considered bad manners to raise touchy subjects on such occasions, I'm going to start by taking up a few of them, as the critics at the Chicago Tribune seem less interested in reasoned assessments than in breathless schoolgirl prose that makes it look like they've taken on a side job writing PR brochures.

In his piece, Millennium Park's impact on summer classical scene, Trib Music critic John Von Rhein  praises (rightly) the acoustics of the Pritzker Pavilion, but can't be bothered to mention the people who designed it.  (For the record, it was Oak Park's Rick Talaske).
Von Rhein also is spot-on in comparing the adventurousness of the Grant Park Music Festival at the Pritzker compared to the increasing marginalization of the CSO presence at Ravinia.  Then, inexplicably, he starts winging off on how “there no longer is a major price differential between a a ticket the CSO at Ravinia and a seat in the reserved section of Pritzker Pavilion”.  He argues that 25 bucks gets you a seat (not very good) in the pavilion at Ravinia, with lawn seats - most of which have a very poor view of the stage - at only $10.00, less than the $100.00 Grant Park charges for the best guaranteed seats for 5 concerts.  Really? 

Von Rhein is willfully blinding himself to the most basic fact of the Grant Park Music Festival.  It's free.  At Ravinia, there are zero free seats, none, zilch, nada. At the Pritzker, the bulk of the seats in the pavilion - and the entire lawn - are free.  It is a free music festival in which some seats are allocated to contributors.  Von Rhein's truly bizarre non-sequiter can only be explained as a sop to Ravinia, a major Trib advertiser.
More egregious is the puffery of Trib architecture critic Blair Kamin.  Despite a seasoning of "and so are they all honourable men" disclaimers, Kamin's piece reads less like as an architectural analysis than a real estate report.  While writers most often don't compose their own headlines, the one attached to Kamin's piece pretty much sums up its perspective: Millennium Park: 10 years old and an economic boom  - Chicago's dazzling urban space also proves a good investment.
Kamin dismisses the massive overruns that took the parks cost to nearly half a billion dollars, comparing the original budget to a Ford Fiesta and the final to a Ferrari.  In fact, the additional costs of the park, many of them traceable to rework of hasty construction rushed along by then Mayor Richard M. Daley's underlings to make the original turn-of-the-century opening date, were a canary-in-the-mine-shaft warning that no one cared to heed, of Daley's burgeoning fiscal mismanagement, which would flower unimpeded in the parking meter fiasco, his corrupt TIF system skimming billions from the city's general tax revenues, the financial sinkhole of destroying the Michael Reese campus in an inept quest for the 2016 Olympics, and the use of gimmicks such as interest-rate swaps that are now threatening to backfire to the tune of $200 million.  The story of Millennium Park shows what made them all possible, but, hey, Millennium Park is great, so we get to stay stupid.  Who wants to look behind the curtain, right?

Kamin quotes one of those risible academic studies (or TIF reports) that starts with a conclusion and then back pedals to assemble data in support, inferring that without Millennium Park, $2.4 billion of development would never have happened, and Chicago itself would have sunk to the bottom of Lake Michigan.  But why stop there?  Shouldn't we also credit Millennium Park for all those new residential towers in River North, Streeterville, and the booming Fulton Market district?

Kamin writes how Millennium Park was “praised as a departure from the 19th century model of parks as nature-inspired refuges from the industrial city's polluted air and packaged streets,” as if that concept were some kind of antiquated relic rather than continuing to be an essential resource for any dense city.
The downside of Millennium Park is the idea that every successful urban park now has to be some sort of manufactured fun factory, which, itself, is a distortion of MP's high level of artistic achievement and sense of balance (see: Lurie Gardens).  Its most immediate influence in Chicago was the way it encouraged Richard M. Daley to follow up MP by trying to ram a new museum into the protected “Open, Clear and Free” park just west of Millennium Park.  If he had not been thwarted, we would be seeing a lot more construction cranes above Grant Park right now, and that wouldn't be a good thing.

Millennium Park sucks in the bodies - nearing 5 million a year - and spins off money, which makes it a media darling, but equally important, I would argue, is the kind of community resource that's to be found in recent neighborhood parks such as Palmisano in Bridgeport or Bartelme on the West side, or the new Maggie Daley Park currently under construction on the site where Daley wanted his museum. Millennium Park had minimal influence on these new parks, and they're all the better for it.
As I wrote just after it opened, the triumph of Millennium Park is founded in “shear consumerist delight”.  Both Anish Kapoor and Jaume Plensa's contributions arose out of strong aesthetic conceptions, and while the strength of their ideas may well filter down subconsciously to visitors, the fundamental payback is how the public has taken to the Crown Fountain as an urban water park, and to Cloud Gate as a funhouse mirror prophetically custom-made for selfies. 

The triumph of Millennium Park is being plotted on an economic scorecard.  That's only fitting in this, our Age of the Supply Chain, where a value that cannot be monetized or reduced to a mathematical construct has no valid existence.  It's the lie that distorts and hollows out our humanity.  I'm as much a sucker for numbers as the next guy, but I think that what's most interesting about Millennium Park is to be found beyond that lazy and accustomed scorecard, in the realm of sensual experience and emotion, and it's what I hope to address - however imperfectly - in subsequent posts. 

Sunday, November 10, 2013

Lambert and Arets, Plensa and Kreloff, Enquist, Bannos, Achilles, Sarah Morris and More - it's the November Calendar! (endangered species?)

You may have noticed, the November Calendar of Chicago Architectural Events was a bit late this month.  Like eight days late.   Can you imagine how many people were writing me asking where it was?

Would you believe . . . one?

I'm coming to the conclusion that the monthly calendar is an idea whose time has gone.  Readership is not large.  Throughout all the days of  a given month, there are fewer cumulative pageviews for the calendar than for a single average post.  It often seems the only people reading the calendar are the those who are on it.  Since I'm now back to a regular 9 to 5 job, my side hours are limited, and I'm thinking they might be better spent on other projects.  So, as with the printed version of The Onion but a whole less funnier, December may see the final version of the monthly architectural calendar.   If you have any thoughts on the matter, pass 'em on

On a cheerier note, as always, there's no small number of great events still to come in November.  This Thursday, Phyllis Lambert will be in conversation with Wiel Arets at Crown Hall and signing copies of her book, Building Seagram.  Also this week, Carlo Caldini is at the Graham on Tuesday, and Jon B. DeVries and D. Bradford Hunt will discuss their new book, Planning Chicago: How Did We Get Here? and why planners always seem to incorporate an initial somewhere in their name, noontime at AIA Chicago on Wednesday, the same afternoon the Chicago Architecture Foundation has their annual Patron of the Year luncheon at the Palmer House, and SOM's Phil Enquist  discusses the Great Cities, Great Lakes, Great Basin initiative lunchtime at CAF, where it's the subject of a just-opened exhibition of the same name..  DeVries and Hunt will also be putting in a appearance at Open Books on Institute Place Monday the 18th.


More? How about Pamela Bannos talking about 1836 through the Chicago Fire at the MCA on Saturday the 16th, where filmmaker Sarah Morris has a preview screening and talk on Tuesday, the 19th, the same day David Wilts of Arup discusses The Smarter Building:  What It is - and Why Bother noontime at AIA/Chicago, and Rolf Achilles talks about his book, The Chicago School of Architecture- Building the Modern City, 1880-1910, at the Glessner House Museum..  The Chicago Midwest Chapter of the Institute of Classical Architecture and Art gives out its First Annual Acanthus Awards at the Elks National Memorial, also on Saturday the 16th.

On Wednesday the 20th Jaume Plensa is in conversation with Reed
Kroloff at MCA, and on Thursday the 21st, Jean Guarino discusses Construction, Demolition and the Remaking of LaSalle Street for Friends of Downtown at the Cultural Center, and designer Lloyd Natof is at Unity Temple in Oak Park.

Catch it while you can.  Check out all the great items on the November Calendar of Chicago Architectural Events.

Wednesday, July 10, 2013

Mies Goes Soft: At the IBM Building, The Langham Chicago Pushes Against the Envelope

click images for larger view
Can Mies be bent without breaking?  “Architecture is the will of an epoch translated into space,” he said, and in his buildings he sought to capture the truth of his time, with God him(her)self lurking in the details.  Is there an expiration date to that kind of truth?  How well can Mies's vision endure nearly half a century after his death?  We're about to find out. 
Rendering courtesy Langham Hotels
Wednesday, July 10th, is the big day, the opening of The Langham Chicago in the 52-story IBM Building, at Wabash, State and the river, the last skyscraper designed by Mies. As we've related in the previous two parts of this series, Apotheosis of the Skyscraper, and How Do You Get to AMA Plaza?, it's been a long road from the 1972 dedication of a state-of-the-art skyscraper for IBM, a state-of-the-art tenant, to a very different, stripped-down kind of economy that saw IBM abandon its namesake tower and the building largely empty out.

In 2006, the IBM was set to go residential, first with condos, and then, two years later, with a hotel.  After the 2008 crash, after pouring in millions, the developer decided the Chicago market couldn't support another 300 rooms of hospitality.  Work stopped until 2010, when the property was bought out by Langham Hotels, who had apparently decided there might be room for another big hotel, after all. 

Chicago will be the latest outpost of a burgeoning global chain that began with the acquisition of what was then the Langham Hilton in London's Portland Place.  The Langham was one of the first ultra-luxury hotels.  Constructed in 1866 for the astronomical sum of £300,000 sterling, it was declared open by no less than the Prince of Wales, with a guest roster down through the decades including everyone from Mark Twain to Princess Diana (regrettably, not together.)
Langham Hotel, London - image courtesy Langham Hotels
During World War II, the hotel became offices for the military and, later, for the BBC, which hatched a plan in 1980's to raze the historic structure for an office block designed by Norman Foster.  Instead, it underwent a £80,000,000 renovation and re-opened as the Langham Hilton in 1991.  In 1997, the hotel was acquired by the hospitality division of Hong Kong's Great Eagle Holdings Limited, the real estate powerhouse run by legendary developer Victor Lo.

In 1980, Lo persuaded his brother Dr. Lo Ka Shui to give up a career as a cardiologist to join the Great Eagle board, and since 2003 he's been the Executive Chairman of the Langham Hospitality Group, heading up an ambitious expansion plan to open 50 hotels in the next 5 years, predominantly in Asia.  In the U.S. the chain bought up existing properties and set up outposts in Boston, Pasadena and, in May of this year, New York.

Now it's the Chicago's turn, with 316 upscale rooms - the smallest over 500 square feet- and over 15,000 square feet of event facilities at The Langham Chicago.
When Langham acquired the property, some of the heavy lifting - including carving out multi-story public spaces - had already been done by the previous developer before they put their project on ice.  [Or maybe not - see the comments below.](Goettsch Partners has remained the local architect of record.) “It's amazing,” said architect Dirk Lohan, ”they managed to take beams out and make two story [spaces].  They ripped everything out, the steel beams, and then reinforced when necessary.  I remember we did that years ago in the Dirksen Building, to make more federal courtrooms.”
Rendering Courtesy Langham Hotels
“Of course we never thought it would become a hotel one day, but it is interesting that, because of the modularity of the building and it's five foot module, the rooms all are based on the 15 foot width - the minimum room is three windows, which is wider than almost all other hotels." Ceiling height is a generous nine-and-a-half feet.
John Rutledge of Oxford Capital, which retained a minority interest in the hotel after the floors were resold to Langham, told Crain's Chicago Business that the cost of building out the former office space was half the cost of new construction.   In addition, the previous developers got the IBM designated an official Chicago Landmark - the newest building to be so listed.  The Trib's Karoun Demirjian reported that nearly 75% of the estimated $139 million cost of the renovation will qualify for ‘Class L’ incentives that will reduce property taxes over the next 12 years.
First floor lobby, Rendering Courtesy Langham Hotels
With designation comes oversight.  The landmarking ordinance for the IBM includes protection for the ground floor lobby, so the Langham brought in  Lohan, Mie's grandson, to work on the design, and he strikes a balance that respects Mies's original even as it changes it.  The uninterrupted sweep of the lobby is gone, but an inferred permeability remains. “There are actually two walls,” says Lohan.  “Where you come in, there is a vestibule first, which has a glass wall to the office lobby and another glass wall to the inner lobby, with glass doors.”  
In the vestibule, there's a big clunky wooden cabinet for storing guests' luggage.
In the Lohan-designed lobby, itself, the bronze beaded curtain along the east wall seems much more insistent installed than it appeared in the renderings, but the lightly framed glass of the separator wall passes the ‘almost nothing’ test.
Images Courtesy Langham Hotels
The lobby's art, selected by Lohan and Catherine Lo, include a head by Jaime Plensa (left), the artist behind Millennium Park's Crown Fountain, and a large painting by Enoc Perez (right).  Eventually, a work by Taiwanese sculptor Ju Ming is slated to be the first permanent artwork ever placed on the building's south plaza.
The Landmarks Commission allowed one change to the building's protected exterior, and it's an unfortunate one.  A sub-canopy has been added beneath the wider one of the original design.  The stated reasoning was to provide better protection  for guests waiting for cabs, but since the arcade that wraps the lobby already affords that, it's much more likely the actual objective was for a visual marker for the hotel's entrance.  Polished bronze, it's very, very bright and shiny.  With fussy scoring on the sides and a phalanx of light bulbs beneath,  it looks a bit like a flattened game token in an overpriced Monopoly set.
“The design of the upper floors,” said Lohan, “is very soft, very non-Miesian . . . probably based on the understanding of the British firm Richmond.  Very much a continuation of the Langham brand identity and feeling.  And that's what people who go from one of their hotels to another expect, a certain level of design.”
And this is crux of the matter, the tension that comes from inserting a 21st Century luxury hotel into a 20th Century Mies van der Rohe box. The glory of Mies is in his mastery of form.  While few would emulate his love of luxurious materials, his concept of universal space found favor in innumerable cheapened knock-offs, not for its poetics, but for the way it dovetailed with the demands of a supply chain economy to transform everything possible into an interchangeable commodity.   In the hands of others, Mies's elegant towers became the massive floorplates of buildings like Sears Tower, where workers are buried deep in the bowels of the building, far away from any window.

The IBM Building worked because, whether you were talking about open floors of cubicles,  extruded workbenches, or perimeters of executive offices, the standardized spaces flowed unobtrusively behind the perfect Miesian curtain wall. For a high-end hotel, such reticence is not practicable.  A grand hotel like The Langham is theater.  “I don't want realism” Blanche Dubois once famously remarked, “I want magic.’
Image Courtesy Langham Hotels
Enter Richmond London, “Over 45 years ago, we set the benchmark for international hospitality design and have been at the forefront ever since.”  Unlike Lohan's lobby, Richmond's design of the hotel floors was unencumbered by Landmarks Commision oversight.
The one great carry-over from Mies is how the hotel's floor-to-ceiling windows open up the guest rooms to dramatic views, especially those overlooking the river across the south plaza.   The trick of a grand hotel, however, is transforming what is, in reality, a prolific extrusion of largely standardized guest rooms into an illusion of individualized, high-end domesticity, complete with 55" flat-panels.  And so all the useless things Mies stripped away - the mouldings and closets and bathrooms with more marble than a royal tomb - become essential symbols of the luxury experience.
I asked Lohan what his grandfather would have made of it all.  “I think he maybe would have chuckled a little bit, but I also feel that we would have accepted it because it is not visible to the outside . . . Despite of all of this the outside of the building remains as is, because the windows are tinted.  You can't see that there is a real change inside.  The only visible part that's different is the ground floor lobby that I'm doing.  The rest you don't see.”
With all due respect, I would have to suggest that Lohan may have miscalculated a bit here.  To me, the changes brought by the Langham have changed the IBM's appearance from the outside, without disturbing so much as a single I-beam mullion.
Even the guest room floors read differently from the office floors they replaced.  Instead of the continuous strips of lit windows, emphasizing the flowing space, the guest rooms appear to light up on the facade as isolated pixels, breaking up the visual sweep. And then when you come to public amenity floors just above the entrance lobby,  the visual difference, most especially at night, spills past the curtain wall to upset the subtle balance of Mies's original conception.
In that design, Mies followed Louis Sullivan's concept of the parts of a skyscraper corresponding to the components of a classical column.  In the case of the IBM, the base of the column is the recessed lobby. Just above it is the tall shaft, one identical office floor after the other, rising continuously to the top the building, where the visually distinct mechanical floors comprise the capital.  Three parts, all in one unifying 695-foot-high wrapper.

Now all those often double-height spaces a hotel requires - the check-in lobby, the ballrooms, Chicago's first Chuan spa, the 67-foot swimming pool, the open-kitchen restaurant designed by David Rockwell - have changed how the outside of the building reads. One of the basic conceits of a Mies skyscraper - the dark tower resting atop a pillow of light - is subverted.
Now the the glow of the tall lobby floor must compete with floors of double-height spaces with ornate chandeliers and pink accent lights.
According to Langham Managing Director Bob Schofield, a continuous 30-foot-long, 18-inch-high video screen is designed to be “a beacon, if you like, in our second floor where our restaurant is located and the lounge is located.  It's on Wabash.  So if you're coming over on the bridge, you're going to see that light up on the second floor and it's hopefully going to track people in.”
Treatment Room, Chuan Spa - Image Courtesy Langham Hotels
The irony is that, with the AMA and other banner tenants moving in, if the developer had just held on, it might well have filled up floors 2 through 14 (actually 13, but you know the superstitions) without any recourse to a hotel.  But what's done is done.  It's not unsubtle, and it's not a crime.  It's reversible.  But for the forseeable future, the Langham is stretching Mies's aesthetic in ways that will be debated for a long time to come.

Lohan, for one, thinks Mies would have been accepting.  “I asked him,” said Lohan, “what he felt should be done with his buildings as time goes on.  Because even then there were people who were so enamored that, if you touch a Mies building, they go to the barricades.  I don't feel that way, because he said, ‘this is not for me to decide, whether you and the future generations feel these buildings are worthy of preservation.  Some of them are and others are not.’  And I think he's absolutely right.  I feel that same way.”

Read More:

Monday, May 20, 2013

Chicago Nightscene: Triple Crown

click image for larger view
To tide you over while I work on my latest TLDR . . .