In his column “It’s just too much of a stretch” (Commentary, Aug. 8), Dennis Byrne raises some important issues about the proposed Fordham Spire.
Fortunately there are answers to his questions.
Would the spire “further choke Chicago’s densest area”? No. We have proposed to build only two-thirds the number of housing units allowed by current zoning and would build less than the square footage allowed.
Would the spire cast too much of a shadow? No. Current zoning allows for two buildings–one of them 35 stories high, the other 50 stories–with massive floorplates that would cast large, slow-moving shadows. The spire is exceptionally slender. Its slim shadow would pass in minutes.
Should the parklike nature of the lakefront be preserved? Yes. The base of the spire will occupy less than 20 percent of the site. The remaining 80 percent will be developed as gardens, fountains and a park looking out over the lake. There will even be a restaurant “with gorgeous lake views”–or perhaps river views–as Byrne suggests.
Will the spire reproduce on the central lakefront the “mess of high-rises along Sheridan Road”? Of course not. There can be no comparison between those buildings and the elegant, innovative design by Santiago Calatrava.
Finally, why build the spire at the meeting of the lakefront and the river? On this question, I trust the judgment of one of the world’s greatest architects. Calatrava says, “It was obvious that this is a place where a great building can be made.”
Byrne suggests the stockyards as an alternative. Frankly, I think that would stink.
