CHICAGO | Willis Tower (formerly Sears Tower) | 1,451 FT / 442 M | 108 FLOORS | 1974 - Page 9

cbotnyse · #**161** Posted **Feb 26, 2009, 3:50 AM**

keep it black

george · #**162** Posted **Feb 26, 2009, 4:12 AM**

Ditto, keep it black! Are they nuts?

Steely Dan · #**163** Posted **Feb 26, 2009, 4:12 AM**

^ A-FREAKING-MEN!

BWChicago · #**164** Posted **Feb 26, 2009, 4:13 AM**

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1cd_Hq1yIeU Here's a segment from Modern Marvels on the Sears' cladding

george · #**165** Posted **Feb 26, 2009, 4:26 AM**

jcchii · #**166** Posted **Feb 26, 2009, 4:40 AM**

they can paint it silver if they stay home and paint the empire state building silver as well

M II A II R II K · #**167** Posted **Feb 26, 2009, 4:41 AM**

no!

QuarterMileSidewalk · #**168** Posted **Feb 26, 2009, 5:28 AM**

What a totally heinous idea.

While we're at it, let's redo the White House. I can see it now: The Blue and Green Stripey House. This is the 21st Century, after all.

Tom Servo · #**169** Posted **Feb 26, 2009, 6:21 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jcchii

they can paint it silver if they stay home and paint the empire state building silver as well

how about some chicago company go and buy the empire state building and reclad it white terra-cotta... let's have a war of the skyscraper owners!

or maybe build a second sears tower, in black... then we'd have two flavors of the same great thing!

or... let's just reclad ever building in chicago silver!

actually, yeah... that'd be awesome...

man, ridiculous ideas are easy to produce, huh?

i think it's time to forget this hoopla of a proposal as it'll never happen. if this article came out a few years ago when money wasn't so tight, i'd be concerned. but now-a-days?

Zerton · #**170** Posted **Feb 26, 2009, 8:11 AM**

The black is a big part of what gives the Sears Tower its dominance

emathias · #**171** Posted **Feb 26, 2009, 4:00 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by aaron38

...
How would they change the color of the glass? A film?
...

Yes. The glass itself in the Sears Tower is clear and gets it's bronze tinting from a film applied.

A few years back, just before 9/11, my desk looked directly into the Sears Tower (that was fun, actually), and one day I came in and it looked like they'd removed the windows in the offices directly across from me. But then I saw workers cleaning the glass and then applying a film to it. I guess if they just changed the tint of the windows to a more gray color instead of bronze, that by itself would look dramatically different. Add in a "silver" paint job and it'd match all the new buildings on that stretch of Wacker.

I think it'd be funny if they silver-plated it with actual silver.

Nowhereman1280 · #**172** Posted **Feb 26, 2009, 6:06 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by AdrianXSands

how about some chicago company go and buy the empire state building and reclad it white terra-cotta... let's have a war of the skyscraper owners!

Better yet, lets just have Daley send some bulldozer crews over to Manhattan in the middle of the night and bulldoze giant X's back and forth across the length of Manhattan, especially central park...

Chicago29 · #**173** Posted **Feb 27, 2009, 1:01 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by cbotnyse

keep it black

"Keep" it black

honte · #**174** Posted **Feb 27, 2009, 2:48 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by emathias

Add in a "silver" paint job and it'd match all the new buildings on that stretch of Wacker.

That's a good point... Sears would lose a lot of its identity from ground level just by blending in too much. You have to wonder what these fools are thinking.

honte · #**175** Posted **Feb 27, 2009, 2:51 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nowhereman1280

We can't landmark without owner consent can we? Is there any way we can just simply say "Umm, no. Not happening in our city." to these people? Stupid New Yorkers...

Chicago's landmarks policy does NOT have an owner consent clause. The city can impose landmarking, subject to proper hearings, votes, etc.

That is, back before our entire landmarks law was up in the air.

Quote:

Originally Posted by wrabbit

Yep, time to landmark. Is there an age requirement for that, and if so, does Sears get in? And what is the status of the Landmark Ordinance now? I should be following developments there but haven't - my bad.

Expect to see more of this kind of ill-considered nonsense as the great Chicago modernist gems of the 60s & 70s fall into a generational funk.

The city is appealing the decision.

There is nothing on the books to prevent a landmark from being designated due to age, nothing at all. However, the unofficial rule is that something needs to be 50 years of age or greater.

wrab · #**176** Posted **Feb 27, 2009, 2:57 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by honte

Chicago's landmarks policy does NOT have an owner consent clause. The city can impose landmarking, subject to proper hearings, votes, etc.....

Except for active church buildings. But that doesn't apply here, obviously. Unless Sears is part of some secret cult that I'm unaware of.....

arlekin_m · #**177** Posted **Feb 27, 2009, 3:19 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by emathias

...I guess if they just changed the tint of the windows to a more gray color instead of bronze, that by itself would look dramatically different...

That actually reads like a great idea.

wrab · #**178** Posted **Feb 27, 2009, 4:05 AM**

Oh heck, why not just paint it pink and put an umbrella on top?

TANGELD_SLC · #**179** Posted **Feb 27, 2009, 8:25 PM**

If it goes silver then it will be no different from the dime-a-dozen scrapers that are popping up all over the globe.

KEEP IT BLACK!

It will cease to be a major American icon if it's changed in any way as dramatic as a re-tinting.

scalziand · #**180** Posted **Feb 27, 2009, 9:06 PM**

gaaah-WHAT!?

If it happens, we're going to neeed to hand out a bunch of these

to the Chicago forumers and 'fix' things.