CHICAGO | 110 N Wacker | 817 FT | 56 FLOORS

[LouisVanDerWright]

Originally Posted by RedCorsair87

^I will double down on what I've said before: Based on the success of leasing the OPO and 110 N Wacker and barring any country-wide economic calamity, a super-tall Class A office tower is absolutely viable in Chicago if built on the Chicago River or east of the Kennedy.

Considering neither of the buildings you list are supertalls office buildings I'm going to go with "no, that's nonsense". Why? Because people will just build more 700' tall office buildings and undercut the prices asked by a supertall which will need to charge more to be viable.

[Via Chicago]

Originally Posted by rgarri4

I'm probably in the minority here, but this tower looks tremendously boring to me.

theres nothing special about this building at all other than that its new.

[jc5680]

Originally Posted by rgarri4

I'm probably in the minority here, but this tower looks tremendously boring to me.

I wouldn't go so far as to call it boring, but it does seem to be following the 150 riverside formula in a way that is unfortunate: Interesting structural element at the base, some level of interest to the 'front' of the building, regrettable material contrast and volume proportions above the base, a fairly middling curtain wall, and a largely ignored 'back' of the building.

I get the impression many will forgive a lot of the details because of the structural acrobatics. I am mostly just happy Goettsch remembered to account for the louvers for mechanicals here unlike whatever the hell happened at 150 that let to the unsightly floor on it's back.

[BonoboZill4]

Say what you want, but it certainly helps improve the river canyon effect. (I love it though, even the Wacker side because it reflects its neighbors really well)

[NYC2ATX]

Originally Posted by BonoboZill4

Say what you want, but it certainly helps improve the river canyon effect. (I love it though, even the Wacker side because it reflects its neighbors really well)

Yeah that's one of the least warped building reflections I've ever seen on even the best curtain wall facades.

It's clear that the Wacker face was not meant to be the focus of this design, but then again, I always felt that the total effect of these new glass towers is the more significant addition. The sum here is FAR greater than each of the parts, and each individual tower is part of this movement of the symphony.

[BuildThemTaller]

Originally Posted by -Nick-

From today 8/19/19.

I agree that this is turning out to look a little blah the more we see. However, there are two views that give me hope. From the north or the south along the River, you can see the glass fins. The view along Wacker is just as bland as a blue box can be. And honestly, that's fine to me. Few will see that view as it is surrounded by tall neighbors on 3 sides. The approaches from the north and south of the River give me hope. Staring at this head-on from the Boeing Building is not its best angle. It's best viewed from the plaza just south of 150 Riverside.

[JMKeynes]

This thing is a fatty!

[BonoboZill4]

[SpireGuy]

Originally Posted by rgarri4

I'm probably in the minority here, but this tower looks tremendously boring to me.

Totally agree. The riverwalk portion looks like it will be nice, but the tower suckssssss. Another blue glass box with silver mullions.

[maru2501]

I was hopeful at first put it is coming in a little Dallas 1987


agree the river side treatment saves it a little, but I fear the great blue wall once all these towers go in that row. If this were black or green we'd all probably like it, although if green it might detract from 333 w wacker

[BuildThemTaller]

Originally Posted by maru2501

I was hopeful at first put it is coming in a little Dallas 1987


agree the river side treatment saves it a little, but I fear the great blue wall once all these towers go in that row. If this were black or green we'd all probably like it, although if green it might detract from 333 w wacker

Why worry about a Great Blue Wall? It's neighbors to the north are black, then green. To the south are beige and then brown. And across the river, there is black. Blue on that side of the river looks good.

[MorganChi]

SpireGuy :Totally agree. The riverwalk portion looks like it will be nice, but the tower suckssssss. Another blue glass box with silver mullions.




If it’s not height y’all complain about it’s the design. Some cities would die to have a building like this stop complaining and enjoy what’s being received GOT DAMN !!!!!!!

[rivernorthlurker]

Better learn to like it because the BMO building is going to be a smaller clone.

Disclaimer - I really like this building.

[bnk]

I don't get all of the dislikes. It is better than what was there clearly.

Its location is prime. Walkable from the Metra Rail Down Town Stations.


I'm quite content with this one. I'm sure it will also be a financial success.


Plus eye candy for the river canyon for the tourist boats.

[BonoboZill4]

Originally Posted by bnk

I don't get all of the dislikes. It is better than what was there clearly.

Its location is prime. Walkable from the Metra Rail Down Town Stations.


I'm quite content with this one. I'm sure it will also be a financial success.


Plus eye candy for the river canyon for the tourist boats.

It's already 2/3rds leased, so that's a pretty safe bet haha

[Donnie77]

Originally Posted by MorganChi

SpireGuy :Totally agree. The riverwalk portion looks like it will be nice, but the tower suckssssss. Another blue glass box with silver mullions.




If it’s not height y’all complain about it’s the design. Some cities would die to have a building like this stop complaining and enjoy what’s being received GOT DAMN !!!!!!!

AMEN.....

[bhawk66]

Originally Posted by MorganChi

If it’s not height y’all complain about it’s the design. Some cities would die to have a building like this stop complaining and enjoy what’s being received GOT DAMN !!!!!!!

Complaining and criticizing are two different things. It's an architecture forum for cripes sake. Opinions, good and bad, are both warranted.

[kolchak]

I like the play of different architectural periods off one another. Having a single style produce several examples is not a bad thing. It alows the cityscape to blend together well and prevents Dubaitis.

Chicago still has many different types of skyscrapers. If you don't like these blue glass buildings with the vertical mulions there is no need to worry that this style will become any more prominant than early modern or other phases.

The reflections of the neighboring towers off 110 gives a nice prismatic effect. The glass works well here imo.

[Citizen]

I believe any tower of this size and it's useful location is a fine addition to Chicago. We can all be amazed and dream that every office tower should match the fit and finish of One Vanderbilt in NY. Different markets, different price points. Proud to see Chicago keeps building and bringing jobs/tenants back downtown. I'm sure she'll shine in the end.

[BonoboZill4]

Originally Posted by kolchak

I like the play of different architectural periods off one another. Having a single style produce several examples is not a bad thing. It alows the cityscape to blend together well and prevents Dubaitis.

Chicago still has many different types of skyscrapers. If you don't like these blue glass buildings with the vertical mulions there is no need to worry that this style will become any more prominant than early modern or other phases.

The reflections of the neighboring towers off 110 gives a nice prismatic effect. The glass works well here imo.

Couldn't have said it better myself. Plus, better this than the beige hellscape of the 90s-00s. At least the materials we are getting for the glass towers are mostly top notch