^ yeah no, Sears tower is such a giant that even if the proposed Tribune tower was built near it it would disappear in its shadow.....

Neighboring 311 South Wacker - roof 961 ft almost a supertall - looks small next to the ST.

This is so true. There's a parking garage just to the east of Sears on the other side of Franklin. That could and should eventually be redeveloped. Even if that becomes a supertall, the lot is half the size of the base of Sears. It would be super skinny. Sears is so damn thick.

Most of the other blocks near Sears in the Loop are already developed by those 500-800 ft towers. Unless a company with massive amounts of money wants to redevelop one of those towers a la 270 Park Ave in Manhattan, I just don't see a future where Sears gets a neighbor that has a similar presence. That kind of company would need Chase Bank money. Chicago doesn't have that kind of company. Maybe Boeing once they get past the whole 737 Max issue.

Skyline shot on February 2, 2020, from the south lakefront path:

https://i.imgur.com/SVNqRWG.jpg?1

I like that from this vantage point, the Big 4 (Willis, 401 N Wabash, Aon, Hancock) now have company. I think it's my favorite perspective, especially since it shows NEMA's most dynamic angle.

The most shocking thing about this panorama is that there are 800 ft. buildings that are barely visible.

^Haha yeah! and I'm surprised at how Nema and Vista towers look taller than 401 N Wabash. Vista is a great looking building and darker looking than I thought from a distance.

800' isn't what it once was in chicago.

when i joined this forum in 1999, there were only 9 towers in the city over 800' tall.

once Salesforce kicks off any week now, the city will have 20 towers over 800' including U/C projects.

back in 1999, the city's 20th tallest building was NBC tower at 627'. the ceiling has been raised ~200' over the past 2 decades.

Nema has made a huge impact. Yall know I am new here, but this is still funny. My gf said she thought that was the tallest building(taller than ST, obviously) the other day. I live right next to it so it does stand out really nicely.

The architecture and placement of NEMA on the skyline is sublime. They really hit that one out of the park. Needs a nighttime lighting scheme though.

Funny, but this does say it all about NEMA’s design. That the laywoman thinks this is the 2nd tallest building goes to show the building visually soars! From the angle above, NEMA has made its way into my top five tower designs of all time!

Yeah, its funny, I was talking about how much I love that building(and the Paragon) and she was surprised. We mostly see it from Michigan Avenue, so we see a massive parking garage and lot. But what makes it so nice to me is the towering design of it. It stands out, for sure. Up close I don't think its all that special, but man does that thing make you know its there.

I love the building. Agree with all the positive comments on it. Anyone know how leasing is going?

I can see a lot of lights turned on at night so that's probably a good sign? (although I suppose they could be faked)

Yeah, I have no idea. Its a TAD out of my price range and I am not up on that type of stuff. I toured the Paragon though, and the dude acted like they were filling up fast. Could be true, could be pressure. He did tell me that three people viewed one of the units I liked eithin 4 hours of me leaving. That either indicates theres a lot of interest in the building or that hes a huge liar. I will never know.

I will say the Paragon is beautiful and the units are actually priced decently for what you get.

I can't speak for NEMA, but I read an article on Paragon that specifically mentioned the building manager's ability to control lights in all the units, such that it made the building look more vibrant and appealing to potential renters.

So yeah, the many lights on at Paragon could be (a) a mostly full building or (b) fancy parlor tricks to entice better leasing numbers. Either way, it's a great building and I love that it graces the South Loop's skyline.

Got it, thanks.

It definitely could. If it does, I expect lawsuits by the States. Ultimately, census counting is a Constitutional mandate, and the privacy rules are only statutory. Depending on the Supreme Court, the privacy laws could be struck down or ordered to be modified. The political makeup of the Court doesn't even make predicting what a decision looks like very easy, as arguments could be made from many different perspectives.

The most worrisome aspect is that non-Federal governments won't even get access to real numbers as it currently stands. Ultimately, though, while the census makes certain data mining operations easier, it's not required to do what they describe. I'd be surprised if the Government could prove that the Census actually greatly reduced privacy compared to what is already available. Ultimately, if the cat's already out of the bag, it's hard to argue that the negatives of distortion are outweighed by theoretical privacy concerns that have already been lost. Which means the real data may be delayed, but it seems unlikely to be kept for the full 72 years.

From Sep 13

via https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8960...7i13312!8i6656


WPS + 353 W Grand is really gonna build a wall.

https://i.imgur.com/fqSqlD2.png

incredible

Yeah, we've built a brand new small city in just that 5 square-block area of Wolf Point and the north corner of Wacker. It's amazing to see such an incredible change in just five years.