CHICAGO | 375 East Wacker (Arquitectonica Tower) | 840 FT / 256 M | 76 FLOORS | PRO - Page 18

gttx · #**341** Posted **Jun 10, 2007, 6:07 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dan in Chicago

The JPMorgan Chase Tower in Dallas (738') has a hole in the top. Centerpoint Energy Plaza in Houston (741') has an open structure at the top, but not quite a hole in the same sense.

There is also a building proposed in Atlanta (construction pending a lead tenant) that will be 45 floors and have a big hole at the top:

Alliance · #**342** Posted **Jun 11, 2007, 2:16 AM**

We'll just have to build ours first. Aqua's got to be close to completly sold. I think it was over 80% last time I heard. Will Lowenburg really wait until every last unit is sold in Aqua until he markets this building. They've got to want to start construction next year...to use Aqua to lure tennats to this building. I mean, we are talking about the biggest architectural statement in Chicago almost half a century.

SamInTheLoop · #**343** Posted **Jun 11, 2007, 3:34 AM**

^ There's no reason to wait for every unit in Aqua to be sold - that could take quite a while as the last 5%- 10% or so often do (besides, Aqua won't be completed until late 2009, so there is plenty of time to finish off sales there). I think Magellan should be very comfortable launching sales of this tower with Aqua around 90% sold...

BANKofMANHATTAN · #**344** Posted **Jun 11, 2007, 1:47 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by gttx

There is also a building proposed in Atlanta (construction pending a lead tenant) that will be 45 floors and have a big hole at the top:

I like both of these towers quite a bit, 50 Allen is this one's little brother.

SamInTheLoop · #**345** Posted **Jun 20, 2007, 12:12 AM**

Walked by the site on Upper Wacker this afternoon. Active soil test drilling taking place today amidst the staging area for the Tides (precisely this was close to Field Blvd (due north of the short 10 or 12 story section of the Tides), and somewhat nearer Wacker than the Tides itself...

spyguy · #**346** Posted **Jun 20, 2007, 7:34 PM**

Another future rendering from the LSE website

dropdeaded209 · #**347** Posted **Jun 20, 2007, 7:41 PM**

from that render you get a good sense of how the hole is going to line up well with LSD drivers approaching from the south. gives a good sense of what an impact it will make on the skyline too...more so than little blue 600 N. Fairbanks anyway...

Pandemonious · #**348** Posted **Jun 20, 2007, 7:53 PM**

It also depicts really well just how much of a HULKING MASS bcbs will be after the expansion is complete..

GregBear24 · #**349** Posted **Jun 20, 2007, 11:28 PM**

BCBS will have such an enormous impact on the skyline. I don't anyone will truly relize this until it's t/o

chicubs111 · #**350** Posted **Jun 20, 2007, 11:56 PM**

I agree about blue crosses impact...This building has serious sq footage on top of the added height will make the building really massive.

Alliance · #**351** Posted **Jun 21, 2007, 2:53 AM**

it was nice that they added the BCBS exansion in too, but its too thick for my tastes.

What LSE really needs is a 1300-1500 footer the east of Arqui, building up to the Spire.

ardecila · #**352** Posted **Jun 22, 2007, 2:37 AM**

The design has not been released yet for the tower at the corner of Wacker/LSD. This tower should obviously be a supertall to balance out the Spire at the river mouth.

fioco · #**353** Posted **Jun 22, 2007, 3:09 AM**

Viewing the skyline from the Lake, the Chicago Spire will be 'downstage' from most of the skyline. I'm not so sure it needs a nearby supertall for balance. Its unique position will give it a place of prominence not unlike that of the ESB in NYC (for now) -- the CS will stand sentinel as the skyline behind it continues to grow and soar ever higher. Personally, I hope it keeps its singular position. The entire skyline provides the peaks and valleys; it doesn't need a cluster around it.

bnk · #**354** Posted **Jun 22, 2007, 3:38 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by fioco

Viewing the skyline from the Lake, the Chicago Spire will be 'downstage' from most of the skyline. I'm not so sure it needs a nearby supertall for balance. Its unique position will give it a place of prominence not unlike that of the ESB in NYC (for now) -- the CS will stand sentinel as the skyline behind it continues to grow and soar ever higher. Personally, I hope it keeps its singular position. The entire skyline provides the peaks and valleys; it doesn't need a cluster around it.

Good viewpoint. See the lighthouse of Alexandria for an example and the vision for SC view of what he envisions for Chicago and this location in particular. At first I was afraid of the location of a 2000 foot building so close to the lake, but now I am getting it and...

Alliance · #**355** Posted **Jun 22, 2007, 4:31 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by fioco

Viewing the skyline from the Lake, the Chicago Spire will be 'downstage' from most of the skyline. I'm not so sure it needs a nearby supertall for balance. Its unique position will give it a place of prominence not unlike that of the ESB in NYC (for now) -- the CS will stand sentinel as the skyline behind it continues to grow and soar ever higher. Personally, I hope it keeps its singular position. The entire skyline provides the peaks and valleys; it doesn't need a cluster around it.

It doens't neet it for balance, it needs a crescendo...one or two parnters is not a crime...the Spire is being built in such a stand-alone location anyway, there are very few ways to touch it.