CHICAGO | Aqua | 858 FT / 262 M | 87 FLOORS

[Alliance]

Side note: It would be really sweet if "Aqua II" (i forget the actual site name) was cantilevered over Aqua's podium.

Great shots EB.

[BVictor1]

09/30/08

[Nowhereman1280]

Originally Posted by Alliance

Side note: It would be really sweet if "Aqua II" (i forget the actual site name) was cantilevered over Aqua's podium.

No offense Alliance, but I think that would be the dumbest thing ever and totally take away from the reason based design of Aqua. I mean having a tower with some ridiculous wasteful cantilever over a building that is entirely rational at its core, with a clever way of hiding/beautifying balconies to decorate it.

Ugh the thought of something like that makes me shudder...

[Alliance]

It was more born out of some of EB's photos...I never saw Aqua in person since the podium massing was complete. It looks a bit large to me. I was justt thinking of a way to try to salvage all of that space. I don't think it would really interfere with Aqua at all. There is still plenty of room between them.

Anyway: Here is a video of Gang at the recent CTBUH conference in Dubai. She talks some about her general philosophy of building. The middle of the presentation is heavy on Aqua and she ends with some on Solstice. There were a few pics I've never seen before as far as the design and concept of Aqua are concerned. The vid is certainly worth a watch.


http://blip.tv/file/1244625
~CTBUH

[EarlyBuyer]

Thanks Alliance for posting this video!

Also, thanks all for your compliments.

[ardecila]

I'm not sure a cantilever over the podium would be nice... but a cantilever over the south walkway (Lake Street extension) would be good, providing a little bit of shelter.

[williamchung taiwan]

Compare to rendering, I feel a little disappoint....

[williamchung taiwan]

Compare with rendering, I feel a little disappoint....

[ChiPsy]

Look back a few pages for pictures taken closer to the building (which are comparable to the renderings) -- the variation in the facade is much more dramatic.

[brian_b]

The Tribune is reporting that Strategic Hotels is pulling out of the Aqua deal.

[honte]

^ Yeah - Whoa. This could have major implications... I don't want to even speculate about what it might mean for future projects like the Arquitectonica etc.

____

Fairmont owner pulls out of Aqua project

By Alby Gallun, Oct. 03, 2008

http://www.chicagorealestatedaily.com/cgi-bin/news.pl?id=31268

(Crain’s) - Citing turmoil in the financial markets, the owner of the Fairmont Chicago hotel has dropped plans for a 225-room expansion in the Aqua building, an 87-story tower being built across the street.

Strategic Hotels & Resorts Inc., which bought the Fairmont in 2005, said it has terminated a $84-million contract to buy about 15 floors in Aqua, a mixed-use high-rise under construction at 225 N. Columbus Drive, just east of the Fairmont.

...

[Via Chicago]

Heres the link:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/chi-081003strategic,0,2544428.story

Financial crisis fallout: Strategic Hotels pulls out of Aqua project

By Jim Kirk | Tribune staff reporter
7:37 AM CDT, October 3, 2008

The ongoing credit crisis is putting the brakes on a significant Chicago building project.

Chicago-based Strategic Hotels & Resorts, Inc. said it is scrapping plans to purchase the hotel development at the Aqua Building, currently under construction and adjacent to the company's Fairmont Chicago Hotel.

"Despite the opportunities this property presents, the financial markets and economic operating environment have changed significantly since we first entered into the agreement to purchase the space in 2006,'' said Laurence Geller, president and chief executive of Strategic. "We remain committed to our thoughtful and disciplined business approach which, given the higher cost of capital, escalating total project costs and our dedication to maintaining sufficient liquidity for all market conditions, makes it imprudent for the company to proceed at this time.''....

[chrslyp]

^^^ uh oh.

[trvlr70]

I wonder what effects this will have on Aqua as a whole? Was Strategic obligated to finance a portion of the podium and the vast amenities?

[Tom In Chicago]

I wonder if this isn't an opportunity for Mandarin Oriental to bail on their condo project. . . seems like a good fit. . .

[ardecila]

I'm pretty sure they will finish the building up to its final height, but the bottom hotel portion will be unoccupied. It'll probably end up as either residential units (condo or rental) or Magellan will be able to line up another hotel tenant. Also, as trvlr70 mentioned, the amenities in the podium may not be finished either (ballroom, pool, gardens).

[trvlr70]

Originally Posted by Tom In Chicago

I wonder if this isn't an opportunity for Mandarin Oriental to bail on their condo project. . . seems like a good fit. . .

I doubt it. Aqua's hotel space doesn't really have the right mix of ultra luxuries amenities needed: high ceilings, huge spa, etc..

But would the very sucessful and next door Swissotel be insterested?

[Alliance]

*swears prolifically*

[honte]

Originally Posted by trvlr70

I doubt it. Aqua's hotel space isn't really have the right mix of ultra luxuries needed: high ceilings, huge spa, etc..

But would the very sucessful and next door Swissotel be insterested?

Yes, I agree.

I wonder what will become of the special pedway connection to the Fairmont? Another one of Chicago's famous, forgotten, mothballed spaces?

Maybe it's wide enough to convert into an ultra-hip underground linear bar/lounge over Columbus Drive, like something at an airport terminal.

[wrab]

Originally Posted by honte

Yes, I agree.

I wonder what will become of the special pedway connection to the Fairmont? Another one of Chicago's famous, forgotten, mothballed spaces?

Maybe it's wide enough to convert into an ultra-hip underground linear bar/lounge over Columbus Drive, like something at an airport terminal.

Or a high-tech dog run...