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

[lawfin]

I'll probably get piloried for this....but I find Aqua "gimmicky"

[wrab]

^ Nah - the more opinions the better. Not that I agree

Anyway, 1/31. Still tweaking this one, so it may be up & down for a while:

[Ch.G, Ch.G]

lawfin, I think it depends on whether or not you believe the rationale for the balconies. Regardless, you're not the first to hold that opinion.

[Jibba]

Tweak away, but that's an awesome frame and comp. as-is.

[wrab]

Originally Posted by Ch.G, Ch.G

lawfin, I think it depends on whether or not you believe the rationale for the balconies. Regardless, you're not the first to hold that opinion.

Yeah - that is the crux - the balconies extend into predetermined view corridors. Also, Mangellan is responsible for the "Aqua" monicker - I get the feeling that Gang would rather it be called something else LOL - but the balconies aren't trying to evoke breakers.

1/31, w/Trump

[wrab]

1/31

[FlashingLights]

Originally Posted by lawfin

I'll probably get piloried for this....but I find Aqua "gimmicky"

I find it gimmicky also, I feel it could have been executed different. The white concrete slab balconies look cheap and contrast the modern windows.The entire waves thing seems gimmicky, it's like the building is trying to be revolutionary and fails at it. It also seems like the entire window should have come out to the level of the wave balcony, and entire large sections of the building should have been in the wave budges, not just the balconies. It was probably not done this way because it would be to expensive to build and condo buyers want balconies. (This was already talked about earlier in the thread.) I think if it was done with higher end material it might look nicer too, but it seems cheaped out on like other Lowenberg buildings.

Also I'm for modern design and I think this building could have been awesome, but when you look at it it's not comforting to the eyes at all it looks like the building has a disease growing on it and you just want to scrape it off. I shouldn't have to stare at it trying to like it for being groundbreaking it should just be. It fails to be a marina tower as others were attempting to compare it to earlier in the thread. I still think its a step in the right direction towards more modern design, especially compared to say The Elysian.

[blart]

From afar, judging just from photos, this is a really interesting building; contrasts nicely with its neighbors.

Don't know if this was brought up before, but how successful it is visually may depend on how clean those concrete balconies can stay. If they get stained or dirty, especially the undersides, it may really look like a disease growing, as FlashingLights said.

[BVictor1]

Originally Posted by EarlyBuyer

An update released from Magellan 1/30/09:

"...Magellan Development reports today that Aqua will be pouring the 79th floor next week. Windows are installed to the 65th floor. Lastly studs are being installed on the 53rd floor..."

So I suppose depending on how you count the floors, there are either 3 floors left to pour or like 8.

[ginsan2]

Originally Posted by FlashingLights

I find it gimmicky also, I feel it could have been executed different. The white concrete slab balconies look cheap and contrast the modern windows.The entire waves thing seems gimmicky, it's like the building is trying to be revolutionary and fails at it. It also seems like the entire window should have come out to the level of the wave balcony, and entire large sections of the building should have been in the wave budges, not just the balconies. It was probably not done this way because it would be to expensive to build and condo buyers want balconies. (This was already talked about earlier in the thread.) I think if it was done with higher end material it might look nicer too, but it seems cheaped out on like other Lowenberg buildings.

To my inexperienced eye, it just looks like they constructed a building meant to be viewed from only one angle. From the ground and the side perspectives, it really adds nothing to the street. So from that perspective, I too agree that it's very "gimmicky"; clearly built for only one angle, for only one effect.

Also, I had a biology class once where I had to cut open a cow intestine. The lining of its stomach and the intestine looked exactly like that building's waves and ripples. It makes me a little ill.

[Nowhereman1280]

How do white balconies "look cheap" in contrast to "modern glass". I find that to be really silly. Last time I checked "white" is a very "modern" color. And what makes this glass any more "modern" than painted concrete?

Also, this building would be a failure if the glass reached out to the edge of the balconies because that would defeat the entire cleverness of the design. That would throw this building into the same category of the exhibitionist thoughtless designs you see in Dubai. The genius of this building is that it is a box with balconies, an extremely efficient form, yet it hides those balconies with a clever design scheme. Also, if you put the glass out to the edge you entirely defeat the practical point of the waves which is to provide balconies that have extended lines of sight. The moment you put glass on them, you prevent a person on one balcony from seeing across the others and having waves at all is pointless... Then the curves are indeed a gimmick and completely pointless except for aesthetics.

[the urban politician]

I think that in 50 years, this building will be considered a landmark

[CHAPINM1]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

I think that in 50 years, this building will be considered a landmark

I'd say it already is...

[spyguy]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

In all seriousness, I'm guessing Roundy's

http://www.chicagorealestatedaily.com/cgi-bin/news.pl?id=32883

Roundy’s exits West Loop lease, in talks on 2 other sites
By Eddie Baeb, Feb. 04, 2009

...Roundy’s also is in advanced talks for a new store in Lakeshore East, just northeast of Millennium Park, and would lease 50,000 to 60,000 square feet, roughly double the size of a Treasure Island grocery store that had been planned there.

[Jibba]

Tonight:

[Ch.G, Ch.G]

^ Thanks, Jibba. That's such a great cluster of buildings, minus the other Loewenberg. There's a narrow lot just to the east of the church, right? It would be great to eventually see something take advantage of the amazing westward views of the river.

[Nowhereman1280]

You can now see Aqua from State all the way from Division to about Oak... It almost forms a Terminus at the end of the street...

[Steely Dan]

huh, how could aqua possibly form a terminus at the end of state street? perhaps you're thinking of rush street?

[wrab]

Aqua is also clearly visible now from the inbound Kennedy.

[Nowhereman1280]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

huh, how could aqua possibly form a terminus at the end of state street? perhaps you're thinking of rush street?

Nope, I mean state, Rush ends when it intersects with State at Elm, so you can see if from State St. but you are technically looking down the Rush St. Canyon. I guess I should have worded it as "it forms a terminus from there" not "a terminus for state" or whatever I said...

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=chicago&ie...87.627565&spn=0.004352,0.006909&t=h&z=17

I guess I didn't say rush because you can really only see if from the diagonal part of State and a for a little bit as you walk down Rush...