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

[EarlyBuyer]

Thanks for the updates wrabbit and harry, nice work!

[Dac150]

Cool building; though it seems it would be more of home in Miami.

[sentinel]

Originally Posted by Dac150

Cool building; though it seems it would be more of home in Miami.

That's a very ignorant thing to say, especially coming from you Dac - why is it that every cool/interesting/unique building in this country HAS to belong to one of the coasts? 'Cause we're just a bunch of hillbillies here in the Great lakes area, who can't appreciate high visual art - it is very much at home in Chicago. btw, that 'Top' picture Harry is pretty damn awesome!

[Dr. Taco]

oh my gosh

Originally Posted by wrabbit

[Nowhereman1280]

Originally Posted by sentinel

That's a very ignorant thing to say, especially coming from you Dac - why is it that every cool/interesting/unique building in this country HAS to belong to one of the coasts? 'Cause we're just a bunch of hillbillies here in the Great lakes area, who can't appreciate high visual art - it is very much at home in Chicago. btw, that 'Top' picture Harry is pretty damn awesome!

I have a feeling he was referring more to Chicago's tradition of very minimalist buildings. On the surface, it does seem like Aqua wouldn't fit in with our tradition of minimalist boxes, but then when you think about the design implications of Aqua's balconies and the practical concerns that lead to their forms and you realize it really is just another minimalist building with a different set of parameters determining its form. If this were the excessive Gehry tower going up in NYC, then I'd say it belongs in some tropical resort, but this buildings waves actually serve a purpose other than decoration.

[wrab]

[Aleks]

Originally Posted by sentinel

That's a very ignorant thing to say, especially coming from you Dac - why is it that every cool/interesting/unique building in this country HAS to belong to one of the coasts? 'Cause we're just a bunch of hillbillies here in the Great lakes area, who can't appreciate high visual art - it is very much at home in Chicago. btw, that 'Top' picture Harry is pretty damn awesome!

I really doubt he meant that. Really really doubt. Plus how is that ignorant? And New York also has a building that has waves and is completely covered in stainless steel. Which is even more uncommon than Aqua's facade.

I agree with him though. Chicago could've had a much better building. It looks really nice from the side and from some angles from the bottom. I feel like the waves could've been better. And yeah, it does feel like it belongs in Miami. I guess it's because the waves looks very cheap, like they just painted over the concrete and that's it.

And don't the 'waves' on the Beekman also serve a purpose? Sure they're decorative but it's the same with this building. Aqua a just a box with wave balconies. The floorplates on Beekman follow the form of the waves so in one way or another it adds space and difference from one apt to the other. Plus I don't think stainless steel is pretty popular in tropical places. White balconies and green glass on the other hand...

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by Aleks

The floorplates on Beekman follow the form of the waves so in one way or another it adds space and difference from one apt to the other.

But Beekman Tower's floorplates don't really vary that much, it's pretty subtle - look at the construction photos before the cladding goes up. The thickness of the cladding is varied to produce the waves, and the windows are set pretty deeply back. I'm not sure what goes into the recesses in the wall - maybe just insulation?

Regardless of whether you think Aqua is appropriate for Chicago or not, it is now part of our architectural tradition, and it will influence other architects just as Marina City, Federal Center, and the Reliance Building did. Honestly, I'm not in love with the white color either, but it looks really sharp in the winter when everything else looks muddy and washed-out.

[NYCLuver]

Eek some of you guys are so picky. :lol:

I think Dac only said that he feels it would belong somewhere like Miami because of the color, white balconies and greenish/bluish glass. A lot if not most of the buildings in Miami are these colors, so I think that was what he meant.

Calm down. And no need to Bring Beekman into the discussion.

[Ch.G, Ch.G]

Originally Posted by Aleks

I really doubt he meant that. Really really doubt. Plus how is that ignorant? And New York also has a building that has waves and is completely covered in stainless steel. Which is even more uncommon than Aqua's facade.

I agree with him though. Chicago could've had a much better building. It looks really nice from the side and from some angles from the bottom. I feel like the waves could've been better. And yeah, it does feel like it belongs in Miami. I guess it's because the waves looks very cheap, like they just painted over the concrete and that's it.

And don't the 'waves' on the Beekman also serve a purpose? Sure they're decorative but it's the same with this building. Aqua a just a box with wave balconies. The floorplates on Beekman follow the form of the waves so in one way or another it adds space and difference from one apt to the other. Plus I don't think stainless steel is pretty popular in tropical places. White balconies and green glass on the other hand...

I mean, sentinel was obviously overreacting. His response says more about him than it does Dac's comment. But, whether or not you buy the logic behind Aqua's undulating balconies-- which makes for the most pointed critique, not superficial finishes like the paintjob-- there is an attempt at a form-al logic behind them, which is more than you can say for the flimsy pretext provided by Gehry for the curves in the Beekman.

That sounds like a slight against the Beekman, but I don't intend for it to. It's pretty exhilarating to watch it rise, and I'm sure the system Gehry pioneered to engineer those panels will garner a lot of attention if it's as efficient and cost effective as he claims it to be. And, as far as finishes go, those of the Beekman are in a different league than Aqua.

But, in terms of form, Aqua is a building with a precedent in the distinctly Chicago credo-bordering-on-myth "form follows function," while the Beekman, I would say, has more in common with Art Deco era skyscrapers like the Chrysler Building, especially when you consider its setbacks.

[george]

http://www.flickr.com/photos/ifmuth/3950275975/sizes/l

[Dr. Taco]

^ so good

[sentinel]

Originally Posted by george

http://www.flickr.com/photos/ifmuth/3950275975/sizes/l

So dense - thanks George!

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by george

http://www.flickr.com/photos/ifmuth/3950275975/sizes/l

^ The evolutionary story of highrise development, all within a few square blocks of downtown Chicago

[wrab]

Originally Posted by Aleks

......Chicago could've had a much better building. It looks really nice from the side and from some angles from the bottom. I feel like the waves could've been better. And yeah, it does feel like it belongs in Miami. I guess it's because the waves looks very cheap, like they just painted over the concrete and that's it.

And don't the 'waves' on the Beekman also serve a purpose? Sure they're decorative but it's the same with this building. Aqua a just a box with wave balconies. The floorplates on Beekman follow the form of the waves so in one way or another it adds space and difference from one apt to the other. Plus I don't think stainless steel is pretty popular in tropical places. White balconies and green glass on the other hand...

Aqua's irregular ledge forms bump out the footprint of the tower to line up with specific view corridors - the forms are site-specific & not at all random.

-----

Aqua & Beekman are both great towers, and they both have irregular floorplates. Otherwise, it's apples & oranges. Both cities are lucky to have them.

[wrab]

Found this great photo on-line:



http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2521/3944513367_26e53d9bb9_o.jpg

[J_M_Tungsten]

Sweet find wrabbit!

[the one and only]

wish i lived there

[Aleks]

Originally Posted by Ch.G, Ch.G

I mean, sentinel was obviously overreacting. His response says more about him than it does Dac's comment. But, whether or not you buy the logic behind Aqua's undulating balconies-- which makes for the most pointed critique, not superficial finishes like the paintjob-- there is an attempt at a form-al logic behind them, which is more than you can say for the flimsy pretext provided by Gehry for the curves in the Beekman.

That sounds like a slight against the Beekman, but I don't intend for it to. It's pretty exhilarating to watch it rise, and I'm sure the system Gehry pioneered to engineer those panels will garner a lot of attention if it's as efficient and cost effective as he claims it to be. And, as far as finishes go, those of the Beekman are in a different league than Aqua.

But, in terms of form, Aqua is a building with a precedent in the distinctly Chicago credo-bordering-on-myth "form follows function," while the Beekman, I would say, has more in common with Art Deco era skyscrapers like the Chrysler Building, especially when you consider its setbacks.

Oh I'm not doubting the reason behind waves (well, I kind of am) but I'm just saying that the quality could've been better. I mean, they could've made the building look better (if you're one of the few who don't think it came if at its best) and still keep good quality. I was super duper excited for this project when it first came out but as time went my love for it fainted away and it slowly was gained by Beekman. Either way, both buildings are really different as you said. I don't think that there really is a comparison other than the waves and floorplate situation. Plus Aqua's waves are HUGE! While Beekmans are just to add a little bay window effect.

[Foun10Head-X]

Awesome. I like the wavy structure of the building... consisting balconies, maybe?

Anyway, I like the design - way to go, Chicago.