LOS ANGELES | Wilshire Grand Development | 1,100 FT | 73 FLOORS | U/C - Page 62

hunser · #**1221** Posted **Dec 18, 2013, 11:20 PM**

^ Thanks guys, appreciate it. I'm glad it will have such an impact on the skyline.

sw5710 · #**1222** Posted **Dec 19, 2013, 12:22 AM**

The top of the crown would be a little higher since it is 1000' above the ground.

shakman · #**1223** Posted **Dec 19, 2013, 3:35 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by eclipse

Here's a quick outline of the tower on that image.

Look closely and one can see the jib of a crane onsite.

sw5710 · #**1224** Posted **Dec 19, 2013, 11:33 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by shakman

Look closely and one can see the jib of a crane onsite.

Good call!

hunser · #**1225** Posted **Dec 19, 2013, 11:56 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by shakman

Look closely and one can see the jib of a crane onsite.

Yep, indeed.

It's so nice to see other U.S. cities building supertalls outside of New York.

Mojeda101 · #**1226** Posted **Dec 20, 2013, 12:54 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by shakman

Look closely and one can see the jib of a crane onsite.

It'll be a bit taller than that. The crown will real almost the same height as the Bank Tower.

Valyrian Steel · #**1227** Posted **Dec 20, 2013, 8:41 AM**

Yeah, I just drew some lines. Wasn't supposed to be extremely accurate.

unanimity · #**1228** Posted **Dec 21, 2013, 4:03 AM**

my attempt

peanut gallery · #**1229** Posted **Dec 21, 2013, 4:28 AM**

I've always loved that shot of downtown LA, and this building is only going to make it that much better. Cant wait for my next trip down south, to check out the progress.

Valyrian Steel · #**1230** Posted **Dec 21, 2013, 7:21 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by unanimity

my attempt

Nice.

supertallchaser · #**1231** Posted **Dec 21, 2013, 7:52 PM**

but the glass encased roof needs to be closer to the height of the bank tower right?and good job

colemonkee · #**1232** Posted **Dec 21, 2013, 10:06 PM**

^ No, the height of the tower itself is closer to 950ft, so shorter than US Bank Tower, and closer to AON Tower in height. The spire takes it up to 1,100 ft. Regardless, this will have the largest impact on the downtown LA skyline for many, many years to come.

Mojeda101 · #**1233** Posted **Dec 22, 2013, 9:28 AM**

Untitled by mojeda101, on Flickr

mdiederi · #**1234** Posted **Dec 22, 2013, 3:23 PM**

Closeup of Mojeda101's last photo so we can see how much rebar is in place already.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/21978107@N08/11492391653/sizes/o/

viewguysf · #**1235** Posted **Dec 22, 2013, 8:04 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by colemonkee

^ No, the height of the tower itself is closer to 950ft, so shorter than US Bank Tower, and closer to AON Tower in height. The spire takes it up to 1,100 ft. Regardless, this will have the largest impact on the downtown LA skyline for many, many years to come.

It indeed will and is much needed, but I'm tired of towers putting skinny sticks on top to supposedly make them taller. To me, they shouldn't be counted as official height unless they are substantial and well integrated into the architectural design of the building (as in the Chrysler Building). Trump tower in Chicago and even 1 WTC come to mind as fluff, and this tower will join that list for me.

unanimity · #**1236** Posted **Dec 22, 2013, 10:28 PM**

im so excited about this tower. so it looks like only the south side is curved and the north side is flat. i cant find a single rendering of the north side. the footprint confirms this, and i attribute it to the south side bulging out to accommodate the rooftop pavilion and pool. i can just picture now hollywood a-listers shooting their movie promo on top of that with the us bank tower shining in the back!! so incredible for los angeles for california, and the united states!!

unanimity · #**1237** Posted **Dec 22, 2013, 10:38 PM**

on second thought, if the north side is indeed curved, it cant reflect in the current footprint without chopping into the street. so if the north side is indeed curved, which not a single picture or rendering shows, it will hang over the sidewalk area, which would be very cool. every rendering, however, avoids the north side, even the rooftop renderings show the south side pools with the north side hiding behind. does someone on here have any knowledge on whats up with the north side??

Quixote · #**1238** Posted **Dec 22, 2013, 11:18 PM**

Excellent job, eclipse!

Quote:

Originally Posted by peanut gallery

I've always loved that shot of downtown LA, and this building is only going to make it that much better. Cant wait for my next trip down south, to check out the progress.

The skyline view from this vantage point ties that, IMO. You don't have the amazing mountain backdrop, but the skyline appears larger. Unfortunately, you won't be able to see much of the Wilshire Grand from this angle.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/subodhkolla/11484691856/sizes/h/

Valyrian Steel · #**1239** Posted **Dec 22, 2013, 11:50 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by viewguysf

It indeed will and is much needed, but I'm tired of towers putting skinny sticks on top to supposedly make them taller. To me, they shouldn't be counted as official height unless they are substantial and well integrated into the architectural design of the building (as in the Chrysler Building). Trump tower in Chicago and even 1 WTC come to mind as fluff, and this tower will join that list for me.

Pretty sure the architects went with the spire because it will be unique for LA in an otherwise flat-topped skyline, rather than some imagined height competition. In a time when hundreds of supertalls are u/c and proposed (and even a couple megatalls), I doubt an 1,100 tower will be that big a deal to the world.

As someone who lives near LA, I'm more excited about how this building will help in Downtown's revitalization and of course it's skyline than it's official height.

mdiederi · #**1240** Posted **Dec 23, 2013, 12:03 AM**

I think it's great that LA is finally getting its first tall building with a spire on top.