CHICAGO | 400 N Lake Shore Drive | 851 FT & 765 FT | 73 & ? FLOORS

[Baronvonellis]

Are there any examples of recent skyscrapers using terra-cota? I'm trying to picture what that would be like. I can only think of classical and art-deco buildings with terra-cota.

[Fvn]

Originally Posted by Baronvonellis

Are there any examples of recent skyscrapers using terra-cota? I'm trying to picture what that would be like. I can only think of classical and art-deco buildings with terra-cota.

111 w 57th in NY

[sentinel]

Originally Posted by 230Roberto

For me anything below 1500ft for this site is disappointing. This is one of the most valuable sites in the U.S. And the only chance for Chicago to have a 1500 footer for the next decade or 2

That’s silly; Personally, I’d be thrilled with even a 1,200’ tall building if it was well-designed....but then again, my number is just as arbitrary as yours, so, oh well..

[Khantilever]

They already have the foundation to support something ridiculously tall, so it would be strange to me if they didn’t take full advantage of it.

Others can speak more on this issue, but isn’t the foundation the most significant cost element to going that high? Of course there are other marginal costs to additional height—e.g. less usable floor space on lower levels, maybe more complicated logistics—but those seem relatively inconsequential. But maybe I’m wrong.

[Kumdogmillionaire]

Originally Posted by left of center

I was never a fan of a 2000 ft tower at this location. From the lake, and Navy Pier, it would totally overpower the skyline. Chicago's skyline is all about balance. Something between 1200 and 1500 ft would be dope though. Two towers in that height range would be insane.

You saved me from typing out my exact thought. If it's taller than Sears then I'll be ecstatic, but I'd take a couple well designed true supertalls over one big sky penis.

[HomrQT]

Originally Posted by left of center

I was never a fan of a 2000 ft tower at this location. From the lake, and Navy Pier, it would totally overpower the skyline. Chicago's skyline is all about balance. Something between 1200 and 1500 ft would be dope though. Two towers in that height range would be insane.

I thought because of its relatively centered location East/West in relation to the downtown area it did bring a balance to the skyline





And from a North/South viewing it sort of bookended the skyline to the lake.





When the Sears Tower and JHC were built, they were said to stick out until the city filled in more around them. This site already has some momentum behind it. I hope they go bigger than 1500'.

[HomrQT]

Originally Posted by Fvn

111 w 57th in NY

If we got something the quality and scope of this building I'm sure we'd all be happy.

[BraveNewWorld]

Originally Posted by Zapatan

It's one of them, but not the only one.

I'm not expecting 1,500 feet, but ~1,250 would be rad. If it's the second highest roof in Chicago that'd be great.

This is my thought exactly. If it’s 1300-1400 feet it’ll look like the tallest building in the skyline from the lake front. It’d be the biggest game changer since the Sears tower. Tribune tower is also going up at about 1,400 ft if that stay the same. So this could be incredible.

[10023]

Why is everyone so focused on the view from the lake?

Yes that’s the postcard shot, but most people most of the time are actually viewing the skyline from the other direction. It’s the view from the Kennedy that really counts.

[denizen467]

Shouldn't be too long now. Rumor from about a month ago (sorry, I have been out of town a lot lately) was that official news can be expected before late spring.

Design firm's name will not break any past precedents here, but their approach to this particular project might.

[HomrQT]

Originally Posted by 10023

Why is everyone so focused on the view from the lake?

Yes that’s the postcard shot, but most people most of the time are actually viewing the skyline from the other direction. It’s the view from the Kennedy that really counts.

With it still being mostly centered in our skyline I think it looks balanced from either way.

[gebs]

Originally Posted by HomrQT

With it still being mostly centered in our skyline I think it looks balanced from either way.

If you were to add One Bennett Park, Vista, and Wolf Point South, then it really makes the center the new peak, pulling attention away from the N/S extremes. It's a literal transformation of the skyline in 10 years.

[cannedairspray]

^To the point that if you erased Sears from skyline and history, and then proposed it now in 2018, people might find it odd to have such a tall building so far to the south. Transit nodes notwithstanding.

[harryc]

Originally Posted by 10023

Why is everyone so focused on the view from the lake?

Yes that’s the postcard shot, but most people most of the time are actually viewing the skyline from the other direction. It’s the view from the Kennedy that really counts.

Sorry it is the view from the El that counts !

[Kenmore]

there are so many units coming online in the next year, really feel like this is still a full cycle off

[HomrQT]

Originally Posted by gebs

If you were to add One Bennett Park, Vista, and Wolf Point South, then it really makes the center the new peak, pulling attention away from the N/S extremes. It's a literal transformation of the skyline in 10 years.

Also the new Tribune building and of course the Trump Tower. I understand it's not likely that a 2000 footer is headed to the former Spire site. But it really would not be out of place or throw off the balance of the skyline.

[10023]

Originally Posted by harryc

Sorry it is the view from the El that counts !

I’m a transit fan too, but that diagonal angle is the best...

[XIII]

Originally Posted by Kenmore

there are so many units coming online in the next year, really feel like this is still a full cycle off

Maybe. Business relocations are driving some serious downtown unit demand so the building may continue for a bit longer to keep up with corporate investment downtown.

Chicago has thrived in the globalized world—at least on a superficial level. The evidence is everywhere, from the gleaming office towers and condos going up alongside the river to the prosperous international companies like Motorola Solutions, the whiskey giant Beam Suntory, and GE Healthcare that have relocated their headquarters to downtown. In May, the unemployment rate for the Chicago metropolitan area sank to 4.1 percent, the lowest since the government started tracking it in 1976. (It has since ticked back up to 5.3 percent.) Almost one-quarter of households in the city of Chicago earned more than $100,000 a year in 2016, according to census data. These factors are part of why Chicago was one of just four U.S. cities to be named one of PricewaterhouseCoopers’s “Cities of Opportunity,” in its periodic report on places that foster economic innovation and “common wellbeing.”

https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2018/03/chicago-segregation-poverty/556649/

[rgarri4]

Here's some massing done at 1,500 feet. Some angles it looks amazing, others not as much an impact. 2,000 feet would fix a lot of that but that's probably wishful thinking.

[Kumdogmillionaire]

My favorite view will always be the one coming from the South no the Dan Ryan/I90, but I'm biased as that was my view whenever I would come back home from school. Regardless, those hypothetical renderings of the skyline in 5-6 years make me as excited as a fat kid left alone in a candy shop. Oh boyyyyyy here we come.