#035 l AT&T Corporate Center l CHICAGO l 307m l 60fl

[D-Mac]

AT&T Corporate Center
Chicago, USA

HEIGHT: 307m/1,007 feet
FLOORS: 60 floors
COMPLETION: 1989
ARCHITECT: Skidmore, Owings and Merril (SOM)

In order to consolidate space for 3,800 employees, AT&T chose Skidmore, Owings and Merrill to design its new headquarters on an 85,000 square feet site in Chicago's Loop. Skidmore, Owings and Merrill's plan involved two phases: the 60-story, 1.7 million square feet AT&T headquarters, and the 35-story, 1.1 million square feet USG headquarters. The two buildings create a continuous urban facade, with each tower emerging from the 16-story base to form a distinct profile on the skyline.

The two buildings are perceived at the pedestrian level as a single composition. A sequence of public rooms distinguishes the ground level, with a two-story retail concourse joining the two phases. The lobby spaces of the ground floor are a series of grandly scaled rooms, finished in oak and marble. The main lobby is in the tradition of the European great hall; forty-four feet high, it is clad in Italian marble, gold leaf, satin-finish brown and American oak wood trim.

[RafflesCity]

7/10

It looks older than what it is but kinda grand. I think the spires are vital to make it look 'complete'. Its lift lobby is posh!

[SteelCity32]

what a strange looking thing. BUT I LOVE IT. 9/10

I was never a big fan of this skyscraper... it's too bulky for my taste, and other than its "cat ears" the building looks very dull.






I give it a 3/10!

[Jasonhouse]

Quintessential Chicago. It also vaguely reminds me of the never built Travelstead tower from NYC. Not so much the massing, but the look and feel of it...

If this tower was in just about any other besides Chicago, it would make a HUGE mark on the skyline... Not the best tower in the World or even Chicago, but certainly no slouch.

7.5/10

[Jasonhouse]

Originally posted by X-seed 4000
I was never a big fan of this skyscraper... it's too bulky for my taste, and other than its "cat ears" the building looks very dull.






I give it a 3/10!

You're nuts X-Seed!

A "3 or less" is for one of those hulking Soviet Bloc apartment buildings, or a windowless building like NYC's AT&T Longlines Building. Even if you HATE it, it should still get a 4-5 or so. I mean, the thing is over 1,000 feet tall!

[Muse]

Saving it from being just a total 1007 ft mass 'n bulk "number" are the multitude of set-backs, indents and intricate roof work.

8

[Ersh]

I thought this is an old building for some reason and am surprised to find it was built in 1989. Doesn't look too modern. 7/10

[Caledon1981]

looks a bit too old, i agree, and the width makes it look shorter than it is .. . 6.5/10

[TYW]

3 / 10 It looks ugly

Sorry............

[DrumCorpsAlum]

7.5/10. Nothing special.

[AG]

Plain, but very odd.

6.5/10

[Patrick]

i ilke these kinds of skyscrapers

8/10

[tayser]

7.5

Sorry, don't really like this one.

5.5/10

In pictures? 6.5. In person? A solid 8. You folks that have never been to Chicago might think it's 1989 going on 1935, but if you ever saw it in person, you'd know it's not that old. The facade surfacing is very modern. Look veeeeery closely at some of the pictures.

I like the stile of the building so I gave it a 9.0

[SUNNI]

not my style, and it dosnt suit in the skyline

I like it. Certainly not convincing in it's role as a feax-art-deco skyscraper, it's still a very interesting hybrid.

7.5

[cabasse]

I love Chicago for it's great architecture. This building has not been included however... My tastes don't care for it. When I look at Dylan's poster and see this building on there I think "what the hell is this doing here?!" Even so, there is much worse like Jasonhouse said, so I gave it a 6.5.

SOM built this?!?!? Very different for them IMO.

NP: Craig Armstrong - Weather Stormy