Height: 349m (1144ft) Floors: 93 Location: 375 E Wacker Architect: Jeanne Gang(studio gang) Developer: Magellan Development Group, and Wanda Group
NEW DESIGN
OLD DESIGN
OLDER DESIGN
Chinese property conglomerate Wanda Group plans to invest $900 million in building an 89-story five-star hotel and apartment complex in Chicago, news portal chinanews.com reported Tuesday.
The 350-meter-high building, located near Chicago's Millennium Park, will start being built this year and is expected to open to visitors in 2018 and will become the third-highest building in the city, according to the report.
I love it. Everyone is saying is not Chicago. Well it is time to change Chicago and go into the future. For the last few years almost everything has been like a box. Now let's be daring and go outside the box. I am happy.
The height isn't impressive but I like the design. It is unorthodox but in a good sense of the word. I think it will be a good addition to the skyline that will complement the new generation of Chicago supertalls, which have evolved beyond what we traditionaly associate with Chicago. I'm a hardcore box lover, but I don't see why non boxy buildings should be kept out of the skyline if they are well designed. And this in my opinion is well designed :cheers:
But the thing that is truly the most positive news that this proposal brings is that it shows developers are sensing top class residential demand. This is great news for the Spire, which in my opinion is vastly superior both in height and design compared to this proposal. If developers and investors sense this "disturbance in the Force" it is another positive sign that the Spire might be built as it is planned after all :cheers:
The 89-storey mixed-use development will have a gross floor area of 131,400m² and will house a 240-room five-star hotel, apartments and a commercial centre. Wanda Group chairman Wang Jianlin said that investing in Chicago property is Wanda's first move into the US real estate market. Jianlin said: "By 2020, Wanda will have Wanda branded five-star hotels in 12 to 15 major world cities and build an internationally influential Chinese luxury hotel brand."
Your iffiness is completely understandable. The shape is highly unusual. So when you have polished renders or a low resolution sketchup model in Google Earth, you can't see the full effect of the building in situ.
The cladding of this building will be key. If it's elegant and high quality, the shape will be reinforced and the building will be futuristic and sophisticated.
If it's cheap and shoddy, it will look like something out of a state carnival.
Having been to Chicago I can confirm that most buildings in the skyline are certainly impressive, not just the tallest. If you've never seen them in real life you are in no position to judge their impressiveness.
In fact I have seen much shorter buildings that were absolutely overwhelming to behold in real life. The Kölner Dom (Cologne cathedral) is a good example, short on paper compared to most skyscrapers, but what a presence!
And that is exactly the problem. Impressions when you see a building should never determine whether a building has impressive height or not. The only thing that should determine that are hard numbers. I've never seen a skyscraper, just highrises max, but I've seen the height figures of all the tall buildings and that is what matters. Height is not something architectural, it is a number, therefore math should be the only factor that decides whether a building has impressive height or not. Design is there for personal impressions, height is math :cheers:
Something being impressive comes from the human emotion of being impressed, for which all the numbers do not matter, only first hand experience does. I can assure you that once you see a 350m building in person you won't say a word about its height not being impressive.
^^ Well, I am impressed by numbers, not by impressions. Seeing a building doesn't change its dimensions. One thing why height means to me more than to most other people is because I'm a number cruncher, not an artist. That is the reason why I am about to study engineering, not architecture. Numbers remain the same whether I see them in person or read them on the internet. The whole point in caring about height is to get a mathematical impression, not an emotional impression :cheers:
Um... just curious, what's the tallest building you've ever seen in person?
In what universe is a 1150 foot ~90 story building "not impressive" height wise? I'm still a little dumbfounded.
I still fail to see your point. There are a very small handful of buildings in the world that have a solid roof much over this height, a very select few go much higher, almost all of them are concentrated in Asia, Middle East and USA.
Like I said, with your logic someone with 500 million USD can't be rich apparently because there are a few billionaires in the world.
Do the 3-digit numbers from 984 to 999 impress you though?
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
SkyscraperCity Forum
139.4M posts
1.1M members
Since 2002
A truly global community dedicated to skyscrapers, cities, urban development, and the metropolitan environment. Join us to share news, views and fun about architecture, construction, transport, skylines, and much more!