Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'm really excited for this project, hopefully all goes smooth. I'm really excited for 200 North Riverside Plaza as well.
It's been renamed 444 W. Lake Street. My office window actually overlooks this site, and I'm very excited to see it all go up, especially the unique factor that the building will be built over 5 sets of rail tracks that lead passenger trains into Union and Ogilvey train stations, and the site is suppressed down with Lake Street actually over 20 feet above the ground/track level and the L tracks raised another 20 feet above the level of Lake Street.
From the Blue Line subway below the river level with its water taxis up to the ground level/commuter train tracks up to Lake Street pedestrians and autos bridge up to the L tracks above them is a very interesting degree of grade separation. Not sure how many other points have 5 levels of individual transport options stacked on top of each other. Subway-boats-commuter tracks-roadway-elevated train. It will be nice to see how the building and it's large riverfront plaza play all those levels.
Proposals are the new approvals/it will actually get built? Oh okay I got it. Thanks!
Didn't the Chicago Spire get approved and work actually started (what happened to that big hole) where is that project today again?
We'll talk when this project actually sees some type of height.
Difference was that the spire began construction at the worst possible time when the economic crisis came to be. The Chicago post office development will span 20 years in what will be 3 phases but like I said in a earlier post, no skyscraper proposal/construction is final until its actually built.
Either way I like being optimistic about this project as the first phase of the project is guaranteed. Even if the other two phases of this project (which includes the 2000ft building) are not completed it will still be a great achievement for the city. Construction is set to begin in September.
Difference was that the spire began construction at the worst possible time when the economic crisis came to be. The Chicago post office development will span 20 years in what will be 3 phases but like I said in a earlier post, no skyscraper proposal/construction is final until its actually built.
Either way I like being optimistic about this project as the first phase of the project is guaranteed. Even if the other two phases of this project (which includes the 2000ft building) are not completed it will still be a great achievement for the city. Construction is set to begin in September.
That's true I just really would've preferred the Spire! I was actually looking forward to following the progress. But optimism is always healthy and if this project is spanning over 20 Years the Chicago market should need this development by then.
The one world trade center has been officially been crowned the tallest building in the western hemisphere but there is a catch, the height is based from the buildings base level to its spire which serves no purpose but as a decoration. Although the Willis tower does have its own antennas they are not considered permanent pieces of its architecture since they were put on after its construction.
In terms of base to roof the Willis Tower is actually taller than its counterpart as seen from this size comparison.
Which building do you consider being the real tallest building in the Americas?
Willis Tower
Architecture 442.1 m (1,450 ft) Antenna 527 m (1,729 ft) Top floor 412.7 m (1,354 ft)
One world Trade Center
Architectural (With Spire) 1,776 ft (541.3 m)[2][5] Antenna 1,792 ft (546.2 m)[2] Top floor 1,268 ft (386.5 m
In my opinion, 1 WTC is more beautiful than the Willis Tower, which I still call the Sears Tower but whatever. I go to Manhattan pretty often, and I often have views of the skyline from NJ, and I am always in awe of this new building, especially when I'm close to it. Its shape is so unique but streamlined, and the glass that covers it reflects off of anything - most beautifully, the color of the sky as the sun goes down. I have some stunning pictures - quite a few actually, call me slightly obsessed - of this building in various states of construction and times of day.
As a side note, I thought the spire served a purpose for communications of some sort? Has that changed? I didn't think it did but I haven't looked into it in a little while.
I may be partial, because I literally watched this building every day in its construction as I lived somewhere with city views, and frequent Lower Manhattan quite often, but 1 WTC truly is a beautiful building to me. I like the Sears Tower, as well, but was honestly never a fan of its tiered shape, if you will. I think it looks kind of odd, but it's still a nice looking building as it's so tall and iconic. I first visited Chicago when I was about 10 and remember thinking then how the shape was unusual to me, but its height impressed me. Just my opinion.
One last thing, the height of 1 WTC wasn't trying to beat anything else. It is obviously symbolic for our country's founding year, 1776. 1 WTC was called the Freedom Tower (I still call it that), referring to its symbolic height, which is an answer to what happened to the original 2 towers on 9/11, but they changed the name as they feared having the word 'Freedom' in the building's name would spark more attacks. So NYC wasn't trying to one up Chicago or anyone else, this building has genuine meaning in its 1776 feet - spire or not. I also know that a lot of people dislike the big concrete base at the bottom of this building, but that's supposed to protect it from collapsing from the force of bombs or even plane crashes. The things we have to go through now when building skyscrapers, especially ones as meaningful and symbolic as this one… *sigh*
Last edited by JerseyGirl415; 07-25-2013 at 12:15 AM..
I find Sears (Willis does sound ridiculous) to be the more Iconic and unique looking of the two... It anchors the Chicago Skyline more impressively than 1WTC and I absolutely abhor the spire on 1WTC... I'm a fan of roof height over Spire height any day.
In my opinion, 1 WTC is more beautiful than the Willis Tower, which I still call the Sears Tower but whatever. I go to Manhattan pretty often, and I often have views of the skyline from NJ, and I am always in awe of this new building, especially when I'm close to it. Its shape is so unique but streamlined, and the glass that covers it reflects off of anything - most beautifully, the color of the sky as the sun goes down. I have some stunning pictures - quite a few actually, call me slightly obsessed - of this building in various states of construction and times of day.
As a side note, I thought the spire served a purpose for communications of some sort? Has that changed? I didn't think it did but I haven't looked into it in a little while.
I may be partial, because I literally watched this building every day in its construction as I lived somewhere with city views, and frequent Lower Manhattan quite often, but 1 WTC truly is a beautiful building to me. I like the Sears Tower, as well, but was honestly never a fan of its tiered shape, if you will. I think it looks kind of odd, but it's still a nice looking building as it's so tall and iconic. I first visited Chicago when I was about 10 and remember thinking then how the shape was unusual to me, but its height impressed me. Just my opinion.
One last thing, the height of 1 WTC wasn't trying to beat anything else. It is obviously symbolic for our country's founding year, 1776. 1 WTC was called the Freedom Tower (I still call it that), referring to its symbolic height, which is an answer to what happened to the original 2 towers on 9/11, but they changed the name as they feared having the word 'Freedom' in the building's name would spark more attacks. So NYC wasn't trying to one up Chicago or anyone else, this building has genuine meaning in its 1776 feet - spire or not. I also know that a lot of people dislike the big concrete base at the bottom of this building, but that's supposed to protect it from collapsing from the force of bombs or even plane crashes. The things we have to go through now when building skyscrapers, especially ones as meaningful and symbolic as this one… *sigh*
I agree that the One world trade center is a beautiful building even though it may get a bad rep architecturally. I know the 1776 number is very symbolic for the country but putting the tragic events aside, I set this poll up to see what people may feel is deserving of the tallest building title when discussing it from a architecture perspective.
Its like when the Petrona Towers surpassed the Sears Tower in 1998 as the world tallest building, there was allot of controversy behind that.
And for good reason
Their spire was the sole reason that the United States lost the title of having the tallest building in the world at the time.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
- of this building in various states of construction and times of day. 
