It's a dangerous path, my friend.

The CTBUH says a "building" is one with at least 50% occupiable height. We're already down to 60% with some buildings. At some point we're going to have a crazy tall structure below 50% and CTBUH is again going to have to make a call like they did with the WTC spire issue.

my main complaint is it is very wide in that render looking from the west. Thinner and taller would be better

This would be a better rule. Antennas and Spires should count but they must be attached to a tower at least 300% taller then the actual antenna/spire.

I'm 5' 9". If I spike my hair up into a mohawk am I now 6' 2"?

Lets focus on getting OCS off the ground and getting to two concurrent supertalls uc. That alone would be one hell of a feat. First time since the early 1970's! (Sears & Aon)


Spires that are purely architectural count towards the height of a building, whereas communications antenna do not count. So under this paradigm, the spire atop Trump Tower and Franklin Center count, whereas the antennas atop the Hancock or Sears do not since they broadcast TV/radio.

I thought it was the other way around. The more you know :cheers:

How often does this happen?

If helicopters have to avoid it...

I am still taking that 950ft figure with a grain of salt. It is probably the height to the floor slab of the highest occupied floor or something. If you look at the rendering from the south it looks like the first setback on WPS is at the same height as the top of WPE. This would make sense to contextualize the two designs and visually tie them together. If that is indeed the case that setback would be around 680ft. Above that setback I count the equivalent of 29 stories including the crown. Assuming 12ft/story, which seems reasonable for a luxury condo or office building, that would add 348' to 680' for a total height of 1,028ft.

I like the design of this building even if it is nothing earth shattering. However, I do find the design of this along with its sibling WPE to be too similar to One Chicago Square and its sibling. The height of the taller and shorter towers in the two project are very close. The massing, style, and deco echo influences are all very similar. For me they are too similar. I like both proposals on their own but together they seem to be aping each other too much.

The sad thing is that the tower slated for one of the most visually prominent sites in the city is the inferior design.

Chicago used to be all about spires and antennas. The city has since built a lot of quality skyscrapers, but much of that history has been hidden away by characterless monoliths (which this tower seems to want to join the list of). I don't see the harm in another spire, especially after it was teased a few years back. It might make looking up at this glass slab more captivating.

https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3866/...b2fedf2f_b.jpg
Vintage Found Photo - Chicago Skyline by Mark Susina, on Flickr

put a stick on it!

https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/4WFo...ill02_dusk.jpg

The roughly 6-story tan building to the right of lower center is the site of One Bennett Park

Wasn't the tower from I, Robot in roughly this spot? A spire-like building would work nicely.

http://www.dylancolestudio.com/Matte.../ir5_70_MP.jpg

IDGAF how tall it is, this design is lit now. Just goes to show much improvement several years of gradual refinement can bring. I love the broadside of the building, a Spire would be totally inappropriate and ruin that entire elevation. Also, with the insane n/s girth of this building every last sliver of Jarta's view will be stamped out.

I couldn't agree more!
The New York Times Tower is classed as a Supertall, and considered taller than First Canadian Place.

http://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?searchID=80059617

Wonder if that guy still lurks SSP. I hope he is as livid as I imagine him to be, lol

haha, esp., given your screen name.

WPS all day.

What page exactly? WPS appears more refined in just about every way.

Lit indeed.

A new drawing of this popped up on the Chicago diagram, and it appears to place it around 1,100 feet.

Source / link?!?! :cheers:

Mechanical penthouse/screening could nudge the 950' height figure (that's ALWAYS been bandied about for this tower) just over the 1,000' threshold, but 1,100' is pretty unlikely, unless there's a specific height increase or they tack on a spire of some sort.