Seems like 400-500ft up in the air. Just a rough estimate. Anyone know how many floors it has done so far?

The glass at Lakepoint Tower, Sears, Hancock, and others does not look blue in any way. Look at those new towers in Logan Square near the L. The glass is always black.

May 7, 2018





The top of the core looks to be about 45.

Thanks^^

I would really like to see this view of the South Loop from 10 or 20 years ago for comparison. I've Googled it and can't find that perspective anywhere.

With GP2 and 1000M this would rival most major skylines in the U.S. Hopefully the West Loop steps up the height game after the mid-rise phenomenon runs its course and is worthy of such a distinction as well.

It's crazy how that view makes it appear we are basically building a Philadelphia sized skyline south of Harrison. That photo is amazing, it looks like a dense urban core. Every other view I've seen you can see how spread out it is and that it looks nothing like a CBD.

Probably at least 2/3 of the buildings in the foreground weren't there 20 years ago - is my guess. It's great to see it fill in year after year

Gonna like the contrast with the white/light frame color of the superstructure.

Looks like a fair amount of buildings were destroyed in the Urban Renewal period. This earlier photo shows a more developed albeit lower area than we had 20 - 30 years ago Even a streetwall on the south side of the park -

http://i63.tinypic.com/13zmvjb.jpg
Chicago Architecture Foundation

This looks like the 70`s judging by the vehicles.

Well, the Illinois Central (to the left of the Pepsi sign) was torn down in '74'.

and 2nd mccormick center was completed in '71, so it has to be in that '71 - '74 window.

If you look at solar's picture below and sampled colors from different areas the glass in the left three bays would be dark gray or black, the glass in the right three bays would be closer to blue, and the sears tower would be a lighter blue/gray building. How you have defined things in your mind and how you actually see them or they are photographed in different conditions varies.

These are 100 level concepts taught in any applied arts education. It is why people have a hard time with things like drawing familiar objects. They rely too much on what they think they know rather that relying on what they observe.

So yes, all those buildings you described any reasonable person would consider black. But if you pay more attention to the details and how much they actually vary you will see that the surfaces are quite dynamic in color. That is also why seeing a blue reflection in a couple panes of glass doesn't mean they are blue.

Yep. This is shaping up to be a stunner.

So, uh, the picture actually has a caption:

http://www.architecture.org/architec...-caf-archives/

Not much there. Lots of empty buildings. Urban blight.

The concrete looks very sloppy in person. Like they intended to cover it with metal panel. I hope the paint helps. I can't really believe that they're going to have painted CMU at street level.

I highly doubt that the CMU remains uncovered. That most certainly will have cladding at least on the street facing sides.

As for the concrete, if it is being painting, it's mostly important that the surface texture (or lack thereof) is consistent and that the edges and joints are crisp. The blotchy color variation will go away. That said, there are many painted concrete buildings in the city that don't look very pretty when you get too close to them.

May 10

They're painting

https://i.imgur.com/BecIVJu.jpg

Here goes nothin...

What are we looking at here, a paint, a primer, a sealant, or something else?