CHICAGO | Willis Tower (formerly Sears Tower) | 1,451 FT / 442 M | 108 FLOORS | 1974

[M II A II R II K]

I found that link because of your registration in the first place!

And it's not just the name change in and of itself, I think Sears sounds alot better personally, but what's the point in petitioning after the fact....

[rkrause]

Joseph Plumeri, chairman and CEO of Willis Group Holdings, recently made the public statement that Chicago's three tallest buildings are now all named for insurance brokerage firms. But how can that be true? The Trump International Hotel and Tower is currently the second tallest building on the Chicago skyline -- and in the nation. So Mr. Plumeri is wrong. His facts are outdated.

This kind of blatant ignorance certainly proves his firm's commitment to Chicago. He wouldn't even recognize a lineup of the local skyscrapers if he was given a cheat sheet.

Remember when Bank of America touted their "commitment to Chicago" while using that outdated photo of the Chicago River in their advertising two years ago -- the ire that drew from native Chicagoans? How is this kind of faux pas any different?

First they disrespect Chicago's architectural past now they even disrespect Chicago's architectural present.

--Randall

[denizen467]

^ This doesn't quite rise to the ignorance of the BoA blunder you cited. I think the operative fact is that the Trump building isn't fully completed (high-rise condos and more notably riverwalk and retail) and opened yet, so it hasn't fully arrived in the public consciousness quite yet. In addition, it's the offhand statement of one executive as opposed to the calculated advertising execution of an entire p.r. department. However, your general conclusion that Willis are tone-deaf to the city's culture is spot-on.

[rkrause]

Originally Posted by M II A II R II K

I found that link because of your registration in the first place!

And it's not just the name change in and of itself, I think Sears sounds alot better personally, but what's the point in petitioning after the fact....

I'm in agreement. I think the building will always be reminiscent of Chicago business and industry in the 1960-70s, and therefore the name should follow suit -- and at least pay homage to that era.

"Sears Tower" and the likeness thereof screams American minimalist, industrial, corporate, muscular, powerful, functional, efficient, demanding, and dominating design. It is in many ways the masculine aesthetic counterpart to 311 South Wacker.

The photo that was posted earlier in this thread depicting the western facade in early-morning shadow with a dense cloud of steam emanating from the roof -- giving the Tower its gigantic "industrial power-plant" like sillhouette -- is exactly what makes this building so awe-inspiring to me. It is Chicago, and it means business.

--Randall

[rkrause]

I took the Segway Tour in downtown Chicago a few months ago, and at one point the tour guide was pointing out Sears Tower. It was kind of boring, the usual rundown of trivia -- that is until a little boy from Germany asked the most profound question:

"What will happen to Sears Tower's antennae when analog TV broadcasts are discontinued?"

Wow, even I don't have an answer to this one. Nor does it seem anybody else has yet clued into what a dramatic effect could have as far as the rooftop is concerned. I guess the moral of the story is: Don't ever doubt our youth

--Randall

[Mr Downtown]

Huh? Analog TV broadcasts have already been discontinued. Is there some reason the antennae would not be used by the new transmitters?

[rkrause]

Like I said, this was over three months ago. However, other than the newer HDTV antennae, it would seem the remainder are obsolete. So I'm wondering if they will inevitably be disassembled in time.

--Randall

[FlashingLights]

Originally Posted by rkrause

Like I said, this was over three months ago. However, other than the newer HDTV antennae, it would seem the remainder are obsolete. So I'm wondering if they will inevitably be disassembled in time.

--Randall

The FCC already auctioned off some of those frequencies to be used for cell phone networks and wireless data providers like Qualcomm. This way Mobile TV and other data can be streamed to phones. Other companies are suggesting building large wireless broadband networks. Google and Verizon are already trying to lobby the FCC for different uses of the frequencies. Google is winning so far.

It's not like just because analog TV is dead suddenly all use for the antennas are gone, especially with cell phone data craze going on in the US.

[Nowhereman1280]

I think large antenna like this pretty much become a part of the building as shown by buildings like 1Pru where the antenna hasn't been used for decades and still stands. It wouldn't be worth the money to disassemble the antenna because the maintenance on them is extremely low. All you have to do is give it a paint job every few years and that's about it.

Here's another question: do these still even count as antennae if they aren't being used as antennae? I mean at this point, since they aren't being used, they are essentially just large archtiectural spires. So in theory wouldn't that revert the "highest architectural point" field to the tops of these spires (old antennae).

[Busy Bee]

"rkrause", hmm, I don't suppose you're the little boy from Germany?

[spyguy]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/busine...,1396015.story

United Airlines' workforce to take flight in operations center's move to Willis Tower

By Julie Johnsson and Hal Dardick
August 5, 2009

United Airlines is expected to announce as early as Thursday that it is moving its giant operations center and 2,800 employees from the northwest suburbs to downtown Chicago, sources tell the Tribune.

The city is pulling together about $25 million in incentives to help Chicago-based United pay its moving bills and the costs of building out about 450,000 square feet of space in the Willis Tower.

[jc5680]

[rkrause]

Originally Posted by FlashingLights

It's not like just because analog TV is dead suddenly all use for the antennas are gone, especially with cell phone data craze going on in the US.

I guess it ultimately depends on whether the existing antennas are already being used for HDTV (or if they can be readily adapted for that purpose). I'm not a broadcast engineer, so it's difficult for me to say. And unfortunately, there's not a lot of detailed and up-to-date information related to the transmission facilities at Sears Tower.

--Randall

[rkrause]

Originally Posted by Nowhereman1280

Here's another question: do these still even count as antennae if they aren't being used as antennae? I mean at this point, since they aren't being used, they are essentially just large archtiectural spires. So in theory wouldn't that revert the "highest architectural point" field to the tops of these spires (old antennae).

Please keep in mind that you are talking about the CTBUH who refuses to even acknowledge that the original 25-foot diameter cylindrical bases (which don't broadcast anything whatsoever) are integral to the superstructure and therefore should be included at least in the building's architectural height.

--Randall

[rkrause]

I was in downtown Saturday morning, and I've confirmed the rumours about vandalism to the signage. Protestors have been ripping off the lettering for the past few weeks. Already much of the "W" is gone, and it won't be long before the "r" is removed. I have several photos posted on my site.

--Randall

[Dac150]

I find that very interesting. It’s almost a test to see if Willis will give in to the fact that the new image hasn’t taken well in the public eye. What I also find interesting is how one gets away with doing something like that in the middle of a city regardless of what time it is.

[bnk]

This antenna issue to me seems to be a total non issue.

I am sure they are still doing their job.

Heck even a year ago or so there were plans for a 2000 foot tower in the near south side to use as an antenna and observation deck. Since that plan went nowhere the Sears is still the tallest out there. I can not find the link to it but just look at all of the other supertall proposals. They were all dependent upon a platform to reach the 2000 foot limit to broadcast.

See 7SD

or this one

Beitler Telecom Tower

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=90005

"The $300 million Pelli tower would function as a platform for local television stations to mount their new high-definition broadcasting antennas.

...

The project would be driven by agreements, not yet signed, with local television stations, which are preparing for a shift to exclusively high-definition broadcasting, expected to be required in 2009.

..."

[cbotnyse]

[mainstreet]

In terms of the antennae, perhaps part of the rationale is that at any point (though however unlikely), they could be put back in use - so does that mean that they would suddenly have to change the height again?

[Ch.G, Ch.G]

Originally Posted by cbotnyse