CHICAGO | St. Regis Chicago (Vista) | 1,191 FT | 101 FLOORS - Page 177

pilsenarch · #**3521** Posted **May 3, 2018, 1:22 PM**

^Unfortunately, it's not tall enough...

Meanwhile, contrary to Ms. Gang's justification for the shade changes, based upon the renderings, the glass that we are looking at, going up at this position should be of the darkest variety... (which contradicts the rule established by SG, that the largest floor plates should have the lightest glass...)

Ned.B · #**3522** Posted **May 3, 2018, 1:30 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by pilsenarch

^Unfortunately, it's not tall enough...

Meanwhile, contrary to Ms. Gang's justification for the shade changes, based upon the renderings, the glass that we are looking at, going up at this position should be of the darkest variety... (which contradicts the rule established by SG, that the largest floor plates should have the lightest glass...)

That's because all of the frustums are sloping in at the bottom and the two flanking the center are double height, I would assume to accommodate the larger programmatic requirements of the base. The sides (east west facades) of the bottom frustums are also vertical until they get above the neighboring buildings and the center cantilevered box. Once we get above the first 12 floors the pattern quoted above will hold true.

Depending on which rendering you look at, it appears that Gems is equivalent in height to either 9 or 10 floors of Vista, so there will be a couple floors of exposed party wall above the building. But Gems also sticks out proud of Vista, so hopefully that will make this condition less prominent.

vexxed82 · #**3523** Posted **May 3, 2018, 1:37 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by pilsenarch

^Unfortunately, it's not tall enough...

Meanwhile, contrary to Ms. Gang's justification for the shade changes, based upon the renderings, the glass that we are looking at, going up at this position should be of the darkest variety... (which contradicts the rule established by SG, that the largest floor plates should have the lightest glass...)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ned.B

That's because all of the frustums are sloping in at the bottom and the two flanking the center are double height, I would assume to accommodate the larger programmatic requirements of the base. The sides (east west facades) of the bottom frustums are also vertical until they get above the neighboring buildings and the center cantilevered box. Once we get above the first 12 floors the pattern quoted above will hold true.

Correct. Even in the outdated rendering, the lowest floors have the darkest shade of glass

kolchak · #**3524** Posted **May 3, 2018, 2:35 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by pilsenarch

^Unfortunately, it's not tall enough...

Meanwhile, contrary to Ms. Gang's justification for the shade changes, based upon the renderings, the glass that we are looking at, going up at this position should be of the darkest variety... (which contradicts the rule established by SG, that the largest floor plates should have the lightest glass...)

The glass is darker there - its just reflecting the sky from certain angles. Here you can see the change when it reflects something lighter (the sky) vs darker:

pilsenarch · #**3525** Posted **May 3, 2018, 2:56 PM**

^yes, correct, I was just pointing it out...

LouisVanDerWright · #**3526** Posted **May 3, 2018, 3:18 PM**

I'm not at all concerned about the party wall. The city requires you to continue fire rating a certain distance above an adjacent building like this anyhow. The core for Gems is already high enough to cover up most of it from view once the floor plates catch up so unless you lease an East facing unit at Coast, you aren't even going to see it.

sentinel · #**3527** Posted **May 3, 2018, 3:42 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

I'm not at all concerned about the party wall. The city requires you to continue fire rating a certain distance above an adjacent building like this anyhow. The core for Gems is already high enough to cover up most of it from view once the floor plates catch up so unless you lease an East facing unit at Coast, you aren't even going to see it.

I'm not concerned either - if you look at the latest render (on the right; older render on the left), there only appear to 2 floors on Aqua that would have the exposed, visible party wall:

From Curbed
https://chicago.curbed.com/2018/2/9/...y-upper-school

And even then, only a portion of the party wall would be visible as the other portion appears to be hidden behind RTUs or any functional elements/play area that may be located on the roof..

left of center · #**3528** Posted **May 3, 2018, 5:16 PM**

I wouldn't be too worried about 1 to 2 floors of exposed party wall that's already 8 floors above ground level. It won't be visible from 99% of angles, and as long as its painted right it will barely be noticeable.

Its the 120 - 150 ft east facing party wall on The Chandler that will remain exposed that bothers me much, much more.

Notyrview · #**3529** Posted **May 3, 2018, 5:24 PM**

They should do a mural for the kids at Gems

simon07 · #**3530** Posted **May 3, 2018, 5:32 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by left of center

I wouldn't be too worried about 1 to 2 floors of exposed party wall that's already 8 floors above ground level. It won't be visible from 99% of angles, and as long as its painted right it will barely be noticeable.

Its the 120 - 150 ft east facing party wall on The Chandler that will remain exposed that bothers me much, much more.

I'm sure the alderman will solve that. He has already asked for a redesign I believe that is more cohesive with whats already there. These are the types of things they should be doing.

Kumdogmillionaire · #**3531** Posted **May 3, 2018, 6:09 PM**

I second the mural

kolchak · #**3532** Posted **May 3, 2018, 9:42 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by left of center

Its the 120 - 150 ft east facing party wall on The Chandler that will remain exposed that bothers me much, much more.

Yep. That would be an interesting place for a Trompe l'oeil mural maybe. The building cut away and the sunset behind it kind of thing perhaps

Kngkyle · #**3533** Posted **May 4, 2018, 7:54 PM**

Looks like they're advertising as being over 40% sold now. I don't think that is big news here as they've been hovering around 35-40% for awhile now, but interesting to see them use this in their ads:

the urban politician · #**3534** Posted **May 4, 2018, 8:01 PM**

The “Vista” of Vista coming up from LSE is going to be dramatic. I don’t think one can overstate it’s presence.

El Duderino · #**3535** Posted **May 4, 2018, 9:24 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by the urban politician

The “Vista” of Vista coming up from LSE is going to be dramatic. I don’t think one can overstate it’s presence.

It definitely has a MetLife on Park Ave.-style impact, but may be even more striking with its height and color. Very excited to see this really start rounding into form from afar