Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Taco
taller than the tallest building in a lot of towns...
I wonder if anyone has ever independently played around with what could be put there without doing any demo
|
Sad but very much true (from San Antonio - a very backward city - that holds on to a UFO looking building that is only used for dining at a less than percent 3 star restaurant. They say it's a romantic restaurant, which rotates...pfft! I went. Horrible. Kids all over the place and aged!). If this building, at 23 floors, were finished off with a nice glassy look as with WTC1 or WTC4, it would be much better than any building in downtown San Antonio. I really do not understand why some cities think ahead and others do or others do think ahead but others prevent. Put it this way, for instance, I did some research over the business downtown in San Antonio. Nearly 75 percent of the buildings are hotels. I know of three that have over 900 rooms. The last time I did a check was the weekend of 08-05/08-07-2011 were all sold out. I do not get it. This also includes one of two five star hotels which are only 12 and 13 stories, respectfully. Here in South Texas, we call this a 'high-rise'. Yes, I know, what am I getting to?
I have been to Chicago many, many times. I love it there. I love all the trees, the green, the uniqueness to each and every building, and most importantly, the space between buildings. Other than wanting to invest into this project if it were something else, if I had the movie, I do not think Chicago will let this go on. Places like San Antonio do not even like it when buildings are taking too long and have charged buildings that do not meet their deadlines by the day (e.g., for more, look up news stories on the Grand Hyatt Riverwalk). I would like to think the city should do the same. In addition, I am kind of happy they did not finish it. May be something better looking will go up, and as someone said on this forum, 'the foundation was built for something larger' and anyone vested in such a project should 'should take advantage of that'. You see, my reasoning is, as with the example about San Antonio regarding less than 20 story hotel buildings with a hand full of over 25, if their is a need to build taller, then it should be done. At current, the Waterview is 23 stories. For Chicago standards, this is simply a parking garage. The building to the right of the Waterview is simply beautiful. Since then, Chicago has seen it's fair share of great beauty (e.g., the Aqua) and the based on what the Waterview was suppose to be when top out, it would not have stood the test of time. It would have been some random building that is simply just tall. To be honest, the upper part of what the Waterview would have been looks like the Four Seasons Chicago, only with less bulk (thinnier). Thus, nothing new. May be that is why it could not get funding. I mean, I have never heard of a building so far in development just stop and be left as it is now (with the exception of the Ryugyong Hotel in North Korea which begin in 1987 and topped out and stopped work on in 1992. This was a 105 story building. However, after 16 of inactivity, work on the building started up again in 2008 and is pretty much finished and will open in 2012).
Sorry for all the little stories to give my opinion whilst giving a collection to my open. In the end, if a city such as San Antonio that is so backward in construction (the new buildings they build are of the same color and made to look old...huh?) and if a county which started a major high-rise finishes it's project, albeit 16 years (which would be a good thing, at least they did not have to redo the hotel for the 21st century - 16-20 years makes for a big difference - as it will not be so outdated by now for such a big project), I am sure a Chicago - a city of great architecture and of progressive thinking - will do something worthy on the site of the Waterview. And, hey, if you all are thinking the same thing will happen as with the Spire, do not. The Spire is really just on hold. They have the money and the backing for it. They are just waiting for the right timing. I mean, hey, look at the Aqua. The Aqua is already filling up! So many people are living there now. I love the fact that you do not have to be making millions to live in a high-rise in Chicago. The market in terms of living in a high-rise with such great architecture is what Chicago truly is. It is the way things should be. Why should only the super rich live in great living conditions? I just recently heard that the Carnegie 57 - at 1, 005 ft. - just sold a 6,000 sq ft condo for 40 million! That is about $6, 667 per sq ft! You can get a great apt or condo at the Aqua, for example, for less than $300,000 and with more sq ft. - more bag for the buck. That is a true example of thinking ahead or building greatness for all to see, not just the super rich and not just for the poor and middle class to look at and dream about. What can you get in Manhattan for $300,000? May be a small apt in a noisy, unusually noisy, part of town. Never would I think it to be realistic to built high-rises just for the super rich. It is not progressive in nature at all, and with more and more people believing the best way to expand is to centralize, as oppose to decentralizing (moving away from the city), Chicago seems to be the only city thinking of it's people and not just the super rich. When I travel for business or leisure, as with Chicago, I love just walking the streets. Those that live in Chicago are so lucky.
just not in the winter months lol.
Thanks for readings. Nothing but good can come from the Waterview in a city of beauty.
Prev
Linear Mode
