CHICAGO | Highrise Projects & Construction - Page 391

ChiPhi · #**7801** Posted: **May 10, 2012, 10:06 PM**

Some pics of curbed today of K station. The more I see this building, the more I hope they don't paint the concrete. It would be pretty darn nice just glass over the raw concrete. The renderings make it look like it'll be painted white though.

Also, we may not lose tallest building status after a design change at 1 WTC according to the Trib / AP.

J_M_Tungsten · #**7802** Posted: **May 10, 2012, 10:27 PM**

Out of all of those, my two that I wish I could see happen would be both of the south wacker drive projects. They would have a nice skyline impact from the west on 290.

chief56 · #**7803** Posted: **May 10, 2012, 11:54 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila

Oh, so there are precast panels? Why are they scoring the concrete, then??

The tan color looks like a really bad impression of limestone, but I'm assuming it's waterproofing.

Precast on the north and west sides from ground, then scored concrete on the east side, and from 14 up is scored. Probably doing a color test to see what it will look like, that patch will be covered up anyways.

ChiPhi · #**7804** Posted: **May 11, 2012, 2:12 AM**

^^^
Is precast more expensive than painting the concrete (I suppose it would be)? Would that be why they are only doing the two street facing sides in precast and the others painted? Or is it an aesthetic (if that word can be applied to this building) choice?

ChiPhi · #**7805** Posted: **May 11, 2012, 2:26 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by J_M_Tungsten

Out of all of those, my two that I wish I could see happen would be both of the south wacker drive projects. They would have a nice skyline impact from the west on 290.

I gotta agree, there isn't much place to make a skyline impact nowadays in the CBD without building a supertall near supertall, and those are some of the few lots.

As a side note, I really think that all of these designs are quite good. Even the SCB west loop econoboxes have some visual interest. I like the way that the lobby does not run parallel to the street in 625 W. Adams - that would add some real interest at the pedestrian level and break up the sidewalk monotony. And 108 N. Jefferson has that interesting setback with a huge outdoor space above. It is still slightly taller than the other buildings which make up the cornice line, and therefore adds some unexpected rhythm to the street, but it doesn't overwhelm its neighbors. I also like the way that the left side of the building makes up the majority of that giant slab of glass and has mullions or window supports or whatever vertically aligned. And then the right side has horizontally aligned window details. Hopefully this will break up the sprawling, squat flatness of what could not be more of a box. It was an architects smart response to a developer who wanted to build as cheap a building as possible.

Dan in Chicago · #**7806** Posted: **May 11, 2012, 2:57 AM**

Phorio got a height today for the Optima Center Chicago: 442'-5" measured from St. Clair, which we're using as the official height. If you measure from Upper Illinois it would be 418'-9".

ChiPhi · #**7807** Posted: **May 11, 2012, 3:37 AM**

^^^
Not bad at all. When you say "today," did you just notice today, did they send some sort of update, or were you checking everyday. If it is the last, that is dedication...

ardecila · #**7808** Posted: **May 11, 2012, 4:34 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jc5680

I guess SCB is using that as it's unofficial logo now?

To boldly go where no architect has gone before...

Oh wait, we're talking about SCB.

Dan in Chicago · #**7809** Posted: **May 11, 2012, 6:24 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChiPhi

When you say "today," did you just notice today, did they send some sort of update, or were you checking everyday.

I just went to the construction trailer and looked at the blueprints. It was actually sort of a joint Phorio-CTBUH effort as a friend of mine from the Council came with. We'll try to get a few more heights in the near future as we haven't got this mini-boom totally covered yet.

BraveNewWorld · #**7810** Posted: **May 11, 2012, 6:38 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dan in Chicago

I just went to the construction trailer and looked at the blueprints. It was actually sort of a joint Phorio-CTBUH effort as a friend of mine from the Council came with. We'll try to get a few more heights in the near future as we haven't got this mini-boom totally covered yet.

Does your CTBUH friend know what the final verdict is on the WTC antennae ?

Dan in Chicago · #**7811** Posted: **May 11, 2012, 7:02 AM**

Good question, I think it's safe to say there's no final verdict but there are torn opinions on the issue. It wouldn't be the first time they've included an architecturally-designed antenna into the height of a building, but honestly it's getting hard to argue that those should be included when real antennae aren't.

We discussed the possibility of Phorio introducing a new, more intuitive height rule that will please a lot more people, but more on that later. We have to get the site in order first. Still lots of features missing....

BraveNewWorld · #**7812** Posted: **May 11, 2012, 7:14 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dan in Chicago

Good question, I think it's safe to say there's no final verdict but there are torn opinions on the issue. It wouldn't be the first time they've included an architecturally-designed antenna into the height of a building, but honestly it's getting hard to argue that those should be included when real antennae aren't.

We discussed the possibility of Phorio introducing a new, more intuitive height rule that will please a lot more people, but more on that later. We have to get the site in order first. Still lots of features missing....

Have you not heard about the major change, here are some article on it.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...619775032.html

http://newyorkyimby.blogspot.com/201...-redesign.html

Dan in Chicago · #**7813** Posted: **May 11, 2012, 7:16 AM**

Oh yes, certainly. We talked about it a lot today. But there's a lot of reason to think the Council will go ahead and count the antenna anyway in the end. They seem reluctant to make the call already.

BraveNewWorld · #**7814** Posted: **May 11, 2012, 7:22 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dan in Chicago

Oh yes, certainly. We talked about it a lot today. But there's a lot of reason to think the Council will go ahead and count the antenna anyway in the end. They seem reluctant to make the call already.

How can they count the antennae without also counting the Sears, JHC, ESB..exc ?

Dan in Chicago · #**7815** Posted: **May 11, 2012, 8:09 AM**

Exactly... but they already do in some cases, where the antenna was designed by the architect as a supposedly integral part of the design. One example is Commerzbank in Frankfurt, along with several Australian skyscrapers.

The antenna on One WTC will in fact not be a TV mast at all, it will be decorative - with all the broadcasting equipment arranged in a ring around its base. It might be odd to call a utility pole decorative though, when there's so little effort put into making it aesthetic, and when even the architect (David Childs of SOM) disavows it in the planned form.

macatawa · #**7816** Posted: **May 11, 2012, 3:28 PM**

is the front page no longer active, it has not be updated in a long time

Steely Dan · #**7817** Posted: **May 11, 2012, 3:39 PM**

[COLOR="Red"]*off topic posts deleted*

guys, this is not the proper thread to discuss the antenna on the WTC project in NYC.

this thread is for discussion on CHICAGO highrise developments.

Chicago Shawn · #**7818** Posted: **May 11, 2012, 6:09 PM**

I went to the Park Drive Development meeting in Streeterville this week. The building will be 53 stories. The tower will rise to about 630 feet with mechanicals and screening; although I am not certain where that height begins counting (North Water Vs. New Street).

The loading dock has been moved to Lower North Water and off of New St.

The building will be set back 1'-8" from new street allowing space for full size planters with trees.

The hotel flag will not be reviled yet, but the developer pretty much gave it away. He said its a big name fortune 100 company with a single letter in the stock ticker, and this brand is not in Chicago yet. So that means Grand Hyatt or Lowe's. I'm leaning toward Lowe's because the Developer also said they have a property in Santa Monica, which they do after some quick research.

In other Hotel News,
233 East Ontario will be now be known as the IVY hotel and will be opening soon.

-The Wyndham has been sold and will be re-flagged as the Hyatt Magnificent Mile on June 4.

-The Comfort Suites in River North is now the Acme Hotel.

-The Affinia on Superior Street is now known as the MileNorth Hotel.

woodrow · #**7819** Posted: **May 11, 2012, 7:36 PM**

Interesting about the hotel changes.
Another Hyatt. hmmm...
I hope that Comfort Suites does something interesting/odd/cool with the decor, otherwise Acme would be an odd name. <edit - that's exactly what they are doing>

Busy Bee · #**7820** Posted: **May 11, 2012, 9:52 PM**

^Agreed on the Acme name. Kind of reminds me of the Ace Hotel projects. They're all throwback industrial and vintagy and target the hipster set. If they weren't doind those things and I didn't know what it was I would probably think it was a hot sheets motel or an SRO. Something about the name Acme...