HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Buildings & Architecture > Completed Project Threads Archive


 

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #641  
Old Posted Feb 15, 2017, 1:09 AM
BVictor1's Avatar
BVictor1 BVictor1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 10,391
Quote:
Originally Posted by HomrQT View Post
What are slosh damper containers usually made of? Would welding pieces of metal together to create the container not make it sealed against leaks? Also what are your thoughts on the tuned mass damper for Taipei 101?
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/09/r...wind.html?_r=0
__________________
titanic1
     
     
  #642  
Old Posted Feb 15, 2017, 7:16 AM
BVictor1's Avatar
BVictor1 BVictor1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 10,391
1200 S INDIANA AVE
Description: INSTALL FREE STANDING POTAIN MD 485B TOWER CRANE

Application Review Summary
Name Completed Date Status
FINAL DATA REVIEW 2017-02-01 APPROVED
STRUCTURAL REVIEW 2017-01-31 APPROVED
PRELIMINARY INTAKE REVIEW 2016-12-27 APPROVED

The owners of this address received a permit on Wednesday, February 1, 2017
__________________
titanic1
     
     
  #643  
Old Posted Feb 15, 2017, 2:40 PM
SamInTheLoop SamInTheLoop is offline
you know where I'll be
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,535
Major Equity Source is from China - Ping An Insurance

Industry newsletter Real Estate Alert revealed yesterday that the majority of the project's equity is being funded by China insurer Ping An.

Total project cost is estimated right around where I thought it would end up - $350 mil. or so.

Article cited a unit count of around 900. That could be a mistake. Or, it also wouldn't surprise me if it's been increased somewhat with smaller avg unit sizes.....anyone here have up-to-date intel on that?
__________________
It's simple, really - try not to design or build trash.
     
     
  #644  
Old Posted Feb 15, 2017, 2:52 PM
BVictor1's Avatar
BVictor1 BVictor1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 10,391
^The unit count hasn't changed.
__________________
titanic1
     
     
  #645  
Old Posted Feb 15, 2017, 4:35 PM
skyscraper skyscraper is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,374
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2PRUROCKS! View Post
I really hope the second tower is not built as designed. It looks like the height difference between 1GP and the second tower is 50ft at the most. That would be a disappointment.
It won't be. That is an old rendering. I did dozens of different options and iterations. I was laid off before any final decisions were made, so I have no idea what the design will be (and I don't think they know yet) but you can rest assured it won't look exactly like the old rendering. Whether it will be better or worse remains to be seen. But some of the options were as tall as 950 feet.
the overall plan had been, and this could have changed since I worked on it, to have 100 condo units at the top and about 650 rentals on the lower floors. I had heard that they had done away with some amenity floors to raise the efficiency of the building but nothing is etched in stone yet AFAIK.

Last edited by skyscraper; Feb 15, 2017 at 6:32 PM.
     
     
  #646  
Old Posted Feb 15, 2017, 6:30 PM
skyscraper skyscraper is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,374
Quote:
Originally Posted by skyscraper View Post
It won't be. That is an old rendering. I did at dozens of different options and iterations. I was laid off before any final decisions were made, so I have no idea what the design will be (and I don't think they know yet) but you can rest assured it won't look exactly like the old rendering. Whether it will be better or worse remains to be seen. But some of the options were as tall as 950 feet.
the overall plan had been, and this could have changed since I worked on it, was to have 100 condo units at the top and about 650 rentals on the lower floors. I had heard that they had done away with some amenity floors to raise the efficiency of the building but nothing is etched in stone yet AFAIK.
Those unit counts were for phase 2, btw. The last I heard, Phase 1 counts were 792 rentals, but if that's up to 900 now then Phase 2 must be getting pared down because there is a limit of how many residential units they're allowed there by zoning.
     
     
  #647  
Old Posted Feb 15, 2017, 7:59 PM
Ike Beaard Ike Beaard is offline
Daprato Rigali
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 4
Quote:
Originally Posted by skyscraper View Post
It won't be. That is an old rendering. I did dozens of different options and iterations. I was laid off before any final decisions were made, so I have no idea what the design will be (and I don't think they know yet) but you can rest assured it won't look exactly like the old rendering. Whether it will be better or worse remains to be seen. But some of the options were as tall as 950 feet.
the overall plan had been, and this could have changed since I worked on it, to have 100 condo units at the top and about 650 rentals on the lower floors. I had heard that they had done away with some amenity floors to raise the efficiency of the building but nothing is etched in stone yet AFAIK.
very interesting.

Can you lend any info/ideas/teases to some of the other design and/or massing elements that might be in play?

If GP 1 is a nod to Sears, would GP 2 be a nod to anything?
     
     
  #648  
Old Posted Feb 15, 2017, 8:08 PM
skyscraper skyscraper is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,374
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ike Beaard View Post
very interesting.

Can you lend any info/ideas/teases to some of the other design and/or massing elements that might be in play?

If GP 1 is a nod to Sears, would GP 2 be a nod to anything?
they were both going to be a "nod" to sears (yechhh, I hate that concept but it wasn't my call.) the massings would have been similar; I always described them as conjoined fraternal twins. "my" tower would have been taller and the setbacks would have happened at different levels and in different locations, but it was just a variation on the same theme.
     
     
  #649  
Old Posted Feb 15, 2017, 8:09 PM
Domer2019 Domer2019 is offline
Biased in a good way?
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Chicagoland
Posts: 264
Quote:
Originally Posted by skyscraper View Post
But some of the options were as tall as 950 feet.
So that just reinforces the likelihood of the towers being "nearly" identical in height.
     
     
  #650  
Old Posted Feb 15, 2017, 8:20 PM
skyscraper skyscraper is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,374
Quote:
Originally Posted by Domer2019 View Post
So that just reinforces the likelihood of the towers being "nearly" identical in height.
I guess that depends on your definition; at the time they were around 75-80 feet apart, which is almost 10% of the height so to me not really "nearly identical."
     
     
  #651  
Old Posted Feb 15, 2017, 10:01 PM
UPChicago's Avatar
UPChicago UPChicago is offline
Vote for me for Mayor!
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Chicago
Posts: 797
I'm going to diverge from the group think for a moment and state that I would love for the developer to stick with the fraternal twin scheme.
     
     
  #652  
Old Posted Feb 15, 2017, 10:12 PM
Ike Beaard Ike Beaard is offline
Daprato Rigali
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 4
Quote:
Originally Posted by UPChicago View Post
I'm going to diverge from the group think for a moment and state that I would love for the developer to stick with the fraternal twin scheme.
I like the fraternal twin theme, but i just want it to be about 100' taller.


Looking at the skyline from Grant Park:

I think that the Museum park towers, and the grant park towers on the left would provide a nice profile.

Combined with Essex and 1000M on the right.

both sides then kind of would be starting to bring the skyline up to a point.
IMO they should burn the Jewel at Wabash/Roosevelt to the ground and put up a 1500' + tower there.

Would make for an awesome 4th "peak" in the skyline.
     
     
  #653  
Old Posted Feb 15, 2017, 10:26 PM
skyscraper skyscraper is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,374
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ike Beaard View Post
I like the fraternal twin theme, but i just want it to be about 100' taller.
Hard to do. Zoning in that area requires that the ceiling in the highest occupied unit not exceed 900 feet. You can have mechanical and utility spaces above that, but not occupied spaces. We had planned 2-3 levels of mechanical above the last residential floor, but nothing that would get us to 1000'.
     
     
  #654  
Old Posted Feb 16, 2017, 12:11 AM
HomrQT's Avatar
HomrQT HomrQT is online now
All-American City Boy
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Hinsdale / Uptown, Chicago
Posts: 1,939
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVictor1 View Post
Sorry I didn't see that answer any of my questions?
__________________
1. 9 DeKalb Ave - Brooklyn, NYC - SHoP Architects - Photo
2. American Radiator Building - New York City - Hood, Godley, and Fouilhoux - Photo
3. One Chicago Square - Chicago - HPA and Goettsch Partners - Photo
4. Chicago Board of Trade - Chicago - Holabird & Root - Photo
5. Cathedral of Learning - Pittsburgh - Charles Klauder - Photo
     
     
  #655  
Old Posted Feb 16, 2017, 1:24 AM
LouisVanDerWright LouisVanDerWright is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 7,440
Quote:
Originally Posted by UPChicago View Post
I'm going to diverge from the group think for a moment and state that I would love for the developer to stick with the fraternal twin scheme.
I agree, I very much like the original concept. Besides, how often do you see two very tall buildings that are very similar, but not exact twins? It's kind of a different concept. I know there's certainly nothing like it in Chicago. Hell, there are virtually no twins in Chicago except for CME and Marina City. It's almost an Illinois Center like scheme, just on steroids.
     
     
  #656  
Old Posted Feb 16, 2017, 1:32 AM
KWILLSKYLINE's Avatar
KWILLSKYLINE KWILLSKYLINE is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Chicago
Posts: 625
Quote:
Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright View Post
I agree, I very much like the original concept. Besides, how often do you see two very tall buildings that are very similar, but not exact twins? It's kind of a different concept. I know there's certainly nothing like it in Chicago. Hell, there are virtually no twins in Chicago except for CME and Marina City. It's almost an Illinois Center like scheme, just on steroids.
I agree as well. They can be our Warner Towers, just much thinner, but still cornering our park.
     
     
  #657  
Old Posted Feb 16, 2017, 5:11 AM
BVictor1's Avatar
BVictor1 BVictor1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 10,391
Quote:
Originally Posted by HomrQT View Post
Sorry I didn't see that answer any of my questions?
Guess you'll have to research it yourself then
__________________
titanic1

Last edited by BVictor1; Feb 16, 2017 at 8:22 AM. Reason: wording
     
     
  #658  
Old Posted Feb 16, 2017, 8:29 PM
HomrQT's Avatar
HomrQT HomrQT is online now
All-American City Boy
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Hinsdale / Uptown, Chicago
Posts: 1,939
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVictor1 View Post
Guess you'll have to research it yourself then
Well I guess that's it, nobody ask anymore questions from the experts here, just go do the research yourself. Why would you even respond to my comment with a link that didn't answer any of the questions I asked in the first place?
__________________
1. 9 DeKalb Ave - Brooklyn, NYC - SHoP Architects - Photo
2. American Radiator Building - New York City - Hood, Godley, and Fouilhoux - Photo
3. One Chicago Square - Chicago - HPA and Goettsch Partners - Photo
4. Chicago Board of Trade - Chicago - Holabird & Root - Photo
5. Cathedral of Learning - Pittsburgh - Charles Klauder - Photo
     
     
  #659  
Old Posted Feb 16, 2017, 9:51 PM
JK47 JK47 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 365
Quote:
Originally Posted by HomrQT View Post
What are slosh damper containers usually made of? Would welding pieces of metal together to create the container not make it sealed against leaks? Also what are your thoughts on the tuned mass damper for Taipei 101?

According to the link the tank would likely be made of concrete. The simple fact though is that you're dealing with water and cost. Concrete is cheap whereas constructing a tank with copper or stainless steel is not and water will eventually corrode both of those alternatives. Everything that holds water will, given sufficient time, leak.

Lastly, a tuned mass damper is a mechanical damper which is essentially what was described as an alternative (a mechanism for absorbing shock mechanically).
     
     
  #660  
Old Posted Feb 16, 2017, 11:00 PM
HomrQT's Avatar
HomrQT HomrQT is online now
All-American City Boy
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Hinsdale / Uptown, Chicago
Posts: 1,939
Quote:
Originally Posted by JK47 View Post
According to the link the tank would likely be made of concrete. The simple fact though is that you're dealing with water and cost. Concrete is cheap whereas constructing a tank with copper or stainless steel is not and water will eventually corrode both of those alternatives. Everything that holds water will, given sufficient time, leak.

Lastly, a tuned mass damper is a mechanical damper which is essentially what was described as an alternative (a mechanism for absorbing shock mechanically).
Thanks. I like the concept that the engineers of Tapei 101 implemented, which takes away the issues with dealing with water and provides a single point of maintenance over time if that damper needs to be checked or repaired.

I can't help but let my mind wander with the slosh damper, like a layer of aluminum creating a barrier with the concrete which is relatively cheap and fairly resistant against corrosion. In time if there's any issue with the aluminum barrier, drain the tank, install a new barrier and refill the tank. Admittedly a single physical damper that wouldn't need attention for a very long time sounds more desirable even if the upfront cost is more.
__________________
1. 9 DeKalb Ave - Brooklyn, NYC - SHoP Architects - Photo
2. American Radiator Building - New York City - Hood, Godley, and Fouilhoux - Photo
3. One Chicago Square - Chicago - HPA and Goettsch Partners - Photo
4. Chicago Board of Trade - Chicago - Holabird & Root - Photo
5. Cathedral of Learning - Pittsburgh - Charles Klauder - Photo
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
 

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Buildings & Architecture > Completed Project Threads Archive
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 9:39 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.