I'm simply repeating what others have said but this is some exciting stuff. Thanks for the great pictures as well as the explanation of the supply chain hold-up and why the facade was started on the 10th floor. The close-up details of the facade being installed definitely gets my attention. I will be checking this thread a lot more oftern. And yes, who in Chicago doesn't like a dark building?!?! This is going to be such a great addition to the city along with 1000M. Love seeing both taking shape at the same time as well as the finish product looking better than the renderings which is often not the case.

Again, thanks for all the great pictures. Much appreciated!! :worship:

This is gonna be the Sears Tower of the West Loop

It's interesting when you see it from the West Loop versus from a distance with the rest of the skyline. I will have to post a pic this week from my rooftop because at a distance, it barely even registers.

Basically this. :D

How much more do this one have to go?

It's really sprouted into my RN balcony view! I think it will ultimately be blocked by the Cassidy Tire highrise though, but I'll enjoy it for the time being haha.

You think? Even 900 Randolph couldn't do it and will end up "faking" the steel that will cover up the concrete.

NYC is still rocking the steel framework. Chicago? Not so much.

900 Randolph is an actual highrise tower, and it's residential - there are valid reasons to use concrete. And they couldn't do an exposed steel frame if they wanted to, it would fail the energy code. In our climate, the building skin always has to be separate from the structural frame with an insulation layer between.

1020 Randolph is a little 5-story midrise, and it's office. The use of concrete is purely an aesthetic choice so they could do mushroom columns with drop caps and make it look like an old warehouse inside:
https://1020wrandolph.com/

Makes me appreciate just how big the Sears Tower really is in comparison. Nonetheless it will be the Sears Tower of Fulton Market for some time. :cheers:

The Hanncock is residential. And the Sears is the tallest building in the midwest. Both are steel. Not sure of the 'energy code' but things may have changed since then. I am more inclined to believe it's due to cost. Which...great. So be it. We'll see how 900 Randolph's fake ass shit holds up in 20-30 years. God willing ;)

NYC may not get the amount of cold days that Chicago gets but it gets plenty cold in January just the same. Just saying. It's a higher priced city and they are still jamming with steel. Because they can. For how much longer will be determined.

What?

Over the last handful of years, we just saw 5 new office towers over 700' go up that were all steel frame.

The general rule for highrises in Chicago these days is:

- office towers: steel frame (with concrete core)
- residential/hotel/mixed-use towers: concrete frame

There are of course a few exceptions both ways, but that's how the VAST majority of towers have shaken out here for the past 3 decades now.

it is absolutely nothing new.




Uhhhhhh.....

You do realize that the exterior cladding on Sears, Hancock and every single other steel frame skyscraper in the city is "fake ass shit" too, right?

Structural steel has to be fire protected by code (for very good reason). you can never just leave it exposed as an exterior finish material.

From your recent commentary in this thread, you don't seem particularly well-versed in the basics of skyscraper engineering/design/construction.

A whole chunk of the Hancock Tower cladding even fell off earlier this year.

https://lede-admin.blockclubchicago....0-x-1080-1.jpg
https://lede-admin.blockclubchicago....0-x-1080-1.jpg

900 Randolph is posing. End of story.

All of Hanncocks revolutionary cross bracing is 'fake' because it has a skin on it?

Yea, 900 Randolph. Same thing.

the Eifel Tower isn't clad in anything.

but it's an extremely poor point of comparison.

it's not a skyscraper and it was built 125 years ago.

modern steel frame skyscrapers never have their structural steel exposed. the structural steel is first fire-proofed and then clad in any number of exterior finish materials (stainless/corten steel, aluminum, stone, precast concrete, etc.), aka "fake ass shit" according to you.



that does seem to be the extremely strange argument that you're attempting to make here.

the structural steel cross-bracing on hancock is buried behind fire-proofing and its annondized aluminum facade panels.

or "fake ass shit" as you so eloquently put it.

you, nor i, nor anyone under the age of 50 has ever seen the actual steel structural cross-bracing members themselves.




as is every single other residential highrise built in the city over the past 3 decades, i suppose, with the lone exception of the 2002's Erie on the Park.


in reality, the only thing "posing" in this discussion here is you.

I mean 270 park is being built as we speak and you can go right now and look at what they're doing to the structural steel.

900 Randolph is imposing a look of structural steel where no structural steel exists. It is disingenuous at best. It also is a sure thing to age poorly.

The Empire State Building is imposing a look of stone masonry construction where no structural stone exists. It is disingenuous at best. It also is a sure thing to age poorly.

When buildings like 270 Park build their structure out of 100% steel framing, it is not a stretch to see it 'skinned' in a similar fashion. Because IT IS STEEL. The Hanncock covered the steel structure and you still get the point. It's made of steel. But 900 Randolph is 'pretending' to give the illusion that it is good ole', broad shoulder Chicagoan, made of steel. When it is not.

That is all. Moving on.

Alright. We can disagree on this subject. No offense.

^ Well, your argument appears to boil down to this:

Steel frame highrise clad with brick = ok
Steel frame highrise clad with stone = ok
Steel frame highrise clad with precast = ok
Steel frame highrise clad with terra cotta = ok
Steel frame highrise clad with metal = ok
Concrete frame highrise clad with brick = ok
Concrete frame highrise clad with stone = ok
Concrete frame highrise clad with precast = ok
Concrete frame highrise clad with terra cotta = ok
Concrete frame highrise clad with metal = "fake ass shit!!!"

That high rise at Fairbanks and grand is a lie. I was told this and I’m not sure if it’s true but the budget commanded a concrete frame office building but the architect wished the expression to be steel. So it’s concrete waffle slabs clad with with a steel and glass exterior.