SkyscraperPage Forum - CHICAGO | Salesforce Tower | 850 FT

Prev 1 23 73 113 119 120 121 122123124 125 126 127 133 139 Next

Viewing Page 123 of 139

Show 50 post(s) from this thread on one page

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/index.php)

- Completed Project Threads Archive (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=348)

- - CHICAGO | Salesforce Tower | 850 FT | 60 FLOORS (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=217949)

donnie

Sep 1, 2022 6:37 PM

got it, thank you

iLeunamme

Sep 1, 2022 6:55 PM

We have our own mini Hudson Yards in Chicago ;)

rivernorthlurker

Sep 1, 2022 7:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by iLeunamme (Post 9718861)

We have our own mini Hudson Yards in Chicago ;)

Totally. Let's finish it off it off with something big at 130 N Franklin.

twister244

Sep 1, 2022 10:12 PM

That last shot really does reinforce my opinion that this building's best angle is from the North Branch of the river. It has this perfect angle that compliments WPE and has the loop behind it as a coat tail. Love the shot.

pianowizard

Sep 1, 2022 11:15 PM

CHICAGO | Salesforce Tower | 835 FT | 60 FLOORS

Quote:

Originally Posted by pianowizard (Post 9713923)

Would the admins please correct Salesforce Tower's height on the Diagrams page? It should be 850 ft, not 835 ft. Thanks.

After digging around more, I realized that 835 ft is correct. Thus, would the original poster or the admins please correct the height in the thread title? Thanks.

Even at 835 ft, Salesforce Tower is still taller than 100 North Wacker, making it the tallest office-only building completed in Chicago since 1990. See CTBUH's list here: https://www.skyscrapercenter.com/exp...y=&output=list

chris08876

Sep 2, 2022 12:09 AM

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Fbm8ozqW...jpg&name=large
Credit: John Scalzi

Steely Dan

Sep 2, 2022 12:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pianowizard (Post 9719159)

The 835' figure is old and likely outdated.

Midway through construction two floors near the top got height increases adding roughly 15' to the tower.

It's all documented here in this thread somewhere.

rivernorthlurker

Sep 2, 2022 10:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pianowizard (Post 9719159)

The core topped out at 840' according to the construction team at Walsh. Then the additional 10' is the architectural top.

Though they do qualify 'approximately.' And maybe more notably is this is 'Level 61.' Everything else says 60. If anything maybe the change really needs to be from 60 to 61? I'd be curious what the details are about that.

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/walsh...791245314-RUdY

https://i.imgur.com/ER1BScb.png

Also via Yimby https://chicagoyimby.com/2022/01/sal...ver-north.html

BY: JACK CRAWFORD 7:45 AM ON JANUARY 12, 2022

Quote:

This week, the concrete core for Chicago’s Salesforce Tower reached its full height, marking a key milestone for this 60-story skyscraper rising at 333 W Wolf Point Plaza along the confluence of the Chicago River. As noted in a LinkedIn post by the general contractor Walsh Construction, the final height of the core stands 840 feet, falling in line with recent speculation of a 15-foot height bump. Furthermore, it appears that the final architectural height of the edifice will now be 850 feet above the river walk, once the superstructure is accounted for.

rivernorthlurker

Sep 2, 2022 10:37 AM

Also I found a pretty interesting article about some of the structural design and challenges of the building

https://www.enr.com/articles/54072-h...-tower-chicago

https://www.enr.com/ext/resources/Is...o-drawings.jpg

https://www.enr.com/ext/resources/Is...se-Smaller.jpg

pianowizard

Sep 2, 2022 1:30 PM

Thanks for the info. Hopefully we will know the exact height eventually. Would be great if it is >850 ft.

dewbs

Sep 2, 2022 2:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rivernorthlurker (Post 9719545)

Also I found a pretty interesting article about some of the structural design and challenges of the building

https://www.enr.com/articles/54072-h...-tower-chicago

This quote is interesting:

Quote:

One way to minimize the carbon footprint is to reduce the office size. At 4-ft 9-in. square, Salesforce offices are half the size of a traditional office.

Those sound like those prison cells they use for torture, where they're too small to lie down. Almost seems impossible -- how can you fit in a desk and a chair and also have room to open a door?

Klippenstein

Sep 2, 2022 3:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dewbs (Post 9719712)

Those sound like those prison cells they use for torture, where they're too small to lie down. Almost seems impossible -- how can you fit in a desk and a chair and also have room to open a door?

Yeah, that is tiny. Doors open outwards probably, but damn. Hopefully the views help make up for it.

rivernorthlurker

Sep 2, 2022 3:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dewbs (Post 9719712)

This quote is interesting:

Those sound like those prison cells they use for torture, where they're too small to lie down. Almost seems impossible -- how can you fit in a desk and a chair and also have room to open a door?

Yeah I caught that too. Something doesn't seem right about that.

pianowizard

Sep 2, 2022 3:54 PM

There is probably a typo in the dimensions, for example perhaps "4-ft 9-in" was supposed to be "7-ft 9-in", although "half the size of a traditional office" is likely correct. If this building's offices were twice their current sizes, it could have been taller than Sears/Willis Tower!

Ned.B

Sep 2, 2022 4:29 PM

Maybe a sliding door. Or maybe these aren't fully enclosed offices?
I worked on an office build-out 10 years ago that was similarly looking to compact employees since most were on the road half the time anyway. The typical L shaped open office desk fit in about 5'-8"x 7'-0" The client experimented with in some places making offices in the same size but determined even with glass from 42" to the ceiling that they felt too claustrophobic, and increased the smallest enclosed offices to 7'-8" square. I am having a hard time imaging working in a 4'-9" square box.

I would consider "typical office" to be 100sf. As pianowizard says, half that size would be more like 7 foot square.

rivernorthlurker

Sep 2, 2022 4:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ned.B (Post 9719885)

Maybe a sliding door. Or maybe these aren't fully enclosed offices?
I worked on an office build-out 10 years ago that was similarly looking to compact employees since most were on the road half the time anyway. The typical L shaped open office desk fit in about 5'-8"x 7'-0" The client experimented with in some places making offices in the same size but determined even with glass from 42" to the ceiling that they felt too claustrophobic, and increased the smallest enclosed offices to 7'-8" square. I am having a hard time imaging working in a 4'-9" square box.

I would consider "typical office" to bee 100sf. As pianowizard says, half that size would be more like 7 foot square.

Maybe the offices were 9' 6" square and the author just 'halved' the linear dimension when he heard they were half size. :shrug:

dropdeaded209

Sep 4, 2022 1:37 PM

spotted out on North Ave. Beach pier...

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...d9b77ed7_h.jpg

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...405fd458_h.jpg

BVictor1

Sep 5, 2022 2:51 AM

09.02.22
https://uniim1.shutterfly.com/ng/ser...346174/enhance

SolarWind

Sep 11, 2022 8:02 AM

September 8, 2022