SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/index.php)
-   Proposals (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=361)
-   -   CHICAGO | 400 N Lake Shore Drive | 875 FT & 765 FT | ? & ? FLOORS (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=219306)

aaron38 Oct 24, 2015 1:28 AM

The central pit is a circle, the caisons are arranged in a circle around it. I'd be very surprised if the footprint of the building wasn't also a circle. Lot they can do with the building form after that.
Whatever it is, I just hope it's something simple and elegant.

photoLith Oct 24, 2015 4:34 AM

It's been what, 7 years since Chicago Spire construction stopped at the site and the foundation being just out in the open for 7 years probably isn't good and I'm sure that hole fills up with water and ice. It's probably in pretty rough shape now.

Kngkyle Oct 24, 2015 5:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by photoLith (Post 7210102)
It's been what, 7 years since Chicago Spire construction stopped at the site and the foundation being just out in the open for 7 years probably isn't good and I'm sure that hole fills up with water and ice. It's probably in pretty rough shape now.

How can an underground foundation be out in the open? The only piece that has been exposed to the elements is the temporary retaining wall for the core. The caissons will all be perfectly usable, as will the slurry & secant walls holding back the river.

Scrapeskyer Oct 24, 2015 5:43 AM

I really hope something becomes of this big hole in the ground, even if it's not a supertall project. I'd also like to see something built across the street. I don't like the whole rule against building east of the LSD. I really think the skyline could be awesome if they did.

Domer2019 Oct 24, 2015 6:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scrapeskyer (Post 7210147)
I really hope something becomes of this big hole in the ground, even if it's not a supertall project. I'd also like to see something built across the street. I don't like the whole rule against building east of the LSD. I really think the skyline could be awesome if they did.

Maybe if the theoretical skyscraper is a museum. Hmm... y'know what, maybe that should be a thing. Chicago International Museum of Architecture featuring the Burnham/Root/Atwood/Sullivan (what have you) Hotel. Sign me up!

ardecila Oct 24, 2015 2:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VKChaz (Post 7209758)
I see. Sounds like that might be BIG's forte. Though if that particular building is replaced, it won't be by a public building. For some developers, the functions mentioned may pose constraints they simply want no part of.

Assuming the Thompson Center gets replaced, it won't be the developer's choice. That building contains vital pieces of the Pedway network and the Clark/Lake transfer station.

Expect the planning process here to be just as complicated as Block 37 was.

Anyway, looking forward to what BIG can do at the Spire site. There's still plenty of interesting urban surroundings to interface with, from Lake Shore Drive to the river to Ogden Slip.

VKChaz Oct 24, 2015 10:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila (Post 7210294)
Assuming the Thompson Center gets replaced, it won't be the developer's choice. That building contains vital pieces of the Pedway network and the Clark/Lake transfer station.

Expect the planning process here to be just as complicated as Block 37 was.

And you just said the magic word..."Block 37"
I am leery of the notion that the functions that exist neatly within a civic building will all readily find their way into a newly-constructed private one. But that may be correct. If it goes forward, I am sure it will be a long process. We'll see what happens either way.

Doubleu1117 Nov 3, 2015 3:34 AM

Being from NY I'm a little apprehensive about this. I really don't think BIG's style fits NYC, and much less Chicago. I dont believe he made a tower that could fit in NY, which I think is easier to do than Chicago. Chicago I believe has a more overall aesthetic. The city works together, NY is more of a sum of its parts. I hope he doesnt put up some "new age" twisty "evolutionary" monstrosity.

Tom Servo Nov 3, 2015 9:37 PM

Quote:

I hope he doesnt put up some "new age" twisty "evolutionary" monstrosity.
Hah. You mean, like this?

http://www.e-architect.co.uk/images/...01108_viz2.jpg
e-architect.co.uk


I welcome anything from Bjarke Ingels Group with open arms.

Tom Servo Nov 3, 2015 9:51 PM

Video Link


Fearless dreamers, we as a city could use more of this once again...

HomrQT Nov 3, 2015 9:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chris08876 (Post 7208299)
I wish they could just build this. Maybe make a 1600-1700' version, carve an wide rectangular opening around the 1500' mark, add an observation deck with restaurant, make it mixed used, and call it the CWFC. Chicago World Finacial Center. :D

One of my favorite proposals in the country that didn't happen. :(

While I liked the spire, it wasn't anything special except for its height (IMO). Now this proposal, this was a bummer to not have.

Whatever rises, this location, with impeccable views, needs to be great and something that stands out on the national level. Yes, I'd like it to be a super tall that exceeds all. To wishful thinking :cheers:. Here Here... :cheers:

http://41.media.tumblr.com/f8c537caf...fqyo1_1280.jpg
Credit: http://themanonfive.com/page/125?rou...page%2F%3Apage

https://www.google.com/maps/vt/data=...jpBfFq1k-NfLGK

This in that location, and thats a wrap for the day.

Agree with all of this. :cheers:

munchymunch Nov 3, 2015 10:00 PM

I don't care how it looks, the one thing I know is that whatever it is... it will be unique. You may look at it once it's completed and say how ugly it looks. Well the one thing I know is that uniqueness... with time, will eventually go appreciated, and loved by Chicagoans.

Zapatan Nov 4, 2015 8:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by munchymunch (Post 7221733)
I don't care how it looks, the one thing I know is that whatever it is... it will be unique. You may look at it once it's completed and say how ugly it looks. Well the one thing I know is that uniqueness... with time, will eventually go appreciated, and loved by Chicagoans.

Yea... 2WTC has grown on me a lot at least from a couple angles.

I hope BIG doesn't try to get too weird though, I do appreciate simplicity and looking like a normal building. Height could always help.. maybe I'm being unrealistic but I'd be disappointed if it ends up shorter than 400. :haha:

untitledreality Nov 5, 2015 12:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by munchymunch (Post 7221733)
You may look at it once it's completed and say how ugly it looks. Well the one thing I know is that uniqueness... with time, will eventually go appreciated, and loved by Chicagoans.

Just like Prentice right?

...or maybe the Thompson Center?

munchymunch Nov 5, 2015 12:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by untitledreality (Post 7223598)
Just like Prentice right?

...or maybe the Thompson Center?

Thompson Center is not functional, sad it could not stay longer. Prentice was difficult to see go, and it many tried to save it...

The North One Nov 14, 2015 8:53 PM

Hell no, I don't want one of BIG's shitty toy block towers.

go go white sox Nov 14, 2015 10:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HomrQT (Post 7221730)
Agree with all of this. :cheers:

What a shame this never got build it's stunning! I had never seen this proposal before, what are the odds of this resurfacing as we are seeing proposals from before the recession starting to put back into recirculation. This would be perfect for the spire spot as indicated.

munchymunch Nov 14, 2015 10:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by go go white sox (Post 7235653)
What a shame this never got build it's stunning! I had never seen this proposal before, what are the odds of this resurfacing as we are seeing proposals from before the recession starting to put back into recirculation. This would be perfect for the spire spot as indicated.

0% The site is where the Loews was built.

go go white sox Nov 15, 2015 2:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by munchymunch (Post 7235659)
0% The site is where the Loews was built.

Not at that exact site but somewhere else who are the designers behind this proposal? Thanks

munchymunch Nov 15, 2015 3:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by go go white sox (Post 7235873)
Not at that exact site but somewhere else who are the designers behind this proposal? Thanks

DeStefano, and Fordham was the developer.

Reinsdorf Sucks Feb 16, 2016 3:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zapatan (Post 7223170)
I hope BIG doesn't try to get too weird though, I do appreciate simplicity and looking like a normal building.

There will be a competition with proposals from multiple firms.

Steely Dan Feb 16, 2016 4:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reinsdorf Sucks (Post 7337188)
There will be a competition with proposals from multiple firms.

any insider info/clues on which firms may be involved in the process?

Kngkyle Feb 16, 2016 8:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reinsdorf Sucks (Post 7337188)
There will be a competition with proposals from multiple firms.

It would be interesting if they selected the top 3 proposals and put it up for a public vote. If they are going all-out height wise it would certainly get a lot of media attention like the Spire itself did. It would be especially appropriate for Chicago given the architectural history and enthusiasm that many residents have, at least in comparison to most other cities.

It would be a genius marketing ploy as well. Just require a validated email address to vote and then boom, you get a massive database of email addresses you can directly market the units to.

Zapatan Feb 16, 2016 8:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reinsdorf Sucks (Post 7337188)
There will be a competition with proposals from multiple firms.

I hope SHoP is one of them :)

If it does end up being BIG his supertalls in NY aren't *that* bad, and would be something new for Chicago.

maru2501 Feb 16, 2016 9:10 PM

I have written this off as a supertall

Notyrview Feb 16, 2016 9:53 PM

Yeah, it'll be a shitbox

rlw777 Feb 16, 2016 11:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by maru2501 (Post 7337656)
I have written this off as a supertall

Why? Especially with a foundation already in the ground to support a supertall structure I would assume they have incentive to go for height.

marothisu Feb 16, 2016 11:29 PM

At this point, I'm more curious as to what they want more than who the architect is going to be. of course, that'll change once I find out what it'll be :)

ardecila Feb 16, 2016 11:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Notyrview (Post 7337717)
Yeah, it'll be a shitbox

Given the configuration of caissons, I highly doubt it will be a box. The foundation is designed for a round or septagon-shaped tower, and the architects will have to work around those constraints unless they want to pour some crazy system of giant grade beams to distribute the weight from a rectangular column grid.

The odd number of sides (7!) in Calatrava's design is actually a huge design challenge, because there's no easy or elegant way to transition that back to a 4-sided square or rectangular floorplate.

Ryanrule Feb 17, 2016 12:24 AM

Related would rather dig up the foundation than build something interesting.

maru2501 Feb 17, 2016 3:49 PM

you have to wonder how damaged that foundation could be

Zapatan Feb 17, 2016 6:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by maru2501 (Post 7337656)
I have written this off as a supertall

Sadly I wouldn't be surprised if it wasn't but what makes you say that? It could be... the location is perfect.

Zapatan Feb 17, 2016 6:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ryanrule (Post 7337901)
Related would rather dig up the foundation than build something interesting.

I like One Museum Park, didn't Related Midwest build that?

I guess I won't get my hopes up too high for this one since there seems to be the general consensus that it will end up short and ugly, but why not seize the opportunity to build something amazing?

LouisVanDerWright Feb 17, 2016 7:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by maru2501 (Post 7338532)
you have to wonder how damaged that foundation could be

By what? They are designed to be in the ground and have been in the ground the entire time, I doubt there is any damage at all. They've been pickled in 55 degree mud since they were laid.

Kumdogmillionaire Feb 17, 2016 8:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zapatan (Post 7338778)
I like One Museum Park, didn't Related Midwest build that?

I guess I won't get my hopes up too high for this one since there seems to be the general consensus that it will end up short and ugly, but why not seize the opportunity to build something amazing?

Don't say that too loudly. People hate OMP on here. I like it too, I think when Viñoly and Jahn buildings come in they'll be complimented and not look as out of place.

Kumdogmillionaire Feb 17, 2016 8:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright (Post 7338960)
By what? They are designed to be in the ground and have been in the ground the entire time, I doubt there is any damage at all. They've been pickled in 55 degree mud since they were laid.

You don't think it's possible all that sitting water, freezing and unfreezing could have done damage? While I'd bet on the foundation being fine since it has to hold up to immense pressures anyway, I would not be surprised to see them tear it up and replace it

jc5680 Feb 17, 2016 8:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kumdogmillionaire (Post 7339056)
You don't think it's possible all that sitting water, freezing and unfreezing could have done damage? While I'd bet on the foundation being fine since it has to hold up to immense pressures anyway, I would not be surprised to see them tear it up and replace it

What about it's current condition is any different than if there was a building resting on it?

You have made more than a few contradictory statements in several Chicago threads now. Please enlighten us with the facts and knowledge you are using to arrive to your conclusions.

BVictor1 Feb 17, 2016 9:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zapatan (Post 7338778)
I like One Museum Park, didn't Related Midwest build that?

I guess I won't get my hopes up too high for this one since there seems to be the general consensus that it will end up short and ugly, but why not seize the opportunity to build something amazing?

No, that wasn't Related, the was Forest City/Jerry Fogelson

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kumdogmillionaire (Post 7339056)
You don't think it's possible all that sitting water, freezing and unfreezing could have done damage? While I'd bet on the foundation being fine since it has to hold up to immense pressures anyway, I would not be surprised to see them tear it up and replace it

No. No damage to the caissons because of this. Who says there's a general consensus that it'll end up short and ugly?

ithakas Feb 17, 2016 10:55 PM

Quote:

"You can see that Manhattan is booming, so we have a number of opportunities and leads there," Schumacher said. "We have more work in Miami, we have a second tower underway there, we're competing in Chicago, we've looked at opportunities in LA, and these are all pretty much booming."
So perhaps Hadid is in the mix? The only other big commission I think they might be competing on is the Macerich site on Wabash.

http://www.dezeen.com/2015/07/15/zah...-architecture/

Steely Dan Feb 17, 2016 11:03 PM

^ hmmmmmm...........

intriguing.

Zapatan Feb 18, 2016 12:48 AM

I'm dreaming but a 450 meter Hadid tower here would look amazing.

I would think that Wanda being constructed a few blocks away and the presence of AON in the area as well would push them above 400 to make a statement, but then again it all comes down to demand and $$$. We shall see..

rlw777 Feb 18, 2016 1:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright (Post 7338960)
By what? They are designed to be in the ground and have been in the ground the entire time, I doubt there is any damage at all. They've been pickled in 55 degree mud since they were laid.

LOL yeah unless someone has been secretly trying out a new jackhammer in the spire pit I think the foundation is just fine.

Zapatan Feb 18, 2016 1:38 AM

Quote:

LOL yeah unless someone has been secretly trying out a new jackhammer in the spire pit I think the foundation is just fine.
It'll probably be fine but it has been more exposed than foundations that have buildings covering them... I'm sure that makes quite a difference. They even capped 2WTC's foundation in NY for that reason but the Spire's has been exposed to air for a decade.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BVictor1 (Post 7339160)
Who says there's a general consensus that it'll end up short and ugly?

Just commentary over the past year or so, I'm not saying people are right but no one seems to have faith in Related Midwest or think that Chicago's Market is strong enough for a 400+ building.

nomarandlee Feb 18, 2016 3:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ithakas (Post 7339327)
So perhaps Hadid is in the mix? The only other big commission I think they might be competing on is the Macerich site on Wabash.

http://www.dezeen.com/2015/07/15/zah...-architecture/

Any possibility you can give a hint where you heard that Hadid or any other firms were working on the Macerich project? It's probably on my radar more then any other and yet its the least I hear about. That would be encouraging news if Hadid or any other big name was involved.

ithakas Feb 18, 2016 4:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nomarandlee (Post 7339698)
Any possibility you can give a hint where you heard that Hadid or any other firms were working on the Macerich project? It's probably on my radar more then any other and yet its the least I hear about. That would be encouraging news if Hadid or any other big name was involved.

Unfortunately I have no intel to share. All I recall was a comment on this forum writing about various architecture teams meeting with the development team. (Even then I'm not 100% sure this was for Macerich.) Just speculation that it might, theoretically, be an alternative to Hadid presenting for the Spire site.

harryc Feb 18, 2016 4:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kumdogmillionaire (Post 7339056)
You don't think it's possible all that sitting water, freezing and unfreezing could have done damage? While I'd bet on the foundation being fine since it has to hold up to immense pressures anyway, I would not be surprised to see them tear it up and replace it

The foundation work is all well below the frost line, the very top of the 70-80' wall being the only exception - and it was designed for that.

The crumbly stuff you see in this shot from last year is the gravel that is poured on top of the caissons (or wall here) to protect the re-bar that is protuding out many feet, but still does not reach ground level..

harryc Feb 18, 2016 4:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zapatan (Post 7339550)
It'll probably be fine but it has been more exposed than foundations that have buildings covering them... I'm sure that makes quite a difference. They even capped 2WTC's foundation in NY for that reason but the Spire's has been exposed to air for a decade.



Just commentary over the past year or so, I'm not saying people are right but no one seems to have faith in Related Midwest or think that Chicago's Market is strong enough for a 400+ building.

Not exposed at all - buried deep below the frost line - even in the pit.

In this photo from March of 2008 the drilling rig can clearly be seen poking up out of the hole, that is a full sized crane, once a caisson was drilled, socketed, and poured rebar would be left poking up the thickness of the mat - to allow the drilling rig to maneuver these holes with the exposed rebar would be filled in with the gravel shown in the earlier photo, so the crane could then drive over them. Thus the tops of the caissons are well below the frost line (2-3 ft here) https://climateillinois.files.wordpr...4/02/feb26.gif


LouisVanDerWright Feb 18, 2016 5:49 AM

God, what a fascinating project that was. The entire downward construction method on that project would have been insane to watch. Still sad we didn't get to see it rise. I can only hope Related grows some balls and builds something worthy on this site. There is significantly less land available in the area now as there was in 2005 when this this was first conceived. Perhaps that will justify at least a moderately tall proposal from Related if they are willing to go to the ~850' range at One Bennett Park not too far from here.

Zapatan Feb 18, 2016 6:23 PM

Quote:

Not exposed at all - buried deep below the frost line - even in the pit.
I was mistaken, I thought there was still some steel sticking up, in that case you're right, it should be fine.

Quote:

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright (Post 7339855)
God, what a fascinating project that was. The entire downward construction method on that project would have been insane to watch. Still sad we didn't get to see it rise. I can only hope Related grows some balls and builds something worthy on this site. There is significantly less land available in the area now as there was in 2005 when this this was first conceived. Perhaps that will justify at least a moderately tall proposal from Related if they are willing to go to the ~850' range at One Bennett Park not too far from here.


If people are excited about 850' here Chicago really has lost it's spark. This city put up a 1,450 foot tower to the roof over 40 years ago. I'm not expecting a new tallest here but 850 feet is not a tall building in Chicago. If the design is amazing it'll be a nice addition sure, but this is the perfect location for a masterpiece.

nomarandlee Feb 18, 2016 6:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zapatan (Post 7340436)
I was mistaken, I thought there was still some steel sticking up, in that case you're right, it should be fine.


If people are excited about 850' here Chicago really has lost it's spark. This city put up a 1,450 foot tower to the roof over 40 years ago. I'm not expecting a new tallest here but 850 feet is not a tall building in Chicago. If the design is amazing it'll be a nice addition sure, but this is the perfect location for a masterpiece.

Is the location that obvious for a masterpiece though? I was always skeptical how much it really is. It isn't that close to the Mag Mile or RN where much of the great shopping/dining is. You aren't that close to the cultural attraction of the Loop or your office if you are a professional. You aren't even getting the best views of the River corridor IMO which run from Michigan to Lake.

Yea, you get great lake views and are close to the lake front path but that isn't that unique. There are +10 miles of shoreline where one can claim that.
For those out on their boats on the lake or driving down LSD yea this is a prime spot but I can think of a handful of others I would think of as more attractive as a potential resident.


All times are GMT. The time now is 4:18 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.