SkyscraperPage Forum

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)

Notyrview Oct 26, 2018 3:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zapatan (Post 8358674)
That's a slight bump back in the right direction :shrug:


Hopefully the height cuts of WPS and OCS will be made up for by other upcoming projects. It's crazy to me those developers didn't take advantage of all the space, anyone know why exactly?

Bc post-industrial capitalism is only about short-term gains. Rather than play the long game and maximise the site's profit potential, it's much easier to make a quick return with a mediocre development and then start another project. The market is a win/win when it incorporates a certain degree of ethical/social responsibility, but that has slowly eroded over the last 40-50 years. As a result our political economy is far more fragile than it used to be and myopically dedicated to immediate gratification/profits. It's sort of like the individual's choice to look at cute internet cats all day rather than read a book. We all know the latter would be more rewarding over time, but it doesn't feel that way because the immediate reward of cuteness is so addictive and omnipresent.

Handro Oct 26, 2018 4:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steely Dan (Post 8358672)
ohhhhh, actual numbers!

your source?

I work for a contractor bidding on the project. Those are the most recent numbers.

Steely Dan Oct 26, 2018 4:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Handro (Post 8358756)
I work for a contractor bidding on the project. Those are the most recent numbers.

^ thanks for letting us know! :tup:

and please keep us updated if you come across revised figures in the future.

Zapatan Oct 26, 2018 4:51 PM

This is mildly good news because that extra 44 feet is just enough to make it stand out a bit amongst the other buildings in the area.

Steely Dan Oct 26, 2018 5:26 PM

also, at 844' tall, it'll still be "officially" taller than indy's salesforce tower (811'), so those all-important bragging rights will remain intact ;)

Notyrview Oct 26, 2018 5:32 PM

The bar is LOW

Vlajos Oct 26, 2018 5:45 PM

I don't care as much about the building height, but more about its occupants. Any word on Saleforce and the potential of 1,000s of jobs here?

Zapatan Oct 26, 2018 7:43 PM

I'm curious how different the design looks. If it's shorter maybe it's fatter as well?

left of center Oct 26, 2018 9:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steely Dan (Post 8358529)
^ it's not really "rumored" at this point. some exec at hines was directly quoted in a recent article that the tower was now planned to be around 800' tall.

Damn. While I'm not typically a stickler for numbers (well... i *try* not to be at least, hah), I feel that Wolf Point is just too prominent a location for not putting up a taller building. It will be perpetually be prominent and visible from many, many angles along the river, and as such the location almost demands a breathtaking height. "Make no small plans" and such.

IMHO.

left of center Oct 26, 2018 9:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Notyrview (Post 8358580)
Not a criticism at all - but i don't know how you missed this - must have been on vacay? This is the one height reduction that really stings mostly bc the developer is bailing on their promises, as if this were any lot on any random city block. They were all like Wolf Point will be a marquee development for a marquee location, we're in this for the long haul, blah blah blah.

This one is on me. Been pretty busy since about mid September, and my visitation to this board has been spotty at best as of late, lol. My schedule is thankfully beginning to clear up though, so I should be able to resume my near daily spamming :cool:

Notyrview Oct 26, 2018 10:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by left of center (Post 8359194)
This one is on me. Been pretty busy since about mid September, and my visitation to this board has been spotty at best as of late, lol. My schedule is thankfully beginning to clear up though, so I should be able to resume my near daily spamming :cool:

Well, mazel tov on a lighter load. I'm sorry you got this news-turd delivered to you in any event.

left of center Oct 27, 2018 5:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Notyrview (Post 8359299)
Well, mazel tov on a lighter load. I'm sorry you got this news-turd delivered to you in any event.

Yeah, its a bit of a bummer, but we still got a hell of a lot to be excited about so I wont let it get me down :tup:

Notyrview Oct 27, 2018 7:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by left of center (Post 8359593)
Yeah, its a bit of a bummer, but we still got a hell of a lot to be excited about so I wont let it get me down :tup:

Lol werk power of positive thinking

Zapatan Oct 27, 2018 8:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IronWright (Post 8359911)
There's nothing to be excited about in the super-tall realm. It looks like Wanda is it for the foreseeable future and that took over a decade.

I fear this but stay cautiously optimistic. Vista alone is pretty awesome.

Quote:

400 N. LSD is now under threat from Reilly and his demands etc. I'm sure a height reduction will also be in order after a closer look at the market yada, yada, yada.....
Related simply stated they would redesign the buildings. It could end in a height cut but could also end in a combination of the towers or height increase. No one knows but I don't think it's the end of the project at all.


Quote:

Tribune Tower addition is still minimally 5 years out so who knows on that front.
I read they were submitting plans for approval last month and try to start construction next year provided financing is secured. Not sure of the status though or really the legitimacy of Golub & Co who are behind it.


I'm not really that upset about the height cuts at WPS and OCS since they will still be great/tall buildings.

The LSE tower across the highway from the spire site has also risen to about 1000 I believe.

Quote:

I want Chicago to be in league with NY and Asia which it once was as far as height and architectural prominence.
NY is a much bigger/denser city, obviously it'll be tough for Chicago to compete. Same with Chinese cities, they have like 30 million people a piece and construction is cheap. Not to say Chicago can't do well on a world scale but just pointing that out.

marothisu Oct 27, 2018 9:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zapatan (Post 8359923)
NY is a much bigger/denser city, obviously it'll be tough for Chicago to compete. Same with Chinese cities, they have like 30 million people a piece and construction is cheap. Not to say Chicago can't do well on a world scale but just pointing that out.

Up until a few years ago, Chicago and NYC were kind of in the same league. NYC has gone a little crazy in the last few years so it's pulled ahead of most places.

Chicago is a large city for US standards, but if it were in China, it would be around the 40th largest city (Los Angeles would be something like 25th largest). I've been to 6 cities in China - Shanghai, Hong Kong, Beijing, Shenyang, Hangzhou, and Chengdu. 5 of these 6 cities have a higher city proper population than NYC. The only one that doesn't is Shenyang, but it only has a few hundred thousand people less than NYC. The average American has probably never heard of Chengdu, Hangzhou, or Shenyang. There's many other cities like this that are much bigger than the city proper population of NYC - Chongqing, Tianjin, Shenzhen, Harbin, Guangzhou. It's not really a surprise.

China's population has increased by over 200 million people since 1990. Things happen fast and high rises have been the best way. Not that every skyscraper in China is cheap, but many are and put up very quickly and it's for reasons like this. I'm sure if the US added 200 million people over the next ~20 years, you'd see way more skyscrapers go up in cities.

Zapatan Oct 27, 2018 9:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by marothisu (Post 8359966)
Up until a few years ago, Chicago and NYC were kind of in the same league. NYC has gone a little crazy in the last few years so it's pulled ahead of most places.

Chicago is a large city for US standards, but if it were in China, it would be around the 40th largest city (Los Angeles would be something like 25th largest). I've been to 6 cities in China - Shanghai, Hong Kong, Beijing, Shenyang, Hangzhou, and Chengdu. 5 of these 6 cities have a higher city proper population than NYC. The only one that doesn't is Shenyang, but it only has a few hundred thousand people less than NYC. The average American has probably never heard of Chengdu, Hangzhou, or Shenyang. There's many other cities like this that are much bigger than the city proper population of NYC - Chongqing, Tianjin, Shenzhen, Harbin, Guangzhou. It's not really a surprise.

China's population has increased by over 200 million people since 1990. Things happen fast and high rises have been the best way. Not that every skyscraper in China is cheap, but many are and put up very quickly and it's for reasons like this. I'm sure if the US added 200 million people over the next ~20 years, you'd see way more skyscrapers go up in cities.


Right, although US city populations are misleading considering we leave out the metro (which is how everyone else measures cities). The US is a nation of suburbs and sprawl.

Donnie77 Oct 27, 2018 9:18 PM

People continue to amaze me in thinking the U.S. can compete with other countries that use slave labor to build their cities! How many of these Chicago projects do you guys think were actually going to leave the drawing desk 5 years ago? And yet we now bitch about the upcoming projects and their reduced height and what not.

Ungrateful A$$holes, and if this offends you then you are who im talking to._.

BonoboZill4 Oct 27, 2018 9:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IronWright (Post 8359911)
There's nothing to be excited about in the super-tall realm. It looks like Wanda is it for the foreseeable future and that took over a decade. With One Chicago Square being knocked back to 977' I'm sure that area won't see another building even approaching 1,000' in the next 20-30 years. WPS at 844' was the last/best spot on the river for a super-tall and now that won't ever happen. 400 N. LSD is now under threat from Reilly and his demands etc. I'm sure a height reduction will also be in order after a closer look at the market yada, yada, yada.....Tribune Tower addition is still minimally 5 years out so who knows on that front. There seems to be an extreme lack of ambition to push the limits in Chicago and visionaries have all but abandoned the city. I don't buy into the rationalizations and justifications that others do about height doesn't matter and comparatively these buildings are still tall in relation to anything outside of NY or Asia. I want Chicago to be in league with NY and Asia which it once was as far as height and architectural prominence. Now your average building going up is some banal high rise that just sort of fits in rather than reshapes it surroundings.

This comment is quite melodramatic and prophetic :haha:

You do realize that 20 to 30 years ago we didn't even have much of Streeterville, LSE, the South Loop, West Loop, or River North built at all? The city has expanded rapidly, and we've had several supertalls(Pru2, 311 S Wacker(close), Franklin Center, Trump, Vista, and maybe a couple more soon). Step away from the ledge my friend. The end is not neigh

Others have already made quite salient points about how relative to our size we have already done an amazing job anyway, and our impact on the global level is not contingent on building more supertalls. Chicago is a top 10 city in terms of economic impact, and that isn't going to change anytime soon(unless we get Amazon, in which case maybe we get even higher ;) )

marothisu Oct 27, 2018 9:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zapatan (Post 8359974)
Right, although US city populations are misleading considering we leave out the metro (which is how everyone else measures cities). The US is a nation of suburbs and sprawl.

This varies by country, but yes in this case maybe a little misleading. Still - China is a bit ridiculous. The skyscraper building makes sense really. Some of the metro areas like Houston, Dallas, etc in the US have grown a bit, but they still aren't building masses of new high rises (though at least they have built more).

1. Guangzhou, China: 44.3 million people
2. Shanghai, China: 37 million
3. Chongqing, China: 25.165 million
4. Beijing, China: 22.5 million
5. New York City, US: 20.3 million
6. Wuhan, China: 19.78 million
7. Chengdu, China: 18 million
8. Tianjin, China: 16 million
9. Xi'an, China: 13.6 million
10. Los Angeles, US: 13.3 million
11. Jinan, China: 13 million
12. Nanjing, China: 12.65 million
13. Shenyang, China: 12.2 million
14. Harbin, China: 12 million
15. Shantou, China: 11.6 million
16. Chicago, US: 9.5 million
17. Wenzhou, China: 9.1 million
18. Qingdao, China: 9 million
19. Quanzhou, China: 8.1 million
20. Dallas, US: 7.4 million
21. Changsha, China: 7.3 million
22. Houston, US: 6.9 million
23. Washington DC, US: 6.2 million
24. Miami, US: 6.16 million
25. Philadelphia, US: 6.1 million
26. Atlanta, US: 5.9 million
27T. Boston, US: 4.8 million

27T. Zhengzhou, China: 4.8 million
29T. Phoenix, US: 4.7 million
29T. San Francisco, US: 4.7 million



etc

bnk Oct 27, 2018 10:27 PM

I like the cut of your jib IronWright


Welcome to the fourum and I look forward to you’d posts I the future.


All times are GMT. The time now is 9:32 AM.

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