HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > Skyscraper & Highrise Construction


One Chicago Square in the SkyscraperPage Database

Building Data Page   • Comparison Diagram   • Chicago Skyscraper Diagram

Map Location
Chicago Projects & Construction Forum

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #281  
Old Posted Oct 30, 2017, 5:17 AM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is offline
TL;DR
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: the city o'wind
Posts: 15,674
Quote:
Originally Posted by bgsrand View Post
Is that the same type of retaining wall used at the Spire site?
Yes. The more relevant comparison here is Block 37, which was also a full-block excavation with several levels below grade, and is also adjacent to two subway lines.

I would actually expect to see a slurry wall at One Chicago Square, as this is cheaper than a secant pile wall.

Sheet piling is usually the cheapest way to retain an excavation in Chicago, but I'm not sure it is cost-effective to go this deep with sheet piling...
__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #282  
Old Posted Oct 30, 2017, 12:30 PM
k1052 k1052 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,125
IIRC JDL used a secant wall up the street for 9 Walton.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #283  
Old Posted Oct 30, 2017, 3:08 PM
bgsrand bgsrand is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Chicago
Posts: 192
Is everyone here an engineer besides me hahaha? Every time I think have a grasp of terms and technique I realize I know nothing.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #284  
Old Posted Oct 30, 2017, 3:33 PM
HomrQT's Avatar
HomrQT HomrQT is offline
All-American City Boy
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Hinsdale / Uptown, Chicago
Posts: 1,879
Quote:
Originally Posted by bgsrand View Post
Is everyone here an engineer besides me hahaha? Every time I think have a grasp of terms and technique I realize I know nothing.
I'm in the IT field. All of this is pure hobby for me. When these guys start talking about construction I am extremely fascinated and quite often very lost. But this is a good community to get answers if you are looking to learn something.
__________________
1. 111 W 57 - Manhattan, New York - SHoP Architects - Photo
2. The Smith Center - Las Vegas, Nevada - David M. Schwarz Architects - 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
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #285  
Old Posted Oct 30, 2017, 4:29 PM
bgsrand bgsrand is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Chicago
Posts: 192
Quote:
Originally Posted by HomrQT View Post
I'm in the IT field. All of this is pure hobby for me. When these guys start talking about construction I am extremely fascinated and quite often very lost. But this is a good community to get answers if you are looking to learn something.
Absolutely, everyone is tremendously helpful when it comes to my ignorant questions. Always fascinated.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #286  
Old Posted Oct 30, 2017, 4:45 PM
rgarri4's Avatar
rgarri4 rgarri4 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Chicago
Posts: 872
The busy setbacks are mostly on the West facing elevation. The East facing elevation is a bit cleaner.



__________________
Renderings, Animations, VR
Youtube
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #287  
Old Posted Oct 30, 2017, 5:58 PM
HomrQT's Avatar
HomrQT HomrQT is offline
All-American City Boy
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Hinsdale / Uptown, Chicago
Posts: 1,879
Quote:
Originally Posted by rgarri4 View Post
The busy setbacks are mostly on the West facing elevation. The East facing elevation is a bit cleaner.

I hope you don't mind, I added a few floors to the top just to see what it would look like.

I think they should definitely go taller, purely from a design aesthetic standpoint

__________________
1. 111 W 57 - Manhattan, New York - SHoP Architects - Photo
2. The Smith Center - Las Vegas, Nevada - David M. Schwarz Architects - 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
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #288  
Old Posted Oct 30, 2017, 6:39 PM
rgarri4's Avatar
rgarri4 rgarri4 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Chicago
Posts: 872
Agreed. Especially from that angle.
__________________
Renderings, Animations, VR
Youtube
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #289  
Old Posted Oct 30, 2017, 9:14 PM
BVictor1's Avatar
BVictor1 BVictor1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 9,972
Quote:
Originally Posted by HomrQT View Post
I hope you don't mind, I added a few floors to the top just to see what it would look like.

I think they should definitely go taller, purely from a design aesthetic standpoint

I would love to see additional height, and the way I'd truly justify it would be if the developers were willing to set their tower back from State Street an additional 15' to allow for a transformation to a grander green space over the mediocrity being proposed now.

Setting the tower back would eat into the square footage of the base. Compensate floor area and financially by adding 4 additional floors of penthouses for sale.

Make the tower 1,075'...
__________________
titanic1
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #290  
Old Posted Oct 30, 2017, 9:29 PM
Khantilever Khantilever is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Lincoln Square, Chicago
Posts: 314
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVictor1 View Post
I would love to see additional height, and the way I'd truly justify it would be if the developers were willing to set their tower back from State Street an additional 15' to allow for a transformation to a grander green space over the mediocrity being proposed now.

Setting the tower back would eat into the square footage of the base. Compensate floor area and financially by adding 4 additional floors of penthouses for sale.

Make the tower 1,075'...
Aw man, I really liked the original design but after seeing this edit the original just looks stubby. Can't be unseen.

The issue with cutting back on the base for more height is that it's not a trade of square footage of equal value. The base is for amenities like the grocery store, restaurant, etc, which increase the value of all of the units in the building. And if a few additional penthouses were worth constructing, then they would have already designed for that since height doesn't really seem to be an issue with the Alderman.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #291  
Old Posted Oct 30, 2017, 10:11 PM
rlw777 rlw777 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 1,761
As long as we're making it taller might as well continue the stepped theme like so.

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #292  
Old Posted Oct 30, 2017, 10:17 PM
gebs's Avatar
gebs gebs is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: South Loop
Posts: 716
Quote:
Originally Posted by rlw777 View Post
as long as we're making it taller might as well continue the stepped theme like so.

^^^ build that instead
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #293  
Old Posted Oct 30, 2017, 10:53 PM
HomrQT's Avatar
HomrQT HomrQT is offline
All-American City Boy
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Hinsdale / Uptown, Chicago
Posts: 1,879
Quote:
Originally Posted by rlw777 View Post
As long as we're making it taller might as well continue the stepped theme like so.

Excellent work.
__________________
1. 111 W 57 - Manhattan, New York - SHoP Architects - Photo
2. The Smith Center - Las Vegas, Nevada - David M. Schwarz Architects - 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
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #294  
Old Posted Oct 31, 2017, 3:33 AM
BVictor1's Avatar
BVictor1 BVictor1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 9,972
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stunnies23 View Post
Go to Aldermanhopkins.com/onechicagosquare

There you can voice your support for the project. I told him to approve as presented tonight, as quickly as possible.

Half of the comments were from NIMBYS concerned about parking, traffic, and views.
The other half were generally supportive of the project. We can win this battle for sure!

http://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/688fe2...fd73bc59c9.pdf
__________________
titanic1
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #295  
Old Posted Oct 31, 2017, 3:46 AM
HomrQT's Avatar
HomrQT HomrQT is offline
All-American City Boy
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Hinsdale / Uptown, Chicago
Posts: 1,879
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVictor1 View Post
Cool presentation. I like how they made their own little skyscraperpage style diagram.
__________________
1. 111 W 57 - Manhattan, New York - SHoP Architects - Photo
2. The Smith Center - Las Vegas, Nevada - David M. Schwarz Architects - 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
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #296  
Old Posted Oct 31, 2017, 5:19 AM
VKChaz VKChaz is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: California
Posts: 517
Appear to be resident windows on the property line over the one-story restaurant that will remain. Is that expected? Does the new development own air rights or how would that work?

Quote:
Originally Posted by IrishIllini View Post
There's no square tough
Or any public space for that matter.
McCormick Square doesn't have much of a square either. That seems to be a thing now - squareless squares.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #297  
Old Posted Nov 1, 2017, 10:23 AM
10023's Avatar
10023 10023 is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: London
Posts: 21,081
Quote:
Originally Posted by IrishIllini View Post
There's no square tough
Or any public space for that matter.
It's too bad that stupid little restaurant wouldn't sell. They could push the main tower back to the west side of the block, and actually build a square in the corner facing Holy Name Cathedral. Would be a dramatic space with the church on one side and a huge tower on the other.


Now the real question... when this is U/C, will it go in the Supertall forum or the Highrise forum at 998ft?
__________________
There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there always has been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge." - Isaac Asimov
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #298  
Old Posted Nov 1, 2017, 6:58 PM
Kumdogmillionaire's Avatar
Kumdogmillionaire Kumdogmillionaire is offline
Development Shill
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 1,130
It's a supertall.... so supertall, there's no "real question". That being said the other tower will be in the highrise thread obviously
__________________
For you - Bane
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #299  
Old Posted Nov 1, 2017, 7:10 PM
HomrQT's Avatar
HomrQT HomrQT is offline
All-American City Boy
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Hinsdale / Uptown, Chicago
Posts: 1,879
Quote:
Originally Posted by 10023 View Post
Now the real question... when this is U/C, will it go in the Supertall forum or the Highrise forum at 998ft?

For buildings above a height of 300 m (984 ft), the term "supertall" can be used, while skyscrapers reaching beyond 600 m (1,969 ft) are classified as "megatall".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skyscraper
__________________
1. 111 W 57 - Manhattan, New York - SHoP Architects - Photo
2. The Smith Center - Las Vegas, Nevada - David M. Schwarz Architects - 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
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #300  
Old Posted Nov 1, 2017, 7:18 PM
Investing In Chicago Investing In Chicago is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 1,212
Quote:
Originally Posted by 10023 View Post

Now the real question... when this is U/C, will it go in the Supertall forum or the Highrise forum at 998ft?
Isn't the generally accepted term (at least on this site) for supertall 300M? This building is above that threshold.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

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

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > Skyscraper & Highrise Construction
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:54 PM.

     

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