CHICAGO | BMO Tower | 727 FT | 50 FLOORS - Page 41

HomrQT · #**801** Posted **Jan 2, 2020, 3:41 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Koodoo25

I would have added the drawing earlier but it wasn't actually added to the database until this week.

The Chicago diagram/database is kind of a mess at the moment. A lot of buildings are listed as U/C when they've been completed, Proposed when they're well above ground, etc. Not only that, but lots and lots of heights are incorrect as well. The height of a building can be revised so many times during planning and construction and the diagrams section can't always keep up with it.

Every once in a while I try to request corrections and new buildings, but the sheer amount of requests that would need to be sent in to fix everything is rather daunting.

No worries. The effort you've done on the huge amount of models you've put into that database is incredible. I'm a huge fan of your work.

rivernorthlurker · #**802** Posted **Jan 2, 2020, 3:47 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Koodoo25

I would have added the drawing earlier but it wasn't actually added to the database until this week.

The Chicago diagram/database is kind of a mess at the moment. A lot of buildings are listed as U/C when they've been completed, Proposed when they're well above ground, etc. Not only that, but lots and lots of heights are incorrect as well. The height of a building can be revised so many times during planning and construction and the diagrams section can't always keep up with it.

Every once in a while I try to request corrections and new buildings, but the sheer amount of requests that would need to be sent in to fix everything is rather daunting.

Great to hear from you Koodoo

What is the process (if any) for updating the building statuses/heights? Seems like whoever's 'in charge' doesn't have any time for it these days.

Also - do you have any idea what causes the 'default' diagram for a building to be displayed? Seems like right now it's just the most recent upload basically.

Skyguy_7 · #**803** Posted **Jan 2, 2020, 1:56 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chisouthside

Your enthusiasm is appreciated, 'Southside.

I know everyone was busy with the holidays; but too busy to allow more than a single banana post to celebrate the official start of a 50-floor, 727ft, full-block office tower? How spoiled have we become??? This is a once-in-a-generation boom! Cmon guys.

What a time to be alive!

HomrQT · #**804** Posted **Jan 2, 2020, 2:34 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skyguy_7

This is a once-in-a-generation boom!

Don't say that! Don't jinx us like that! We're going to do another run like this in 2024!!!

Koodoo25 · #**805** Posted **Jan 2, 2020, 2:54 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by rivernorthlurker

Great to hear from you Koodoo

What is the process (if any) for updating the building statuses/heights? Seems like whoever's 'in charge' doesn't have any time for it these days.

Also - do you have any idea what causes the 'default' diagram for a building to be displayed? Seems like right now it's just the most recent upload basically.

I don't keep super close track of all the changes so I can't say for certain... but I think sometimes the editors make additions and corrections themselves, although usually it's done by request. There are hundreds, if not thousands, of buildings that are proposed and built every year, so I can't blame the people in charge if they can't keep up with it. Sometimes I do wish it was possible to submit new buildings/changes through a more structured, streamlined form similar to how you submit new drawings, because the current system is definitely slow and tedious.

Sometimes buildings are added early on in the planning stage. Other times, they'd prefer to wait for the details to get settled out, permits approved, etc before adding the building to the diagram. I think it depends on the editor and the building. The line between "vision" and "proposal" can be blurry sometimes, which can make the admins hesitant to add new projects right away.

As for which drawing gets to be the default: the editors pick which drawing they want to be the primary diagram. How they decide which drawing is best is up to them.

aaron38 · #**806** Posted **Jan 2, 2020, 6:50 PM**

I'm excited for this one. It'll be a year from now but I'll have great sightlines on this one from Oak Brook. Just 311 in the background, so it'll stand out nicely.

AMWChicago · #**807** Posted **Jan 3, 2020, 12:08 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by chris08876

Site from above. This parcel is massive on a side note.

Credit: Chicago Cityscape

Exactly! This image gives you the shear scale of this project. Unfortunately the height puts this on the media backburner, but I feel like the potential of this tower is immense. This corner of the West Loop has always felt like the misfit of the CBD. Sears was an attempt to give the West side of the Loop and elite and impactful status. BMO may prove to anchor Union Station and this portion of the West Loop and drive future development. Very exciting!!!

SolarWind · #**808** Posted **Jan 3, 2020, 2:31 AM**

January 2, 2020

pianowizard · #**809** Posted **Jan 3, 2020, 8:48 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by AMWChicago

BMO may prove to anchor Union Station and this portion of the West Loop and drive future development. Very exciting!!!

Yes, I just realized that BMO will be the tallest building this far west of Sears, since the slightly taller River Point and 150 North Riverside are both a block east of BMO. Chicago's skyscraper zone is slowly expanding westward! It would be wonderful if 725 W Randolph gets built.

rivernorthlurker · #**810** Posted **Jan 4, 2020, 12:35 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Koodoo25

I don't keep super close track of all the changes so I can't say for certain... but I think sometimes the editors make additions and corrections themselves, although usually it's done by request. There are hundreds, if not thousands, of buildings that are proposed and built every year, so I can't blame the people in charge if they can't keep up with it. Sometimes I do wish it was possible to submit new buildings/changes through a more structured, streamlined form similar to how you submit new drawings, because the current system is definitely slow and tedious.

Sometimes buildings are added early on in the planning stage. Other times, they'd prefer to wait for the details to get settled out, permits approved, etc before adding the building to the diagram. I think it depends on the editor and the building. The line between "vision" and "proposal" can be blurry sometimes, which can make the admins hesitant to add new projects right away.

As for which drawing gets to be the default: the editors pick which drawing they want to be the primary diagram. How they decide which drawing is best is up to them.

I see - thank you for some insight into the process. Maybe I will submit some correction requests and see if we can't get things a little more current.

harryc · #**811** Posted **Jan 5, 2020, 1:36 PM**

Jan 2

kolchak · #**812** Posted **Jan 5, 2020, 2:15 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by rivernorthlurker

I see - thank you for some insight into the process. Maybe I will submit some correction requests and see if we can't get things a little more current.

Thanks as well. I would really love to see the diagram page updated to include this as UC but also to remove several buildings (465 North Park, One South Halsted for example) from 'UC' to 'completed.'

Between this and the Old Post Office I am also looking forward to seeing some new restaurants and bars open along the Canal Street corridor.

TheKeenEye · #**813** Posted **Jan 8, 2020, 8:26 PM**

I am back for weekly update. Here are some pix from my lunch stroll. Very active site with lots of movement.

Cheers,
Franusch

SteelMonkey · #**814** Posted **Jan 9, 2020, 3:28 AM**

^ Thanks for posting

SolarWind · #**815** Posted **Jan 14, 2020, 2:31 AM**

January 13, 2020

akbussey · #**816** Posted **Jan 20, 2020, 8:07 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skyguy_7

Your enthusiasm is appreciated, 'Southside.

I know everyone was busy with the holidays; but too busy to allow more than a single banana post to celebrate the official start of a 50-floor, 727ft, full-block office tower? How spoiled have we become??? This is a once-in-a-generation boom! Cmon guys.

What a time to be alive!

Is it really a full block with the transit center space being what it is?

Randomguy34 · #**817** Posted **Jan 20, 2020, 9:59 PM**

^ Also the park takes up half the site, so including the transit center this tower a little more than a quarter of the block. Still a great tower, but not as imposing as it could be

KWillChicago · #**818** Posted **Jan 20, 2020, 11:51 PM**

^yeah I love the green space being added to the area but if the tower took up the whole block aside from the transit hub it would be massive.

Skyguy_7 · #**819** Posted **Jan 20, 2020, 11:57 PM**

Ooook good job fact-checking, guys. Obviously it’s not a full block. The photos show that. Feels like a full-block construction site to me.

akbussey · #**820** Posted **Jan 22, 2020, 9:13 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by KWillChicago

^yeah I love the green space being added to the area but if the tower took up the whole block aside from the transit hub it would be massive.

Like a modern day AON