CHICAGO | Waterview Tower | 1,047' Official / 1,035' Roof | 89 FLOORS |NEVER BUILT - Page 26

BVictor1 · #**501** Posted **Jun 28, 2007, 7:59 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by harryc

I was told that the reason for the odd angle on the crane is so that once it goes external it will be aligned with the exterior wall.

Yeah. The back wall of the tower after the setback will be angled. I'm just saying that after the setback on the 29th floor, the crane as far as I know will then rise along the outside of the structure.

SamInTheLoop · #**502** Posted **Jun 28, 2007, 9:37 PM**

Just out of curiosity, does anyone know why they have not installed a concrete pump from the core? I had expected they would for this project by now.....

Just walked by the site - painfully slow progress as usual. I think the Spire might give Waterview a run for its money as far as topping out first!

Adam186 · #**503** Posted **Jun 28, 2007, 11:05 PM**

When I was in the sales center, the lady told me that they a building it bucket by bucket. I don't know if they will ever get a pump. It could be logistics that is restricting using a pump.

LoyolaBeachView · #**504** Posted **Jun 28, 2007, 11:40 PM**

Double post

LoyolaBeachView · #**505** Posted **Jun 28, 2007, 11:40 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Adam186

It could be logistics that is restricting using a pump.

I would really love to believe that's the case. Believe me I would. But they are stalling until financing goes through; otherwise, they run out of money, construction stops, the press has a field day and sales take a hit.

If the foreign market is bullish for CS, Waterview should work with Shangri-La Hotels and launch a huge foreign sales campaign. The potential halo effect from a successful CS could land Waterview some deep pockets. Same goes for many luxury downtown projects.

Chitown · #**506** Posted **Jun 28, 2007, 11:52 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SamInTheLoop

Just out of curiosity, does anyone know why they have not installed a concrete pump from the core? I had expected they would for this project by now.....

Just walked by the site - painfully slow progress as usual. I think the Spire might give Waterview a run for its money as far as topping out first!

The race will be Waterview vs. the Freedom Tower.

SamInTheLoop · #**507** Posted **Jun 29, 2007, 3:44 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by LoyolaBeachView

I would really love to believe that's the case. Believe me I would. But they are stalling until financing goes through; otherwise, they run out of money, construction stops, the press has a field day and sales take a hit.

If the foreign market is bullish for CS, Waterview should work with Shangri-La Hotels and launch a huge foreign sales campaign. The potential halo effect from a successful CS could land Waterview some deep pockets. Same goes for many luxury downtown projects.

Oh Lord. If they are really building this whole thing bucket by bucket the race won't be CS vs. Waterview, nor Freedom Tower vs. Waterview - it will be Waterview vs. a manned mission to Mars.....

the urban politician · #**508** Posted **Jun 29, 2007, 5:49 AM**

So what are we saying? Is this project on the ropes or what?

Alliance · #**509** Posted **Jun 29, 2007, 5:58 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SamInTheLoop

Just out of curiosity, does anyone know why they have not installed a concrete pump from the core? I had expected they would for this project by now.....

Why install a pump when you can carry it up in buckets? The buildings being built fast enought as it is.

honte · #**510** Posted **Jun 29, 2007, 6:00 AM**

^ Pure speculation. But it is somewhat informed by observation and knowledge concerning the apparent lack of solid construction financing.

Alliance · #**511** Posted **Jun 29, 2007, 6:03 AM**

Your comment still kind of works.

Eventually...Chicago · #**512** Posted **Jun 29, 2007, 12:37 PM**

I can't believe that the slow construction is a method of stalling. You don't stall when you have construction crews on site working at pretty significant rates, you simply just pause construction. No GC in the world would tell their crews to work slower, it cuts into their profit, the more they keep people on site. If they are seriously dictating what methods they use by the sales of this project, then that seems to be the most ridiculous plan ever. It has to be much cheaper just to get the project built as quick as you can, try to sell the units once built, and shut down any part of the building that may be inactive. This was my argument as to why bc/bs was stupid in not building their entire building in one shot. The premium they are paying for a contractor to work with an existing structure must be incredible as would the additional contract amount to pay a contractor to work slow.

LoyolaBeachView · #**513** Posted **Jun 29, 2007, 12:53 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eventually...Chicago

I can't believe that the slow construction is a method of stalling. You don't stall when you have construction crews on site working at pretty significant rates, you simply just pause construction. No GC in the world would tell their crews to work slower, it cuts into their profit, the more they keep people on site. If they are seriously dictating what methods they use by the sales of this project, then that seems to be the most ridiculous plan ever. It has to be much cheaper just to get the project built as quick as you can, try to sell the units once built, and shut down any part of the building that may be inactive. This was my argument as to why bc/bs was stupid in not building their entire building in one shot. The premium they are paying for a contractor to work with an existing structure must be incredible as would the additional contract amount to pay a contractor to work slow.

Fine, then the truth is that they just can't afford the goddamn pump. Sorry, but this project pisses me off. I need something to renew my faith in it.

chi-arch · #**514** Posted **Jun 29, 2007, 2:29 PM**

They got my money. That should account for something.

....and someone needs a nap.

caltrane74 · #**515** Posted **Jun 29, 2007, 3:25 PM**

wow, very small floorplate.

Chicago Shawn · #**516** Posted **Jun 29, 2007, 3:25 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eventually...Chicago

This was my argument as to why bc/bs was stupid in not building their entire building in one shot. The premium they are paying for a contractor to work with an existing structure must be incredible as would the additional contract amount to pay a contractor to work slow.

Well yes, but when you put up the entire structure of a building you are paying higher taxes even if its not used. Building owners do not recieve a discount on asessed value if the space is vacant, especially when its brand new. So when you factor in 10 years of higher taxes, it is cheaper for a one time high payout to a contractor to finish the job.

honte · #**517** Posted **Jun 29, 2007, 5:50 PM**

^ Small technicality: The AV does increase, but you can file yearly for a vacancy and pay 20% of the normal tax bill on the portion of the space that is not occupied - if the county grants it. However, I agree with you overall that in the case of BC/BS, it would have been crazy to build all that space and let it sit. Not only the tax increase, but also don't forget that you would have to run the mechanical systems to a certain point just to keep the space from destroying itself.

But, in the case of Waterview, I think Eventually...Chicago makes a really good point. I always just think about the cost of renting that crane - it would be nuts to put it up simply as a way to bring good will. That's a small fortune in itself.

Working without a pump is rather odd, I agree. I am trying to see how this could possibly be more efficient, even with the small site. Obviously, once they move any higher, one will appear pretty soon.

The only thing that gives me pause about this project is that it always appears there are not too many people on-site. This might only be my imagination, though.

TowerGuy37 · #**518** Posted **Jun 29, 2007, 8:35 PM**

I think we all know by now something is going on here!!!!!! We all know its a a really small site but its been almost a year and half now and still they have not reached wacker drive! It does not take this long to make the progress they have made.

I still say you have extremely expensive condos for a location that still is pretty much untapped where no one lives yet. Given this market now they are really gonna have to rethink the STARTING price of $726,000 for a one bedroom on wacker and clark! I am not knocking this building as i want to see it built along with park michigan more than any other building in chicago! I just think the available pool of people to shuck out that kind of money for a condo is far and few between! They may have to lower those proices a bit to sell those units to hit 50% sale mark!

BVictor1 · #**519** Posted **Jun 29, 2007, 8:41 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by TowerGuy37

I think we all know by now something is going on here!!!!!! We all know its a a really small site but its been almost a year and half now and still they have not reached wacker drive! It does not take this long to make the progress they have made.

I still say you have extremely expensive condos for a location that still is pretty much untapped where no one lives yet. Given this market now they are really gonna have to rethink the STARTING price of $726,000 for a one bedroom on wacker and clark! I am not knocking this building as i want to see it built along with park michigan more than any other building in chicago! I just think the available pool of people to shuck out that kind of money for a condo is far and few between! They may have to lower those proices a bit to sell those units to hit 50% sale mark!

It's a shame people here have no faith.

They're at about 63% with the condo sales and I believe 35% with the hotel condo.

People need to stop being greedy. Things are progressing.

jrickw · #**520** Posted **Jun 29, 2007, 11:23 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by BVictor1

It's a shame people here have no faith.

They're at about 63% with the condo sales and I believe 35% with the hotel condo.

People need to stop being greedy. Things are progressing.

A friend of mine who also is a realtor in Chicago mentioned to me the other night that people don't want to live in the financial district, which is really one of the main problems that is holding sales volume down. The 63/35 statistic doesn't sound so bad, though. It seems odd that the hotel condos are only at 35, because one would think that the business district would actually appeal to corporate buyers and investors who might actually prefer to have a place in that area.