CHICAGO | 400 N Lake Shore Drive | 851 FT & 765 FT | 73 & ? FLOORS

[iguy]

Originally Posted by iLeunamme

What a bittersweet moment. The Chicago Spire sparked my interest in Chicago developments. Seeing all this activity on the site after more than ten years; What a journey it has been...

I got into Chicago developments long after the Spire saga and without actually initially knowing about it at first; imagine my shock when I found out Chicago was supposed to have a 2,000 footer at one point.

A small part of me then continues to hold out hope for a [big] height bump on the second tower here. However, I suppose we need to worry about this first one formally starting lol.

[lakeshoredrive]

Originally Posted by iguy

I got into Chicago developments long after the Spire saga and without actually initially knowing about it at first; imagine my shock when I found out Chicago was supposed to have a 2,000 footer at one point.

A small part of me then continues to hold out hope for a [big] height bump on the second tower here. However, I suppose we need to worry about this first one formally starting lol.

I think Chicago was supposed to have three at this point. The Spire, the 7 S Dearborn building, and the Miglin Beitler building.

[MorganChi]

Fuck the nimby , move to Naperville if you don’t like skyscrapers

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by MorganChi

Fuck the nimby , move to Naperville if you don’t like skyscrapers

Not that I disagree with your general sentiment, but it seems to be coming outta nowhere.

The Chicago Spire, 7SD, and the MB Skyneedle were all done-in by economics. NIMBYs had nothing to do with any of them, as all 3 projects had been granted the necessary approvals, they just couldn't get financed, which will forever be the toughest nut to crack in Chicago for ridiculously tall proposals.

[Zapatan]

Originally Posted by iguy

A small part of me then continues to hold out hope for a [big] height bump on the second tower here. However, I suppose we need to worry about this first one formally starting lol.

Considering that neighboring Parcel I supposedly got a height cut I'm assuming that won't happen, although it will still be a nice cluster in the years to come.

The Lakeshore will potentially add:

850'+ 400LSD
800'+ Parcel I Tower
750'+ South Tower (LSD)
500'+ 195 Columbus

Tribune East? (Not really Lakeshore though and maybe not happening although someone will build something there at some point)

Then again maybe if interest rates go down enough over the next few years and there's some new found optimism surrounding the economy and development we may get some pleasant surprises.

An 850 footer in Chicago merits maybe one dancing banana. A supertall would merit many.

[Bonsai Tree]

There will be a serious shortage of apartment construction downtown in a few years, and with interest rates going down, I'm hopeful there will be more proposals and also movement on those projects. Chicago has tighter margins than a lot of other markets, but has huge demand downtown. It's really just a waiting game.

[nomarandlee]

Originally Posted by Bonsai Tree

There will be a serious shortage of apartment construction downtown in a few years, and with interest rates going down, I'm hopeful there will be more proposals and also movement on those projects. Chicago has tighter margins than a lot of other markets, but has huge demand downtown. It's really just a waiting game.

Far more likely...continued downtown office conversions to apartments and condos. The work-from-home movement will not reverse course anytime soon and will only strengthen. It is of existential importance that banks and building owners stay ahead of the curve.

To capitalize, I think the city needs to double down on making downtown as prime of a living environment as possible as much as a working one in the next five years. Given the number of potential conversions, I think the idea that there will be anything approaching a slew of new residential buildings is low, even if the downtown population continues to increase in residential growth.

[Klippenstein]

There has been a demand for new construction downtown for a long time and there will continue to be demand into the foreseeable future even if it's at a lower volume.

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by BrickellBased

I think the convention on this thread is usually caisson drilling.

So we're waiting for the below equipment to get on site to prep the bananas, and then once they are drilling we dance the bananas.

https://ipi.cityofchicago.org/Reporting/...NwPLLpm%2frhjqbxgNXEaCPUOLaZ3RpD7%2fw%3d

Pretty awesome they can build this tower with only (3) new caissons. All the rest will use the existing Chicago Spire caissons.

[Zapatan]

I'm surprised the existing caissons weren't worn down by weather and are still structurally safe. I guess they were covered / sealed or something.

Odd though they're using caissons designed for a 2k foot building for an 0.85k foot one.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by Zapatan

Odd though they're using caissons designed for a 2k foot building for an 0.85k foot one.

It would only be odd if they weren't trying to reuse them.

Those old spire caissons are already there in the ground, literally a sunk cost in this case (on some other entity's dime to boot!), and almost certainly more than adequate to support this 850' tower if they were originally intended to shoulder the load of something significantly taller/larger.

Why wouldn't they try to reuse them? It's free money! There ain't no better kind of money to a developer.

[BrickellBased]

I mean that's what caissons are supposed to do - sit in the ground for decades...

Originally Posted by Zapatan

I'm surprised the existing caissons weren't worn down by weather and are still structurally safe. I guess they were covered / sealed or something.

Odd though they're using caissons designed for a 2k foot building for an 0.85k foot one.

Yeah thanks for pointing out - I'm just realizing this. The foundation phase of this could be really brief because of that which means we could be into vertical construction very quickly.

Originally Posted by ardecila

Pretty awesome they can build this tower with only (3) new caissons. All the rest will use the existing Chicago Spire caissons.

[twister244]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

It would only be odd if they weren't trying to reuse them.

Those old spire caissons are already there in the ground, literally a sunk cost in this case (on some other entity's dime to boot!), and almost certainly more than adequate to support this 850' tower if they were originally intended to shoulder the load of something significantly taller/larger.

Why wouldn't they try to reuse them? It's free money! There ain't no better kind of money to a developer.

Zapatan brings up a really interesting point though.... How many other buildings of this height (or higher) fall into this unique category of construction? Caissons poured years ago.... Sat underneath a dynamic mid-latitude climate for years..... only to be uncovered and used for construction of a new skyscraper?

The more I think about it, the more it's actually pretty fascinating.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by twister244

... Sat underneath a dynamic mid-latitude climate for years.....

The frost depth in our area is only about 3.5' below grade.

Those old buried spire caissons are 100% fine.

Afterall, they were designed and built to last for centuries.

[Zapatan]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

It would only be odd if they weren't trying to reuse them.

Those old spire caissons are already there in the ground, literally a sunk cost in this case (on some other entity's dime to boot!), and almost certainly more than adequate to support this 850' tower if they were originally intended to shoulder the load of something significantly taller/larger.

Why wouldn't they try to reuse them? It's free money! There ain't no better kind of money to a developer.

I assumed it would be overkill to use such caissons for this building, as far as why they wouldn't, like I mentioned in my post if they have been exposed to the elements for years without proper maintenance they may not be structurally safe.

Of course I'm not the overseer of this site nor an expert on the matter, and I trust their judgement, but I was just wondering.

I guess they were capped. Or maybe caissons last forever lol.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by Zapatan

I assumed it would be overkill to use such caissons for this building.

Even better!

overkill is just negative spin for "increased safety factor".

Originally Posted by Zapatan

as far as why they wouldn't, like I mentioned in my post if they have been exposed to the elements for years without proper maintenance they may not be structurally safe.

They've been buried in the earth for the past 15 years. What's to maintain?

The caissons are almost certainly fine.

[NSW2492]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

Even better!

overkill is just negative spin for "increased safety factor".






They've been buried in the earth for the past 15 years. What's to maintain?

The caissons are almost certainly fine.

Even if they had issues with the rebar being thoroughly corroded to the point of failure, with how massive those caissons are, they could easily remove a couple feet of concrete and cut the rebar down past the corrosion and then it'd be like starting fresh with far more structural support than they could ever need.

I doubt that's even necessary because they buried them as you mentioned, I'm just saying even if it was necessary to rework the tops a bit, it would still be more structurally sound, and at a fraction of the cost of drilling and pouring an entirely new network of them.

[Kngkyle]

Originally Posted by BrickellBased

I mean that's what caissons are supposed to do - sit in the ground for decades...



Yeah thanks for pointing out - I'm just realizing this. The foundation phase of this could be really brief because of that which means we could be into vertical construction very quickly.

I think it'll actually be the opposite due to the underground parking garage. Someone mentioned here that the construction timeline doesn't have this thing going vertical until the end of 2024/early 2025, iirc.

[MorganChi]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

Not that I disagree with your general sentiment, but it seems to be coming outta nowhere.

The Chicago Spire, 7SD, and the MB Skyneedle were all done-in by economics. NIMBYs had nothing to do with any of them, as all 3 projects had been granted the necessary approvals, they just couldn't get financed, which will forever be the toughest nut to crack in Chicago for ridiculously tall proposals.

I was just thinking when this project was first shown to the public it was 1,000ft and now it’s 851. I really hope Chicago get a 2,000ft tower but it seems doubtful

[BrickellBased]

Oh I was not aware - thanks. Well I am will be thrilled when it breaks ground either way.

Originally Posted by Kngkyle

I think it'll actually be the opposite due to the underground parking garage. Someone mentioned here that the construction timeline doesn't have this thing going vertical until the end of 2024/early 2025, iirc.