CHICAGO | One Chicago | 971 FT & 574 FT | 78 & 49 FLOORS - Page 60

Bombardier · #**1181** Posted **Mar 14, 2019, 6:43 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by OhioGuy

How long do we estimate it will take before this tower begins rising above ground? How long for all of the base/ground work before we can see it above the fencing?.

There is a significant amount of deep foundation and excavation that will happen this year prior to getting anything above ground. November of this year would be a good target to start seeing work above grade.

the urban politician · #**1182** Posted **Mar 14, 2019, 6:46 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bombardier

significant amount of deep foundation and excavation

Love

Every

Minute

HomrQT · #**1183** Posted **Mar 14, 2019, 10:33 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by the urban politician

Right now the 3 contenders for 'worst parking lot in Chicago' are..........

(drumroll)

In no particular order:

1. The former Chicago Mercantile Exchange lot -- those bastards!
2. The Rock n Roll McDonald's parking lot -- how I hate thee!
3. The North Bridge mall/Macerich parking lot -- build something, damn it!

I'd like to see the parking lot at State between Balbo and Harrison get built out. Put a giant building there and attach an elevated green/orange line station to it.

donnie · #**1184** Posted **Mar 15, 2019, 3:13 AM**

Is the 1000 footer back on?

https://www.chicagoarchitecture.org/2019...o-start-across-from-holy-name-cathedral/

BonoboZill4 · #**1185** Posted **Mar 15, 2019, 3:49 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by donnie

Is the 1000 footer back on?

https://www.chicagoarchitecture.org/2019...o-start-across-from-holy-name-cathedral/

I hope, but unlikely. "Editor" is notorious for using months, and even at times, years old data when making his articles.

skysoar · #**1186** Posted **Mar 15, 2019, 2:06 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by BonoboZill4

I hope, but unlikely. "Editor" is notorious for using months, and even at times, years old data when making his articles.

According to the article, it states for those who are height watchers, the most recent filing has the tallest building at 1011 ft, and the second tower at 654 ft. So for me I will consider these numbers official until I see something more factual for OCS. The best thing is that the financing is in place and OCS is getting ready to begin

LouisVanDerWright · #**1187** Posted **Mar 15, 2019, 2:47 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by skysoar

According to the article, it states for those who are height watchers, the most recent filing has the tallest building at 1011 ft, and the second tower at 654 ft. So for me I will consider these numbers official until I see something more factual for OCS. The best thing is that the financing is in place and OCS is getting ready to begin

That's not official just because that blog is reporting it. We have people reporting here that the height is lower because they've seen the actual construction drawings. It's VERY unlikely that a developer would circulate construction drawings for a 969' tower and then decide to build the 1011' version anyhow. Why? Because you are now reinflating the construction costs and mucking up all the loan underwriting etc you already got approved.

The second point to keep in mind here is that the city approves a PD (Planned Development) that allows UP TO a certain height. In this case that height is 1011'. Numb nuts over at Chicagoarchitecture.org is likely reading the PD document without realizing that's not actually reflecting the final height of the building. A recent example of this is Vista which is allowed to go up to 1,200' as per it's PD, but will only top out at 1,191'.

So go ahead, consider whatever you want to be the final number, just know that you are wrong and this building will not be 1,011'. The nerds here at SSP are THE definitive source on Chicago skyscrapers and almost never wrong. We are everywhere, we see everything, we are legion!

Lol

Steely Dan · #**1188** Posted **Mar 15, 2019, 3:33 PM**

^ thank you for saving me from typing out a similar rebuke.

bombardier has seen recent bid docs and reported the actual height figures here.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bombardier

969'-2" per GP ASK 2019-01-24_01. The smaller tower is now 578'-2" and 49 floors per HPA ASK 5. Both of these were issued for facade buyout so should be very close to final.

we will be sticking with those figures unless better info becomes available.

an article from chicagoarchitecture.org is not "better info".

BonoboZill4 · #**1189** Posted **Mar 15, 2019, 10:53 PM**

^ Thanks for confirming my suspicious, gang. Can't trust that blog lol

BVictor1 · #**1190** Posted **Mar 15, 2019, 11:00 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by BonoboZill4

^ Thanks for confirming my suspicious, gang. Can't trust that blog lol

Of course you can't.. The dude wanted to argue with me that Streeterville's boundary was Grand Ave.

rgarri4 · #**1191** Posted **Mar 15, 2019, 11:16 PM**

I did some exploring in my 3d model of Chicago in VR mode. A majority of the walkthrough is around OSC. I wish you could tell just how massive it felt in VR. I'm so excited to watch this rise.

• Video Link

BonoboZill4 · #**1192** Posted **Mar 16, 2019, 1:27 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by BVictor1

Of course you can't.. The fucker wanted to argue with me that Streeterville's boundary was Grand Ave.

That's primordial ooze tier IQ... what the heck?

HomrQT · #**1193** Posted **Mar 16, 2019, 2:01 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by rgarri4

I did some exploring in my 3d model of Chicago in VR mode. A majority of the walkthrough is around OSC. I wish you could tell just how massive it felt in VR. I'm so excited to watch this rise.

• Video Link

Excellent work! Bravo!

the urban politician · #**1194** Posted **Mar 18, 2019, 3:16 PM**

I'm posting here for no other reason than just being like a starry eyed teenager in love.

I LOVE that this project is happening.

Sorry for the bump.

chicubs111 · #**1195** Posted **Mar 18, 2019, 3:29 PM**

I think this looks like a newer image..slights changes if you look closely in the setbacks...

The Pimp · #**1196** Posted **Mar 18, 2019, 3:31 PM**

This project is a game changer. Because of it's location.

The North One · #**1197** Posted **Mar 18, 2019, 3:46 PM**

They definitely changed the setbacks, looks less bottom heavy and the top is different.

The Lurker · #**1198** Posted **Mar 18, 2019, 3:52 PM**

Somebody someplace else said this project was grossly out of scale for the area. I reminded him of its proximity to Hancock and pointed out how hilariously out of scale that diner on the corner will be.

the urban politician · #**1199** Posted **Mar 18, 2019, 4:04 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Lurker

Somebody someplace else said this project was grossly out of scale for the area. I reminded him of its proximity to Hancock and pointed out how hilariously out of scale that diner on the corner will be.

Yeah but I can't really imagine another use for that diner. I'm actually glad it's staying.

However, if somebody wanted to I guess they could tear it down and replace with with a 4 story walk up style building. Would that make any financial sense, though?

pianowizard · #**1200** Posted **Mar 18, 2019, 5:24 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Pimp

This project is a game changer. Because of it's location.

Yes indeed. Below is again the photo that BVictor1 posted on Jan 18, 2018, showing that this building fills a "hole" quite nicely: