CHICAGO | Waldorf=Astoria | 1,265' Official / 1,200' Roof | 107 FLOORS | NEVER BUILT - Page 43

BVictor1 · #**841** Posted **Dec 21, 2007, 9:13 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

i know shawn got some shots of the model. though don't too excited, it wasn't a finished model or anything, just a white board massing model depicting W=A, 319 illinois, and the existing surrounding structures.

As did I...

honte · #**842** Posted **Dec 21, 2007, 10:02 PM**

^ Cool BVictor. Thanks.

If the model is scaled to 1265', the next-door apartment tower looks a lot taller than 600'... Maybe this is the same trick Carley used at Fordham Spire, scaling his own product down a bit to make it "fit in" better?

Steely Dan · #**843** Posted **Dec 21, 2007, 10:08 PM**

when we were looking at the model, shawn said W=A was under-scaled by about 100' or so.

Northwest · #**844** Posted **Dec 23, 2007, 5:00 PM**

I dont understand how the scale could be so far off in these models, given the almost exclusive use of computers and CAD.

Unless of course, they ARE intentionally trying to manipulate people, as was just suggested. I dont know how that shady technique could be in their best interest though, I mean in high profile public cases, these "little white lies" usually blow up into a fiasco and come back to bite the liar. I could easily see a scenario when mis-representing the size of these towers to some potentially VERY pissed-off citizen's groups (ninbys) or politicians could backfire big time.
Is this just the way it works? Or is this a tempest in a teacup? Perhaps this was just a crude mock up, never intended to convince people one way or the other?

Dr. Taco · #**845** Posted **Dec 23, 2007, 5:07 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Northwest

I dont understand how the scale could be so far off in these models, given the almost exclusive use of computers and CAD.

Unless of course, they ARE intentionally trying to manipulate people, as was just suggested. I dont know how that shady technique could be in their best interest though, I mean in high profile public cases, these "little white lies" usually blow up into a fiasco and come back to bite the liar. I could easily see a scenario when mis-representing the size of these towers to some potentially VERY pissed-off citizen's groups (ninbys) or politicians could backfire big time.
Is this just the way it works? Or is this a tempest in a teacup? Perhaps this was just a crude mock up, never intended to convince people one way or the other?

nimbys are sheeple. if their first impression of the building is better than it would have been had the building been a hundred feet taller, then their ignorance is our bliss. They're not gonna do detective work and then have a public outcry when they find out the model they saw was 8% off

honte · #**846** Posted **Dec 23, 2007, 6:34 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Northwest

Is this just the way it works? Or is this a tempest in a teacup? Perhaps this was just a crude mock up, never intended to convince people one way or the other?

Yes, to a good extent for all of your questions. All renders and models are "artist's impressions," and they do get played with a lot. For example, if there are elements of the building that make it look too busy or too complicated on the page, most architects will just leave them off. If there is a bush or tree in the way, well, leave it out. Etc.

Models change scales sometimes to emphasize things. I don't necessarily approve of the "shrunken supertall" concept, since it seems less about convenience / practicality of representation and closer to intentionally misrepresenting a key issue of a project, but it is not outside the realm of feasibility. The only reason I would suggest it is just because we saw the same phenomenon with Fordham Spire and Chicago Spire.

The architects may argue, and I think there is some validity in this, that when you are on the street, the perception will be that the building is about this size. Since this is a model for the neighborhood's benefit, it might be reasonable.

It may also have been a simple matter of someone getting the relative scales a little off, or even just what size of material would fit on the prototyper or whatever kind of equipment they are using to fabricate the pieces.

aaron38 · #**847** Posted **Dec 24, 2007, 1:21 AM**

For those who saw the model in person, did they close off New St, or cover it? Because it looks like that grassy "quad" area between the towers goes all the way east to those existing condos.

Or is the street still there?

denizen467 · #**848** Posted **Dec 24, 2007, 1:38 AM**

^ Good question. When 440 and 480 N. McClurg were built with the stairs going up from McClurg in between them, I feel like that raised plaza was supposed to continue westwards to Columbus (as a part of the 1980s SOM plan I guess). If that's correct, then this would be following through on that plan.

BVictor1 · #**849** Posted **Dec 24, 2007, 3:25 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by aaron38

For those who saw the model in person, did they close off New St, or cover it? Because it looks like that grassy "quad" area between the towers goes all the way east to those existing condos.

Or is the street still there?

The street is still there. Althoughthedecking over sounds like a really good idea. not only would it hide the blank walls of 440 and 480 N. McClurg landscaping above the "decking" would add a nice element and it could connect to the public space atop the McClurg Ct. rental towers lobby entrance.

a chicago bearcat · #**850** Posted **Dec 24, 2007, 8:35 AM**

the model might've been commisioned before it's height was increased

and regardless of if it was done on purpose or not, it's only a good thing for such a beautiful, yet dense project to get presented as less intrusive than it will be to the neighboring Streeterville newcomers, who are just as responsible for the increasing density and "traffic" as a new Plano or Yorkville resident is responsible for the loss of the "small town" feel

aaron38 · #**851** Posted **Dec 24, 2007, 5:41 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by BVictor1

landscaping above the "decking" would add a nice element and it could connect to the public space atop the McClurg Ct. rental towers lobby entrance.

I agree, that connection would be great, even if it's just a small pedestrian bridge over New St. so that you could walk from the Slip to Columbus through those plazas.

The existing towers are rental then? They might be more likely to go for it. I could see condo owners not wanting to open that fountain plaza to through traffic. A rental owner might welcome the extra traffic.

who62500 · #**852** Posted **Dec 26, 2007, 2:56 PM**

I think you guys are probably over thinking the scale issue with the model. As I'm sure most of you know buildings of this size change constantly at this stage of their design. The height certainly could vary by 100' feet based on changing footprint dimensions, FAR calculations, etc. The developer can't have a model of this scale built for every version of the tower at this stage of the game.

BVictor1 · #**853** Posted **Dec 26, 2007, 4:57 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by who62500

I think you guys are probably over thinking the scale issue with the model. As I'm sure most of you know buildings of this size change constantly at this stage of their design. The height certainly could vary by 100' feet based on changing footprint dimensions, FAR calculations, etc. The developer can't have a model of this scale built for every version of the tower at this stage of the game.

It's cardboard, not a $50,000 glass and stainless steel model...

aaron38 · #**854** Posted **Dec 27, 2007, 2:41 AM**

It wasn't worth a picture, but they were soil testing again today as I walked by.

honte · #**855** Posted **Dec 27, 2007, 2:07 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by BVictor1

It's cardboard, not a $50,000 glass and stainless steel model...

OK, good to know that - hard to tell the materials from the photos. But $50K is not likely to get you a professional model made of glass and stainless steel either.

BVictor1 · #**856** Posted **Dec 27, 2007, 5:47 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by honte

OK, good to know that - hard to tell the materials from the photos. But $50K is not likely to get you a professional model made of glass and stainless steel either.

Fine.

Plexiglass and acrylic paint then...

Quote:

Originally Posted by aaron38

It wasn't worth a picture, but they were soil testing again today as I walked by.

Was it on the north end of the site (closest to Illinois Street) or the southern end of the site (closer to the Sheraton)?

SolarWind · #**857** Posted **Dec 28, 2007, 2:17 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by aaron38

It wasn't worth a picture, but they were soil testing again today as I walked by.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BVictor1

Was it on the north end of the site (closest to Illinois Street) or the southern end of the site (closer to the Sheraton)?

Close to Illinois St. It's clearly for the rental tower. I placed an 'X' approximately where the rig was located.

Image from Google Maps

Ch.G, Ch.G · #**858** Posted **Dec 28, 2007, 3:03 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SolarWind

Close to Illinois St. It's clearly for the rental tower. I placed an 'X' approximately where the rig was located.

Image from Google Maps

Seeing pictures of soon-to-be-no-longer parking lots makes me really, really giddy.

aaron38 · #**859** Posted **Dec 28, 2007, 6:32 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by BVictor1

Was it on the north end of the site (closest to Illinois Street) or the southern end of the site (closer to the Sheraton)?

A large section of the parking lot at the rental portion was roped off, and it looked like they'd done multiple drillings.
Are they looking for something specific (are there old tunnels), or are they just probing for how deep the caisons need to be?

Nowhereman1280 · #**860** Posted **Dec 28, 2007, 2:02 PM**

^^^ They are doing required soil testing looking for multiple things. They need a general geological survey so the engineers know exactly what to expect below the site and, especially in Streeterville, they check to see what kind of pollution, if any, is beneath the site. If you look carfully, you will see they are drilling the entire site in a grid pattern with a hole about every 15' or so.