daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > World Development News Forums > General Urban Developments > DN Archives



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old April 16th, 2010, 02:39 AM   #9581
Draegen
I LIKE SKYSCRAPERS
 
Draegen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 466
Likes (Received): 44

Quote:
Originally Posted by Abdy View Post
Steel still rust... It's so sad for this project to be ON HOLD while Freedom Tower is UC.
I'm sure it has water proofing on it
Draegen no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old April 17th, 2010, 01:21 AM   #9582
Abdy
BANNED
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Dinan (Britain, France)
Posts: 190
Likes (Received): 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by Draegen View Post
I'm sure it has water proofing on it
Waterproofing on it ? Look at the last photo ! Of course, it hasn't !
Abdy no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 17th, 2010, 04:29 AM   #9583
Ewan117
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 267
Likes (Received): 18

Quote:
Originally Posted by ksuch74 View Post
...and what's the big hole for?
Its for a tall tower that is built on unsteady soil, ie needing greater support. I guess the soil in Chicago CBD can hold up a tall tower using the hole they have, hence, they don't need to dig that deep. Please correct me if thats wrong.
Ewan117 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 17th, 2010, 07:57 AM   #9584
casinoland
Registered User
 
casinoland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: somewhere up north
Posts: 106
Likes (Received): 6

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ewan117 View Post
Its for a tall tower that is built on unsteady soil, ie needing greater support. I guess the soil in Chicago CBD can hold up a tall tower using the hole they have, hence, they don't need to dig that deep. Please correct me if thats wrong.
you're right. chicago sits on dolomite bedrock, and a top layer of glacial till from previous glaciations, so it's pretty sturdy and good for anchoring skyscrapers.

shanghai's on a river delta, the alluvial deposits aren't that sturdy. in fact, the weight of skyscrapers on the accumulated silt is making the land sink. that, and drilling for ground water, are causing subsidence. so it may be a good idea to not build skyscrapers in shanghai, at least not ones this big.
casinoland no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 17th, 2010, 08:48 AM   #9585
Elnerico
Registered User
 
Elnerico's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Vancity, Tdot
Posts: 797

poor hole, what will they do with it now?
Elnerico no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 17th, 2010, 01:26 PM   #9586
yangkhm
Registered User
 
yangkhm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 920
Likes (Received): 172

The deep hole is good for a high building to sustain the whole building. Chicago or Shanghai both located near the large water source so soil is soft.
__________________
Peace in your mind, Peace in the world!
http://www.pelnee.blogspot.com

Romantic Music
yangkhm no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 18th, 2010, 10:11 PM   #9587
Msradell
Always looking up
 
Msradell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Louisville, Kentucky
Posts: 1,773
Likes (Received): 209

Quote:
Originally Posted by yangkhm View Post
The deep hole is good for a high building to sustain the whole building. Chicago or Shanghai both located near the large water source so soil is soft.
It suggests you read post 8132. Chicago has bedrock fairly close to the surface so it's not difficult to create a good foundation. Shanghai on the other hand does not have readily accessible bedrock and creating adequate foundations is much more difficult. Being near water does not necessarily mean construction is more difficult.
__________________
"Written using Dragon Naturally Speaking"
I've learned that depression is merely anger without enthusiasm.
Msradell no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 19th, 2010, 12:51 AM   #9588
Fury
Proudly Canadian
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 2,059
Likes (Received): 350

Hi all.

For those comparing The CS hole with the ST hole :
1 - The CS hole is not the size of the tower footprint as they were to do a top down excavation process for the U/G levels. The ST hole is the full size of the tower as they are doing the more traditional method of constructing the lower levels from the bottom up. Therefore the size of the ST hole is bigger than the entire CS site (just a guestimate).
2 - The CS piling consists of 60 or 70 piles for the tower and they rest on bedrock. Not sure of the length. The ST has 955 - 1 meter dia. - 86 meter long skin friction piles. Like the BK the piles don't go down to bedrock. Yes that number is correct - 955 piles. On top of that they poured a 60,000 cu. m. raft (which must be a world record for a continuous foundation pour). The ST site may not be as stable as the CS site but the tower foundation is stable.

I would like to see this project go ahead just as the ST is. Both are great designs and with heights over 600 meters both are ambitious projects that would be welcome additions to the supertall skyscraper list.

__________________
Burj Khalifa - The Greatest Structure of our Time !!
Fury no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 19th, 2010, 12:57 AM   #9589
spectre000
Moderator
 
spectre000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: St. Paul
Posts: 7,910
Likes (Received): 5173

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fury View Post
Hi all.

For those comparing The CS hole with the ST hole :
1 - The CS hole is not the size of the tower footprint as they were to do a top down excavation process for the U/G levels. The ST hole is the full size of the tower as they are doing the more traditional method of constructing the lower levels from the bottom up. Therefore the size of the ST hole is bigger than the entire CS site (just a guestimate).
2 - The CS piling consists of 60 or 70 piles for the tower and they rest on bedrock. Not sure of the length. The ST has 955 - 1 meter dia. - 86 meter long skin friction piles. Like the BK the piles don't go down to bedrock. Yes that number is correct - 955 piles. On top of that they poured a 60,000 cu. m. raft (which must be a world record for a continuous foundation pour). The ST site may not be as stable as the CS site but the tower foundation is stable.

I would like to see this project go ahead just as the ST is. Both are great designs and with heights over 600 meters both are ambitious projects that would be welcome additions to the supertall skyscraper list.

The cofferdam they dug was just for the core. Surrounding the hole there are caissons buried and covered up. Below is a picture of just how wide the diameter of CS was to be. I've no doubt ST is still larger since it's a mix use building, while CS is strictly condominiums.

Followup, the lobby footprint is 15,220 sq ft. So it's not very big when compared to say office towers like 1WTC (40,000 sq ft) or Sears/Willis Tower which is 50,000 sq ft. But 15k sq ft is pretty massive for a residential building.


Last edited by spectre000; April 19th, 2010 at 01:03 AM. Reason: addt'l followup comment
spectre000 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 19th, 2010, 01:29 AM   #9590
Fury
Proudly Canadian
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 2,059
Likes (Received): 350

Hi Spectre.

Here is a shot showing the pile layout.



I count 66 piles for the tower itself.

Such a pity if this project dies. So much work already completed with great photog coverage - the majority from Harry of course.
Over 4000 pics in my CS pics folder.

__________________
Burj Khalifa - The Greatest Structure of our Time !!
Fury no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 19th, 2010, 03:17 AM   #9591
Draegen
I LIKE SKYSCRAPERS
 
Draegen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 466
Likes (Received): 44

How long are you allowed to have a big hole like this in Chicago? especially in an area like that.
Draegen no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 19th, 2010, 03:26 AM   #9592
spiller9
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Adelaide, Australia
Posts: 196
Likes (Received): 10

Quote:
Originally Posted by Msradell View Post
It suggests you read post 8132. Chicago has bedrock fairly close to the surface so it's not difficult to create a good foundation. Shanghai on the other hand does not have readily accessible bedrock and creating adequate foundations is much more difficult. Being near water does not necessarily mean construction is more difficult.
Wasn't this area of land reclaimed from the lake with the debris from the Chicago Fire anyway? Or was this only the Gold Coast area...?
spiller9 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 19th, 2010, 11:45 PM   #9593
vano-2005
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 239
Likes (Received): 32

its very funny post this big hole every day?
vano-2005 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 20th, 2010, 08:26 PM   #9594
helghast
Registered User
 
helghast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,374
Likes (Received): 147

I think the only proposition is to go back to Version A. It would dramatically cut the number of units, but keep all of the same amenities. what's everyone's thought's ?
__________________
"If you put the empire state building on top of the Sears Tower then it's reasonable to say you'll be in the neighbourhood," Mr Baker says.

Last edited by helghast; May 12th, 2010 at 07:48 AM.
helghast no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 20th, 2010, 08:48 PM   #9595
Sparxter
Student ROC Bouwkunde
 
Sparxter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Veldhoven
Posts: 365
Likes (Received): 6

I think it still will be a very nice addition to the skyline. Also the exceptional shape which never has been used before is still forthcoming.
Sparxter no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 22nd, 2010, 10:23 PM   #9596
DFDalton
Banished from SSP
 
DFDalton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Suburban Chicago
Posts: 487
Likes (Received): 127

Quote:
Originally Posted by helghast View Post
I think they only proposition is to go back to the Version A. It would dramatically cut the number of units, but keep all of the same amenities. what's everyone's thought's ?
Calatrava has a long history of designing beautiful but fiscally ill-conceived structures that come in well over budget. Version A was rejected because it was almost a third more expensive per square foot than the current plan. If Kelleher can't get funding for this version, certainly Version A has even less of a chance.

This is all moot, of course. The project is dead.
DFDalton no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 1st, 2010, 02:09 AM   #9597
Douly
Registered User
 
Douly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Marseille 6čme
Posts: 4,050
Likes (Received): 1647

Spire

image hosted on flickr
__________________
-> MARSEILLE PROVENCE : European Capital of Culture in 2013 - MP2013
-> MARSEILLE named European city of 2014 by the Academy of Urbanism
-> MARSEILLE - MUCEM wins the 2015 European Museum Prize


Visit the MP2013 official thread on SSP

Visit "La Marseillaise" highrise thread on SSP
http://vimeo.com/104242985#at=27
Douly no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 1st, 2010, 06:33 AM   #9598
Reinsdorf Sucks
Seven Costanza
 
Reinsdorf Sucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Chicago
Posts: 352
Likes (Received): 4

Ohhh there's a hole..

Reinsdorf Sucks no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 1st, 2010, 06:49 AM   #9599
carewser
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 112
Likes (Received): 15

At least the rendering got it right. A picture of a giant screw is exactly what this project got.
__________________
overly regulated, overly legislated and overly taxed.
carewser no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 3rd, 2010, 09:05 PM   #9600
simulcra
Cynical post-collegiate
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Seattle
Posts: 937
Likes (Received): 1

so is this still "On Hold"? even if the real estate market recovers within the next year, it still won't support the kind of prices kelleher was asking for a place here.
__________________
Mmm... forbidden donut...
simulcra no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
chicago, santiago calatrava, spire, tallest, tower

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 07:10 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

tech management by Sysprosium