Troy Boston (formerly Albany St Hotel) | 275 Albany Street | South End

Thanks for the clarification.

Thinking about it now that you've mentioned it, it does make sense that the brace frame can be eliminated and thus offer larger, unobstructed spaces and views with CIP cores and shear walls.
 
TC said:
It has to be a cost savings. The concrete core saves steel on the structure and also provides the fire ratings for the elevator and stairwell shafts.
Click to expand...

Setting Rebar, Constructing Cores, Pouring, Curing, and Finishing of concrete is the most expensive structural component on any job. And the most labor intensive. Cost might not be the only factor here.

cca
 
I agree it is not the only factor as it also has the benefit of opening up the floor plate which was noted previously.

However in the early stages of a project it seems like reducing the tonnage of steel is high on the list and is a focus of the Structural Engineers. Reducing the diagonal bracing and arguably the most labor intensive connection (gusset plates, etc.) is a good start.

There are pros and cons with all designs and it really comes down to the decision of the owner/developer.
 
This discussion is referring to two different structural systems.
(1) Floor plate design - composite deck (traditional), cast-in-place (Millennium Place), girder-slab (newer style design, here and Envoy).
(2) Lateral system - concrete shear walls, braced frame.

This is not an either / or of construction time or cost. There are many factors which feed into the decision. This topic was discussed with some detail in the Millennium thread. Unfortunately I find the search function here difficult or I would point you to it, it started around here.

You can see here, the south Troy building has both a shear wall system and a braced frame (2). Here you can see the taller building (north) has only a braced frame system.

So the same developer, architect, contractor and the two systems are different. That's because the buildings design, layout and structural needs are different. It's not immediately clear why the north building did not use a shear wall system in part. The east-side elevator core might have been sufficient to take the loads. But it looks like the bracing lines extend to the exterior columns in the north-south direction implying that this building was too tall (overturning or foundation issues) in this direction for the narrow core. The cost of the steel is not likely governing here. As cca said, pouring concrete flat slab is more expensive and somewhat slower than steel framing.

In this picture you can see that the buildings use both floor systems as well. On the closer building (north) the first two floors are composite deck and the upper floors are precast composite. Probably because the first two floors have higher floor to floor heights for lobby and restaurant spaces. Whereas the upper residence floors require tight floor to floor heights.
 
TC said:
I agree it is not the only factor as it also has the benefit of opening up the floor plate which was noted previously.

However in the early stages of a project it seems like reducing the tonnage of steel is high on the list and is a focus of the Structural Engineers. Reducing the diagonal bracing and arguably the most labor intensive connection (gusset plates, etc.) is a good start.

There are pros and cons with all designs and it really comes down to the decision of the owner/developer.
Click to expand...

I don't really agree with this. Reducing steel tonnage given a specific design is always a goal. But that's not the same thing as choosing CIP shear walls over steel bracing.

Bracing and gusset plates are used because they are cheap. Shimming and bolting is easy compared to field welding and certainly compared with forms and tieing rebar.

As has been said before the time to prep the steel at the factory, not expensive, but time required, can be higher than the concrete.

The decision is mostly down to the architect in consultation with the engineer. And almost certainly for a building like this (hotel/residence) which has a simple design and no massive floorspace tradeoffs for going with different decisions. If the designs are similar then the owner may take a cost view from the contractor. Or if they are going to be condos then the owner might take a lot more interest over the particular design elements governed by the structural system (where can windows go, ceiling heights, open space, awkward layouts etc).
 
Couple from the train

5468BB27-3553-484A-A04E-DB971ACF06A3_zpswzzu7xco.jpg


2752E5A8-E84C-4868-9744-DF470403D25F_zps19nt0kb5.jpg
 
The Marriott (ex-ACE Tickets) over by Fenway also uses the girder slab system. It seems to be very popular with hotels.
 
Popular in residential buildings with mostly vertical distribution.
Helps keep floor to floor heights down pretty well.
I've only done one, but it was a dorm down in Pittsburgh.

Quicker and lighter than doing CIP. Thought both are common in hotels and are good at keeping floor heights short. CIP has the added benefit of more open above ceiling space for straight MEP runs. The girder slab, still has beams, but they are partially hidden up in the slab portion of the floor. But, there will still be deeper beams to cross in areas.

As mentioned above, all have different pros and cons, and some fit different applications better. It's when the wrong structural system is chosen for the wrong application, that we start having major coordination issues. Currently seeing a trend with deep open trusses in lab buildings, that is not as conducive as everyone seems to think. Not enough open space in the trusses for the major duct runs, and there are always deep beams at the core to carry the trusses. Vierendeel's are left open for ducts, but the coordination of these is difficult and restrictive, and rarely going to allow for supply and return ducts.

The trusses are great for the other trades however.....
 
Last edited:
I'm having a hard time envisioning what this neighborhood will look like when it's all said and done...Harrison should be much improved on this stretch but only on the side of the street. The other side of the street is still industrial and ugly. Ink block feels like an island separated by 93, 90 and the aforementioned electric co buildings on Harrison. Will this project generate outside foot traffic? Or just car trips to WF?
 
617 said:
I'm having a hard time envisioning what this neighborhood will look like when it's all said and done...Harrison should be much improved on this stretch but only on the side of the street. The other side of the street is still industrial and ugly. Ink block feels like an island separated by 93, 90 and the aforementioned electric co buildings on Harrison. Will this project generate outside foot traffic? Or just car trips to WF?
Click to expand...

I think the nabe won't be revolutionized on day one, but these buildings are the tip of an iceberg. We'll see more built here in coming years and a lot of renovations as well.
 
617 said:
I'm having a hard time envisioning what this neighborhood will look like when it's all said and done...Harrison should be much improved on this stretch but only on the side of the street. The other side of the street is still industrial and ugly. Ink block feels like an island separated by 93, 90 and the aforementioned electric co buildings on Harrison. Will this project generate outside foot traffic? Or just car trips to WF?
Click to expand...

In my view, the area is not very attractive once you cross East Berkeley. It is kind of broken up by various parking lots and industrial uses. Not to my taste for $1000/SF. However, 345 Harrison is being developed and so is 80 East Berkeley. I am not sure Quinzani's will ever be redeveloped, although any Traveler lot development would do well to find 8 parking spaces at a subsidized rate in exchange for developing an attractive retail storefront. I would guess the bean sprouts site will be developed and made more residential and neighborhood like.

The Traveler St lot owned by Tufts is a long-term development opportunity. As is much of the real estate on Washington St. Presumably the Albany St taxi places will eventually sell-out as well. So the neighborhood will continue to be developed.

I am not sure the answer to your question is either / or. There will clearly be more foot traffic and car traffic. However, there is already a lot of foot traffic in the area going to the Harrison St restaurants, SOWA (particularly summer weekends), Chinese markets. There is foot traffic to and from South Boston on West 4th and will eventually be from South Bay. There is foot traffic to the public parking under I-93 and other parking. Clearly the residents of Ink Block will drive on weekends etc, but they are also likely to work in downtown and walk to work.

If you look at the Whole Foods at Symphony it generates a lot of foot traffic and this one should too, from South End, Bay Village, South Boston and to some extent from Chinatown. It will be normal Boston city traffic with lots of walking and driving depending on time of day, between a Stuart / Kneeland and Washington corridor or like Tremont (with fewer restaurants).
 
The Harrison development is going to be huge if i remember correctly, so that should help both the street and foot traffic in terms of population.
 
Deetroyt said:
The Harrison development is going to be huge if i remember correctly, so that should help both the street and foot traffic in terms of population.
Click to expand...

All the low rise in the area and parking lots will be gone in 5 years to a decade. None of the industrial footprint is slated to remain, and at $1000/sq. ft. they would be foolish to dally. Most of the land is already in the hands of developers waiting their turn.

I also expect the low rise parking structures along the Pike to get redeveloped (Castle Square and 1000 Washington).
 
This may be pie in the sky, but i hope all of the develpment in this area overloads the silverline buses (I assume a lot of these folks are working downtown) and there are renewed calls for Green Line down Washington to Dudley
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top