HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > General Development


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #36341  
Old Posted Feb 11, 2017, 4:19 AM
the urban politician the urban politician is online now
The City
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Chicago region
Posts: 21,375
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in Chicago View Post
I think we've chatted about this site before. At one point it had a big "hotel coming soon" sign, and over the past few months there's been a project to construct what looks like another strip mall.

There are now "for sale, for lease" signs up on the unfinished building. So it looks like someone built a stupid strip mall in an odd location on spec.
That lot will have a strip mall and a 5 story building on the south end of the lot

The hotel is supposed to be on the NW corner of that intersection
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #36342  
Old Posted Feb 11, 2017, 3:13 PM
danielschell's Avatar
danielschell danielschell is offline
Chicago picture-taker
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Chicago
Posts: 171
Cook County Central Campus Health Center

Caisson work underway. 9 stories, 282,000 square feet. http://wp.me/p7uLxw-2fr

Rendering from Gensler



__________________
buildingupchicago.com

Twitter: @buildupchicago
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #36343  
Old Posted Feb 12, 2017, 7:09 PM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is offline
TL;DR
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: the city o'wind
Posts: 16,383
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jibba View Post
Romanticizing it as such strikes me as odd, though, especially given the benefits of having it buried. "Embracing" highways should be more sensitively and thoughtfully incorporating them into the city so that their presence doesn't reign supreme and preclude the functionality of the areas adjacent to them, not leaving them on display to serve as strident reminders of maximizing efficiency.

The obvious benefit of the expanded park space is legible access to the lakefront for those N Michigan Avenue shoppers who otherwise wouldn't bother. If they can glimpse the edges of an oasis (sans highway) on their horizon, they're times over more likely to go and explore, and I'd rather have their eyeballs on those parts of the skyline than those of speeding motorists.

That being said, I'd rather have the money go towards a seamless connection between Grant Park and the lake (with improvements to the lakefront path between Oak and Ohio St. beaches).
First, LSD isn't an expressway, it's a parkway that intentionally does not conform to Interstate standards. Speed limits are lower, trucks are banned, there are no breakdown lanes, turn radii are tighter, and landscaping/barriers come right up to the edge of the driving lanes. Lightposts, overpasses, and barriers are designed as things to be seen and appreciated, not utilitarian. The efficiency of moving traffic is not, in fact, the primary goal.

By its very design, LSD already discourages high speeds and is a "sensitive" urban road that plays nice with surrounding neighborhoods and with recreational park space. It doesn't need to be hidden away. By remaking LSD into more of a traditional expressway, and sticking it underground like some kind of embarrassment, IDOT is threatening to upset this balance.

The presence of the highway hasn't diminished property values; even where the Inner Drive and Outer Drive are right next to each other with no buffer, there is still massive demand to live there as evidenced by the wall of highrises.

I'm not against improving the pedestrian connection at Oak Street. But building a massive tunnel seems wrong both from a financial ($$$) and a design standpoint. Why not just build a generous underpass like the many others that have been built at the Museum Campus, 53rd, LaSalle through Lincoln Park, etc. Or a broad overpass that offers sweeping views of the beach, with gentle grades?



Basically this:
The emphasis on little neighbourhoods, the stoop, local shops and walking distances, the "human scale" only tells part of the story of the city - after all, these things can be found in villages and small towns. All cities need sublimity, a touch of holy terror, a defiance of human scale that asserts connection to the greater urban whole. Elevated highways, crowds, tall buildings, interconnection and confusion - these things can be to some people dismaying and unpleasant, but the awe they strike is the overture of accepting the condition of living in a city.
-Will Wiles
__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...

Last edited by ardecila; Feb 12, 2017 at 7:19 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #36344  
Old Posted Feb 13, 2017, 2:37 AM
SolarWind's Avatar
SolarWind SolarWind is offline
Chicago
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,477
Lakeshore LDS Meetinghouse - 822 N Clark

February 8, 2017



Reply With Quote
     
     
  #36345  
Old Posted Feb 13, 2017, 2:37 AM
SolarWind's Avatar
SolarWind SolarWind is offline
Chicago
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,477
Moxy Hotel - 530 N LaSalle

February 8, 2017

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #36346  
Old Posted Feb 13, 2017, 5:46 PM
gebs's Avatar
gebs gebs is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: South Loop
Posts: 790
This is just a general thought on the opportunities Chicago has with some of its large, vacant lots. Speaking specifically to the large swath of land south of Roosevelt that Related Midwest now owns, does anyone here think that we could potentially see a Hudson Yards-esque type development happening there?

Related is the developer for the New York project, which is rapidly becoming a self-contained community. If Chicago were to attempt something like this, Related might be the one to do it, and that plot of land might be a great spot. The South Loop doesn't have the West Loop's fierce opposition to density, we're seeing a skyline rapidly moving southward, and that area has a ton of public transit access.

Granted, I haven't given it much thought beyond this post ... and as a relative n00b to this community, I'm sure it's been discussed before.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #36347  
Old Posted Feb 13, 2017, 8:00 PM
LouisVanDerWright LouisVanDerWright is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 7,450
Probably won't happen given how much developable land there is down there. But remember, before there was Hudson Yards there was LSE which is a similarly large mega development. We just don't have that kind of demand here in Chicago. However I would expect Related to come out with an equally game changing midrise development with a couple of highrises tossed in. Chicago doesn't need to develop like NYC, we just need to fill in the gaps and then we can start thinking big like that again. Plenty of other still active rail yards we can build over once we burn up all the brownfield sites.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #36348  
Old Posted Feb 14, 2017, 12:00 AM
KWILLSKYLINE's Avatar
KWILLSKYLINE KWILLSKYLINE is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Chicago
Posts: 625
Any west-siders have some photo updates of United Center and Blackhawks training center?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #36349  
Old Posted Feb 14, 2017, 6:44 AM
danielschell's Avatar
danielschell danielschell is offline
Chicago picture-taker
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Chicago
Posts: 171
Chicago Blackhawks Community Training Center

Quote:
Originally Posted by KWILLSKYLINE View Post
Any west-siders have some photo updates of United Center and Blackhawks training center?
http://wp.me/p7uLxw-2fS

__________________
buildingupchicago.com

Twitter: @buildupchicago
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #36350  
Old Posted Feb 14, 2017, 11:18 AM
KWILLSKYLINE's Avatar
KWILLSKYLINE KWILLSKYLINE is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Chicago
Posts: 625
Thanks schell.
http://www.progressiverailroading.co...-Center--50837

I wonder if there is still opportunity for them to build a hotel, restraunts, other entertainment. I know the neighborhood is totally against it. Im not looking for a staple center conversion but some extra buisness could do the area some good if it's managed right. Way too many parking lots.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #36351  
Old Posted Feb 14, 2017, 1:35 PM
BuildThemTaller BuildThemTaller is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Long Island City, NY
Posts: 1,016
Quote:
Originally Posted by KWILLSKYLINE View Post
Thanks schell.
http://www.progressiverailroading.co...-Center--50837

I wonder if there is still opportunity for them to build a hotel, restraunts, other entertainment. I know the neighborhood is totally against it. Im not looking for a staple center conversion but some extra buisness could do the area some good if it's managed right. Way too many parking lots.
CTA announced this week that a new Green Line stop will be added at Damen, just 2 blocks north of the UC. My dream is that they build a parking garage on one or two of the south lots and convert the north lots into a mix of retail, hotel, commercial, and residential.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #36352  
Old Posted Feb 14, 2017, 2:02 PM
jpIllInoIs's Avatar
jpIllInoIs jpIllInoIs is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,213
I always thought that the missed opportunity in the UC area was not landing a proper Fire soccer stadium. The soccer season is in the summer and allows for year round use of infrastructure. Off course building hotels, housing and and concentrating some parking in well designed garages. The entertainment options will follow the crowds.

As of now the Fire are dying a slow death with lower 1/3 of league attendance in an totally transit inaccessible industrial location. MLS stadiums are modest in size - 18-20k and footprint and host about 32 home games + exhibitions + playoffs. And also host youth programs on team away dates. Would it fit in K lot?
rant off...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #36353  
Old Posted Feb 14, 2017, 3:00 PM
Mr Downtown's Avatar
Mr Downtown Mr Downtown is offline
Urbane observer
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,387
Quote:
Originally Posted by jpIllInoIs View Post
The entertainment options will follow the crowds.
Yes, we've seen that theory proven over and over again—at 35th & Shields, at 71st & Harlem, at Mannheim & Lunt, not to mention around the new ballparks in Schaumburg, Geneva, Joliet, and Gary.

Soccer's fan base in this country is families with kids who play, and immigrants who've made it into the middle class. They're much more interested in a cheap place to park the minivan than in nearby entertainment.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #36354  
Old Posted Feb 14, 2017, 3:04 PM
emathias emathias is offline
Adoptive Chicagoan
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: River North, Chicago, Illinois
Posts: 5,157
Quote:
Originally Posted by jpIllInoIs View Post
I always thought that the missed opportunity in the UC area was not landing a proper Fire soccer stadium. The soccer season is in the summer and allows for year round use of infrastructure. Off course building hotels, housing and and concentrating some parking in well designed garages. The entertainment options will follow the crowds.

As of now the Fire are dying a slow death with lower 1/3 of league attendance in an totally transit inaccessible industrial location. MLS stadiums are modest in size - 18-20k and footprint and host about 32 home games + exhibitions + playoffs. And also host youth programs on team away dates. Would it fit in K lot?
rant off...
Seems like putting a stadium in Addams/Medill Park just north of Pilsen would be a great location, especially if a Pink Line station were added at Roosevelt (but even that's not a deal-breaker since Polk is like a 3-block walk from that park - closer than Roosevelt Green Line to Soldier Field). Easy access from the Ike, Pink Line connections to Pilsen and Little Village, Ashland access to the Ukrainian Village and Wicker Park and the border of Bridgeview and McKinley Park, Pink Line access to downtown, close to UIC. Easy access from Ogden where it meets Roosevelt. Even access from the Stevenson isn't that bad. I mean, you'd have super-easy access to just about every soccer-loving demographic you could dream of.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #36355  
Old Posted Feb 14, 2017, 3:16 PM
nomarandlee's Avatar
nomarandlee nomarandlee is offline
My Mind Has Left My Body
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,358
Quote:
Originally Posted by jpIllInoIs View Post
I always thought that the missed opportunity in the UC area was not landing a proper Fire soccer stadium. The soccer season is in the summer and allows for year round use of infrastructure. Off course building hotels, housing and and concentrating some parking in well designed garages. The entertainment options will follow the crowds.

As of now the Fire are dying a slow death with lower 1/3 of league attendance in an totally transit inaccessible industrial location. MLS stadiums are modest in size - 18-20k and footprint and host about 32 home games + exhibitions + playoffs. And also host youth programs on team away dates. Would it fit in K lot?
rant off...
Nope. The footprint wouldn't seem to fit if the current stadium outline is anything to go by.

I've always thought it would be a cool idea to either see a new Sox Park or perhaps a new Fire stadium over the Amtrak Yards at Roosevelt and the south branch. It would add extra expense and don't know if it would be feasible but for the new communities on the east bank of the South Branch stadiums would probably be nicer to look and the views from inside the stadium would be tops as well. Transportation links would also be pretty darn good.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #36356  
Old Posted Feb 14, 2017, 4:05 PM
Mr Downtown's Avatar
Mr Downtown Mr Downtown is offline
Urbane observer
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,387
^Rapid transit is a long walk away, unless you're pushing through the Clinton Subway.

Why are we constantly pouring public money into sports venues—and then pouring even more public money into putting a transit station nearby? Why not put the sports venue next to an existing station that needs the ridership?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #36357  
Old Posted Feb 14, 2017, 4:06 PM
Via Chicago Via Chicago is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 5,617
toyota park was built in 2004. its not going anywhere. lets maybe lay off the taxpayer subsidized stadium fetish for a bit.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #36358  
Old Posted Feb 14, 2017, 5:44 PM
Justin_Chicago Justin_Chicago is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 377
Quote:
Originally Posted by Via Chicago View Post
toyota park was built in 2004. its not going anywhere. lets maybe lay off the taxpayer subsidized stadium fetish for a bit.
Many people are speculating that the 2017 MLS All Star game was strategically placed in Soldier Field to highlight Chicago interest in MLS soccer if a "new" owner is willing to invest in a stadium within city limits. I would not be surprised if Andrew Hauptman cashes out now that expansion fees are exceeding $100 million. I predict Toyota Park is eventually downgraded to the second-division league (NASL) in the next 5 years. New stadiums are getting built with expansion capabilities to 30,000+ as the talent and fanbase continues to grow. I personally think Chicago Fire should share Solider Field like Seattle Sounders (CenturyLink).

I like the idea of having a new MLS stadium near a Pink Line CTA stop to drive economic development in a different section of the city.

http://www.hottimeinoldtown.com/2017...oad-greys-cf97
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #36359  
Old Posted Feb 14, 2017, 6:01 PM
Via Chicago Via Chicago is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 5,617
Quote:
Originally Posted by Justin_Chicago View Post
I personally think Chicago Fire should share Solider Field like Seattle Sounders (CenturyLink).
they used to and the whole reason they built toyota park in the first place was because the bears kept whining about the Fire tearing up "their" field
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #36360  
Old Posted Feb 14, 2017, 7:59 PM
Chi-Sky21 Chi-Sky21 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,286
That field is horrible, the company that resods that must donate a lot to the right people to stop the Park District from using field turf there.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > General Development
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 1:21 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.