HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

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

About The Ads  This week the ad company used in the forum will be monitoring activity and doing some tests to identify any problems which users may be experiencing. If at any time this week you get pop-ups, redirects, etc. as a result of ads please let us know by sending an email to forum@skyscraperpage.com or post in the ads complaint thread. Thank you for your participation.


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #35581  
Old Posted Nov 28, 2016, 7:31 PM
the urban politician the urban politician is offline
The City
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Chicago region
Posts: 17,635
I have a fear that the Mega Mall redevelopment is going to turn out awful. Just horrible. The renderings are a scam, it will be cheap and tacky. Sorry, just my gut feeling.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #35582  
Old Posted Nov 28, 2016, 8:20 PM
Via Chicago Via Chicago is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 4,654
im skeptical of any rendering that uses watercolors, for starters

i truly want to believe they'll put the craftsmanship into making it look like an old Ravenswood warehouse...but Ill eat my hat if they actually execute anywhere near the level of detail and subtle variation they're suggesting
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #35583  
Old Posted Nov 28, 2016, 8:36 PM
ithakas's Avatar
ithakas ithakas is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 797
Quote:
Originally Posted by ardecila View Post
Isn't this exactly what MANA Contemporary is on Cermak?
Interesting and I hadn't thought of MANA, but it's not exactly the same. MoMA PS1 and Hauser Wirth & Schimmel are both almost entirely public-facing institutions focused on exhibitions, programming, etc. Hauser Wirth & Schimmel in particular integrates a lot of nice uses into their complex to bring people in from beyond the art world (a bookstore, a restaurant facing sculpture terrace with 20' tall Isa Genzken rose).

MANA's got the exhibition spaces but it's more about the artist studios and collections storage. It also feels very isolated from the surrounding neighborhood set back south of Cermak.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #35584  
Old Posted Nov 29, 2016, 1:07 AM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is offline
TL;DR
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: the city o'wind
Posts: 13,868
Quote:
Originally Posted by the urban politician View Post
I have a fear that the Mega Mall redevelopment is going to turn out awful. Just horrible. The renderings are a scam, it will be cheap and tacky. Sorry, just my gut feeling.
The PD filing shows the materials will be actual brick.

Probably they will be veneer brick on precast panels, but that can look good too if executed properly (see the Hillshire Brands HQ in West Loop). Honestly the biggest thing they could do to make the building appear historic is to skip the balconies, and it looks like they've done that.

This image appears to show some nice, somewhat authentic detailing:
https://cdn1.vox-cdn.com/uploads/cho...mall-new-2.jpg
__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...

Last edited by ardecila; Nov 29, 2016 at 1:19 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #35585  
Old Posted Nov 29, 2016, 1:18 AM
LouisVanDerWright LouisVanDerWright is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 6,379
Quote:
Originally Posted by Via Chicago View Post
i will say, the thing i hate about remodeled buildings is the forced air heat. its not a step up IMO. radiators are still the gold standard and its why i still choose to be in older buildings. A) it saves me a buttload on heating costs as a renter, and B) dosent dry everything out. plus theyre more efficient and require less maintenance anyway.

my girlfriend bought a house in Little Village for 50k (speaking of affordable housing) and is actively looking to rip out the duct work and put radiators back in.
Don't do it, it's a terrible idea. As a renter radiators only save you money because you aren't paying for gas. What you don't see is the cracked pipes in the basement that cost $3000 to fix, the blown pumps that cost $5k, or the huge heating bill you get just for having it turned on in Septembers like this year when it's 60 degrees all month and you are burning gas like it's -10 degrees in january.

The absolutely do not require less maintenance, I'm not sure where you are getting that from. Any time you are talking about water it's a maintenance nightmere and a liability just waiting to totally trash your asset. Water is the enemy of property owners and can do a tremendous amount of damage in a matter of hours. With radiators you are talking about hot water under preassure that sits idle for 6 months a year. Ugh, gives me the creeps just thinking about it.

Anyhow, I've never even owned a building with radiators. Every single property I've bought up until the one I just mentioned, I mean every single one (and I've bought and sold double digit numbers of properties) has had space heaters when I've purchased them. Now these are the best thing ever, like modular radiators that can be easily turned on and off and sip gas. They also have zero maintenance other than occassionally sucking all the dust bunnies out of them so they don't catch fire. The only problem with them is that they are single point sources of heat and massive fire hazards which is why I always end up eventually tearing them out and putting in ductwork.

The best option in Chicago is spiral duct forced air with AC. No soffits needed, easy to adjust if you are getting uneven heating after install, just add another vent and point it at the cold spot. AC, easily accessible to clean out in the future. I'm not sure how having to swap out a filter every few months is more maintenance than having to totally drain the system of water once a year.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #35586  
Old Posted Nov 29, 2016, 1:19 AM
LouisVanDerWright LouisVanDerWright is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 6,379
PS construction fencing went up today around the Mega Mall, see you later you ugly b*tch!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #35587  
Old Posted Nov 29, 2016, 1:27 AM
Via Chicago Via Chicago is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 4,654
my parents have owned an old Victorian with original radiators for 35 years and aside from bleeding them once a year, i dont think theyve had any issues with heating whatsoever (aside from setting up some different zones in the house so they can tailor it a bit more). maybe its nostalgia but theres something inherently cozy and comforting about cast iron pinging to life on a cold winter night. obviously any system that isnt well maintained will present problems though.

Last edited by Via Chicago; Nov 29, 2016 at 1:40 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #35588  
Old Posted Nov 29, 2016, 2:25 AM
the urban politician the urban politician is offline
The City
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Chicago region
Posts: 17,635
^ One of the reasons landlords use HVAC is so that tenants pay their own heat. It's easier to have separate GFA units in each apartment with their own gas meters, as opposed to boilers where there is usually 1 for the entire building
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #35589  
Old Posted Nov 29, 2016, 4:41 AM
Randomguy34's Avatar
Randomguy34 Randomguy34 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Chicago & Philly
Posts: 1,042
The final RFP was put up for the Michael Reese site. Looks like the city is also advertising the Marshalling Yard and Advocate/McDonald's site to the west and north as well. Seems they want to have all responses by February 22nd, and select a developer on April 6th.



https://webapps1.cityofchicago.org/e..._RFP_FINAL.pdf
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #35590  
Old Posted Nov 29, 2016, 4:44 AM
LouisVanDerWright LouisVanDerWright is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 6,379
And the winner is.... McCrapfrey!!!



Quote:
Originally Posted by the urban politician View Post
^ One of the reasons landlords use HVAC is so that tenants pay their own heat. It's easier to have separate GFA units in each apartment with their own gas meters, as opposed to boilers where there is usually 1 for the entire building
^^^ Without a doubt.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Via Chicago View Post
my parents have owned an old Victorian with original radiators for 35 years and aside from bleeding them once a year, i dont think theyve had any issues with heating whatsoever (aside from setting up some different zones in the house so they can tailor it a bit more). maybe its nostalgia but theres something inherently cozy and comforting about cast iron pinging to life on a cold winter night. obviously any system that isnt well maintained will present problems though.
Don't get me wrong, I like them too personally, but they are an absolute nightmere from a landlord or building owner's perspective. I have seen large systems in like 30-50 unit buildings and it's downright dreadful. Also heaven forbid the system shuts down or the gas is off and it gets below freezing somewhere in the walls and cracks a pipe. When you turn it on again welcome to the jungle. I've actually seen some modern systems that are really nice with all copper plumbing. Was just looking at a cousin's house built around 1960 that had a vintage baseboard system and it was absolutely great. It's the old galvanized stuff that is really scary.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #35591  
Old Posted Nov 29, 2016, 4:59 AM
the urban politician the urban politician is offline
The City
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Chicago region
Posts: 17,635
Quote:
Originally Posted by Randomguy34 View Post
The final RFP was put up for the Michael Reese site. Looks like the city is also advertising the Marshalling Yard and Advocate/McDonald's site to the west and north as well. Seems they want to have all responses by February 22nd, and select a developer on April 6th.



https://webapps1.cityofchicago.org/e..._RFP_FINAL.pdf
Ugh, I hate this. Fucking can't stand how people in Government think sometimes. It's going to be the same shit. One of 3 or 4 well connected master developers will bid, somebody will win, and some splendid master plan will be approved. The plan will be some sort of monotonous, overscaled development and perhaps 1/3 of it will be built until the next cycle and a new round of bidding and master developers.

I'd love Chicago to talk the talk and actually do one thing that breaks down barriers to more than just the 8 connected people out there. How about sending a message to Texas that we're finally getting it--we can adapt and join the game of creating opportunities for the smaller guys out there. Getting rid of a few licenses and permits is symbolic crap. You want to open up some opportunities and investment? Divide up this land into prezoned lots and allow it to develop organically. Let some businesses thrive, let a real set of neighborhoods get built, the way Chicago was. The alternative will almost certainly be McCaffery or Antunovich making some great renderings, followed by a bait and switch, followed by large parking lots, followed by Subway and Jimmy Johns and perhaps a giant Whole Foods that will make Tina Feldstein cream her pants. I already see how this crap is gonna go down.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #35592  
Old Posted Nov 29, 2016, 3:08 PM
moorhosj moorhosj is offline
Closed account
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 511
Quote:
Originally Posted by the urban politician View Post
How about sending a message to Texas that we're finally getting it--we can adapt and join the game of creating opportunities for the smaller guys out there.

The alternative will almost certainly be McCaffery or Antunovich making some great renderings, followed by a bait and switch, followed by large parking lots, followed by Subway and Jimmy Johns and perhaps a giant Whole Foods that will make Tina Feldstein cream her pants. I already see how this crap is gonna go down.
These comments seem contradictory, every time I have been in Texas, I see large parking lots, Subways and Jimmy Johns all over the place.

How will making our development more like thier's provide us development that is different from their's?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #35593  
Old Posted Nov 29, 2016, 3:15 PM
UPChicago's Avatar
UPChicago UPChicago is offline
Vote for me for Mayor!
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Chicago
Posts: 741
Quote:
Originally Posted by the urban politician View Post
Divide up this land into prezoned lots and allow it to develop organically.
I would love this but the reason it won't happen is because the city doesn't want to build the infrustructure needed to divide the land. Each lot would require ingress and egress, sewers and sidewalks, etc.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #35594  
Old Posted Nov 29, 2016, 3:31 PM
Ryanrule Ryanrule is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 772
Quote:
Originally Posted by the urban politician View Post
^ One of the reasons landlords use HVAC is so that tenants pay their own heat. It's easier to have separate GFA units in each apartment with their own gas meters, as opposed to boilers where there is usually 1 for the entire building
whats the story on buildings with central heat/cooling pushed up to forced air units? condo only?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #35595  
Old Posted Nov 29, 2016, 4:47 PM
the urban politician the urban politician is offline
The City
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Chicago region
Posts: 17,635
Unhappy

Quote:
Originally Posted by moorhosj View Post
These comments seem contradictory, every time I have been in Texas, I see large parking lots, Subways and Jimmy Johns all over the place.

How will making our development more like thier's provide us development that is different from their's?
I'm referring to allowing smaller entities a chance to impact the cityscape and have a piece of the pie instead of the same 6 connected campaign contributors, which has largely become the Chicago story.

With narrow lots, zoning, and perhaps some general rules against strip malls and drive thrus it would be very easy to see a nice, fine grained neighborhood with even some decent density get built here given the proper zoning, while giving a lot of people a shot at owning prime real estate. Or you can just give it all to Antunovich who will build your dream town center
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #35596  
Old Posted Nov 29, 2016, 4:49 PM
the urban politician the urban politician is offline
The City
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Chicago region
Posts: 17,635
Quote:
Originally Posted by UPChicago View Post
I would love this but the reason it won't happen is because the city doesn't want to build the infrustructure needed to divide the land. Each lot would require ingress and egress, sewers and sidewalks, etc.
That can be addressed by charging an initial assessment on property taxes for the purchase of the land. A one time surcharge rolled into the purchase price whose funds are dedicated to the cost of installing such infrastructure.

Creative minds can easily address this problem.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #35597  
Old Posted Nov 29, 2016, 4:59 PM
BrandonJXN's Avatar
BrandonJXN BrandonJXN is offline
Ascension
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Riverside, California
Posts: 5,225
Quote:
Originally Posted by Randomguy34 View Post
The final RFP was put up for the Michael Reese site. Looks like the city is also advertising the Marshalling Yard and Advocate/McDonald's site to the west and north as well. Seems they want to have all responses by February 22nd, and select a developer on April 6th.



https://webapps1.cityofchicago.org/e..._RFP_FINAL.pdf
Is this still a thing or was the redevelopment of Lake Meadows a pipe dream?


http://www.scb.com/app/uploads/2016/...3-1600x996.jpg
__________________
Washed Out
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #35598  
Old Posted Nov 29, 2016, 5:53 PM
UPChicago's Avatar
UPChicago UPChicago is offline
Vote for me for Mayor!
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Chicago
Posts: 741
Quote:
Originally Posted by the urban politician View Post
That can be addressed by charging an initial assessment on property taxes for the purchase of the land. A one time surcharge rolled into the purchase price whose funds are dedicated to the cost of installing such infrastructure.

Creative minds can easily address this problem.
And how much would that assessment be to overcome the initial investment? How long would it take for the city to recoup its investment? Seems like a large developer would be most cost effective, maybe not the most organic or pleasant, though.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #35599  
Old Posted Nov 29, 2016, 5:59 PM
the urban politician the urban politician is offline
The City
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Chicago region
Posts: 17,635
^ I'm not too sure of that.

Is there any evidence that a large developer is more cost effective compared to what I'm proposing, taking into account long term gains in property values and tax revenue for said land after several years?

My guess is no, and that this is more about convenience up front.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #35600  
Old Posted Nov 29, 2016, 8:17 PM
PKDickman PKDickman is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 557
Quote:
Originally Posted by the urban politician View Post
I'm referring to allowing smaller entities a chance to impact the cityscape and have a piece of the pie instead of the same 6 connected campaign contributors, which has largely become the Chicago story.

With narrow lots, zoning, and perhaps some general rules against strip malls and drive thrus it would be very easy to see a nice, fine grained neighborhood with even some decent density get built here given the proper zoning, while giving a lot of people a shot at owning prime real estate. Or you can just give it all to Antunovich who will build your dream town center
While I agree that a fine grain organic streetscape is what makes city life attractive. breaking up a parcel this size into 50 projects only magnifies the opportunity for failure. Imagine one project in the middle being surrounded by arrested development because of swings in the marketplace.

In reality the city owns thousands of narrow lots waiting for small developers with the necessary infrastructure already under the street. Why would they want to dilute that market.

This parcel's real selling point is its size, but the pool of customers is a lot smaller.
If you had a 75 ct diamond, you wouldn't cut it up into .01ct melee just because you like pave' settings.
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


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 2:04 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.