CHICAGO | General Developments

[AlpacaObsessor]

Originally Posted by Sohcatoah

Is there a forum that discusses Chicago architecture/infrastructure? This site is good for skyscrapers obviously, and Reddit isn't terrible but I am looking for something a little more focused.

Well there's this thread that focuses on transit, but not really 'general infrastructure.'

[emathias]

Originally Posted by marothisu

What's the website? I'll get my fiancee to translate.

I don't think I knew you got engaged! Congrats!

Originally Posted by 10023

Gross. That is a terrible, un-urban development too. The set back from the street is inexcusable. And it’s being built by a mediocre college with a small endowment, so the quality of construction isn’t going to be impressive either.

Ignoring the ad hominem attack, tons of universities in urban settings if similar density have buildings with setbacks like that. The DePaul Center in the Loop has a setback creating a small plaza at State and Jackson, also DePaul's Arts and Letters Hall in Lincoln Park has a setback similar to the Loyola rendering.

Further afield, Harvard's Smith Campus Center across from Harvard Square has a similar-sized setback. A ton of MIT's buildings incorporate setbacks. As do University buildings everywhere.

Originally Posted by SolarWind

September 28, 2018

http://www.chicagotribune.com/busine...926-story.html

I had thought that the new glass-topped dinner cruise boat was pretty cool until I saw photos of these three Tokyo Cruise River boats - Chicago should have cool, modern boats to go with all the new construction along the River.

Don't use the "English" button, as not all pages are available, view it in Chrome and select English when Chrome prompts you to ask if you want the page translated. The link above opens on the Himiko boat, and from there you can view the Emeraldas and the Firearma boats, too, all very cool and modern-looking!

Originally Posted by SIGSEGV

I read pseudo pomo as pseudo porno and was very confused.

I thought of "pseudo-porn" while watching Love, Actually this past week. I love that movie, but it would need a lot of cuts before my conservative mother could enjoy it - probably only be an hour long by that point, lol!

Originally Posted by JK47

...
That's a feature not a bug. The biggest challenge facing students right now is affordability, especially in the face of declining public support for higher education. One of the big drivers of increasing costs is the arms race in student residential construction (as part of the effort to attract the best students). Schools shouldn't be spending a fortune on their residential buildings...especially if it depletes funds that could be used towards instruction or financial aid.

I completely agree. Another overlooked factor with luxury-finish academic construction is that it goes even further in alienating lower-income students. I came from a working class family and was often quite uncomfortable with the fancier parts of my college experience - and I arrived at college already having put a lot of thought into class issues and related things, and had the benefit of some family having gone to University so I had a good idea of what to expect. I can only imagine what it might be like to try and transition from a working poor part of Appalachia to pretty much any school in the Northeast, or especially to any of the famous private schools in California.

Originally Posted by Barrelfish

The Treasure Island at Clark and Elm has a 4 story parking garage on it. Could also be a good redevelopment spot.

That's also on the north end of that 2 block stretch of Clark that's full of car dealerships for some reason. If a treasure island redevelopment started the process of chipping away at those, I would be quite happy.

I'd be cool with pushing the rest of those dealers over in the vicinity of Division and the Kennedy. Then redeveloping Clark with TOD-compliant housing, a bit of commercial, and then just enough retail space to replace any non-car space being lost.

[SIGSEGV]

Originally Posted by emathias

I can only imagine what it might be like to try and transition from a working poor part of Appalachia to pretty much any school in the Northeast, or especially to any of the famous private schools in California.

(I'll take this as a cue for a long and probably obnoxious digression)

Well, when I was there at least (shit... almost 10 years ago now?) at least the majority of undergrad dorms at Stanford weren't particularly nice compared to the rest of campus (take a look at Stern and Wilbur halls...). It doesn't look like too much has changed based on a quick glance at the housing web site. But yes, the main quad / oval felt way too nice at first (and I'm not even from a poor family). And Palo Alto itself is nauseatingly bourgeoisie , which I'm sure this has gotten even worse since then. My wife and I (both alumni) were visiting last year and couldn't believe that at point that was our everyday surroundings.

I went to MIT for grad school, and though a pretty nice campus (in places...) it felt drab and dreary by comparison. Maybe it's because I spent most of my time in building 26, which is so ugly it's hard to even find a link to a picture of... (and here's the best I can do: https://whereis.mit.edu/?go=26)

As for UChicago, as far as I can tell (I'm a postdoc at UChicago, so I only minimally interact with undergrads... mostly just the ones in my research group), UChicago is going all out to attract undergrads. They've built super-nice new dorms (with a Dollop inside, which I can hardly afford). The Harper Center has led to making 53rd street much shinier (UChicago old-timers lament that 53rd has lost its edge). We even apparently have a policy preventing non-faculty staff from teaching or even subbing classes to game undergrad rankings. Since UChicago's US News ranking has shot up, I've heard several people comment that the undergrad population is becoming... shall I say... less quirky? (i.e. more broadly similar to the student bodies at Stanford/Harvard). I guess it's working?

I think the biggest improvement UChicago's campus would cost very little and consist of pedestrianizing Ellis between 56th and 59th, 57th between Ellis and University, and University between 57th and the Oriental Institute (maybe allow buses, like Serra Mall at Stanford has buses; the food trucks can stay too).

[harryc]

Dec 24

[Busy Bee]

Originally Posted by harryc

Dec 24

Less than stellar tolerance on the panel installation if I may say so.

[spyguy]

Originally Posted by spyguy

Ugh, demolition delay for 42-46 E Superior again. Not sure what they are planning after Reilly axed the last proposal.

Some potentially good news:

Status: 90-day hold extended to 03/08/2019 by mutual agreement

I really hope they aren't allowed to demo these buildings.

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by SIGSEGV

We even apparently have a policy preventing non-faculty staff from teaching or even subbing classes to game undergrad rankings.

Not that this is the point of your post, but good. When I was an undergrad (at another university), my computational theory class (proofs on DFA, NFA, etc) was taught by 2 PhD candidates. Both were very smart (one went to U of Chicago, and the other went on to be a postdoc at Cal Tech after), but bad teachers. It was so bad that the chair of the Computer Science department made a rule that no grad students could teach a more advanced undergrad class like this again.

Originally Posted by emathias

I don't think I knew you got engaged! Congrats!

Thanks! It happened about a month and a half ago.

[10023]

Originally Posted by emathias

Ignoring the ad hominem attack, tons of universities in urban settings if similar density have buildings with setbacks like that. The DePaul Center in the Loop has a setback creating a small plaza at State and Jackson, also DePaul's Arts and Letters Hall in Lincoln Park has a setback similar to the Loyola rendering.

Further afield, Harvard's Smith Campus Center across from Harvard Square has a similar-sized setback. A ton of MIT's buildings incorporate setbacks. As do University buildings everywhere.

Many academic buildings do. That doesn’t make it good urban design. And MIT’s campus is not exactly Yale’s.

And do you know what ad hominem means? That comment was directly related to a prediction about the likely project budget, and in any case, refers to the institution commissioning the project, not my opponent in an argument. An “ad hominem attack” is impossible in the context.

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

This coming from a medicore forumer with a small "endowment", the quality of this post isn't inprssive either...

Now, THIS is an ad hominem attack.

Anyway the post is really too old for me to even remember the building in question, so never mind.

[LouisVanDerWright]

^^^

Originally Posted by spyguy

Some potentially good news:



I really hope they aren't allowed to demo these buildings.

Why not build over them? Why couldn't they build an elevator core on the vacant lot in the corner and another core in the NE corner behind the historic buildings and then bridge floors between them well above the historic properties? Boom, you get rid of the vacant lot and put a 50 floor highrise holding that corner, you save the historic buildings, and you do something architecturally unique. Something like that couldn't possibly be any more complicated than what they did at 150 Riverside and you don't even have to deal with live rails.

[harryc]

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

^^^



Why not build over them? Why couldn't they build an elevator core on the vacant lot in the corner and another core in the NE corner behind the historic buildings and then bridge floors between them well above the historic properties? Boom, you get rid of the vacant lot and put a 50 floor highrise holding that corner, you save the historic buildings, and you do something architecturally unique. Something like that couldn't possibly be any more complicated than what they did at 150 Riverside and you don't even have to deal with live rails.

That sounds really really expensive - save the facades as has been done more commonly, and more economically.

• Roosevelt Dorms
• Legacy on the park (?)
• that theater on North and Clark
• 905 Fulton Market.

Or even a full tear down, and then re-use of the old skin like at the Cedar Hotel.

[BonoboZill4]

Originally Posted by harryc

That sounds really really expensive - save the facades as has been done more commonly, and more economically.

• Roosevelt Dorms
• Legacy on the park (?)
• that theater on North and Clark
• 905 Fulton Market.

Or even a full tear down, and then re-use of the old skin like at the Cedar Hotel.

Yeah the Legacy at Millennium park and its sister tower behind the old City Library were both facadecotmies, and well done ones at that.

[harryc]

Dec 17



Dec 19



The Clark street face


From the river


Dec 26

Never realized that the building bridges lower Carol and the ROW.

[LouisVanDerWright]

I had no idea they were chopping off the entire top of the building leaving only a retail stub. Now I see why you are so mad!


In all seriousness though, that model demonstrates how little they care about the architectural integreity of the remodel, they don't even care what it will look like in context of the entire building as if it would have been significantly more expensive to just build a model of the whole building

[harryc]

Dec 18





Dec 28

Heritage Bikes and Coffee In the summer they plan to offer repair work through the alley door.

[tjp]

Didn't get to snap any photos, but Flats / Cedar Street's "The Draper" development at Broadway and Argyle is looking pretty good. And it's big...342 units! The immediate area should feel much more active in a couple of years with that plus TimeLine theater going in across the street.

[harryc]

Dec 7

[harryc]

Dec 7

[harryc]

Dec 7

[harryc]

Dec 7

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

^^^



Why not build over them? Why couldn't they build an elevator core on the vacant lot in the corner and another core in the NE corner behind the historic buildings and then bridge floors between them well above the historic properties? Boom, you get rid of the vacant lot and put a 50 floor highrise holding that corner, you save the historic buildings, and you do something architecturally unique. Something like that couldn't possibly be any more complicated than what they did at 150 Riverside and you don't even have to deal with live rails.

http://urbantoronto.ca/database/proj...llington-house

Definitely seems possible to build the parking podium on the warehouse site, maybe with reconstructed facade, and span over the three Victorians with a truss and super column on the vacant corner lot. Have the tower be a long slab running east-west and set it back to the north end of the site to give prominence to the historic buildings.