HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Buildings & Architecture > Never Built & Visionary Projects > Cancelled Project Threads Archive


Park Michigan in the SkyscraperPage Database

Building Data Page   • Comparison Diagram   • Chicago Skyscraper Diagram
Chicago Projects & Construction Forum

 

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #541  
Old Posted Jan 12, 2008, 3:16 AM
headcase's Avatar
headcase headcase is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: East Village, Chicago
Posts: 455
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pandemonious View Post

Are there any elevations available of this tower? We could then see how slender the narrow face of the tower is.
Someone might have them, but if I remember correctly the tower itself is 80' X 100'

SSDD
__________________
He was constantly reminded of how startlingly different a place the world was when viewed from a point only three feet to the left.
     
     
  #542  
Old Posted Jan 12, 2008, 5:35 AM
Pandemonious's Avatar
Pandemonious Pandemonious is offline
Chaos Machine
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,290
Ok, so the tower portion of the building is 80' at its narrowest, but that doesn't mean that the base of the tower isn't significantly wider, right? The parking lot currently there is ~110' wide N-S.. so the total building overall has slightly less than an 8:1 slenderness ratio.. which is slender, but not that slender for a reinforced concrete building. I'd say the slender portion of the building isn't more than about 700' tall.

I am working on a reinforced concrete supertall building that has a roughly 9:1 slenderness ratio AND leans out cantilevering over 20+ feet at the top. We have some thick shear walls at the base, but it really isn't that complex.

We have no tuned mass damper either..
This tower is definitely doable, regardless of where it is in the city.

I say there is more going on, or they had a half ass engineering job to begin with, which seems unlikely since P/H has done highrise buildings before, although not as tall.
__________________
My Diagram: http://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?m2346
     
     
  #543  
Old Posted Jan 12, 2008, 5:51 AM
honte honte is offline
Registered
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Chicago - every nook and cranny
Posts: 4,628
^ That supertall wouldn't - ahem - be anywhere in Illinois would it?
     
     
  #544  
Old Posted Jan 12, 2008, 6:02 AM
Pandemonious's Avatar
Pandemonious Pandemonious is offline
Chaos Machine
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,290
^No. Not even close.
__________________
My Diagram: http://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?m2346
     
     
  #545  
Old Posted Jan 12, 2008, 6:17 AM
honte honte is offline
Registered
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Chicago - every nook and cranny
Posts: 4,628
^ Ah, shucks. I was hoping to get a few more details on the ultra-secret Pandemonious Chicago supertall rumor. If that thing officially dies, please let us know so that we can take it off the "rumored supertall list".

Anyway, in keeping with this line of discussion, the government-rejected, 80-story tower once proposed for the Athletic Assocaition just off of Michigan Avenue had an awesome 11.5:1 slenderness, in nearly identical conditions as Park Michigan. It never got as far as wind tunnel, but it was going to be fine. The system was steel frame with concrete core and a few additional shear walls.
     
     
  #546  
Old Posted Jan 12, 2008, 6:40 AM
Northwest Northwest is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Chicago
Posts: 405
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pandemonious View Post
^No. Not even close.
If I had to guess, this would be in Dubai.
I really wish Park Michigan would pull through. I have my fingers crossed!

     
     
  #547  
Old Posted Jan 14, 2008, 5:53 AM
Jaroslaw's Avatar
Jaroslaw Jaroslaw is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Seoul
Posts: 1,792
edit: news already posted
__________________
Cambodia, Laos, Vietnam
     
     
  #548  
Old Posted Mar 1, 2008, 6:27 PM
spyguy's Avatar
spyguy spyguy is offline
THAT Guy
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 5,887
http://chicagobusiness.com/cgi-bin/news.pl?id=28421

Plan for South Loop condo tower takes a hit
By Eddie Baeb and Thomas A. Corfman
March 01, 2008


Plans for an 80-story condominium tower that would overlook Grant Park on South Michigan Avenue are in doubt after a lender filed a foreclosure lawsuit, seeking to recoup more than $4.25 million.
     
     
  #549  
Old Posted Mar 1, 2008, 6:37 PM
nomarandlee's Avatar
nomarandlee nomarandlee is online now
My Mind Has Left My Body
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,009
Obviously its disappointing as its a great height and a nice looking tower but hopefully we can still get a a 45- 60fl. building there and maybe more in that range behind the Michigan streetwall south of the CNA and the Colombian.
     
     
  #550  
Old Posted Mar 1, 2008, 7:17 PM
BVictor1's Avatar
BVictor1 BVictor1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 9,528
^Maybe a competent developer will invest in the project and move forward. There's still hope.
__________________
titanic1
     
     
  #551  
Old Posted Mar 1, 2008, 10:11 PM
jet cm jet cm is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Chicago area
Posts: 109
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVictor1 View Post
^Maybe a competent developer will invest in the project and move forward. There's still hope.
Second that!!! Same goes for 1000 S. Michigan.

     
     
  #552  
Old Posted Mar 2, 2008, 3:33 AM
simcityaustin's Avatar
simcityaustin simcityaustin is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Atlanta/Chicago
Posts: 408
...they do seem very confident at least. I really hope this goes through at 80....the south loop really needs it.
__________________
University of Iowa! Go Hawkeyes!
No, I think I'll just go down and have some pudding and wait for it all to turn up.... It always does in the end. ~ Luna Lovegood
Chi-town fan!
     
     
  #553  
Old Posted Mar 2, 2008, 3:46 PM
chicubs111 chicubs111 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,060
Quote:
Originally Posted by jet cm View Post
Second that!!! Same goes for 1000 S. Michigan.

Yea...what i cant undertand is that 1000 S. Michigan actually had like 60 or 70% sold...how he couldnt find a lender with those numbers is beyond me..and this was quite awhile...before the housing bust
     
     
  #554  
Old Posted Mar 2, 2008, 5:49 PM
honte honte is offline
Registered
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Chicago - every nook and cranny
Posts: 4,628
If they could have at least gotten city approval for this project, it would bode much better for someone else stepping in to pick it up. As it is now, I don't think the odds of it being built as envisioned are very good.

Too bad, of the three in jeopardy now (680 Rush, Mandarin, Park Michigan), this was the project I liked the most.
     
     
  #555  
Old Posted Mar 2, 2008, 6:26 PM
Chicago Shawn's Avatar
Chicago Shawn Chicago Shawn is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,793
^Word.

The biggest mistake with this one was getting the proposal out of the gates too late. Had it been a serious proposal a year earlier, it would have been approved and probably be in a similar situation with X/O. This proposal however was dragged into the 2nd ward elections and become a political football. Fioretti never made a public announcement during the election season that he would kill it, but I suspect he is using this project as a bargaining chip to get William Barr to fix the window leakage problem at 1717 Prairie, which has now gotten attention.

Personally, I feel the foreclosure is the final nail in the coffin on this awesome tower. Barr really doesn't have any major assets that I can think of in the city for liquidation to raise the cash he needs ASAP. Perhaps he can dump unsold units at Vision on state to an auction or something, perhaps he has suburban property to sell. I cannot see him picking up investors who will make up the lions share of the financing on a project that has no guarantee of political approval. Anyway, that is just my opinion, I could be way off base.

My assessment: If the bank doesn't take back the land, Barr will sell the site and use the cash to move forward on Park 1000. Despite the weak market, product in good locations, (particularly those with unobstructed views forever) still sells. This building will have buyers if it ever moves forward, regardless of who the developer is.

Last edited by Chicago Shawn; Mar 2, 2008 at 6:38 PM.
     
     
  #556  
Old Posted Mar 2, 2008, 7:18 PM
Tom Servo's Avatar
Tom Servo Tom Servo is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,647
Quote:
Originally Posted by honte View Post
If they could have at least gotten city approval for this project, it would bode much better for someone else stepping in to pick it up. As it is now, I don't think the odds of it being built as envisioned are very good.

Too bad, of the three in jeopardy now (680 Rush, Mandarin, Park Michigan), this was the project I liked the most.
yeah, as much as i hate p/h this one seems pretty nice for my 'hood.
     
     
  #557  
Old Posted Mar 3, 2008, 6:27 PM
museumparktom museumparktom is offline
Chicagotom SSC
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Chicago
Posts: 438
This one is DEAD

* moderator edit *

tom, the link to the crain's article you posted was already posted by spyguy on the previous page of this thread. always remember to read through a thread before you post articles to see if someone has posted them before you, thanks.

- steely

Last edited by Steely Dan; Mar 3, 2008 at 6:53 PM.
     
     
  #558  
Old Posted Mar 3, 2008, 11:12 PM
BVictor1's Avatar
BVictor1 BVictor1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 9,528
Quote:
Originally Posted by honte View Post
If they could have at least gotten city approval for this project, it would bode much better for someone else stepping in to pick it up. As it is now, I don't think the odds of it being built as envisioned are very good.

Too bad, of the three in jeopardy now (680 Rush, Mandarin, Park Michigan), this was the project I liked the most.
They couldn't get approval before the election, and we all know what happened after the election in terms of PD approvals in the 2nd ward.
__________________
titanic1
     
     
  #559  
Old Posted Mar 4, 2008, 12:24 AM
museumparktom museumparktom is offline
Chicagotom SSC
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Chicago
Posts: 438
My bad. Didn't see it. It's a shame that this one isn't going to be built. I think that it was one of the better designs of the boom.
     
     
  #560  
Old Posted Mar 4, 2008, 11:08 PM
APPRAISER APPRAISER is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 258
This is a prime spot for a tall building.........lets just wait until the real-estate mess gets worked out. Chicago will have another building boom, and who knows??........The building in this spot, could or might, be taller, or have a better design.
I'm sad too!! I was hoping this one would be built in the current boom....
     
     
This discussion thread continues

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

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Buildings & Architecture > Never Built & Visionary Projects > Cancelled Project Threads Archive
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 5:23 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.