CHICAGO | General Developments

[the urban politician]

^ Hey, at least the building will be "much bigger" than the original.

I don't mind loss of historic buildings if they are replaced with larger structures. :cheers:

If you want small, cute buildings, move to New England

[honte]

:doh:

[Ch.G, Ch.G]

:doh:

My sentiments exactly...

[lawfin]

From Yelp:
01/05/2009 Addie L. says:

SPORTS CORNER WILL BE BACK!

Sports Corner is getting a face lift and will be back late June early July. The new building will be beautiful and much bigger than the original. Construction was started as early as possible in order to be back for some of the Cubs Season. Also, Sport Corner gift certificates will be honored at Vines on Clark and Cubby Bear if you want to use them now.

-

What do they mean by "much bigger" ? Sports corner was in a 3 story structure....so what can we expect ...6 stories??

[Nowhereman1280]

^^^ I hope they build a building the size of 50 East Chestnut! Wouldn't that be great?

[ardecila]

I'm pretty sure they just mean that the BAR will be bigger than the original. The overall building will be smaller because it won't have apartments above.

[the urban politician]

I'm pretty sure they just mean that the BAR will be bigger than the original. The overall building will be smaller because it won't have apartments above.

^ Truth is, you're probably right.

We don't get a bigger building. We get a bigger one story bar

[Mr Downtown]

I don't mind loss of historic buildings if they are replaced with larger structures.

Seriously? You value quantity over quality?

Is that also how you evaluate food? Books? Women?

[dropdeaded209]

Men?

[the urban politician]

Seriously? You value quantity over quality?

Is that also how you evaluate food? Books? Women?

Loaded question! ;)

I was being a bit tongue-in-cheek, and NO, I prefer historic buildings over larger monstrosities in most cases unless we're talking about a significant gain in density (ie a 3 story brick structure getting replaced by a 20-story glass highrise).

Regarding the rest:

Food: quantity helps, but quality wins
Books: Rarely read them any more. Journals, newspapers, and the internet pretty much satisfy me
Women: Quantity would be nice if I were an Arab prince, but my wife keeps me happy :haha:

[spyguy]

In case any photographers were interested...

It looks like workers will be installing some of the giant new windows on the trading floor at the Mercantile Exchange Building today. It looked like they were getting ready to do so when I walked by this morning. It will be on the river side.

http://img27.imageshack.us/img27/8991/p1000938lp2.jpg

[Nowhereman1280]

Three quick notes on lots near Chicago and State.

1. There is a backhoe and construction fencing on the Southwest corner of Superior and Dearborn. Not sure what is going on there, does anyone know?

2. A building is being built very quickly over on Clark Between Superior and Chicago. Its already up to 8 stories and looks like it might go higher. Does anyone know about this or what it is? It just started like 2 or 3 weeks ago and the cinderblock walls are already 8 stories tall. Seems strange given the state of the credit markets.

3. There were survey crews out on the site of the dunkin donuts a Chicago and State. It appears that the retail and 25 E. Pearson expansion is moving very rapidly. This is where Loyola intends on expanding its existing classroom building over the lot that is currently there. The building is completely gone now, not even rubble left...

[spyguy]

http://chicagojournal.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&SubSectionID=60&ArticleID=7029&TM=64088.64

Hockey is heading west
City to sell land to owner of rink for new facility

By MICAH MAIDENBERG

Plans for a new hockey rink on the West Side took a step forward Tuesday, when the city's Community Development Commission voted to sell four parcels of land near Campbell and Madison to a company associated with Johnny's Ice House, the West Loop hockey facility.

Tom Moro, owner of Johnny's, wants to build a three-story 60,000-square-foot building containing a 29,000-square-foot ice rink, a locker room, media center and other training space in the 2500 block of W. Madison Street. The rink itself will be on the second floor, with 60 parking spaces on the first. A third level will seat spectators.
---
http://img3.imageshack.us/img3/1554/largejohnnys01kw8.jpg
http://img3.imageshack.us/img3/9660/largeperspective200120crw2.jpg
http://img3.imageshack.us/img3/7144/largejohnnys03zy4.png
http://img3.imageshack.us/img3/985/largejohnnys04ip2.png

[spyguy]

Three quick notes on lots near Chicago and State.

1. There is a backhoe and construction fencing on the Southwest corner of Superior and Dearborn. Not sure what is going on there, does anyone know?

2. A building is being built very quickly over on Clark Between Superior and Chicago. Its already up to 8 stories and looks like it might go higher. Does anyone know about this or what it is? It just started like 2 or 3 weeks ago and the cinderblock walls are already 8 stories tall. Seems strange given the state of the credit markets.

1. Poetry Foundation.
2. By Zed? I believe that's only supposed to be around 7-8 floors. Condos + restaurant space.

[ardecila]

The new Johnny's Ice House looks fantastic! A nice piece of modern architecture in East Garfield Park, where all new building has been postmodern... :)

[honte]

^ :haha: Now I know why they had all those samples of channel glass floating around the Wheeler-Kearns office.

[the urban politician]

Good news on the ice skating rink, plus it already has financing (a growing rarity)

[Nowhereman1280]

OOO I like the Ice Rink, nice design, nice name...

1. Poetry Foundation.
2. By Zed? I believe that's only supposed to be around 7-8 floors. Condos + restaurant space.

Well those are both great improvements over empty lots! Great to hear!

[the urban politician]

^ The Poetry foundation actually replaced something, didn't it?

[denizen467]

The rink itself will be on the second floor, with 60 parking spaces on the first.
Would this make Chicago the city with the highest ice rink in the world?
Most of 'em are gonna be on ground level, one figures.

It'd be nice to add to our highest supermarket in the world (in JHC - I think that's right, yes?) and other trophies.

[Jibba]

Old news that I'm still psyched about; Sullivan's uncovered facades on Wabash:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3461/3276390687_3a0a3f2d2e.jpg?v=0http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3359/3276389793_b2bf2d8fda.jpg?v=0
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3469/3276410485_7627bbf8cd.jpg?v=0

[Nowhereman1280]

^^^ Oh! I walked by that the other day and didn't realize that it was the uncovered Sullivan! I thought to myself "hey there's a Sullivan building", actually I even said it to my Mother who was with me and has recently gotten into Louis Sullivan and FLW after reading a book about FLW.

I'm really happy about that too, I hope there are many more like it to be uncovered!

[Nowhereman1280]

I have got news regarding the Sears Skydeck glass walkway thing.

They are not punching out the windows on the skydeck level (104 or whatever it is) but rather on the 99th floor which used to be a ballroom. They currently have the ballroom closed and have completely gutted the floor already. It shouldn't be long until we see them replace the windows...

Also, as much as I agree that this is sort of a defacing of the original design, I have to disagree with Honte's point about us no longer being able to look straight up the West face. We can't look straight up the west face right now, that barrel lobby prevents anyone from getting close enough to look straight up the face. The 4 foot glass projection on only the 99th floor is not going to be enough to break the current shape of the building from that angle. I doubt it will be noticeable from all but the closest perpendicular views. For example, if you work on the top of 311 wacker, expect to have your elevation view of Sears disrupted by a 4ft glass box.

[Via Chicago]

The new Johnny's Ice House looks fantastic! A nice piece of modern architecture in East Garfield Park, where all new building has been postmodern... :)

Agreed; that design is a pleasant surprise

[emathias]

...
2. A building is being built very quickly over on Clark Between Superior and Chicago. Its already up to 8 stories and looks like it might go higher. Does anyone know about this or what it is? It just started like 2 or 3 weeks ago and the cinderblock walls are already 8 stories tall. Seems strange given the state of the credit markets.
...

2-3 weeks? No, they've been working on this for quite some time. You may have just noticed it 2-3 weeks ago, but I live 2 blocks from there and, trust me, it's been under way for several months. I believe it's topped out now. I don't think credit markets hit projects like this as hard as larger ones - this probably only costs a few million to construct, so it could easily be self-financed by a lot of people.

That said, I'm glad to see this kind of building go up. I hope we see more like it in the area, as long as they aren't in places that will block what would otherwise be a good location for a future highrise. :-)

[VivaLFuego]

I like it too. Built out to the maximum allowable floor area and dimensions as allowed by right under the DX-7 zoning. Gives you an idea of how that area could seriously densify if and when it's totally built out.

That said, it's also an indicator of the threat that some smaller-scale ~4 story historic buildings face due to the development potential of the land they're on. The area desperately needs some sort of landmark district to protect the handful of gems that remain and add irreplacable character to the area. Luckily, this particular one replaced an utterly forgettable 1-story structure, but of course we haven't always been so lucky, nor will we be in the future.

[DCCliff]

Would this make Chicago the city with the highest ice rink in the world?
Most of 'em are gonna be on ground level, one figures.

It'd be nice to add to our highest supermarket in the world (in JHC - I think that's right, yes?) and other trophies.


'Fraid not. For one, NYC has a rink on the midtown west side that is on at least (I think) the 12th floor.

[EarlyBuyer]

The Parkhomes at Lakeshore East

Photos taken by EarlyBuyer

http://img15.imageshack.us/img15/5197/dsc0730nz9.jpg


http://img10.imageshack.us/img10/4726/dsc0778km6.jpg

[EarlyBuyer]

Site of future Village Market at Lakeshore East

Photo by EarlyBuyer

http://img27.imageshack.us/img27/1499/dsc0670su8.jpg

[Ch.G, Ch.G]

http://img15.imageshack.us/img15/5197/dsc0730nz9.jpg

I feel like this is the equivalent of a gold grill.

[denizen467]

'Fraid not. For one, NYC has a rink on the midtown west side that is on at least (I think) the 12th floor.
Thanks for the info.
Is it regulation size though, or something smaller for recreation/practice rather than full hockey?

[denizen467]

They are not punching out the windows on the skydeck level (104 or whatever it is) but rather on the 99th floor which used to be a ballroom. They currently have the ballroom closed and have completely gutted the floor already. It shouldn't be long until we see them replace the windows...


WTF, there was a ballroom on 99 ?!? That was more profitable than renting to some private equity outfit or something ??
I presume this will become a new stop on the Skydeck elevator run?

I think the big aesthetic question remaining is whether the 4-foot punchout will run the full width of the west face or something lesser than that. What have you heard?

[ChiPsy]

I think the big aesthetic question remaining is whether the 4-foot punchout will run the full width of the west face or something lesser than that.

I think that's one big remaining aesthetic question, but, geez, if they're adding a box to the facade on a *ballroom floor*, another question is what's to prevent them from adding another one on the west side of the skydeck to excite tourists, and then one on the east side of the 11th floor to get SPSS to re-new its lease, and maybe one just for fun on the 84th floor to attract butterflies??

Without regulation (as is apparent, or they wouldn't be able to do something this audacious to begin with), the entire Sears Tower could be pockmarked with an acne breakout of notched-out overlooks and notched-in sunrooms.

Financially desperate owners of architectural treasures shouldn't be allowed to mar them this egregiously -- especially when they're dealing with the biggest single building on the Chicago skyline.

Where is Blair Kamin on this?!

[Nowhereman1280]

Come on now ChiPsy, I'm sure this isn't going to lead to mutilations all over the building. And for the record, this IS going to be on the West Face, just below the SkyDeck floor.

Yes there is a Ballroom on 99 and there always has been according to my friend. I have no word on how large its going to be other than the 4ft projection and that it will be on the West Face floor 99. I'd assume that it will probably be along most, if not all, of the West face of that floor, but I don't know for sure.

[honte]

I think that's one big remaining aesthetic question, but, geez, if they're adding a box to the facade on a *ballroom floor*, another question is what's to prevent them from adding another one on the west side of the skydeck to excite tourists, and then one on the east side of the 11th floor to get SPSS to re-new its lease, and maybe one just for fun on the 84th floor to attract butterflies??

Without regulation (as is apparent, or they wouldn't be able to do something this audacious to begin with), the entire Sears Tower could be pockmarked with an acne breakout of notched-out overlooks and notched-in sunrooms.

Financially desperate owners of architectural treasures shouldn't be allowed to mar them this egregiously -- especially when they're dealing with the biggest single building on the Chicago skyline.

Where is Blair Kamin on this?!

I agree. Once a building is compromised, it's a very slippery slope. The alterations usually seem to say, "We don't value the original architectural statement - do what you please."

I doubt Kamin knows this is happening. Maybe someone should tip him off? BVictor, you seem to have a good relationship.

[Mr Downtown]

I'm sure this isn't going to lead to mutilations all over the building.

Yeah, it's not like they're going to put a lunchbox-shaped entry facing Wacker Drive or anything. Or a cable-supported glass pavilion on the Jackson St side of the plaza. Or put a bunch of stainless steel accents and white marble all over the lobby.

[honte]

^ I get your point...

But the difference between the earlier plans and the new modifications is that, more or less, the earlier renovations were formal additions or appendages to the base of the tower. Not ideal, but not too detrimental. And they are executed by the original designers or people associated with SOM, giving them varying degrees of validity.

[harryc]

SpyGuy posted this in SSC
http://img463.imageshack.us/img463/9797/riverwalkgh5.jpg

A very busy site with multiple crews
http://lh4.ggpht.com/_8TC_VUmf9Fw/SZc-nyzFpdI/AAAAAAABGNk/aczsX-oVNBg/s800/P1250224.JPG

Tied into the bank.
http://lh5.ggpht.com/_8TC_VUmf9Fw/SZc-b4L2SFI/AAAAAAABGMQ/m-npvWzObc4/s800/P1240746.JPG

http://lh4.ggpht.com/_8TC_VUmf9Fw/SZc-dY5zJLI/AAAAAAABGMc/pV_lTNGcVe4/s800/P1240750.JPG

http://lh4.ggpht.com/_8TC_VUmf9Fw/SZc-e2q5nNI/AAAAAAABGMo/6-eO0OjNdW4/s800/P1240836.JPG

http://lh5.ggpht.com/_8TC_VUmf9Fw/SZc-kMDpvpI/AAAAAAABGNM/e1XLCplrSN0/s800/P1240857.JPG

A well used barge
http://lh4.ggpht.com/_8TC_VUmf9Fw/SZc-gonSEJI/AAAAAAABGM0/hJxnw7QpIl4/s800/P1240838.JPG

Sfety - Safety - safety
http://lh4.ggpht.com/_8TC_VUmf9Fw/SZc-iskqp4I/AAAAAAABGNA/lkA44N_OTVw/s800/P1240851.JPG

Standing on fill - this was river just days ago.
http://lh4.ggpht.com/_8TC_VUmf9Fw/SZc-l7EpK3I/AAAAAAABGNY/eodP2ZQqVAY/s800/P1250221.JPG

The old riverwall, 2 rows of pilings with a 3 deep set of planks inbetween.
http://lh3.ggpht.com/_8TC_VUmf9Fw/SZc-pqrdpSI/AAAAAAABGNw/GE3qovbji4M/s800/P1250225.JPG

http://lh4.ggpht.com/_8TC_VUmf9Fw/SZc-rRHfYRI/AAAAAAABGN8/SZbLLVdNXCo/s800/P1250330.JPG

Pilings galore.
http://lh4.ggpht.com/_8TC_VUmf9Fw/SZc-tAwwgDI/AAAAAAABGOI/HgKhoB8dhfY/s800/P1250247.JPG

[Ch.G, Ch.G]

^ Are they going to rename it the Chicago Creek?

[honte]

^ Yeah, that was my concern too... in the end, it probably will be worth it, but I hate to make the river more narrow in places.

Also, that icky 300 LaSalle color scheme in the renders makes me uneasy. I hope that's just there to make the changes more apparent for the sake of the render.

I wish the city would make an architectural advisory committee, comprised of Chicago's best architectural practitioners, to give their input in civic decisions like this.

[harryc]

^ Are they going to rename it the Chicago Creek?

It doesn't appear to take away from the navigable section much. The riverwalk isn't out much further that the yellow bumpers were, and it will now serve their purpose of protecting the bridges. Once you start tying up boats to the side then yes it is going to get crowded, a good problem to have.

[orulz]

Awesome photos, keep the riverwalk updates coming!

So from what I'm seeing, the footprint of the new construction on the riverwalk is something like this: (google maps (http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&ie=UTF8&t=h&msa=0&msid=116658137107650977656.000462f51eed2cd2a45c3&ll=41.887387,-87.623708&spn=0.002915,0.009012&z=18))? The segment where the riverwalk is already pretty narrow, on the curve directly across from Trump, isn't getting widened at all. It also looks like the new riverwalk sections won't rise quite as far out of the water as the old sections. Are my observations correct?

[EarlyBuyer]

Harry, thanks for the outstanding update of the work in progress. Nice work!

[ardecila]

^ Yeah, that was my concern too... in the end, it probably will be worth it, but I hate to make the river more narrow in places.

Also, that icky 300 LaSalle color scheme in the renders makes me uneasy. I hope that's just there to make the changes more apparent for the sake of the render.

I wish the city would make an architectural advisory committee, comprised of Chicago's best architectural practitioners, to give their input in civic decisions like this.

The odd color, if you look closely, is wood planks. Apparently that will be the decking material of the riverwalk extensions, rather than poured concrete or pavers. It makes sense to use a distinct material because the new sections will be much closer to the water - more dock than seawall. I doubt that the rendering is meant to indicate the species or color of the wood. Personally, I'd like to see a dark-stained teak. It would look gorgeous. However, the city may end up using synthetic decking to gain "green cred" and weather resistance.

[Ch.G, Ch.G]

Chicagoist has finally made mention (http://chicagoist.com/2009/02/15/on_jan_31_when_we.php#comments) of the landmark ordinance ruling if anyone feeling's like leaving a comment...

[Jibba]

Riverwalk:
http://img16.imageshack.us/img16/5953/dsc083012612442ma5.jpg

Also, a reminder to those interested: a meeting will be held tomorrow night at the Bucktown-Wicker Park Library (1701 N. Milwaukee), and MCM's proposed parking garage on Milwaukee, adjacent to the NW Tower, will be discussed. Starts at 7pm.

[brian_b]

The riverwalk extension does take away some of the river width, but it doesn't extend more than a few feet beyond the bridge protection pilings that were there before. So the usable space for boat traffic is hardly impacted at all. It's a very good tradeoff considering how much this improves the riverwalk.

[orulz]

The odd color, if you look closely, is wood planks. Apparently that will be the decking material of the riverwalk extensions, rather than poured concrete or pavers. It makes sense to use a distinct material because the new sections will be much closer to the water - more dock than seawall. I doubt that the rendering is meant to indicate the species or color of the wood. Personally, I'd like to see a dark-stained teak. It would look gorgeous. However, the city may end up using synthetic decking to gain "green cred" and weather resistance.

SpyGuy posted this in SSC
Standing on fill - this was river just days ago.
http://lh4.ggpht.com/_8TC_VUmf9Fw/SZc-l7EpK3I/AAAAAAABGNY/eodP2ZQqVAY/s800/P1250221.JPG


Are you sure about the wood decking? I find it unlikely that they would be spending all this time and money on installing these new bulkheads and placing fill dirt behind them, only to deck the riverwalk with wood. IMO, wood is not the ideal material. Even teak doesn't doesn't last that well when exposed to the elements, it can be slippery when wet, should never be salted to prevent ice buildup, and on the whole just looks cheap. IMO it would look bad to have what amounts to a flimsy wooden dock (basically, a boardwalk) hanging off the side of the concrete riverwalk. This is downtown Chicago, not some gaudy beach town or some sleepy little marina.

[laro3]

just got back from san antonio's river walk.very nice,the river is only 4 feet deep and i think 7 at its deepest,and about 10 to 15 feet wide.if it wasnt for the river walk and the alamo,i dont no what kind of economy they would have.

[Jibba]

Some notes from the Bucktown Community Organization meeting this evening:


Of the two parking garages proposed for Bucktown/Wicker Park near the Six Corners intersection (North/Damen/Milwaukee), one is "going through" according to Courtney Owen, VP of Planning and Zoning for the BCO. The garage that is proceeding with construction is the one located on Damen, 1611 N. to be precise. However, they still need approval from the zoning board of city council.

This garage, at 1611 N. Damen, is going ahead in a reduced form: the footprint of the structure has been reduced, and accordingly the building located to the north that was slated to be demolished for the larger-footprint version is now going to be untouched. With the reduced footprint, the number of parking spaces in the garage has been reduced to 66 from 135. Retail at the base is still part of the design.

The BCO received confirmation from the developer of the garage that agreed-to stipulations about the design for the previous version would carry over to the new design. I asked Courtney for specifics regarding these agreed-to criteria, and I did not receive any specific details, only that the BCO gave the developer a variety of stipulations about the design regarding the functionality and the aesthetic.

The other parking garage, at 1628 N. Milwaukee, is still at a preliminary stage. I wasn't able to gather many further details about the current state of the proposal beyond what I have previously posted; Philip (the BCO president) was out of town for the meeting, and he likely has the most up-to-date information. One interesting bit of new information was that Karbowski has run into a bit of a snag with his proposal, which involves the CTA and their interest over the piece of property in question for future expansion plans. Scott Waguespack is still disapproving of the design. There will also be a community vote about the proposal in March (I still need to get the specific date from Courtney), but it is for BCO members only. I am not sure about the efficacy of this vote insofar as how consequential it is to the final outcome of the project.

A person attending tonight's BCO meeting also attended a meeting held by the WPC discussing this garage proposal, and they were presented with a traffic study at that meeting. Not surprisingly, the traffic study they were presented with was very vague, and the party presenting the study was unable to field even minor and uncomplicated questions regarding the logistics of traffic flow on North Avenue. Further corroborating the likelihood that the traffic study was a complete sham, the same agency conducted the traffic studies for both the 1628 Milwaukee proposal and the aforementioned proposal at 1611 Damen, and the traffic studies for each were wildly different according to said gentleman. This despite the fact that they are about 800 ft. from one another. The gentleman also stated that it sounded as though the traffic studies were catered to each development to a high degree and that the agency responsible for them was likely pandering to the developers.

Another zoning item on tonight's agenda was a property at 1810 W. Cortland, previous home of Chicago photographer and preservationist Richard Nickel. Minor modifications have been proposed for the property: a zoning change from RS-3 to RT-4, and a proposed 400 sq.-ft. addition to the rear of the property. According to Courtney, the zoning change is only being requested so that the property can be split into two units out of the current single unit. I am not very familiar with the terms of the zoning lexicon, so I don't know what the potential ramifications of the changed designation are. Also, the owners have expressed their desire to seek landmark status of the property; this despite their desired addition to it (I'm not sure if the addition conflicts with their goal of landmarking or not).

[BWChicago]

Some notes from the Bucktown Community Organization meeting this evening:


Another zoning item on tonight's agenda was a property at 1810 W. Cortland, previous home of Chicago photographer and preservationist Richard Nickel. Minor modifications have been proposed for the property: a zoning change from RS-3 to RT-4, and a proposed 400 sq.-ft. addition to the rear of the property. According to Courtney, the zoning change is only being requested so that the property can be split into two units out of the current single unit. I am not very familiar with the terms of the zoning lexicon, so I don't know what the potential ramifications of the changed designation are. Also, the owners have expressed their desire to seek landmark status of the property; this despite their desired addition to it (I'm not sure if the addition conflicts with their goal of landmarking or not).
[/LIST][/INDENT]

The addition to Nickel's house is troubling. My understanding is that the rear wall was the main alteration Nickel made to the house. I'm not sure why you'd want to split that to two units either - it's a really neat work/live space as it is, it seems like that would be more marketable than a couple of rental units.

[Ch.G, Ch.G]

^ Wow, Jibba, thank you for the comprehensive update.

I'm still disappointed to hear the 1611 N Damen garage is going through. The Damen Blue Line stop is right there, traffic at that intersection is already pretty terrible and it's a prominent, highly visible site. But the preservation of that existing building is great news.

I guess if it does eventually get the okay that would at least put (yet another) damper on Karbowski's plans, right? I mean, two parking garages almost directly across the street from each other...?

[harryc]

Making quick work of the foundation.
http://lh6.ggpht.com/_8TC_VUmf9Fw/SZwHqnPDd1I/AAAAAAABGlc/tRzsqLSdjZA/s800/P1250688.JPG

Old block foundation of bookstore behind garage, the large concrete sleeper is in the old alley.
http://lh5.ggpht.com/_8TC_VUmf9Fw/SZwEJ_eVWiI/AAAAAAABGkU/9VxXOjDDqBw/s800/P1250690.JPG

Digging out a grease trap, which will sit directly under the alley. Uncovered the other side of the old buried alley, a brick arch.
http://lh6.ggpht.com/_8TC_VUmf9Fw/SZwELzjWe_I/AAAAAAABGkg/QiekpS8i_u8/s800/P1250693.JPG

Old doorway ?
http://lh4.ggpht.com/_8TC_VUmf9Fw/SZwEO9jsyWI/AAAAAAABGkw/h122TNjxYhQ/s800/P1250697.JPG

[BVictor1]

Didn't see this posted yet.

http://www.suntimes.com/business/1436134,CST-FIN-condo18.article

The woes of condos

REAL ESTATE | Downtown sales sink to negative 250 units in fourth quarter

February 18, 2009

BY DAVID ROEDER droeder@suntimes.com


It sounds like a bad joke, but it's true: The downtown residential market is so awful, it's shrinking.

Last year, the number of new condominiums slated downtown declined by almost 3,000 units. And in the fourth quarter, the number of residential sales was a negative 250 units.

http://media1.suntimes.com/multimedia/39.jpg_20090217_20_56_30_106-282-400.imageContent
New condominiums along the Chicago River (east of Columbus Drive, west of Lake Shore Drive) are seen downtown in 2005. Nearly 5,000 units are expected to be delivered this year, but hardly any new units are expected in 2010 and 2011. (Sun-Times file)

How can that be?

The numbers are drawn from an annual survey that Appraisal Research Counselors reported Tuesday. They are the worst results anybody can recall for the reports, which the company has compiled in quarterly updates since 1997.

Gail Lissner, vice president at Appraisal Research, said the residential inventory fell as developers scrapped projects they would have delivered in a couple of years. The sales figures went negative in late 2008, she said, because buyers began canceling contracts and some developers were caught fudging sales data from earlier in the year.

Overall, 592 condos sold in central Chicago during 2008, the survey found. The result was abysmal for a market that has generated annual sales of 4,000 to 8,000 units.

Lissner said business came almost to a standstill as a lack of credit joined with the recession to scare buyers or render them unable to qualify for a mortgage. The same conditions denied developers the funds to build.

She saw little prospect for recovery this year. "Buyers are going to need to be convinced they have good job security," Lissner told a luncheon audience of real estate executives.

But she said that for all the gloom in the industry, condo prices downtown are holding close to steady. The company's report covers lakefront neighborhoods from North Avenue to McCormick Place, extended to include the West Loop.

Appraisal Research's check of sales data in existing condo towers showed that since 2005, prices in a few buildings are up 10 percent to 20 percent. They include 195 N. Harbor Drive and 360 E. Randolph, where lake views proved good investments.

But other buildings registered a price decline of 10 percent to 20 percent. Leading losers were 345 N. La Salle and 33 W. Delaware, where Lissner said desperate sales by speculators were a factor.

Another condo conundrum: even though projects are being scrapped, nearly 5,000 units are expected to be delivered in 2009. "We're at the tail end of what really has been four years of record deliveries," Lissner said.

The new arrivals were conceived and financed around 2006, before credit problems took hold. But Lissner said hardly any new units can be expected downtown in 2010 and 2011. "We're looking at several years of very limited new inventory," she said.

More stable, but smaller, is the market for downtown apartments. Ron DeVries, Appraisal Research vice president, said builders were able to finance new projects until recently.

[Jibba]

I'm still disappointed to hear the 1611 N Damen garage is going through. The Damen Blue Line stop is right there, traffic at that intersection is already pretty terrible and it's a prominent, highly visible site.
[...]
I guess if it does eventually get the okay that would at least put (yet another) damper on Karbowski's plans, right? I mean, two parking garages almost directly across the street from each other...?

Yeah, I'm rather disappointed that the garage is going through as well. That's just something that does not need to get built in the neighborhood. I'm convinced that in a lot of cases with parking supply ends up creating the demand instead of vice-versa. If Bucktown/Wicker Park provides something unique and desirable, people will travel there whether there is a glut of parking or not--I can't tell you how many times I've seen people on the El and the bus in all different parts of the city with shopping bags from boutiques located exclusively in Bucktown. Why we can't foster this approach to accessing the neighborhood is irritating. Yes, the sweeping changes needed to make public transit the "more convenient" experience it needs to be for a lot of people will take some time, but the foundation has been set. We don't need parking garages squandering possible progress and throwing the momentum the other way.

I have mixed feelings as to the chances of Karbowski's garage on Milwaukee. He is quite an insidious and unrelenting fellow, and he already pulled some BS with his relative-slash-zoning attorney to get a use permit for NW Tower even though Scott Waguespack opposed it. Philip, of the BCO, thinks that it could come down to how favorable the local alderman's (Scott's) relationship is with City Hall if it gets to that point, which I think it could. The most promising news to me was that the CTA is now in the mix, so at least an institution with a little more clout than a neighborhood organization is involved as an opposing party.

----------------------------------------

BWChicago: I'm a little disappointed with the proposed addition to Nickel's former residence as well, especially considering all of the work he put in to restoring the rear of the building and converting the first-floor bakery. However, I question the pertinence of placing his residence on the Chicago Seven. Don't get me wrong; Richard Nickel's legacy is a great one, and he is a personal hero of mine, but is his legacy strong enough to warrant placing his home on that particular list when there are likely many stronger candidates to bring attention to? I don't mean any disrespect, but I question the motivation behind Preservation Chicago effectively declaring his former home some sort of shrine to his existence on the scale of that large of a commitment to it. This is not to say that I don't care about the structure at all; quite the opposite, in fact. But do you think that Nickel, were he to be alive today, would want to see attention drawn to more significant structures?

[Mr Downtown]

I also found the enshrining of Nickel's home a rather odd thing to go to the mat for.

[EarlyBuyer]

News update today from Magellan:

"...Roundy's Supermarkets, Inc. has just signed-on as the full service grocer for the Village Market Center. Roundy's Supermarkets, Inc. is headquartered in Milwaukee, Wisconsin and is one of the Midwest's oldest and largest grocers operating 152 retail grocery stores in Wisconsin and Minnesota. This 56,000 square foot store anchoring the Village Market Center will be Roundy's first in Chicago.

More information on The Village Market including an estimated ground breaking date will be (forthcoming)..."

[OhioGuy]

I made the mistake of posting this in the highrise proposal section of the forum, so I'll repost here.

In the State of the University address presented on January 28, 2009, Dr. Charles Middleton, President of Roosevelt University, provided some information regarding the University's plans to construct a highrise tower primarily for student housing on the site of the Herman Crown Center (http://www.emporis.com/en/wm/bu/?id=116933) (located on the east side of Wabash between Van Buren & Congress).

In the power point presentation that was used, two renderings were provided to give somewhat of an idea of what to expect in the coming years. Dr. Middleton referred to the building as, "an expression of our continuing success and a public statement about where the University is and where it's going, and of future excellence to come." I've included a link to where the video is located on the RU website, however it cuts off before he concludes his speech. The information regarding the highrise is near the end of the video. I remember him providing further details about the building, though unfortunately that commentary is beyond where the video ends. I seem to remember him commenting that this will be a LEED certified building. He noted that education infrastructure is an element that the new Obama administration is keenly interested in providing assistance to, and as a result it's possible the University may be able to receive some financial assistance. He also commented about the construction timeline, indicating that the building is basically ready to go once the Board of Trustees makes the final vote in June. I do know the building is somewhere between 400 - 500 ft, though I'm not sure on the number of floors.

Here's a link to the RU President's page (http://www.roosevelt.edu/president/default.asp) with the State of the University video & power point presentation.

The two renderings below are taken directly from the power point presentation.

(View from Grant Park - it's the tallest building between the red CNA tower and the Sears Tower)
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3558/3290853117_4a157fd4e9_o.jpg

(View from the El on Wabash Avenue heading southbound toward Roosevelt Road)
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3543/3291669650_a9e7f4bbb4_o.jpg

And here's the timeline that was presented in the power point presentation:

January 2009: Design/Development documents 100% complete
February 2009: Application filed with Dept. of Planning and Development
February 2009: General contractor identified for main project
Spring 2009: Periodic meetings with community and landmark groups
Spring 2009: Demolition of Herman Crown Center begins
Summer 2009: Demolition to be completed
May 2009: Construction drawings 90% complete
May - June 2009: Ordinance published
June 2009: Board of Trustees deliberation
August 2009: Ground-breaking
June 2011: Substantial completion
August 2011: Occupancy for teh 2011/12 AY

[spyguy]

^Thanks for posting that. I'm not sure why it was a mistake to post it in the boom section - like you said, it's going to be 400-500 ft.

What's the footprint of the dorm? Is it just replacing the Herman Crown Center (no problem with that) or are they going to demolish the small, but nice, Fine Arts Annex and build on that plus the parking lot at the corner of Wabash and Van Buren?

[Busy Bee]

Wow. Looks killer. But I think this does actually belong in highrise proposals, or the Rundown.

[OhioGuy]

I'm not sure about the footprint of the building. In the timeline I posted, it only mentions demolishing the Herman Crown Center. However judging by the rendering from Grant Park, the new tower seems to extend more north/south than HCC currently does.

Wow. Looks killer. But I think this does actually belong in highrise proposals, or the Rundown.

Ugh, I can't get things right today. You're right that it probably should go in the Rundown thread in city compilations. I've never actually been in that part of the forum. I've always seemed to overlook it. I look in the highrise construction subforums and also in the general development forum, but I've never clicked into the city compilations forum before. And this being the first time I've posted a thread regarding a new highrise, I've now been mistaken twice in where it should be posted. I'll repost this info again in that thread. Moderators feel free to delete the post I made in this thread with the information.

[BWChicago]

BWChicago: I'm a little disappointed with the proposed addition to Nickel's former residence as well, especially considering all of the work he put in to restoring the rear of the building and converting the first-floor bakery. However, I question the pertinence of placing his residence on the Chicago Seven. Don't get me wrong; Richard Nickel's legacy is a great one, and he is a personal hero of mine, but is his legacy strong enough to warrant placing his home on that particular list when there are likely many stronger candidates to bring attention to? I don't mean any disrespect, but I question the motivation behind Preservation Chicago effectively declaring his former home some sort of shrine to his existence on the scale of that large of a commitment to it. This is not to say that I don't care about the structure at all; quite the opposite, in fact. But do you think that Nickel, were he to be alive today, would want to see attention drawn to more significant structures?

Probably not, and I think this will almost certainly be approved since the interior has been completely altered from Nickel's time and the back wall might've already been too - I don't totally remember. I think if they're moving to landmark it too, more power to them. I think it's a fine proposal, just disappointing. And there's no telling what Nickel would have thought of such a proposal for something else - I think his position would have evolved considerably. But that's all quite academic.

[munda]

I hate Chicago sports stadium!!!
all these old ass stadiums!!!
all the other cities are building brand spanking new stadium and Chicago is stuck with these old ass stadiums... sure they got history and legacy but the Yankee Stadium did and they tore that down. the Dallas Stadium has history and they will demolish that down too. Shea Stadium is gone and many many more old stadiums that are being replaced with state of the art new stadiums.
its time for Chicago to do the same!!!!!!

[lawfin]

I hate Chicago sports stadium!!!
all these old ass stadiums!!!
all the other cities are building brand spanking new stadium and Chicago is stuck with these old ass stadiums... sure they got history and legacy but the Yankee Stadium did and they tore that down. the Dallas Stadium has history and they will demolish that down too. Shea Stadium is gone and many many more old stadiums that are being replaced with state of the art new stadiums.
its time for Chicago to do the same!!!!!!

Well lets see....Comiskey Park "The Cell" is all of what 18 years old, the UC is about 14 years old, Soldier field was rehabbed only a few years ago

....other than that ....yeah all our stadia are old as hell

time for you to go back to sleep, me thinks

[the urban politician]

I hate Chicago sports stadium!!!
all these old ass stadiums!!!
all the other cities are building brand spanking new stadium and Chicago is stuck with these old ass stadiums... sure they got history and legacy but the Yankee Stadium did and they tore that down. the Dallas Stadium has history and they will demolish that down too. Shea Stadium is gone and many many more old stadiums that are being replaced with state of the art new stadiums.
its time for Chicago to do the same!!!!!!

^ Gotta disagree.

See Lawfin's post.

Don't forget the new Chicago Fire stadium, plus that new hockey rink planned for the west side.

[Taft]

I hate Chicago sports stadium!!!
all these old ass stadiums!!!
all the other cities are building brand spanking new stadium and Chicago is stuck with these old ass stadiums... sure they got history and legacy but the Yankee Stadium did and they tore that down. the Dallas Stadium has history and they will demolish that down too. Shea Stadium is gone and many many more old stadiums that are being replaced with state of the art new stadiums.
its time for Chicago to do the same!!!!!!

Lemme guess: you are a disgruntled Cubs fan? ;)

Honestly, though, Wrigley is the only sports venue in Chicago that I can think of that hasn't been built or radically renovated in the last 20 years. Can't we let just ONE piece of sports history stand?

[killaviews]

I have a question about Chicago's sport stadiums. Does this city have the most neighborhood professional sports stadiums? Wrigley Field, obviously right in the middle of a neighborhood. UC and "The Cell" are surrounded by parking lots, but there are still a lot of residential units around it. And Soldier field is right across from the booming south loop. Point being, thousands of residents can walk to pro sport stadiums. How do other cities stack up? Do other cities have stadiums in neighborhoods?

[emathias]

Well lets see....Comiskey Park "The Cell" is all of what 18 years old, ...

Plus it also had significant updates/changes made just a few years ago, too, to further improve it.

[Nowhereman1280]

Yeah, I dunno about you guys, but I feel like the spaceship that landed on soldier field certainly counts as a "new stadium" especially when they took away the landmark status over it (didn't they?).

[emathias]

I have a question about Chicago's sport stadiums. Does this city have the most neighborhood professional sports stadiums? Wrigley Field, obviously right in the middle of a neighborhood. UC and "The Cell" are surrounded by parking lots, but there are still a lot of residential units around it. And Soldier field is right across from the booming south loop. Point being, thousands of residents can walk to pro sport stadiums. How do other cities stack up? Do other cities have stadiums in neighborhoods?

I think it was the first Dodger's stadium build in LA that pioneered the whole "stadium in the middle of nowhere, surrounded by parking" method.

A lot of places do. Most aren't as "in the middle of a neighborhood" as Wrigley is - even Fenway isn't as neighborhoody as Wrigley - but a lot of stadiums are integrated into cities in ways that are at least theoretically walkable for some residents. Portland's arena for the Trailblazers isn't in a residential area, but it's not far from one, and it is in the middle of a commercial neighborhood in the center of the city. Their PGE Park, home of their AAA baseball team is also in a neighborhood.

In Seattle, Key Area is in the center fo the city, just blocks from the Space Needle, and QWest Field and Safeco Field are sort of in an area that shares some similarities with Chicago's South Loop.

In Minneapolis, the Metrodome is just a few blocks from downtown and some residentialish areas - not a great walk, but doable. Target Center is literally in the middle of downtown.

In San Francisco, there are neighborhoods very near Candlestick and AT&T Park is between downtown and the Bay.

In Baltimore, Camden Yards is across the street from neighborhoods.

In Cleveland, both stadiums are on the edge of downtown.

I might help if you defined better what you mean by "neighborhoods" I guess, since a lot of places have stadiums integrated into the city that may or may not meet your criteria.

[Nowhereman1280]

That little classroom expansion at Loyola's Downtown Campus is moving very fast, they have already blown out that auditorium that prevents retail space from being at the NW corner of Wabash and Chicago and have closed the sidewalk. They apparently just started demolition on the existing classroom building where they are going to be opening up the walls because I am in class right now and there is a constant loud thud and the whole building is shaking. Haha, this is funny, now I know what the poor folks in BCBS must have felt like over the past year...

Anyone else here been in an existing highrise while part of the building is being demolished? Haha its certainly an experience, the whole building is rattling.

[lawfin]

I think it was the first Dodger's stadium build in LA that pioneered the whole "stadium in the middle of nowhere, surrounded by parking" method.

A lot of places do. Most aren't as "in the middle of a neighborhood" as Wrigley is - even Fenway isn't as neighborhoody as Wrigley - but a lot of stadiums are integrated into cities in ways that are at least theoretically walkable for some residents. Portland's arena for the Trailblazers isn't in a residential area, but it's not far from one, and it is in the middle of a commercial neighborhood in the center of the city. Their PGE Park, home of their AAA baseball team is also in a neighborhood.

In Seattle, Key Area is in the center fo the city, just blocks from the Space Needle, and QWest Field and Safeco Field are sort of in an area that shares some similarities with Chicago's South Loop.

In Minneapolis, the Metrodome is just a few blocks from downtown and some residentialish areas - not a great walk, but doable. Target Center is literally in the middle of downtown.

In San Francisco, there are neighborhoods very near Candlestick and AT&T Park is between downtown and the Bay.

In Baltimore, Camden Yards is across the street from neighborhoods.

In Cleveland, both stadiums are on the edge of downtown.

I might help if you defined better what you mean by "neighborhoods" I guess, since a lot of places have stadiums integrated into the city that may or may not meet your criteria.

Yankee stadium was pretty integrated.....I do not know about the new one


I have a question for you guys...How much better would Comiskey ( I still call it that) be if they got rid of most or even all of the parking lots surrounding the park and turned into relatively high density living say on the order of 3 - 6 story flats primarliy. On top of this allowed for a nice mix or commercial.

The parking situation I think would work itself out just fine....as it does around wrigley...if you are silly enought to drive

On its face it seem to be a tremendous improvement and would help propel the area around bridgeport into more of a destination as east lakeview has become

thoughts??

[jc5680]

Yankee stadium was pretty integrated.....I do not know about the new one


I have a question for you guys...How much better would Comiskey ( I still call it that) be if they got rid of most or even all of the parking lots surrounding the park and turned into relatively high density living say on the order of 3 - 6 story flats primarliy. On top of this allowed for a nice mix or commercial.

The parking situation I think would work itself out just fine....as it does around wrigley...if you are silly enought to drive

On its face it seem to be a tremendous improvement and would help propel the area around bridgeport into more of a destination as east lakeview has become

thoughts??

As much as I would love for that situation to work out, I think it would be a huge risk for them.

The agency I work for was pitching them two years ago when they where looking for a new one. Part of their marketing strategy revolves around the ease of getting to the stadium. This lets them cater to a geographically larger area, ie the suburbs.

Making Comisky a more truly urban stadium would put them in more direct competition with the Cubs…right now they really don't compete for many fans. At least not in the sense of people who are actually attending games.

Maybe if the area continues to grow, then eventually it could be feasible. But it would have to be almost risk free for them to consider scrapping the parking lots and losing potential fans.

[jjk1103]

^ Gotta disagree.

See Lawfin's post.

Don't forget the new Chicago Fire stadium, plus that new hockey rink planned for the west side.

.....what west side hockey rink ? ..is it for the Blackhawks ?

[lawfin]

As much as I would love for that situation to work out, I think it would be a huge risk for them.

The agency I work for was pitching them two years ago when they where looking for a new one. Part of their marketing strategy revolves around the ease of getting to the stadium. This lets them cater to a geographically larger area, ie the suburbs.

Making Comisky a more truly urban stadium would put them in more direct competition with the Cubs…right now they really don't compete for many fans. At least not in the sense of people who are actually attending games.

Maybe if the area continues to grow, then eventually it could be feasible. But it would have to be almost risk free for them to consider scrapping the parking lots and losing potential fans.

That an interesting point but I do think that it is the Cubs that appeal to a broader geographical fan base & I would say it is substantially broader. But I do agree that a major contingent of Sox fans are western suburban and south suburban.....many x-chicago people.

I think eventually if they changed the area to something more integrated......but not overly programmed....ala the area around wrigley they could gain fans as the area could itself become a destination.

[spyguy]

While reading the Dearborn Association newsletter I came across a few bits of info.

First, the Three Arts Club building is no longer going to be a hotel. Soho House pulled out of the deal and now M Development is going to sell the building, possibly to a private elementary school.

Second, they mentioned something interesting about Ogden. I remember that they wanted to add a high school but the newsletter also said they were looking for a site to relocate the elementary school because of construction on Walton Street. Are they planning to expand or are they going to build an entirely new school on Walton? I wonder if they've considered selling that prime site to a developer.

[munda]

ok...
chicago has build United Center, U.S. Cellular Field and renovated Soldier Field all in the past 20 years. Lets see The UC resemblance Chicago Stadium. The Cell resemblance Old Comiskey Park. Putting a spaceship on top of Soldier Field dont make it new. Chicago built "new" stadiums, but used the blueprint of old stadium.
all i am saying is that chicago needs new stadium design as eye popping as the architecture of the city.

[aic4ever]

..

[ChicagoChicago]

Hey everybody.

Just want to let you all know our new website has launched so you can see some of the stuff that I, as well as the rest of the team at Centaur has been up to!

www.centaurco.com (http://www.centaurco.com)Jesus! The "Kaplan Residence" is stunning!

[harryc]

Hey everybody.

Just want to let you all know our new website has launched so you can see some of the stuff that I, as well as the rest of the team at Centaur has been up to!

www.centaurco.com (http://www.centaurco.com)

Nice slideshows - just need to be more extensive.

thanks for the link.

[sammyg]

Lets see The UC resemblance Chicago Stadium. The Cell resemblance Old Comiskey Park.

Are you kidding me? Have you even been to Chicago, let alone to a game here? Here's Chicago Stadium:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/89/Oldfront.gif
Here's United Center:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/47/United_Center_060716.jpg/250px-United_Center_060716.jpg
Both Pictures courtesy Wikipedia

Not to mention the United Center's modern amenities, lounges, etc.

[aic4ever]

Nice slideshows - just need to be more extensive.

thanks for the link.

More updates coming shortly. Some of the stuff in "News" is active and moving, and we've got the W Hotel renovation to be added in as well over the next week or two of updates. Had to launch with some fixed content, though.

[munda]

Are you kidding me? Have you even been to Chicago, let alone to a game here? Here's Chicago Stadium:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/89/Oldfront.gif
Here's United Center:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/47/United_Center_060716.jpg/250px-United_Center_060716.jpg
Both Pictures courtesy Wikipedia

Not to mention the United Center's modern amenities, lounges, etc.

Of course the interior is different from each stadium and offer different amenities. when people see the stadium they see the exterior first. the exterior of UC resemblance Chicago Stadium.
Chicago stadium was in a square/rectangle shape.
the UC is just turned on its axis and just rounded out the edges.

Its exterior bears a striking resemblance to that of Chicago Stadium.
-Wikipedia

[emathias]

ok...
chicago has build United Center, U.S. Cellular Field and renovated Soldier Field all in the past 20 years. Lets see The UC resemblance Chicago Stadium. The Cell resemblance Old Comiskey Park. Putting a spaceship on top of Soldier Field dont make it new. Chicago built "new" stadiums, but used the blueprint of old stadium.
all i am saying is that chicago needs new stadium design as eye popping as the architecture of the city.

There are only so many ways to design a basketball arena. The United Center doesn't really look much like Chicago Stadium - it's oval vs. rectangle, to begin with.

There are also only so many ways to design a baseball stadium, and "The Cell" is almost nothing like old Comiskey. Two gently sloping levels of seats, covered by a roof over the stands along the sides. Old Comiskey looked somewhat like Wrigley. "The Cell" is one gently sloping level below a very steep level, with skyboxes in between the two and not much of a roof.

And Soldier Field wasn't a "renovation," it was a completely new stadium constructed within the confines of the original stone walls of the war memorial. Nothing remained of the structure or interior of the original Soldier Field, not to mention the layout and capacity is entirely different. The original was an old-school symetrical "bowl," with all the seats rising uniformly from the playing field, no overhangs or roofs. The new field is not symetrical, and has overhangs and skyboxes and seats 61,500 people. The original could be configured for seating from 57,000 to 100,000.

Basically, you don't know what you're talking about, so quit trolling.

[emathias]

...
Its exterior bears a striking resemblance to that of Chicago Stadium.
-Wikipedia

Wikipedia is the exact opposite of authoritative.

[the urban politician]

Does anybody have renderings of the new Metropolis development at 39th and State? I wonder if the developer will consider adding residential at a future date?

[spyguy]

http://www.chicagorealestatedaily.com/cgi-bin/news.pl?id=33039

Foreclosure suit hits Armitage Ave. shopping center
By Eddie Baeb, Feb. 18, 2009

...Mr. Hunt’s firm also owns a site at North and Clybourn avenues, where sources say Apple Inc. is in talks for a second Chicago store.
----

They could just be repeating old information, but at least it's something...

----
^To go along with that, I saw this on a blog (http://www.chicagohousingbubble.com/2009/01/rumor-new-apple-store-at-northclybourn.html) a month ago. Take it with a grain of salt, of course, but it still sounds pretty interesting.

Rumor: new Apple store at North/Clybourn
January 23, 2009

I received a rumor from a reliable source today: firm plans exist to build an Apple store above the Red Line station at North Avenue and Clybourn. Cool!

...Sounds good. But what I heard was a little different... my source told me Apple is partnering with the CTA/Chicago to rebuild the adjacent red line station and mash it together with the newly constructed store. Apple would in essence "donate" the station for the right to have it connect/integrate with the retail space.

[ardecila]

An Apple-designed subway station would be cool beyond belief. It's too bad they picked this station, though... it's the only subway station from the 1930s era with an above-ground headhouse.

[honte]

:haha:

Maybe Helmut paved the way with 600 N Fairbanks? You've talked about it before but I think it's a point worth repeating: There's not much of a middle ground in this city. Buildings are either razed or preserved totally in tact, no contemporary addition or progressive rereading.

To be fair, other American cities haven't done a great job, either. I mean, you have an architect as high profile and acclaimed as Norman Foster make a total mess of the old Hearst building. Cesar Pelli's proposed addition to South Station is similarly awkward.

Has anyone seen this one by Garofalo Architects?

http://www.garofaloarchitects.com/work/noble/noble.html

http://www.garofaloarchitects.com/work/noble/images/noble_02.jpg
http://www.garofaloarchitects.com/work/noble/images/noble_03.jpg

I wish projects like that happened more often. Maybe one day we'd even get something like this:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/javier1949/2634431378/

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3267/2634431378_71dfa2d63e.jpg?v=0

...although, given the treatment of the interior, I guess that's the definition of facadectomy?

This is an amusing post for me... I see where you're going, but as far as your examples, I feel exactly the opposite. I think the Hearst Tower leaves something to be desired, particularly on the inside, but I think the exterior is an absolute success.


Meanwhile, I sorely dislike the two positive examples you bring up. The Garafolo thing, which I see almost daily, is in my opinion a disrespectful wreck, a kind of architectural graffiti that has no understanding for its underlying canvas.

H+dM lost a lot of credibility for me with that project (in Spain, right?). The people clearly asked for preservation of that structure, but the architects were too high-and-mighty to defer to the old. I have a lot more respect for someone like Weese or Vinci or Crombie Taylor, who can (could) execute great buildings whenever they wanted, but were confident enough to do real restorations when they were warranted.

I'm not opposed to creative reinterpretations, but they'd better be well done, respectful, and highly informed. Which is to say, there is a right time and a right place for this, but that's not too common. Otherwise, forget it. But the main thing that interests me far more is the addition of the real parameters associated with respecting the existing urban fabric and the implications this can have upon the new product - not what impact the new can have upon the old. I don't see many people operating in that fashion...

[spyguy]

^I agree. It's a beautiful and unique station, it just needs to be repaired.

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/cgi-bin/mag/article.pl?articleId=31354

Next stop: no gas
By: H. Lee Murphy February 23, 2009

Drivers will have an even harder time finding a North Side gas station if Houston-based Shell Oil Co. succeeds in selling five prime locations.

Shell has signed contracts to sell stations in River North, Old Town, Lincoln Park and Lakeview, brokers and developers say. The buyers are believed to be interested in converting the gas stations into retail developments, these people say. The deals are subject to financing and other contingencies.
http://img25.imageshack.us/img25/5613/31354.jpg

[Jibba]

An Apple-designed subway station would be cool beyond belief. It's too bad they picked this station, though... it's the only subway station from the 1930s era with an above-ground headhouse.

That's my main problem with this proposal (no telling how serious it is, of course).

The first image that popped into my head when I read about it was that of exiting a ride at Great America and having no choice but to be corralled through a labyrinth of shops:

"Thank you for riding the CTA Red Line. Please remember to buy an iPod."

[lawfin]

That's my main problem with this proposal (no telling how serious it is, of course).

The first image that popped into my head when I read about it was that of exiting a ride at Great America and having no choice but to be corralled through a labyrinth of shops:

"Thank you for riding the CTA Red Line. Please remember to buy an iPod."

Yeah no shit!

Further insidious erosion between public and private sector

[lawfin]

dp

[schwerve]

Yeah no shit!

Further insidious erosion between public and private sector

who cares,

they can call it the "apple present the new ipod store at division station, on the mcdonalds red line, brought to you by the chase cta... buy a whopper" if it helps fix/improve the system, bring it on.

[BWChicago]

who cares,

they can call it the "apple present the new ipod store at division station, on the mcdonalds red line, brought to you by the chase cta... buy a whopper" if it helps fix/improve the system, bring it on.

Doesn't CDOT own the subway stations?

[Mr Downtown]

Correct. The subway lines are owned by the City of Chicago, an Illinois municipal corporation. The Chicago Transit Authority, another Illinois municipal corporation, assumed the franchise of Chicago Rapid Transit to occupy and operate through said facilities. As I understand it.

[SkokieSwift]

^I agree. It's a beautiful and unique station, it just needs to be repaired.

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/cgi-bin/mag/article.pl?articleId=31354

[B]Next stop: no gas

http://img25.imageshack.us/img25/5613/31354.jpg

It would be awesome if that North Avenue parcel became a (gulp) highrise to help "bookend" the southern border of Lincoln Park. Anyone know the zoning?

[BWChicago]

It would be awesome if that North Avenue parcel became a (gulp) highrise to help "bookend" the southern border of Lincoln Park. Anyone know the zoning?

Hope this isn't why North Federal Savings and Loan/Diamond Bank wasn't landmarked.

[cbotnyse]

Here are some renders of the current renovations of U.S. Cellular Field. I am a bit confused though. It doesnt look like anything is new, just a redesign of the existing ramp. :shrug:

http://www.isfauthority.com/managex/index.asp?x=172&y=173&y3=250&articlesource=250

http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f21/cbotnyse/35thStreetProjectRenderings-1of2.jpg

http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f21/cbotnyse/35thStreetProjectRenderings-2of2.jpg

[VivaLFuego]

Hope this isn't why North Federal Savings and Loan/Diamond Bank wasn't landmarked.

That would actually be the one context under which I'd be fine with the foregone landmarking. It's criminal how underutilized the land along North Ave. is between Clark and Wells (with the exception of the building on the SE corner of North/Wells which should be landmarked).

Zoning here is only for an FAR 3.0, and it falls under the lakefront protection ordinance, and it's 43rd Ward. I doubt we'd see anything other than 1 story retail. And if that's the case, then I too hope that it doesn't include the Modernist bank.