EVANSTON | 708 Church St. (Fountain Square Tower) | 409 FT| 35 FLOORS

[Steely Dan]

Regarding the second proposal, if you look at the elevation drawing in the evanstonnow.com article, the support columns for the tower go right through the Hahn building.
Which would mean the Hahn building would be completely 'facademized', right?

i don't think so. the new tower is kind of propped up on stilts over the existing hahn building. i do know that the hahn building was built with beefy enough coulumns and footings to support additional stories, however i didn't think they could withstand 33 additional stories, but i'm no structural engineer so what the heck do i know. either the existing hahn building structure can support the new load, or they have some fancy system for shoring up and strenghtening the exisitng strucutre to handle it, but either way, this doesn't look like a facedectomy to me.

[honte]

^ Unless for some odd reason that thing is built on caissons or piles, I don't think there is any way to reuse those old foundations. That is, unless very light loads were coming down on them and most of the loads transferred back over to the main structural members in the new tower.

There is a pretty unusual technique where one gets equipment into the ground level / basement, and creates micropiles around an existing footing. Then a beefed-up pile cap is built to engage the old column to the new, strengthened foundation.

Unless Evanston is preparing to really stick it to these guys, I can't see them doing any of the above before they just facadectomize the whole thing and call it a day.

I'd much rather see a true cantilever system that would just suspend the new tower over the Hahn building. That's probably asking for too much though.

[Steely Dan]

honte, this should ease your concerns about the hahn building. an excerpt from the evanstonnow.com article:

"Mr. Coffey said he was confident that the caissons to support the tower can be inserted into the Hahn Building while still preserving its structure and said his firm has worked on several similar projects in Chicago."

[honte]

^ Oh, ok, thanks - I haven't taken time to read the article yet. Well, since Coffey is involved, I'd trust that a lot more than if I heard it from others.

But the phrase "preserving its structure" is pretty loaded, wouldn't you think? It's clear they are going to be adding new support structure (caissons, he claims), so reuse of the existing foundation seems to be out. The question then becomes, does he mean just "exterior structure" i.e. facadectomy? I can't see another way to get a caisson rig in there.

Perhaps the new columns only intrude into one side of the Hahn building (it appears so), which means they might just do a partial demo of the southernmost side to allow equipment to enter.

[Steely Dan]

But the phrase "preserving its structure" is pretty loaded, wouldn't you think? It's clear they are going to be adding new support structure (caissons, he claims), so reuse of the existing foundation seems to be out. The question then becomes, does he mean just "exterior structure" i.e. facadectomy? I can't see another way to get a caisson rig in there.



i don't know about that. the phrase "inserted into the hahn building" makes me think they have something else up their sleeve. we'll just have to be patient until we know more.

time, as always, will tell.

[Steely Dan]

if you click the link to the evanstonnow.com article, there's a diagram showing elevation heights at the base of this building. the 1st residential level (level 5) starts at 62'-0" in the air, and after that all subsequent residential levels have an even 10'-0" floor-to-floor height. so the first 4 levels are 62' high and the remaining 33 residential floors are 330' high, giving us a rough figure of 392' for the total height of the building, not including any parapets and what-nots that might be on the roof.

even if only this proposal goes forward, that's still over 100' taller than evanston's current tallest.

[Steely Dan]

here is my best photoshop attempt of super-imposing the new tower rendering onto the first one. it's clear that my photoshop skills are weak, but at least i tried...........

too much of a good thing on one small triangular block?

http://img141.imageshack.us/img141/2945/fountainsquarecombinedxp3.jpg

[Pandemonious]

Wow, this block just flat out fuckin' rules now. These two buildings will give Evanston a much taller and denser skyline, a fairly impressive one, at that.

[Busy Bee]

too much of a good thing on one small triangular block?

No. Build. Now. Must Build Now.

This is getting into the Asian boom cities' "we're building something that's gonna kick your ass" ethos. This would bring Evanston development to a new level. Hell, imagine how great that would look at some Chicago intersections.

[Steely Dan]

This is getting into the Asian boom cities' "we're building something that's gonna kick your ass" ethos.
that might work for asia, but i have a hunch that little old evanston's ethos is directly opposed to the notion of ass kicking. i love tall buildings as much as the rest of you, especially for the increased urbanism they bring when designed correctly, but the fountain square block is quite small. these two proposals together might be too much building for such a small block.

though, my crappy photoshop obviously shouldn't be the sole determinant of such a judgement. there was talk the two development teams were talking about collaboration, so hopefully we'll get to see what they come up with.

[honte]

^ How about something more unified? A Momo-style bridge that spans over the Hahn would be interesting.

[Marcu]

that might work for asia, but i have a hunch that little old evanston's ethos is directly opposed to the notion of ass kicking. i love tall buildings as much as the rest of you, especially for the increased urbanism they bring when designed correctly, but the fountain square block is quite small. these two proposals together might be too much building for such a small block.

though, my crappy photoshop obviously shouldn't be the sole determinant of such a judgement. there was talk the two development teams were talking about collaboration, so hopefully we'll get to see what they come up with.

No way in hell is Evanston city council letting both stay as is. Chances are we'll see both built but at around 20-25 stories each. After all it's Evanston. The city that must give everyone some say in all matters.

[Steely Dan]

No way in hell is Evanston city council letting both stay as is. Chances are we'll see both built but at around 20-25 stories each. After all it's Evanston. The city that must give everyone some say in all matters.

i really don't know what the city council will end up approving for this block, but to say with 100% certainty that both proposals will be chopped down to the 20-25 story range seems foolish to me. many people within the evanston planning department and the city council have gone on record saying that if evanston is to have a new tallest building, this is the block to put it on, so it's certianly not out of the question that something taller than 20-25 floors will eventually get built on this block.

[alex1]

i for one hope that both buildings go through and get built at their current height. The more highrise housing you put in an already highrise section of any city (especially with good transit connections), the happier I am.

[Chicago3rd]

who is "they"? the two proposals come from competing development interests with different ownership options for different parcels of land on the block in question.

No back room dealing in Cook County, Evanston or Corporate offices...no sireee......

[Steely Dan]

^ well, if you believe in conspiracy theories, "they" are always out to get you, but i just can't be that paranoid.

an interesting thing to consider: if my rough estimate of 392' for the second tower pans out, then it could rival the 395' gallagher center out in itasca, leaving only the 418' oakbrook terrrace tower as taller, meaning that even if only this 2nd fountain square tower goes forward, evanston will still be jockeying for position up near the very top of the list for tallest building in illinois outside chicago.

[Chicago3rd]

^ well, if you believe in conspiracy theories, "they" are always out to get you, but i just can't be that paranoid.

Right Steely....I see black helicopters flying all around Evanston right this very minute.

[Dan in Chicago]

Dan - the shorter proposal has been given an Emporis ID of 300671. For lack of an official name, we're calling it "1600 Orrington Avenue" for now.

[BVictor1]

http://www.suntimes.com/business/roeder/405882,CST-FIN-roeder30.article

Sky's the limit in Evanston
REAL ESTATE | 37-story condo high-rise could go up next to suburbia's tallest building

May 30, 2007

BY DAVID ROEDER Sun-Times Columnist

Downtown Evanston has become the happening place, its restaurants, movie theaters and stores giving it life both day and night. If the condo market cooperates, all that daily commerce in the suburb will shortly translate into changes in its skyline.

Word previously has gotten out about discussions over a 49-story building in downtown Evanston that would be the tallest in suburban Chicago. But right next to that site is another potential project, a building that's not as tall but exudes lofty ambitions.

A team that includes HSA Commercial Real Estate, architect Daniel Coffey and residential investor Robert Horner is proposing a condo high-rise atop a commercial base. It would be on a wedge-shaped parcel where Sherman and Orrington avenues meet Davis Street.

The property at the corner is a city-owned piece called Fountain Square, intended as a public gathering place but little used. The developers would connect it to about 24,000 square feet of retail, with a grand outdoor staircase leading to what they hope will be a high-class restaurant. Behind that would be a 37-story tower containing about 275 units.

Details are inexact because nothing has passed through the city's planning review. But early talks with city officials have begun. Coffey said he and his partners have a compelling proposition for Evanston, which is known for its lengthy reviews of building projects. "We're proposing something that we think is very real, and will give back a lot to the city," Coffey said.

Aside from the Fountain Square renovation, the project also envisions reusing the three-story Hahn Building, a local landmark for its terra cotta details. The tower would partially arise from the Hahn Building, but be set back.

Coffey said the smaller structure would retain its own identity, and not look like a "pasted on" facade for the moneymaker behind it.

His high-rise would feature a triangular shape similar to the landmark Flatiron Building, which no doubt will please all those North Shore subscribers to the New Yorker. The wedged end of the building would have a southern exposure, so Coffey built in oversized balconies and penthouses with terraces big enough to almost be a backyard.

At the same time, he said he's tried to ensure the building presents a "slippery" face that won't kick up any wind tunnels for the shoppers and diners down below.

It would concede a height advantage to its potential neighbor on the north end, but the project could become a significant landmark in its own right. Coffey said the developers are asking for no tax subsidy to support the work at Fountain Square that would include improvements to a memorial for war veterans.

Also in the deal would be a couple levels of underground parking. A six-story building on part of the site, formerly a department store, would be torn down. The condo prices haven't been set.

Coffey built a reputation on historic renovations. His work at the University of Illinois at Chicago amounted to a much-needed "correction" of prior architecture. He has moved on to original designs of increasing scale, with a recent example being the new Schaumburg Convention Center.

He said he and his partners have a contract to acquire the Evanston property, and depending on condo sales and the Evanston approval process, they could get started before their neighbors do. The aspiring developers of the tallest building in the suburbs are Klutznick Fisher Development Co. and Focus Development Inc.

[BVictor1]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/chi-evanstontower_30may30,1,3998004.story?coll=chi-news-hed

2nd builder eyes Evanston sky
High-rise proposed for same block as other team's plan

By Blair Kamin and Deborah Horan
Tribune staff reporters
Published May 30, 2007


It's dueling skyscraper plans in Evanston.

A month after one team of developers floated a proposal to build a 523-foot condominium tower, another team on Tuesday night briefed city officials on its design for a 421-foot condo high-rise on the same triangle-shaped block.

Each skyscraper would supplant the 418-foot Oakbrook Terrace Tower as the tallest in Chicago's suburbs, but it is unlikely that both will be built.

They would block each other's views, for one thing, and the prospect of side-by-side behemoths could stir up a political firestorm in Evanston, which in the past has forced developers to downsize skyscraper proposals.

In addition, the city recently hired a team of urban planners to prepare a report, expected to be finished in the fall, that charts the future of the fast-growing downtown.

"I've proposed a moratorium on anything happening downtown until the study is done," Ald. Delores Holmes said in an interview before the new tower plan was discussed at a meeting of the City Council's Planning and Development Committee. "It's just common sense to wait."

Advanced by R.D. Horner & Associates, a veteran Evanston and Chicago housing developer, and HSA Commercial Real Estate, a longtime Chicago retail and industrial developer, the new plan calls for a 37-story high-rise, sheathed in glass with a wedding-cake top.

Designed by Chicago architect Dan Coffey, the building would rise in the middle of the block bounded by Church Street, Orrington Avenue and Sherman Avenue. It would have 250 to 275 units along with shops and parking.

The previous plan, from Klutznick Fisher Development Co. and Focus Development Inc., called for putting a 218-unit tower on the block's north side, where a two-story retail building stands.

George Halik, a partner at Booth Hansen architects of Chicago, which designed the Klutznick-Focus plan, criticized the new proposal Tuesday, saying it would cram the skyscraper directly alongside Evanston's two tallest buildings -- to the east, the 277-foot Chase Building office tower, and, to the west, the 276-foot Sherman Plaza condo tower.

"This crowds the area. It pushes all three tall buildings together whereas ours stands free," Halik said.

But Coffey said the Horner-HSA tower wouldn't block views from neighboring skyscrapers.

The developers, he added, would shoulder the cost of rebuilding the decrepit Fountain Square Plaza at the block's south end in exchange for a zoning change that would let them build above the block's height cap of 125 feet. He estimated the plaza redevelopment cost at $1 million to $2 million.

In the Klutznick-Focus plan, Evanston would pay for improving the plaza with new real estate taxes generated by the tower.

"We're trying to do a major civic benefit at no cost -- rebuilding the heart," Coffey said.

Neither development team has made public a cost for its project.

Despite the slowdown in the housing market, the competing plans appear to strengthen economic momentum for a major redevelopment on the centrally located block. Downtown Evanston's center of gravity has shifted westward in recent years with the opening of a popular movie complex along the Metra tracks.

"You've got a pretty deep market in Evanston. Market conditions will certainly be different by the time this project gets under way," said Gail Lissner of Chicago-based Appraisal Research Counselors, a housing research firm. Lissner has consulted for R.D. Horner & Associates, she said, but is not working on this project.

The competing plans have other differences:

* The Klutznick-Focus plan would place parking in a five-story aboveground "podium" structure that would contain two levels of shops and, above them, a three-level parking garage. The Horner-HSA plan would put two levels of parking underground, with shops at street level and one floor above.

* The Klutznick-Focus plan would leave intact the three-story Hahn Building, an official Evanston landmark in the middle of the block. The new plan envisions stiltlike structural columns for the condo tower rising directly above the midsection of the classically decorated retail building. About half of its interior would be gutted, Coffey said.

Coffey, whose credits include the renovation of the former Medinah Temple at 600 N. Wabash Ave. into a Bloomingdale's home furnishings store, and a role as design architect for the Sherman Plaza skyscraper, said the renovation would not be a "facade-ectomy," a pejorative term for saving only a building's skin.

Structural bays along the exterior of the Hahn Building would be saved, along with the facades, he said. The tower would be set back by about 10 feet from the Hahn Building's facades and raised 20 feet above its roof to differentiate old and new.

"We're doing it very sensitively," Coffey said. "It's not wallpaper."

Carlos Ruiz, Evanston's preservation coordinator, said that while the city's preservation law allows for alteration of landmark buildings, the city's preservation commission would have to judge whether placing a tower above the Hahn Building would undercut the building's integrity.

The upper floors of the Horner-HSA tower would have 7 to 10 units apiece, Coffey said. Penthouse condominiums would be in the top three floors.

John Mangel, an HSA vice president, confirmed that the developers have an option to buy the Hahn Building and a 1940s midrise office building at the block's south end from their current owners if Evanston grants a zoning change. The midrise would be torn down, as in the Klutznick-Focus plan, to make way for an extensive remake of Fountain Square Plaza.

Coffey's plan envisions a circular, glass-walled restaurant building just north of the plaza. A monumental outdoor staircase would ascend from the plaza to a roof terrace atop the restaurant building.

Whether Evanston is ready to stretch its skyline to new heights, however, is far from certain. "There's going to be redevelopment on that block without a doubt," said Ald. Cheryl Wollin, in whose ward the towers would be built. "What kind and what it will look like is still open in my mind."

----------

bkamin@tribune.com dhoran@tribune.com



Copyright © 2007, Chicago Tribune

[Steely Dan]

Dan - the shorter proposal has been given an Emporis ID of 300671. For lack of an official name, we're calling it "1600 Orrington Avenue" for now.
thanks dan.






A month after one team of developers floated a proposal to build a 523-foot condominium tower, another team on Tuesday night briefed city officials on its design for a 421-foot condo high-rise on the same triangle-shaped block.

Each skyscraper would supplant the 418-foot Oakbrook Terrace Tower as the tallest in Chicago's suburbs.

that's cool, so if either tower goes forward as currently proposed, suburban chicago will have a new tallest, and it will be in evanston, where such a building rightfully belongs in my opinion.






but it is unlikely that both will be built.

it would have been nice if kamin had given some reference for this tidbit. is this coming from conversations he's had with folks in the planning dept./city council or is it just his own editorializing? dan coffey, architect of the 2nd proposal, says that both buildings could exist on the block; click the link to the evanstonnow.com article to read more: http://www.evanstonnow.com/node/2401

[Columbian1893]

Both towers will not coexist. See the link below...

http://chicagobusiness.com/cgi-bin/news.pl?id=25167&bt=klutznick&arc=n&searchType=all

[Steely Dan]

^ as per forum rules, please post a link to the source article.

[BVictor1]

37-Story proposal

http://www.chicagotribune.com/media/photo/2007-05/30155619.jpg

[Steely Dan]

^ what's with coffey's penchant for the terraced wedding cake top? it didn't work for sherman plaza, what makes him think it'll work this time around?

[Dr. Taco]

that's cool, so if either tower goes forward as currently proposed, suburban chicago will have a new tallest, and it will be in evanston, where such a building rightfully belongs in my opinion.


Yeah, I agree. office buildings out in the middle of "nowhere" (I don't really have a definition of nowhere, but I basically mean, the middle of suburbia) look out of place. I'm looking at you, Naperville, Schaumburg, and Oakbrook :-P. I really love Evanston, and it probably comes closest to a real downtown than any other suburb of Chicago (Elgin comes pretty close).


it would have been nice if kamin had given some reference for this tidbit. is this coming from conversations he's had with folks in the planning dept./city council or is it just his own editorializing?

I think he's probably going the safe route with pessimism. But yeah, when I first read the article, I had to read it a couple times before I realized that "both" is not the same as "either", lol

37-Story proposal

http://www.chicagotribune.com/media/photo/2007-05/30155619.jpg

Don't ask me why, but this building sort of reminds me of a luxury cruise ship. I mean, I like it, but the top of the building could probably be transplanted to a boat and it would look good. But I hope both of them get built

[BVictor1]

^ what's with coffey's penchant for the terraced wedding cake top? it didn't work for sherman plaza, what makes him think it'll work this time around?


It might work because it isn't painted or pre-cast concrete. Sherman Plaza is ass ugly. At least this is an attempt at decency.

[Steely Dan]

Sherman Plaza is ass ugly.
you got that right. isn't it just so perfect that evanston would allow a trainwreck like sherman plaza to be built while denying hovey's wicked-slick proposal for chicago & davis.




It might work because it isn't painted or pre-cast concrete.
how do you know this? those white floor-plate bands sure look like painted concrete to me. it may have a nicer flat-iron shaped massing, and the proportion of glazing has certainly been increased with the floor-to-ceiling ribbon windows, but i'm concerned that this one has sherman plaza part II written all over it. i guess i can grant it the minor improvement that is isn't that god-awful beige/brown color that's supposed to mimic stone coloring.

[Columbian1893]

I agree that Sherman Plaza is weak in design and I wouldn't necessarily expect anything different across the street. At least with the Booth-Hansen proposal you can count on a quality design similar to Momo, 30 West Oak, or Sono. How many other highrise condo buildings has Coffee completed other then Sherman Plaza?

[Wild Onion Mike]

37-Story proposal

http://www.chicagotribune.com/media/photo/2007-05/30155619.jpg

One of my best friends, a nautical architect, thinks the top of this "screams cruise ship." As for me, I wish it had a little more punctuation to it. The top just seems too passive and docile. IMHO

[Marcu]

I agree that Sherman Plaza is weak in design and I wouldn't necessarily expect anything different across the street. At least with the Booth-Hansen proposal you can count on a quality design similar to Momo, 30 West Oak, or Sono. How many other highrise condo buildings has Coffee completed other then Sherman Plaza?

I go back and forth with Sherman Plaza. At this point, I'm convinced that my dislike for it is only limited to views from the south. From the north and northeast, it's not so bad. Almost adds a more residential image to downtown Evanston with all the surrounding balconies. In a strange way it even comes off as European.

The crown thing at the top? I don't know what the deal is. Are they even finished with it? I was sort of hoping it would look more integrated into the building once it's done. Last time I saw it, however, it just didn't make any sense. Looked like it didn't belong at all.

If I was to choose, I would definetly take the first proposal just b/c the crown thing will look awful again. Even if it means chopping it down to the height of the second.

[Dr. Taco]

One of my best friends, a nautical architect, thinks the top of this "screams cruise ship." As for me, I wish it had a little more punctuation to it. The top just seems too passive and docile. IMHO

sweet! thats what i said

[ardecila]

Okay... I saw a 3d flyaround on ABC-7 tonight, which showed some close-ups of the circular restaurant/plaza (great idea), as well as the ass end of this building (big disappointment)

The Focus/Klutznick proposal is FAR superior architecturally, but doesn't really do anything significant to the plaza. I have a feeling Evanston will side with the taller one because of the setbacks, but require the developers to include the plaza in their plans.

[NYC2ATX]

I don't like the 37-story proposal. The other one was a nicer design, and this one seems like a cookie-cutter condo tower.

.....plus, the other one is taller. ;)

[spyguy]

Okay... I saw a 3d flyaround on ABC-7 tonight,

http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?section=local&id=5353825

[Steely Dan]

^ thanks for the link spyguy.





The Focus/Klutznick proposal is FAR superior architecturally, but doesn't really do anything significant to the plaza. I have a feeling Evanston will side with the taller one because of the setbacks, but require the developers to include the plaza in their plans.
if only one of these proposals can go forward, that would kind of be an ideal outcome. if evanston is smart, they'll play the 2nd proposal off of the first one to strong arm klutznik/focus into ponying the money to get fountain square refurbished. and that way, the hahn building stays wholely unmolested, so the preservation community would be happy as well.

[Steely Dan]

i've added a poll to the thread to vote for which proposal you'd rather see go forward if you were forced to choose.

also, please give the reasoning for your vote here in the thread if you wouldn't mind.

[ardecila]

I've already given my reason for voting Focus/Klutznick. Remember, Evanston can just as soon deny BOTH towers, or force them to wait until next fall, which may very well kill one or both proposals. On the other hand, plenty of people want to live in DT Evanston. Thus, the City of Evanston can place realistic demands on the developers and expect to see them agreed to.

[Steely Dan]

Remember, Evanston can just as soon deny BOTH towers,
oh, i don't think anyone is going to forget about that. the reason i made the poll was not to imply the inevitably of one of the designs being built, but rather to get more opinions about the relative merits of the two designs from what we've seen of them so far.

in nerdy statistic news, i discovered in looking through the emporis database that evanston has a chance to not only have the tallest building in the burbs, but it could also become home to the greatest concentration of highrise buildings in the burbs as well. currently schaumburg holds that title with 13 completed highrise buildings standing 12 floors or higher. evasnton currently has 8 completed with a further 2 under construction for a toal of 10. there are two other approved highrise proposals that will most likely go forward (1881 oak, carroll place), and a 3rd highrise proposal that is going through the approval process right now (1890 maple). assuming those 3 are all built, that would bring evanston's highrise total to 13, tied for 1st with schaumburg. and then of course, if even only one of these fountain sqaure towers should become a reality, evanston moves into the definitve role as suburban chicago's 1st skyline, both in height and number of buildings.

[Latoso]

I voted #1 because #2 looks too much like a retro '90s building, and nothing '90s should be retro yet.

[spyguy]

Interesting to see the difference between this poll and the Tribune's

Which design do you like best?

72.0%
The latest one (421 feet) (661 responses)

28.0%
The earlier one (523 feet) (257 responses)

918 total responses

[Mr Roboto]

I like the first one a little better, but its mainly just the height. It also reminds me a little of the legacy, which I like. I agree with the cruise ship comment for the second one.

I also would really like to see the nimbys of evanston get a 500+ footer thrown in their face.

[Dan in Chicago]

I chose the taller proposal for a few reasons:

1. The added height will give the Evanston skyline the definition it deserves;

2. I don't trust the renderings entirely, and I trust Booth/Hansen to do a better building than Coffey, given both firms' track record;

3. Although I would be fine with a tall building on either site, the Klutznick team has a point - its tower would fit the checkerboard pattern and maintain open views, while the other one would create more crowding.

[Alliance]

I think the base of the Horner tower is much more appealing, but the rest looses me....especially the top. However, the building's form is more sensative to its location.

Still....I' have to go with Klutznik

[ardecila]

I'm pretty sure the reason the Horner proposal is winning the Trib poll is because of it's flatiron shape, which people really love... it's not really reflecting on the facade treatment, which isn't really "horrendous" anyhow. The Focus/Klutznick proposal looks like a box from the renderings (although I'm pretty sure it's actually wedge-shaped/trapezoidal).

[Alliance]

Klutznick's render is horrible...you really need the CGI to give it a good presentation.

[aaron38]

I voted for the Focus proposal. I like the base better. I don't like the way the second proposal sits on stilts over the existing building. I just think it looks silly.

[Steely Dan]

evanstonnow.com has posted some images of the klutznik/focus model that was presented at a Site Plan and Appearance Review Committee meeting yesterday afternoon. follow the link:

http://www.evanstonnow.com/image/tid/91

[Equilibria]

Actually, after seeing those new images, I like the design less. Not enough to change my position, since the other one looks like a mediocre condo lot from SimCity, but I'm not sure about the base. It does provide curb appeal, but if this is going to be the tallest in Evanston for the foreseeable future it should have a more imposing entrance, IMO.

[Steely Dan]

^ keep in mind that the model depicted in those images is probably a preliminary study model. i would expect several rounds of refinements from booth hansen, particularly at the base, if this project moves closer to becoming real. i would like to see the tower portion pulled down through the podium along church street, and to see a better integration overall of the two parts; they clearly aren't complimenting each other very well in those model images.

[Marvel 33]

There are two large high-resolution renderings of the Daniel P. Coffey and Associates design at the bottom of this article:

http://www.newcityskyline.com/DevelopersfaceoffoverFountainSquare.html

[Marvel 33]

By the way, when we asked for the official height of the Daniel P. Coffey and Associates design. Both the architect and the developer said that height has not been officially determined. The only thing they know is that it'll be between 425' to 400' but they asked us to leave it at 400' for now. The number of floors will remain the same tho.

[spyguy]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/chi-oped0702mccarronjul02,1,2271065.story?coll=chi-opinionfront-hed

Evanston's lofty skyline dilemma

By John McCarron who teaches
writes and consults on urban affairs
Published July 2, 2007

My neighbors in Evanston -- the navel of metropolitan Chicago -- are agonizing these days about downtown skyscrapers.

Not in the Loop or along Wacker Drive, but skyscrapers right here in the ever-so-thoughtful home of nuclear-free zones, four-hour public hearings and holistic therapy.

Normally I advise those who live in one of our region's other 265 municipalities not to mind what's going on in Evanston. How much does a body need to know about organic landscaping, say, or Afrocentric middle school curricula?

But this time everyone should pay attention -- especially everyone who lives in a mature, not to say old, inner-ring community being sapped quietly of population and economic energy by the sprawl machine that growls 24/7 out along the suburban frontier.

Evanston, you see, has stumbled onto a formula for reinvigorating itself. So have Oak Park, Arlington Heights, St. Charles, Elmhurst and a handful of others. They are redeveloping old downtowns, often around a Metra station. They are saving bits and pieces of the familiar -- an old movie palace here, a beloved family restaurant or ice cream shop there -- while recruiting developers to build in their midst -- gasp! -- multiunit townhouses and condo towers.

The idea is to bring back the old retail centers as residential villages. They're pulling in young people, professionals, gays and empty-nesters; people fed up with outer suburbia's left-turn lanes and soulless strip malls; people seeking a taste of urban chic, or just a sense of place, without having to move to the city proper. There are more such people, it turns out, than anyone had imagined.

All of which threatens some mossback suburbanites. They like things the way they were -- quiet -- before the espresso bar or the fine arts center or the multiscreen cinema. They especially don't like condo towers. Such congestion, they argue, is why they chose not to live in the city.

This tension over what suburbs are supposed to be is spreading across the region. And Evanston, a college town blessed with sandy beaches, too many PhDs and an eminently recyclable downtown, is the bellwether.

Battle after battle is being fought over the height of condo towers, the number of required parking spaces and the displacement of locally owned stores by formulaic chains. But the biggest fight is just getting started.

Earlier this year, shortly after developers James Klutznick and Tim Anderson sold out and leased-up their 25-story Sherman Plaza condo-over-retail megastructure, the two announced plans to redevelop the north half of what's called the Fountain Square block across the street. This one would soar 49 stories, or 523 feet, above Church Street between Sherman and Orrington Avenues. Whereupon a second development team, led by R.D. Horner Associates and HSA Commercial, announced a condo-over-retail extravaganza for the southern half of the same block, theirs rising 37 stories, or 421 feet.

Suddenly Evanston has a three-front skirmish among two developers, who, as a practical matter, can't both build what would be suburbia's tallest building on the same narrow block, and a good portion of the town's citizenry, who want no new skyscrapers whatsoever.

What to do? Well, Evanston is blessed with legions of know-it-alls like myself who know exactly what to do. But don't look for this reporter at any of those four-hour public hearings. Covered too many of them as a cub. So instead, here's what I think Evanston should do, short and quick:

*Force the two development teams to merge or force one to buy out the other. The entire block should be redeveloped under a single concept.

*Trade height for what Evanstonians desire at street level. Let the developer go 50 stories, 60 even, on their residential tower ... if it's a sleek design and if they're willing to preserve the charm and low cornice line of the existing limestone storefronts.

*Negotiate, also, for underground parking; for retention of local stores and professional services willing to pay rents that reflect new space; for preservation, at minimum, of the front of the landmark Hahn Building located at mid-block; and for construction, at the developer's expense, of a first-class veterans' memorial and fountain to replace tired Fountain Square. Fact is, cities can negotiate for just about anything in return for the zoning approvals and public infrastructure required by developments of this magnitude. But first those cities need to know what they want, not just what the NIMBYs don't want. And they need confidence -- confidence in the strength of their market; confidence in their ability to bring in another developer if the first one can't or won't deliver.

After decades of losing stores, jobs and population, Evanston and other older "railroad" suburbs find themselves beseeched by opportunity -- and yes, by opportunists. They need to get their acts together, to calm the fears of the uninformed, but most important, to press their advantage.

Take it from someone who witnessed the bad old days -- the days when Sears, Marshall Fields, Lyttons, Baskins, Rothschilds and Smythe Furniture all lined up to leave town. We have problems now, sure. But compared to then, these new problems are good ones to have.

[Steely Dan]

^ well, i suppose we can plant McCarron firmly in the group of people who "get it". the bad news is that most evanstonians are simply too myopic to understand the broader concepts of which McCarron speaks.

[BVictor1]

^ well, i suppose we can plant McCarron firmly in the group of people who "get it". the bad news is that most evanstonians are simply too myopic to understand the broader concepts of which McCarron speaks.


Agreed.

I could definately live with "his vision" for the site. But I must say forget 60 stories. If you are going to have one developer buyout the other, and you want them to make all these concessions, zoning needs to be approved to the maximum. Allow an 80-story tower, or am I just being greedy?:shrug:

[Alliance]

:haha:

Probably greedy.

oh yeah, and McCarron definately is on our side...i.e. "gets it" Great Article.

[Steely Dan]

well, the horner/HSA proposal may already be dead in the water.

read more: http://www.evanstonnow.com/node/2610

[Steely Dan]

well, with the withdrawal of the horner/HSA proposal from the review process, i've gone ahead and edited the title of this thread and closed the poll. if evanston is to see a large tower on the fountain square block, and that's a BIG if, it looks as though the klutznik/focus plan will be the one to go forward, at least for now.

evanstonnow.com has an article on the preliminary review process for the project that will begin in august.

here's a link to the article: http://www.evanstonnow.com/node/2642



note to any Emporis editors that might read this thread: 1600 orrington avenue (aka fountain square tower #2, horner/HSA) should be listed as a "never built" project. there's a slim outside chance that horner might revive efforts to build on the block, but it would probably come back to life as a different project. i've already removed it from the page 1 list in the rundown thread

[Dan in Chicago]

Thanks Steely, I changed its status. Let me know if anything starts to happen at the Winthrop Club site. I was there in late June, and preparatory demolition was wrapping up. (It might save you a couple of minutes if you want to check it from the Sherman Plaza garage - there's a good view from there.)

[Steely Dan]

^ i'll keep an eye on winthrop club.

in fountain square tower news, evnastonnow.com has posted an article on last night's presentation, the first of what will probably be many public meetings about this project.

link to the article: http://www.evanstonnow.com/node/2662

[forumly_chgoman]

Hey SD,
Know this is off topic but it does concertn another Evanston highrise..the howard station apt tower...looks to be about 8 stories at this point...I think it is destined for 17 any idea on ultimate height?

[Steely Dan]

it'll stand 17 stories. the height figure is unknown, but i'd guess it'll be roughly in the 160'-170' range.

[Steely Dan]

from today's trib:


Locals resist skyline change
Plans for 49-story tower in downtown Evanston revealed

By Deborah Horan | Tribune staff reporter
August 3, 2007

More than 100 Evanston residents weighed in on everything from wind to loss of local retail business after a presentation by developers proposing a spire that would reach more than 500 feet to become the tallest building in the Chicago suburbs.


read more: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chicago/chi-spire_03aug03,0,2200826.story

[nergie]

from today's trib:


Locals resist skyline change
Plans for 49-story tower in downtown Evanston revealed

By Deborah Horan | Tribune staff reporter
August 3, 2007

More than 100 Evanston residents weighed in on everything from wind to loss of local retail business after a presentation by developers proposing a spire that would reach more than 500 feet to become the tallest building in the Chicago suburbs.


read more: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chicago/chi-spire_03aug03,0,2200826.story

And they pansy whiny babies start, why are people so freaking moronic it is annoying. I really wish these people would understand how critical mass and density make a place more vibrant. They should all be forced to live in tiny apartments in Asia and made to like it.

[Pandemonious]

By "spire" do they mean building, or are they sticking a really tall spire on this tower? If thats the case, spires produce almost no shadow so these people are just grabbing at straws.

"If you go about it wrong, you can produce an ongoing cyclone,"

^Maybe a cyclone of rebirth and reinvestment into their center city. OH NO, WATCH OUT, GROWTH!!!! RUN FOR THE HILLS!! (No, seriously.. please run for the hills or somewhere else if you can't handle skyscrapers at THE HEART of a downtown area)

"Some residents complained the building would cast long shadows over the city center, undermine independent retailers and appear out of place in an area where the tallest building is half its height."

^How about the multiple Walmart supercenters and other big box stores (which are far more influential than a few smaller chain stores that may end up in this complex) in the Evanston area, that are far worse at undermining independent retailers? Oh, they must shop there, so its ok.. Also, how is the height of the current tallest even relevant? It was built nearly FORTY YEARS AGO, in a completely different economic and social era really. It is amazing how people unleash their ignorance out of fear of change.

These people seriously must have their heads up their asses. There are plenty of non-urban places for them to live, why do they have to live where their lifestyle clearly doesn't fit in and try to fuck it all up for the rest of us?

[mcfinley]

Dammit. I had so much hope for this building. More so even than most of the projects in downtown Chicago. There will always be another 1000 footer in Chicago, but this would have been a STATEMENT about high rise development.

Who are these people, how do you get 100 people to oppose a building for the stupidest reasons!? I feel like some chicken little went door-to-door telling residents of horrors and damnation this project would bring if it were allowed to go up.

:hell: :hell: :hell: :hell: :hell: :hell: :hell: :hell: :hell: :hell:

Is there any chance the city will say, "Individuals are smart, people are dumb, let Anderson and Klutznik build anyway."?

[Steely Dan]

Who are these people, how do you get 100 people to oppose a building for the stupidest reasons!? I feel like some chicken little went door-to-door telling residents of horrors and damnation this project would bring if it were allowed to go up.

remember, evanston is a city of ~75,000 people, so the opinions of 100 residents are hardly representative of the whole, especially when you realize that very, VERY few people in the history of our human species have ever gone out of their way to publicly endorse a private development, on the other side, these types of public hearings only attract the whiniest of malcontents who pretty much oppose everything on the basis that change of any sort is the tool of the devil.

evanstonnow.com had a poll on their website about this tower, and with over 100 votes, the results where overwhelmingly in favor of a very tall building being built in downtown evanston. the majority of evanston's residents really don't care if this project goes forward or not. then there are small minorities on the fringes who both support and oppose the project. the problem is that the people who would actually like to see the project built are never as passionate as those who would oppose, thus the seemingly one-sided nature of these public hearings.

evanston has some smart people in its leadership positions who know what needs to be done, but they also understand that they have to pay some lip service to the malcontents to give the appearance that the public is involved in the process.

[Steely Dan]

By "spire" do they mean building, or are they sticking a really tall spire on this tower? If thats the case, spires produce almost no shadow so these people are just grabbing at straws.


no, there's no spire on the building. when the building was first introduced, blair kamin did a write-up on the project and dubbed it "the suburban spire" in reference to the chicago spire. i guess the tribune is now just running with that theme anytime they write an article about this project.

[Dr. Taco]

ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, some people are soo fucking stupid! argggh!

its such a privilege for evanston for Klutznik to be proposing this tower there. I mean, would they honestly be happy if he decides to up and move the proposal to elgin or something? Why can't they understand how good something like this would be for downtown? NIMBY's suck ass

[BVictor1]

http://www.suntimes.com/business/roeder/500996,CST-FIN-roeder08.article

Tower plan comes up short in Evanston

DEVELOPMENT | For now, investors nix 2nd high rise in downtown's Fountain Square

August 8, 2007
DAVID ROEDER droeder@suntimes.com

Plans for high-rise construction on Evanston's Fountain Square block downtown have turned into a case of survival of the tallest, if not the fittest.
Investors in a proposed 37-story building near the southern end of Fountain Square have withdrawn the proposal after heavy criticism. The tower would have gone up next to a 49-story building that's also in the talking stage......

http://www.suntimes.com/business/roeder/500996,CST-FIN-roeder08.article

[Steely Dan]

articles from evanstonnow.com:



Design group backs tower plan
Submitted by Bill Smith on Thu, 08/09/2007 - 11:56am.

The plan for a 49-story tower on the Fountain Square block drew cheers from local design professionals but jeers from some other residents at Wednesday's Evanston Plan Commission hearing.

read more: http://www.evanstonnow.com/node/2693





Tower developer acquires Hahn building
Submitted by Bill Smith on Wed, 08/08/2007 - 8:10pm.

Developers of the proposed 49-story tower building on the Fountain Square block announced at this evening's Evanston Plan Commission meeting that they have reached agreement to acquire the neighboring historic landmark Hahn Building.

read more: http://www.evanstonnow.com/node/2689

[forumly_chgoman]

This is good news......the Evanston resident Fcuktards of course are against it

[Dr. Taco]

articles from evanstonnow.com:

Design group backs tower plan
Submitted by Bill Smith on Thu, 08/09/2007 - 11:56am.


"Architect Stephen Yas... the project will be a 'profoundly welcome landmark for our downtown urban core' and that the design 'is likely to be recognized far beyond our city's borders.'

But Paul Barker of 815 Oakton St., an artist, said that while the building is beautiful, it would only be appropriate in Chicago, '[B]not in my back yard.'

He said [building here] would be 'a monster' and that population limits should be set for downtown and all of Evanston."


^ I can't believe Mr. Artist Barker actually said those famous words (nimby). The idea of a population limit is the most selfish thing I can think of. As long as you get to live there, eh, Paul? Asshole

[Pandemonious]

Wow, it almost isn't even fun to try to bash that guy, as we don't even have to.. hell, he just gave that one to us, LOL.

[Alliance]

design 'is likely to be recognized far beyond our city's borders.'
:haha:

it would only be appropriate in Chicago:haha: 'not in my back yard.'
:rolleyes: :haha:

monster
:haha:

population limits should be set for downtown and all of Evanston.:haha: :haha: :haha: :haha: :haha:

:hell:

[Segun]

"Architect Stephen Yas... the project will be a 'profoundly welcome landmark for our downtown urban core' and that the design 'is likely to be recognized far beyond our city's borders.'

But Paul Barker of 815 Oakton St., an artist, said that while the building is beautiful, it would only be appropriate in Chicago, '[B]not in my back yard.

815 Oakton is roughly two miles from the site. What a backyard.

[Marcu]

815 Oakton is roughly two miles from the site. What a backyard.

...and about 2 blocks north of Chicago. So his backyard is actually Chicago where he wants this building built instead of downtown Evanston. What an idiot.

[Alliance]

Maybe he just want the building closer to him...and not in his backyard of Evanston?:shrug: :rolleyes:

[Steely Dan]

there's a rather amusing artcile published today by evanstonnow.com that speaks about the chronic myopia that infests the evanston citizenry when it comes to planning issues. it's not specifically about the fountain square tower, but it speaks to the overall downtown area.


Downtown goals don't match
Submitted by Bill Smith on Thu, 08/16/2007 - 9:35am.

Downtown Plan Committee members this week concluded that Evanstonians asked for the impossible when they demanded both increased retail activity and less traffic congestion during last month's downtown charrette planning process.

read more: http://www.evanstonnow.com/node/2717



i guess evanston's new city motto should be changed to: "But why can't i have my cake and eat it too?" ;)

[CenIL_LA]

delete

[forumly_chgoman]

there's a rather amusing artcile published today by evanstonnow.com that speaks about the chronic myopia that infests the evanston citizenry when it comes to planning issues. it's not specifically about the fountain square tower, but it speaks to the overall downtown area.


Downtown goals don't match
Submitted by Bill Smith on Thu, 08/16/2007 - 9:35am.

Downtown Plan Committee members this week concluded that Evanstonians asked for the impossible when they demanded both increased retail activity and less traffic congestion during last month's downtown charrette planning process.

read more: http://www.evanstonnow.com/node/2717




i guess evanston's new city motto should be changed to: "But why can't i have my cake and eat it too?" ;)
Typical evanstonian entitlement Fcuk-tardism

[mcfinley]

Plan Commission Chairman James Woods, noting that some residents had complained that the city's parking garages are too crowded, added, "If there aren't cars in those parking garages -- that's a problem."

This is just, wow, I can't even wrap my head around this. I have never not been able to find parking in any part of Evanston. What does too crowded even mean? When I park, I don't want to see anybody else's car?

Mr. Smith said, "People have funny attitudes about the garages. They recognize that it's good to have garage parking available, but they still want to park right in front of a shop."

The irony is that these same residents would probably walk further in a Walmart lot without complaint than they would from a municipal garage to a local shop.

[Steely Dan]

dp

[Steely Dan]

evanstonnow.com has posted an interesting article about the relationship of evanston building heights to chicago building heights over the last century or so, noting that evanston's tallest at any given point in time has historically been around 1/4 of the height of chicago's in the same era. with the 2,000 ft. tall chicago spire now under construction........ ;)


link to the article: http://www.evanstonnow.com/node/2741

[Alliance]

Of course, we don't have to slavishly follow what's happening in Chicago.

YEAH YA DO. Get buildin, 'burbs.

:cool:

[Steely Dan]

YEAH YA DO. Get buildin, 'burbs.

:cool:
i'm just waiting for chicago to propose and build a 4,000 foot monster so that evanstonians will have to put up with a supertall "in their back yard" (aka downtown evanston). ;)

[Steely Dan]

if the fountain square tower development gets built as currently proposed, evanston's cute little skyline could look something like this in the coming years.

what do you guys think?


http://img240.imageshack.us/img240/2900/evanstonfountainsquarejy9.jpg

[Steely Dan]

in other evanston highrise news:

the 15 story Winthrop Club condo building on the southwest edge of downtown evanston is now officially under construction. Revcon was out there this morning and the caisson rig was spinning away.

[Marcu]

^ Thanks for the update. Here is a render of the building http://wibiti.com/altthumbs/hpmain/288/140288.jpg (source: http://wibiti.com/HomePageView.aspx?v=v&c=0&HpID=%c2%baYX%e2%80%a0%c6%92). A nice design that fits in well with the surrounding architecture. The parking podium is kind of ugly but overall a great addition.

[Steely Dan]

The parking podium is kind of ugly but overall a great addition.

yes, the parking podium is not great, but the potential saving grace is that it's really only visible along the south side of the property, which currently butts up to a surface parking lot for a bank. so if land values continue to rise in downtown evanston, there's hope that maybe that surface lot will one day be redeveloped and thus block that ugly podium wall.

[Alliance]

Will this tower have an observation deck?

[sentinel]

^^^ Lol :jester:
Oh you!

[Steely Dan]

^^ i assume you're just clowning around, alliance.

but in case you aren't, there are no current plans to include an observation deck in the top of this building. however, the now dead Rozsak tower proposal for this block was supposed to have a restaurant at the top of tower; it's an idea that i think the Klutznik/Focus development team should seriously consider for this project.

[Alliance]

Thats a good plan. They should have no problem landing a nice resturant for that location.

[Nowhereman1280]

Why don't they just add a spire to get WTB?

[Steely Dan]

for those interested in some of the nitty-gritty details of this project, here's a link to a staff letter to the plan commission regarding the 708 church street proposal (aka fountain square tower) posted on the evanstonzoningmatters.org website:

http://www.evanstonzoningmatters.org/docs/staffReport708Church.pdf

[Steely Dan]

here's a link to an evanstonnews.com article about the plan commission meeting last night about fountain square tower. the article includes a high-res rendering of the base of the building showing the retail/parking podium in detail. yeah, it's it's still a parking podium, but it looks pretty decent.

check it out: http://www.evanstonnow.com/tower-picks-up-more-parking

[aaron38]

Yeah, that podium doesn't look that bad. It was also interesting that they said they could get more spaces without adding another floor to it.

But I was curious about this note Mr. Anderson said that while the developers don't plan to ask for any tax increment financing assistance to build the tower, they will need some level of financial help to restore the landmark three-story Hahn Building next door and preserve it for use as Class B office space.

How solid is that financial help looking? Is that State or local funding, and does the project die if that money doesn't come through?

[Steely Dan]

How solid is that financial help looking? Is that State or local funding, and does the project die if that money doesn't come through?

those are good questions that i don't have answers for, unfortunately. perhaps details on that aspect of the project will come out in later plan commission meetings.

evanstonnow.com has posted a new article talking about the mixed views of plan commission members on this tower project. follow the link: http://www.evanstonnow.com/planners-split-on-tower

[Steely Dan]

in other evanston high-rise news:

the controversial 1890 maple project (a 14 story rental building with ground floor retail on the northwest edge of downtown) was surprisingly approved by the city council last night after the developer made promises to pursue a trader joe's or other grocery retailer for the building.

read more at evanstonnow.com: http://www.evanstonnow.com/food-seals-the-1890-maple-deal