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

[Alliance]

Haha. Oh what suburbanietes will do for pointless retail.

*carrot on stick* But it'lll have a starbucks!!! *waves in front of suburbanite face*

[Steely Dan]

Haha. Oh what suburbanietes will do for pointless retail.

i hardly consider grocery stores to be "pointless retail". in fact, in the grand scheme of things, i find them to be one of the most essential types of retail that makes neighborhoods livable.

but in the end, it doesn't matter because the grocery store is what got the project approved, which is good news for those of us who want to see continued urbanization in downtown evanston. 13 stories of residents and a grocery store is a much better use for the land in question than for it to remain the vacant 2 story office building it has been for the last several years.

[Alliance]

it was more a mock of endless obsessions with such typical stores like "Trader Joes"

Certianly the building is a good move up, I just laughed at what actually got it approved.

[Steely Dan]

it was more a mock of endless obsessions with such typical stores like "Trader Joes"

Certianly the building is a good move up, I just laughed at what actually got it approved.

well, it wasn't trader joe's that convinced the councilman to approve, it was merely the inclusion of a grocery retailer, any grocery retailer. the developer just threw trader joe's out there as a potential tenant because he has a letter of interest from them, but nothing seems to be finalized at this point in time.

[Marcu]

it was more a mock of endless obsessions with such typical stores like "Trader Joes"

Certianly the building is a good move up, I just laughed at what actually got it approved.

I hardly consider Trader Joe's a typical store. It's one of the best grocery stores out there. Even more reason to be excited about this building.

[Marcu]

This project keeps gaining steam and about time the NIMBYS illogical argument of more people/business = bad for existing local business got shot down.

http://www.evanstonnow.com/tower-gets-business-backing

Tower project opponents have portrayed local business owners as big losers if the 49-story building is added to Evanston's downtown Fountain Square block.

But some local merchants and service providers weren't buying the victim role when they testified at the Plan Commission hearing on the project Thursday.

Daniel Kelch, owner of Lulu's restaurant at 804 Davis St., said of claims high-rise developments have a negative effect on small businesses "nothing could be further from the truth.

http://www.evanstonnow.com/tower-gets-business-backing

[Dr. Taco]

I hardly consider Trader Joe's a typical store. It's one of the best grocery stores out there. Even more reason to be excited about this building.

yeah, if i was on the edge about a building in my neighborhood, and I heard they were opening a trader joe's, that'd win me over in a second

My shit neighborhood could sure use one...

[Equilibria]

There's already a Whole Foods, though. What this neighborhood needed was a Staples or OfficeMax... but that doesn't have quite the appeal to the city fathers.

[Steely Dan]

There's already a Whole Foods, though.

whole foods and trader joe's are entirely different stores that market to entirely different classes of people. whole foods is like shopping at prada, trader joe's is more like sears.

[forumly_chgoman]

This project keeps gaining steam and about time the NIMBYS illogical argument of more people/business = bad for existing local business got shot down.

http://www.evanstonnow.com/tower-gets-business-backing

Tower project opponents have portrayed local business owners as big losers if the 49-story building is added to Evanston's downtown Fountain Square block.

But some local merchants and service providers weren't buying the victim role when they testified at the Plan Commission hearing on the project Thursday.

Daniel Kelch, owner of Lulu's restaurant at 804 Davis St., said of claims high-rise developments have a negative effect on small businesses "nothing could be further from the truth.

http://www.evanstonnow.com/tower-gets-business-backing

I think what the argument that these big developments are bad for local business really refers to are locally owned operated stores, not chains. There is anecdotal and as far as I know some empirical evidence that these large development cater more to chain style stores, they are more able to afford the rents in these new units than locally owned operated who cannot. There is also evidence that in such developments money spent in these chain style stores tends to flow out of the community, whereas money spent at locally owned operated has a higher incidence of remaining w/in the community.

I do not think this argument is completlly w/out merit, but it raises another issue of the costs of rents these newer places are charging

[Marcu]

^ Even if that assumption is correct, it is not a legitimate reason to halt a development in an area. And even if there is conclusive evidence that preventing construction will keep chains out, the other consequences and side effects are so detrimental (eg less affordable housing due to shortage of housing, less choices for consumers, loss of street life, loss of property taxes, loss of density around transit stations, etc.) that it's just not worth it.

Also, it is highly suspect that the "local businesses" the article cites as opposing this building are competing land owners in the downtown Evanston.

[forumly_chgoman]

Well...I never said it was a reason to halt construction I merely said that the argument is not completely w/out merit.

Your reply reeks of false choice or law of excluded middle

I am actually for this development. But I certainly can understand the concern that local merchants may have. There are many small, independent style shops in Evanston that could be negatively impacted by this development...notice I said could , not would. This point is at least worth investigating instead of dismissing it out of hand.

As to your point about lost tax revenues...perhaps.....but lets assume that many of these smaller independent shops are owned & employ local residents. If they are harmed or run under it could pose similar tax risks as you described on the positive side.

Oh and by the way the notion that halting this construction would harm affordable housing is laughable......at least as far as I know.....if I am wrong I am sorry....but I do not believe this development has any set asides for affordable housing. Just look at Sherman Plaza across the street.

[Steely Dan]

Oh and by the way the notion that halting this construction would harm affordable housing is laughable......at least as far as I know.....if I am wrong I am sorry....but I do not believe this development has any set asides for affordable housing. Just look at Sherman Plaza across the street.

this development would not include any on-site affordable housing units, but the developers will be required to donate money to evanston's affordable housing fund to get out of the affordable housing requirement, just as was done with sherman plaza across the street and all other recent highrise residential developments in downtown evanston. the effectiveness of those affordable housing funds is certainly up for debate.

as for the other issue about large developments and small independent retailers, it's important to note that the local business owner who spoke up in favor of the project at the plan commission meeting was the owner of Lulu's restaruant, a small, independent, locally-owned, non-chain restaurant. so clearly not everyone in the small-business owners community is on the same page regarding large developments and their business's financial well-being.

also, the point raised by one of the opposition speakers about evanston needing more office space instead of residential space is irrelevant when you consider that residential projects in downtown evanston have all met with good success while at the same time there is a completely vacant office building that's only about 10 years old on the northside of downtown. evanston will simply never be a significant suburban commercial office center like schaumburg, rosemont, or oak brook because it is much to far away from convenient expressway access.

[Marcu]

Oh and by the way the notion that halting this construction would harm affordable housing is laughable......at least as far as I know.....if I am wrong I am sorry....but I do not believe this development has any set asides for affordable housing. Just look at Sherman Plaza across the street.

Affordable housing contributions are not what I was referring to (as Steely pointed out their effects are highly disputed and they usually place a great burden on the middle class that aren't poor enough to get the units marked as "affordable" and not rich enough to pay the extra markup on the market rate units resulting from the mandatory contribution. As we know housing is highly inelastic with high barriers to entry and almost all costs put on the developers are passed directly the the buyers).

I was simply referring to a basic supply/demand argument. The best way to assure that downtown Evanston stays affordable is to allow for adequate supply. Richer people will relocate from older, less luxurious buildings to new construction making the older units more affordable for people with average incomes. We're seeing this play out with the Loop office market, where all the new construction has made older office buildings much more affordable for small businesses that may otherwise have moved to the burbs or gone under.

A sure way to keep affordable housing out is to artifically restrict supply in an area.

I am actually for this development. But I certainly can understand the concern that local merchants may have. There are many small, independent style shops in Evanston that could be negatively impacted by this development...notice I said could , not would. This point is at least worth investigating instead of dismissing it out of hand.


I agree with you. There is certainly a possibility that this will negatively effect small businesses. After all, I doubt [insert pretentious overpriced boutique] can compete with [insert generic trendy chain that likes new-urban settings]. But as I point out, even if we assume that the argument that this will negatively effect small businesses is true, it is still not worth wasting time and money on an investigation since that alone is not worth stopping development. There is no point of investigating just for the sake of investigating.

[Steely Dan]

A sure way to keep affordable housing out is to artifically restrict supply in an area.


yep. see "san francisco" for reference.

[Steely Dan]

evanstonnow.com's article about wednesday evening's plan commision hearing about the tower.



Tower, downtown plan slip together
Submitted by Bill Smith on Thu, 10/11/2007 - 5:09pm.

Folks who thought the Fountain Square tower project shouldn't be voted on until a new downtown plan was in place may be coming closer to getting their wish.

full article: http://www.evanstonnow.com/tower-downtown-plan-slip-together

[Steely Dan]

here's an article from evanstonnow.com about the proposed downtown zoning plan and it's possible development implications. the article has a pretty cool image showing potential redevelopment sites downtown and what their maximum massing could look like under the new proposed zoning rules.


Squeeze play for development
Submitted by Bill Smith on Tue, 10/30/2007 - 7:40pm.

Downtown Evanston has barely enough potential development sites to accommodate projected market demand over the next decade, assuming new zoning limits in the draft downtown plan are adopted.

read the full article: http://www.evanstonnow.com/squeeze-play-for-development

[CHAPINM1]

evanstonnow.com's article about wednesday evening's plan commision hearing about the tower.



Tower, downtown plan slip together
Submitted by Bill Smith on Thu, 10/11/2007 - 5:09pm.

Folks who thought the Fountain Square tower project shouldn't be voted on until a new downtown plan was in place may be coming closer to getting their wish.

full article: http://www.evanstonnow.com/tower-downtown-plan-slip-together

Great to see this one still very active! I was wondering what was going on with this project. It appears to be mostly good news, I can't complain about that. ;)

With downtown Evanston becoming as dense as it is, the only way to build is up. The city officials are finally getting it through their heads that building up is going to be the only option, let alone the most practical. The idea of building highrises after a while will sink in more and more people will be less obective to it.

Thank you for keeping this very much upated.

[spyguy]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/northwest/chi-evanston_01nov01,0,3725621.story

In Evanston, voices rise over City Council's high-rise dealings

By Deborah Horan
November 1, 2007

As plans for a sleek downtown spire move forward, an increasingly vocal group of Evanston residents is worried the City Council has conducted behind-the-scenes conversations with developers that may facilitate construction of the 523-foot tower without regard for their concerns.

[Steely Dan]

well, the vocal minority, sensing the way the wind appears to be blowing, is grasping for straws now. no surprise there. :rolleyes:

[CenIL_LA]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/northwest/chi-evanston_01nov01,0,3725621.story

In Evanston, voices rise over City Council's high-rise dealings

By Deborah Horan
November 1, 2007

As plans for a sleek downtown spire move forward, an increasingly vocal group of Evanston residents is worried the City Council has conducted behind-the-scenes conversations with developers that may facilitate construction of the 523-foot tower without regard for their concerns.

Yeah this thing is going to take up sooo much of their gigantic prairie blue sky.....its a good thing there are no mountains nearby. They will have to start cutting down the trees thoughout the city to let more endless sky in, or acknowledge the fact they are anal and they are afraid of change.

[nomarandlee]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-evanston_07nov07,0,5099270.story?coll=chi_tab01_layout

Evanston downtown plan revealed
Development would be broken into zones

..............But even though it is not explicitly mentioned in the plan, a proposed tower at Fountain Square continued to come up during public comments. Planners appeared to encourage the sleek, 49-story tower, which has generated controversy, by suggesting building an "iconic" structure at the square, though at a maximum of 42 stories.

The draft calls for dividing the city center into three zones: a central core where developers hope to build the condo tower, a traditional zone around Davis Street that preserves smaller mom-and-pop stores and a transitional zone that leads to residential areas.

The core zone would allow buildings up to 42 stories if developers added amenities from a list that includes public art, concealed parking and contributions to child day care or affordable housing.......................

[Dr. Taco]

^ its nice that they're encouraging higher development, but why do they have to come up with a set maximum number of floors (42)? Is it because they feel like they need to give developers a tangible incentive?

[Marcu]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/northwest/chi-evanston_01nov01,0,3725621.story

In Evanston, voices rise over City Council's high-rise dealings

By Deborah Horan
November 1, 2007

As plans for a sleek downtown spire move forward, an increasingly vocal group of Evanston residents is worried the City Council has conducted behind-the-scenes conversations with developers that may facilitate construction of the 523-foot tower without regard for their concerns.

The Trib article has a comments section where the nimbys are posting ridiculous comments. Everyone should go there and post something intelligent. Here is the link http://www.topix.net/forum/source/chicago-tribune/TS35EVTKSHEH2FPGL

[Alliance]

Ok, well I responded with a post of my own.

[Via Chicago]

its not worth arguing on those tribune message boards, just dont bother.

[Northwest]

Well my comment on this was rejected because the quote I was resonding to was quickly deleted.
I understand the underlying reasons why, but WOW, how belligerent and closed-minded can our local NIMBYs get? Simply unacceptable arguments!

[Steely Dan]

from evanstonnow.com:


Tower plan gets a shorter base
Submitted by Bill Smith on Thu, 11/15/2007 - 8:08am.

Developers of the proposed Fountain Square tower suggested reducing its base from five to four stories Wednesday as the Plan Commission wrapped up public comment on the project.

Commission Chairman James Woods said the panel will vote on the plan at its next meeting Dec. 12.


full article: http://www.evanstonnow.com/fountainsquare



_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________




so Dec. 12th is the big date (unless it gets deferred). if the plan commission approves this, signs look good for the city council to follow suit and give full approval for the development. though i wouldn't be surprised if several floors are knocked off the tower as a tiny bone to throw to the NIMBY reactionaries.

[mcfinley]

from evanstonnow.com:


Tower plan gets a shorter base
Developers of the proposed Fountain Square tower suggested reducing its base from five to four stories Wednesday as the Plan Commission wrapped up public comment on the project.

That's just dumb. So NIMBYs have been complaining that this project will diminish the street level charm in Evanston, so the developers have knocked off a level from the project which reduces the amount of retail space available to the public.

Oh well, at least this project looks to be a go. Very much looking forward to seeing the building's impact in a couple years. :)

[Steely Dan]

Oh well, at least this project looks to be a go.

i wouldn't say that. the project still has to be approved, and in evanston, it ain't over til it's over. only one alderman has publicly expressed disapproval for the tower, so that's a pretty good sign that it would most likely be approved by the city council if it gets that far, but it first needs to be approved by the plan commission. if the plan commission rejects the development, then the city council could theoretically over-rule that decision, but it seems to me that would be unlikely given the very controversial nature of this development.

[spyguy]

http://www.evanstonnow.com/business/plan-commission-approves-tower

Plan Commission approves tower
by Bill Smith on Wed, 12/12/2007

The Evanston Plan Commission tonight voted 4-3 to recommend approval of the proposed 49-story tower at 708 Church St. to the City Council.

[Pandemonious]

^OWNED! Take that NIMBYs!

Booth Hansen's office is actually in the base of the building I live in. Right at their main entrance they keep some updated renderings of this sleek tower. Glad it will be moving forward. Actually, none of the renderings I have seen are on here.. maybe I should snap a shot of the latest one they have up there.

[Alliance]

Great news!

[aaron38]

I loved these lines from the Evanstonnow.com article:
The commissioners were sharply divided on whether development downtown over the last several decades has made the Fountain Square block an appropriate site for high-rise development.

Commissioners who looked to the east and west saw Sherman Plaza, the Chase Bank tower and other high rise developments and said yes.

Commissioners who looked to the north and south claimed to see only the low rise buildings across the street and said no.

The taller Rotary International, Optima Towers and 1800 Sherman buildings a little further north and south escaped comment by either side.

[Steely Dan]

i'm absolutely STUNNED that this project was approved by the plan commission. i though for sure that they would reject the plan and that it would be up to a city council override to get the project approved, but with the plan commission giving their approval, the stormy waters ahead for this project just got A LOT calmer.

this project could actually get built as proposed. evanston could actually become home to a 500' foot tower. it's a little hard to believe.





Actually, none of the renderings I have seen are on here.. maybe I should snap a shot of the latest one they have up there.
yes please. :)

[trvlr70]

[gasp] Hell HAS frozen over!

[OhioGuy]

Yay for Evanston! As the only suburb in the area that I could even remotely ever consider living in, this kind of development just makes it even more attractive (at least to me).

Booth Hansen's office is actually in the base of the building I live in. Right at their main entrance they keep some updated renderings of this sleek tower. Glad it will be moving forward. Actually, none of the renderings I have seen are on here.. maybe I should snap a shot of the latest one they have up there.

Yes, please do so! :)

[Nowhereman1280]

Hurray for Evanston! It's a real city now, not just some piss ass collection of grumpy neighbors! I can't wait to see this baby go up! This should also really extend the Chicago Skyline north into Evanston with a marker like this! This also has the potential to displace Park Place Tower at the end of Sheridan as the tallest building north of downtown Chicago! That will all depend on the exact height since Park place is 531ft. If not, then this will at least displace Park Tower, the big black triangular building just north of foster on Sheridan, as the second tallest north of downtown Chicago.

Edit: Actually I just check Emporis and this has the potential to be the tallest building outside of downtown Chicago, in any direction, if it beats Park Place Tower.

Also, I didn't know Park Place Tower was a Lowendburg, which is surprising since I've developed a fondness of PPT and almost everything Lowendburg designs is craptastic.

[Steely Dan]

Edit: Actually I just check Emporis and this has the potential to be the tallest building outside of downtown Chicago, in any direction, if it beats Park Place Tower.

another meaningless claim to fame for this building: it would be the tallest building on the great lakes not located in a major city.

it would also make evanston the 3rd tallest Big 10 city after minneapolis and columbus, both of which are major cities.

and it would make evanston only the 13th midwestern city to join the 500' club.

[Nowhereman1280]

Speaking of the great lakes, it would also be as tall as the depth of the water that the Edmund Fitzgerald lies in... :shrug: Too meaningless?

[Steely Dan]

^ no, that's a highly relevant connection of deep, profound meaning ;)


in celebration of this project getting approved by the plan commission, i felt like reposting these images of what might become of Evanston's cute little skyline.



Before:

http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/6642/evanstonnn8.jpg




After:

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

[honte]

Shock and awe!

[Steely Dan]

here's a new rendering from a different angle:

http://img232.imageshack.us/img232/8505/fountainsquaretower2ld6.jpg

[Dr. Taco]

omg, thats gonna destroy the streetlife, increase congestion, kill all the birds, and cause a pigeon epidemic :hell:

[honte]

So now that it's finally approved, we can safely raise the question: Is this design good enough to be Evanston's tallest building? I personally think it's a little bland.

[Steely Dan]

So now that it's finally approved,
it's not finally approved, it has only made it past the first phase of approval - the plan commission. full approval (or rejection, god forbid) should come at the next city council meeting in january, unless something else comes up to delay a vote by the council before then. part of me wants to say that things look promising for full city council approval, but evanston being evanston, there always seems to be something........




Is this design good enough to be Evanston's tallest building? I personally think it's a little bland.
the tower is shaping up very well in my opinion, love the proportions, love the glass, the recessed balcony pattern, the inward slanting end walls. with proper detailing i think it will make a fine piece of architecture. then again, i'm one of this forum's most notorious defenders of "box-itecture", so take my praise with a grain of salt.

the podium on the other hand, that's where i still have some pretty big reservations. the tower to podium junction looks awkward to me. hopefully we'll get to see some high-res base stuff soon.

[Steely Dan]

chicago tribune:

Evanston panel signs off on tower
Plans for 500-foot downtown building inch closer to reality

By Brian Cox | Special to the Tribune
December 14, 2007

A controversial proposal to build a skyscraper in downtown Evanston cleared its first big hurdle late Wednesday.

full article:http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-hightower_14dec14,1,3770191.story




evanston roundtable:

Plan Commission Approves Tower Plan
BREAKING NEWS:
December 13, 2007:

Split along lines of age and gender, the City's Plan Commission voted 4-3 on Dec. 12 to approve the proposed 49-story mixed use proposal for downtown Evanston.

full article: http://www.evanstonroundtable.com/

[honte]

the tower is shaping up very well in my opinion, love the proportions, love the glass, the recessed balcony pattern, the inward slanting end walls. with proper detailing i think it will make a fine piece of architecture. then again, i'm one of this forum's most notorious defenders of "box-itecture", so take my praise with a grain of salt.

the podium on the other hand, that's where i still have some pretty big reservations. the tower to podium junction looks awkward to me. hopefully we'll get to see some high-res base stuff soon.

Yep, the base is a concern. The last render you gave us seems to show a poor attempt to be contextual by screwing with the modernity and glassiness at the base.

I probably rank right alongside you in the adoration of boxes. But a box has to be great to cut it... I have many reservations about the flatness of these facades, without any apparent texture. This is a trick that really takes a lot of finesse to pull off successfully - usually hinging on the absolute tautness and knife-like quality of the facade. I just can't see how this will be an aesthetic success when it is pierced by balconies all over, and further the designers seem to desire to draw attention to said balconies by rearranging them in a variety of patterns as the tower rises.

The other concern I have is the overall form. I think it's pleasant, but it would be best among other buildings and not as such a commanding presence. In short, I don't think it's quite enough to preside over the North Shore. This is not an argument for flashy forms or applied ornament, but it seems like the building should have a more iconic, even celebratory nature.

[Steely Dan]

i agree that the success will hinge on the detailing and achieving the proper "tautness" of the facade, but i don't think the recessed balconies will necessarily affect that in a negative fashion (i'm thinking of the recessed balconies and facade of 600 north fairbanks here).

as for the tower not being iconic enough, i guess this is a situation where one might want to see more celebratory flamboyance, but at the same time, i've always admired how boston's hancock tower commands the relatively anemic back bay skyline in all of its boxy, modern simplicity. i think this tower, if excuted with the care and detailing booth-hansen is capable of, will be a knockout and very worthy of presiding over the northshore for decades to come.

the podium still needs a lot of work though.

[alex1]

yeah, i too worry about the base. looks downright horrific having the garage entrance next to that older looking structure.

not knowing the area very well, is that building next door significant and is there a better solution to the problem of where to situate parking garage entrance?

re: boston's Hancock tower. its a beauty. from certain angles, the building looks impossibly thin and without dimension (which is quite wonderful and is what makes the building great). Can this building pull off the same visual tricks? I'd personally love to see that happen because as Dan states, architecture doesn't have to be flamboyant to be successful.

[Alliance]

http://img232.imageshack.us/img232/8505/fountainsquaretower2ld6.jpg


Oh my. She's definately got a real stong Legacy complex. The buildings are practically clones.

Count me in as liking it. Then again, I think Legacy is one of the most exciting structures being built right now...I'm just a big fan of the modern glass box, even if its an SCB.

[Steely Dan]

yeah, i too worry about the base. looks downright horrific having the garage entrance next to that older looking structure.

not knowing the area very well, is that building next door significant and is there a better solution to the problem of where to situate parking garage entrance?

the building next door is significant, it's the landmarked hahn building, it's a very nice structure and of the 3 buildings currently on the fountain square block it is the most worthy of preservation.

and to answer the second part of your question, no, unfortunately there is no better place on the block to situate the parking garage entrance, so they really need to focus on the design of that element, along with the rest of the podium, to make this building work at street level.




Oh my. She's definately got a real stong Legacy complex. The buildings are practically clones.

the fact that neither building has been built, combined with the fact that we haven't even seen any high quality renderings for the fountain square project makes your claim of "The buildings are practically clones" a bit dubious in my eyes. for sure there are some similarities that they share such as the wedge form (fountain square's wedge shape is actually dictated by its site) and a glassy curtain wall, but being that one tower is from SCB and the other from booth-hansen, we might see some some key differences in the detailing. or maybe not, they may turn out to be relative clones of each other, but until we get more visual information, particularly on the fountain square project, i think it's too early to make that call.

[Alliance]

the fact that neither building has been built, combined with the fact that we haven't even seen any high quality renderings for the fountain square project makes your claim of "The buildings are practically clones" a bit dubious in my eyes. for sure there are some similarities that they share such as the wedge form (fountain square's wedge shape is actually dictated by its site) and a glassy curtain wall, but being that one tower is from SCB and the other from booth-hansen, we might see some some key differences in the detailing. or maybe not, they may turn out to be relative clones of each other, but until we get more visual information, particularly on the fountain square project, i think it's too early to make that call.

Maybe, but its more than that...the strong central balcony line on the front, the pattern of balconies on the sides. Maybe "clone" is too strong, but there's a lot of similiarities tht warrant an immediate comparison.

But, we'll see.

[Steely Dan]

Maybe "clone" is too strong, but there's a lot of similiarities tht warrant an immediate comparison.

of course the two designs are similar enough to draw comparisons, i was just reacting to your use of the word "clone" and wanted to point out that with the minimal amount of low-quality visual info we've seen for fountain sqaure these still could be very differently detailed towers.

and like you, i think the legacy design is very promising, so if this evanston tower turns out to be a clone of it, that won't be the end of the world in my view.

[Steely Dan]

another meaningless claim to fame for this building: it would be the tallest building on the great lakes not located in a major city.

it would also make evanston the 3rd tallest Big 10 city after minneapolis and columbus, both of which are major cities.

and it would make evanston only the 13th midwestern city to join the 500' club.

i just realized another meaningless claim to fame for this building. if it is approved and moves to construction sometime in 2008, it would likely become the tallest under construction building in the midwest outside of chicago. the current holder of that title is the 406' river house condos in grand rapids.

there are three proposals in other midwest cities that could be taller (the 689' queen city square in cincy, the mixed-use 43 story lake pointe tower in milwaukee, and the revamped 50 story nicollet project in minneapolis), but it seems likely that all of their their construction time lines will be further out, if they even get built at all, leaving the 523' fountain square tower in little old evanston to claim this title should things continue to go well for this project.

[Steely Dan]

and because we're all so concerned about the base, here's something better to go on. what do you guys think of the base? more concerned? less concerned?

http://img413.imageshack.us/img413/9956/fountainsquaretower3ck9.jpg

[alex1]

seems like if the goal is to busy up the architectural elements to the point that no one pays attention to the garage entrance, you win. even the garage doors look overworked with a semi-translucent material and visual elements that attempt to mimic the windows on the retial portion of the project. I think this aping is fairly thoughtless.

but really, I do worry about the placement of the parking structure and its overall size. Otherwise the podium is fine. Nothing I'd write home about but it accomplishes its goal (a hidden parking garage with retail). This is one time I'd love to see Abalos y Herreros's work influence the design (plaza woermann within this visual language).

if the parking entrance can't be moved to another street then my only wish is to minimize its size and really control how it exists within its environment. in other words, give it a personality that's unique and interesting.

[Tom In Chicago]

Steely Dan - what do you guys think of the base? more concerned? less concerned?

meh. . .

[honte]

I disagree that the garage doors look overworked; in fact, they appear rather handsome to me. The really troubling aspect of this to me remains the contextual approach, which threatens to significantly dull the impact of an all-glass tower. The minor and useless band of contrasting material introduces a heavy cloud of doubt over the designers' intentions and confidence in doing an all-glass building.

Also, I sincerely hope they lose the Home Depot sconces.

[Equilibria]

I can actually picture that facade pretty well at street level, and it seems to match well with the other facades thereabouts (Hotel Orrington, Library, etc). I actually like the art deco accents, in a nod to the Library across the intersection. Nonetheless, That transition could be a little cleaner, but that would mean no pretty trees on the shelf.

[Wheelingman04]

I think this tower looks very good.

[Steely Dan]

I actually like the art deco accents, in a nod to the Library across the intersection.
good point, i hadn't made that connection in my own mind yet, thanks for pointing that out.


Nonetheless, That transition could be a little cleaner, but that would mean no pretty trees on the shelf.
yeah, it cuts both ways, doesn't it? i don't think the base is a perfect solution, but i also don't think the nods to some neighborhood contextualism are awful. i really like the tower of this project. and the podium, as far as podiums go, isn't that bad in the grand scheme of things. do the two components work together? not really. is there an architectural solution to make the two competing forces work better together? perhaps, but i don't know what that is.

in any event, from what i've seen so far, this project will have a FAR superior street level presence than sherman plaza across the street, but i suppose that's not really saying very much.

[DCCliff]

I can actually picture that facade pretty well at street level, and it seems to match well with the other facades thereabouts (Hotel Orrington, Library, etc). I actually like the art deco accents, in a nod to the Library across the intersection. Nonetheless, That transition could be a little cleaner, but that would mean no pretty trees on the shelf.

I just don't see it. the podium overwhelms and ignores the Hahn Building. The close-up view from Steely only reinforces (in currently-rendered state, anyway) the greater sophistication of the tower skin vs. the base skin. Also, tend to agree with alex1, but my description is less elegant: It's CLUNKY in the extreme. Perhaps a reworking that was sensitive to the Hahn and even to the post-prairie/art & crafts (its not deco) library would be more successful. Or maybe just a facade less busy. SCB, Klutznick-Fisher/Focus, can you take the challenge?

I also disagree that garage entrance is in the only place it can go. What about splitting the entrance/exit on both Orrington and Sherman and minimizing impact on each side?

This is HUGE for Evanston and must not be f**ked up. (And - full disclosure - having grown up nearby, the condition of DT Evanston means a lot to me.)

[Steely Dan]

SCB, Klutznick-Fisher/Focus, can you take the challenge?

the architect for this project is booth-hansesn, not SCB.




I also disagree that garage entrance is in the only place it can go. What about splitting the entrance/exit on both Orrington and Sherman and minimizing impact on each side?
that would be the worst case situation. if you have to put in curb cuts on this block for the new project, it's far better to do it in only one spot than to start spreading the curb cuts around the block and making the pedestrian experience worse in more places. the garage exit/entrance is in the best possible place right now. it should certainly not go on the church street side, and because sherman is a more prominent street than orrington, i like the orrington placement they have gone with.

[Steely Dan]

another NIMBY battlecry debunked:


Chief douses tower fire claims
Submitted by Bill Smith on Thu, 12/20/2007 - 8:25am.

Evanston Fire Chief Alan Berkowsky says the city is fully prepared to fight fires in any high-rise building, whether it's 20 or 60 stories tall.

"The tactics and strategies are the same," Berkowsky said. "Practically speaking, beyond eight stories, we treat all fires as a high-rise situation."


full story: http://www.evanstonnow.com/business/chief-douses-tower-fire-claims

[DCCliff]

the architect for this project is booth-hansesn, not SCB.

Ooops, thanks; sloppy - - knew that. And I have to admit your garage argument is correct.

[a chicago bearcat]

was just in downtown evanston
and noticed something interesting about this building in comparison to those around it

The retail or ground floor, is huge, twice the height of most in the downtown area, but similarly scaled to the newer developments, all of which feel pedestrian-wise, more like michigan avenue than the downtown evanston I really love, such as just around fountain square

but, this is an odd complaint in one sense, because all of the "historic" buildings in evanston are infact imitations of what was being built on michigan avenue at the same time, when it was the boutique alternative to State street, and evanston wanted to be the alternative to Michigan avenue

so maybe it's appropriate on a philosophical level for it to impersonate michigan avenue, but I'd much rather have the pedestrian scaled storefronts of the older buildings, because I despise mall-ification of the street

[Steely Dan]

this article from the evanston review is from last week, but i've been out of commission since blowing out my knee on christmas eve, so here it is. also, as a reminder, now that the plan commission has given its final approval of this project, it will likely be on the agenda of the City Council's Planning and Development Committee at its Jan. 14 meeting, that's less than 2 weeks away.


Tower plan heads to City Council
December 27, 2007
By BOB SEIDENBERG City Editor

A developer's proposal to build a 49-story tower downtown now goes to the Evanston City Council after city Plan Commission members offered widely divergent views last week on the project's merits.

The commission had voted 4-3 at their Dec. 12 in support of developers' request for zoning relief to allow construction of the high-rise, almost twice the size of the city's next tallest building, on the south side of Church Street between Orrington and Sherman avenues.

full article: http://www.pioneerlocal.com/evanston/news/713907,ev-tower-1227-7-s1.article

[aaron38]

^From the article:

Nearly twice as tall as the next-highest building, "It doesn't add to the skyline, doesn't create cohesion, but rather dominates," argued the group members, one of whom, Schuldenfrei, is a doctoral candidate in architectural history at Harvard University. Nyden and Burrus boast professional planning credentials.
"A skyline should be composed of buildings, generally of the same height, but they should be distinguished from one another by a variety of roof forms," said the group.
Evanston's skyline, they said, should not be composed "of mainly 25 story buildings and then a single building twice as tall."


Wow. Since when is the plateau the ideal shape of a skyline? And Sears and the Empire State Building don't add to their respective skylines then?
He doesn't make a very convincing argument.

[LucasS6]

I agree that having one building be twice as tall as everything around it isn't usually a good look. The way to fix this, however, isn't to stop a building twice as big from being built, but turning that demand into other buildings: some 50% taller, some 75% taller, to make the one 100% taller fit in better.

It's not a reason to stop growth, it's a reason to encourage it.

[BVictor1]

^From the article:

Nearly twice as tall as the next-highest building, "It doesn't add to the skyline, doesn't create cohesion, but rather dominates," argued the group members, one of whom, Schuldenfrei, is a doctoral candidate in architectural history at Harvard University. Nyden and Burrus boast professional planning credentials.
"A skyline should be composed of buildings, generally of the same height, but they should be distinguished from one another by a variety of roof forms," said the group.
Evanston's skyline, they said, should not be composed "of mainly 25 story buildings and then a single building twice as tall."


Wow. Since when is the plateau the ideal shape of a skyline? And Sears and the Empire State Building don't add to their respective skylines then?
He doesn't make a very convincing argument.


Hell, I guess Evanston will have to build a few more 50-story buildings now to make the Fountain Square Building fit in. :tup:

[honte]

He doesn't make a very convincing argument.

It's rarely a good thing when architecture historians attempt to become architecture critics.

[Marcu]

Evanston may be close to Chicago but it's a world apart. Much of Evanston's old NIMBY guard is comprised of pseudo-intellectuals whose detox diets and intense meditation regimines are better suited in a Boulder or Sedona. Thankfully, the old guard is slowly being replaced by working professionals, families looking for an urban setting with good schools, and empty nesters. In other words, by real people. To the old guard, this isn't just about a tall building. This is the final straw that will make Evanston maintstream again. Expect them to fight this tooth and nail until the building is topped out.

[aaron38]

Hell, I guess Evanston will have to build a few more 50-story buildings now to make the Fountain Square Building fit in. :tup:

Exactly. And once Fountain Square is built, anything less than 50 stories is "out of the character of the neighborhood"!

[Ch.G, Ch.G]

It's rarely a good thing when architecture historians attempt to become architecture critics.

Harvard must really be lowering its standards...

[Steely Dan]

Hell, I guess Evanston will have to build a few more 50-story buildings now to make the Fountain Square Building fit in. :tup:
that's doubtful, all the talk in the downtown planning discussion is that the fountain square block would be the only block in evanston where a building this tall could be built. all the surrounding blocks would be zoned for building heights that would taper down, creating the often mentioned "wedding cake" effect. the downtown plan now being considered may not be enacted as currently proposed, but your vision of a downtown evanston filled with 50 story buildings is most likely just fantasy.








I agree that having one building be twice as tall as everything around it isn't usually a good look.
i disagree. the 1st image below looks just fine to me. it looks FAR better than the plateau skyline that the 3 dissenting plan commission members are lobbying for (2nd image).

http://img247.imageshack.us/img247/3100/evanstonfountainsquare2wf4.jpg

http://img152.imageshack.us/img152/5483/evanstonfountainsquare3dj4.jpg

[Ch.G, Ch.G]

all the surrounding blocks would be zoned for building heights that would taper down, creating the often mentioned "wedding cake" effect.

God, Evanston is so weird.

[Steely Dan]

^ i fail to see what's so weird in the statement that i made. would you care to explain?

[Dr. Taco]

^ I think its pretty weird, too. Except it might not be weird in the sense that evanston is different from other cities. But it is pretty weird how the government is trying to shape the shape of their skyline in any one direction

[Steely Dan]

^ again, i fail to see what's weird about that. it's called city planning; it is in fact quite normal.

[Ch.G, Ch.G]

^ again, i fail to see what's weird about that. it's called city planning; it is in fact quite normal.

uhhh "wedding cake" effect? that's weird. they'd be like square-block stepped pyramids. WEIRD.

[phillyskyline]

I love the developer's vision and it's a great location.

[VivaLFuego]

Evanston may be close to Chicago but it's a world apart. Much of Evanston's old NIMBY guard is comprised of pseudo-intellectuals whose detox diets and intense meditation regimines are better suited in a Boulder or Sedona. Thankfully, the old guard is slowly being replaced by working professionals, families looking for an urban setting with good schools, and empty nesters. In other words, by real people. To the old guard, this isn't just about a tall building. This is the final straw that will make Evanston maintstream again. Expect them to fight this tooth and nail until the building is topped out.

Just a comment, these exact words could be applied to Hyde Park, where suddenly (this year), there finally seems to be a community concensus that development and density aren't bad things; if anything, they are to be encouraged to support retail vibrancy, with community input to ensure the design is appropriate from a form/aesthetic standpoint. Hopefully, as your point out, this project will represent the absolute defining turning point for Evanston in this regard (though the several large-scale projects of the last 3 years, both in the Main St and Davis St areas, show that the trend has been building for some time).

[VivaLFuego]

^ I think its pretty weird, too. Except it might not be weird in the sense that evanston is different from other cities. But it is pretty weird how the government is trying to shape the shape of their skyline in any one direction

If Evanston planning building heights like this freaks you out, do yourself a favor and don't ever research planning in San Francisco.

[Steely Dan]

uhhh "wedding cake" effect? that's weird. they'd be like square-block stepped pyramids. WEIRD.

you're getting hung up on the word "wedding cake". it's simply a metaphor for a tiered skyline in which there is a tall centrally located main tower surrounded by shorter buildings that taper downwards in height. it doesn't mean that they want their skyline to literally look like a wedding cake.

[Dr. Taco]

you're getting hung up on the word "wedding cake". it's simply a metaphor for a tiered skyline in which there is a tall centrally located main tower surrounded by shorter buildings that taper downwards in height. it doesn't mean that they want their skyline to literally look like a wedding cake.

well, it might be a little too much to ask for, but I think it would make for a much more interesting city if they had a couple peaks, like chicago's spread out jhc, aon, and sears. Don't get me wrong, I'm not against city planning, but a specific "build this height here, this height here, and this height here" seems too controlling. If Evanston were to get this proposal built, I'm sure it would eventually encourage some taller buildings like it elsewhere in evanston, and I think it would be better if it wasn't a block away from fountain square

[Marcu]

^ Evanston seems to have a shortage of office space. Perhaps we can see a 400 foot office tower proposal in the next few months if fountain squaqre gets the go. As with any large scale suburban project, fountain square's approval is critical for several proposals in the pipeline.

[Steely Dan]

well, it might be a little too much to ask for, but I think it would make for a much more interesting city if they had a couple peaks, like chicago's spread out jhc, aon, and sears. Don't get me wrong, I'm not against city planning, but a specific "build this height here, this height here, and this height here" seems too controlling. If Evanston were to get this proposal built, I'm sure it would eventually encourage some taller buildings like it elsewhere in evanston, and I think it would be better if it wasn't a block away from fountain square
well, i think you're wishing for the impossible. should fountain square tower be approved and built, we're not going to see 500' towers popping up all over evanston, it simply isn't going to happen. i too would be more inclined to let the free market dictate where and how many tall buildings should be built in evanston, but that is not the way evanston wants to do things, so they are in the process of revising their downtown zoning to govern how tall and where high-rise buildings can be built. it may be anti-free-market, but it hardly makes evanston weird or unusual.






^ Evanston seems to have a shortage of office space. Perhaps we can see a 400 foot office tower proposal in the next few months if fountain squaqre gets the go.
in the debate over fountain square tower, other people have brought up this supposed lack of office space in downtown evanston as well, but i gotta be honest, i just don't see it. right now, in the northwest corner of downtown there is a 3 story office building that has sat vacant for years. there is space available for companies to come in and set up office space, there just doesn't seem to be any demand for it right now. hopefully that will change.







As with any large scale suburban project, fountain square's approval is critical for several proposals in the pipeline.
what are these "several proposals in the pipeline" that are reliant on fountian square tower's approval? if there are any other significant high-rise projects in the works for downtown evanston right now, they certainly haven't been made public. do you know something we don't?

[Marcu]

^ Other than a few unreliable "I heard so and so"s from several Evanstonians, I do not have personal knowledge of any new project in the pipeline. I did hear, however, that there is a proposal in the works for a large project on Oakton (former Osco site) and some sort of large office proposal downtown where B&N used to be. Not sure what is meant by "large", especially in the world of Evanston. I wouldn't be surprised, though, if a few projects do surface once Fountain Square is approved. I'm sure several developers are waiting out the storm to see the outcome.

As far as the existing vacant office space, as we have seen in the loop existing vacant space does not mean that a developer can't get record rents for new class A office space.

[Steely Dan]

I did hear, however, that there is a proposal in the works for a............... large office proposal downtown where B&N used to be.

that could be very interesting. and given that the existing structure on that site is nowhere close to being landmark worthy, it would not be a great loss if it were to be replaced by a better project. i would caution, however, that some of these "i heard so and so"s could very well have been started by the anti-development NIMBYs themselves to spread fear and paranoia amongst the community; sort of a "if they approve fountain square, i heard they might propose another big tower project across the street from it, oh the horror". well, whether the rumor is just fear mongering or based in some reality, i guess we'll just have to wait and see how fountain square pans out before anything substantive is made public about any other big proposals in downtown evanston, if such proposals even exist right now.






As far as the existing vacant office space, as we have seen in the loop existing vacant space does not mean that a developer can't get record rents for new class A office space.
that does work in downtown chicago, but the equation might be different in evanston. that said, i would certainly like to see more than just residential highrises built in downtown evanston, the more you mix the uses, the more interesting things get. if a developer can pull off a large office project in downtown evanston, more power to him. though i do maintain my skepticism.

[honte]

what are these "several proposals in the pipeline" that are reliant on fountian square tower's approval? if there are any other significant high-rise projects in the works for downtown evanston right now, they certainly haven't been made public. do you know something we don't?

The principals of Garrison partners mentioned in an interview on YoChicago that they plan to start marketing a new high-rise on the North side of downtown Evanston...

[Steely Dan]

The principals of Garrison partners mentioned in an interview on YoChicago that they plan to start marketing a new high-rise on the North side of downtown Evanston...

i believe the highrise that you're refering to is Carroll Place, an 18 story condo proposal on the northside of downtown that has already been fully approved by the city. or are you talking about another unknown condo project on the northside of downtown evanston that garrison is also going to be marketing as well?

Carroll Place:

http://img358.imageshack.us/img358/6316/evcp01qz6.jpg

[honte]

^ That could be the one. Honestly, I find it hard to keep up with the Evanston proposals, since I don't know the roads very well by name.

As they plan to start marketing soon, you're probably correct that it's an already-approved project.

[Steely Dan]

another meaningless claim to fame for this building: it would be the tallest building on the great lakes not located in a major city.

it would also make evanston the 3rd tallest Big 10 city after minneapolis and columbus, both of which are major cities.

and it would make evanston only the 13th midwestern city to join the 500' club.

i just realized another meaningless claim to fame for this building. if it is approved and moves to construction sometime in 2008, it would likely become the tallest under construction building in the midwest outside of chicago. the current holder of that title is the 406' river house condos in grand rapids.

there are three proposals in other midwest cities that could be taller (the 689' queen city square in cincy, the mixed-use 43 story lake pointe tower in milwaukee, and the revamped 50 story nicollet project in minneapolis), but it seems likely that all of their their construction time lines will be further out, if they even get built at all, leaving the 523' fountain square tower in little old evanston to claim this title should things continue to go well for this project.


and yet another meaningless claim to fame for this project: if it is built, evanston would become the only city in america to have 1 building over 500' and no other buildings over 300'.

[Steely Dan]

word is that this project will likely be on the agenda when the city council's planning & development committee meets on Feb. 11 at 6:30pm.

stay tuned........

[nergie]

I hope Evanston could become Chicago's version of Bellevue. I know this might be a dream but dreams can happen.

[OhioGuy]

Fingers crossed.

[Steely Dan]

more waiting....................



Aldermen delay tower debate until March
Submitted by Bill Smith on Tue, 02/12/2008 - 10:46am.

Evanston aldermen ran out of time Monday to start a scheduled review of the proposed 49-story tower project on the Fountain Square block.

full story: http://evanstonnow.com/business/bill-smith/story/2008/02/12/aldermen-delay-tower-debate-until-march

[Steely Dan]

buried in an article from evanstonnow.com about the evanston city council meeting last night, is this paragraph about fountain square tower:


The aldermen also started discussion in their Planning and Development Committee of the proposed 49-story condo development at 708 Church St, hearing a presentation about the project from its developers. They've scheduled a special meeting for 6:30 p.m. on Monday, March 17, to hear public comment on the project.

link: http://www.evanstonnow.com/government/bill-smith/story/2008/03/11/council-adopts-immigration-measure

[BVictor1]

http://www.evanstonnow.com/business/bill-smith/story/2008/03/13/plan-board-slices-downtown-heights
Plan board slices downtown heights
Submitted by Bill Smith on Thu, 03/13/2008 - 10:30am

The Plan Commission Wednesday started redrawing the map of downtown to downscale Evanston's future.

The commissioners agreed to make the following changes in maximum zoning heights proposed in the draft downtown plan developed by city consultants:


**Fucking morons**