https://crain-platform-ccb-prod.s3.a...ast%20View.jpg

https://crain-platform-ccb-prod.s3.a...%20Station.jpg

https://crain-platform-ccb-prod.s3.a...3/lake-two.jpg

https://crain-platform-ccb-prod.s3.a...20Corridor.jpg
From Crain's

With all the height reductions in this area, is there any chance we'll see site O go back to the aqua twin tower design?

Someone on twitter took a few pictures of the presentation (saw the RT by Building Up Chicago)

That's some pretty dense living, Looks like places in China.

I hope waking distant retail and restaurants got a place down by there (sp). Pretty far from the jobs and day/nightlife hemmed in by the river and LSD.

Wouldn't be my choice to live there. People from out of town not familiar with Chicago some probably would consider its isolation a positive I imagine.

To me that's a de facto city gated community there. Not a suburban gated community but a city one. Certainly not as horrible as the flat Dearborn Park.

^ Site I looks quite a bit bigger than 875' considering that the last setback of Vista is 857'

I was just thinking the same thing

I continue to not understand comments like this. Site I is a 0.5mile, 10-15 minute walk to Michigan Avenue. There are tons of highly desireable neighborhoods in this city that are that far from a commercial street, where the only restaurants are a fast food chain. People happily choose to live there without retail right across the street. And the jobs aren't on those quiet tree lined streets either.

They are getting killer lake views, riverwalk, lakeshore access right at their front door. Every location has tradeoffs.
Some people want to be able to stumble home from a club at 4am, some people want to be able to head out for a 6am lakeshore bike ride.

lets not forget this tower is sitting on a 5 story base so i dont know if that was included in the original plans for this tower...hence it looking more around 930 ft or so

Naw guys it would suck so much to live there where my wife can just walk to work in the pedway when it's rainy instead of making me drive her to the L stop. I would be bummed to live right on the corner of the house and the lake with sprawing river, lake, city, and park views in all directions. I don't know how I could cope with that, please punish me with this awful existence now!

All that walking would be very difficult. Can't imagine how anybody could do it :D

The new rendering looks great. Hope it is 930 feet or more like we suspect.

There are some rather interesting and unfortunate design choices here.

I’m thinking, at first glance, of the shared party wall to the west that is being left exposed. It’s a shame that this is basically designed as a “tower in a park” in such a prominent location, instead of forming a continuous street wall like the best part of Lake Shore Drive (which is East Lake Shore Drive, for avoidance of doubt). Was that forced on the developers by “neighborhood concerns”, or was that some of their own volition?

Then there’s the swimming pool at the base of the next building south, which not only forces the building to an odd angle, and means that sunbathers and swimmers will enjoy the pleasant drone of LSD right next to them, but also puts the pool in the building’s shadow any time after lunch. Great thinking. Yes I know the idea is to have a view over the water, but that’s why you put the swimming pool on the roof.

And lastly, what’s with the gap between that building and the next one to the south (195 Harbor Drive), which leaves a bunch of LSD exposed to the park, and the park in a sort of hole with another blank wall to the south? Why not just bring all of it up to “grade” at the same level as the older buildings in the southeast corner of the neighborhood?

I mean, I guess if you want to live in a gated community downtown it’s fine, but I wish it presented a better face toward the lake and river. The tower itself is fine, but the lack of streetwall and the interaction at ground level is crap.

Also I know it's a prime location but it's also a lot of condos, what are the odds it gets pushed to the next cycle?

I would say 100%.

Source: https://chicago.curbed.com/2018/8/30...opment-meeting

They won't even begin Site I until Sites K/L and J are completed. Those towers will take at the minimum 2 to 3 years from today (still got to get approval, do site prep, etc) until completion.

I 100% agree that LSE is not a gated community, however this proposal makes it feel a bit like one. The very last rendering posted by rgarri perfectly illustrates my point. They are adding a security station, multiple security cameras, and fencing around the whole ramp section. This seems to be wanting to keep people out, not encouraging them to walk through. I bet this area will be dead of pedestrians most days.

Well, there are a few massive homeless encampments around lower wacker and in the Illinois Center's covered street areas. I'd understand their pensiveness at remaining too open.

The access drive to 195 Harbor is apparently untouchable, Magellan is doing its best to build park space around and over it.

Basically this site is the eastern gateway to LSE and the only direct access to the Lakefront Trail, so the site needs to provide clear and efficient paths to both the upper and lower levels of LSE. On the lower level, they are planning a cycle track that will connect through an existing tunnel to LSE Park. But they need the sloped green space to lead people between the upper and lower levels also.

Right now that end of Harbor Drive is inundated with confused tourists trying to get from Millennium/Maggie Daley Park to the lakefront and Navy Pier. Seriously, just stand there for ten minutes and several people will ask you for directions. The current path to the lakefront, descending down into LSE Park on Field Blvd or a staircase and then going through what appears to be a dark loading dock access under The Lancaster, is far from obvious, and most tourists prefer to stick to the upper level since that's where Maggie Daley Park dumps them. The other route - winding east from Maggie Daley Park down to Lower Randolph - is also not obvious, requiring several switchbacks in the park and leading across busy onramps to LSD. (It's better than it used to be, though, now that the park has been reworked.)

I don't necessarily think the tower-in-a-park model is a bad thing for this site. Looks like there is a tall retaining wall on the driveway that will clearly separate the public terraced park from the more private outdoor space around the towers. The open site plan will ensure that plenty of light and air reaches Harbor Drive from the lakefront.

On that note, when I saw this ramp crossing some months ago, there were no pedestrian cross signals either. Mass confusion and not exactly safe. More attention is needed for the entire pedestrian experience between the lakefront and the parks or river.

My understanding is that bKL wanted a design that continued the street wall with a bustle of some sort, but the developer (which includes Lend Lease in addition to any involvement from the Lowenberg/Magellan side of the business) was under the misguided belief that doing so would detract from the 'icon' status of the tower...

And, yes, this is coming much later... so maybe there's a good chance we might still see the continuation of the 'wall'... (Build that Wall!)

A 10 ride pass on the Water Taxi costs $25. Less than CTA fares.