CHICAGO | Boom rundown - everything over 12 floors. v5

[emathias]

Originally Posted by AdrianXSands

all 5 towers in this picture should be razed.
and the awfulness of the paint comes as no surprise. really, are you guys surprised?

I count six towers ... ;-)

[Cbautz]

Construction Pic of Trump, Elysian, 300 n. Lasalle, and others

[Marcu]

Originally Posted by zuelas

Wow, you guys are really spoiled in Chicago when all you have to do is complain about the paint job on an otherwise decent bldg. I guess I truly don't get it because I think 'echelon' looks just fine. I wish we had those 'problems' in my city. Jeez....

Not we. Just Adrian, who would level half the city if it was up to him. Most of us choose to live within the confines of reality and realize our entire building stock cannot consist of scandanavian-style modern glass boxes.

[aaron38]

Cbautz's pano is great. 300 N LaSalle's making an impact, Elysian will have a big impact too.
I'm surprised Parkview West isn't visible though, I thought 500' would be enough to stick out. Streeter Place will though.

[spyguy]

http://www.chicagorealestatedaily.com/cgi-bin/page.pl?id=2166

Chicago: New City, 1482-1560 N. Clybourn Ave., 490-unit mixed-use development, October 2008, $250 million.

Chicago: Aloft Hotel, 635 S. Wabash Ave., 18-story hotel, December 2008, $15 million.

[Dan in Chicago]

In Cbautz's panorama above, if you look between 1555 N. Astor and The Bristol (just find the low point between Park Tower and The Clare), what is that little curved bubble right above the top of the Marriott? That CAN'T be One Museum Park, CAN IT?!?!?!? It's so far away, but I can't think what else it could be.

[i_am_hydrogen]

^Yes, that's OMP.

[VivaLFuego]

Originally Posted by Dan in Chicago

In Cbautz's panorama above, if you look between 1555 N. Astor and The Bristol (just find the low point between Park Tower and The Clare), what is that little curved bubble right above the top of the Marriott? That CAN'T be One Museum Park, CAN IT?!?!?!? It's so far away, but I can't think what else it could be.

I think it is. Just think of the north view those penthouse folks would have had if they'd pushed the tower 100ft higher... not that those paupers will exactly have a bad north view as it is, but still, wow.

[jpIllInoIs]

Originally Posted by spyguy

http://www.chicagorealestatedaily.com/cgi-bin/page.pl?id=2166

Chicago: New City, 1482-1560 N. Clybourn Ave., 490-unit mixed-use development, October 2008, $250 million.

Chicago: Aloft Hotel, 635 S. Wabash Ave., 18-story hotel, December 2008, $15 million.

Leave it to SG to bring us some good news today!

[jet cm]

Before any chicken littles start clucking, Silver Tower has reached their transfer floor and will appear to slow for a couple weeks.

[Chicago3rd]

215 West Washington

[BVictor1]

Dear Neighbor:


There is going to be a community meeting today (Thursday, April 10) at 7 PM at Grace Place, located at 637 South Dearborn Street. The topic of the meeting will be "To discuss the proposal for Development of Clark and Polk," to be presented by Avalon Bay in coordination with 2nd Ward Alderman Bob Fioretti's office. Please see the attached (pdf) flyer for more information about tonight's meeting. I have also attached some renderings of the proposed development as presented by Avalon Bay.


General Information About the Proposed Development and the Approval Process


Location of Proposed Development - The southwest corner of Clark and Polk Streets, which is currently the location of two parking lots with about 300 parking spots that will be taken up by the development. This location also includes a section of street formerly know as the 800 South Block of LaSalle Street, which at one point had Zone 550 parking, which has since been turned over to be incorporated into the development.

Current Zoning (since June 2006) - Designated as Planned Development 1022, allows for three towers to be built with respective heights of 33, 34, and 42 stories, with a total of 1000 residential units. Off-street parking is limited to .70 spaces per unit.

Previous Zoning (before June 2006) - Designated as DX-7, which under the City of Chicago's Zoning Ordinance, allowed for a maximum height of 155 ft. for residential buildings before a "Planned Development Review and Approval" process was required.

Proposed Zoning - Designated as Amendment Planned Development 1022, would allow for two towers of 42 stories each to be built , with a total of 1000 residential units. Off-street parking would be limited to .95 spaces per dwelling unit.

General Approval Steps - This proposed development would next be heard and voted upon at the Chicago Plan Commission, presumably at it next meeting on Thursday, April 17 at 1 PM. These meetings are held at City Hall. This proposed development was originally scheduled to be held at the March 20 meeting, but was deferred. Once approved by the Plan Commission, the City Council's Committee on Zoning would then need to vote on the proposed development, which would presumably occur at the first Committee meeting after approval by the Plan Commission - Which is currently scheduled to be held on April 24. If approved by the Zoning Committee, the full City Council would then vote. If approved by the City Council, the proposed development then becomes a City ordinance and can then proceed.

Public Comment - At both the Plan Commission, and the Committee on Zoning, the public is afforded an opportunity to comment either for or against a proposed development (i.e. zoning change in this case). The procedure for doing so calls for the interested party to sign-in at the beginning of the meeting. The Chair of the meeting will then call those who have signed up to speak.

Summary of March 11 Community Meeting - For those of you who live in the area, you are probably aware of many of the concerns that this development brings. Many of those concerns were aired in the first community meeting held on this proposed development, also at Grace Place, back on March 11. One of the biggest concerns expressed by many people, myself included, was over the use of "pile-driving" versus "caissons" during the construction process. Some at the March 11 meeting expressed their very strong concern over the use of the "pile-driving" method because of the noise and damage that previous uses of this method by other developers caused to the surrounding area. While cost differences were cited by the Avalon Bay developer in the preferred use of "pile-driving" over "caissons," no figures or estimates were given as to what those cost differences actually were. At the March 11 meeting, the Avalon Bay developer also stated their intention to proceed with the development as allowed in the current zoning if the Plan Commission did not approved the proposed zoning (amendment).

I hope to see you all at tonight's meeting.

xxxxxxx xxxxx

[Loopy]

Originally Posted by BVictor1

Dear Neighbor: One of the biggest concerns expressed by many people, myself included, was over the use of "pile-driving" versus "caissons" during the construction process. Some at the March 11 meeting expressed their very strong concern over the use of the "pile-driving" method because of the noise and damage that previous uses of this method by other developers caused to the surrounding area. While cost differences were cited by the Avalon Bay developer in the preferred use of "pile-driving" over "caissons," no figures or estimates were given as to what those cost differences actually were.

Well, they did give those cost differences at a later meeting for the GSLA, and they are huge. This is going to be an interesting issue to watch; Absent a new city ordinance, can the surrounding community force a developer to use expensive lined caissons where they are not required for engineering reasons?

I wonder if the Pile Institute or anyone else has done an environmental impact comparison between pile foundation vs. caissons.

It seems likely to me that the total pounds of pollutants emitted from driving a beam into the ground would be significantly less than having a huge diesel drill roaring for months on a site.

Not to mention the pollution from kilning loads of concrete and driving it to the site.

It might be a good argument for a developer to have in their back pocket when fighting complaints about noisy pile operations and de minimus damages associated with same.

The Alderman of "The Greenest Ward in the City" might be interested too.

[VivaLFuego]

Originally Posted by Loopy

Well, they did give those cost differences at a later meeting for the GSLA, and they are huge. This is going to be an interesting issue to watch; Absent a new city ordinance, can the surrounding community force a developer to use expensive lined caissons where they are not required for engineering reasons?

I wonder if the Pile Institute or anyone else has done an environmental impact comparison between pile foundation vs. caissons.

It seems likely to me that the total pounds of pollutants emitted from driving a beam into the ground would be significantly less than having a huge diesel drill roaring for months on a site.

Not to mention the pollution from kilning loads of concrete and driving it to the site.

It might be a good argument for a developer to have in their back pocket when fighting complaints about noisy pile operations and de minimus damages associated with same.

If pile-driving indeed damages the structure of surrounding buildings, than the developer should be responsible for paying to repair the damage. If that cost is factored in, is pile-driving still drastically cheaper? Obviously measuring "expected damage" is speculative, but it's an important question.

Also, I smell Fioretti in the major increase in off-street parking ratio. A ratio of 0.7 for high-density rental towers, near retail (Roosevelt Collection) and several colleges would have been incredible for area vitality. 0.95 is not ideal, but obviously could be much worse.

The Alderman of "The Greenest Ward in the City" might be interested too.

Right. Free off-street parking for everyone! Save the earth!

[pyropius]

Speaking of a botched paint job, have you seen the new tower near the Howard station?

[Tom Servo]

WHOA. that's an insane illusion!

[honte]

Originally Posted by pyropius

Speaking of a botched paint job, have you seen the new tower near the Howard station?

I wonder if you might snap a photo next time you go by there? This is one tower that has almost escaped the Boom without any photos.

Speaking of which, the progress on the Brininstool+Lynch tower in downtown Oak Park seems to be moving along well. Haven't seen any photos of that site in ages. HarryC, don't you live out that way? It would be great to see some photos of the progress if you ever happen to be there with your camera.

[Big John]

http://www.chicagorealestatedaily.com/cgi-bin/news.pl?id=28905

601 W. Monroe St.

From Crain’s :

Fifield hopes to break ground in July on a planned 26-story office tower in the West Loop.

[Mr Roboto]

.

Anyone get a chance to go to the hearing?

[Sir Isaac Newton]

Originally Posted by Mr Roboto

Anyone get a chance to go to the hearing?

I was there....saw BVictor there as well. Don't have too much time to write right now, but I'll try to cover some of the basics.

- The developer said they will be using caissons on the parking garage and that they will consider using caissons on the high-rises if the cost of doing so doesn't come out to more than $2 million than what it would cost to use piles. LOTS of people complained about the noise of the piledriving that went on at Burnham Pointe and other projects and were very anti-pile-driving in general. One guy then said he was especially concerned about the retirees in the building on the southeast corner of Polk and Clark. And elderly man cut him off in midsentence, told him that he lived in that building himself, and then went off on the guy for trying to speak for the elderly people in that building!

- They raised the parking/unit ratio from .7/1 to .95/1. That seemed to appease some people, but there were still a couple parking NIMBY's who complained. One guy even went on a tirade about the glory days of 10 years ago when there were a "one thousand" parking lots in the immediate area, and all these traders and architects used to drive to the city for work and park there. I guess now that a lot of these parking spots are gone, these traders, architects, and other professionals must have given up their jobs....

- I believe that they said that the buildings would be LEED certified.

- Mr Downtown was there too, and after mentioning that he lived at 899 South Plymouth (Fioretti had everyone mention where they lived, when they first spoke) complained about how the building was ugly and that he'd have to spend the rest of his life looking at these ugly buildings. I do agree with his point, although I don't think that these buildings are entirely ugly either - I personally feel that they are not great, not ugly, but decent. But I thought it was hilarious that he complained about ugly buildings that he would have to see every day out his window because 899 South Plymouth is 10 times uglier....it essentially looks like an ugly, 50 year old or so college dorm tower....except twice as big!

- There will be no ground floor retail - which would be my one biggest complaint.

- Fioretti said that there will probably be a 9th street extension....and a lot of Dearborn Park people completely freaked out until Fioretti explained that the extension would be west of Clark, and that it would never be east of Clark.
-
In general, while there were some people complaining, I got the impression that it's a pretty safe bet that this development will go through, at the current 2 tower, 42-story proposal. Most people seemed to be pretty satisfied with Avalon Bay, and how they were being really transparent, how they were working with the community, and how they were making a lot of compromises.