HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > City Compilations


Closed Thread

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #321  
Old Posted Jan 10, 2007, 2:15 AM
VivaLFuego's Avatar
VivaLFuego VivaLFuego is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Blue Island
Posts: 6,509
Quote:
Originally Posted by LA21st View Post
My building (211 E. Delaware) was aquired in December by a developer.

Im going to have starting somewhere else very soon. Shit, I will miss this neighborhood. East Delaware has alot of class, imo. You always read about these other buildings being covereted into condos from apts, you dont think much of it.

Until it happens to you.
If it's any consolation, apartment buildings going condo means highrise rental units being taken off the market, and as a result (hopefully) new highrise rentals will be built. Keeps the boom going!
     
     
  #322  
Old Posted Jan 10, 2007, 2:35 AM
LA21st LA21st is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 8,060
Of course it great for development. I have read that this condo boom has created a shortage (if not severe) downtown. Its great for the city that there is so much demand to live here and all....but it has its downsides too.

I found a site that has 25 E. Delaware for affordable rental prices. Maybe the last one left around here. I just dont want to leave (or be forced out) of the Gold Coast/Mag Mile. That would suck.
     
     
  #323  
Old Posted Jan 10, 2007, 4:19 AM
Steely Dan's Avatar
Steely Dan Steely Dan is online now
devout Pizzatarian
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Lincoln Square, Chicago
Posts: 30,260
well i finally got around to a page 1 update this evening.

- all 2006 dates updated to 2007, including removal of all the italization of the projects started in 06.

- erickson institute removed form the list, as it's now below 12 floors.

- burnham point moved to "U/C"

- 1600 museum park moved to "U/C"

- imperial palace hotel and rendering added to proposed

- image for 1890 maple in evanston added

- new height for 500 N LSD added

- new floor count for 235 W van buren added

- some other stuff too that i don't remember right now.


the old images that aren't showing up anymore will be coming back at some point in the future. patience........
__________________
"Missing middle" housing can be a marvelous middle ground for many middle class families.

Last edited by Steely Dan; Jan 10, 2007 at 4:29 AM.
     
     
  #324  
Old Posted Jan 10, 2007, 4:50 AM
Steely Dan's Avatar
Steely Dan Steely Dan is online now
devout Pizzatarian
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Lincoln Square, Chicago
Posts: 30,260
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan in Chicago View Post
Can anyone give a report on Park View East, up on Grace Street in Lakeview? Is it finished yet?
sorry about the late reply dan, but i just remembered this as i was going back through the thread for updates tonight. i can confirm that Park View East is still not complete as of this past sunday. from the Red line i clearly saw that the top most penthouse windows/louvers still had yet to be installed, so this one was definitely not a 2006 completion. though it does look like it might be wrapping up very soon, perhaps this month.
__________________
"Missing middle" housing can be a marvelous middle ground for many middle class families.
     
     
  #325  
Old Posted Jan 10, 2007, 5:57 AM
Chicago3rd Chicago3rd is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Cranston, Rhode Island
Posts: 8,693
Park East in Lake View as of this past Sunday:
__________________
All the photos "I" post are photos taken by me and can be found on my photo pages @ http://wilbsnodgrassiii.smugmug.com// UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED and CREDITED.
     
     
  #326  
Old Posted Jan 10, 2007, 6:29 AM
denizen467 denizen467 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,212
Quote:
Originally Posted by spyguy View Post
for the property generally located at 401-501 South Franklin Street, 219-259 West Van Buren Street. The applicant proposes to construct a 48 story building containing 714 dwelling units, ground floor retail, commercial and office space and 570 off-street parking spaces. (2nd Ward)
I assume this is just a minor mistake, but in case it's not, how can something be located, even generally, at 401-501 South Franklin ... that would mean it's spanning a street (Congress). Shouldn't it be 401-499 South Franklin?
     
     
  #327  
Old Posted Jan 10, 2007, 6:44 AM
SamInTheLoop SamInTheLoop is offline
you know where I'll be
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,575
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chicago3rd View Post
Park East in Lake View as of this past Sunday:

What a hideous piece of work. We also have Marquee Michigan Avenue to look forward to from this same developer..
__________________
It's simple, really - try not to design or build trash.
     
     
  #328  
Old Posted Jan 10, 2007, 6:53 AM
SamInTheLoop SamInTheLoop is offline
you know where I'll be
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,575
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Dan View Post
^ good catch. 714 units is a crapload of units, for either a 38 or 48 story building, but 38 floors sounds less plausible, so the 48 story figure is probably correct.
The densities of CMK's latest projects are absolutely incredible. I was shocked when I first read that 1720 S. Michigan contained nearly 500 units. Obviously smaller size, more entry-level type units, but we need as many of these types of towers downtown as we do the super-luxury variety. I love developers like CMK - their stuff comes out of nowhere and they move really fast. I also love the location of 235 Van Buren - great place to add residential infill.
__________________
It's simple, really - try not to design or build trash.
     
     
  #329  
Old Posted Jan 10, 2007, 7:01 AM
SamInTheLoop SamInTheLoop is offline
you know where I'll be
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,575
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lukecuj View Post
235 W Van Bueren

Looks Ok, not crazy about the base. It's great to see highrises going in here, but I'm concerned with residential towers encroaching into this area of the loop. To me this area is a logical extension of future office towers with its proximity to the trains. So if we get another great supertall office proposal in our life times, will it catch flak from these new residential towers and their soon to be NIMBY residents.


Personally I love this design and think new residential towers are exactly what this area needs. Plus, there are so many vacant and underutilized (non-historically significant) parcels downtown that there will always be room for another supertall (future supertalls in Chicago are overwhelmingly likely to be residential or mixed-use anyhow)...
__________________
It's simple, really - try not to design or build trash.
     
     
  #330  
Old Posted Jan 10, 2007, 7:06 AM
SamInTheLoop SamInTheLoop is offline
you know where I'll be
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,575
500 N Lsd

Quote:
Originally Posted by LA21st View Post
Caisson drawings were submitted to OUC for a 57 story building. Its on LSD between Grand and Illinois.
I'm really starting to wonder what Related Midwest's next move is. They've been sitting on Canyon Ranch now for quite a few months. Could they instead be planning to launch 500 N LSD first? It's difficult for me to imagine they would launch both projects around the same time...
__________________
It's simple, really - try not to design or build trash.
     
     
  #331  
Old Posted Jan 10, 2007, 7:15 AM
SamInTheLoop SamInTheLoop is offline
you know where I'll be
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,575
360 N. Union

Fifield's latest proposed high-rise in the K Station development has again been deferred by on the Plan Commission agenda, this time until the February meeting. It seems to me this one has been deferred at least 3 or 4 times now. Does anybody know what issue(s) are holding this one up? I'm very interested in seeing the design of this one, especially in light of the huge disappointment of Allure at K Station and Steven Fifield's assertment that architecture and design will be a key point of differentiation for residential developments (see Sun-Times article posted on page 9 of this thread). I'm hoping for a major improvement and a new architect. Personally, I've experienced enough "contemporary deco" from P/H to last me several lifetimes!
__________________
It's simple, really - try not to design or build trash.

Last edited by SamInTheLoop; Jan 10, 2007 at 7:22 AM.
     
     
  #332  
Old Posted Jan 10, 2007, 7:23 AM
pip's Avatar
pip pip is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Chicago
Posts: 4,559


I go through streaks and maybe I am to negative on Chicago right now but I am going to go against my impression of the general consensus of this building on SSP. I think this building sucks.
     
     
  #333  
Old Posted Jan 10, 2007, 7:34 AM
HK Chicago HK Chicago is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 987
^ I couldn't agree more... I try not to comment on the bad, but don't think you're on your own. It does suck, and when completed it will suck more because it looks similar to the CMK work at Franklin/Ontario. The end result there is very poor.
     
     
  #334  
Old Posted Jan 10, 2007, 7:46 AM
honte honte is offline
Registered
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Chicago - every nook and cranny
Posts: 4,628
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eventually...Chicago View Post
The articles name is "Battling for better architecture: The argument for activist criticism"

It ends with Kamin saying something like (paraphrasing) ...Chicago is the only city where architectural criticism is engaged by the general population...

... and only mildly by the major paper architecture critics!
     
     
  #335  
Old Posted Jan 10, 2007, 7:52 AM
honte honte is offline
Registered
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Chicago - every nook and cranny
Posts: 4,628
Quote:
Originally Posted by SamInTheLoop View Post
I also love the location of 235 Van Buren - great place to add residential infill.
Agreed. I drove past the site tonight, and it is a very special place, smashed between the Eisenhower underground ramp (a personal favorite of mine, sorry Jane Jacobs people) and two other streets. It will be very cool to come around that curve and have this building looming over you.

There are two vintage buildings on this site that would come down. They are 25-foot lot style; one is one story and the other is a two-story Queen Anne storefront. Their design is actually rather nice, but there is no hope for them in the CBD and no one will object to their demolition. The majority of the site is a surface lot. I personally will miss the two buildings, if only because it's just remarkable that such smaller historic buildings survive in the shadow of the Sears Tower.
     
     
  #336  
Old Posted Jan 10, 2007, 12:05 PM
Chi_Coruscant Chi_Coruscant is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Chicago
Posts: 485
No another round of slamming CS this time but.....

Developer readies a sales pitch for once-in-a-Millennium deal
(http://www.suntimes.com/business/roeder/203849,CST-FIN-roeder10.article)

January 10, 2007

BY DAVID ROEDER Sun-Times Columnist
Working with the architects at Solomon Cordwell Buenz, a Park Ridge-based real estate firm is completing plans for a 40-story apartment tower destined for a prominent spot in the skyline. BJB Partners is drumming up community support for the building at the northeast corner of Michigan and Randolph, overlooking Millennium Park.

BJB has promised to unveil the design at a meeting Monday of the Grant Park Advisory Council. Know this: The building will be skinny. It's on a tiny parcel next to the Doral Plaza at 151 N. Michigan and just west of the Prudential building.

Despite the height, the building will have only about 80 units. BJB, which owns Doral Plaza, expects the location and views will allow for premium rents.

John Lahey, principal at the Solomon firm, said the project envisions vibrant retail space at the street level, including a renovation of storefronts in the Doral.

"This is real important because retail-wise, that is dead space in need of a major makeover," said Bob O'Neill, president of the Grant Park group.

The 6:30 p.m. meeting at Daley Bicentennial Plaza, 337 E. Randolph, also promises an appearance by Garrett Kelleher touting his 2,000-foot-tall condo spire near Navy Pier.

PRESERVATION POWER: A lot of people were flummoxed last week when the Commission on Chicago Landmarks voted narrowly to prevent a partial demolition of the Farwell Building at 664 N. Michigan. The reconstruction of the building was an integral part of Prism Development Co.'s plans for a 40-story building next door.

The ranks of the flummoxed included Prism and its victorious arch-foes, the preservationist groups. The project had the OK of the city's Planning Department and the neighborhood's alderman, Burton Natarus (42nd), and that usually settles the issue for the city's review agencies. But with one absence and one abstention on the nine-member commission, the matter fell a vote short of the five needed to pass.

Prism principal Jon Rodgers said the company is considering its next step. He noted that the proposal for the Farwell, which called for taking apart and reassembling the facade, was worked out after lengthy negotiations with city officials. Attached to the Farwell would be a condo building marketed under the Ritz-Carlton name, with hotel-like amenities and prices that aspire to the highest standards in Chicago.

Rodgers said contracts have been signed for about 35 percent of the 86 units being offered. Time has become his enemy, however, and if he hopes to get more people to tie up their money, he'll have to settle on a Plan B quickly.

The 11-story Farwell, dating from 1927 and designed by Philip Maher, is acknowledged to be in bad shape. Maybe the landmark panel's vote shows that patience is wearing thin with "facadectomies," the practice of hollowing out a building while keeping its outer walls. But was that the best way forward for the Farwell?

Speaking of facades, the group Preservation Chicago has raised objections to developer Mark Hunt's plan for a 20-story hotel at 1112 N. State. It's the site of the four-story Cedar Hotel, whose terra cotta front would be incorporated into the new structure. Michael Moran, vice president of Preservation Chicago, is concerned about keeping the site's "front yard" of outdoor seating for a couple of cafes. He said it is an important gathering spot for the crowds drawn to Division Street.

Moran said a decorative roofline on the building was removed a few months ago. He's suspicious of the timing. A spokesman for Hunt said his company, M Development, was not involved in the removal, which was done by the current owner. Hunt "will use his best efforts to replace it" if the sale closes, the spokesman said. The Cedar Hotel was built in 1924 and was the work of architectural firm Rissman and Hirshfeld. It is not a landmark but is entitled to a 90-day city review of any demolition request.
     
     
  #337  
Old Posted Jan 10, 2007, 2:41 PM
SamInTheLoop SamInTheLoop is offline
you know where I'll be
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,575
500 N Lsd

Quote:
Originally Posted by LA21st View Post
Caisson drawings were submitted to OUC for a 57 story building. Its on LSD between Grand and Illinois.
I'm not 100% certain but I think 500 LSD may not need to go before the Plan Commission in its current form as it falls within an already approved PD...I really wish they would turn this into a thinner 800-footer...
__________________
It's simple, really - try not to design or build trash.
     
     
  #338  
Old Posted Jan 10, 2007, 4:00 PM
Steely Dan's Avatar
Steely Dan Steely Dan is online now
devout Pizzatarian
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Lincoln Square, Chicago
Posts: 30,260
Quote:
Originally Posted by HK Chicago View Post
^ I couldn't agree more... I try not to comment on the bad, but don't think you're on your own. It does suck, and when completed it will suck more because it looks similar to the CMK work at Franklin/Ontario. The end result there is very poor.
i'm surprised to hear you of all people say this. 630 n franklin might not be CMK's finest project yet, but these are the same people that got the contemporaine built as well, so i'm willing to give them a little more slack than some others. besides, i reserve the word "suck" for the truly, truly awful, like the caravel, park millennium, and so forth. i'll take poorly executed modern over "outright abomination of piled shit" anyday.
__________________
"Missing middle" housing can be a marvelous middle ground for many middle class families.
     
     
  #339  
Old Posted Jan 10, 2007, 4:04 PM
honte honte is offline
Registered
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Chicago - every nook and cranny
Posts: 4,628
^^ With Bruce Abrams (sp?) gone, LR (Related) seems to have lost its drive to do really remarkable buildings. It's really too bad. Not that I care for Park Tower too much, but at least it attempted greatness.

500 LSD will be nice, I'm sure, but it doesn't sound like they're shooting for anything spectacular. I'll wait to see the drawings...
     
     
  #340  
Old Posted Jan 10, 2007, 4:58 PM
brian_b brian_b is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,572
I've looked at floor plans for 630 n franklin, 1620 south michigan, and 1720 south michigan. I see how CMK is cramming so many units into their buildings. I wouldn't pay for floor plans like this. So many of their units use a partial height wall in the kitchen to allow a bedroom to exist without any windows. Very shady if you ask me.
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Closed Thread

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > City Compilations
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 5:54 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.