CHICAGO: boom rundown - everything over 12 floors. v4 - Page 31

VivaLFuego · #**601** Posted **Jan 21, 2007, 4:50 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by spyguy

I used a pic from a few years ago, but the images didn't quite line up

Sweet.

BVictor1 · #**602** Posted **Jan 21, 2007, 5:03 PM**

Central Area Action Plan

Thursday, February 1, 2007
Chicago Cultural Center
Washington & Michigan
Millennium Park Room, 5th floor southeast
12:15 pm ? 1:15 pm

Chicago?s Central Area Plan, completed in 2003, set a blueprint for the growth and development of downtown Chicago for the next 20 years. Now, the City of Chicago is embarking on an action plan to bring the Central Area Plan?s recommendations and ideas to reality. Benet Haller of the City of Chicago Department of Planning & Development and Richard Wilson of URS Corporation will discuss the Central Area Action Plan and its impact on the future of downtown.

the urban politician · #**603** Posted **Jan 21, 2007, 5:30 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by BVictor1

Central Area Action Plan

Thursday, February 1, 2007
Chicago Cultural Center
Washington & Michigan
Millennium Park Room, 5th floor southeast
12:15 pm ? 1:15 pm

Chicago?s Central Area Plan, completed in 2003, set a blueprint for the growth and development of downtown Chicago for the next 20 years. Now, the City of Chicago is embarking on an action plan to bring the Central Area Plan?s recommendations and ideas to reality. Benet Haller of the City of Chicago Department of Planning & Development and Richard Wilson of URS Corporation will discuss the Central Area Action Plan and its impact on the future of downtown.

^ I'm hoping some discussion will occur about making adjustments to this plan that fit in with reality, such as dropping the self-serving height limits imposed by the small handful of activists such as McClendon.

BVictor1 · #**604** Posted **Jan 21, 2007, 5:36 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by the urban politician

^ It seems counter-intuitive to have a 600+ footer immediately step down to townhomes. What's the city thinking on that one?

And are they actually going to build a 10 story building or is the whole site slated for townhomes now?

That sucks--I can just smell the NIMBY seeds being sewn by that shitty planning decision. Lets just hope that these townhomes will have nice concrete stairs leading up to their entrance--a much more elegant look than the ones where the entrance is level with the sidewalk, IMO.

Besides that, the rest is good news except for the Phase 3 thing--but I'm sure somebody will cover those tracks in the next half-century or so...

What's the big deal? You can't have a highrise everywhere! It appears that it was the city who told them no on that particular tower. Get over it. I actuall agree with the decision. Besides you have a possible 80-story building for the southwest corner of Roosevelt and Indiana, and possibly an even taller tower to the west at the corner of Michigan and Roosevelt. I believe that the townhomes will allow for some breathing room.

And from memory, the majority of the townhomes in that area do have concrete steps leading to the entrance.

As for covering the tracks, well I can take it or leave it. Yes it would be nice to extand the green space further south, but also, those tracks are apart of the city's heritage and grittyness and I rather like that. Plus I like trains, and it would be a shame to cover all of it.

Tom In Chicago · #**605** Posted **Jan 21, 2007, 5:44 PM**

Dan. . . I know people who live in Regatta. . . not sure how we're calling it these days, but it's been occupied for a few weeks. . .

nomarandlee · #**606** Posted **Jan 21, 2007, 6:19 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by BVictor1

What's the big deal? You can't have a highrise everywhere! It appears that it was the city who told them no on that particular tower. Get over it. I actuall agree with the decision. Besides you have a possible 80-story building for the southwest corner of Roosevelt and Indiana, and possibly an even taller tower to the west at the corner of Michigan and Roosevelt. I believe that the townhomes will allow for some breathing room.

And from memory, the majority of the townhomes in that area do have concrete steps leading to the entrance.

As for covering the tracks, well I can take it or leave it. Yes it would be nice to extand the green space further south, but also, those tracks are apart of the city's heritage and grittyness and I rather like that. Plus I like trains, and it would be a shame to cover all of it.

I agree that I don't think its a big deal. A relative low rise 30 story building that will got mostly lost from most vantage points in central station is not a big deal. If anything it may afford the allowance of raising the heights on the rest of the towers that more importantly frame GP and make them perhaps make them more viable.

I am much more dissapointed by the tracks not being covered. I would like to find some way and somebody to fund their covering (or most of their covering anyway).

SamInTheLoop · #**607** Posted **Jan 21, 2007, 6:28 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by the urban politician

^ I'm hoping some discussion will occur about making adjustments to this plan that fit in with reality, such as dropping the self-serving height limits imposed by the small handful of activists such as McClendon.

Amen to that!! People just don't understand that they are mere guidelines. And what sucks is that IMO if the Central Area Plan was done just a few years later, they probably woudn't even have adopted those guidelines (because it's really only been in the last 2 or 3 years that the administration and dpd have really started to embrace the benefits of tall and thin (as well as more forward-thinking architecture of course)...

BVictor1 · #**608** Posted **Jan 21, 2007, 6:49 PM**

I don't think that this development has been reported or posted before, and I'm not going thorugh 600 posts too see.

In todays Tribune (real estate section) there's advertisment for 2930 North Sheridan. I called the number, and was the building was about 22 floors.

www.2930north.com

SolarWind · #**609** Posted **Jan 21, 2007, 7:28 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by spyguy

I used a pic from a few years ago, but the images didn't quite line up

Thanks spyguy! I enjoy looking at before and after pics. It's then that you realize just how much the skyline has really changed.

VivaLFuego · #**610** Posted **Jan 21, 2007, 7:53 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by the urban politician

^ I'm hoping some discussion will occur about making adjustments to this plan that fit in with reality, such as dropping the self-serving height limits imposed by the small handful of activists such as McClendon.

Self-serving how?

And also, great news on 2930 Sheridan....that is already an incredibly dense urban neighborhood, great to see it get even moreso. For all the construction the last few years, there really hasn't been much along the north lakeshore...

LA21st · #**611** Posted **Jan 21, 2007, 9:48 PM**

Yup, the Lakefront is putting up alot of tower proposals lately. The way it should be.

Oh yea...
YOU SUCK GROSSMAN!!!!!WTF ARE YOU DOING???????? This game should be at least 21-7. You might have just cost the Bears the game single handly again.
Go away, you bum.

Alliance · #**612** Posted **Jan 21, 2007, 10:52 PM**

WOAH! Now we are up 32 - 14. So calm down

Save the hate.

honte · #**613** Posted **Jan 21, 2007, 11:03 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by BVictor1

I don't think that this development has been reported or posted before, and I'm not going thorugh 600 posts too see.

In todays Tribune (real estate section) there's advertisment for 2930 North Sheridan. I called the number, and was the building was about 22 floors.

www.2930north.com

Quite to my amazement, I don't think anything will be torn down for 2930 N. Sheridan.

Now I can be 100% excited about this proposal.

If anyone hears anything to the contrary, please post about it. Thanks.

a chicago bearcat · #**614** Posted **Jan 21, 2007, 11:35 PM**

"^ I'm hoping some discussion will occur about making adjustments to this plan that fit in with reality, such as dropping the self-serving height limits imposed by the small handful of activists such as McClendon."

Quote:

Originally Posted by SamInTheLoop

Amen to that!! People just don't understand that they are mere guidelines. And what sucks is that IMO if the Central Area Plan was done just a few years later, they probably woudn't even have adopted those guidelines (because it's really only been in the last 2 or 3 years that the administration and dpd have really started to embrace the benefits of tall and thin (as well as more forward-thinking architecture of course)...

guys, activists are an integral part of the growth of a city

some people on here confuse growth and development, possibly because the growth of a city is most evident in real estate developments

and unbridled development without all opinions being brought to the table would result in houston, and we are a much more cultured city than houston

the central area plan is not a law, height limitations will be dealt with as they always are, on a project by project basis

lets not resort to cheapshots directed at people who are as much a part of the discussion as our forums pro-anything slant

and I think it's the developers that have become more welcoming to quality architects, but I agree it's mostly because the city has all but demanded them to

spyguy · #**615** Posted **Jan 21, 2007, 11:37 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by honte

Quite to my amazement, I don't think anything will be torn down for 2930 N. Sheridan.

Now I can be 100% excited about this proposal.

If anyone hears anything to the contrary, please post about it. Thanks.

Is this really a new project? On atproperties.com, they say, "Buy Now, Move in April." I'm thinking it's a conversion...

And oh, THE BEARS ARE GOING TO THE SUPERBOWL!!!

LA21st · #**616** Posted **Jan 21, 2007, 11:37 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alliance

WOAH! Now we are up 32 - 14. So calm down

Save the hate.

I still cant stand the bum. They are successful in spite of him. He had 5 good passes all game (Berrian really bailed him out on that TD). They would still be undefeated if it wasnt for Grossman. Get rid of him next year so the season is less stressful.

GO BEARS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

honte · #**617** Posted **Jan 22, 2007, 12:04 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by spyguy

Is this really a new project? On atproperties.com, they say, "Buy Now, Move in April." I'm thinking it's a conversion...

April 2009?

Maybe you're right - there is a highrise near this address that I missed in my search. The PIN must be under the side street.

There is also indeed a vacant parcel near this address, but probably closer to 2950 North. There are some very beautiful, modernist, fee-simple townhomes to the south, but I don't think those are threatened due to the ownership arrangements.

Tom In Chicago · #**618** Posted **Jan 22, 2007, 12:16 AM**

go Bears!!!

HK Chicago · #**619** Posted **Jan 22, 2007, 2:37 AM**

Yeah!!! Mandatory 2 week sig change... if they win we can move on and put '85 to rest forever.

Alliance · #**620** Posted **Jan 22, 2007, 3:04 AM**

Chicago:

Superbowl Bid: 2006 Bears

Skyscraper Bid: Chciago Spire

Presidential Bid: Barack Obama

Olympic Bid: 2016

Things are good.