HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

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


Closed Thread

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #661  
Old Posted Jan 24, 2007, 5:06 AM
VivaLFuego's Avatar
VivaLFuego VivaLFuego is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Blue Island
Posts: 6,509
^ so this 161 Kinzie site was formerly the 345 north Wells proposal? And befor e that, an entrance to the Mart parking garage (which is now becoming 300 N LaSalle!) Woo.
     
     
  #662  
Old Posted Jan 24, 2007, 5:33 AM
Steely Dan's Avatar
Steely Dan Steely Dan is offline
devout Pizzatarian
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Lincoln Square, Chicago
Posts: 30,233
Quote:
Originally Posted by VivaLFuego View Post
^ so this 161 Kinzie site was formerly the 345 north Wells proposal?
yes, that is my understanding. can anyone else confirm?
__________________
"Missing middle" housing can be a marvelous middle ground for many middle class families.
     
     
  #663  
Old Posted Jan 24, 2007, 5:56 AM
DANTHEDISCOMAN's Avatar
DANTHEDISCOMAN DANTHEDISCOMAN is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Downtown
Posts: 134
^^I'm kinda confused becase when I google earth it, it doesn't come up at the site of 345 North wells but I assume its taking the place of this, probally with 353 North clark they threw the hat in. www.sterlingbay.net/345wells/

Last edited by DANTHEDISCOMAN; Jan 24, 2007 at 6:03 AM.
     
     
  #664  
Old Posted Jan 24, 2007, 6:46 AM
Chicago Shawn's Avatar
Chicago Shawn Chicago Shawn is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,829
Quote:
Originally Posted by VivaLFuego View Post
^ so this 161 Kinzie site was formerly the 345 north Wells proposal? And befor e that, an entrance to the Mart parking garage (which is now becoming 300 N LaSalle!) Woo.
Correct. The building will have 4 floors of retail at the base, with ground floor entrances to two of the levels because of the slope in Wells Street. The one additional thing I would love for this to have would be a CTA entrance to the Brown/Purple Lines. That station is a pain in the ass to access from street level, especially on weekends when the side entrances to the Mart are locked down.
     
     
  #665  
Old Posted Jan 24, 2007, 8:33 PM
Steely Dan's Avatar
Steely Dan Steely Dan is offline
devout Pizzatarian
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Lincoln Square, Chicago
Posts: 30,233
161 west kinzie, the new proposal by valerio dewalt train next to the merchandis mart, has now been added to the page 1 list.
__________________
"Missing middle" housing can be a marvelous middle ground for many middle class families.

Last edited by Steely Dan; Jan 24, 2007 at 9:04 PM.
     
     
  #666  
Old Posted Jan 24, 2007, 8:39 PM
budman budman is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 487
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Dan View Post
161 west madison, the new proposal by valerio dewalt train next to the merchandis mart, has now been added to the page 1 list.
^Steely, dont you mean Kinzie?
     
     
  #667  
Old Posted Jan 24, 2007, 9:14 PM
Steely Dan's Avatar
Steely Dan Steely Dan is offline
devout Pizzatarian
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Lincoln Square, Chicago
Posts: 30,233
^ yes, obviously i meant kinzie, not madison. i have no idea how i confused those two streets as they're quite a bit different from each other to say the least.
__________________
"Missing middle" housing can be a marvelous middle ground for many middle class families.
     
     
  #668  
Old Posted Jan 25, 2007, 12:33 AM
Alliance's Avatar
Alliance Alliance is offline
NEW YORK | CHICAGO
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: NYC
Posts: 3,532
Quote:
Originally Posted by pherek View Post
This is incredible!!!!! Chicago may more than duplicate its skyline in a matter of 10 years!!! Now that is worth a dancing banana.
I did the calculations on this a while back. I don't remeber what the exact height limit was, but Chicago WAS basically doubling the significant amount of structures in its skyline. And not in a cheesy way. Almos every pre-existing structure had a proposed (many now U/C) partner that was taller.

Last edited by Steely Dan; Jan 25, 2007 at 4:39 AM.
     
     
  #669  
Old Posted Jan 25, 2007, 4:35 AM
spyguy's Avatar
spyguy spyguy is offline
THAT Guy
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 5,946
Give it up already

http://www.chicagojournal.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&SubSectionID=60&ArticleID=2633&TM=84346.06

Pie in the sky?
New Prairie Avenue group hopes to change plans for already approved towers

By LAURA PUTRE, Editor


A group of residents in the Prairie Avenue District say they were so irked by X/O, a glass skyscraper going up in their otherwise low-rise historic neighborhood, that they have been inspired to form a new community group, the Prairie District Neighborhood Alliance.

"That was the straw that broke the camel's back," says Tina Feldstein, PDNA president and a real-estate agent who lives in the neighborhood. "In the last two years, all of a sudden, all these buildings started popping up that didn't belong here."

The group's boundaries will consist of the rail tracks north of 16th Street, Cermak, the west side of Indiana and Lake Shore Drive. Some thirty condo associations and their boards are members of the new group, says Feldstein. "We want to preserve the historic integrity and feel of the neighborhood, but with some respect."

Feldstein says her neighbors don't feel adequately represented by other community groups in the neighborhood, including the Near South Planning Board, which is primarily business-focused, and the Greater South Loop Association, which covers a much broader area. Both groups supported the X/O development, which would be located at 18th and Prairie near the Victorian-era mansions of a neighborhood that was once a millionaire's row.

"They're good groups, they're doing their thing, but the problem is neither of those groups are 100 percent residential," says Feldstein.

Feldstein said her group recently met with Second Ward Alderman Madeline Haithcock's office, who told them the X/O project would not go any further in the process. "We've asked for a redesign, but we haven't gotten a response from the developer. We met with the alderman and she said she did not want the zoning ordinance approved."

But the zoning ordinance already has been approved-at least for the phase of the project the PDNA most objects to. Keith Giles, developer for the X/O project, noted that the two high-rise towers-45 and 33 stories-proposed for the project have been formally OK'd by the city's Plan Commission and thus any chance of negotiating has passed. The only part of the project still up for negotiation is the townhome phase, which is still on the drawing board.

"We've told them more than once, the towers are not up for discussion," he said. Since the city has already approved the project, he says, "we don't really have to talk to these people, but at the request of the alderman we've agreed to talk with them about the streetscape."

Feldstein emphasizes that hers is not a one-issue group. "We have so many goals," she says. "Very few areas in the city of Chicago have as many infrastructure issues as we do. We need new sewage, new water lines in the area from 16th to Cermak. They never got updated."

The PDNA also would like to name a new park in the area Fort Dearborn Park after the Fort Dearborn massacre that took place during the war of 1812. Along those lines, the group hopes to excavate an old memorial to the event that is supposedly lying in storage somewhere, for display in the park.
     
     
  #670  
Old Posted Jan 25, 2007, 5:06 AM
SamInTheLoop SamInTheLoop is offline
you know where I'll be
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,575
^ Talk about not knowing when to quit! These Nimbies are a whole new level of pathetic.... It's over, you LOST!!
__________________
It's simple, really - try not to design or build trash.
     
     
  #671  
Old Posted Jan 25, 2007, 5:42 AM
Chi_Coruscant Chi_Coruscant is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Chicago
Posts: 485
* moderator edit *

please post all comments about the 2016 olympics bid, the olympic stadiums, the olympic village, etc. in the chicago olympics thread in city discussions.
     
     
  #672  
Old Posted Jan 25, 2007, 6:22 AM
Mr Downtown's Avatar
Mr Downtown Mr Downtown is offline
Urbane observer
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,393
Quote:
Originally Posted by the urban politician
I'm hoping some discussion will occur about making adjustments to [The Chicago Central Area 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
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
The whole point of the Central Area Action Plan is to adjust the downtown plan for changing conditions. Several task forces began meeting late last year, but the process is a little unclear. There's also the problem of trying to have any kind of serious discussion while Ald. Natarus is in the room . . .

What page are these height limits (or guidelines) on? I don't see anything about specific heights in the Central Area Plan.
     
     
  #673  
Old Posted Jan 25, 2007, 8:29 AM
Marcu Marcu is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,649
Quote:
Originally Posted by SamInTheLoop View Post
^ Talk about not knowing when to quit! These Nimbies are a whole new level of pathetic.... It's over, you LOST!!
That's the part that scared me. They won't quit until they get their way. And from what it seems like, they got unlimited time and resources.
     
     
  #674  
Old Posted Jan 25, 2007, 9:35 AM
Chicago Shawn's Avatar
Chicago Shawn Chicago Shawn is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,829
Quote:
Originally Posted by SamInTheLoop View Post
^ Talk about not knowing when to quit! These Nimbies are a whole new level of pathetic.... It's over, you LOST!!
Thank goodness this project slipped through when it did, because if proposed six months from now it likley would have been scaled down and redesigned into to some pomo POS to appease the idoits. Once agian, how many of these poeple live in the Prairie District Homes project? A project which was approved to have THREE high-rise buildings in it way back around 2001-2002. It was even on the big model in the sales center.

I also like how the article talks about the new park, and leaves out the fact IT IS BEING BUILT with X/O. Serriously, the Chicago Journal's journalism skills are pathetic. Could they do a little more cherry picking with the facts in each development article they publish?
     
     
  #675  
Old Posted Jan 25, 2007, 1:55 PM
SamInTheLoop SamInTheLoop is offline
you know where I'll be
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,575
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chicago Shawn View Post
Thank goodness this project slipped through when it did, because if proposed six months from now it likley would have been scaled down and redesigned into to some pomo POS to appease the idoits. Once agian, how many of these poeple live in the Prairie District Homes project? A project which was approved to have THREE high-rise buildings in it way back around 2001-2002. It was even on the big model in the sales center.

I also like how the article talks about the new park, and leaves out the fact IT IS BEING BUILT with X/O. Serriously, the Chicago Journal's journalism skills are pathetic. Could they do a little more cherry picking with the facts in each development article they publish?

Shawn, was it also approved by the City Council after Plan Commission?
__________________
It's simple, really - try not to design or build trash.
     
     
  #676  
Old Posted Jan 25, 2007, 1:59 PM
trvlr70 trvlr70 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: usa
Posts: 2,245
But honestly, although I like the towers, I'm not a fan of the townhouses/base. So, in this case, I'm pleased for the design intervention. Perhaps something better will come from talks?
     
     
  #677  
Old Posted Jan 25, 2007, 2:40 PM
honte honte is offline
Registered
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Chicago - every nook and cranny
Posts: 4,628
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Downtown View Post
There's also the problem of trying to have any kind of serious discussion while Ald. Natarus is in the room . . .

So true!
     
     
  #678  
Old Posted Jan 25, 2007, 2:50 PM
VivaLFuego's Avatar
VivaLFuego VivaLFuego is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Blue Island
Posts: 6,509
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Downtown View Post
There's also the problem of trying to have any kind of serious discussion while Ald. Natarus is in the room . . .
Heh. I don't know why, but he kind of reminds me of Ted Kennedy
     
     
  #679  
Old Posted Jan 25, 2007, 4:06 PM
Mr Downtown's Avatar
Mr Downtown Mr Downtown is offline
Urbane observer
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,393
X/O's planned development was approved by City Council October 4, 2006, Council Journal p. 88450.
     
     
  #680  
Old Posted Jan 25, 2007, 5:15 PM
BVictor1's Avatar
BVictor1 BVictor1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 10,789
Quote:
Originally Posted by trvlr70 View Post
But honestly, although I like the towers, I'm not a fan of the townhouses/base. So, in this case, I'm pleased for the design intervention. Perhaps something better will come from talks?

Well, they could care less about the townhomes. The want to change the towers, so what are you talking about?
__________________
titanic1
     
     
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 12:40 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Privacy Statement - Top

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