CHICAGO: boom rundown - everything over 12 floors. v4

[Steely Dan]

page 1 now has all of its pretty pictures back

[Chicago Shawn]

Originally Posted by Lukecuj

Sure Prairie Avenue itself should maintain its historic feel, but holy shit the horse is out of the barn and across state lines if you think their version of the boundries of this district is historical, so much of this area has been light industrial for so long, what the....? This group is Al Queda dangerous , they need to be fought against. How you can take one 5 block street of 9 or so landmarked homes and now claim oversight of this expanded area, it's bullshit.
I see where they're going.... It's the West Loop prototype. The aim is to block all towers that will front the immediate Lakeshore area. The natural progression of the lakefront property should be for high density towers because it prime land.

In addition to that, this area is adjacent to the largest convention center in the nation. How do you assume an area will stay "quiet" when you live next to McCormick Place?

[Loopy]

These are the same people that were telling the Chicago Journal that the X/O proposal was reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission without appearing on the publically announced agenda. This is bullshit, of course.

They were too stupid to recognize the address of the development on the agenda, and they missed the opportunity to speak against the project. Too bad.

[Chicago Shawn]

^Ah, but don't you see, they were "Bamboozeled" by thier elected officials. Surley its all a corumpt scheme to benifit the evil developers and screw them out of a quiet neighborhood full of history.

1. All of the housing is brand new down there, and all of it built by "evil" developers
2. High-rises have been planned here for about 7 years
3. This is downtown, and next to the nation's premiere convention center
4. The history of Prairie Avenue was lost long ago, anything left is preserved; while the rest is recovering from a derlict industrial neighborhood
5. X/O has an FAR of 7.0, which was the zoning of the site before it was downzoned.
6. We all knew X/O's approval was to begin in August, and we knew this back in June. If you hate a project, at least stay on top of the info to make your complaints official.

Seems pretty reasonable and clear to me. Of course most NIMBYs are incapable of providing a rational argument and instead go by impulse of having a lost view or whatever other petty issue irks them.

[SamInTheLoop]

Originally Posted by Mr Downtown

X/O's planned development was approved by City Council October 4, 2006, Council Journal p. 88450.

That's great to hear! The alderwoman could still try to do something silly like withhold building permits, but I don't see how there's any way she could get away with such a stunt...

[SamInTheLoop]

Originally Posted by BVictor1

Well, they could care less about the townhomes. The want to change the towers, so what are you talking about?

I agree - that is what they really are after - the towers. I don't think the developer should budge an inch on even the design of the townhomes (even though the base and townhomes don't thrill me either) - because I am convinced absolutely any design compromise made with input from these people will result in a worse design!! Afterall, these people live in Prairie District Homes, and that's no beauty pageant winner!!

[modkris]

These Prairie District suburbanites are making me ill! I hope that area isn't held back by this scary new alliance of condo associations. X/O is one of my favorite new proposals. It will add so much to the southern skyline. I can't stand these hypocritical newcomers that wouldn't even live in the area without this current South Loop boom. I hope the city railroads more projects through all around them!

[LoyolaBeachView]

Hello all,

I was lucky enough to be readmitted to the forum, after first joining about a year ago and essentially acting like I owned the place. I want to thank the moderator for a second chance. I had attacked the bedrock of this boom--the construction workers--without considering their hard work. For that, I truly apologize.

I recently read a riveting story on NPR's Marketplace, covering a contest funded by the History Channel called "Cities of the Future." The challenge was for visionary architects/engineers to create a plan that explains how their cities will adapt to the environmental challenges we will all face in this century. The finalists (no surprise) are NYC, Chicago, and LA.

The Chicago team assumed that water scarcity in the Southwest will drive population growth in Chi-town; parched people will flock here in droves to quench their thirst.

In terms of the Boom, the Chicago crew proposed the city will develop taller buildings to accommodate the "refugee" surge and population density. You won't believe the ideas for sustaining the the Lake's water supply. Will this happen sooner than later? Are we the city of the future? You all can decide based on the information.

Here is the link to the Marketplace piece...

http://marketplace.publicradio.org/shows/2007/01/15/AM200701151.html

Once again, I'm very glad to be back and am excited to contribute to the intriguing discussions on this forum.

Chris

P.S. If Calatrava's masterpiece breaks ground soon, the latest rendering of the skyline should by used by the Chicago2016.org.

[BVictor1]

^^I guess that I will be the first to say... WELCOME BACK!!!

Also, Lexington Park on Cermack is now in the site prep mode. I drove past earlier and there was an excavator on site digging around.

[chicubs111]

Texas developer eyes River North lot
Considering apartments near Merchandise Mart

January 26, 2007
BY DAVID ROEDER AND FRAN SPIELMAN Staff Reporters
A San Antonio company has proposed building an apartment tower immediately east of the Merchandise Mart.
Lynd Co. has filed a zoning request with the city for property at 161 W. Kinzie. The site is at the southeast corner of Kinzie and Wells, and has a surface parking lot.

A Lynd affiliate has proposed a 32-story building containing about 250 homes plus 25,000 square feet of commercial space. The company owns or manages 36,000 apartments that are mostly in the southern United States.

This would be its first investment in Chicago, said Lynd's vice president for development, Jason Tompkins. He cautioned that the deal is not a sure thing, and that several design issues must be negotiated with the city.

Lynd has a contract to purchase the property, said Andy Gloor, principal of Sterling Bay Cos., the current owner. Gloor said he hopes the deal can close in 30 days.

Sterling Bay has considered several options for the lot since it acquired it in 2004 as part of its purchase of the former Helene Curtis building at 325 N. Wells.

The Helene Curtis property became office condominiums and Sterling Bay considered that use for the empty lot. But Gloor said his company and Lynd connected through a mutual acquaintance and that the prospective buyers were eager to expand to the Chicago market.

[email protected]

http://www.suntimes.com/business/230647,CST-FIN-kinzie26.article

[trvlr70]

....and one more surface lot bites the dust!

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by BVictor1

^^I guess that I will be the first to say... WELCOME BACK!!!

Also, Lexington Park on Cermack is now in the site prep mode. I drove past earlier and there was an excavator on site digging around.

thanks victor, page 1 has been updated accordingly.

[honte]

Originally Posted by trvlr70

....and one more surface lot bites the dust!

But one that used to contain one official City Landmark and one possible landmark....

[Chicago Shawn]

Originally Posted by honte

But one that used to contain one official City Landmark and one possible landmark....

What was torn down for that lot? The existing loft building now home to The Chicago School of physc. is not part of the apartment tower plan, which will only go as far south as Carroll Avenue.

[Chicago Shawn]

Originally Posted by LoyolaBeachView

Hello all,

I was lucky enough to be readmitted to the forum, after first joining about a year ago and essentially acting like I owned the place. I want to thank the moderator for a second chance. I had attacked the bedrock of this boom--the construction workers--without considering their hard work. For that, I truly apologize.

I recently read a riveting story on NPR's Marketplace, covering a contest funded by the History Channel called "Cities of the Future." The challenge was for visionary architects/engineers to create a plan that explains how their cities will adapt to the environmental challenges we will all face in this century. The finalists (no surprise) are NYC, Chicago, and LA.

The Chicago team assumed that water scarcity in the Southwest will drive population growth in Chi-town; parched people will flock here in droves to quench their thirst.

In terms of the Boom, the Chicago crew proposed the city will develop taller buildings to accommodate the "refugee" surge and population density. You won't believe the ideas for sustaining the the Lake's water supply. Will this happen sooner than later? Are we the city of the future? You all can decide based on the information.

Here is the link to the Marketplace piece...

http://marketplace.publicradio.org/shows/2007/01/15/AM200701151.html

Once again, I'm very glad to be back and am excited to contribute to the intriguing discussions on this forum.

Chris

P.S. If Calatrava's masterpiece breaks ground soon, the latest rendering of the skyline should by used by the Chicago2016.org.

Welcome back.

That is an interesting proposition. I have been recently speculating at how much Chicago could actually benifit from the era of global warming, as we are high enough and away from the oceans to not worry about sea level rise; which could be as high as 40 feet if both the Greenland and antartic ice sheets melt, putting parts of places like Tokyo, London, Miami and Manhattan under water within the next 50-100 years. And, we have an innexhustable supply of fresh water at our door step now protected from other states siphoning it off. The southwest is expected to dry up as the Colorodo River will no longer have a steady supply of mountain snow and glacial melt water in the future. The river already has stoped reaching the Gulf of California in Mexico. If true, Chicago's future calls for a construction boom that will never end.

[brian_b]

I noticed a forgotten tower in my neighborhood looking like it's about to pop out of the ground...

The Allure at K Station:

This one is going to butt right up to Des Plaines Street. You can see the overpass in the bottom left of the photo.

I honestly forget how tall this one will be; the floor count will be somewhere in the mid 30s. I think.

[budman]

^39 stories, not bad - http://www.fifieldco.com/residential/detail.asp?id=60

[urban_encounter]

You know the city's highrise construction is red hot, when a 39 story highrise goes virutally without notice....

[SolarWind]

Originally Posted by brian_b

I noticed a forgotten tower in my neighborhood looking like it's about to pop out of the ground...

The Allure at K Station:

I guess we were thinking the same thing. Since I went through the trouble of walking over there, I'm going to post my pictures anyway even though you beat me to it.

These are from this morning. A portion of the tower crane has arrived on site. You can see it on the left-hand side of the second photo.

[SolarWind]

January 26, 2007

Trio




740 Fulton