CHICAGO: boom rundown - everything over 12 floors. v4

[spyguy]

www.livepurechicago.com

[honte]

^ Not bad. The real saving grace is the fact that there are no visible balconies on the front facade.

Originally Posted by VivaLFuego

Related question: The post-fire Italianate 3-5 story buildings around and along Clark st. in River North; are they landmarked? I'd hate to lose more of those, it's a nice glimpse of River North's past before it became a giant parking lot.

Nay, the only things landmarked near the river in River North are the Chicago Varnish Co. building (Harry Carry's), the old Courthouse, the Cable Car powerhouse on LaSalle, and the Vesseman Building. By the way, one of those Italianates on Clark that you mention is by WW Boyington (Chicago Water Tower et al).

They are wonderful and definitely should be considered for landmarking - this Boom has erased just about all of the buffer zones between these buildings and the next wave of development. Some time around 2002 Preservation Chicago listed these on their most endangered list and requested a "Lower River North" historic district, but the Vesseman building is the only one thus far that has been protected from that proposal.

[VivaLFuego]

^ Thanks honte,
That's troubling that they aren't landmarked, because there are some really incredible specimens there. And you bring up the reason I asked; they are now in the last swath of River North that hasn't seen large-scale redevelopment.

[BVictor1]

Originally Posted by honte

^ That post office was designed by Myron Goldsmith (SOM). I forget the date, but I believe it's not later than 1975. Terrible loss for a park, IMO.

The really nice modern fire station on Illinois was also being targeted, last I heard.

They should instead target fugly River North spots, such as the McDonalds, Rainforest, &c. Those surely will all become tower sites someday, so there wouldn't be much difference in terms of the cityscape. Plus, if they put a park in that area, it might hurry-up the replacement of some of the remaining suburbanized ventures with urban towers.

Can't agree with you on this one. The fire station and the post office are fugly buildings. And with the other — that's been built in that neighborhood these are the easiest things to demo. That area is sorely lacking in green space, and it will be a welcomed addition, seeing at the park/plaza at Illinois and State isn't long for this world. Just because it was designed by Myron, don't make it a work of art. Even great architects can design — which doesn't necessarily have to be saved.

But I agree Rainforest, McDonalds, the Vodka building can all go.

[BVictor1]

Originally Posted by Mr Downtown

If that's true, why are pile foundations hardly ever used in Chicago, even for a little 11-story building like One Place?

You'd probably have to ask the structural engineers or the city that question. Economics, the city, land conditions and structure all come into play.

[Norsider]

Originally Posted by BVictor1

Can't agree with you on this one. The fire station and the post office are fugly buildings. And with the other — that's been built in that neighborhood these are the easiest things to demo. That area is sorely lacking in green space, and it will be a welcomed addition, seeing at the park/plaza at Illinois and State isn't long for this world. Just because it was designed by Myron, don't make it a work of art. Even great architects can design — which doesn't necessarily have to be saved.

But I agree Rainforest, McDonalds, the Vodka building can all go.

Totally agree, Victor. Reflexively demanding that an uninteresting, squat eyesore of a postoffice be saved does not lend credibility to any preservationist movements. All it succeeds in doing is making our voice that much more easily ignored when it comes to saving something truly worth saving.

[budman]

This is the first I have heard that the River North fire station and the post office are going to be demo'd. Does anyone have any more details, re; the timing and what will replace them? (it sounded like a park will replace the post office, but what about the fire station...and is there a schedule?)

[honte]

^ This was from an old plan for River North. Both were supposed to become parks. I saw it several years ago, around the time that all the Magellan stuff was being completed. From what BVictor says, it might be still in the works.

Norsider, no one is demanding that the post office be saved. I simply like it; doubt any of the city's preservationists will bat an eyelash. BVic, I like its aesthetics, not just that it's a Goldsmith. I simply mentioned that because it gives you a new appreciation for what is being said when you take it in the context of his other work. He was a master minimalist / modernist - maybe you should consider it in that light the next time you look at it if you haven't before. Few people are familiar with his work in brick, which was quite good.

Perhaps we should continue this over in the General Developments thread?

[Tom In Chicago]

What is everyone's favorite building from the current boom, either U/C or proposed?

Optima Old Orchard Woods is an exceptional project. . . not a big fan of Aqua. . . but most of you know how I feel about it (cough - boring!!! Marina City part II - cough). . .

[museumparktom]

OMP/OMPW combo

[trvlr70]

^^^^^^^^
That's a surprise!

[VivaLFuego]

Grand Plaza !!!!

[Busy Bee]

^ I'm not sure, but I know alot, maybe most, crappy fast food generic shopping mall suburban — (you name it) is often designed and built by a construction company. In other words, some of these construction companies have got design departments (SCARY!, I've always thought it should be the other way around: Good architecture firms should have construction departments) —an all-in-one design-engineer-build firm. No room for art. This is why most everything in the burbs, not to mention the architectural abominations they call tract housing, looks like throw away —.

The whole situation, the idea of bypassing an architect with real vision for an in-house draftsperson makes me about as discouraged as when I'm reminded that Wal-Mart wants banks in their stores. This was a tangent.

[X-fib]

Sort of like the "house in a box" pick it from a catalog designs that plagued residential architecture of the late 19th - ealry 20th centuries. Talk about throw away, dime a dozen —!

[Steely Dan]

page 1 updates from the last several days:

- leland park and its rendering added to the list

- new rendering for pure added to the list

- changed the "year of completion" dates for parkview east and 740 fulton to "2007"

[SamInTheLoop]

Originally Posted by VivaLFuego

I assume 360 N. Union will be the one starting this fall. It's a good location for a tower, it will provide a northern terminus for the view coming up I-90/94 before it veers west into Hubbard's cave.

That said, great news that Fifield is plowing ahead, this land is horribly underutilized and is a great spot for some high density. I also like how there are fewer parking spaces than units planned...

That's what I thought as well - that it would be the 31 story, approximately 375 unit tower at 360 N. Union, but it seems that it will be a larger tower (I think 420+ units further east that will be next...perhaps this will be the 43-story tower???...

[VivaLFuego]

Design-Build just means you're award a single contract to a firm to do both the design and construction phases of the project...it is clearly more efficient to do so but often butts up against procurement guidelines.

[Eventually...Chicago]

Design build may be considered more efficient for the right kind of project. For a very normal run-of-the-mill building like a strip mall or office warehouse design-build is could be a good solution. However, in almost all other cases you would rather have an architect looking out for your interests.
Not to turn this into a construction industry thread. But design-build contractors, whether stipulated sum or % of construction, will never provide as good of a product as an architect will.
Really, its just putting too much power into one persons' hands.

Concerning Museum Park West... I noticed that it is in the site prep/demo group. I just bought a condo in Tower IV and I was talking with the realtor (in the sales office) and he said that the developer was holding off on this building until the inventory he has now decreases. I wonder if there are going to be many proposed buildings that wait a year or two for the residential market to absorb what is on the market now?

[the urban politician]

^ Pardon my ignorance, but what are you referring to when you mention 'Tower IV'?

[honte]

** Deleted for copyright infringement **

- Dylan Leblanc