CHICAGO: boom rundown - everything over 12 floors. v4

[budman]

Originally Posted by Norsider

The next step in this part of town is to demolish the Wacker Drive onramps and rezone the land for some buildings. That should really open up a development corridor down Clark St. going south.

^Norsider, what are you referring to here?

[budman]

Originally Posted by honte

This is the biggest line of crap I've heard in a long while. From what distance? Hello... Michigan Avenue is not Wabash in the Loop - you have vistas and a "hill" near the Wrigley Building.

I hope the commissioners vote entirely against this BS - more nay votes than last time. They should be insulted.

Clearly what's going on is a charrade: "Let's just hope the "no" vote was a fluke, we'll make some token 'refinements,' and then we'll hope for a better outcome."

Little known fact: If the Commission rejects a building in the process of landmarking for ANY reason during the process of designation, it can never be revisted again as a landmark per City code unless it's contributing to a larger district. So, why can a crappy developer waste everyone's time with nearly the same proposal twice over?

^Also, I thought the main reason that the commission (properly) voted no last time was that only 65% of the facade was going to be replaced. It looks like, with a 33% encroachment by the Rtiz building onto the footprint of the Farwell building, that wont change appreciably, if at all. So the proposed changes dont even address the main concern raised at the initial vote. This is totally a second bite at the apple, and a hope that they will get luckier this time. If the public outcry is as loud for this vote as it was last time, perhaps the outcome will be identical.

[SamInTheLoop]

Originally Posted by Sir Isaac Newton

Wow, that's crazy - they still haven't opened up a website for 235 West Van Buren or officially started marketing units to the general public. But I am sure that they will have no problem selling the majority of their units in a relatively short period of time.

In the first picture, you can see the sign as well as the site for Wacker Plaza. Does anyone know what the status is for this building?

CMK is an unstoppable development machine. I love these guys!! Other people talk and talk about putting up nice scrapers, like to spend years marketing their units, are all about publicity and charades - this company just shuts up and builds!! (and sells out their buildings just about faster than anybody too)!! (Certainly my enthusiasm for them isn't hurt by the fact that I love the design of their projects too)

[SamInTheLoop]

Originally Posted by BorisMolotov

Is there still a strong need for more hotels?

Wait, I think I just answered my own question. All of the hotels (for the most part) are very high-end, and we need the cheaper ones for not-rich people, like me.

Is this one high-end? I've never heard of this chain before.

There is indeed a huge need for more hotels - this is without a doubt (despite the strong competition from rental apartments) the strongest downtown property type right now (and still getting stronger). Although it seems like most of the new projects are super-luxury, there are a lot of more moderately priced projects - River North Hotel, The Wic, The Blackstone renovation, the new hampton at the Shubert, Staybridge, I'm sure I'm forgetting at least a couple...

[SamInTheLoop]

Check out the back page of Crain's this week - Golub has a neat ad. It does mention a spring groundbreaking for 355 E. Ohio (Streeter II)...I have a feeling this one will getting underway very soon...

[SamInTheLoop]

I agree that this thing with the Farwell going back before the landmarks commission is a complete charade - who really buys this bs??

The developers have restarted advertising the condos big time - see their full page ad in Crain's this week. Gee, I wonder if they've been given a heads-up as to the result of the upcoming vote on the "revised" plan??? this is chicago politics at its worst......

I am curious how I'd feel though if the developers were putting up something truly architectrually remarkable next to the farwell.....maybe i'd feel like that proposal would make the overall plan palatable.....I guess we'll never know as they opted for the timidity of retro LaGrange......

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by Norsider

The next step in this part of town is to demolish the Wacker Drive onramps and rezone the land for some buildings. That should really open up a development corridor down Clark St. going south.

This won't happen until demand in this area reaches huge levels. I think most developers would rather build on the large vacant parcel (Grand Central Station) to the south.

Even if we do get to that point, I don't think the city would just let the ramps go like that. Maybe if the developer built his building around the ramps.

[Steely Dan]

i don't think this ever got posted, so here is a new clean rendering of the 14 story 1890 maple street proposal in evanston. on the right side of the image you can see the taller 18 story carroll gardens proposal from the same developer. carroll gardens is approved while 1890 maple is still in governmental limbo.

1890 maple is slated to replace an incredibly non-descript 2 story commercial office building that's been vacant for years and really kinda kills the corner.

carroll gardens is slated to replace a vacant lot that's been vacant for as long as i can remember.

[sentinel]

^^ Very nice! Thanks Steely, great find.

[SamInTheLoop]

So the agenda isn't completely high-rise free afterall this month. This is the sliver of an apartment building set to go up at the NE corner of Michigan and Randolph...

[SamInTheLoop]

This is on the Plan Commission Agenda but deferred until a later meeting...
What is this? Would this be a possible address for the post office? Is this an actually legitimate re-use plan for the post office building? The agenda item does't mention if it involves an existing building or new construction. Whatever it is, it's a HUGE project: 455,000 sf of office space, 300 residential units, 240 hotel rooms, 400 parking spaces.......if it was new construction, this could certainly be a supertall.......Anybody out there have some info??

[SamInTheLoop]

There's a short story about this project in this month's Midwest Construction online mag - midwest.construction.com. Here's a rundown of the article:

3 architecture firms: Zimmer Gunsul Frasca, Anderson Mikos, and of course SCB

2 construction management firms: M.A. Mortenson and Power

1.1 million sf.

construction costs $535 million, undetermined total project cost (I believe this week Crain's reported this as $800 million)

groundbreaking spring 2008, completion by spring 2012

[Nowhereman1280]

Originally Posted by SamInTheLoop

This is on the Plan Commission Agenda but deferred until a later meeting...
What is this? Would this be a possible address for the post office? Is this an actually legitimate re-use plan for the post office building? The agenda item does't mention if it involves an existing building or new construction. Whatever it is, it's a HUGE project: 455,000 sf of office space, 300 residential units, 240 hotel rooms, 400 parking spaces.......if it was new construction, this could certainly be a supertall.......Anybody out there have some info??

Could this be our new mystery supertall that was mentioned by someone the other day?

[Steely Dan]

^ i doubt it, i think that 401-439 west van buren is the block of the old post office, so it's gotta be some redevelopment scheme for that old behemoth.

[honte]

Hey, here's an interesting find...

I believe these are before and after renders of two versions of 235 West Van Buren. The funkier one appears to be out....

I don't think we've seen this angle before. It's still a cool, and legitimate project (thanks Shawn for the photos)!

Before:


After (present):

[honte]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

^ i doubt it, i think that 401-439 west van buren is the block of the old post office, so it's gotta be some redevelopment scheme for that old behemoth.

Yeah, I think so. Wacker is 400 W (right?) and there isn't any land west of there on Van Buren. It's a supertall on its side.

[SamInTheLoop]

Originally Posted by honte

Yeah, I think so. Wacker is 400 W (right?) and there isn't any land west of there on Van Buren. It's a supertall on its side.

True enough...

[SamInTheLoop]

Originally Posted by honte

Hey, here's an interesting find...

I believe these are before and after renders of two versions of 235 West Van Buren. The funkier one appears to be out....

I don't think we've seen this angle before. It's still a cool, and legitimate project (thanks Shawn for the photos)!

Before:


After (present):

hmmm....it would be interesting to see that earlier version from different angles. Oh well, I'm pretty happy with what is apparently the current version (I'd have to say with the exception of the base, but let's face it - as imperfect as it is, it's easily better than 80% of the residential tower bases in this city - which of course is not saying much at all)...

[spyguy]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

Looks good to me.

Here's a better rendering of Clearwater in Oak Brook

[Chicago3rd]

The Boeing Building is 400 West Randolph (100 North Riverside Plaza) and we are on the west side of the river.....same as the old Post Office.