CHICAGO: boom rundown - everything over 12 floors. v4 - Page 73

BorisMolotov · #**1441** Posted **Mar 10, 2007, 1:44 AM**

From now on, the Month of March shall be known as "Let's Build a Skyscraper Month!" Seriously, we've had like what, 5+ buildings start in March already? And 3 today! Keep 'em coming!

spyguy · #**1442** Posted **Mar 10, 2007, 2:11 AM**

More images of 353 N Clark

BorisMolotov · #**1443** Posted **Mar 10, 2007, 2:17 AM**

This is one of the sharpest projects in Chicago right now. Or for that matter, one of the sharpest projects I have ever seen. It looks incredibly professional. I especially love the clearish blue glass, hopefully it will rival the Trumps.

SolarWind · #**1444** Posted **Mar 10, 2007, 2:22 AM**

Thanks spyguy! I don't recall seeing some of those before. The building looks impressive. Great find!

i_am_hydrogen · #**1445** Posted **Mar 10, 2007, 3:10 AM**

Is 235 W Van Buren really U/C?

chicubs111 · #**1446** Posted **Mar 10, 2007, 3:21 AM**

^ lol..I know...i dont know how a building can go underconstruction in less than 2 month...and its not even an apartment building...but from what people are reporting technically it is underconstruction

Sir Isaac Newton · #**1447** Posted **Mar 10, 2007, 3:34 AM**

There have been a good 10-20 piles driven on 235 West Van Buren. But like BVictor mentioned, they haven't even torn up the entire parking lot yet. Some of the piles were driven right through the concrete...I'm not sure the reasoning behind that.

DANTHEDISCOMAN · #**1448** Posted **Mar 10, 2007, 3:41 AM**

Anyone else find those ventilation panels half way up, disrupting to the flow of the building? It seems a blueish color matching the glass would of been easier on the eyes than grey. Oh well, the retail looks amazing...

I forgot to post these. From yesterday:

Burnham Pointe

Printers Corner

Vetro

1720 S Michigan

900 S Clark

Michigan Avenue Tower II

i_am_hydrogen · #**1449** Posted **Mar 10, 2007, 4:03 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sir Isaac Newton

There have been a good 10-20 piles driven on 235 West Van Buren. But like BVictor mentioned, they haven't even torn up the entire parking lot yet. Some of the piles were driven right through the concrete...I'm not sure the reasoning behind that.

I admire the developer's testicular fortitude. Recall the following post at SSC:

Quote:

Originally Posted by PilotEricB

One of the things about CMK is that they have a strong contingent of repeat buyers who have moved from project to project. The 235 W. Van Buren building also has a strong pull because of the partnership with Ralph Johnson.

It's possible that, given this history with repeat buyers, the developers wanted to send a clear message that this building would become a reality in order to attract them to this building. It's one thing to say "Oh, we have this great building planned on 235 W. Van Buren, hang in there and see what happens." It's quite another to say "This building is now being constructed."

jcchii · #**1450** Posted **Mar 10, 2007, 4:06 AM**

the boom is crazy right now. you can't go anywhere without going past a construction site

denizen467 · #**1451** Posted **Mar 10, 2007, 4:11 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by DANTHEDISCOMAN

Oh well, the retail looks amazing...

The podium is nice, but the renders are typical developer/architect B.S. renders in that the retail will most realistically end up being McDonald's and Subway, etc.

The tower is meh, with the possible exception of those suspended 'wings' of glass protruding at the corners of the curtainwall.

Sir Isaac Newton · #**1452** Posted **Mar 10, 2007, 4:13 AM**

Another factor for 235 West Van Buren moving along so quickly is that CMK seems to price the units of their buildings at very competitive prices...and as a result, they have been able to sell their units like hotcakes!

BorisMolotov · #**1453** Posted **Mar 10, 2007, 4:28 AM**

^ ^
More power to 'em. I can't wait to see what they come up with next.

i_am_hydrogen · #**1454** Posted **Mar 10, 2007, 4:38 AM**

Developing a building is a double-edged sword at almost every juncture. In order to gain financing, a requisite percentage of units must be sold or rented. Problematically, if a building is proposed or approved, sales/rentals can certainly proceed but they do so without an iron-clad guarantee that a unit sold/rented will be a unit occupied. There's no collateral on the buyer's side. However, once a building is under construction, the likelihood of occupying that unit becomes almost certain. The process essentially works in reverse.

Nowhereman1280 · #**1455** Posted **Mar 10, 2007, 4:39 AM**

You know, I don't usually do this, but Chicago deserves a dancing banana for all of the badassery is has unleashed today!

Sir Isaac Newton · #**1456** Posted **Mar 10, 2007, 5:23 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by denizen467

The podium is nice, but the renders are typical developer/architect B.S. renders in that the retail will most realistically end up being McDonald's and Subway, etc.

The tower is meh, with the possible exception of those suspended 'wings' of glass protruding at the corners of the curtainwall.

I'm not so sure. From what I've seen, it seems like newer, Class A office buildings tend to have at least somewhat nicer restaurants whereas most of the cheaper, fast-food restaurants downtown tend to be in older or less high-profile buildings and in the various food courts around the loop.

Eventually...Chicago · #**1457** Posted **Mar 10, 2007, 5:25 AM**

true dat, nowhereman.

I can't wait for the ground to thaw a bit more and get the temps into the 50's everyday. Buildings will fly!

oh yeah & a banana for the city!

Does anyone know what the borders for treo's park over the metra tracks area?

Also, i think buck's latest is very sleek and sharp. I know we all want the diversity retail brings at the base of these buildings, but there is something to be said for having a district of raw commerce.

I had never seen those renderings of 353 North Clark. Very Very Cool. Does anyone want to put a bet on when the porn shops will move off of hubbard? I can't imagine people will stand for them that much longer with the new development there. Especially the one next to brasserie Jo

SamInTheLoop · #**1458** Posted **Mar 10, 2007, 6:08 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chicago3rd

I wish they would shut up about the older office towers. This is called free market baby. Those land lords sat on too much stock and let it go downhill..plus the buildings do have a shelf life....duh. The older towers....let's be inventive landlords and start making them evolve into something that will make downtown more comprehensive.

Agreed. The market is actually being quite rational here - what you have are really the tenants calling the shots, and the city's best tenants are generally demanding state-of-the-art, efficient, technologically and environmentally advanced office towers with floor-to-ceiling, wall-to-wall glass to take advantage of natural light and views and where possible locations that allow for great views from higher floors (after 155, I'm really looking to Hines' proposed 200 N. Riverside as the most likely 1 mil+ sf office tower to be launched). As for 155 N. Wacker, Buck will undoubtedly do very well despite the current low level of pre-leasing.

SamInTheLoop · #**1459** Posted **Mar 10, 2007, 6:15 AM**

Awesome new renderings - thanks Spyguy! I'm liking this one more. Take a look at the last rendering - look directly above the sign for the fictional 'Metropol' store in the low-rise retail portion: could this be the reflection of the last piece of the River North Center development, the roughly 500 ft residential tower? Probably reading waaayyy to much into it - anyway, I've been wondering when the residential tower will move forward - what the developers really should do is make it rental, as I'm sure a high-end rental tower would do very well at that location...

SamInTheLoop · #**1460** Posted **Mar 10, 2007, 6:18 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sir Isaac Newton

I'm not so sure. From what I've seen, it seems like newer, Class A office buildings tend to have at least somewhat nicer restaurants whereas most of the cheaper, fast-food restaurants downtown tend to be in older or less high-profile buildings and in the various food courts around the loop.

I agree - developers of the new Class A+ office towers are obsessive about the image that they're creating for prospective tenants...don't look for a McDonald's or Subway in the 353 Clark retail space, as I would be very surpised to find them there...