HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

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


Closed Thread

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #261  
Old Posted Apr 12, 2007, 5:47 AM
Alliance's Avatar
Alliance Alliance is offline
NEW YORK | CHICAGO
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: NYC
Posts: 3,532
...a parking garage...how honorable.
     
     
  #262  
Old Posted Apr 12, 2007, 12:13 PM
Chi_Coruscant Chi_Coruscant is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Chicago
Posts: 485
Lakeshore club in danger
(http://www.suntimes.com/business/337897,CST-FIN-lake12.article)

April 12, 2007

BY DAVID ROEDER
The prospective buyer of the old Lakeshore Athletic Club, 850 N. Lake Shore Drive, plans to raze the 19-story building and construct new luxury residences in its place, despite claims by preservationist groups that it should be a landmark.

The new structure would be the same height as the old one and thus wouldn't need a zoning change, Alan Schachtman, senior vice president at Fifield Cos., said Wednesday. He said Fifield has a contract to buy the property from Northwestern University.

The contract is contingent on Fifield securing a demolition permit. Schachtman declined to discuss other terms, but sources said the building sold for more than $40 million.

Both Preservation Chicago and Landmarks Illinois have listed the old club as among the most endangered, notable buildings in Chicago, and have called for it to be saved. Some neighborhood residents have spoken in favor of the old building, but that sentiment is based party on suspicions that a high-rise would replace it.

Fifield is betting it can blunt some of that opposition by agreeing to abide by height limitations already written into the site's zoning.

Schachtman emphasized that the plans will be open for community review, even though Fifield is under no legal obligation to do that. "We're not trying to fight with anybody about it,'' he said. "People will see that we will do a very, very high-quality and very nice-looking building."

The firm of noted Chicago architect Lucien Lagrange will design the new building, Schachtman said. It will sit on a prime corner alongside Lake Michigan, between two towers designed by Ludwig Mies van der Rohe and Lagrange buildings that went up in the late 1990s.

"The intent is to build something that looks like it's always been there," Schachtman said.

He said the old club, which dates from 1927, is unsuitable for renovation, because much of it was designed as open, public space. A pool, gym, squash courts and rifle range all were on the lower floors of the club, which Northwestern converted into student housing before shuttering the building in 2005.

Preservationists argue those interior features, including murals and a marble lobby, are the top reasons to save the building. It was designed by Jarvis Hunt, and hosted many society galas in its early years.

Michael Moran, vice president of Preservation Chicago, called on City Hall to declare the building a landmark. He said his group will start a petition campaign on the building's behalf.

The plan emerges as 42nd Ward Ald. Burton Natarus, who has opposed landmark designation for the club, gives way to incoming Ald. Brendan Reilly. Moran said Reilly's defeat of Natarus in the February election showed residents are tired of policies that favor developers.

Schachtman said his firm has shown the plans to Reilly, who made no commitments and urged him to set up community meetings. A spokesman for Reilly said he was unavailable Wednesday.

Any request to demolish the building triggers a 90-day review by the city's planning department. That's because the building was flagged in a property survey a few years ago that it had potential architectural or historic importance.

The Fifield firm is an experienced residential and commercial developer known for new office buildings in the West Loop and a 1990s renovation of the Civic Opera Building. Founder Steven Fifield has expanded the Chicago-based company's activities in California.

He tussled with preservationists a few years ago over his plan, never implemented, to put a condominium tower on top of the Medinah Temple on the Near North Side.
     
     
  #263  
Old Posted Apr 12, 2007, 12:57 PM
honte honte is offline
Registered
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Chicago - every nook and cranny
Posts: 4,628
^ Oh Lord, the worst of ALL possible worlds!?

' "The intent is to build something that looks like it's always been there," Schachtman said.' !!

Back-ass-wards plan: No increase in height or (potential) density. No bold architecture. Hire a mediocre archiect. Destroy the historic building. Make it look like it was "always there"?

And, to top it all off, at the $40 Million tag, this project will have ultra high-end units... which, just like the moronic Ritz Carlton project, just sucks money out of the market that otherwise could be going to great projects like Chicago Spire, Waterview, etc.

Last edited by honte; Apr 12, 2007 at 1:04 PM.
     
     
  #264  
Old Posted Apr 12, 2007, 2:39 PM
VivaLFuego's Avatar
VivaLFuego VivaLFuego is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Blue Island
Posts: 6,509
Quote:
Originally Posted by honte View Post
^ Oh Lord, the worst of ALL possible worlds!?

' "The intent is to build something that looks like it's always been there," Schachtman said.' !!

Back-ass-wards plan: No increase in height or (potential) density. No bold architecture. Hire a mediocre archiect. Destroy the historic building. Make it look like it was "always there"?

And, to top it all off, at the $40 Million tag, this project will have ultra high-end units... which, just like the moronic Ritz Carlton project, just sucks money out of the market that otherwise could be going to great projects like Chicago Spire, Waterview, etc.
Yep, a real travesty. If they're going to demolish it, the only way it would be acceptable is if they were replacing it with an exciting, remarkable project (i.e. very tall, bold architecture, etc). It sounds like we're gonna get a shit sandwich instead. Shame, shame on Fifield for such an awful proposal.
     
     
  #265  
Old Posted Apr 12, 2007, 2:54 PM
trvlr70 trvlr70 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: usa
Posts: 2,245
Quote:
Originally Posted by VivaLFuego View Post
Yep, a real travesty. If they're going to demolish it, the only way it would be acceptable is if they were replacing it with an exciting, remarkable project (i.e. very tall, bold architecture, etc). It sounds like we're gonna get a shit sandwich instead. Shame, shame on Fifield for such an awful proposal.
This is devestating. I don't get it. The price points in that neighborhood, along with guaranteed lake views, should allow for a careful condo conversion, like the Palmolive Building.

This would be real loss to the hood's character.
     
     
  #266  
Old Posted Apr 12, 2007, 2:59 PM
BVictor1's Avatar
BVictor1 BVictor1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 10,803
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chi_Coruscant View Post
Lakeshore club in danger
(http://www.suntimes.com/business/337897,CST-FIN-lake12.article)

April 12, 2007

BY DAVID ROEDER
The prospective buyer of the old Lakeshore Athletic Club, 850 N. Lake Shore Drive, plans to raze the 19-story building and construct new luxury residences in its place, despite claims by preservationist groups that it should be a landmark.

The new structure would be the same height as the old one and thus wouldn't need a zoning change, Alan Schachtman, senior vice president at Fifield Cos., said Wednesday. He said Fifield has a contract to buy the property from Northwestern University.

The contract is contingent on Fifield securing a demolition permit. Schachtman declined to discuss other terms, but sources said the building sold for more than $40 million.

Both Preservation Chicago and Landmarks Illinois have listed the old club as among the most endangered, notable buildings in Chicago, and have called for it to be saved. Some neighborhood residents have spoken in favor of the old building, but that sentiment is based party on suspicions that a high-rise would replace it.

Fifield is betting it can blunt some of that opposition by agreeing to abide by height limitations already written into the site's zoning.

Schachtman emphasized that the plans will be open for community review, even though Fifield is under no legal obligation to do that. "We're not trying to fight with anybody about it,'' he said. "People will see that we will do a very, very high-quality and very nice-looking building."

The firm of noted Chicago architect Lucien Lagrange will design the new building, Schachtman said. It will sit on a prime corner alongside Lake Michigan, between two towers designed by Ludwig Mies van der Rohe and Lagrange buildings that went up in the late 1990s.

"The intent is to build something that looks like it's always been there," Schachtman said.

He said the old club, which dates from 1927, is unsuitable for renovation, because much of it was designed as open, public space. A pool, gym, squash courts and rifle range all were on the lower floors of the club, which Northwestern converted into student housing before shuttering the building in 2005.

Preservationists argue those interior features, including murals and a marble lobby, are the top reasons to save the building. It was designed by Jarvis Hunt, and hosted many society galas in its early years.

Michael Moran, vice president of Preservation Chicago, called on City Hall to declare the building a landmark. He said his group will start a petition campaign on the building's behalf.

The plan emerges as 42nd Ward Ald. Burton Natarus, who has opposed landmark designation for the club, gives way to incoming Ald. Brendan Reilly. Moran said Reilly's defeat of Natarus in the February election showed residents are tired of policies that favor developers.

Schachtman said his firm has shown the plans to Reilly, who made no commitments and urged him to set up community meetings. A spokesman for Reilly said he was unavailable Wednesday.

Any request to demolish the building triggers a 90-day review by the city's planning department. That's because the building was flagged in a property survey a few years ago that it had potential architectural or historic importance.

The Fifield firm is an experienced residential and commercial developer known for new office buildings in the West Loop and a 1990s renovation of the Civic Opera Building. Founder Steven Fifield has expanded the Chicago-based company's activities in California.

He tussled with preservationists a few years ago over his plan, never implemented, to put a condominium tower on top of the Medinah Temple on the Near North Side.

I saw a presentation yesterday of the new design and it's not bad. They are saying that it isn't cost effective to renovate the old building. The column spacing is too close, windows too small and the floor to ceiling height too low. The new building will be the same height and square footage as the old building. There was an agreement that a structure of a larger size would not be built there. Northwestern wouldn't sell to anyone who wanted to change the zoning. The new design is classical in style. It has a rounded bay on the corner and other bays along the east and north facades. It reminds me of the Marshall & Fox designed building on E. LSD around the corner. The base and top will be stone while the mid section material is up in the air. it could possible be pre-cast similar to the LaGrange designed building directly to the south. My preference is that they use real limestone, or at least a limestone veneer. I tried to get a rendering, but was told that it's too early in the process to release it. They are planning to reuse the foundation of the current structure which is thousands of wood piles with massive concrete caps. Parking will be underground and because of the height limitation, mechanical will be within the building and not on the roof. There is going to be more than the 25% green roof requirement. The project will be roughly 354,000 sq ft and 217' tall. The current PD allows for about 200 units, they will develop significantly less with about 6 units per floor with a total of 18 floors. It will be similar in quality to the 65 E. Goethe. They are planning to submit a demo permit within the next few weeks and of course there is a 90 day stay fro the city to make a decision. It will probably take about 9 months to demo the building and another 24 months for construction. The units will all be built out, nothing sold as raw space.
__________________
titanic1

Last edited by BVictor1; Apr 12, 2007 at 3:08 PM.
     
     
  #267  
Old Posted Apr 12, 2007, 3:21 PM
Jaroslaw's Avatar
Jaroslaw Jaroslaw is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Seoul
Posts: 1,792
--Decisive info, as usual. And now in addition to all the other valid complaints, where will the lux condo market be in nine months? Will the city give them the demo permit without a guarantee that the site won't stay empty who knows how long? And what is Northwestern's problem, with that no-rezoning clause? Have they done anything good for the city in the last couple of decades, urban-wise?
__________________
Cambodia, Laos, Vietnam
     
     
  #268  
Old Posted Apr 12, 2007, 3:41 PM
MasonsInquiries's Avatar
MasonsInquiries MasonsInquiries is offline
B-MORE than u strive for!
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Baltimore
Posts: 187
wonderful developments you guys have going on in the windy city
__________________
|<O>| República de Federative de Brasil
     
     
  #269  
Old Posted Apr 12, 2007, 3:46 PM
honte honte is offline
Registered
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Chicago - every nook and cranny
Posts: 4,628
^ I believe the no rezoning thing is them making good on the promise they made the the community when the first Lagrange and DeStefano buildings went up to the south. You may recall better than I; there was some strange thing about that land where it was donated to them on the condition that it always be used for eductational uses. Well, they ignored that, but SOAR and the like caused an uproar about it, and this eventual deal was agreed upon.

As far as BVic's post about the windows, ceiling heights, &c: BVic, thanks for the info, but I've heard all of that time and again and I just don't buy it. I don't care how hard Lagrange tries - it's probably not going to be this nice. Goethe was his most valiant attempt to match the quality of the old so far, and it really falls short on the detailing and quality of the facade.
     
     
  #270  
Old Posted Apr 12, 2007, 4:23 PM
BVictor1's Avatar
BVictor1 BVictor1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 10,803
Quote:
Originally Posted by honte View Post
^ I believe the no rezoning thing is them making good on the promise they made the the community when the first Lagrange and DeStefano buildings went up to the south. You may recall better than I; there was some strange thing about that land where it was donated to them on the condition that it always be used for eductational uses. Well, they ignored that, but SOAR and the like caused an uproar about it, and this eventual deal was agreed upon.

As far as BVic's post about the windows, ceiling heights, &c: BVic, thanks for the info, but I've heard all of that time and again and I just don't buy it. I don't care how hard Lagrange tries - it's probably not going to be this nice. Goethe was his most valiant attempt to match the quality of the old so far, and it really falls short on the detailing and quality of the facade.
Well what can you do? Lie in front of the bulldozer?
__________________
titanic1
     
     
  #271  
Old Posted Apr 12, 2007, 4:26 PM
Busy Bee's Avatar
Busy Bee Busy Bee is online now
Closeted Normie
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: on the artistic spectrum
Posts: 13,028
^I agree, they should bring in Robert A.M. Stern or Quinlan Terry to give LaGrange some neo-classical guidance.
__________________
Everything new is old again

Sic semper tyrannis
     
     
  #272  
Old Posted Apr 12, 2007, 6:11 PM
honte honte is offline
Registered
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Chicago - every nook and cranny
Posts: 4,628
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVictor1 View Post
Well what can you do? Lie in front of the bulldozer?
It's been done before...

Well, this building falls within the 90-day hold period, which was instituted as you know after the Merc ordeal specifically for this kind of issue. It is a legal tool that is designed to "give the city time to evaluate the demo" which of course translates into time to rally the troops and lobby the city. That's exactly what will be done.

This deal is especially interesting because Fitfield clearly knows there is a chance of this happening, and he has an out which = no apparent loss for him. So, the city may be more inclined to landmark because there won't be lawsuits from the developers.

If there is enough support to protect this thing in the community, the alderman will come out in favor of preservation / adaptive reuse, and the city will likely move on it. Meanwhile, of course NU will be flexing its muscle to do otherwise, so the community support will have to be very strong.

Fitfield is wise to hire Lagrange to do some PoMo crap because it will appease a lot of the NIMBY, view-oriented neighbors obviously, and probably muffle their objections. Especially once he starts telling them how much their property values are supposed to rise, and so forth.
     
     
  #273  
Old Posted Apr 12, 2007, 6:16 PM
trvlr70 trvlr70 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: usa
Posts: 2,245
[QUOTE=honte;2762094 Goethe was his most valiant attempt to match the quality of the old so far, and it really falls short on the detailing and quality of the facade.[/QUOTE]

If a new building is inevitable, then I hope they instead hire the architect who designed 15 Central Park West[one of my favorite new buildings] in NYC. Now that is a quality!
     
     
  #274  
Old Posted Apr 12, 2007, 6:22 PM
SevenSevenThree's Avatar
SevenSevenThree SevenSevenThree is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 400
Im against this 100%.

It makes absolutely no damn sense to tear down this building for yet another beige faux-Parisian POS that doesnt have an ounce of the quality that its replacing. We are raping what historic streetscape we have left and I am now officially sick of it!
__________________
Satan (impatiently) to Newcomer: The trouble with you Chicago people is, that you think you are the best people down here; whereas you are merely the most numerous.
- - - Mark Twain "Pudd'nhead Wilson's New Calendar," 1897
     
     
  #275  
Old Posted Apr 12, 2007, 6:25 PM
brian_b brian_b is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,572
I took dance lessons in that building and the ballroom is beautiful. It will be sad to see the building destroyed, but from the sounds of it they will at least be building something with quality in its place (not necessarily speaking of architectural quality).
     
     
  #276  
Old Posted Apr 12, 2007, 6:31 PM
SevenSevenThree's Avatar
SevenSevenThree SevenSevenThree is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 400
Quote:
Originally Posted by trvlr70 View Post
If a new building is inevitable, then I hope they instead hire the architect who designed 15 Central Park West[one of my favorite new buildings] in NYC. Now that is a quality!

If they just have to tear it down, I want something thats no less than B-R-E-A-T-H-T-A-K-I-N-G! Even if this building isnt the most architecturally relevant, I'd rather keep it than to erect another bland attempt at re-creating history. I wish developers and architects in this city could be more creative. Ugh.
__________________
Satan (impatiently) to Newcomer: The trouble with you Chicago people is, that you think you are the best people down here; whereas you are merely the most numerous.
- - - Mark Twain "Pudd'nhead Wilson's New Calendar," 1897
     
     
  #277  
Old Posted Apr 12, 2007, 6:47 PM
trvlr70 trvlr70 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: usa
Posts: 2,245
Quote:
Originally Posted by brian_b View Post
I took dance lessons in that building and the ballroom is beautiful. It will be sad to see the building destroyed, but from the sounds of it they will at least be building something with quality in its place (not necessarily speaking of architectural quality).
Now I'm 200% against this!
     
     
  #278  
Old Posted Apr 12, 2007, 7:31 PM
Sir Isaac Newton Sir Isaac Newton is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 315
Don't mean to change the subject but I heard an ad on the radio, earlier today, for 1555 South Wabash. They announced that groundbreaking will begin on April 21st.
     
     
  #279  
Old Posted Apr 12, 2007, 7:43 PM
Steely Dan's Avatar
Steely Dan Steely Dan is online now
devout Pizzatarian
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Lincoln Square, Chicago
Posts: 30,345
Evanston news

in a bit of a suprising move, the evanston plan commission has unanimously approved the 1890 maple project, a 14 story rental builing. i would expect that this will now be approved by the city council.

read more at evanstonnow: http://www.evanstonnow.com/node/2212
__________________
"Missing middle" housing can be a marvelous middle ground for many middle class families.
     
     
  #280  
Old Posted Apr 12, 2007, 8:57 PM
Marcu Marcu is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,649
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Dan View Post
in a bit of a suprising move, the evanston plan commission has unanimously approved the 1890 maple project, a 14 story rental builing. i would expect that this will now be approved by the city council.

read more at evanstonnow: http://www.evanstonnow.com/node/2212
Wow. Evanston not caving to the NIMBYs for a change. Just to remind everyone, this is the project that drew the following quote from the following person.

"Ms. Posner argued that the site is part of a transitional area -- not really downtown -- and should have lower height limits."



Ms. Posner lives in a 28 story Optima building.
     
     
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 1:52 PM.

     

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