CHICAGO | Boom rundown - everything over 12 floors. v5

[spyguy]

Here's a link to an article that refers to the 50 story building honte mentioned a while back in Evanston.

http://www.evanstonnow.com/node/2252

[firstcranialnerve]

Originally Posted by Marcu

Isn't that the new Carley tower site?

What is this Carley Tower on Illinois street? I haven't yet heard of any actual building proposals, just that he was speculating about a hotel and some retail.

[honte]

^ I don't think anyone's seen a concrete proposal for that site yet.

Originally Posted by spyguy

Here's a link to an article that refers to the 50 story building honte mentioned a while back in Evanston.

http://www.evanstonnow.com/node/2252

Thanks, spyguy. There are key some differences from my earlier information, and good ones, as far as I am concerned. From the sound of the article, the landmark and the corner building may not be in jeopardy, as I was thinking. And the tower is at the upper end of the height range I had heard. So, this sounds like a win-win to me.

Let's see how it fares in the unpredictable world of downtown Evanston development.

[Eventually...Chicago]

Originally Posted by honte

^
and greatly diminishing the impact of the Burnham plan's Loop "gateway" building (as different as it is from his vision). OK?

I just am not understanding the merits of the post office. I don't think it is particularly stunning nor well detailed. Its proportions are ok but, unless the interior is great, I think this building gets too much credit for simply being old. Personally, i would rather see this building get interfered with a bit more. How about not just removing portions of it, but really adding something special and dynamic that adds to this "gateway". Driving east on the Ike underneath this thing feels more like driving into a concrete wall than an entry way.

And people, lets cool it a bit on the harsh tones. Like every building, we all have a stake in it whether it be economically (from taxes) or emotionally (attachment to the building/chicago). Architecture is a public art and science so every decision impacts us, if for no more reason than some of us will have to look it the darn thing every day of our lives. So, lets keep it a bit more academic there norsider.

[SkokieSwift]

Originally Posted by Eventually...Chicago

I just am not understanding the merits of the post office. I don't think it is particularly stunning nor well detailed. Its proportions are ok but, unless the interior is great, I think this building gets too much credit for simply being old. Personally, i would rather see this building get interfered with a bit more. How about not just removing portions of it, but really adding something special and dynamic that adds to this "gateway". Driving east on the Ike underneath this thing feels more like driving into a concrete wall than an entry way.

Agreed.

[Norsider]

Originally Posted by Eventually...Chicago

I think this building gets too much credit for simply being old.

To me, this is the central issue.

[Norsider]

Originally Posted by honte

^
And yes, my money is on the line. So is yours. There is going to be TONS of TIF money thrown at this project. Also, it's a federal building, so the public has a right to demand a certain quality of outcome.

Nothing of ours is on the line. The TIF money is a sunk cost. We paid it and at no time had a reasonable expectation of micromanaging how it was allocated. If they spend it on the post office or something else, that money's gone. We are not at risk for any financial loss. You and I have no skin in the game.

I'm sure you are disappointed at some level with the final proposal, but we simply have no way of knowing what obstacles were encountered during the planning process. Perhaps they considered the very thing you proposed but found it to be structurally or economically impossible. We just don't know enough about the process to make these type of value judgments.

[the urban politician]

^ I tend to fall in line with the "whats the big deal it's really not that spectacular of a structure" school of thought.

Despite saying that, I must comment that it's actually the massing of this building that blows me away. It's not so much the fact that it was built in the art deco period, nor the design of the building, that captures my attention. Instead, it's that it is really one of only 2 buildings of this scale built in Chicago (the other being the Merchandise Mart). I don't see something of these dimensions being built today, with the exception of some of the McCormick Place complexes.

By trimming it down, you really are getting rid of the most distinctive attribute of this building.

[nomarandlee]

Originally Posted by Eventually...Chicago

I just am not understanding the merits of the post office. I don't think it is particularly stunning nor well detailed. Its proportions are ok but, unless the interior is great, I think this building gets too much credit for simply being old. Personally, i would rather see this building get interfered with a bit more. How about not just removing portions of it, but really adding something special and dynamic that adds to this "gateway". Driving east on the Ike underneath this thing feels more like driving into a concrete wall than an entry way.
.

I somewhat agree. I don't beleive the integrity of the building is sancrosanct. It would be nice if they could keep the integrity of the building but it is not like cutting off the tower on the Wrigley building or something. But I wish if they did want to demolish part of it they woudl do something inovative. I wish they would just demolish the middle part and and build something like a glass curtain wall low section or something as a bridge to the two towers. The bridge section just looks weak when something connecting the towers and bridging the IKE should tie it all together and make one admire it. I don't see what is planned for that now doing that.

[denizen467]

This has been a great debate. Also, I think TUP emphasized what might be the real main issue here; more than the design, the age, or the gee-whiz spanning of a highway, it's the huge mass, and the fact that, as a federal government building and once the country's (world's?) largest postal facility, it's a colossal testament to Chicago's role as the capital of the interior of the country, just like ORD is the modern age's premier airport, this behemoth was situated to handle the nation's mail, atop one part of the nation's biggest rail juncture (and next to a river, and above a superhighway, under which a subway line runs...). It is a historical embodiment of national public works called on to serve a national interest on the largest of scales.

[denizen467]

Ok, now that I've romanticized it to bits, I just wonder, from a construction/engineering point of view, would it be extremely difficult or costly to carve out an interior courtyard from such a structure?

[LoyolaBeachView]

Originally Posted by museumparktom

LBV - Great pic! Did you have a chance to convert the northerly exposure? Do you work on the building?

Cool, thanks. No, my friend is an architect working on the project. If you have any specific questions, I might be able to coax info. out of him—though the details of the project probably couldn't be more public. Here's the view looking north:

[SolarWind]

April 20, 2007


^ On the left, soil sampling is taking place for the next building; brian_b mentioned this earlier in the week

[Eventually...Chicago]

SolarWind, as always, never disappoints.

I am a bit confused on what is going on around the tracks here. I take the metra out to the 'burbs every morning and thought that most of the development here was part of trio. Is the trio part (with the grocer & park over the parking deck) on the west side of des plaines and then allure is the east side?

Originally Posted by denizen467

This has been a great debate.

You it is interesting as to how often our discussions fall back to the central issues of historic preservation.

[honte]

Originally Posted by Norsider

Nothing of ours is on the line. The TIF money is a sunk cost. We paid it and at no time had a reasonable expectation of micromanaging how it was allocated. If they spend it on the post office or something else, that money's gone. We are not at risk for any financial loss. You and I have no skin in the game.

That sounds right out of Real Estate grad school. Heaven forbid the "micromanager" (eg "obstructionist")! I know that a lot of people agree with this notion, but really... So, the City just approves these TIF districts left and right, often with very little public input, taking money from the school system and other larger public pools. Then we're supposed to just allow them throw it around wherever they like, and we aren't allowed to recognize that this is public money that's being spent, or criticize how they spend it? I see.

And I just love that expression "skin in the game" when applied to real estate. One of Roeder's favorites. It implies that the development and growth of a city is merely a financial "game," just a giant dealmaker's paradise, with no human or social content whatsoever.

Originally Posted by Norsider

I'm sure you are disappointed at some level with the final proposal, but we simply have no way of knowing what obstacles were encountered during the planning process. Perhaps they considered the very thing you proposed but found it to be structurally or economically impossible. We just don't know enough about the process to make these type of value judgments.

Well, I think you make some large assumptions about my background and the background of people on this forum to claim that we have no knowledge of the obstacles.

That aside, all I can say is that preservation of structures can be expensive, yes, but we all also know that selective demolition and materials removal - much less, over a working interstate highway - ain't gonna be the cat's meow either.

I think it's worth noting, in all the years I've been following this, I cannot recall a single preservation compromise that yielded a deal where the developer couldn't make his profit, and a healthy one too. It takes a certain kind of developer with a certain creativity and care, yes. And granted, the developer might not get such a massive return (is this really a bad thing?). But even theoretically very thin-margin projects like the adaptive reuse of Medina Temple can be turned into cash-producing assets with a creative team and the selective use of City subsidies.

I agree with TUP and others that the value of this building is not entirely in its architectural merits, although obviously it's got a lot going for it too in that area. For me it's the whole package - the history of a building following the Burnham Plan years in advance, in expectation of its completion. The massiveness. The "gateway" aspect (although I can admit, it's rather drab in its current state). Etc etc.

This issue may be getting stale for others on this thread, so this will be my last reply to the subject. It's perfectly fine if we don't see eye-to-eye about this one.

[alex1]

i like the thought of a 50 story building in downtown Evanston. Hopefully, it has the potential to get other suburbs to rid themselves of density fear by seeing how successful Evanston has been.

it's amazing at how divergent Oak Park's path to development has been compared to Evanston. 5 years ago, I would have clumped the two suburbs together in terms of successful places. Nowadays, OakPark almost seems provincial and isolationist as it fights off high-rise plans.

[Marcu]

Originally Posted by firstcranialnerve

What is this Carley Tower on Illinois street? I haven't yet heard of any actual building proposals, just that he was speculating about a hotel and some retail.

Mostly speculation but this is the site. I think he owns the lot.

[Latoso]

Originally Posted by Eventually...Chicago

I just am not understanding the merits of the post office...

Exactly! As someone who eventually wants to live here, rather than someone who's actually from here, I can see how you wouldn't understand. We grew up with this building welcoming us when we came downtown. We have a vested emotional attachment to it, and because of the Burnham Plan it is uniquely entwined in our history. Is this the most beautiful building in the world or even Chicago? Not by a long shot. But using that argument is like having a doctor pull your mother off of life support because he thinks she's ugly and not worth spending $2 million a year to keep on life support. Next thing you'll be telling us that we should get over Marshall Field's changing to Macy's because they have more sales.

[spyguy]

http://chicagobusiness.com/cgi-bin/news.pl?id=24670

New Streeterville apartment tower on the market

A joint venture led by Golub & Co. has put a new 50-story luxury apartment building in Streeterville up for sale as the developer gets ready to build another one just as big right next door.

Chicago-based Golub has hired the Chicago office of Holliday Fenoglio Fowler L.P. to sell the Streeter, a 481-unit high-rise at 345 E. Ohio St. that is expected to fetch more than $200 million, or about $416,000 a unit.

Financed with $108 million in loans from Union Labor Life Insurance Co. and the California State Teachers’ Retirement System, the building opened to tenants last year and is currently about 75% leased.

"It's leasing up well ahead of expectations," says Matthew Lawton, senior managing director at Holliday.

Apartment-building values have risen the past few years, as investors have poured money into real estate and the strong leasing market has fueled big rent increases at many properties. Effective rents at downtown Class A buildings have jumped 12% in the past year, Mr. Lawton says. The Streeter is one of the most expensive apartment buildings in the city, with rents that average $2.46 a square foot.

The strong downtown leasing market also has encouraged developers to start building again. That includes Golub, which plans to begin construction of a second tower just east of the Streeter this summer. That building, expected to open in 2009, would stand about 50 stories tall and have 480 units.

Yet developers are more active in other parts of town than they are in Streeterville, easing concerns about new competition.

"There's nothing else that we're aware of in that submarket aside from (the second tower), and that's a good thing," says Ron DeVries, vice-president at Appraisal Research Counselors, a Chicago-based consulting firm that tracks the apartment market.

On the plus side, developers who convert apartments into condominiums have been busy in recent years, removing thousands of units from the market. With the condo market in a slump, condo converters have backed off, making it more likely that a traditional income-oriented apartment investor will buy the Streeter, Mr. Lawton says.

Golub's partners in the high-rise for sale are AEW Capital Partners and a unit of BlackRock Realty Advisors Inc. A Golub executive did not return a phone call for comment.

[firstcranialnerve]

I noticed there is no separate thread for the Cityfront Plaza III +700 ft building. On Emporis it says this building is approved. Is there a reason it is being neglected? It seems all other 700+ projects get a page.