CHICAGO | Boom rundown - everything over 12 floors. v5 - Page 31

spyguy · #**601** Posted **Apr 25, 2007, 1:24 PM**

http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/chi-0704240722apr25,0,3273072.story?coll=chi-business-utl

NAPERVILLE GRAND:

In Naperville, construction recently got under way on a $43 million, 144-room luxury hotel being developed by Calamos Real Estate LLC, a private subsidiary of Calamos Family Partners Inc. of Naperville.

The hotel, which will include fine dining and room rates in the $200-a-night range, is expected to open in summer 2008, said Daniel Slack, president of Calamos Real Estate.

The CityGate Centre Grand, as the hotel will be called, will carry the flag of Chicago-based Preferred Hotels and Resorts LLC. The hotel is part of an approximately $300 million mixed-use project. Once completed in 2010, the development will include 1 million square feet of offices, 150,000 square feet of retail, the hotel and a 700-seat performing arts center.

"What's really interesting is that we're registered with the U.S. Green Building Council to be certified as a green project with a green hotel," Slack said.

---------------

I believe this is a highrise but I will try and find more info if possible.

Here are some renderings I posted a while back on SSC:

Webcam with groundbreaking sign
http://citygatecam.calamos.com/local/viewer/index2.shtml

sentinel · #**602** Posted **Apr 25, 2007, 1:34 PM**

^^^ Too bad it isn't in Chicago.

bnk · #**603** Posted **Apr 25, 2007, 1:53 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by sentinel

^^^ Too bad it isn't in Chicago.

It is in Chicagoland, would you rather not have had it at all?

VivaLFuego · #**604** Posted **Apr 25, 2007, 1:57 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by honte

Ah ha, they are showing the corner of 68th and South Shore in the render. Which means they are taking down not one, but two incredible lakefront homes for this. I now officially despise this project. Two of the nicest houses on the far South Side.

The corner house at 68th street is really great - even better than the one Lee Bey was writing about on his web site.

Honestly, I'm still for the highrise; I would love to see South Shore as beautiful (and as recognized) as the north lakeshore. And of course, countless beautiful single-family lakefront homes were bulldozed to build the awesome wall of highrises on the lakeshore, and for the most part(with a few clear exceptions), I'm glad they were (though I wish some of them had been more thoroughly documented photographically).

All that said, there are definitely other parcels that would be more desirable sites for new highrises in south shore; but as we know, in real estate development it's not a top-down decree of where you can build your tower, it's simply whatever the developer can get the rights to.

VivaLFuego · #**605** Posted **Apr 25, 2007, 1:58 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by sentinel

^^^ Too bad it isn't in Chicago.

I think it's great to see development like this in Chicago's sprawly suburbs. There's been alot of good new higher-density stuff in downtowns throughout the area, particularly Des Plaines, Arlington Heights, Palatine, and Elmhurst come to mind. Great to see Sprawlcity (Naperville) joining in too.

BVictor1 · #**606** Posted **Apr 25, 2007, 2:39 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by honte

Ah ha, they are showing the corner of 68th and South Shore in the render. Which means they are taking down not one, but two incredible lakefront homes for this. I now officially despise this project. Two of the nicest houses on the far South Side.

The corner house at 68th street is really great - even better than the one Lee Bey was writing about on his web site.

I wouldn't say they are some of the nicest houses. They have some nice detailing. One has been sonverted to a daycare center I believe. There are plenty of these types of homes just a few blocks west in the Highlands. While I would also like to see them saves, I know that ain't going to happen.

sentinel · #**607** Posted **Apr 25, 2007, 2:57 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by bnk

It is in Chicagoland, would you rather not have had it at all?

Don't patronize me bnk, that's a stupid comment; I'm not a 10 year old who has to decide whether or not he wants to eat his broccoli in order to play 10 minutes on the Wii. I was merely stating that it would be nice to have these types of massive developments in the City as compared to way out in Naperville. Chicago could defintely support something like this and I wish developers would understant that as well. Get over it.

kayosthery · #**608** Posted **Apr 25, 2007, 3:05 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by sentinel

Don't patronize me bnk, that's a stupid comment; I'm not a 10 year old who has to decide whether or not he wants to eat his broccoli in order to play 10 minutes on the Wii. I was merely stating that it would be nice to have these types of massive developments in the City as compared to way out in Naperville. Chicago could defintely support something like this and I wish developers would understant that as well. Get over it.

Roosevelt Collection?

altfelix · #**609** Posted **Apr 25, 2007, 3:48 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by spyguy

http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/chi-0704240722apr25,0,3273072.story?coll=chi-business-utl

NAPERVILLE GRAND:

In Naperville, construction recently got under way on a $43 million, 144-room luxury hotel being developed by Calamos Real Estate LLC, a private subsidiary of Calamos Family Partners Inc. of Naperville.

The hotel, which will include fine dining and room rates in the $200-a-night range, is expected to open in summer 2008, said Daniel Slack, president of Calamos Real Estate.

The CityGate Centre Grand, as the hotel will be called, will carry the flag of Chicago-based Preferred Hotels and Resorts LLC. The hotel is part of an approximately $300 million mixed-use project. Once completed in 2010, the development will include 1 million square feet of offices, 150,000 square feet of retail, the hotel and a 700-seat performing arts center.

"What's really interesting is that we're registered with the U.S. Green Building Council to be certified as a green project with a green hotel," Slack said.

---------------

I believe this is a highrise but I will try and find more info if possible.

The hotel is a highrise, I see at least 13 floors, plus this tidbit appeared in the minutes of the Naperville Plan Commission late last summer [height increase to 165 from 155 ft]:

http://www.naperville.il.us/emplibrary/PCM09202006.pdf

alex1 · #**610** Posted **Apr 25, 2007, 3:52 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by VivaLFuego

I think it's great to see development like this in Chicago's sprawly suburbs. There's been alot of good new higher-density stuff in downtowns throughout the area, particularly Des Plaines, Arlington Heights, Palatine, and Elmhurst come to mind. Great to see Sprawlcity (Naperville) joining in too.

I don't think this development is in downtown Naperville. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong.

Naperville's downtown has been densifying for a long time now. They've been putting up condos, new businesses and working on their riverwalk for as long as I can remember. They've probably got the #2 or #3 suburban downtown in terms of size in the chicagoland area at this time (Oak Park may or may not be larger).

kayosthery · #**611** Posted **Apr 25, 2007, 4:05 PM**

No, it is not in downtown Naperville. It is just North of I-88 off of RT. 59. Fox Valley mall is just a little South of the proposed location. Downtown Naperville would be about 3 or 4 miles to the Southeast of this development.

Tom In Chicago · #**612** Posted **Apr 25, 2007, 4:28 PM**

This wedge shaped building on the left in this rendering is already complete. . . it's quite nice for a suburban structure and can be seen for miles east of rt. 59 driving out west on I-88. . .

Norsider · #**613** Posted **Apr 25, 2007, 4:56 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by kayosthery

No, it is not in downtown Naperville. It is just North of I-88 off of RT. 59. Fox Valley mall is just a little South of the proposed location. Downtown Naperville would be about 3 or 4 miles to the Southeast of this development.

Yes indeed. This project is nothing more than a mixed use shopping/working center. Either you drive there to your office or you drive there to shop. This project will do close to nothing to improve density. This project is hardly blazing a trail either. It's just adding to similar malls/offices all up and down the East/West corridor - except that it's on the far west end. This is not a solution to sprawl - this IS sprawl.

forumly_chgoman · #**614** Posted **Apr 25, 2007, 5:00 PM**

Agreed.....though with a little height......then again there are plenty of office parks with building with similiar height.....sprawl......um...yes

X-fib · #**615** Posted **Apr 25, 2007, 5:02 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by honte

Ah ha, they are showing the corner of 68th and South Shore in the render. Which means they are taking down not one, but two incredible lakefront homes for this. I now officially despise this project. Two of the nicest houses on the far South Side.

The corner house at 68th street is really great - even better than the one Lee Bey was writing about on his web site.

This is my old neighborhood. And I agree, it is the character of these homes that shapes the impression of the area. Although I am all for skyscapers this is not a good place for one.

Segun · #**616** Posted **Apr 25, 2007, 7:00 PM**

Its bizarre, Chicagoland suburbs are starting to resemble TOD developments in areas such as DC, Toronto or even Los Angeles, but the city has yet to catch up, even with vast amounts of space near rapid transit stops.

Marcu · #**617** Posted **Apr 25, 2007, 7:28 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Segun

Its bizarre, Chicagoland suburbs are starting to resemble TOD developments in areas such as DC, Toronto or even Los Angeles, but the city has yet to catch up, even with vast amounts of space near rapid transit stops.

Toronto is probably a better example. DC "suburbs", especially those around metro stops, are basically the city since DC itself has very little land, height restrictions, and those "suburbs" are sometimes 2 or 3 metro stops away from the heart of DC. It would be like the North/Clybourn stop on the red line officially being Virginia or Maryland. LA TODs are not really TODs since transit use is so low. They're mostly a product of high land values.

Norsider · #**618** Posted **Apr 25, 2007, 7:55 PM**

Sorry if this was posted already...

Hamilton Takes Out $26M Loan, Plans Tower

By Gina Kenny of GlobeSt.com

Tuesday, April 24, 2007 - CHICAGO-Hamilton Partners, based in Itasca, has received a $26-million short-term loan for 29 S. LaSalle St. and 39 S. LaSalle St. The Commercial Mortgage division of Allstate Real Estate Investment Group, based in Northbrook, provided the three-year loan which has a floating-rate with an interest rate cap and has “flexibility to prepay,” says Sam Davis, senior managing director of Allstate Real Estate Investment Group. David Tomfohrde, with Chicago-based Draper & Kramer Inc., arranged the financing on Allstate’s behalf. The loan is 75% of the value of the properties, Davis tells GlobeSt.com.
The short-term loans are typically given to allow a building owner to lease-up a building in preparation of selling it or to allow a developer to finalize business plans, Davis says. The two buildings are located next to each other on LaSalle. Hamilton Partners has plans to construct a large office tower on the site, Davis says. Representatives from Hamilton declined to be interviewed for this story.

The building at 39 S. LaSalle St. was designed by William Le Baron Jenney and is a landmark. The buildings are currently 75% leased with more than 100 small tenants located in the two buildings, Davis tells GlobeSt.com.

VivaLFuego · #**619** Posted **Apr 25, 2007, 8:30 PM**

I suppose the fact that 39 S. LaSalle is a designated landmark is meaningless after the precedent set with the Farwell...

This could still be a decent development if they treat 39 S. with the respect it deserves....i.e. the facade and lobby preserved and restored in their entirety, and as much of the original structure as is feasible to save.

spyguy · #**620** Posted **Apr 25, 2007, 8:44 PM**

^Decent? I don't think so. The new tower is so plain that I wouldn't even want it if it were on a vacant lot. Hopefully companies don't want it either and will opt for a Buck or Hines building instead.