CHICAGO | Boom rundown - everything over 12 floors. v5 - Page 49

Loopy · #**961** Posted **May 13, 2007, 8:25 PM**

I wish they would just re-skin the whole thing if there is no way to stop them from doing this project.

Here is Goettsch's rendering of the chimera 55 East Monroe:

hoju · #**962** Posted **May 13, 2007, 8:46 PM**

My god, I can't believe these people are allowed to perform this desecration right in the front row of the skyline. How in the world did this get approved?

Kngkyle · #**963** Posted **May 13, 2007, 9:04 PM**

Horrible. Just horrible. The absolute WORST project in this boom. You lot should try and stop it from happening.

Alliance · #**964** Posted **May 13, 2007, 10:53 PM**

10 E Delaware might still be worse.

It'll still be a laughingstock...the ADD building.

Tom Servo · #**965** Posted **May 14, 2007, 1:11 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Loopy

OMG! Please just tear the whole thing down!

ardecila · #**966** Posted **May 14, 2007, 1:44 AM**

I'm pretty sure I'm the only one that likes it... I've always hated the visually boring, oppressive mullions of that building. The Park Monroe makes it so that, from Grant Park below, all you see is the renovated portion.

Jaroslaw · #**967** Posted **May 14, 2007, 2:35 AM**

What happened to the Construction Starts Calendar? Dan was doing it before, and then I thought it got moved to the first page, but I can't find it there...

pyropius · #**968** Posted **May 14, 2007, 5:00 AM**

At least they got rid of the whoop-de-doo on top. And if they redid the whole thing it would be bland, but acceptable. However, in its currently planned state, it's offensive.

Marcu · #**969** Posted **May 14, 2007, 7:03 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by pyropius

At least they got rid of the whoop-de-doo on top. And if they redid the whole thing it would be bland, but acceptable. However, in its currently planned state, it's offensive.

Definitely. The thing on top was the worst part of the project so at least they got rid of that. I'm really hoping it won't turn out as bad as the render.

honte · #**970** Posted **May 14, 2007, 7:37 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by hoju

My god, I can't believe these people are allowed to perform this desecration right in the front row of the skyline. How in the world did this get approved?

The city can't do anything about the design unless it's landmarked or within a district. And since this one is not, and there is a foolish unwritten policy that most modern buildings aren't considered for landmarking, they can't say anything.

a chicago bearcat · #**971** Posted **May 14, 2007, 10:59 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by honte

The city can't do anything about the design unless it's landmarked or within a district. And since this one is not, and there is a foolish unwritten policy that most modern buildings aren't considered for landmarking, they can't say anything.

there is no such unwritten rule
the preservation of the recent past is a real aspect of preservation
this building simply does not fall within the definition of a good building
let alone landmarkable
it's just unremarkable

and for example the inland steel building,
860-880 LSD, and daley center are all landmarked

it's true that most international style modernist buildings aren't considered for landmarking
it's also true that most art deco style modern buildings aren't considered for landmarking
and that most classical structures in the city aren't considered for landmarking

there will be more landmarked as time goes on, we must remember that the palmolive building and tree studios were not completely landmarked until this decade, preservation takes time for reflection, and sometimes the threats of demolition. That simply hasn't arose for much of the cities imitation mies modernism. Plus much of the modernist stock in this city could disappear without anyone noticing, just like many of the nondescript deco, chicago school, and italianate buildings that preceded them.

itsnotrequired · #**972** Posted **May 14, 2007, 12:08 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by AdrianXSands

OMG! Please just tear the whole thing down!

Hey, not unless they find me a new job...I work in the building.

SamInTheLoop · #**973** Posted **May 14, 2007, 1:04 PM**

Saw an entry on Friday for what was quite obviously The Wit Hotel in Bidclerk.com. The status was listed as Awarded and mentioned that all trades were let, with a construction start in June. It's about time for this one! I was just wondering about the status of this project last week...

DANTHEDISCOMAN · #**974** Posted **May 14, 2007, 1:11 PM**

Soil testing rig being assembled this morning at the site of the proposed washington and wells apartment tower.

trvlr70 · #**975** Posted **May 14, 2007, 1:30 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SamInTheLoop

Saw an entry on Friday for what was quite obviously The Wit Hotel in Bidclerk.com. The status was listed as Awarded and mentioned that all trades were let, with a construction start in June. It's about time for this one! I was just wondering about the status of this project last week...

Excellent. This one has been in site prep for so long that I wanted to downgrade it back to just "approved proposal". I hope the design has seen a redesign.

VivaLFuego · #**976** Posted **May 14, 2007, 2:25 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by DANTHEDISCOMAN

Soil testing rig being assembled this morning at the site of the proposed washington and wells apartment tower.

You mean 215 Washington? or whatever its called now? The one developed by Jupiter, designed by SCB?

honte · #**977** Posted **May 14, 2007, 4:48 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by a chicago bearcat

there is no such unwritten rule
the preservation of the recent past is a real aspect of preservation
this building simply does not fall within the definition of a good building
let alone landmarkable
it's just unremarkable

and for example the inland steel building,
860-880 LSD, and daley center are all landmarked

it's true that most international style modernist buildings aren't considered for landmarking
it's also true that most art deco style modern buildings aren't considered for landmarking
and that most classical structures in the city aren't considered for landmarking

there will be more landmarked as time goes on, we must remember that the palmolive building and tree studios were not completely landmarked until this decade, preservation takes time for reflection, and sometimes the threats of demolition. That simply hasn't arose for much of the cities imitation mies modernism. Plus much of the modernist stock in this city could disappear without anyone noticing, just like many of the nondescript deco, chicago school, and italianate buildings that preceded them.

Trust me, I've been down this road before. Unless a building is something universally - and I do mean universally - regarded as extraordinary, the "unwritten rule" applies. Landmarks is inundated with requests for landmarking, and anything post-war will be the last they would consider (if ever), by default. But there is more to it than that - there is a general feeling that these buildings are not "ripe" for consideration, meaning that there isn't any merit for their protection simply due to their age. Very short-sighted policy if you ask me.

As far as threats of demolition not having arisen for our modernist legacy .... well, I'd ask you to look a little harder. We've lost a lot of great work in the last 5 years.

Concerning MidAmerica being "unremarkable," I think a number of people on this forum, myself included, would take this to task. But since we've been down that road before, I won't get into it again.

Anyway, my post wasn't to suggest that MidAmerica Plaza be landmarked - I wouldn't dream of it, given the above. I was meaning to explain the city's ability to do anything beyond "influencing" design moves by developers. Sans landmarking, they have no control.

spyguy · #**978** Posted **May 14, 2007, 5:46 PM**

May Plan Commission

A proposed Residential Business Planned Development submitted by Banner, LLC, for
the property located at 1431 South Blue Island Avenue. The Application allows for the
construction of a twelve (12) story building with 130 dwelling units and 8,562 square feet
of ground floor retail. The Applicant also proposes to construct a 4,000 square foot TCF
Bank branch with nineteen (19) parking spaces. (25th Ward)

A proposed Residential Business Central Area Parking Planned Development submitted by
210-218 W Lake LLC, for the property located at 200-18 West Lake Street. The Applicant
proposes to develop a 43-story mixed-use building containing 335 rental dwelling units, 152
of which will be efficiency units. The project includes 549 parking spaces consisting of 184
accessory parking spaces and 365 non-accessory parking spaces. The project will also
include approximately 10,000 square feet of ground floor retail. (42nd Ward)

A proposed Amendment to Residential Business Planned Development No. 1005 submitted
by Urban R2 Development Company for the property generally located at 618-30 West
Washington Street. The applicant proposes to amend the development to increase the
dwelling unit count from 190 to 215. The approved project includes a 250-foot mixed-use
building to contain approximately 14,000 square feet of ground floor retail, dwelling units
and 255 parking spaces. (42nd Ward)

observer · #**979** Posted **May 14, 2007, 5:53 PM**

Does anyone know what building is being planned at the southeast corner of Clark and Harrison?...the parking lot has been recently roped off....I guess it would be apartments....I have not heard about a condo tower for this site.

Sir Isaac Newton · #**980** Posted **May 14, 2007, 5:59 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by observer

Does anyone know what building is being planned at the southeast corner of Clark and Harrison?...the parking lot has been recently roped off....I guess it would be apartments....I have not heard about a condo tower for this site.

I wish your guess was right....but someone mentioned on SSC that they had heard that they are putting a drive-through bank there, with a few parking spots as well.