CHICAGO | Boom rundown - everything over 12 floors. v5

[TowerGuy37]

WOW!! this is one of those projects that...had a building demolished, clerared the site in a week, got a permit quickly and broke ground a month later! This is going to be great a building i think...its rising pretty fast already!

[Norsider]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

^ yeah, congress is defintiely my mental cut-off for the southern border of the loop. everything south of congress is south loop.

To me, the "Loop" is the entire "peninsula" bordered by Lake Michigan and the Chicago River on 3 sides, and then Congress on the south.

If you think about it, technically speaking a loop is just the physical loop itself. There's nothing very special about being inside it as opposed to outside. After all, buildings directly outside the loop (like this one on Lake and Wells) are nearer to the actual loop than a building at the exact center (like 3 First National Plaza).

[Norsider]

Originally Posted by BorisMolotov

Another one bites the dust!

Now this is in the loop, correct? How many more surface parking lots are there strictly WITHIN the loop? I can't imagine many more, am I correct in this assumption. Wouldn't that be great if there wasn't a single parking lot dowtown?

I love it. Watching stand-alone parking garages and surface lots be demolished is a source of truly exquisite pleasure.

[Dan in Chicago]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

^ yeah, congress is defintiely my mental cut-off for the southern border of the loop. everything south of congress is south loop.

There actually is an official boundary. The "Loop" has 2 clearly defined meanings, and either one is acceptable. The physical and traditional use refers to the ring formed by the elevated tracks. The community area named the Loop is bounded by the river, the lake, and Roosevelt Road. The name "South Loop" is normally applied to the southern part from Congress to Roosevelt, and the area south of Roosevelt is the Near South Side.

[DANTHEDISCOMAN]

Originally Posted by TowerGuy37

WOW!! this is one of those projects that...had a building demolished, clerared the site in a week, got a permit quickly and broke ground a month later! This is going to be great a building i think...its rising pretty fast already!

What?! The site sat empty after demolition for probably 5-7 months without any activity! As far as it being a "great building" we have yet to see a west elevation or rendering which worries me greatly.

[SamInTheLoop]

Originally Posted by HK Chicago

Sidewalk canopy has been going up at Staybridge over the last 2 days.

At least something new has happened at the site! I hope this means construction will begin by mid-June at the latest...

[SamInTheLoop]

Ok - somebody needs to explain to me what the owner of the IBM building is thinking. On Bidclerk.com again, they are apparently still planning conversion to condo of floors 3 to 14? 3 to 14 - are you kidding me!? The owners here are clearly desperate.... The only way this would be successful is if they would price these very aggressively - priced to sell - unless they are very serious about pricing to move units, they can forget about this plan, because most units will not have views...

[Loopy]

^I cringe to think how they are going to provide operable windows; and the visual impact of that on the exterior of this priceless building.

[ardecila]

Landmark protection?

[denizen467]

Originally Posted by Loopy

^I cringe to think how they are going to provide operable windows

Is this a city requirement for residential buildings? Does it apply to conversions too?

Can anyone cite any postwar office buildings converted to residential use, to use as examples of converting non-operable to operable windows? The only example that comes to mind is the Ward's HQ, although there they replaced the facade entirely.

[BVictor1]

You are now able to comment of the subject of the article on their website.

http://chicagojournal.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&SubSectionID=60&ArticleID=3039&TM=20121.99

5/23/2007 10:00:00 PM Email this article • Print this article
South Loop residents heat up over development
Panel discussion brings concerns to the table

By HAYLEY GRAHAM
Editor


A panel discussion became heated when residents voiced their continued concerns over new developments at the Greater South Loop Association's meeting on May 19.

The debate covered a variety of issues from construction noise to design plans, and led into an introduction of one of the latest proposed developments in the South Loop.

The panel consisted of experts in urban planning and government officials, including 2nd Ward alderman Bob Fioretti and 3rd Ward alderman Pat Dowell. Benet Haller, director of Urban Planning for Chicago's Department of Planning and Mitch Carrel, chair of Land Use at Vedder Price, also sat on the panel.

Both Fioretti and Dowell stressed that increased communication between themselves, residents and developers will be key to ensuring that the needs and concerns of the South Loop community are met.

"Developers only go to the usual suspects, and need to talk to the condo associations," Dowell said.

And Fioretti reiterated what he had said throughout his election campaign, that he will only grant permits to developers with solid records and good relationships with the communities they have built in.

One resident who lives at 13th and Indiana spoke out saying that he has no problem with high rises, but added he would like to be informed on the process, which was the consensus among many of the people in attendance.

"We don't know anything about what's going on," he said.

However, others at the meeting also said it is the responsibility of the residents to seek out information on new development in the area and become more involved in the community.

Following the panel discussion, one of the newest proposed developments in the South Loop was introduced by its developers, Rokas International.

The 37-story high rise will be located at 21st and Prairie, and will include 325 units, 365 parking spaces and 7 townhouses, with about an additional 3,000 square feet of commercial space.

Steve Ryniewicz, a principal architect at FitzGerald Associates Architects, which is designing the building, said they took many the concerns and ideas of residents in the area into account while designing the building. He said that even though development problems have left people in the neighborhoods feeling sour, he is trying to work with the community to protect the Prairie District.

"We've taken a lot of comments back, and this is where we are at today," Ryniewicz said.

The building was well received by most South Loop residents at the meeting, and some stating that they liked the appearance of the building.

However, some people still had reservations, and are worried that the South Loop is losing its charm because of the incoming high-rises. Some residents said they had moved into the lofts of the Prairie District for the views, but are now living in "caves" shadowed by the towers surrounding them.

[wrab]

Originally Posted by BVictor1

..... Some residents said they had moved into the lofts of the Prairie District for the views, but are now living in "caves" shadowed by the towers surrounding them.

It takes some work to find a place with guaranteed views, here and in just about every other market I can think of - properties abutting parkland or water are usually safe - thing is, you'll pay for the privilege, because lots of other people want guaranteed views, too. Supply & demand.

Or, you can buy a place w/o the guarantee at a lower price and then cynically manipulate the political process to prevent any view-obstructing developments in the future.

Or, you can just fail to use the normal due dilligence, in which case you are entitled to whine.

[honte]

Originally Posted by Loopy

^I cringe to think how they are going to provide operable windows; and the visual impact of that on the exterior of this priceless building.

Yep. Scary as hell.

Most annoying about all of this is that the City seems to be asleep at the wheel, yet again. This building should have been protected instantly once the talk of residential conversion had started. They could have worked out an agreement, just like they do with so many other residential conversions downtown. Why they are not looking at this matter is beyond me.

Also, how the hell are they going to get a residential lobby in there? Are they going to put up some gyp. board partitions in Mies's grand, open lobby? Is there going to be some "softening" of the so-called (Kamin again) "wind-swept plaza" to attract residents? They've already destroyed a lot of the typography around the plaza, which for a Bauhaus master is rather like ripping the eyebrows off of a supermodel.

Last, this seems to go against all logic we've discussed here about why mixed-use buildings aren't being built in Chicago any longer. What about prospective office tenants? Will they want to be in such an environment, or are the developers shooting themselves in the feet?

[wrab]

The 55 E Monroe ("Park Monroe") conversion saga gives some ominous clues as to what to expect with IBM. And AON. These mid-century office buildings have enormous floor plates that don't covert well to multiple residences, esp light & ventillation. You wind up with a lot of near-windowless shotgun layouts. I pulled these from the Park Monroe website:




Awfully dark and dank, living in a unit without windows in the bedrooms or bathrooms or kitchen or whatever. Don't care how good the view is.

I'm curious if anyone on the board knows of an office project that has been specifically designed from the outset to allow for residential conversion should market conditions change? Seems like a good, pragmatic factor to add to the design/development process.

[budman]

Originally Posted by wrabbit

The 55 E Monroe ("Park Monroe") conversion saga gives some ominous clues as to what to expect with IBM. And AON. These mid-century office buildings have enormous floor plates that don't covert well to multiple residences, esp light & ventillation. You wind up with a lot of near-windowless shotgun layouts. I pulled these from the Park Monroe website:




Awfully dark and dank, living in a unit without windows in the bedrooms or bathrooms or kitchen or whatever. Don't care how good the view is.

I'm curious if anyone on the board knows of an office project that has been specifically designed from the outset to allow for residential conversion should market conditions change? Seems like a good, pragmatic factor to add to the design/development process.

^ I used to work in this building, and in fact on one of the floors that they are converting to condos, so I stopped by the sales office last week out of curiosity. Not only are the prices comparable to other high end developments (like Waterview, for example), but the model unit was finished in upgrades only...so you really had no idea what the standard finishes were, and the upgrades were really expensive (eg, the kitchen in the model was a $65,000 upgrade!). The views you get will be very nice, but as was pointed out above, there arent many windows per square foot. I was told they are 75% sold. I cant believe people would buy a unit here when the competition is so clearly superior. I hope I havent insulted anyone, that is not my intent.

[lalucedm]

I had thought that one of the requirements for all residential buildings was for all bedrooms and kitchens to have natural light and ventilation, hence all those weird half-height walls in the bedrooms you see in the floor plans for various new South Loop highrises. How are they getting away with rooms, like that master bedroom, with no natural light here?

[Marcu]

Originally Posted by lalucedm

I had thought that one of the requirements for all residential buildings was for all bedrooms and kitchens to have natural light and ventilation, hence all those weird half-height walls in the bedrooms you see in the floor plans for various new South Loop highrises. How are they getting away with rooms, like that master bedroom, with no natural light here?

They probably call it a "den". The trick is commonly used by developers in the exurbs where parcels are zoned for 3 bedrooms (in spite of the 40,000 sq/ft) so there's tons of 3 bed room/3 dens houses on the market.

[Chicago Shawn]

Originally Posted by SamInTheLoop

Ok - somebody needs to explain to me what the owner of the IBM building is thinking. On Bidclerk.com again, they are apparently still planning conversion to condo of floors 3 to 14? 3 to 14 - are you kidding me!? The owners here are clearly desperate.... The only way this would be successful is if they would price these very aggressively - priced to sell - unless they are very serious about pricing to move units, they can forget about this plan, because most units will not have views...

Its not a condo conversion, Prime Group is considering putting in a hotel though, which does not need opperable windows. They want to leave the lobby as intact as possible, while taking over the low-rise elevator banks and putting the hotel lobby on an above ground floor.

Btw, has anyone seen the new backlit floor service numbers on the elevator banks? It looks awful, a big distraction in a minimalist meisian lobby.

[Chicago Shawn]

Originally Posted by honte

Yep. Scary as hell.

Most annoying about all of this is that the City seems to be asleep at the wheel, yet again. This building should have been protected instantly once the talk of residential conversion had started. They could have worked out an agreement, just like they do with so many other residential conversions downtown. Why they are not looking at this matter is beyond me.

The city is not at all asleep at the wheel. Any conversion at IBM will be monitored very closely, I have a pretty good source on this.

[BVictor1]

Went by Staybridge Suites site this morning. There are now settlement marks paind along the curb, and there has been some potholing in the southeast corner along the alley. This one should be kicking off in the very near future.