CHICAGO | Boom rundown - everything over 12 floors. v5 - Page 177

Pandemonious · #**3521** Posted **Oct 3, 2007, 2:51 PM**

"hence the explosion of vertical turds in river north"

Classic quote Steely.

I am interested to see how Aqua and the Architectonica (LSE) tower turn out. They will likely have painted concrete, no? The Architectonica design is derivative of Chad Oppenheimer's ICE/ELEMENT designs from Miami, which I think have white painted concrete, but look fantastic compared to some of the junk in River North. We need some architecture like that here. The post-tensioned slabs allow for long thin spans with tons of glass to balance out the sleek concrete elements.

Contemporaine looks great with its raw concrete, but that could be hard to pull off and apply to lots of different designs IMO.

Hopefully, if well executed, Aqua and the LSE towers may start to set the bar for how concrete towers are finished in this city in the future. While I think stone looks beautiful as a cladding, an exposed concrete tower can look equally as stunning if done correctly.

Now that I think about it, there are some south loop buildings that are turning out alright (Vetro? etc.) that must have some painted elements... although they are very glassy, and not really comparable to Lincoln Park 2520 design-wise.

i_am_hydrogen · #**3522** Posted **Oct 3, 2007, 2:54 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by the urban politician

Since Antheus is proposing a highrise, I thought I'd post this here as well:

According to the first letter (upper left corner) of this page of the Hyde Park Herald, there will be a community meeting today at 7pm with Antheus Capital. This meeting will discuss developments planned.

Looks like the NIMBY's are lining up.

I just thought I'd make you guys aware, if any of you live in Hyde Park and would like to attend

Hopefully, we'll get some additional info on Gang's Windermere West.

Steely Dan · #**3523** Posted **Oct 3, 2007, 2:56 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pandemonious

Hopefully, if well executed, Aqua and the LSE towers may start to set the bar for how concrete towers are finished in this city (nation?) in the future.

the true shame is that Bertrand Goldberg tried his ass off to teach this city how to build exposed concrete towers, but it doesn't seem like anyone else wanted to listen.

hopefully Aqua is well executed, i have a lot of hope and expectation riding on that one.

Alliance · #**3524** Posted **Oct 3, 2007, 3:04 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

hopefully Aqua is well executed, i have a lot of hope and expectation riding on that one.

Don't we all.

As to the turds...people do care about the exterior, they just wan't the neveau riche appearance of luxury...which means pseduo victorian...not modernism.

Steely Dan · #**3525** Posted **Oct 3, 2007, 3:16 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alliance

As to the turds...people do care about the exterior, they just wan't the neveau riche appearance of luxury...which means pseduo victorian...not modernism.

no. if people actually cared about exterior appearances, then grand plaza (along with many others) would be 100% vacant.

Nowhereman1280 · #**3526** Posted **Oct 3, 2007, 3:31 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

no. if people actually cared about exterior appearances, then grand plaza (along with many others) would be 100% vacant.

Isn't it pretty empty, there have been condo's for sale signs on it ever since it was completed...

BVictor1 · #**3527** Posted **Oct 3, 2007, 3:36 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by museumparktom

I believe that there were some water issues as they were drilling the cassions. That was some time ago. Thought that they had resolved that issue. There should be some exit clauses in your contract. look closey. normally the developer has a window to deliver the project.

From what I've "heard", some of the caissons were drilled atop old water tunnels that weren't grouted.

I mean seriously, WTF...

Eventually...Chicago · #**3528** Posted **Oct 3, 2007, 3:39 PM**

I think people do care about exterior appearances but not more than three things:

-Location is more important
-Most people have tremendously bad taste
-They care more about money

How do you think walmart sells so much crap? They know americans will buy anything if it is cheap, close-by, and tacky.

But then again, uglies like vision on state and other masterpieces do serve a valuable role. 5-10 years from now they will be a bit more crappy and cheap and provide more affordable housing. Much like the sandburg village area does for the gold coast. Evaluating a building simply by its architectural merits in only part of the picture as would be evaluating a city simply by its population or crime rate or whatever.

I think we talked about this before, but my perspective is that as long as good buildings are continuously being built, i don't care how many crappy ones are.
i.e. as long as OMP, aqua, spire, waterview, trump,... are being built i can take an infinite number of allures, visions, ... as Judge Smails said "the world needs ditch diggers too" Cities need crappy buildings.

Marcu · #**3529** Posted **Oct 3, 2007, 3:46 PM**

They only care if it doesn't cost too much additional cash. They would be willing to pay 10k markup (from say 300k to 310k) for real masonry. Unfortunetly, the markup for masonry is much more than that.

Loopy · #**3530** Posted **Oct 3, 2007, 4:10 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by visitor1030

The Astoria Tower is a mystery to me. I called around and emailed key players and no one seems to know why the project hasn't taken off. I signed a contract in 2005 and after two years, virtually nothing has changed. I 'm thinking about jumping ship on this one. I could have went with the Marquee on Michigan, Vision on State or Library Tower-all progressing well, but instead I chose the Great Pumpkin. I visited Vetro last week and they seem to have a great deal on parking. I don't know what to do. From my research, it seems Astoria Tower won't be completed until late 2009 or early 2010---if it is completed at all (no kidding). I actually Googled the location and another business claimed 9th and State. All my friends and co-workers are laughing at me like Charlie Brown.

Call this guy. He might know something:

http://egov.cityofchicago.org/city/webpo...&entityName=Ward2&entityNameEnumValue=47

Rocket1 · #**3531** Posted **Oct 3, 2007, 4:25 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

we live in a country where the vast majority of people don't give two rat shits about how the exterior of their home looks, only what type of amenities and "luxury finishes" it offers on the inside. hence the explosion of vertical turds in river north.

Once a neighborhood goes down the painted concrete path, it seems like it would be difficult to get future builders to spend more on exteriors.

Since the people who benefit are the neighbors who get a more pleasant view from their River North vertical turd, rather than the residents of the new building themselves.

ChiPsy · #**3532** Posted **Oct 3, 2007, 4:58 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nowhereman1280

Isn't it [Grand Plaza] pretty empty, there have been condo's for sale signs on it ever since it was completed...

Yes; they've been there way past the permitted time and I've thought about calling the city...

...but the buildings probably look better with at least that much of their facades covered up. What a horrible, horrible addition to Chicago's cityscape.

Quick question (exemplified by Grand Plaza): Why do so many developers specify the same pusillanimous beige for their painted-concrete buildings? Why not a ruddy "sandstone" or warmer hue? Right now the Oakwood Hotel at Huron & State is being repainted with a darker color and although it still looks like crap, it at least relieves my tortured eyes from its beige-ville surroundings.

Alliance · #**3533** Posted **Oct 3, 2007, 5:03 PM**

Can we tear grand plaza down?

trvlr70 · #**3534** Posted **Oct 3, 2007, 5:23 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eventually...Chicago

I think people do care about exterior appearances but not more than three things:

-Location is more important
-Most people have tremendously bad taste
-They care more about money

How do you think walmart sells so much crap? They know americans will buy anything if it is cheap, close-by, and tacky.

But then again, uglies like vision on state and other masterpieces do serve a valuable role. 5-10 years from now they will be a bit more crappy and cheap and provide more affordable housing. Much like the sandburg village area does for the gold coast. Evaluating a building simply by its architectural merits in only part of the picture as would be evaluating a city simply by its population or crime rate or whatever.

I think we talked about this before, but my perspective is that as long as good buildings are continuously being built, i don't care how many crappy ones are.
i.e. as long as OMP, aqua, spire, waterview, trump,... are being built i can take an infinite number of allures, visions, ... as Judge Smails said "the world needs ditch diggers too" Cities need crappy buildings.

This is all true. Prospective owners definitely care most about the interiors of their condos. Take 1000 Lake Shore Plaza for example. It has got to be one of uglist buildings in Chicago and the location is unbeatable and some of the condos inside are nothing short of spectacular.

Nowhereman1280 · #**3535** Posted **Oct 3, 2007, 5:34 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by trvlr70

This is all true. Prospective owners definitely care most about the interiors of their condos. Take 1000 Lake Shore Plaza for example. It has got to be one of uglist buildings in Chicago and the location is unbeatable and some of the condos inside are nothing short of spectacular.

I actually kind of like that building, the green brick is HAWT! Its kind of cool in a retro way...

Dan in Chicago · #**3536** Posted **Oct 3, 2007, 5:59 PM**

Emporis has precise height data now for Michigan Avenue Tower II:

architectural height: 314'-1" (to tips of finials, +/- 1 inch)
roof height: 309'-9" (roof of mechanical penthouse)

The correct floor count is 28. Strangely enough, although the height is about the same as Tower 1, it seems to be an inch shorter, and the floor heights, roof height, and floor count are different. So they're not identical twins.

harryc · #**3537** Posted **Oct 3, 2007, 6:02 PM**

Pouring cement down a hole

Pouring stuff down a hole

Testing thingy for bottom of caisson. ( http://www.loadtest2005.net/loadtest-usa/about/ocell/ )

I beam in ground ( 85' )

View from above ( lighting is crap if the sun is out )
[ full set - zoomable http://picasaweb.google.com/harry.r.carmichael/155NWackerHeli ]

Didn't see any grinding bits yet.

trvlr70 · #**3538** Posted **Oct 3, 2007, 6:48 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nowhereman1280

I actually kind of like that building, the green brick is HAWT! Its kind of cool in a retro way...

Are you sure that's just not pity?

honte · #**3539** Posted **Oct 3, 2007, 7:43 PM**

^ I think he's right. Buildings like Grand Plaza, on the other hand, are impossible to debate.

Mr Downtown · #**3540** Posted **Oct 3, 2007, 8:00 PM**

requested by Ardecila yesterday, most taken from my living room this morning:

One Place, with the XFitness special work in the basement finally done, is now going up quickly.

Amli900, topped out, but no exterior cladding yet (at least on the east side):

Burnham Pointe extended its tower crane last weekend. The parking garage is up to the second level:

Roosevelt Collection has the garage base well under way. I suspect they might be hoping for a Thanksgiving 2008 opening for the retail center:

Lexington Park Place is up to the second level, just barely peeking out from behind the barricade:

[/war]