CHICAGO | Boom rundown - everything over 12 floors. v5

[Alliance]

Originally Posted by honte

I am sorry, but it's highly inappropriate to call someone a NIMBY simply because they don't like something.

I'm not. Its an issue of what arguments they're using to attempt to justify not building it.

Originally Posted by honte

As far as I know, the Sears Tower is in no one's backyard, so there are no NIMBYs.

Then why are people complaining about not being able to do a 360 walk aounrd the building to look at unobstructed sides?

Originally Posted by honte

There is a huge difference between people going out of their way to voice educated points of view on a subject that will affect the whole city, versus someone who is whining because they don't want to lose some personal convenience.

I've heard all of the latter and none of the former. This building has tremendous value to the city and the Southwest Loop.

Originally Posted by honte

I have to tell you, these are perfectly legitimate opinions, even if they don't happen to agree with your personal agenda.

My agenda is the advancement of Chicago. Whats yours?

...and just because they agree with your weak arguments does not make thier points valid.

Originally Posted by honte

You are essentially arguing that anyone can have carte blanche right to do whatever they feel like in the city, so long as there will be an increase in density and streetlife. Are these the values that drive all positive change in an urban environment - so much, that they should go unchecked. It should be perfectly obvious that this is an unacceptable situation

At this point, someone will surely point out astutely that the owners of the Sears Tower own the land and they have every right to do what they see fit with their property, within applicable zoning etc. Yes, of course they do. But there is still validity in discussion and questioning if this is right for the future of the city, especially around one of its most noted landmarks. In fact, I would argue that this is precisely the type of "NIMBY" dialogue that is so glaringly absent from Chicago in general these days - yielding rather disgusting results in neighborhoods citywide.

I never argued for a blank check. Such overdramatism isn't constructive, especially if you're trying to present a credible argument. I said a tiny building and redevelopment of a completely useless plaza would provide drastic support to both revamp Sears (of whose future you claim to be so concerned about) and to expand the dead end skyline.

I really fail to see how not being able to see every effing square inch of Sears' facade qualifies as a significant loss to the city and how the aforementioned benefits of such a building is an unessecary gain. So, if the reasons against the building can't seem to get off the BLOCK the building is being built on, I really don't see any of your points. This is a tremendous opportunity for the area. Whining about views and how the new building (which greedily encompasses a third of the lot) might "clutter" the butchest building in the world is simply baseless NIMBYism.

[harryc]

On a rainy Sunday - not (totally) deserted.

[Chicago Shawn]

Originally Posted by ardecila

Hmm.... I didn't suggest that the developers lower their unit counts, only that they fill the lot lines first and see where that gets them height-wise. If it does put them above the height limit, that's okay... but you don't end up with random little bits of greenspace and parking everywhere, and ridiculous setbacks above the parking floors, which seem to be where the West Loop is headed.

I'm all for as much density as possible, but let's stop equating height with density and figure out a way to do high-density between 8 and 15 stories. Paris and other European cities manage to do it (albeit with smaller square footage per unit).

If am for density too, but remember this is Chicago not Europe. European cities do not have obsurdly high parking ratio requirements and our residential units, especially new construction on average are larger, and additionally there are zoning restrictions on the number of studio units allowed in each new building. Mid-rise buildings here will almost always be less dense than thier European counterparts. And more than anything I want the parking above or below grade, not at grade, which butchers the streetscape in this neighborhood. Continuing to build low and mid-rise will cement the development future of this area, as NIMBYism will only continue to grow, especially with the context argument becoming more justified over time. We should be planning for the future not just the present.

Anyway moving on....


I like the tower idea on the Sears plaza, allthough I will withold judgment untill I see something a bit more detailed. The Plaza as it exists now is an awful barren space that is closed to the public half the time. I could see the Skydeck entrance being encorperated into the retail compenent, which I persume would be enormously successful.

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by Chicago Shawn

Continuing to build low and mid-rise will cement the development future of this area, as NIMBYism will only continue to grow, especially with the context argument becoming more justified over time.

What's wrong with a uniform building context? Developers come in and build tall buildings to capitalize on views and economies of scale, and then they sap up all the demand in the area. If the building height in West Loop was capped at 12 stories, there would be enough demand to develop a dense neighborhood all the way out to Western in a matter of a decade or two.

[DHamp]

I don't think it would be the end of the world if the West Loop consisted largely of 12 story buildings from the river to Wester Ave. We just need the right kind of 12 story buildings. There's a big difference between a 12 story building with no ground level retail, 4 stories of parking garage with a 1:2 resident to parking space ratio and a 12 story building with 2 levels of underground parking and vibrant street life.

While I'd love to see some taller buildings sneak through, a 12 story plateau in the West Loop wouldn't be the worst thing in the world if done right. It's not a problem if it looks different than the North Loop or the South Loop, which it will regardless. Unfortunately, we don't hear anything from WLCO stating any of this; these groups need a more complete platform than simply cutting down height if they really want to acheive their goals, which may or may not be totally bad depending on the case.

Also, after a couple of days to calm down and relflect on the Sears thing, I've also come to the conclusion that it wouldn't be the worst thing in the world if a tower were built on that plaza. It's not my preference. The ST parking garage next door is my preference -- the wouldn't even need to use the whole block! Doing that plus re-doing the existing Sears Plaza would make me very happy. However, the new hotel tower could work. However, I'm not happy with the design. I think it needs to do more to, not mimic the look of Sears, but tip it's hat to it. Right now, and I'm basing this judgment off of a very small render, it seems like it's jumping in front and saying "look at me!" when it should really say "look at that big MFer behind me!".

Also, I don't see why the city (I.E. why WE) should defray the cost of this one.

[spyguy]

Finally! Smith + Gill's website has been updated with real info on a few Chicago projects.

First, the Clean Technology Tower
Building on principles of biomimicry, Clean Technology Tower utilizes advanced technologies and climate-appropriate building systems to foster a symbiotic relationship with its local environment. The tower is sited and formed to harness the power of natural forces at its site- but it refines the conventional methods of capturing those natural forces to significantly increase efficiency. Wind turbines are located at the building’s corners to capture wind at its highest velocity as it accelerates around the tower. The turbines become increasingly dense as the tower ascends and wind speeds increase. At the apex, where wind speeds are at a maximum, a domed double roof cavity captures air, allowing for a large wind farm and the use of negative pressures to ventilate the interior spaces. The dome itself is shaded by photovoltaic cells that capture the southern sun. These systems provide both comfort and energy to the space.

The complex includes over 1.8 million square feet of office space as well as a 300,000 square foot hotel, a spa and street-level retail. Dedicated elevators will provide access for both office and hotel tenants to all of the tower’s amenities.

An adjacent grand plaza and park enhances the tower’s relationship with the surrounding neighborhood and provides a public gathering space for tenants. The plaza also complements an existing adjacent winter garden and strengthens the connection between the existing retail and the new tower.

The tower is easily accessible via both public and private transportation. Hotel and office lobbies have dedicated street entrances and vehicle pick-up and drop-off locations. Service access to the building and parking are available below grade.

The tower affords tenants unparalleled views of the city, the Chicago River and Lake Michigan. Office space will be located on high floors to maximize available views and take advantage of the direct natural daylight. The tower’s domed top offers unrestricted skyward views, creating a truly modern, grand atrium space.









Also, this weird Eco-Bridge project

[Alliance]

FINALLY! I actually kind of like it. More Third School!? (Love the warping of the floorplates and the sides into the turbines) But we still don't know height or location. The render with the green is BS...but where is this tower located? With views of the River, lake, and adjacet to a winter park? I can't recognize anyhting from the render.

I kind of like the eco-bridge (Burnham Plan) but I don't know if people would actually use it. Maybe Daley could put the Children's Museum in the lake?

In all serious, the building at the end is their version of a proposed OLYMPIC torch. I don't know how the IOC feels about that and I'm still pulling for it to be on top of the spire, but PROPS to Smith and Gill for thinking.

Also, thier now up-and-runnig website mentions a small 3.5 msqft mixed-use development at someplace called Franklin Point...is that in Chicago

Their office is also @ 111 W. Monroe in case anybody wants to drop in.

[spyguy]

Originally Posted by Alliance

The render with the green is BS...but where is this tower located? With views of the River, lake, and adjacet to a winter park? I can't recognize anyhting from the render.

I'm guessing the lot next to 311.

[wrab]

Whoa, baby - this is some interesting stuff. Thanks for the heads-up on the revamped S&G website.

[Nowhereman1280]

Wow I really like that tower, its the classiest integration of windmills I have yet to see. I wonder how much reality there is behind this project? Do you think this was designed for a client? It could be that lot west of 311 wacker, but it can't be the franklin point building because its office right?

Alliance, is that really their proposal for the torch, if so that would be sweet, it would be like having a great big lighthouse as the centerpoint of our lakefront. As to who would use that, I would go out on it on my bike just to get the skyline view.

[Nowhereman1280]

And now for some construction updates! I tried to get angles we don't see much on here!

The backside of River North Marriott Suites that Steely dislikes so much with 353 N. Clark in the foreground (can't see much of that).


Allure at K Station from the river:


Kingsbury Plaza, is this finished yet?


Silver Tower:


Staybridge Suites:


The Clare from a distance, gives you an idea of the skyline impact this one will potentially have. It will help beef up the Hancock Cluster.


Dana Hotel:


Non-highrise bonus, Two of the mansions that are being restored as part of the Walton on the Park development. Note, they have for sale signs out front now, they are big suckers too, like 10000 sqft.

[sale]

Originally Posted by spyguy

Finally! Smith + Gill's website has been updated with real info on a few Chicago projects.

First, the Clean Technology Tower
Building on principles of biomimicry, Clean Technology Tower utilizes advanced technologies and climate-appropriate building systems to foster a symbiotic relationship with its local environment. The tower is sited and formed to harness the power of natural forces at its site- but it refines the conventional methods of capturing those natural forces to significantly increase efficiency. Wind turbines are located at the building’s corners to capture wind at its highest velocity as it accelerates around the tower. The turbines become increasingly dense as the tower ascends and wind speeds increase. At the apex, where wind speeds are at a maximum, a domed double roof cavity captures air, allowing for a large wind farm and the use of negative pressures to ventilate the interior spaces. The dome itself is shaded by photovoltaic cells that capture the southern sun. These systems provide both comfort and energy to the space.

The complex includes over 1.8 million square feet of office space as well as a 300,000 square foot hotel, a spa and street-level retail. Dedicated elevators will provide access for both office and hotel tenants to all of the tower’s amenities.

An adjacent grand plaza and park enhances the tower’s relationship with the surrounding neighborhood and provides a public gathering space for tenants. The plaza also complements an existing adjacent winter garden and strengthens the connection between the existing retail and the new tower.

The tower is easily accessible via both public and private transportation. Hotel and office lobbies have dedicated street entrances and vehicle pick-up and drop-off locations. Service access to the building and parking are available below grade.

The tower affords tenants unparalleled views of the city, the Chicago River and Lake Michigan. Office space will be located on high floors to maximize available views and take advantage of the direct natural daylight. The tower’s domed top offers unrestricted skyward views, creating a truly modern, grand atrium space.

Also, this weird Eco-Bridge project

I really like the Eco-Bridge thing. It fits in. Dubai-esque, but, there seems to be a trend toward curves in Chicago and this would be the ultimate curve.

[honte]

Originally Posted by Alliance

I really fail to see how not being able to see every effing square inch of Sears' facade qualifies as a significant loss to the city and how the aforementioned benefits of such a building is an unessecary gain. So, if the reasons against the building can't seem to get off the BLOCK the building is being built on, I really don't see any of your points. This is a tremendous opportunity for the area. Whining about views and how the new building (which greedily encompasses a third of the lot) might "clutter" the butchest building in the world is simply baseless NIMBYism.

Well, for someone so concerned about Trump Tower's glass as to bemoan it nearly every day, I would have expected you to be a bit more sensitive to the nuances of careful urban design. Sorry I took the time to argue for a more honest, respectful, and objective interpretation of everyone's opinions.

For the record, I never stated that blocking Sears' facade was an important consideration, although indeed I do agree that it is an issue. My points about this are that I think it and the street need breathing room in the shadow of a 110-story building, and that this new building will disrupt the rhythm and context of Sears and its relationship to the street. These are not matters to be taken lightly if you are at all interested in urban design. Citywide, Modernist plazas are being disfigured, and very few people have the foresight to see the value they add to the city or the character they produce. I don't really care if they are currently used or not - as the city continues to grow, people will realize that these are resources and gift to the public that we should be glad to have.

The Sears plaza is less than successful and we all know that. However, as the park across the street is scheduled to be deleted, this space will regain importance in the future. It could be reconfigured (again, with sensitivity) to serve these needs.

Anyway, no one on this forum cares one iota about our personal differences, so I will halt this argument at this time unless there are further points to be made that are actually germane to the tower discussion. For now, I hope this proposal burns on the boards, and I wish Adrian Smith the best of luck in his other Chicago proposals.

[Alliance]

Originally Posted by sale

Dubai-esque,

Therefore something we should not be emulating.

Originally Posted by Nowhereman1280

Ooohh...and you even caught Grand Plaza

Originally Posted by Nowhereman1280

Kingsbury Plaza, is this finished yet?

It should be close. I love this development. If not just for what your image clearly demonstrates.

[DHamp]

Originally Posted by honte

Well, for someone so concerned about Trump Tower's glass as to bemoan it nearly every day, I would have expected you to be a bit more sensitive to the nuances of careful urban design. Sorry I took the time to argue for a more honest, respectful, and objective interpretation of everyone's opinions.

For the record, I never stated that blocking Sears' facade was an important consideration, although indeed I do agree that it is an issue. My points about this are that I think it and the street need breathing room in the shadow of a 110-story building, and that this new building will disrupt the rhythm and context of Sears and its relationship to the street. These are not matters to be taken lightly if you are at all interested in urban design. Citywide, Modernist plazas are being disfigured, and very few people have the foresight to see the value they add to the city or the character they produce. I don't really care if they are currently used or not - as the city continues to grow, people will realize that these are resources and gift to the public that we should be glad to have.

The Sears plaza is less than successful and we all know that. However, as the park across the street is scheduled to be deleted, this space will regain importance in the future. It could be reconfigured (again, with sensitivity) to serve these needs.

Anyway, no one on this forum cares one iota about our personal differences, so I will halt this argument at this time unless there are further points to be made that are actually germane to the tower discussion. For now, I hope this proposal burns on the boards, and I wish Adrian Smith the best of luck in his other Chicago proposals.

You make some sound points honte. If we think about the future instead of just the past and present, Sears' plaza may be a more valuable resource than we give it credit for. WHEN all of these vacant or underdeveloped lots in the areas fill in, I think we might really miss that plaza a wish it were made into a better plaza, and not a hotel.

[Alliance]

Originally Posted by honte

Well, for someone so concerned about Trump Tower's glass as to bemoan it nearly every day, I would have expected you to be a bit more sensitive to the nuances of careful urban design. Sorry I took the time to argue for a more honest, respectful, and objective interpretation of everyone's opinions.

For the record, I never stated that blocking Sears' facade was an important consideration, although indeed I do agree that it is an issue. My points about this are that I think it and the street need breathing room in the shadow of a 110-story building, and that this new building will disrupt the rhythm and context of Sears and its relationship to the street.

I'd first like to say that this is not personal at all to me.

I think Sears has a pathetic relationship with the street. Hopefully a green and comercialized plaza/retail in the new hotel can actually make Sears an anchor of vibrancy in the southern loop (ala JHC) as opposed to a callous black wall. Sears has all the breathing room it needs in the surround streets and in the skys above. I myself was afraid of a large wall being proposed. I thin Smith's design shows great intelligence (even though Trump's FORM and execution isn't befitting of a supposed "icon")

[Nowhereman1280]

Originally Posted by DHamp

You make some sound points honte. If we think about the future instead of just the past and present, Sears' plaza may be a more valuable resource than we give it credit for. WHEN all of these vacant or underdeveloped lots in the areas fill in, I think we might really miss that plaza a wish it were made into a better plaza, and not a hotel.

Id rather have it in the plaza and not in the parking garage and leave the parking garage for future use...

[Chicago2020]

Please tell me this a serious project. I mean that looks freaking amazing. New Pier. New Islands. And that Statue, I would change that

[DHamp]

^^ I didn't say anything about the parking garage in the quoted segment above. Besides I think you already said that earlier. Care to elaborate?

Just what "future use" do you want for that parking garage? A supertall? I doubt it. This is the financial district of the loop. Office developers just aren't building anything that tall anymore. I think we'd be lucky to see another all office building 311's height over there. I'd love to be proven wrong on that one. Short of that, I'd like to see the hotel on the west half of that garage block and maybe another office building on the other half.

[Alliance]

No supertall is needed there, but a good 6-800'er or so would be welcome.