CHICAGO | Boom rundown - everything over 12 floors. v5 - Page 190

Alliance · #**3781** Posted **Oct 16, 2007, 3:22 PM**

The CBD could go south and west... nto to mention the area around b37 is lacking a lot of height.

What I'm saying is that there IS demand, but there have been no big anchor tenants to secure such a building....no Standard Oil or Sears.

DHamp · #**3782** Posted **Oct 16, 2007, 3:37 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nowhereman1280

Just look at this recent Sears proposal, 60 million TIF?

Which is yet another reason for me to be against this one. Why should the taxpayer pay for this building?

I think Alliance just hit the nail on the head. High demand alone gets us the 50-60 story office tower. For an office supertall, you need a large anchor tenant. A very large anchor tenant. The problem today is single companies typically don't employ as many people all in one city as they did back when Sears and Big Stan were built. Downsizing + globalization + the internet has made sure of that.

Alliance · #**3783** Posted **Oct 16, 2007, 6:23 PM**

Yup.

It would be really cool to get a CBOT-CME tower (CBOT-CME-NYSE tower?), something magalithic on the scale of WTC (1800'?), but it would be a shame if they abandonded the CBOT.

Nowhereman1280 · #**3784** Posted **Oct 16, 2007, 6:28 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alliance

Yup.

It would be really cool to get a CBOT-CME tower (CBOT-CME-NYSE tower?), something magalithic on the scale of WTC (1800'?), but it would be a shame if they abandonded the CBOT.

Yeah that would be sweet, they could build it on some of the lots down on Congress and connect it through skyways or a tunnel...

They should build the Illinois as their headquarters...

SlatsGrobnik · #**3785** Posted **Oct 16, 2007, 6:53 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alliance

Yup.

It would be really cool to get a CBOT-CME tower (CBOT-CME-NYSE tower?), something magalithic on the scale of WTC (1800'?), but it would be a shame if they abandonded the CBOT.

An 1,800 foot tower to house the world's largest financial market? After 9/11? Why not just design it in the shape of a bulleye?

Steely Dan · #**3786** Posted **Oct 16, 2007, 6:58 PM**

let's bring this thread back to its intended purpose: actual news, information, pics, & opinion on REAL chicago highrise developments.

wild unsubstantiated speculation needs to be discussed elsewhere.

Bucky · #**3787** Posted **Oct 16, 2007, 7:32 PM**

The climbing crane has been put up at the Astoria, so presumably progress will resume.

tintinex · #**3788** Posted **Oct 16, 2007, 9:12 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nowhereman1280

Kingsbury Plaza, is this finished yet?

I have a friend that just moved into this building. I'm supposed to go visit her this week. I will search for any outstanding construction if visible.

Sir Isaac Newton · #**3789** Posted **Oct 16, 2007, 9:40 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bucky

The climbing crane has been put up at the Astoria, so presumably progress will resume.

I noticed that today too. There had been no activity on this site for at least a couple of months - does anyone have any idea why?

Ryan81 · #**3790** Posted **Oct 17, 2007, 12:36 AM**

Hello all:

I have posted this before, but have now added Waldorf-Astoria. Placement is probably a little off, but you get the idea.

could use a few super talls nearer to Sears in this view

Rocket1 · #**3791** Posted **Oct 17, 2007, 2:05 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ryan81

could use a few super talls nearer to Sears in this view

Seems like those proposed Central Station skyscrapers -- GP3 and GP4 -- could help along those lines.

harryc · #**3792** Posted **Oct 17, 2007, 2:06 AM**

View from above

Well used caisson top

Shoring up the neighbor

X marks the spot ( hit it on the first try )

Chicago

Chicago2020 · #**3793** Posted **Oct 17, 2007, 2:49 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ryan81

Hello all:

I have posted this before, but have now added Waldorf-Astoria. Placement is probably a little off, but you get the idea.

could use a few super talls nearer to Sears in this view

Now that is what I call Futuristic!!!!

Nowhereman1280 · #**3794** Posted **Oct 17, 2007, 3:05 AM**

The Granville from today:

Hasn't been updated in forever, check out how skinny the core is. It looks even skinnier from the East and West.

I have a good feeling about this development, I think it will really be good for the neighborhood and probably trigger some more redevelopment. I could be wrong, but I hope I'm not.

mind field · #**3795** Posted **Oct 17, 2007, 5:01 AM**

Thanks Ryan81 for posting that future skyline shot. That is AMAZING.

spyguy · #**3796** Posted **Oct 18, 2007, 3:19 AM**

http://www.chicagorealestatedaily.co...age.pl?id=2166

Chicago — The New York — Phase II, 3638-3658 N. Lake Shore Dr., 228-unit residential complex, May 2009, $40 million.

Nowhereman1280 · #**3797** Posted **Oct 18, 2007, 3:29 AM**

Hey Alliance, go check out the large paragraph on page 153 in that PDF interview of Bruce Graham. It seems to foreshadow what you have been saying about Chicago's Trump Tower, even though it is talking about one in New York (at least I think it is, maybe its referring to the Chicago one, but this interview is from 98)...

honte · #**3798** Posted **Oct 20, 2007, 2:06 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by BVictor1

601 W. Monroe

This is an alternate version of 601 W. Monroe. It was shown at the Friends of Downtown presentation last week featuring DeStefano & Partners

Welcome back, fellow forum geeks!

Did anyone see the articles about BP's hunt for new space downtown? This site was one of those mentioned.

Although SamInTheLoop is a highly credible source, I wonder if these plans might have been drawn up for BP and not ComEd, as speculated? Sam, what do you think? Apparently, BP requires a huge trading floor and smaller office floors above; this scheme seems to fit that bill.

Excerpt from Crain's (Full article: http://www.chicagorealestatedaily.com/cgi-bin/news.pl?id=26821):

In the last couple months, BP has had presentations on at least three prospective sites, including:

601-625 W. Monroe St., a site between Jefferson and Des Plaines streets that’s controlled by Chicago-based Fifield Cos.
645 W. Madison St., between Des Plaines Street and Interstate 90-94. The site is controlled by MR Properties LLC.
240 W. Randolph St., the site of a Walgreens store and parking lot at the northeast corner of Randolph and Franklin streets. Chicago developer John Buck Co. has an option to acquire the property.

Fifield for several years been working on plans to build two office towers at 601-625 W. Monroe that would total about 1.2 million square feet. The developer recently had its architect, DeStefano & Partners Ltd., draw up a one-building plan to accommodate BP, confirms Fifield senior vice-president Tom Saletta.
Executives with Buck and MR Properties couldn’t be reached for comment.

VivaLFuego · #**3799** Posted **Oct 20, 2007, 2:54 PM**

Great point. It's a distinctive design, which is obviously a plus to a company going through the trouble of basically building its own HQ. Further, BP has made an obvious branding effort to be the "environmentally-friendly" energy company for the past several years, and a LEED-tower would certainly fit the mold. It almost seems unlikely that BP would want to exert this much effort in relocation if they were only going to move into a non-descript West Loop Fifield office-box-o-matic.

aaron38 · #**3800** Posted **Oct 20, 2007, 4:44 PM**

I saw the BP article in the paper, saying they were consolidating and moving Naperville offices downtown.
The article was talking about cost-cutting and layoffs. Didn't sound like they were in a position to build a brand new building. I had the impression they would be moving into existing offices.

Also, I saw on CLTV that a worker at a south loop highrise was injured on the job. Is he okay?