CHICAGO | Boom rundown - everything over 12 floors. v5 - Page 210

pip · #**4181** Posted **Nov 8, 2007, 5:07 PM**

Jaroslaw, this is the second time I have seen you do a before and after pic. Great job!

Dan in Chicago · #**4182** Posted **Nov 8, 2007, 5:43 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila

Is this just speculation, or will Millennium Station finally get a dignified entrance? From what I know of Millennium Station's underground layout (admittedly, it's all based on my spatial sense and not diagrams), the lower level of Beaubien Court would come between this entrance and the station - there would need to be a connection built somehow. I need to do some exploring down there one of these days, preferably during the daytime, and flesh out my mental diagram of the area.

Re the new rendering of Catalyst: The initial version of the project was great. I think the second version was just out of left field, so that we would welcome with open arms the more restrained use of color on the 3rd one, which was the goal all along. I don't mind the new one, as long as the white parts aren't brilliant white.

The Metra station absolutely needs a new entrance. On weekends and evenings, if you're coming from the NE you have to cross Michigan and Randolph (in a direction *away* from the trains) to get to the nearest entrance, because the Prudential Building is closed, the park entrance is always locked, the lower level east entrance is too far, and the lower Beaubien entrance has been bolted shut since the renovation. Anyway there is a door from the station into lower Beaubien, and I used to take that all the time. It's one of the most hidden parts of the underground labyrinth over there.

I seem to be the only one who likes the Catalyst. The new colors are exciting; everyone always complains about the ugly browns and dark yellows.

Jaroslaw, I will send you a photo from early June of the view south from Logan Monument.

BVictor1 · #**4183** Posted **Nov 8, 2007, 6:11 PM**

A few interior shots of 340 On the Park from last weekends open house.

djvandrake · #**4184** Posted **Nov 8, 2007, 6:26 PM**

Love it. That wood panel looks like Bamboo.

Jaroslaw · #**4185** Posted **Nov 8, 2007, 6:27 PM**

Thanks for the great 340 pics.

Does this mean that the Doral bookmark/pencil building is a go? Have they even started marketing yet? I know it's not a lot of units and they all have park views, but in this climate, who knows...

honte · #**4186** Posted **Nov 8, 2007, 6:45 PM**

^ Doral addition and existing building will remain rental. So, it could "pop" at virtually any time, no advance notice required.

Steely Dan · #**4187** Posted **Nov 8, 2007, 6:59 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by honte

^ Doral addition and existing building will remain rental. So, it could "pop" at virtually any time, no advance notice required.

do you (or anyone else) know if the addition has been fully approved by the city?

bjorda1 · #**4188** Posted **Nov 8, 2007, 7:13 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by BVictor1

A few interior shots of 340 On the Park from last weekends open house.

yea, 340 OTP is solid... now, all they have to do is get all those "investors" to actually move in... i think this one will be a ghost town for a little longer...

i_am_hydrogen · #**4189** Posted **Nov 8, 2007, 7:18 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

do you (or anyone else) know if the addition has been fully approved by the city?

I believe so. Here's my quote in the MPP thread at SSC:

Quote:

Originally Posted by i_am_hydrogen

According to Shawn at SSP, this one has been approved.

Here is Shawn's original response to Sam's question:

Quote:

Originally Posted by SamInTheLoop

Just wondering if anyone stopped by the Plan Commission meeting today. If so, was Millennium Park Plaza approved? (if I'm remembering correctly, I think this was the only development on today's agenda that captured my interest)

Quote:

Yes it was. Lucien LaGrange's Uptown project (with the trapazoid windows) was also approved today.

spyguy · #**4190** Posted **Nov 9, 2007, 12:12 AM**

http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/640738,CST-NWS-hosp08.article

Alderman plays hardball with Children's Memorial
WANTS GARAGE | Reilly says hospital also needs traffic aides, signals

November 8, 2007
BY FRAN SPIELMAN

Downtown Ald. Brendan Reilly (42nd) is demanding that Children's Memorial Hospital build a 1,100-space parking garage -- and put traffic management aides and pedestrian countdown signals at congested intersections -- if they want his support to build an $800 million hospital in Streeterville.

10023 · #**4191** Posted **Nov 9, 2007, 12:15 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by spyguy

http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/640738,CST-NWS-hosp08.article

Alderman plays hardball with Children's Memorial
WANTS GARAGE | Reilly says hospital also needs traffic aides, signals

November 8, 2007
BY FRAN SPIELMAN

Downtown Ald. Brendan Reilly (42nd) is demanding that Children's Memorial Hospital build a 1,100-space parking garage -- and put traffic management aides and pedestrian countdown signals at congested intersections -- if they want his support to build an $800 million hospital in Streeterville.

Underground parking, I assume? Aren't there already several huge parking lots for hospitals ruining that neighborhood?

firstcranialnerve · #**4192** Posted **Nov 9, 2007, 1:59 AM**

^ Please... no more hideous parking lots from NWM. I hate them with a passion.... perhaps they could build the parking underneath or the lower levels? All those parking spots have brought the street are a mcdonalds and a panera bread... I think the only people that eat from that scungy McDonalds are hospital visitors.... and maybe the security guard who 'chills' on that corner....

SamInTheLoop · #**4193** Posted **Nov 9, 2007, 2:04 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by 10023

Underground parking, I assume? Aren't there already several huge parking lots for hospitals ruining that neighborhood?

Probably not. Don't forget the prohibitively (in not all, but most cases) exorbitant costs of underground parking in Chicago. Look for a large above-ground garage (I'm fine with this as long as there is enough first floor retail)...

SamInTheLoop · #**4194** Posted **Nov 9, 2007, 2:09 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by emathias

I live near Erie and Franklin, and received a letter in the mail today from John J. George, the attorney representing McCaffery Interests, which is looking to amend Sub-Area B of Residential Business Planned Development #326, which is 212-232 W Erie and 659-667 N Franklin (between Hooters and the "L", basically).

I know there's been a proposed project called <a href="http://www.emporis.com/en/wm/bu/?id=flairtower-chicago-il-usa">Flair Tower</a> (Flair being the name of the communications company that owns the land) for that plot listed on Emporis for a couple years, but with the housing troubles I'd always assumed it was one of those projects that just fell by the wayside. <a href="http://flairagency.com/FlairMainSite.html">Flair Communications</a> website says (click on "Flair House" on the left and then "Flair Tower Future") they'll move into the tower in 2009, but it uses the older Emporis stats in the description instead of the ones in the notice I received.

The letter lists 201 "dwelling units" and only 185 parking spots, so I'm sure there will be some neighborhood opposition (not from me, though, since I own a parking spot and no car, so the fewer spots the better for my resale value :-) ). The Flair Tower on Emporis lists 167 units with 209 parking spots, so I'm wondering if it's the same tower, just reconfigured to be rental apartments instead of condos. It would partially block some of my urban view, but for the most part I'd be happy to see something go up on that site. Anyone have any additional info?

Thanks for relaying. I can only hope that there has been a redesign of this tower. What is with the lame rental tower proposals in river north - along with the JDL project? 161 W. Kinzie - where are you?

SamInTheLoop · #**4195** Posted **Nov 9, 2007, 2:12 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dan in Chicago

The Metra station absolutely needs a new entrance. On weekends and evenings, if you're coming from the NE you have to cross Michigan and Randolph (in a direction *away* from the trains) to get to the nearest entrance, because the Prudential Building is closed, the park entrance is always locked, the lower level east entrance is too far, and the lower Beaubien entrance has been bolted shut since the renovation. Anyway there is a door from the station into lower Beaubien, and I used to take that all the time. It's one of the most hidden parts of the underground labyrinth over there.

I seem to be the only one who likes the Catalyst. The new colors are exciting; everyone always complains about the ugly browns and dark yellows.

Jaroslaw, I will send you a photo from early June of the view south from Logan Monument.

I didn't like The Catalyst at all until I saw the latest rendering. I think the new one is at least "not bad" whereas the earlier ones were just vomit-inducing....

SamInTheLoop · #**4196** Posted **Nov 9, 2007, 2:17 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by wrabbit

Some unfortunate developments re Franklin Point:

http://chicagobusiness.com/cgi-bin/news.pl?id=27048&pageNo=2

Developer, investor sue each other (Crain’s)
.....The legal tussle involves a proposed 3.5-million-square-foot mixed-use project along the Chicago River, which would be one of the biggest developments in the city, as well as a condominium high-rise planned for the 2000 block of South Prairie Avenue. The dispute raises questions about Mr. Augunas’ ability to finance either project, especially amid a sluggish condo market.....

Honestly I think this has a lot more to do with 2100 (first called The Avalon). It sounds as though that tower might be in trouble. As for Franklin Point, it's really just a concept at this point and perhaps at least a couple years away if not several more...

You also have to wonder about the other Fitzgerald-designed Rokas Tower in the South Loop - if that will ever make it off the drawing board...

Eventually...Chicago · #**4197** Posted **Nov 9, 2007, 3:11 AM**

i wish ald. reily would have attended even one session of greenbuild this week. it is becoming abundantly clear that being a politician controlled by self-serving community groups is as bad or worse than being controlled by developers.

Items like this and dumb a$$ fioretti's one parking spot to one res. unit ordinance makes me call into question whether or not we should even have alderman. They simply are not qualified to hold the authority that they do.

What qualifications does fioretti or reiliy think they have to make planning and zoning decisions?

ComandanteCero · #**4198** Posted **Nov 9, 2007, 3:42 AM**

Regarding Reilly and the NW Hospital, it sounds like he's demanding they add more parking (in other words, it wasn't like the hospital was planning 1,100 surface parking lots (which would be impossible since the area is nearly built out), and he's getting them to put it in a garage. It's more like they were going for some lesser number of spots in their garage, and he's demanding more).

From what i've seen of the area, having a separate parking strucutre wouldn't be good. There are very few developable sites in and around the hospital complex (they tore down a huge apartment building to clear a site for this new building). So any additional parking garages will be at the expense of developable land.

Most of the surface parking in Streeterville is a couple of blocks south of the main complex (i don't think much of it is controlled by Northwestern), and is very quickly being redeveloped into highrise residential buildings.

the urban politician · #**4199** Posted **Nov 9, 2007, 3:43 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eventually...Chicago

i wish ald. reily would have attended even one session of greenbuild this week. it is becoming abundantly clear that being a politician controlled by self-serving community groups is as bad or worse than being controlled by developers.

Items like this and dumb a$$ fioretti's one parking spot to one res. unit ordinance makes me call into question whether or not we should even have alderman. They simply are not qualified to hold the authority that they do.

What qualifications does fioretti or reiliy think they have to make planning and zoning decisions?

^ I don't want to take this off topic, and we can discuss this further in the "General Development thread" if you want, but I have a tough time with this because on one hand I agree with you, but on the other hand I like the idea of Aldermen & community groups blocking strip malls (like the one planned for Milwaukee) or that stand-alone Walgreens in Wicker Park. It's really a mixed bag, this whole Aldermanic prerogative thing.

Mr Downtown · #**4200** Posted **Nov 9, 2007, 4:05 AM**

The problem I see is that Streeterville's street network is just inadequate for this kind of density. It was marginally adequate for a scattering of mansions and warehouses, but it's just overwhelmed by a major medical center, big hotels, and tall office buildings.

Largely because the grid is incomplete, the NMH area is already choked with unnecessary turning movements. The Children's site actually offers one of the few chances to correct this, by pushing Mies south to Superior, where it would meet St. Clair at a dogleg intersection. Of course, no one is talking about such a rational thing, because we don't do any sort of planning in this town. We just wait for developers to propose things and then make them hire consultants to produce a report saying there will be no traffic impact.

In the case of Children's, they know they need many hundreds of parking spaces (1100, I think). But their "plan" is to displace the nonhospital parkers from the NMH garages, and somehow make up the 1100 spaces somewhere down the road in some unspecified manner.