CHICAGO | Boom rundown - everything over 12 floors. v5

[woodrow]

^^^WHAT??!?!!?!?!

Oh, this just makes me CRAZY angry. Destroying the Daily News building. Nice. . . . .Seriously, this makes me so CRAZY angry that I can't even dispassionately list all the reasons this is wrong.

[VivaLFuego]

Seems unlikely it'll happen unless there was a serious spike in demand that drove up rents such that the tower could be justified. That's a tricky site, being on top of the railroad tracks, so I'm not sure how they propose to build a foundation for another tower without disturbing the existing buildings or the active railroad. I can only imagine this as an incredibly expensive project, meaning the leasing price points would have to get pretty high to justify it. Location-wise, the site is desirable to potential tenants, being so close to the Metra stations and not far from the Wacker/LaSalle financial district. Considering the office market in Chicago isn't presently "hot" (not bad, but not hot), with millions of sq ft of Class A space coming online over the next 2 years, my gut says this one is unlikely.

Regardless, it's troubling, 2 N. Riverside and it's plazas are an incredible and largely-preserved example of grandiose Art Deco. The plaza is an awesome summertime public space, along the river sandwiched between two majestic thrones. Definitely a very strong landmarking candidate, in fact I'm surprised it isn't already registered in one way or another. Of course anything is possible, especially with Zell, but I wonder if there's some ulterior motive at play in this announcement; a message to somebody.

[honte]

^ Well, if he continues to announce the tower every so often, he can pretend like it's reality and he is suffering some "hardship" if they do move to protect it. This would be a bargaining chip in some other deliberations with the city - a technically unnecessary bargain, of course, but that's the way things are done in Chicago.

[ardecila]

Welcome to the new demolition wave of the 21st Century, after the terrible one in the 1960s. This time, it's not wholesale demolition, just architectural castration. Still completely in the name of profit. The ABC Building is a small matter compared to the loss of Riverside Plaza, a glassy addition on the Congress Hotel, a glassy addition on the Chicago Athletic Association, and the desecration of Marina City.

[BVictor1]

Well, it looks like theres a neighborhood group that's gone unnoticed that we might have to contend with.

NEAR MEETING ANNOUNCEMENT
NEW EASTSIDE ASSOCIATION OF RESIDENTS

WHEN..... Wednesday, January 9, 2008 @ 6:30pm
WHERE.... Fairmont Hotel, 200 Columbus Drive
http://neweastside.org

[BVictor1]

There's going to be a report tonight about The Clare.

The investigative report will air on the 10pm news on Channel 7.

[ardecila]

Lakeshore East is a planned community - planned for skyscrapers. Unlike Central Station, the townhouse component in LSE is very minor and exists only to mask the blank walls of parking podiums. LSE's main attraction is that you can live in a forest of skyscrapers, with parks, retail, and restaurants all right there with you. Most people living there, I think, are attracted by the idea of more high-rises (although I believe many are deathly afraid of traffic congestion).

Since the whole place is covered in one already-approved PD, any new towers will be difficult to block.

[Chicago Shawn]

Originally Posted by ardecila

Lakeshore East is a planned community - planned for skyscrapers. Unlike Central Station, the townhouse component in LSE is very minor and exists only to mask the blank walls of parking podiums. LSE's main attraction is that you can live in a forest of skyscrapers, with parks, retail, and restaurants all right there with you. Most people living there, I think, are attracted by the idea of more high-rises (although I believe many are deathly afraid of traffic congestion).

Since the whole place is covered in one already-approved PD, any new towers will be difficult to block.

But, it makes admendments to the PD difficult, such as the admendments likely needed to push up the heights of the towers at Wacker and LSD. Some of the neighbors on East Randolph in the older buildings are a real piece of work and complain about everything from LSE construction to Lollapaloza noise. Some even fought against Millennium Park.

[Chicago Shawn]

Originally Posted by Northwest

Well, I have to say that I go to this Dominick's all the time, and it is usually BUSY AS HELL! Im not sure the loss of this store would be a good thing. And AJ's across the street makes some damn fine gyro burgers, even at 3:00 AM!!
On the other hand, the Chicago Lodge Motel in the first picture could go to hell. It looks like a former route 66, 1950's remnant. Let get rid of that shithole first, and make Edgewater a better place! Its further east, and would make a fine candidate for a new highrise!

No reason as to why the Dominick's couldn't be under a couple of high-rises. Surface parking is a vast waste of land 1/4 mile from a transit station and at the start of the CTA bus route 147 express run to Michigan Avenue (only 8 minutes without traffic).

[Chicago Shawn]

Originally Posted by ardecila

Welcome to the new demolition wave of the 21st Century, after the terrible one in the 1960s. This time, it's not wholesale demolition, just architectural castration. Still completely in the name of profit. The ABC Building is a small matter compared to the loss of Riverside Plaza, a glassy addition on the Congress Hotel, a glassy addition on the Chicago Athletic Association, and the desecration of Marina City.

The Congress addition is on the rear of the building. Only one floor will rise above the present roof line As for the Daley News raping, IMO that project needs to die quickly.

[SamInTheLoop]

Originally Posted by Chicago Shawn

But, it makes admendments to the PD difficult, such as the admendments likely needed to push up the heights of the towers at Wacker and LSD. Some of the neighbors on East Randolph in the older buildings are a real piece of work and complain about everything from LSE construction to Lollapaloza noise. Some even fought against Millennium Park.

Shawn - how "likely"? Was an amendment needed for Aqua's height increase? These NIMBIES worry me - some of them are completely loco. There reportedly is a guy who lives in The Buckingham who (himself a retired lawyer) tried to halt 340 by claiming the developers could not have legally purchased the land!! (this was mentioned by someonoe on the developer team a few years ago at a community forum - I want to say it was Carlins but am not positive) I was there at the large Children's Museum Circus, and the sense of false entitlement of these people is very alarming, even by lofty NIMBY standards....

[ardecila]

Well, I kinda expected some loonies out of Harbor East, the Buckingham, and the other older buildings there. The residents of those towers got used to having their buildings stand in the open.

But there should be enough rational people, between 340 OTP, the Lancaster, the Shoreham, the Chandler, the Lancaster, the Regatta, and the Tides, to offset their craziness.

[aaron38]

Originally Posted by BVictor1

There's going to be a report tonight about The Clare.
The investigative report will air on the 10pm news on Channel 7.

Wow, that was a hit piece. Mostly related to property taxes, the Clare is pushing for tax exempt status because it's being built by a religious org.
The most interesting thing was that buyers have apparently been promised they won't have to pay property taxes, and that hasn't been finalized yet.

They raised a valid point though. Why should the Clare be tax exempt?

[SamInTheLoop]

Originally Posted by Chicago Shawn

The Congress addition is on the rear of the building. Only one floor will rise above the present roof line As for the Daley News raping, IMO that project needs to die quickly.

Congress addition might be just fine. Honte's no doubt correct re Daily News (it's such a joke that the media even covered this "story") - that is just a ploy by Zell - there's no chance of this new "proposal" being real - so everyone take a deep breath, shake your panties off and back to the real world...

[SamInTheLoop]

Originally Posted by aaron38

Wow, that was a hit piece. Mostly related to property taxes, the Clare is pushing for tax exempt status because it's being built by a religious org.
The most interesting thing was that buyers have apparently been promised they won't have to pay property taxes, and that hasn't been finalized yet.

They raised a valid point though. Why should the Clare be tax exempt?

There's no reason at all it should be exempt......possible lawsuits brewing on this one??

[VivaLFuego]

Originally Posted by SamInTheLoop

Shawn - how "likely"? Was an amendment needed for Aqua's height increase? These NIMBIES worry me - some of them are completely loco. There reportedly is a guy who lives in The Buckingham who (himself a retired lawyer) tried to halt 340 by claiming the developers could not have legally purchased the land!! (this was mentioned by someonoe on the developer team a few years ago at a community forum - I want to say it was Carlins but am not positive) I was there at the large Children's Museum Circus, and the sense of false entitlement of these people is very alarming, even by lofty NIMBY standards....

I'll just add that Alderman PanderHack Reilly, whose campaign literature had a picture of him frowning with arms crossed in front of Lakeshore East construction, doesn't help our cause here either.

[SamInTheLoop]

Originally Posted by Chicago Shawn

But, it makes admendments to the PD difficult, such as the admendments likely needed to push up the heights of the towers at Wacker and LSD. Some of the neighbors on East Randolph in the older buildings are a real piece of work and complain about everything from LSE construction to Lollapaloza noise. Some even fought against Millennium Park.

Back to LSE - I mentioned it starting a couple years ago, when it was first evident that sooner or later the developers would need to go back to the city to increase allowable density. Just look at the number of units completed, under construction, and proposed (Arquitectonica) relative to the number of buildings in plan, and you find they are building denser than first envisioned (this is a great thing, and very understandable as nobody expected demand to be as strong as it's turned out to be, coupled with a quick acceptance in planning circles of taller, thin buildings actually not being a bad thing!) Perhaps Magellan should get this all done with one fell swoop - go back to the city and negotiate an extra 1,200-1,500 units and of course make NIMBY concessions (I'm not sure what will satisfy them - hopefully they wouldn't be too hard to swallow for those of us with knowledge of sound urban planning and taste in design) This might be preferable than having to deal with potential amendments with every additional building from this point forward, no??

[Chicago Shawn]

Originally Posted by ardecila

Well, I kinda expected some loonies out of Harbor East, the Buckingham, and the other older buildings there. The residents of those towers got used to having their buildings stand in the open.

But there should be enough rational people, between 340 OTP, the Lancaster, the Shoreham, the Chandler, the Lancaster, the Regatta, and the Tides, to offset their craziness.

Well, here lies the problem, they are all grouped together as the "New East Side", and the cry babies on East Randolph are very loud and very well organized, as well as very delusional about where they really live. Community Groups rarely ever display a true representation of how the majority really feels about an issue, usually its the loudest and most organized that gets thier point across and allocates veto power based upon how much ass kissing an Alderman seeks to do.

I am frequent attendee of Grant Park advisory council meetings, and I hear the whinning all the time, for Aqua being too tall to too much wait time on the children's swings. One lazy bitch even said that the playground in Lake Shore East Park is too far away to walk too. Granted, there are some normal, rational thinking residents in this domain, some of whom are even pro high-rise construction and urban lovers; but thier voices are drowned out by the NIMBYs, mostly because normal people understand they live in a city and do not care about other big buildings unerway nearby.

For example, with the Children's Museum issue, only about 5% of "New East Side" residents showed up to 8 condo board meetings held inside each building (quoted from the 9th meeting at Daley Bi). Which means up to 95% were either too busy or didn't give two shits about the issue, but that did not stop the cry babies from stacking the Daley Bi fieldhouse and shrieking about everything and claming Grant Park belongs to them as thier own neighborhood park.

[i_am_hydrogen]

Originally Posted by aaron38

They raised a valid point though. Why should the Clare be tax exempt?

In order to answer your question, it's necessary to distinguish between the developer, Greystone Communities, and the individual owners. For Greystone, it depends on where the profits are going. Under the Internal Revenue Code, for a religious organization to maintain its tax exempt status, no profit can inure to any private shareholder or individual. Thus, if profits from the purchase and development of the parcel of real property are being used to further a religious or charitable purpose, tax exempt status is not endangered. As for the individual owners, I'll have to do some research on it. It would be helpful to be able to see the contracts of sale which promise tax exemption.

[Chicago Shawn]

Originally Posted by SamInTheLoop

Back to LSE - I mentioned it starting a couple years ago, when it was first evident that sooner or later the developers would need to go back to the city to increase allowable density. Just look at the number of units completed, under construction, and proposed (Arquitectonica) relative to the number of buildings in plan, and you find they are building denser than first envisioned (this is a great thing, and very understandable as nobody expected demand to be as strong as it's turned out to be, coupled with a quick acceptance in planning circles of taller, thin buildings actually not being a bad thing!) Perhaps Magellan should get this all done with one fell swoop - go back to the city and negotiate an extra 1,200-1,500 units and of course make NIMBY concessions (I'm not sure what will satisfy them - hopefully they wouldn't be too hard to swallow for those of us with knowledge of sound urban planning and taste in design) This might be preferable than having to deal with potential amendments with every additional building from this point forward, no??

Well, originally the area to be built as LSE was supposed to be twice as dense, I talking somewhere in the range of 9,500 residential units and 1.7 million square feet of office space. Its part of PD 70, which includes ALL of Illinois Center. I would have obtain a copy of the PD and take a good look at the numbers to refresh my memory. The currently approved plan for Lake Shore East calls for about 5,000 units with some office space alang Columbus in towers up to 75 stories which was traded for Aqua, which I believe was through admistrative adjustments. The LSE plan was approved with basic massing "place holders", generic boxes that displayed the hieght and bulk regultions for each building. If major changes where to take place, especially with the FAR transfers from the Aqua II site for the placement of the school, as the newspaper article mentioned a while back, that would more than likely require an amendment, especially since the LSE project falls within the privately owned section of the Lakefront Protection Zone (i.e. near the lake but west of LSD), any sizeable changes often have to face extra review and approvals.