CHICAGO | Boom rundown - everything over 12 floors. v5

[VivaLFuego]

Originally Posted by johnandahalf

I've fallen in love. Don't get me wrong...I've ALWAYS loved Chicago, having grown up in Champaign. And I've ALWAYS loved skyscrapers. However, I've always also loved mansions & such. After seeing listings for 915 Dearborn, 919 Dearborn & 921 Dearborn ( x 11,000,000), I took a virtual stroll around the block, courtesy of Google Maps "street view". These 3 houses are one block west of the Elysian, and share the block with the Scottish Rite church. As I got to the southwest corner of the block (northeast corner of W Delaware Pl & N Dearborn St), I saw a giant sign in front of the house advertising Walton on the Park.

When I look at that block from above, I see 3 magnificent 19th century homes and a big-ass church on the west half, and some parking and a low-rise (sales center) on the east half. PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE tell me the houses are not in danger. Any idea what the projected timeline is for construction? The listings are active, but I have no idea how old the street view images are. Elysian shows up as a construction site, but not above ground yet. Is anything happening with Walton?

ô¿ô

The mansions are being renovated and sold individually as part of the Walton highrise project.

[SolarWind]

July 11, 2008

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by Mr Roboto

While I would prefer a comprehensive site plan for Franklin point similar to the Smith & Gill one, one that utilizes the river location and has a cohesive layout (not to mention what looked like a supertall); maybe developing that land piecemeal will still result in some solid density and some interesting projects. We'll have to see.

I think a piecemeal approach is worse. Just go 3 blocks west and check out the weird plans for Avalon Bay's rental tower and AMLI 900. It's turning into a towers-in-the-park housing project, albeit with shiny glass windows.

[Busy Bee]

I think a compromise would be an AMBITIOUS city-drafted site plan, carried out piecemeal with varied, and more organic feeling architectural components. I suppose maybe the scale and importance of the project might warrant a P&D commission of some kind to guide the individual proposals to carry out a cohesive vision for the site. This way the financial burden of a multi-billion dollar construction project doesn't land on just one developer. Could be a way of making this thing happen in slow economic times?

[BorisMolotov]

^ The other thing is that there will be architectural variety in there, which is something you just can't pull off with a single developer (Central Station).

[the urban politician]

I see nothing wrong with what has been proposed.

NIMBY's are more likely to spoil things than make them better. Unlike sensible people, the following (from most to least important) are the primary issues NIMBY's like to tackle:

1) Parking
2) Lack of Parking
3) Not enough parking
4) Guest Parking
5) Why can't this be less dense?
6) Construction noise
7) Parking
8) Parking revisited
9) Did we get to parking yet?
.
.
.
99) Improving the pedestrian experience
100) Architectural design

[BVictor1]

Originally Posted by brian_b

I almost completely forgot about this, but the parcel of land bordering the river between Randolph and Washington (across the water from GGP) has had a "Public Notice" sign on an easel for perhaps a couple weeks now. The sign is down at ground level and even I, with my excellent eyesight, cannot read it from the sidewalk.

Has this been discussed and does anyone know about it? If not, perhaps someone with a zoom lens needs to go take a look.

That's for the office tower being designed by Lagrange, I believe it's 400 W. Randolph. I will try to take a photo of the notice with my camera and pick up a PD Application from city hall.

[neverdone]

Originally Posted by SolarWind

July 11, 2008

Forgive my ignorance, but has the Waldorf Astoria been given the complete go ahead?

[honte]

^ It has its own thread, where you can read about it, here: http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=138309&page=53

It has been approved.

Nice avatar! RIP Walter.

[aaron38]

W=A does have the green light from the city, but that's not W=A, it's the rental tower on the other half of the site.
It's all on this thread
http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=138309

[BVictor1]

It looks like Opus 110 is topped out

[jet cm]

Originally Posted by BVictor1

That's for the office tower being designed by Lagrange, I believe it's 400 W. Randolph. I will try to take a photo of the notice with my camera and pick up a PD Application from city hall.

It's between Randolph & Lake. Prime Group is the developer. I thought it was being called 150 N. Riverside. +/- 50 story office building.

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by BorisMolotov

^ The other thing is that there will be architectural variety in there, which is something you just can't pull off with a single developer (Central Station).

Sure you can. Look at Lakeshore East - it's managed by a single developer (Magellan) but they've invited plenty of different, outside architects in - Studio Gang, SCB, and Arquitectonica. Magellan does this even though it's owned by Jim Loewenberg, who could design all the buildings himself if he wanted to.

Fogelson, who's developing Central Station, has some sort of weird arrangement with Pappageorge/Haymes - apparently he saves when he buys building designs in bulk. But that doesn't mean that a large development has to be architecturally homogeneous.

[Alliance]

Originally Posted by ardecila

Fogelson, who's developing Central Station, has some sort of weird arrangement with Pappageorge/Haymes - apparently he saves when he buys building designs in bulk.

And thats exactly what we got...the homogeneous 4 for $5 Valu-pak.

[SolarWind]

July 11, 2008

353 North Clark




155 North Wacker

[Taft]

Originally Posted by ualsk

I can understand how waterview tower could run out of money. But whats happening at staybridge? Didnt they know the cost in advance, and allocate the resourses, does this mean that staybridge suites as a brand is possible in financial trouble, not just this one property.

Has anyone heard anything on Staybridge? I walked past there today and there was a crew doing work on ground level, but the crane wasn't working and it didn't seem like much was happening.

This thing is so close to done, from a layman's street-level perspective, anyway. Here's hoping it gets finished off...

Taft

[brian_b]

Originally Posted by jet cm

It's between Randolph & Lake. Prime Group is the developer. I thought it was being called 150 N. Riverside. +/- 50 story office building.

Yeah, I completely messed that one up. Boeing is between Randolph and Washington. LOL.

Thanks for the info everyone. I remember reading that the original PD expired very soon, so it makes sense that something would have to be done.

[photoLith]

What used to be where 155 north wacker is now? Was it a parking lot?

[Xeelee]

lots of stuff going on here.`

[VivaLFuego]

Originally Posted by photolitherland

What used to be where 155 north wacker is now? Was it a parking lot?

A ~10-story brick office building.