CHICAGO | Boom rundown - everything over 12 floors. v5 - Page 446

harryc · #**8901** Posted **Sep 20, 2008, 11:37 PM**

From the Ridgeland stop in the morning

From Left to right
Crane for 353 N Clark ( at base of Trump ) Trump Tower - 300 N LaSalle - Legacy (?) and 155 N Wacker.

BVictor1 · #**8902** Posted **Sep 21, 2008, 12:31 AM**

Parkview West is now completed

i_am_hydrogen · #**8903** Posted **Sep 21, 2008, 2:57 AM**

Taken tonight (various projects):

Larger version available at flickr:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3159/2874521170_c5818bf593_o.jpg

No buildings cut-off:

honte · #**8904** Posted **Sep 21, 2008, 6:35 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by harryc

From the Ridgeland stop in the morning

From Left to right
Crane for 353 N Clark ( at base of Trump ) Trump Tower - 300 N LaSalle - Legacy (?) and 155 N Wacker.

More great photography everyone. The new bulk on the skyline is just terrific, say, compared to 1998. BCBS is one hiuge hunk o' steel.

Harry, I think that would be BCBS and not Legacy you're seeing.

denizen467 · #**8905** Posted **Sep 21, 2008, 6:46 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by i_am_hydrogen

My existence here predates your's by about a year. Search my post history. I've been known to drop an opinion from time to time.

Ok, I should've gone with "months" or something like that. Don't be bein' a stranger with those (especially if anywhere like the thoughtfulness of your photos..).
---

Ok, the following building isn't over 12 stories, but it's kind of proof that the below over-12-story project, Park Kingsbury (by Lagrange) is very dead, since I believe they share the site of the Ronsley building (west side of Kingsbury between Erie and Huron):
http://www.emporis.com/en/wm/bu/?id=parkkingsbury-chicago-il-usa

The replacement is a mere loft conversion of the Ronsley building, although in true developer fashion, the project name has been paradoxically upgraded to "Park Kingsbury Luxury Lofts":
http://www.parkkingsburylofts.com/

SamInTheLoop · #**8906** Posted **Sep 21, 2008, 7:51 PM**

Anyone stop by the Plan Commission Meeting on Thursday? Curious what happened with the ammended proposal for 535 St. Clair.

Obviously, we'd be fortunate to have any additional hotel or condo groundbreakings over the next 12-18 months (I expect we'll get lucky with a few), but this is one of my favorite proposals currently out there. Far superior to the absolutely awful Edition Hotel garbage (the various incarnations of that design range from truly bad to "this has to be a joke"), there is certainly only room for one (at most) of these two - hopefully 535 goes forward while Edition dies...

SamInTheLoop · #**8907** Posted **Sep 21, 2008, 7:58 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by i_am_hydrogen

^One of the worst buildings to go up in this part of the boom.

No way - the Clare is certainly no worse than the middle of the pack (personlly I'd place it in the top third). Point taken about maybe not the best street level impact (that's a definite weakness), but the overall aesthetic here is quite frankly a vast improvement over most other newish beige concrete towers in River North (for just 2 examples [out of very many - just look at post number 8897 for evidence] that happen to be very close, see the Bernardin and Chicagoan, which I think are both more or less POS - the former more so, the latter less so - but still The Clare blows both away)...

honte · #**8908** Posted **Sep 21, 2008, 9:54 PM**

^ I agree, although I am rather fond of the Chicagoan for whatever reason.

Chicago Shawn · #**8909** Posted **Sep 21, 2008, 10:58 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SamInTheLoop

Anyone stop by the Plan Commission Meeting on Thursday? Curious what happened with the ammended proposal for 535 St. Clair.

Obviously, we'd be fortunate to have any additional hotel or condo groundbreakings over the next 12-18 months (I expect we'll get lucky with a few), but this is one of my favorite proposals currently out there. Far superior to the absolutely awful Edition Hotel garbage (the various incarnations of that design range from truly bad to "this has to be a joke"), there is certainly only room for one (at most) of these two - hopefully 535 goes forward while Edition dies...

I went.

535 St Clair was approved. The Grand-Ohio Condo Board of Directors hired some dust fart lawyer to oppose it, even though they were not there to protest the original proposal. They will probably try to sue, its typical NIMBY shit, the building is too tall, too dense, yadda, yadda, yadda. Alderman Reilly mentioned that some residents in the Grand Ohio have expressed support, and that "you can't always please everyone." and tht the public benefits outweigh the negatives. DPD stressed that the project "maintains critical density in the downtown core." That is a new line I haven't heard before, but am very happy to hear it finally recognized within the public view.

Ch.G, Ch.G · #**8910** Posted **Sep 21, 2008, 11:08 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SamInTheLoop

No way - the Clare is certainly no worse than the middle of the pack (personlly I'd place it in the top third). Point taken about maybe not the best street level impact (that's a definite weakness), but the overall aesthetic here is quite frankly a vast improvement over most other newish beige concrete towers in River North (for just 2 examples [out of very many - just look at post number 8897 for evidence] that happen to be very close, see the Bernardin and Chicagoan, which I think are both more or less POS - the former more so, the latter less so - but still The Clare blows both away)...

Earlier it was discussed how Superior 110 makes a much needed bold statement in the area. I think the Clare accomplishes something similar with both aspects of its dichotomous form. Can anyone tell me how that sculptural flourish on top came out? It looks graceful in the renderings...

harryc · #**8911** Posted **Sep 22, 2008, 1:48 AM**

215 W Washington - Sept 16
(note the very long form in the background)

very long form being brought to the foreground

DaWit - Sept 18

Skyline shots - Sept 18

SolarWind · #**8912** Posted **Sep 22, 2008, 2:17 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by spyguy

http://www.suntimes.com/business/roeder/1167682,CST-FIN-roeder17.article

Ronald McDonald's new digs
BY DAVID ROEDER

...Porter plans a 13-story building that would be the largest Ronald McDonald House in the world.[/B]

Some pictures of the existing structure.

September 19, 2008

^ Surrounding neighborhood. The building is to the lower right of 550 St. Clair and has the white satellite dish on top.

pip · #**8913** Posted **Sep 22, 2008, 8:36 AM**

has chicago ever thought not to destroy a historic building in downtown?

TowerGuy37 · #**8914** Posted **Sep 22, 2008, 1:58 PM**

Get Real!!!!!! the city destroys everything! all of daleys trips to paris and yet the administration CONTINUES to let CRAP be built! It only will stop when there are no historic structures left!!!

Mr Downtown · #**8915** Posted **Sep 22, 2008, 3:44 PM**

Not sure what you mean, pip. In the area bounded by Chicago, Halsted, and Roosevelt there are 78 individual landmarks and three landmark districts.

aaron38 · #**8916** Posted **Sep 22, 2008, 4:36 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by pip

has chicago ever thought not to destroy a historic building in downtown?

Does this building have any historical significance? Is it unique in some way?
I'm all for historical preservation, but I just don't see anything worth keeping here.
This building would have been bulldozed in 1931 if the economy hadn't tanked, and nobody would have missed it.

If this was a 20 story pre-war brick tower I would say rehab it. But this just doesn't have the density the city needs.

VivaLFuego · #**8917** Posted **Sep 22, 2008, 6:32 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chicago Shawn

Alderman Reilly mentioned that some residents in the Grand Ohio have expressed support, and that "you can't always please everyone." and tht the public benefits outweigh the negatives. DPD stressed that the project "maintains critical density in the downtown core." That is a new line I haven't heard before, but am very happy to hear it finally recognized within the public view.

Best news I've heard all day (Reilly supporting density in the face of NIMBY opposition, that is). Who is the developer, and what are his political connections that outweigh the NIMBY bitching?

VivaLFuego · #**8918** Posted **Sep 22, 2008, 6:34 PM**

There is a public notice for a zoning change at the 111 W Chestnut / Lubavitch Chabad site at Clark/Chestnut. Was riding by so couldn't stop to check it out.

Nowhereman1280 · #**8919** Posted **Sep 22, 2008, 7:13 PM**

They are dismantling the skip and sidewalk cover at the Clare, looks like this baby is quickly closing on completion.

Sir Isaac Newton · #**8920** Posted **Sep 22, 2008, 11:19 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by aaron38

Does this building have any historical significance? Is it unique in some way?
I'm all for historical preservation, but I just don't see anything worth keeping here.
This building would have been bulldozed in 1931 if the economy hadn't tanked, and nobody would have missed it.

If this was a 20 story pre-war brick tower I would say rehab it. But this just doesn't have the density the city needs.

Agreed. The fact that a building is somewhat old, is really not a good reason to preserve it, in my mind. I really don't see any redeeming qualities to this building (unless it holds some sort of historical significance, which I am guessing it does not).