CHICAGO | Highrise Projects & Construction, v7 - Page 22

emathias · #**421** Posted **Sep 10, 2015, 6:25 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by wierdaaron

Straight from the horse's computer:

More Details on That 24-Story Tower Proposed for River North [Curbed]

Seeing that, I, for one, would really like to see that brick monstrosity across the street torn down for a park now.

Notyrview · #**422** Posted **Sep 10, 2015, 6:46 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jibba

I was going to add to my post that the visible portions of the south and east elevations are very reminiscent of EnV (and in a good way). Indeed, they're the most pleasant sections of the design. Why they battering-rammed an ill-conceived office box into it and then added a Post Modern temple as the chimera's face, I'll never understand.

I've always been really agnostic about that building (EnV) but now that I know its residential I don't like it. It's too corporate looking for living.

munchymunch · #**423** Posted **Sep 10, 2015, 7:29 PM**

River south is on the planning commission. 3 high rises slated for phase one with some town homes.

http://www.cityofchicago.org/content...aft_Agenda.pdf

wierdaaron · #**424** Posted **Sep 10, 2015, 7:47 PM**

Getting a no-comment from Onni about Reilly saying Grand/Orleans is dead. It has to either be Reilly killed it because they didn't kiss the ring or because of the well-organized opposition from Sexton. I'd almost rather it be the first case, because I don't want to believe "don't block my view" hissyfit, which put me in a depressive spiral for a month after witnessing, actually gets them their way.

BVictor1 · #**425** Posted **Sep 10, 2015, 8:28 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by wierdaaron

Getting a no-comment from Onni about Reilly saying Grand/Orleans is dead. It has to either be Reilly killed it because they didn't kiss the ring or because of the well-organized opposition from Sexton. I'd almost rather it be the first case, because I don't want to believe "don't block my view" hissyfit, which put me in a depressive spiral for a month after witnessing, actually gets them their way.

One thing that people were saying was the the developer had been going around having meeting and offering monies ($Two-million),I don't remember for what, and the alderman didn't know what that was about.

wierdaaron · #**426** Posted **Sep 10, 2015, 8:35 PM**

Yeah that was strange. I thought they were talking about the affordable housing contribution, which was originally going to be somewhere in the millions.

ChickeNES · #**427** Posted **Sep 10, 2015, 9:42 PM**

The Wirtz-backed Booth-Hansen tower at Sheridan/Oakdale appears to be starting site prep from looking at a post on the Forgotten Chicago FB group. They've already felled all of the trees on the lot.

sentinel · #**428** Posted **Sep 10, 2015, 10:55 PM**

Updated pg. 1 to include all of this new info.

wierdaaron · #**429** Posted **Sep 11, 2015, 1:46 AM**

The square fenced-in lot at Dearborn and Polk was sold to LG Development and they want to turn it into a high-end microapartments project. 15 floors, matching roof lines with the building next door. I'm waiting for an email with renders to post on curbed, if I don't get that tonight you'll see photos taken off the projector screen tomorrow on dnainfo. 1300sqft retail space on Dearborn side. No parking whatsoever.

Not much outrage from the south loopers in attendance (retirement age on average). They seem to be afraid of more students in the area, but there's no views to block. General disbelief that microapartments are a real thing.

Mr Downtown · #**430** Posted **Sep 11, 2015, 2:07 PM**

You can understand some questions about 300 sq ft units from folks who well remember the New Ritz and St. James hotels just down the street. And the meeting publicity had described the project as a "student residence."

Since no architect has yet been hired, this is at most a massing diagram:

mark0 · #**431** Posted **Sep 11, 2015, 2:54 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by wierdaaron

That River South massing reminds me too much of Illinois Center. Things don't seem to go very well when you let someone design a huge multi-building project in one swing. I think in a perfect world that land would get parceled out to multiple developers so it could form its own identity as a neighborhood and not have an identity chosen for it.

Ive always found this to be one of Chicago's biggest faults, the massive, monolithic super block developments. Parcel by parcel simply makes for a more granular and interesting city. But it comes down to money and I think Chicago has big, institutional investors behind the names on the billboard and they got the pockets to buy up whole blocks whereas in NYC the land is so expensive and the developer pool so deep the footprints are just smaller.

brian_b · #**432** Posted **Sep 11, 2015, 2:56 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by munchymunch

River south is on the planning commission. 3 high rises slated for phase one with some town homes.

http://www.cityofchicago.org/content...aft_Agenda.pdf

The paragraph says 942 dwelling units total and that seems to include the 62 townhouses, so that seems to imply an average of 293 units per high rise.

Perhaps I am understanding this incorrectly, but 293 per building would make these 30-35 floor buildings with an average unit mix.

sentinel · #**433** Posted **Sep 11, 2015, 3:10 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by brian_b

The paragraph says 942 dwelling units total and that seems to include the 62 townhouses, so that seems to imply an average of 293 units per high rise.

Perhaps I am understanding this incorrectly, but 293 per building would make these 30-35 floor buildings with an average unit mix.

The original plan commission documents that the Chi Arch blog had posted a few months ago had the breakdown of tower heights and units for each:

Building A is 600'

Two other buildings are 380' and the remaining two are 500'

http://www.chicagoarchitecture.org/2...uth-loop-plan/

VKChaz · #**434** Posted **Sep 11, 2015, 3:17 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by mark0

But it comes down to money and I think Chicago has big, institutional investors behind the names on the billboard and they got the pockets to buy up whole blocks whereas in NYC the land is so expensive and the developer pool so deep the footprints are just smaller.

I think it has to do with having large areas for development. Doesn't Hudson Yards in NYC have a single master plan and primary developer?
Developers can create plans with genuine urban settings and the public can insist on it when making choices of where to live, spend time, etc. But if people want an LSE environment, then I imagine that is what developers will build.

sentinel · #**435** Posted **Sep 11, 2015, 3:17 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Downtown

You can understand some questions about 300 sq ft units from folks who well remember the New Ritz and St. James hotels just down the street. And the meeting publicity had described the project as a "student residence."

Since no architect has yet been hired, this is at most a massing diagram:

That's not a massing model, that's very much what appears to be a relatively thought-out design by some architect..

wierdaaron · #**436** Posted **Sep 11, 2015, 3:30 PM**

Here we go:

Upscale Micro Apartments Planned for Printer's Row[Curbed]

I'm excited. I won't live there, but it should add an interesting new dynamic to Printer's Row. I suggested to the developers, as did someone in attendance, that reconfiguring the retail to hold the SE corner might have more of an impact and help activate the whole Dearborn Station square as a public space.