CHICAGO | Highrise Projects & Construction, v7

[HowardL]

From the Ravenswood tonight, it looked like (2) Revcon rigs were on site at Atrium Village phase 1.

[munchymunch]

This — —, how does this effect the street wall. — the Character of it, I want something interesting for this generation, if the development doesn't evolve paapageorge — or destroying buildings, the city should stay out of it.


In other news this appeared on Hines' website.

645 West Madison is a proposed 450,000-square foot state-of-the-art office tower located in the West Loop, Chicago’s fastest growing submarket.
The building’s 28,500-square-foot floor plate allows for flexible open plans with core depths of 44 to 70 feet. Tenant amenities include a 6,000-square-foot landscaped rooftop sky garden with skyline views as well as a private 4,000-square-foot tenant terrace. Other amenities planned for the building are a fitness center, conference center and shared tenant lounge. 645 West Madison is located within a few blocks of the commuter rail stations and has direct access from the Kennedy/Dan Ryan expressway.
Completion is expected in 2018.

link

[Mr Downtown]

Isn't it more likely that the design change is mostly the developer's choice after doing some value engineering or wind tunnel testing? Someone here mentioned months ago the engineering problems with the huge exposed structurals.

[Kngkyle]

Originally Posted by Mr Downtown

Isn't it more likely that the design change is mostly the developer's choice after doing some value engineering or wind tunnel testing? Someone here mentioned months ago the engineering problems with the huge exposed structurals.

That is certainly more likely, however that contradicts what Bvictor posted about it coming from city. I suppose it is possible that his source is mistaken.

[rlw777]

Originally Posted by Jibba

This new Essex iteration is elegant and has good verticality, from what I can see. The structure is carried through the N & S elevations nicely which breaks up the mass well. It also has the benefit of having a tall-proportioned park-facing side.

Yes it's doing generic well... In a location where I would rather see a parking lot than this generic —. Here is to hoping this one dies before construction.

[spyguy]

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/realestat...pment-buys-near-chicago-magnificent-mile

New York developer doubles down, just off Mag Mile

The mystery over a New York developer and its plans for a prime River North site has taken a new twist, with the firm paying $12 million for a property next door.

Symmetry Property Development, which floated a plan last year for a 36-story hotel and residential tower at the northeast corner of Wabash Avenue and Superior Street, acquired the property just to the east in April, according to Cook County property records.

This virtually guarantees all of these buildings are destined to come down, continuing this wonderful teardown trend all over Streeterville/River North.

The article also mentions Golub is planning a new high rise for the old Crain's/ Giordano's building. It will be interesting to see how Reilly handles these two potential developments after blocking the previous hotel tower proposal.

[Kngkyle]

Originally Posted by spyguy

This virtually guarantees all of these buildings are destined to come down, continuing this wonderful teardown trend all over Streeterville/River North.

Ugh. That is such a pleasant block to walk along too. I know there is about a 0% chance of this but hopefully they do some architectural wizardry and keep the facades of the old buildings.

[BVictor1]

Originally Posted by Kngkyle

That is certainly more likely, however that contradicts what Bvictor posted about it coming from city. I suppose it is possible that his source is mistaken.

My source was the developer and the architect. They could have mistakenly lied, but they both said specifically that it was the city/landmarks.

[UrbanLibertine]

Originally Posted by spyguy

This virtually guarantees all of these buildings are destined to come down, continuing this wonderful teardown trend all over Streeterville/River North.

The article also mentions Golub is planning a new high rise for the old Crain's/ Giordano's building. It will be interesting to see how Reilly handles these two potential developments after blocking the previous hotel tower proposal.

Why not just let developers demo every old and beautiful building in this city now, so that we can pretend like Chicago has only existed since the invention of the parking podium?

[pilsenarch]

Originally Posted by BVictor1

My source was the developer and the architect. They could have mistakenly lied, but they both said specifically that it was the city/landmarks.

Of course it was Landmarks staff.. I've worked with those power-hungry so-called architects... They are under the mistaken belief that it is their absolute duty to heavily influence the design of any project that comes under their purview regardless of its competence...

Their opinions are not based on any logical basis grounded in architectural history or theory, but merely based upon their subjective opinions... they love to 'dumb down' strong design concepts under the misguided belief that 'lower profile' and less 'controversial' designs must always be better companions to historic districts...

[Mr Downtown]

I know DPD had qualms about the void in the middle of Essex Tower, but I'm not so sure they would have objected to the exoskeleton on principle, especially the later versions we saw. I suspect it was a combination of things, where a redesign to minimize the void prompted the architects to take a closer look at the cost and detailing of the exposed structurals.

[r18tdi]

Curbed put up a few more pictures of the Essex tower here.

[GregBear24]

Essex: there are no words I can muster to fully express my disappointment. The previous design was beautiful, elegant, interesting and different. This is typical Chicago VE. Better than a parking lot, but wish I had never seen the gorgeous stilt design.

[harryc]

5/05


5/17

[braun06]

The Essex Tower addition looks to be more of a code/commission related issue for several reasons to me. The first reason is the similar massing and breaking of massing design style applied to 1000 S. Michigan. With both we have the same awkward structure stretching or leaping above a lower building esthetic. The building has vertical elements but its skin is largely designed on the horizontal. This could be for height reduction scale appearance to make it palatable to community groups though it isn't really flattering.

The second reason I say this design is committee or code related is that it costs money to enclose open space. Its not a cost savings to add glass or mechanical service for a big tall open space that otherwise wouldn't have them.

[Notyrview]

I don't like either of these designs. The second one is boring and like everything else, but the first one doesn't make any sense. Only the original design was worth fighting for.

[pilsenarch]

Originally Posted by Notyrview

I don't like either of these designs. The second one is boring and like everything else, but the first one doesn't make any sense. Only the original design was worth fighting for.

Kinda agree... but that's my point, only the first one was free from Landmarks Staff influence...

[UPChicago]

Originally Posted by Notyrview

I don't like either of these designs. The second one is boring and like everything else, but the first one doesn't make any sense. Only the original design was worth fighting for.

Very true the original was by far the best by leaps and bounds!

[BVictor1]

800 South Michigan Avenue.

[harryc]

5/02
From Harlem ave


5/04
As seen from the Ridgeland stop on the Green line


5/11