CHICAGO | Highrise Projects & Construction, v7 - Page 408

harryc · #**8141** Posted **Jun 20, 2017, 2:52 PM**

June 19

appears to be a lot of re-burying - here are the ends of some sleepers poking out from the fill.

harryc · #**8142** Posted **Jun 20, 2017, 3:30 PM**

June 19

BrinChi · #**8143** Posted **Jun 20, 2017, 4:31 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by marothisu

That building is actually part of this development. It was knocked down for what you see in the rendering. Both the building and the empty lot at the corner were purchased on 2/1/2017 by the same buyer (W Sf Goldfinger Owner VIII LLC). 170 N Halsted (the building) for $5M while the lot (178 N Halsted) was sold for $10M. Demo permit was issued on 4/12 and has been knocked down. This development is absolutely taking up where that building used to be.

The building is still there actually unless it's been knocked down in the last week and i haven't noticed. i pass it every day on the train.

harryc · #**8144** Posted **Jun 20, 2017, 7:23 PM**

June 19

spyguy · #**8145** Posted **Jun 21, 2017, 3:56 AM**

Huron and Dearborn - 11 units

For some reason I was thinking this would extend all the way out to Dearborn, but that's not the case apparently

marothisu · #**8146** Posted **Jun 21, 2017, 4:03 AM**

^ This corner? https://www.google.com/maps/place/W+Huro...6aaca9697!8m2!3d41.8948664!4d-87.6297403

ithakas · #**8147** Posted **Jun 21, 2017, 4:09 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by marothisu

^ This corner? https://www.google.com/maps/place/W+Huro...6aaca9697!8m2!3d41.8948664!4d-87.6297403

Yep, where the Van Cleef church is now. It's a decent design and exactly the kind of building I think River North needs more of but not sure worth losing the small church building...

emathias · #**8148** Posted **Jun 21, 2017, 4:27 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ithakas

Yep, where the Van Cleef church is now. It's a decent design and exactly the kind of building I think River North needs more of but not sure worth losing the small church building...

Above the first floor it's fine. But man, that first floor suuuucccckkkkkssss ...

marothisu · #**8149** Posted **Jun 21, 2017, 4:29 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by emathias

Above the first floor it's fine. But man, that first floor suuuucccckkkkkssss ...

The first floor is terrible. It looks like a garage in an alleyway for some 2 unit building in Lakeview or West Town.

spyguy · #**8150** Posted **Jun 21, 2017, 4:42 AM**

It's fine IMO. It's a luxury building so it's going to have parking. The footprint is tiny so it's not like there's an opportunity to do something amazing along Huron (or even retail) anyway. And whatever is built on the corner will eventually obscure it.

Let's worry about the terrible parking podiums in larger developments (see them forming in harry's photos above).

emathias · #**8151** Posted **Jun 21, 2017, 5:12 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by spyguy

It's fine IMO. It's a luxury building so it's going to have parking. The footprint is tiny so it's not like there's an opportunity to do something amazing along Huron (or even retail) anyway. And whatever is built on the corner will eventually obscure it.

Let's worry about the terrible parking podiums in larger developments (see them forming in harry's photos above).

I'll agree with you if the corner lot is actually going to be developed instead of being turned into a private park like the rendering implies.

10023 · #**8152** Posted **Jun 21, 2017, 9:02 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ithakas

Yep, where the Van Cleef church is now. It's a decent design and exactly the kind of building I think River North needs more of but not sure worth losing the small church building...

The church isn't much of a loss.

The ground floor could maybe be opened up (like a Miesian building), but they need to have onsite parking.

What matters in River North is how new buildings interact with (and protect) the remaining rowhouses, which should be preserved. IMO, anything on this scale is great because it keeps another block from ever being leveled for a massive tower on a podium.

harryc · #**8153** Posted **Jun 21, 2017, 12:48 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by emathias

Above the first floor it's fine. But man, that first floor suuuucccckkkkkssss ...

It is a fine expression of post-modern dystopian design. Form follows function : you can enjoy the view from you balcony while the first floor is a fortress against the zombie hoards just below.

aaron38 · #**8154** Posted **Jun 21, 2017, 2:25 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by emathias

I'll agree with you if the corner lot is actually going to be developed instead of being turned into a private park like the rendering implies.

Renderings are notorious for omitting neighboring buildings and depicting an urban tower in an open park setting. I wouldn't read too much into that unless the developer actually owns that land.

Bonsai Tree · #**8155** Posted **Jun 21, 2017, 2:33 PM**

That penthouse is crazy! Two full floors of floor to ceiling windows. The penthouse also has an awesome balcony. I wonder how many parking spaces it will get. I bet it runs for 3 million plus.

Near North Resident · #**8156** Posted **Jun 21, 2017, 3:08 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by spyguy

Huron and Dearborn - 11 units

For some reason I was thinking this would extend all the way out to Dearborn, but that's not the case apparently

those are going to be verrrrry expensive, whole single floor condos and the penthouse gets 2 floors?

10023 · #**8157** Posted **Jun 21, 2017, 4:46 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bonsai Tree

That penthouse is crazy! Two full floors of floor to ceiling windows. The penthouse also has an awesome balcony. I wonder how many parking spaces it will get. I bet it runs for 3 million plus.

Still a bargain compared to London or NY!

For $3 million (£2.35 million) in central London, you're looking at either a very nicely finished 2-bedroom (maybe 3) of about 1,000-1,200 square feet, or something larger than that but not nearly as luxurious as this.

emathias · #**8158** Posted **Jun 21, 2017, 4:48 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by aaron38

Renderings are notorious for omitting neighboring buildings and depicting an urban tower in an open park setting. I wouldn't read too much into that unless the developer actually owns that land.

Earliest reports made it seem the two lots were tied together but I guess that's not the case.

sentinel · #**8159** Posted **Jun 21, 2017, 6:09 PM**

I like the design, it looks very Booth-Hansen-y, similar to that 18-19 story rental building in East-Lakeview - I wonder if they're the architect?

sentinel · #**8160** Posted **Jun 21, 2017, 6:15 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by 10023

Still a bargain compared to London or NY!

For $3 million (£2.35 million) in central London, you're looking at either a very nicely finished 2-bedroom (maybe 3) of about 1,000-1,200 square feet, or something larger than that but not nearly as luxurious as this.

Not sure where you got that $3 million figure, because I could see a full floor going for $4-5 million, in this neighborhood, if the floorplate is over 6,000 sq.ft....and if the duplex penthouse for possibly over $7 million, if not much more. This is solely based on comps that I've recently seen based on gross area alone, and we don't know what the gross area per floor is yet. Regardless, I understand it's an apples to oranges debate, but this type of real estate still ain't cheap. I am happy that the condo market seems to be gaining a tiny bit of extra steam...at least for a little bit...?