CHICAGO | Highrise Projects & Construction, v7

[Via Chicago]

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.

the entire rest of planet earth is a "bargain" compared to NY or London.

[r18tdi]

Originally Posted by sentinel

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...?

The duplex penthouse at 61 W. Erie is probably the closest, as far as comp units go. It wants $5.85 million:

https://www.redfin.com/IL/Chicago/61...home/113817816

[sentinel]

Originally Posted by r18tdi

The duplex penthouse at 61 W. Erie is probably the closest, as far as comp units go. It wants $5.85 million:

https://www.redfin.com/IL/Chicago/61...home/113817816

Ok, so a 4 bd/br at that price, is still less (potentially) than this proposed building, in terms of floor area per residence, because it looks larger than 5,800 sq. ft. in the render. Even if the area is comparable, that's still a lot of money.

[Vlajos]

I think it looks great. Yeah the parking garage isn't the best, but it looks like it won't be very noticeable.

[vexxed82]

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.

No doubt! Renderings are also notorious for making architects and designers think that photographers can easily recreate the look of a rending, too. You'd be surprised at some of the 'edits' clients have requested to photos I've delivered...

[Investing In Chicago]

Originally Posted by sentinel

Ok, so a 4 bd/br at that price, is still less (potentially) than this proposed building, in terms of floor area per residence, because it looks larger than 5,800 sq. ft. in the render. Even if the area is comparable, that's still a lot of money.

Based on sold comps, It's a pretty safe bet this Penthouse will probably fetch ~$925-950/sq ft.; which seems to be the ceiling in the Chicago Real Estate market, save for a very small handful of units.

Looking at the renderings; and guessing the lot is not much larger than a standard 25x125 lot (which appears to be the case based on Google Maps); I don't think each floor is much larger than ~1,800-2000 sq ft.

[Bonsai Tree]

I love how the balcony looks right onto the vacant lot next door. Does anyone know if the owner of that plot is planning to do something with it? I can imagine the look on the penthouse owner's face when they find out another tower will block their view.

[HomrQT]

Originally Posted by vexxed82

No doubt! Renderings are also notorious for making architects and designers think that photographers can easily recreate the look of a rending, too. You'd be surprised at some of the 'edits' clients have requested to photos I've delivered...

What kind of edits? Proportion changes? Color/saturation/contrast changes? Others?

[r18tdi]

Originally Posted by Bonsai Tree

I love how the balcony looks right onto the vacant lot next door. Does anyone know if the owner of that plot is planning to do something with it? I can imagine the look on the penthouse owner's face when they find out another tower will block their view.

Same with 61 W. Erie. I have a feeling that the single-story Walgreens and surface lot won't be there forever...

[vexxed82]

Originally Posted by HomrQT

What kind of edits? Proportion changes? Color/saturation/contrast changes? Others?

The color/contrast/exposure corrections are easy. Though sometimes window color can be an point of contention. The glass color can vary greatly based on the sky conditions. It's like 'Yes, I know the the glass may be a little more turquoise, but it's reflecting a brilliantly blue sky". So sometimes it's hard/impossible to match the actual glass color to how it photographs. Also totally varies based on cloud cover and types of clouds.

Usually it's the things that can't actually be edited - like perspective relative other buildings/skyline that are tricky. "Can you get the whole building in the shot (need a super wide-angle lens) from x intersection AND make the skyline (that's 1.5 miles away) much closer (need a telephoto lens)" -or- can you make the unsightly parking lot look more like a park (which is a whole other ball of editing/photoshop wax)

Sometimes it just has to do with where they want buildings photographed from. Renderings can be developed from any point in 3d space, but in there real world, there may be a building, or trees, or traffic, or a whole host of other things that make a specific vantage point tricky and/or impossible to shoot from.

[Mr Downtown]

I did a lot of real estate photography around the country back when digital photography was pretty new. Clients were notorious for wanting me to put in a clear blue sky, no matter what the windows were reflecting. They didn't seem to understand that it all goes together, and that an Arizona blue sky looks very different from a Florida blue sky.

At least I finally trained them that, no, I couldn't enhance the photo to show the other side of the building.

[J_M_Tungsten]

Today
1001 W Chicago

[Notyrview]

Wow what a mess

[LouisVanDerWright]

^ I'm going to get railroaded for saying it, but I think these turned out pretty awesome. It's something different, that's for sure.

[ithakas]

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

^ I'm going to get railroaded for saying it, but I think these turned out pretty awesome. It's something different, that's for sure.

I'm waiting for them to finish and clean the bricks before passing judgment, but I think it already looks better than a couple weeks ago.

And the placement/size of this project is really exciting. I don't think any project from this boom has so visibly extended the outer reaches of downtown quite like this one (though I think Related's plans for their South Loop site will eventually have a similar impact on a larger scale). I was looking up Milwaukee from Grand a couple weeks ago and for that first time from that vantage point it seemed downtown was both south and north of me on Milwaukee.

[Rizzo]

First I saw it Sunday I thought the brick looked like a modern take on an old Chicago common wall. The scars of buildings that have come and gone, old ghost signs, repairs here and there with slight mismatches in color and texture. You get layering and banding in the old brickwork. That's beauty with age. Not entirely sure if the brick on this one will age well with time, but I don't find the facade offensive at all. Hell of a lot more interesting than the usual trite cladding systems seen all over town.

[marothisu]

The future Hoxton Hotel at 200 N Green got issued its first new construction building permit yesterday for foundation through level 3. This is 12 stories, so I believe it counts as a high rise.

[emathias]

Originally Posted by r18tdi

Same with 61 W. Erie. I have a feeling that the single-story Walgreens and surface lot won't be there forever...

And Catholic Charities, too, both their building at Huron/Lasalle and their parking lot at Erie/Lasalle. At some point they have to be thinking, "We could do a lot more good work for a lot more people if we sold our prime real estate and invested it somewhere less prime." If Holy Name can redevelop its parking lot, I don't see any reason CC couldn't redevelop theirs. And their building, which used to be a hospital I believe could have some really interesting redevelopment possibilities. It seems like it would make a pretty good small school.

[Near North Resident]

Originally Posted by J_M_Tungsten

Today
1001 W Chicago

I drive by this all the time, and I'm telling you, far and away one of the biggest pieces of ugly garbage erected during this boom

[FrankLloydWrong]

Originally Posted by Near North Resident

I drive by this all the time, and I'm telling you, far and away one of the biggest pieces of ugly garbage erected during this boom

I walk buy this one going to and from work everyday, and I'm still not sure whether I like it or not. But I will say this, it has elicited more of a response from me than a lot of other buildings going up during this boom. I suppose that's worth something.