CHICAGO | General Developments

[harryc]

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

I was walking by the Realtor's site the other day and saw them moving that equipment in. I asked one of the workers if they were planning on replacing it with another building and they said "not yet", whatever that means.

Because that is the wrecking company.


Heneghan Wrecking - "we make space"

[PKDickman]

Originally Posted by ardecila

No plans to restore the cornice. It's a tricky beast - the building was first built in 1893 but extended eastward in 1898 and upward (by one floor) in 1903. That last renovation removed the original cornice and substituted a new one, but that was gone after a decade or two.

The freeze/thaw cycles and rainwater tended to pop these massive terracotta projections off the buildings and onto the heads of pedestrians below. Architects designed them to look pretty and meet certain design ideals, but they didn't have access to lightweight materials and modern waterproofing. No surprise that Monadnock and the Art Deco buildings to follow did not have projecting cornices at all.

Original terra cotta held up pretty well considering. But the concept of maintenance was lost. Every decade or so someone has to go over the side on a bosun's chair and check and point up the joints. If you let it go for 40 or 50 years, stuff happens.

In '74 a piece fell off 22 W Madison and squashed some lady. Buildings cracked down and we lost a lot of cornices between '74 and '78 (when the ordinance lapsed)

About every 25 years, a piece falls off a building and splashes egg on the face of the Dept of Buildings, and they crack down again.

If any wants pics of what the New York Life Bldg looked like with it with its cornice you can find them here:http://www.cityofchicago.org/dam/cit...e_Building.pdf

[wierdaaron]

I'm having trouble understanding which building is this lakeshore athletic club building.

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by Loopy

I know a few architects that would do a lot more than bake cookies to land a job like that.

Setting aside the (vaguely sexist) contention that only women would bring cookies to a meeting, there are many many talented female architects in this town, even if their names are often not on the door like Jeanne Gang's. Most of them would give their eye teeth to land a supertall commission from one of the city's most prominent institutions.

[Remy_Bork]

The old Lakeshore Athletic Club Building is the beige, siding covered building with several floors of parking above it. Here is a link to a google streetview where you can see the old sign

[Ch.G, Ch.G]

Originally Posted by ardecila

Seems like they are exploring multiple design options for the Megamall property. The brochure references a 4-story mega-retail development that is a long, skinny version of the new Mariano's development on Broadway and probably just as ugly (Antunovich strikes again).

However, the renderings show a different scheme with two floors of retail and underground parking... I doubt the underground parking would happen without some kind of TIF subsidy, even though it would produce a far more attractive and vibrant atmosphere along Milwaukee.

No mixed-use is being considered, apparently. This will be strictly an urban shopping center.

Sooooo... just to be clear: They're proposing 426 parking spots?

[wierdaaron]

Originally Posted by Remy_Bork

The old Lakeshore Athletic Club Building is the beige, siding covered building with several floors of parking above it. Here is a link to a google streetview where you can see the old sign

Oh jeeze I thought the whole thing was a parking garage. There was a gym in there?

[wierdaaron]

I went to that McCormick Place meeting tonight. Hardly any new information of interest to this forum or Curbed. Not even any crazy resident comments. The only nuggets I'd consider worth your time:

- Street parking in the surrounding blocks will be tinkered with during and after the construction, resulting in a total of 51 fewer parking spaces, with over 200 free spaces switching to permit parking. Residents will like that because it will keep McCormick workers from parking in what they see as their parking spaces.

- A new pocket park will be added at S Prairie and 21st. I didn't hear any opinions from residents about it. I don't think this was technically new information but it has progressed to rough design phase. McPier will pay for maintaining it.

The general tone from community members seemed to be "please keep all those strangers who are coming into my community for concerts and games from staying too long or looking at my condo building". One guy did say they should be encouraging those people to stay and spend their money and build motor row back up.

[Ch.G, Ch.G]

Originally Posted by wierdaaron

I'm having trouble understanding which building is this lakeshore athletic club building.

From Lynn Becker's blog:



I have a weird fondness for this building. Just to be clear, I know I probably shouldn't, and I certainly won't mourn its loss nor would I ever advocate for its survival, but still...

Maybe it's the blue stairs.

[ChiTownCity]

I just hope they don't get rid of/close off that pedestrian bridge...

[ardecila]

Not exactly a new highrise but a development nonetheless...

The city has allowed a cafe to open up in a newsstand structure at Monroe/Wacker. This isn't technically new, there was one at Pritzker Park for a few years, but this is the first one on a public sidewalk. Hopefully this is successful and opens the door for food carts.


Trib

What's also cool is that the city created a catch-all permit for new types of businesses - not as laissez-faire as it could be but it may make things easier for innovators and small business owners. These kiosks are the first to receive such a permit.

[tjp]

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/reale...51H5815023C7T#

Apple is looking for other locations on Michigan Avenue, including the current Top Shop space, apparently. I wonder if this means Top Shop is thinking of closing already or moving, or if GGP is just willing to get rid of them in order to secure Apple as a tenant?

[intrepidDesign]

Originally Posted by Ch.G, Ch.G

From Lynn Becker's blog:



I have a weird fondness for this building. Just to be clear, I know I probably shouldn't, and I certainly won't mourn its loss nor would I ever advocate for its survival, but still...

Maybe it's the blue stairs.

Tear that vomit down!

[rlw777]

If the athletic club site goes as big as they were originally talking about River Plaza is going to look even more out of place than it already does.

[k1052]

Originally Posted by tjp

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/reale...51H5815023C7T#

Apple is looking for other locations on Michigan Avenue, including the current Top Shop space, apparently. I wonder if this means Top Shop is thinking of closing already or moving, or if GGP is just willing to get rid of them in order to secure Apple as a tenant?

Reportedly the existing building they are in is in very poor shape. They'd have to close the entire store for quite a while to rebuild. A move to new space is more likely since that's most often what they do when a store is at the end of it's life or has been outgrown.

[wierdaaron]

Originally Posted by tjp

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/reale...51H5815023C7T#

Apple is looking for other locations on Michigan Avenue, including the current Top Shop space, apparently. I wonder if this means Top Shop is thinking of closing already or moving, or if GGP is just willing to get rid of them in order to secure Apple as a tenant?

Apple generally prefers total control over their buildouts, especially in big cities, and they aren't afraid to fight with city planning committees to build stores wherever and however they want. I can't see them moving into an existing mag mile building, most of which are pretty old, where all they can change is the interior.

They might be better off attaching themselves to a new building, like that new Sterling Bay project at 300 N Mich (which included an Apple-ish store in one render) or the 2 floors of retail at 200 N Mich.

Otherwise, if they want to stay in mag mile north they're probably looking for a building they can demolish and completely replace, and there aren't many that don't have stuff on top of them.

[j korzeniowski]

Originally Posted by Ch.G, Ch.G

I have a weird fondness for this building. Just to be clear, I know I probably shouldn't, and I certainly won't mourn its loss nor would I ever advocate for its survival, but still...

Maybe it's the blue stairs.

you're not alone. it is somewhat of an icon, at least to me, but as you say, i won't be down there with a picket if they tear it down.

i think because it was in some 80's movies (including, i think, that shitty parent-and-offspring-switch-bodies movie with fred savage and judge reinhold had a scene there.)

[SamInTheLoop]

Originally Posted by ardecila

Setting aside the (vaguely sexist) contention that only women would bring cookies to a meeting, there are many many talented female architects in this town, even if their names are often not on the door like Jeanne Gang's. Most of them would give their eye teeth to land a supertall commission from one of the city's most prominent institutions.

I'm not sure I would call the industry association National Association of Realtors one of Chicago's most prominent institutions though.....

[SamInTheLoop]

Originally Posted by wierdaaron

Apple generally prefers total control over their buildouts, especially in big cities, and they aren't afraid to fight with city planning committees to build stores wherever and however they want. I can't see them moving into an existing mag mile building, most of which are pretty old, where all they can change is the interior.

They might be better off attaching themselves to a new building, like that new Sterling Bay project at 300 N Mich (which included an Apple-ish store in one render) or the 2 floors of retail at 200 N Mich.

Otherwise, if they want to stay in mag mile north they're probably looking for a building they can demolish and completely replace, and there aren't many that don't have stuff on top of them.

A move south of the River by Apple would be huge. Actually though, they should really expand south of the river, not move their one truly downtown location there. Obviously the market is there, and they certainly have been interested in the past, as they were in discussions for a Block 37 store several years ago......200 N Michigan or the 300 Michigan site would indeed also work very well. BTW, re the 300 (current dilapidated Walgreens) site - AFAIK, Sterling Bay is selling this site to its ultimate developer. Hotel/retail, residential/retail, or hotel/residential/retail being the likely program options.....

[k1052]

Originally Posted by SamInTheLoop

A move south of the River by Apple would be huge. Actually though, they should really expand south of the river, not move their one truly downtown location there. Obviously the market is there, and they certainly have been interested in the past, as they were in discussions for a Block 37 store several years ago......200 N Michigan or the 300 Michigan site would indeed also work very well. BTW, re the 300 (current dilapidated Walgreens) site - AFAIK, Sterling Bay is selling this site to its ultimate developer. Hotel/retail, residential/retail, or hotel/residential/retail being the likely program options.....

There is no way Apple will move the Michigan Ave store south of the river.