CHICAGO | Highrise Projects & Construction, v7

[headcase]

Originally Posted by emathias

Can we hope for something as good as the Hearst Magazine Building to come of this?

You can always hope...I wouldn't hold your breath though....


SSDD

[Ned.B]

^Nothing quite like Hearst can happen because as a federally owned building with a Chicago landmarked interior, no local, state, nor federal preservation agency will give approval to gut out the center of the building in order to build a tower inside of it. Anything constructed will have to sit atop the existing donut, which is only 50 feet wide all the way around the light court, and have to be supported by the buildings existing foundations and structural system.

[r18tdi]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

Has the Viceroy Hotel still not received zoning approval yet ? Crains is saying that's the case

The tower crane has been up for weeks. Crains must be confused if they think it is waiting on city entitlements.

[SamInTheLoop]

Let's just hope the overall team that is chosen for it is completely different from previous players attached to prior versions as for developer, architects, etc. I recall at the moment that it was Lucien Lagrange that had designed the (I believe) most recent previous version(s). Need a complete 180 degree turn in all aspects from what was tried/who was involved before....

Also, I'll be skeptical that anything actually gets going here in the next 2-3 years, at least (and thus potentially even for this entire cycle). New team - whoever it is, could always get lucky right off the bat sometime in 2017 and land some huge anchor tenant to launch the project maybe by 2018, but everything would need to fall into place for them (and don't forget, there are very established excellent office proposals far ahead of this potential project 'in line' to launch this cycle still (calling 130 Franklin!)......

We'll see how the process unfolds and eventual actual proposal shapes up.....

[the urban politician]

^ McDonald's? Walgreens? Come on!

[JerellO]

I miss Chicago! bootcamp was in Great Lakes and visited the city while family came to my graduation. Beautiful architecture, city grid and river. Much love from California!!

[maru2501]

^ good luck to you!

[The Pimp]

Originally Posted by JerellO

I miss Chicago! bootcamp was in Great Lakes and visited the city while family came to my graduation. Beautiful architecture, city grid and river. Much love from California!!

Thank you for your service to this great country!

[hotwheels]

Interior Tour: Units and Amenities on View at MILA Open House

Taking its name from the first two letters of the intersection where it sits at Michigan and Lake, the project offers retail frontages that add to the vibrant commercial and nightlife scene in America's third largest city. An elegantly lit double-height lobby welcomes residents, who will enjoy a number of hotel-like amenities, including maid and 24/7 room services. Luxury apartment units in Chicago are in high demand, and the prices reflect that reality. Studios in the bKL Architecture-designed building start at about $2,000 a month with the pictured two-bedroom suite fetching nearly $5,000.

[Busy Bee]

Reminder


http://image.slidesharecdn.com/Deuts...?cb=1269020313

[r18tdi]

Originally Posted by Busy Bee

Reminder

^ Woah. By Lagrange?

[Rizzo]

Wow I haven't seen that union station rendering in ages. I've long forgotten about that

[Ned.B]

Originally Posted by r18tdi

^ Woah. By Lagrange?

Yeah, but don't give him too much credit. All he did was copy the original Burnham/Graham Anderson Probst and White design, but done in precast concrete with all of the detailing at the top simplified.

[ardecila]

I loathe the cheesy faux Deco makeover that LaGrange gave to Union Station's interior spaces back in the 90s.

I don't have much confidence that he would do a good job with the vertical expansion. However, he did come up with a clever scheme back in the 90s to build two slender towers instead of one massive bulky one.

[emathias]

Originally Posted by Ned.B

^Nothing quite like Hearst can happen because as a federally owned building with a Chicago landmarked interior, no local, state, nor federal preservation agency will give approval to gut out the center of the building in order to build a tower inside of it. Anything constructed will have to sit atop the existing donut, which is only 50 feet wide all the way around the light court, and have to be supported by the buildings existing foundations and structural system.

Existing foundations were built with an addition planned and engineered for. I was thinking for about the exterior look than any interior changes. I would rather see a modern top than an extension of the limestone. Obviously not a mimic of the Hearst, but it seems like more than just a box on top could be achieved by a good architect.

[VKChaz]

Related Midwest reaches deal to develop huge South Loop site

Question about the Related South Loop development: Is the assumption that the Metra tracks stay where they are or is it possible that a section of the tracks would be shifted West and allow for development along Clark Street?

[Randomguy34]

Originally Posted by VKChaz

Question about the Related South Loop development: Is the assumption that the Metra tracks stay where they are or is it possible that a section of the tracks would be shifted West and allow for development along Clark Street?

I know someone who said that the city was going to buy the site and use "moving the Metra tracks to improve speed and safety" as an excuse for purchasing the lot. But now that Related bought the site instead, I'm not sure if the city is still going to encourage them to do something with the tracks. If Related has any plans for active street use on Clark, then the only two options they have is to shift the Metra tracks, or to cover/bury the tracks with buildings/parks. If Related does end up just shifting the tracks, then that leaves the old ROW a possible option to reroute the Orange Line through the Wells Street portion of the Loop for better transit access.

[Mr Downtown]

A decade ago, I got Rezmar to look at moving the Metra tracks more to the middle of the site, mirroring the situation north of Roosevelt. There were various issues that eventually caused them to decide moving them was too difficult.

It's even more difficult now. Back then, the tracks were on a "relocatable easement" that could be moved wherever the owner of the underlying property wanted them so long as they got from the south end to the north end. But the PDs for Riverside Park and for Roosevelt Collection converted that easement into fee simple land ownership for Metra—an agency that's not exactly known for being flexible, long-term thinkers.

To move those tracks at this point, the city would have to put big, big pressure on Metra, and pay for everything, including flaggers, boiler inspectors, and a team of unionized balloon-animal shapers on cutover Sunday.

[harryc]

5/3


5/19

[maru2501]

nice to have all the new stuff in that area, it's just all too short