CHICAGO | General Developments - Page 2607

Rizzo · #**52121** Posted **Apr 13, 2023, 4:45 PM**

The Lincoln Ave project is a daycare I believe. And I recall seeing an exact copy of it somewhere else in the city biking around. Just can’t remember where

ardecila · #**52122** Posted **Apr 14, 2023, 6:09 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Randomguy34

Permits issued for 43 Green phase 2

Dope. Between this and the tower at Damen/Lake, it's a good time for Green Line TOD. Unlike the Blue Line TOD, these are mostly affordable housing.

SolarWind · #**52123** Posted **Apr 14, 2023, 9:24 PM**

April 13, 2023

SolarWind · #**52124** Posted **Apr 14, 2023, 9:25 PM**

April 13, 2023

SolarWind · #**52125** Posted **Apr 16, 2023, 8:18 AM**

April 6, 2023

SolarWind · #**52126** Posted **Apr 16, 2023, 8:18 AM**

April 10, 2023

SolarWind · #**52127** Posted **Apr 16, 2023, 8:19 AM**

April 10, 2023

left of center · #**52128** Posted **Apr 18, 2023, 4:28 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SolarWind

April 10, 2023

Great that the holes on that stretch of Chicago Ave are getting filled in. As available developable land begins to become more scarce in that neighborhood, lets hope that gets developers more interested in building on some of the CHA land to the north of Chicago. I imagine the reason those parcels have not been redeveloped yet is due to the requirements for a high percentage of subsidized/low income units, increasing the costs of those projects.

SIGSEGV · #**52129** Posted **Apr 18, 2023, 5:52 PM**

Does anybody know what's going on with Solstice on the Park? Seems like they're doing significant exterior work, which is unexpected for a relatively new building...

Klippenstein · #**52130** Posted **Apr 18, 2023, 5:58 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SIGSEGV

Does anybody know what's going on with Solstice on the Park? Seems like they're doing significant exterior work, which is unexpected for a relatively new building...

Some of the exterior cladding came off and so they put up scaffolding, took off all the corner pieces and stopped letting their school use their playground. It's been like that for months. I'm not sure what's the hold up.

Zerton · #**52131** Posted **Apr 18, 2023, 9:07 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jibba

2700 block-E side N Lincoln

Surprisingly nice-looking infill. Posting full-size so detail is shown. Here's what it replaced: https://goo.gl/maps/HFGb3JhzGxndK8mg6

Edit: This is a daycare, apparently. Article on YIMBY: https://chicagoyimby.com/2021/07/con...coln-park.html

Wow, it's nice to see some decorative brickwork. So many developers cheap out now.

Toasty Joe · #**52132** Posted **Apr 18, 2023, 9:18 PM**

^And traditionally "breaks up the massing" with depth and subtle (yet tasteful) masonry work. Night & day from the cheap crap being put up here and in other cities

Mr Downtown · #**52133** Posted **Apr 19, 2023, 4:11 AM**

Man, that is really well executed.

Do we know the architect?

F1 Tommy · #**52134** Posted **Apr 19, 2023, 5:50 PM**

Looks like some of the buildings around D.C.

I also love 1020 W Randolph, it looks like it could have been built in 1890!! Great little building.

r18tdi · #**52135** Posted **Apr 19, 2023, 9:16 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by F1 Tommy

Looks like some of the buildings around D.C.

I also love 1020 W Randolph, it looks like it could have been built in 1890!! Great little building.

Agreed, and it replaced a fugly drive-thru bank to boot.

pilsenarch · #**52136** Posted **Apr 19, 2023, 10:14 PM**

https://chicagoyimby.com/2021/07/con...coln-park.html

Jibba · #**52137** Posted **Apr 19, 2023, 10:45 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by r18tdi

Agreed, and it replaced a fugly drive-thru bank to boot.

It's nice but looks too deliberate an attempt at facsimile to me when something merely referential would have maybe looked better? The ye olde appearance is belied by the 'floating' parapet; makes the piers look like they're not upholding anything (which, of course, they aren't).

It kinda rests in that uncanny valley of resemblance for me.

Toasty Joe · #**52138** Posted **Apr 20, 2023, 4:25 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jibba

It's nice but looks too deliberate an attempt at facsimile to me when something merely referential would have maybe looked better? The ye olde appearance is belied by the 'floating' parapet; makes the piers look like they're not upholding anything (which, of course, they aren't).

It kinda rests in that uncanny valley of resemblance for me.

Damn just enjoy a solid building with a quality facade. They're getting rarer by the day.

Jibba · #**52139** Posted **Apr 20, 2023, 7:37 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toasty Joe

Damn just enjoy a solid building with a quality facade. They're getting rarer by the day.

I think it's nice, as I said. But it's also a bit hokey. I am OK wanting for more in that regard.

Many cities in Europe do this kind of thing very well -- they retain the parts of the vernacular that are of value and render them through modern materials and methods to transfigure them. You wind up with a building that is at once harmonious with its historical neighbors and fully of its time. Rather than what we have here, which is something attempting to create the illusion that is is the historical thing, through purely superficial means. And the illusion is broken in several ways, leading to the perceptual dissonance that I get from it. Yes, I'd rather have the material richness and texture of this building than one attempting a less effortful illusion (which is a lot of the low-rise stuff going up in the same area), but in general I don't like intentions of this type in architecture (or any domain of life for that matter).

left of center · #**52140** Posted **Apr 20, 2023, 7:57 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toasty Joe

Damn just enjoy a solid building with a quality facade. They're getting rarer by the day.

Agreed. This building looks authentic and not like some cheap Disney-esque architectural revival. Very well executed. Would not mind to see more examples like this going up in the city.