CHICAGO | Boom rundown - everything over 12 floors. v5

[VivaLFuego]

Originally Posted by Chicago Shawn

Additionally, we need to legislate design characteristics that will create instant complaints such as placing windows on mid-block lot lines or carving into party walls for recessed balconies.

You'd think this could have been addressed in the zoning code, or at minimum in the design review of the Planned Development process, but nope.

[VivaLFuego]

Originally Posted by spyguy

A proposed Residential-Business Planned Development submitted by GH 630, L.L.C., for the property generally located at 335-363 East Erie Street, 628-648 North McClurg Court, and 334-362 East Ontario Street. The applicant proposes to construct a mixed-use development with 757 residential units in two residential towers of 51 and 54 stories connected to a 10-level podium structure containing approximately 210,000 square feet of commercial office space, ground-floor retail space and approximately 718 off-street parking spaces. (42 Ward)

Word.

http://www.chicagorealestatedaily.co...age.pl?id=2166

Chicago: Children's Memorial Hospital, 200 E. Chicago Ave., 275-bed hospital, May 2008, $800 million.

Chicago: 330 N. Wabash Hotel Conversion, 330 N. Wabash Ave., 275-unit hotel conversion, April 2009, $20 million.

Chicago: Iliad Hotel, 333 S. Halsted St., 33-story hotel, April 2009, $100 million.

Nice to see this one moving quickly! Get it approved ASAP.

[i_am_hydrogen]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

^ Hell yeah! Great updates. I love that last ground level shot of Parkview West

Thanks TUP. Ironically, when I posted these shots, I thought: "TUP would approve of the base of Parkview West." It isn't revolutionary by any means, but it still provides far better street-level contact than, say, 550 St. Clair.

[honte]

^ Seconded on the sweet photos.

Originally Posted by Chicago Shawn

This is why I am supportive of the office tower on the Medici site (Which is very TALL btw).

Tall in a good way, or tall in an "Oh my God, LaGrange is raping the skyline" kind of way?

[spyguy]

Originally Posted by VivaLFuego

Nice to see this one moving quickly! Get it approved ASAP.

http://www.chicagojournal.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&SubSectionID=60&ArticleID=4457&TM=83636.26

Museum and hotel in Greektown?
Burnett says idea must be vetted

By MICAH MAIDENBERG

Wallach described the building as "very glassy," designed to be thin so it does not create massing close to street level. The museum itself will be a stand-alone structure with frontage at the corner of Halsted and Van Buren, while the hotel tower would rise from the parcel's northeast corner above the parking garage.

..."Something that starts with a three strikes me as not appropriate," Sedler said, referring the 32 stories of the hotel tower. He also said that it is equally important for the developer to offer a building with "world-class architecture."

[aaron38]

Originally Posted by spyguy

628-648 North McClurg Court, and 334-362 East Ontario Street. The applicant proposes to construct a mixed-use development with 757 residential units in two residential towers of 51 and 54 stories connected to a 10-level podium structure containing approximately 210,000 square feet of commercial office space, ground-floor retail space and approximately 718 off-street parking spaces. (42 Ward)

Will they be presenting actual renders to the plan commission? So far all we've seen is one B&W elevation drawing.
And fewer parking spaces than units? I'm surprised.

[aaron38]

Originally Posted by spyguy

..."Something that starts with a three strikes me as not appropriate," Sedler said, referring the 32 stories of the hotel tower. He also said that it is equally important for the developer to offer a building with "world-class architecture."

Why do I get the feeling that he's going to fight a lot harder on the height than on the architecture?

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by spyguy

http://www.chicagojournal.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&SubSectionID=60&ArticleID=4457&TM=83636.26

Museum and hotel in Greektown?
Burnett says idea must be vetted

By MICAH MAIDENBERG

Wallach described the building as "very glassy," designed to be thin so it does not create massing close to street level. The museum itself will be a stand-alone structure with frontage at the corner of Halsted and Van Buren, while the hotel tower would rise from the parcel's northeast corner above the parking garage.

..."Something that starts with a three strikes me as not appropriate," Sedler said, referring the 32 stories of the hotel tower. He also said that it is equally important for the developer to offer a building with "world-class architecture."

^ Sedler's a buffoon. What a damn pathetic loser. He does NOT need to be dictating these things--who is he? He's one goddamn person.

Why is NOBODY calling him out?

[APPRAISER]

I haven't been to part of the city for awhile! I've been in and out of town quite a bit, but how is the progress of the Astoria Tower coming along?

Thanks!

[Mr Downtown]

^Astoria structure is up to about the fifth floor.

[Tom Servo]

Originally Posted by i_am_hydrogen

NICE!




i see two great things in this pic!

[chicubs111]

Originally Posted by spyguy

A proposed Residential-Business Planned Development submitted by GH 630, L.L.C., for the property generally located at 335-363 East Erie Street, 628-648 North McClurg Court, and 334-362 East Ontario Street. The applicant proposes to construct a mixed-use development with 757 residential units in two residential towers of 51 and 54 stories connected to a 10-level podium structure containing approximately 210,000 square feet of commercial office space, ground-floor retail space and approximately 718 off-street parking spaces. (42 Ward)

Is this gonne be the old cbs studio site?

[VivaLFuego]

Originally Posted by Shitler

..."Something that starts with a three strikes me as not appropriate," Sedler said, referring the 32 stories of the hotel tower. He also said that it is equally important for the developer to offer a building with "world-class architecture."

How do you expect a developer to offer "world-class architecture" after you just massacred his margin by limiting the height of the building relative to what the land value warrants? Moron.

[Mr Downtown]

I wasn't aware that good design cost more than bad design. Do you have a price chart somewhere?

And why would a developer pay so much for land that he could only profit by building something three times bigger than what's allowed there?

Developers always say they just want to know what the rules are and they'll play by them. But in Chicago, they're so used to getting the rules changed for them that they make it part of their pro formas.

[the urban politician]

^ Whose rules? Sedler's?

Maybe developers, like many other reasonable people, don't think a 33 story building is particularly out of line for east of Halsted.

[aic4ever]

Originally Posted by Mr Downtown

I wasn't aware that good design cost more than bad design. Do you have a price chart somewhere?

And why would a developer pay so much for land that he could only profit by building something three times bigger than what's allowed there?

Developers always say they just want to know what the rules are and they'll play by them. But in Chicago, they're so used to getting the rules changed for them that they make it part of their pro formas.

It depends on your idea of "good design." If Sedler is talking about "world class architecture" as defined by requiring an architect like Gehry or Jahn, it's going to be one hell of an expensive building, because they will force expensive construction and expensive materials. And yes, an architect of that calibur is going to charge more money than somebody less known, while also causing the building to be more expensive than it might need to be.

A developer would want a taller building because more repetition is cause for more economy of scale and better production if a good contractor is building the building. Also, a taller building means more square footage, which means more to sell, which ought to equal more profit, assuming the developer is living within the realm of reality about what his building is actually going to cost him to build.

[VivaLFuego]

Originally Posted by Mr Downtown

I wasn't aware that good design cost more than bad design. Do you have a price chart somewhere?

And why would a developer pay so much for land that he could only profit by building something three times bigger than what's allowed there?

Developers always say they just want to know what the rules are and they'll play by them. But in Chicago, they're so used to getting the rules changed for them that they make it part of their pro formas.

Sedler didn't demand "good design," he demanded "world-class architecture." Can the latter really be built cheaply?

edit: ^aic nailed it pretty well.

[Haworthia]

Originally Posted by AdrianXSands

NICE!
i see two great things in this pic!

The "Hot Diggity Dog" in the lower left hand corner!

[honte]

I am hoping the phrase "equally important" in the article means to suggest that "world-class architecture" is equally important to a reduction in height. In other words, maybe Sedler and company would be willing to support the height if the design was great.

Given their history, though, I tend to doubt it.

However, if that's truly their position, I would find myself agreeing with them much more than I do now. The last proposal we saw posted here for the museum site looked terrible. The last thing I want is for that thing to be competing with Skybridge as the beacon of the West Loop.

[aic4ever]

Skybridge is heavy competition no matter what...even what's inside:

(Courtesy of Wheeler-Kearns at http://www.wkarch.com/project_home.htm)