CHICAGO | The Row (900 W Randolph) | 495 FT | 43 FLOORS

[Rizzo]

Originally Posted by ardecila

I still think this doesn’t belong here. The podium is admittedly well-designed, with an attractive facade and no parking visible (looks like a bit of office space as a liner).

However, I think it’s too important for Chicago to have a bonafide midrise neighborhood, with 2-4 story buildings mixed in. The city even put in the planning effort to make that happen. For various reasons, we’re unlikely to build this kind of environment anywhere else for the foreseeable future... Dearborn Park forced the South Loop into a total highrise development pattern, and River North/Streeterville are already full of highrises. Industrial areas along the river could be developed as midrise, but those areas have large lots and a very flawed street grid so they’ll never develop the same urban patterns.

What they should do is move this one to the Randolph/Halsted site behind Haymarket, as a proper architectural beacon for the main “entrance” of West Loop.

I agree with this except that it should be a midrise district bounded by high rises along Lake, Halsted, Ike and Ashland. They could throw in contributions to transit funding for height bumps because of their transit adjacencies

[donnie]

Well hello handsome.......
https://chicago.curbed.com/2018/1/31...elopment-adjmi

[left of center]

I see no reason for not allowing high density along the Green Line (or the Blue Line along the Ike for that matter). Chicago needs a lot more TOD development. As someone said above, we were a bit late to the game. No need to squander perfectly good developments near L stations. That will boost CTA ridership and take cars off the streets. A win-win.

A big and dense project will then also alleviate demand and pressure to redevelop existing lower density buildings, many which are historic and would be a shame to lose. Better to allow a half dozen tall and dense projects on a few lots, than leveling entire blocks of historic 4 to 5 story buildings and replacing them with new 8 to 10 story buildings.

[ardecila]

^TBH, the valuable thing about the West Loop is the scale of buildings and the consistency of certain architectural elements (brick, timber, sidewalk canopies, etc). Not individual buildings. I don't shed a tear losing a 3-story warehouse or a one-story bowtruss for an 8-story building if the replacement is designed well and fits into context.

TOD is obviously a noble goal but let's be realistic, anybody moving to the West Loop is already going to take transit or walk/bike to work, assuming the job is downtown. Nobody except the richest, most reclusive executives would drive 1 mile through rush hour traffic to get to their workplace. The whole neighborhood is TOD, so any growth on any site is going to reinforce transit ridership. I don't see why we need to throw the baby out with the bathwater and allow a 600-foot tower in the name of TOD.

[r18tdi]

Originally Posted by donnie

Well hello handsome.......
https://chicago.curbed.com/2018/1/31...elopment-adjmi

Love the pulled back skyline shot. I'm curious how it would look from a north or south perspective.

[Kumdogmillionaire]

Originally Posted by ardecila

I'm not following you. Where is there a building taller than 200' in the West Loop, excluding the boundary areas along Halsted and south of Van Buren? Even the H2O development tops out at 180' to the roofline - admittedly this stretches the definition of midrise and it's a hair taller than I'd prefer for this area, but still a tiny fraction of the 900 W Randolph behemoth.

I wasn't super clear. The trend in the West Loop is very clear. As the lots run out along the Kennedy but the demand remains the same for people to live there, then taller proposals will continue to creep further and further inland. It's just a natural progression. 10 years ago the tallest proposals were 80 feet tall in the West Loop(outside of the Kennedy line), and now we've reached 180 feet. 10 Years from now I fully expect 300 feet to be a common occurrence. By "ship has sailed", I meant the momentum is taking this thing in a certain direction whether you like it or now.

You can accelerate this timeline greatly if Chicago somehow manages to snap Apple or Amazon.

[Jibba]

Originally Posted by Kumdogmillionaire

I wasn't super clear. The trend in the West Loop is very clear. As the lots run out along the Kennedy but the demand remains the same for people to live there, then taller proposals will continue to creep further and further inland. It's just a natural progression. 10 years ago the tallest proposals were 80 feet tall in the West Loop(outside of the Kennedy line), and now we've reached 180 feet. 10 Years from now I fully expect 300 feet to be a common occurrence. By "ship has sailed", I meant the momentum is taking this thing in a certain direction whether you like it or now.

You can accelerate this timeline greatly if Chicago somehow manages to snap Apple or Amazon.

Your supposed fait accompli of "natural progression" only accounts for the developer perspective. You're forgetting that there are other parties involved that shape the finished product, and the precedent so far is that they're the more influential force.

[vandelay]

Surprising amount of NIMBYism from the Chicago contingent here.

[Siriusly]

Originally Posted by vandelay

Surprising amount of NIMBYism from the Chicago contingent here.

If you read here often enough it's not "surprising" at all. This building is lovely and should gain approval as is.

[VKChaz]

Originally Posted by Chicago Shawn

Related Midwest + Tucker Development
Stantec is AOR

300 units, condos
10 buildings preserved and restored
Retail at ground level
570'/51 floors
300 parking
Targeting LEED Gold
Bonus payment of ~$4.9 million
60 minimum affordable units

15' tower setback from Peoria (above podium)
4 story podium with terrace, podium aligns to streetwall. All active space hiding parking
Steel, aluminum brick and glass exterior
Emphasis on depth in facade

Taller and thinner to maximize solar access

Active use would be streetside only, correct? If I am seeing the rendering correctly, looks like three sides of high exposed walls

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by vandelay

Surprising amount of NIMBYism from the Chicago contingent here.

It’s not NIMBYism when I don’t live in the West Loop.

I’m not against more development in the West Loop, and I certainly want more people walking around and even more traffic, but I just think development needs to occur within the midrise paradigm. Make West Loop look like inner Washington DC, but with better architecture. A height limit (be it official or unofficial) encourages more efficient use of space, minimal parking, and smaller more efficient residential layouts, in addition to the other benefits I listed before.

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by ardecila

It’s not NIMBYism when I don’t live in the West Loop.

I’m not against more development in the West Loop, and I certainly want more people walking around and even more traffic, but I just think development needs to occur within the midrise paradigm. Make West Loop look like inner Washington DC, but with better architecture. A height limit (be it official or unofficial) encourages more efficient use of space, minimal parking, and smaller more efficient residential layouts, in addition to the other benefits I listed before.

But I’m not sure this is happening in the West Loop. As I’ve said before, in Chicago, midrises mean ground level parking with opaque windows at the sidewalk. We rarely do underground parking like DC does.

[aaron38]

For all intents and purposes, the west loop goes all the way out to the United Center. (That will be even more true once the Damen station is open and the Green line is more effective).
So there is plenty of land there for midrises. And all the new midrise construction is going to be there for decades. I fail to see how a building east of Morgan, three blocks from the Kennedy, is destroying the midrise nature of the area.

[left of center]

Originally Posted by aaron38

For all intents and purposes, the west loop goes all the way out to the United Center. (That will be even more true once the Damen station is open and the Green line is more effective).
So there is plenty of land there for midrises. And all the new midrise construction is going to be there for decades. I fail to see how a building east of Morgan, three blocks from the Kennedy, is destroying the midrise nature of the area.

This.

Several tall buildings in a mostly midrise neighborhood does not ruin the aesthetics of that neighborhood. If anything, its beneficial because it soaks up demand, alleviating pressure to demolish historic 4 or 5 story warehouses for 6 to 8 story developments.

[KWillChicago]

Rahm still wants to turn that whole parking lot jungle next to the UC into a mini Staples area like in LA. Hotels, Resteraunt s, Bars...etc. Im sure we coud fit some highrises towers over there.

[left of center]

^ Wrigleyville West

[aaron38]

Why not? I'd hope to avoid mega developments. But why shouldn't the Damen Green equal the Addison Red?

[OhioGuy]

Originally Posted by ardecila

It’s not NIMBYism when I don’t live in the West Loop.

I’m not against more development in the West Loop, and I certainly want more people walking around and even more traffic, but I just think development needs to occur within the midrise paradigm. Make West Loop look like inner Washington DC, but with better architecture. A height limit (be it official or unofficial) encourages more efficient use of space, minimal parking, and smaller more efficient residential layouts, in addition to the other benefits I listed before.

Height limits suck. I live in DC. I’m so tired of uniform height block after block after block. The land is so valuable that every developer builds up to the height allowed along that street. With the land becoming increasingly valuable in the West Loop, I suspect any attempt to cap it at a particular height will lead to too much height uniformity there as well.

[Fvn]

Originally Posted by OhioGuy

Height limits suck. I live in DC. I’m so tired of uniform height block after block after block. The land is so valuable that every developer builds up to the height allowed along that street. With the land becoming increasingly valuable in the West Loop, I suspect any attempt to cap it at a particular height will lead to too much height uniformity there as well.

The restricted build heights pressures developers to be unique with facades/cladding, courtyards, etc. For example one of my favorite developments in DC is Square 37, it's uniform stepped facade is something that I feel you wouldn't see anywhere else.

While the chances of this building being dropped in height to 25/30 floors is likely it has a unique facade that sets it apart from the other high rises west of Kennedy.

[KWillChicago]

Originally Posted by aaron38

Why not? I'd hope to avoid mega developments. But why shouldn't the Damen Green equal the Addison Red?

I would love for that neighborhood to turn into it's own district but theres no way the neigbors would ever let that happen.