CHICAGO | Highrise Projects & Construction, v7

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by k1052

I'll take as many plain-ish glass boxes as developers want to give over the army of beige painted concrete turds from the last boom. Absolutely not going to complain.

Yes - also because this looks like the same kind of hybrid window wall as we got on Paragon, a mile and a half down Michigan. A nice upgrade from the regular window wall systems we get on most developer boxes.

MiLa is honestly one of my favorite glass boxes in the city, after a few classics from the Mies/SOM golden era. I’d even put it ahead of certain “classics” like Quaker Oats. Hopefully BKL can deliver again! Wolf Point West and Coast are also BKL towers with nice glass systems.

[chris08876]

Before and after.

Took some images from the Vista thread.

I presume 1970's to 2019

[chicubs111]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

A really tall building would be nice here but since we don't live in a fantasy world where money grows on trees, this is still quite acceptable.

So your saying if a developer built a tower that was say 700ft (and more units of course) with some innovative design elements at this same location he would lose money because the 450ft to 530ft range is the sweet spot where anyone can make money overall? Its a conservative approach by the developer at this location...plain and simple. This location is right on Michigan avenue..they can demand pretty high rents i would think if they designed something worth those higher price points.

[bnk]

Originally Posted by marothisu

Source: bKL, Sterling Bay, and the Chicago Tribune:

What it is replacing won't be missed but Carbon Carbide building will loose some views, but not too bad Wacker separates them.

https://www.google.com/maps/place/30...3!4d-87.625001

[harryc]

March 18







March 22

[marothisu]

Here's some more renderings via Crains of SB's proposed high rise on Michigan Avenue. Seems like they toned down the loudness of the ground floor retail from the last time we saw this.

[bnk]

Originally Posted by marothisu

Here's some more renderings via Crains of SB's proposed high rise on Michigan Avenue. Seems like they toned down the loudness of the ground floor retail from the last time we saw this.

Well what its replacing Will no doubt to be better than what is currently there … Regardless if it is only a 350 foot stump of a building that should have soared to at least 999 feet considering the location of the building. What ever crap out a 346 foot glass tower POShit. What ever.... As long as everyone makes money and no risk ….



I would figure Daniel Burnham would not be happy with this proposal I would imagine. Are there no more make no little plans anymore or is everyone just trying not to fail and make major monies





https://www.google.com/maps/place/30...3!4d-87.625001

I am Not going to miss that chain link fence on 300 N Michigan Ave with the blighted retail and who knows what's going on upstairs in those 4 levels.

[Mr Downtown]

Originally Posted by chicubs111

the 450ft to 530ft range is the sweet spot where anyone can make money overall?

And, more importantly, where the risk of losing money is less. The proportion of floor space devoted to elevators and exit stairs increases, the concrete gets proportionately more expensive as you go up, and most importantly, you run a higher risk of not getting the units absorbed before getting caught out by a recession. Better to do a modest project and survive to do another one.

[Hourstrooper]

Originally Posted by Mr Downtown

And, more importantly, where the risk of losing money is less. The proportion of floor space devoted to elevators and exit stairs increases, the concrete gets proportionately more expensive as you go up, and most importantly, you run a higher risk of not getting the units absorbed before getting caught out by a recession. Better to do a modest project and survive to do another one.

Exactly Seems like a lot of projects are going up around this size which I'm fine with. More density is just as good if not better than height. ill take anything from the point of a contractor like myself.

[harryc]

March 18

[harryc]

March 18



March 22



March 23

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by chicubs111

So your saying if a developer built a tower that was say 700ft (and more units of course) with some innovative design elements at this same location he would lose money because the 450ft to 530ft range is the sweet spot where anyone can make money overall? Its a conservative approach by the developer at this location...plain and simple. This location is right on Michigan avenue..they can demand pretty high rents i would think if they designed something worth those higher price points.

Will the construction loan be on your company's name?

If it defaults will it be you who has to go into bankruptcy? It's always easier to make demands when it's somebody else's money.

The big secret to rental real estate isn't how high you can push rents; it's a about at what rent level you can safely minimize vacancy. That's how a smart investor appropriately gauges the value of an apartment complex. I don't listen to those brokers with all of those pro forma analyses any longer because it's all BS.

[harryc]

March 23

[The Lurker]

Originally Posted by chicubs111

So your saying if a developer built a tower that was say 700ft (and more units of course) with some innovative design elements at this same location he would lose money because the 450ft to 530ft range is the sweet spot where anyone can make money overall? Its a conservative approach by the developer at this location...plain and simple. This location is right on Michigan avenue..they can demand pretty high rents i would think if they designed something worth those higher price points.

How many times do we need to have this debate? Maybe this argument applied in 2013 but excluding Paragon there are currently no buildings under construction in that height range, at all, in the city. Everything else is under 30 stories or pushing 700 ft +.

I don't want anything built there at all but my reasons are selfish. In addition to stealing C&C's thunder, a ~500 footer here is gonna play some MAJOR interference with Vista and Aqua from the river/riverwalk and eliminate that spectacular view from the corner of Michigan and S. water st. of the Mather Tower fully eclpsed by Trump Tower. Somebody have a picture in the archives?

[Busy Bee]

Originally Posted by harryc

March 23

Not related, but does anyone know how long ago those three historic buildings lost their cornices?

[harryc]

March 19



March 22

[BuildThemTaller]

Until rgarri puts together a better render, here's my incredibly crude drawing of how the 300 N Michigan Ave tower will look from Wolf Point.

[harryc]

March 19



March 20



March 22

[harryc]

March 19







March 22

[BonoboZill4]

Originally Posted by The Lurker

How many times do we need to have this debate? Maybe this argument applied in 2013 but excluding Paragon there are currently no buildings under construction in that height range, at all, in the city. Everything else is under 30 stories or pushing 700 ft +.

I don't want anything built there at all but my reasons are selfish. In addition to stealing C&C's thunder, a ~500 footer here is gonna play some MAJOR interference with Vista and Aqua from the river/riverwalk and eliminate that spectacular view from the corner of Michigan and S. water st. of the Mather Tower fully eclpsed by Trump Tower. Somebody have a picture in the archives?

It won't block either of those two towers, so you can breathe easy. Aqua residents would be happy either way: