CHICAGO | 400 N Lake Shore Drive | 851 FT & 765 FT | 73 & ? FLOORS - Page 82

PhyllisJerry2 · #**1621** Posted **Mar 10, 2020, 4:06 PM**

I hope you’re all going to be speaking in favor of the original height, and not ”joining forces with the NIMBYs” as someone suggested. Clearly neither the city or the developer are interested in saving the site for a Spire 2.0 or whatever to come along, so any negative comments about the proposal are liable to lead to a further downsizing of the buildings. Personally, I’d be content with these towers at the reduced height. The height may not be world-class but the design most definitely is. It’s not worth jeopardizing that.

pianowizard · #**1622** Posted **Mar 10, 2020, 4:49 PM**

^Just be extremely clear that you dislike the current design BECAUSE IT'S TOO SHORT.

jc5680 · #**1623** Posted **Mar 10, 2020, 5:56 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by pianowizard

^Just be extremely clear that you dislike the current design BECAUSE [Unintelligible shouting].

Or, you can make a case for supporting additional height without resorting to ongoing hysterics and then still be excited about a good design even if it ends up being nominally shorter.

HomrQT · #**1624** Posted **Mar 10, 2020, 6:20 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jc5680

Or, you can make a case for supporting additional height without resorting to ongoing hysterics and then still be excited about a good design even if it ends up being nominally shorter.

What are some reasonable arguments to make at this meeting encouraging taller buildings besides the buildings having a nicer impact on the skyline or that this site "deserves" something taller?

Skyguy_7 · #**1625** Posted **Mar 10, 2020, 6:38 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by HomrQT

What are some reasonable arguments to make at this meeting encouraging taller buildings besides the buildings having a nicer impact on the skyline or that this site "deserves" something taller?

^ Great question. It's difficult for us to make a rational argument for taller, more impactful buildings, when it's at the expense or risk of someone else. We SSPers have admittedly selfish goals of a more impressive cityscape, while having no skin in the game.

One decent argument is to tell the developer that there is money to be lost with regard to future developments. Potential prime lots of this caliber are dwindling in the heart of the city, so it would be in their best interest to go big, or make no small plans, with a rare, block-wide assemblage while they have it.

jc5680 · #**1626** Posted **Mar 10, 2020, 8:34 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by HomrQT

What are some reasonable arguments to make at this meeting encouraging taller buildings besides the buildings having a nicer impact on the skyline or that this site "deserves" something taller?

Practically, I don't think it is so much about making an argument as it us just making sure you are counted. Attend meetings and contact your alderman letting them know you support a project and would continue to do so if taller. Just showing up is half of the effort; you don't have to go full George Blakemore, but just consistently contributing can be effective.

Trying to make a case about prestige or scarcity of lots probably isn't going to get you very far. There really isn't a shortage of land in any real sense. Full block, entirely empty lots, are scattered all over the core of the city. Not to mention, what is considered the core is an evolving definition. As the core grows, sites you could consider as prime lots also grow. Look at how much the river corridor has changed in just the last boom. You would have had a hard time making a case for a lot of those sites as being anything remotely approaching prime 20 years ago.

You can also get involved with the neighborhood group if you are trying to organize for more influence. Despite a lot of them being a pain, it is not nearly as universal as the complaints here would make it seem. SOAR in particular has a long track record of supporting development and their feedback is most often for the positive (reducing curb cuts, lowering parking, even suggesting buildings should be taller).

CrazyCres · #**1627** Posted **Mar 10, 2020, 10:21 PM**

Also, try and get some photos over there

jc5680 · #**1628** Posted **Mar 10, 2020, 11:42 PM**

Crains has a few updated renderings, more renderings should be coming from the meeting, but the base looks like a potentially huge improvement.

CrazyCres · #**1629** Posted **Mar 10, 2020, 11:53 PM**

Looking better...

rgolch · #**1630** Posted **Mar 11, 2020, 12:19 AM**

From that one rendering, the positioning makes the buildings relate to one another better. Almost has the illusion of arcing towards one another. But I'll reserve judgment till more renderings start flowing in.

Donnie77 · #**1631** Posted **Mar 11, 2020, 12:24 AM**

Yeah I'm not sure these are update since even the smaller tower seems to tower over OBP.... just saying something don't look rite imo

I do like how they are facing tho

rivernorthlurker · #**1632** Posted **Mar 11, 2020, 12:46 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Donnie77

Yeah I'm not sure these are update since even the smaller tower seems to tower over OBP.... just saying something don't look rite imo

I do like how they are facing tho

They're closer. They also appear much taller than Vista. Camera tricks!

I'd say it's borderline fisheye lens/perspective almost. Seems a little 'fishy' to me.

BuildThemTaller · #**1633** Posted **Mar 11, 2020, 12:55 AM**

Love the design. I wish Reilly hadn't nixed the original proposal so that we could have gotten them taller.

Zapatan · #**1634** Posted **Mar 11, 2020, 12:59 AM**

Nice, not bad looking, I was worried from the first rendering.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Donnie77

Yeah I'm not sure these are update since even the smaller tower seems to tower over OBP.... just saying something don't look rite imo

I do like how they are facing tho

You can tell by the setbacks and promotions that they're different buildings

Quote:

^Just be extremely clear that you dislike the current design BECAUSE IT'S TOO SHORT.

Height and design go hand in hand, most iconic skyscrapers in the world are either very tall, or were tall for their time. 875' is a high building but nothing that special.

Fvn · #**1635** Posted **Mar 11, 2020, 1:19 AM**

I'm definitely ok with this!

2PRUROCKS! · #**1636** Posted **Mar 11, 2020, 2:55 AM**

The terra cotta has been reduced. The horizontal bands of terra cotta are gone and only the vertical ones remain. I'm not saying this is bad just different. With only the vertical bands the vertical is more emphasised.

rivernorthlurker · #**1637** Posted **Mar 11, 2020, 4:00 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2PRUROCKS!

The terra cotta has been reduced. The horizontal bands of terra cotta are gone and only the vertical ones remain. I'm not saying this is bad just different. With only the vertical bands the vertical is more emphasised.

I had assumed there was no way they were going to be able to keep the terra cotta as it was previously presented and am pleased to hear that they've managed to keep it in the design!

Toasty Joe · #**1638** Posted **Mar 11, 2020, 4:54 AM**

Crain's mentioned they're building the north tower first (now utilizing the spire foundation... thought that was always the plan?), then will build the second tower... not impossible they apply for a zoning change and come back with a taller southern tower in a few years?

Donnie77 · #**1639** Posted **Mar 11, 2020, 5:27 AM**

^^^So both towers not going up at the same time might actually be a good thing.

SafetyFirst · #**1640** Posted **Mar 11, 2020, 11:00 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toasty Joe

Crain's mentioned they're building the north tower first (now utilizing the spire foundation... thought that was always the plan?), then will build the second tower... not impossible they apply for a zoning change and come back with a taller southern tower in a few years?

Some of you will hold onto any scrap of hope, lol.

As far as I'm concerned, with the economy potentially turning, there's just as good of a chance of them never building the south tower at all than building an even taller one, lol.