CHICAGO | 400 N Lake Shore Drive | 851 FT & 765 FT | 73 & ? FLOORS - Page 89

Donnie77 · #**1761** Posted **May 18, 2020, 9:09 PM**

Im ok with one tower only as im sure the second will be a total redesign!

HomrQT · #**1762** Posted **May 18, 2020, 9:10 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zapatan

+1 to all of that, what are the odds they just cancel this project and sell the land to someone else who would likely build something better?

What's to say the alderman won't stomp all over the next developer and their proposal?

r18tdi · #**1763** Posted **May 18, 2020, 9:15 PM**

Pretty bummed about the lack of terracotta, epically after someone at Related went on the record in March with Curbed Chicago (which is apparently closed indefinitely?) and said that it was still a “feature element” of the facade. Boo.

Busy Bee · #**1764** Posted **May 19, 2020, 1:26 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by bhawk66

you wouldn't even have really noticed the terra-cotta in those proportions. Sure, maybe at ground level (eye-level), but this building is 85% glass. Terra-cotta is more appropriate as a larger percentage material, like, say, One Bennett. Here? Not so much.

Naaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.

_

JK47 · #**1765** Posted **May 19, 2020, 9:10 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

^ don't worry. Reilly won't stop them from building the 2nd tower, this is just his way of ensuring that Related continues to generously donate to his reelection campaign fund for years to come.

Reilly did them a huge solid by killing the hotel component. Besides the lousy location at the end of a cul-de-sac the impact of COVID is making it nearly impossible to secure loans for hotel construction. It's also looking like it'll be a few years before tourism and hospitality recover so building yet another hotel in a well-supplied city wouldn't be a good idea.

BVictor1 · #**1766** Posted **May 19, 2020, 1:09 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by JK47

Reilly did them a huge solid by killing the hotel component. Besides the lousy location at the end of a cul-de-sac the impact of COVID is making it nearly impossible to secure loans for hotel construction. It's also looking like it'll be a few years before tourism and hospitality recover so building yet another hotel in a well-supplied city wouldn't be a good idea.

Oh please. Fuck Reilly. What he did wasn't any favor.

At the end of a cup-de-sac that's attached to the riverwalk and convenient to Michigan Avenue and Navy Pier.

With a staggered construction timeline Reilly could always drop dead between now and then and things could change.

BVictor1 · #**1767** Posted **May 19, 2020, 2:53 PM**

I meant to post this earlier...

If any of you want to send an email to the Chicago Plan Commission to voice support/opinion/objection/or any other feelings or ideas, you have until 10AM, Wednesday May 20th... so tomorrow morning.

Emails can be sent here: [email protected]

chris08876 · #**1768** Posted **May 19, 2020, 3:16 PM**

This Brendan Reilly fella seems like an ahole.

Does he normally stifle progress and growth? I thought Chicago was pro development. Seem's like this Reilly fella is messing things up, along with this City Council.

From an outsiders perspective, its a shame that politicians have so much control over development sites or parcels. I thought Chicago was a little lax on that front. Making it tough for Related.

HomrQT · #**1769** Posted **May 19, 2020, 4:09 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by chris08876

This Brendan Reilly fella seems like an ahole.

Does he normally stifle progress and growth? I thought Chicago was pro development. Seem's like this Reilly fella is messing things up, along with this City Council.

From an outsiders perspective, its a shame that politicians have so much control over development sites or parcels. I thought Chicago was a little lax on that front. Making it tough for Related.

He's trying to keep his NIMBY constituents happy, to the detriment of the city as a whole. He's notorious for this anti development behavior. His NIMBY voters want to live in one of the largest, most developed, most prosperous urban cores in the world - but they don't want it to change too much lest their window views may be obscured.

Zapatan · #**1770** Posted **May 19, 2020, 4:44 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by HomrQT

He's trying to keep his NIMBY constituents happy, to the detriment of the city as a whole. He's notorious for this anti development behavior. His NIMBY voters want to live in one of the largest, most developed, most prosperous urban cores in the world - but they don't want it to change too much lest their window views may be obscured.

It's such a shame, he did have a say in approving Tribune though didn't he? I wonder why that wasn't as much of a problem.

I wonder if after building the first tower of this development they'll want to reconsider and build something taller and more iconic on the second site, with such a long timetable you'd think there's be some hope. I doubt it'll happen but just a thought because 10 years of waiting for 2 buildings that aren't even that tall by Chicago standards is just so beyond disappointing.

ardecila · #**1771** Posted **May 19, 2020, 4:45 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by HomrQT

He's trying to keep his NIMBY constituents happy, to the detriment of the city as a whole. He's notorious for this anti development behavior. His NIMBY voters want to live in one of the largest, most developed, most prosperous urban cores in the world - but they don't want it to change too much lest their window views may be obscured.

I take a more charitable view, I think Reilly's a pragmatist. He actually does a good job in most cases balancing the demands of his constituents with the need for development, and he actually tries to improve projects with the help of certain neighborhood groups like SOAR. He has certainly not prevented downtown from booming during his tenure in office.

He's approved Vista and the Tribune Tower 2, so he's not even against supertalls necessarily. And he's not one of these new socialist aldermen who shut down projects simply because they hate the idea that a developer might earn a profit.

The city currently has, and has in the past, had far worse aldermen for development. Michele Smith, Tom Tunney, Helen Schiller, Bob Fioretti, etc. Real NIMBY panderers. On the other hand, we have aldermen like Walter Burnett or (formerly) Danny Solis who rubber-stamp everything in their little slice of downtown, because they're not accountable... their voters live miles away in low-income, minority neighborhoods. These guys have no principles for evaluating new projects, so they're not likely to push for better design, less parking, etc. Most of the recent projects in South Loop have been crap (Imprint, AMLI, 1000 S Clark, Alta, etc). The review process for these projects boils down to "does it have enough parking? developer should double the parking, just to be sure." West Loop is better, but only because Landmarks reviews many of the designs for compatibility.

skysoar · #**1772** Posted **May 19, 2020, 4:53 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by HomrQT

He's trying to keep his NIMBY constituents happy, to the detriment of the city as a whole. He's notorious for this anti development behavior. His NIMBY voters want to live in one of the largest, most developed, most prosperous urban cores in the world - but they don't want it to change too much lest their window views may be obscured.

Well said. I would also add that the previous administrations had leaders who were more visionary and were more pro-active toward promoting world class developments that enhanced the image of Chicago world wide. They imposed their will and influence over that of individual aldermen on projects they were passionate about.I don't believe Daley or Rahm Emanuel would have been silent while a project as prominent location-wise as 400 N. Lake Shore Drive is being run through the gauntlet. Even L.A.is willing to put the Times Mirror project on hold until the developer is allowed to build something more "bold'. Hopefully the Lightfoot administration will become more involved in future developments ,but I believe the die is cast on 400 N.Lake Shore Drive.

HomrQT · #**1773** Posted **May 19, 2020, 5:34 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila

I take a more charitable view, I think Reilly's a pragmatist. He actually does a good job in most cases balancing the demands of his constituents with the need for development, and he actually tries to improve projects with the help of certain neighborhood groups like SOAR. He has certainly not prevented downtown from booming during his tenure in office.

He's approved Vista and the Tribune Tower 2, so he's not even against supertalls necessarily. And he's not one of these new socialist aldermen who shut down projects simply because they hate the idea that a developer might earn a profit.

The city currently has, and has in the past, had far worse aldermen for development. Michele Smith, Tom Tunney, Helen Schiller, Bob Fioretti, etc. Real NIMBY panderers. On the other hand, we have aldermen like Walter Burnett or (formerly) Danny Solis who rubber-stamp everything in their little slice of downtown, because they're not accountable... their voters live miles away in low-income, minority neighborhoods. These guys have no principles for evaluating new projects, so they're not likely to push for better design, less parking, etc. Most of the recent projects in South Loop have been crap (Imprint, AMLI, 1000 S Clark, Alta, etc). The review process for these projects boils down to "does it have enough parking? developer should double the parking, just to be sure." West Loop is better, but only because Landmarks reviews many of the designs for compatibility.

The fact that this proposal for Related went down the way it did is proof enough to me that Reilly does not deserve a charitable view. And this is not the first project to suffer from being in his district. Has he "allowed" some other larger projects to go less unscathed? Sure, ok. In the end, aldermen should not have this amount of authority to begin with. It should be left up to a city/urban planning council, one that has very staunch checks and balances, so the city can grow in a way that is beneficial to all inhabitants and visitors, and not just catering to people who live within a local vicinity.

bhawk66 · #**1774** Posted **May 19, 2020, 5:55 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Busy Bee

Naaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.

lol. Beautiful photo of a beautiful building. But that's not even close to the same proportions stone to glass as 400 LSD

JK47 · #**1775** Posted **May 19, 2020, 6:10 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by BVictor1

Oh please. Fuck Reilly. What he did wasn't any favor.

Use your head. We're on a tipping point like the one that preceded the GFC during which the mortgage collapse froze construction of condo buildings. This pandemic is going to have the same effect on hotels among other industries. Pushing this as a hotel risks a repeat of the Waterview if we're lucky or, in case you missed it, the giant FUCKING HOLE, in this middle of this site.

Which is assuming the damage to the industry is just from the pandemic and there hasn't been a massive amount of fraud in CMBS (which is possible if the recent whistleblower complaint against commercial & hotel lenders holds water).

Quote:

At the end of a cup-de-sac that's attached to the riverwalk and convenient to Michigan Avenue and Navy Pier.

The River Esplanade you mean since the Riverwalk is along the south bank. It's also not conveniently attached with the three flights of stairs to take to cross the river at Columbus (and back down again) nor is it accessible since there are no elevators. In terms of location vis a vie Michigan Avenue it's about as proximate as LaSalle (and I've never heard of that road being "conveniently" located near Michigan) only the walk West to Michigan is a lot less interesting than the one east from Lasalle...mostly along bland streets with parking podiums filled with "For Lease" retail spaces. A half mile walk, particularly the last half or so which features gated townhomes on one side and a loading dock on the other, is a big ask for tourists. Particularly when they aren't starved for choices. Access to Navy Pier likewise suffers...it isn't direct or inviting and there's plenty of other hotels in more active locations with direct, even line of sight, access.

Quote:

With a staggered construction timeline Reilly could always drop dead between now and then and things could change.

The staggered timeline reduces Related's risk and lets them re-evaluate uses before starting the second tower. With the absurdly drawn out construction they are likely taking this slow to see if they're able to build the second tower as a Condo building...or even convert the first.

Steely Dan · #**1776** Posted **May 19, 2020, 6:17 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by JK47

The River Esplanade you mean since the Riverwalk is along the south bank. It's also not conveniently attached with the three flights of stairs to take to cross the river at Columbus (and back down again)

The river esplanade on the north bank has a pedestrian underpass at river level beneath the columbus bridge. There's no need to go up and down any stairs to get past Columbus at river level.

ardecila · #**1777** Posted **May 19, 2020, 6:36 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by HomrQT

In the end, aldermen should not have this amount of authority to begin with. It should be left up to a city/urban planning council, one that has very staunch checks and balances, so the city can grow in a way that is beneficial to all inhabitants and visitors, and not just catering to people who live within a local vicinity.

I agree, but within the system we have I think Reilly's been pretty fair and acted like the adult in the room, even when NIMBY wailing reaches a fever pitch.

Do you think the wealthy voters of the 42nd Ward would ever elect somebody who is MORE favorable to development than Reilly? Even if they did, would they keep him in office more than one term? Politicians have to balance the demands of their constituents with the needs of the city overall, especially when those two things are in conflict.

Natarus preceded Reilly and he was seen as development-friendly, but he did the exact same kind of politicking to keep everyone in line. He also had a big advantage since he was a machine politician, so he got plenty of "free" votes without having to seriously campaign. And he didn't do jack-squat for urban design, he is one big reason why River North is saddled with so many hideous parking podiums.

IMO Reilly is really the best case scenario for a wealthy, urban ward... even if I strongly disagree with him on a handful of issues like bikes on the riverwalk.