CHICAGO | General Developments

[thewaterman11]

The Wirtz family's plan to renovate 333 N. Michigan will get a boost from the city: $5.5 million in tax breaks over the next 12 years.

On Wednesday, the City Council approved a tax incentive to help fund the $47 million rehabilitation, which includes reconfiguring the building's entrance and renovating the lobby.

For the next 12 years, property taxes on the building will be reduced by $5.5 million to offset construction costs.

Renovations will overlap with demolition at 200 N. Michigan Ave.

http://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/20140...llion-facelift

And here's a Crain's article from 2012 talking about the renovation (paywall).
http://www.chicagorealestatedaily.co...n-avenue-tower

[wierdaaron]

That's good to hear. The Michigan corridor south of the river is going to be completely different in a few years.

The marble work at the base of 333 is kind of nice, though a little gaudy. I wonder how much of a change they're planning on. I think that building gets crummy retail tenants because the spaces are so small, there's not room for kitchens or storerooms.

[Ned.B]

Originally Posted by wierdaaron

That's good to hear. The Michigan corridor south of the river is going to be completely different in a few years.

The marble work at the base of 333 is kind of nice, though a little gaudy. I wonder how much of a change they're planning on. I think that building gets crummy retail tenants because the spaces are so small, there's not room for kitchens or storerooms.

The building is a Chicago Landmark, so you can bet that the marble facade is staying where it is. I noticed that some work on this actually began late last year, including replacing/restoring some of the lower windows and cast iron frames. You can see through the windows that much of the second floor has also been gutted, and the signage suggests that this will be additional retail, similar to the Wrigley Building.

From talking to a few people I know at Wirtz, my understanding is that most of the lobby and facade renovations are aimed at bringing the building back closer to the way it was originally designed. The awful mid-century white marble and bronze entrance and dark, dreary lobby will be replaced by something more like Holabird and Root originally constructed.

[the urban politician]

^. It's also nice to know that at least some of these historic towers will remain as
Office space, and not all of them will be converted to apts, dorms, or hotels

[Rizzo]

I agree, I like vintage buildings serving a variety of purposes although generally I'm more in favor of hotels and residential. Some of those great old buildings get pretty beaten up when they serve strictly commercial purposes as low rent buildings. I actually love working in the prewar buildings when tastefully renovated. 360 N. Michigan was nice because it had been rehabbed in the 2000's and got a bunch of great tenants that spent alot on their spaces.

But when I look about the loop, if there's one thing that makes me cringe is seeing old buildings with the top third of the window covered up by drop ceilings, gross fluorescent lighting and a lobby that had been remodeled some time in the 70's. Seems like a proper hotel or residential conversion can do the building some justice that a commercial use can't. So I'm not surprised by the subsidy here.

My big concern though was that stretch of N. Michigan Ave was becoming a bit too hotel heavy. If it brings more quality retail, I guess I can't object. But the restaurants in that area as well as in the pedway don't benefit much from reduced worker traffic.

333 is one of my favorite art deco buildings downtown. If I'm not mistaken the gutted floor space that you can now see thru was formerly The Blackhawk's front office??

[Buckman821]

Originally Posted by Hayward

Seems like a proper hotel or residential conversion can do the building some justice that a commercial use can't.

I disagree strongly - although you are dead on about the need to get rid of the drop ceilings. I just wish more investors would be willing to convert some of these old office buildings in the east loop to flexible office space with a loft feel. I can't understand why that would be any less desirable than residential. Furthermore, the entire office market is moving towards more flexible space that a gutted vintage office building would seem very capable of providing. Tech, architecture, and other creative industries are already eager to consume this type of product. Give it another decade and even some of the stodgy old industries will be willing.

I wish more investors would do this, in part because I somewhat like the idea of the building living out its intended use for another century, but more so because I don't want State street and Wabash to become single use residential districts and lose their daytime vitality. In the case of the east loop there is the additional concern about not shifting the entire office population too far away from the red line.

I feel like I'm the only one who would prefer to see at least a sizable chunk of these gems remain as offices. I get that they need new capital, and to be essentially gutted inside, but I just don't understand why they must always convert to either residential or hotel.

Here's a prime example:

http://www.thesullivancenter.com/pdf..._photos_sm.pdf
...More of this please.

[Rizzo]

hold on, I think we mostly agree. But we haven't seen aggressive renovations / restorations of vintage buildings into office space lately. I'll take a rehab to hotel / residential now to add another 50 years of useful life as opposed to perpetuating as a stale office building with mediocre care, and the possibility of demolition. The hotel / residential conversions are kind of a safe position for these buildings.

But I'm not in disagreement of the office lofts in vintage buildings. That's part of what I do, so the more of those the better! I just wish there was more....

[Buckman821]

Yes. Agreed that unfortunately the examples of proper vintage office renovations are rare.

[wierdaaron]

Originally Posted by Hayward

But we haven't seen aggressive renovations / restorations of vintage buildings into office space lately.

Does 600 W. Chicago count?

I guess if that were to happen today they'd probably be turning it into a hotel instead.

[Ch.G, Ch.G]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

^. What an absolutely shitty development. Can't they build that worthless thing in Skokie?

Originally Posted by lu9

Fair enough to mock the design. I'm with everyone there, but that Skokie comment..

trying to find a way to read that without getting offended. I'm coming up short.

Originally Posted by Busy Bee

I don't think mentioning Skokie was going anywhere that the emphasis on cheapness and frugality wasn't already. And so what if it was? No group or identity should be beyond ridicule if they deserve it.

I don't know. I found it kind of offensive. Let's say the building was the Jesse White Community Center:

"What an absolutely shitty development. Can't they build that worthless thing in Englewood?"

...or a Howard Brown:

"What an absolutely shitty development. Can't they build that worthless thing in Boystown?"

[Rizzo]

Originally Posted by wierdaaron

Does 600 W. Chicago count?

I guess if that were to happen today they'd probably be turning it into a hotel instead.

That be one odd location for a hotel lol

[Tom Servo]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

^. What an absolutely shitty development. Can't they build that worthless thing in Skokie?

Wait, wtf? Bro, are you serious?

[SamInTheLoop]

Originally Posted by Ch.G, Ch.G

I don't know. I found it kind of offensive. Let's say the building was the Jesse White Community Center:

"What an absolutely shitty development. Can't they build that worthless thing in Englewood?"

...or a Howard Brown:

"What an absolutely shitty development. Can't they build that worthless thing in Boystown?"

To be fair though, they should be suburban counterparts, say Ford Heights, and....Oak Park?? Evanston? Ok, ok, so I don't know the suburbs that well (or the hottest gay neighborhoods for that matter

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by kemachs

Wow, agreed. Way to replace a cool building with an awful and unimaginative design. Maybe you should've used some of that money you saved to hire a decent architect. I'd also love to know how it's more environmentally efficient to go the non-rehab route - and while you're at it define environmentally efficient.

(comments directed at JCYS)

Yes, it's automotive schlock, and it doesn't really belong in this location.

On the bright side, I like the splash of color. Chicago neighborhoods can be dreary, especially this time of year.

I also have no love for this block of North Ave, where it transitions from a neighborhood-scaled street into a West Side speedway. The vibrant retail along North west of Milwaukee suddenly transitions into a bunch of large, soulless apartment buildings that greet pedestrians with the edge of a floor slab. It gets a little better between Leavitt and Claremont but west of Western it's back to same ol' speedway and that continues all the way out to St Charles.

[SamInTheLoop]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

^. It's also nice to know that at least some of these historic towers will remain as
Office space, and not all of them will be converted to apts, dorms, or hotels

Absolutely. It's fantastic to see an historic office building in this area get some love - actually as an office building..... (love those conversions as well too of course, but nice to still have a good mix)

[J_M_Tungsten]

Today
Adams and Aberdeen

[nomarandlee]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/busine...,3368373.story

Sun-Times ends lease in its office building
:14 a.m. CST, January 17, 2014

Chicago Real Estate Daily is reporting: The Chicago Sun-Times has ended its lease at 350 N. Orleans effective at the end of 2014, according to building owner Shorenstein Properties LLC. The newspaper's owner has been leasing 98,000 square feet at the riverfront building bearing the paper's name since 2004. It is unclear whether the paper will move to another building or reduce its space.

Interesting. I wonder if there is a any or even if a slim chance of the owner selling the building only to knock it down and build another project. Are the owners also the Kennedy group? Given that plans for Wolf Point seem to be setting sail I wonder if it could spur ideas to maximize the Sun-Times lot and attempt to piggyback the plans for Wolf Point and intertwine the two. One can always dream...........

[the urban politician]

Out of curiosity, what kind of security do these construction sites have to protect from robbery?

Anyone know?

Thanks for the pics, JM

[Skyguy_7]

^ On large projects, owners rent overnight security guards to watch the premises. On smaller projects especially outside of downtown, burglaries happen all the time. They're usually after power tools and will do anything they can to break into an unattended gangbox. Though, last year, one of my subcontractors' employees were robbed of their tools and equipment during the day at gun point ...at a south-side elementary school.

[marothisu]

1258 N Milwaukee issued a new building permit yesterday for 6 units and 1 commercial space. Currently that's a little plaza type an area. Written about here:

http://chicago.curbed.com/tags/1256-n-milwaukee