CHICAGO | General Developments - Page 2471

Busy Bee · #**49401** Posted **Oct 12, 2021, 1:02 AM**

This gives me a tummy ache.

marothisu · #**49402** Posted **Oct 12, 2021, 1:16 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by thegoatman

$1.4-$1.7 billion for ONE new commuter rail station (plus upgrades or whatever) is insane. No wonder Europe/Asia is completing dusting us when it come to public transit construction. Like KOgc said, they're literally building world class sport stadiums for a billion, and you're trying to tell me a single transit station is gonna cost almost 2 billion? what a joke

Why does it cost that much? Literally makes no sense.

Yeah that makes no sense. It must include costs for years to come for repairs and deep rooted structural/infrastructure changes they need to make this a reality.

On the Asia topic it's hilarious because their stations are still way better than ours on average at a fraction of the cost. oof.

harryc · #**49403** Posted **Oct 12, 2021, 2:21 AM**

Sept 28

SolarWind · #**49404** Posted **Oct 12, 2021, 2:24 AM**

September 30, 2021

SolarWind · #**49405** Posted **Oct 12, 2021, 2:57 AM**

October 11, 2021

SolarWind · #**49406** Posted **Oct 12, 2021, 2:58 AM**

October 11, 2021

thegoatman · #**49407** Posted **Oct 12, 2021, 4:47 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by marothisu

Yeah that makes no sense. It must include costs for years to come for repairs and deep rooted structural/infrastructure changes they need to make this a reality.

On the Asia topic it's hilarious because their stations are still way better than ours on average at a fraction of the cost. oof.

Plus 10 years??? China builds whole new lines in months! Now obviously they don't have the ethics and safety hazards we have, but no reason transit construction should take years upon years.

Great pics, Solarwind, as usual. 345 N. Morgan is good infill.

k1052 · #**49408** Posted **Oct 12, 2021, 11:58 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila

It's still an insane cost. The Englewood Flyover that Metra opened 5 years ago only cost $140M. That was not an easy project either, spanning over one of the city's busiest freight lines and the Dan Ryan. Now they're saying A-2 will cost 10x that amount?

For that price they'd better rebuild every crumbling viaduct from California to Halsted, add a 4th track between Union Station and Pacific Junction, and expand the coach yards in addition to just the flyover.

Yeah I've got some major questions about the scope here and WTF they are doing. I mean the ENTIRE 75th St CIP is only $1B.

bgsrand · #**49409** Posted **Oct 12, 2021, 4:30 PM**

61 Erie is offensively bad.

BrinChi · #**49410** Posted **Oct 12, 2021, 5:24 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila

It's still an insane cost. The Englewood Flyover that Metra opened 5 years ago only cost $140M. That was not an easy project either, spanning over one of the city's busiest freight lines and the Dan Ryan. Now they're saying A-2 will cost 10x that amount?

For that price they'd better rebuild every crumbling viaduct from California to Halsted, add a 4th track between Union Station and Pacific Junction, and expand the coach yards in addition to just the flyover.

Yeah it better include all of those old viaducts for that price. And they are super wide. And if this is on the scale of the Red Line modernization project, phase 1 of that is $2.1 billion. Sometimes the costs get escalated when they are required to maintain service during construction as well. Englewood flyover may have been simpler by not having to deal with passenger rail. Hopefully Federal and state funds can pay for most too.

Looking at the map, I'm wondering why they wouldn't move all of the northbound trains that go through Clybourn and Western Avenue to use Ogilvie and then all of the west bound trains (Kedzie station) would exclusively go out of Union Station. Then it seems like the need for crossing tracks could be mostly eliminated??

Also interesting that putting the new station near Ashland makes the most sense so that it can serve all of those lines simultaneously and provide good connectivity with CTA. This would continue to push the office market west to Damen.

urbanpln · #**49411** Posted **Oct 12, 2021, 5:55 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila

I don't know if I'd call that Douglas. It's blockaded to the south by Dearborn Homes, to the west by the Dan Ryan and to the east by Mercy Hospital. It's really more of an extension of Motor Row area across the Stevenson - similar loft buildings and commercial businesses.

It's within the Douglas Community.

aaron38 · #**49412** Posted **Oct 12, 2021, 7:17 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by bgsrand

61 Erie is offensively bad.

Offensive? This?

Quote:

Originally Posted by SolarWind

September 30, 2021

That is clean basic infill. Nothing fancy, not trying to be something it's not. Doesn't look like it was designed by a 3 year old, no precast concrete rusting balconies (like behind, upper left)
In a few years it will look like it's been there forever and blend right in.

thegoatman · #**49413** Posted **Oct 12, 2021, 7:51 PM**

^Agree with both of y'all. It took over a vacant lot, has ground level retail, and has only two parking spots for 30 residents, sounds like good infill to me.

What looks terrible is that walgreens. That massive parking lot and store needs to be redeveloped.

Busy Bee · #**49414** Posted **Oct 12, 2021, 8:22 PM**

Calling that "offensively bad" is some real balony. If the brickwork had a bit more depth on the base and at the parapet this building could pass for 90 years old. Nothing spectacular, but a fine building both stylistically and in its programming. Far from bad by any definition.

Steely Dan · #**49415** Posted **Oct 12, 2021, 8:36 PM**

^^ 100% agree.

The Walgreens nextdoor is BILLIONS of times more offensive on all levels than this modest and perfectly adequate, if somewhat unremarkable, in-fill development.

OrdoSeclorum · #**49416** Posted **Oct 12, 2021, 9:10 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by bgsrand

61 Erie is offensively bad.

*snort* It could use a more distinct top and a bottom for my taste. But it's not setback, it's got awesome density, it doesn't dominate the block and the it's relatively fine-grained. If there was a whole neighborhood that was nothing but variations on this building it would immediately be in the top 2% of lively, livable urban neighborhoods in the U.S.

bgsrand · #**49417** Posted **Oct 12, 2021, 10:47 PM**

Touched a nerve here, which one of you guys work for LG

....I retract my statement, thanks for helping me see the light.

In all honesty I thought this was the site where they tore down the old rowhouses which maybe spurred my reaction - or I was having a bad day at work.

the urban politician · #**49418** Posted **Oct 13, 2021, 12:58 AM**

^ Throw in stone carvings of faces on the facade, and you’ve got yourself a future priceless gem!

marothisu · #**49419** Posted **Oct 13, 2021, 1:43 AM**

Zoning app is up for this proposal at 3914 N Lincoln Ave with a few changes

https://chicagoyimby.com/2021/04/ren...th-center.html

The number of units are staying the same, but the number of affordable units is increasing from 13 or 14 to 20. At the same time, the amount of parking is decreasing from 36 spaces down to 27 spaces. Bicycle space increases from 68 to 76 spaces too. There is still ground floor commercial.

https://chicago.legistar.com/Legisla...vanced&Search=

aaron38 · #**49420** Posted **Oct 13, 2021, 3:48 AM**

Regarding 61 Erie, just look at this hot mess that was once proposed!
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8940...4!8i8192?hl=en

Preservationists lucked out in getting something human scaled, brick, that protects the older buildings to the east. And it holds the corner with the alley.

That now opens up the Walgreens site for development. Take that alley and step down from a tower to meet it. Form a nice space.