CHICAGO | Highrise Projects & Construction, v7

[Via Chicago]

Originally Posted by munchymunch

did the near west side just suffer from a hurricane?

[J_M_Tungsten]

^^^ bahhahaha!! I thought that too!

[Randomguy34]

Maybe that's their proposal for the expressway. Flood the entire stretch and convert the entire area into a river.

[munchymunch]

Maybe the west loopers found out a 8 story affordable housing apartment building was going up in there neighborhood. RETALIATION.

[Ned.B]

I'll confirm that the 29 S Lasalle project is a long dead pre-recession project by Goettsch Partners and those renderings were created years ago. The project called for demolishing approximately 1/3 of 39 S Lasalle on it's NE corner to build the tower (the part where the trusses are bearing). Seeing as 39 LaSalle is now being converted to hotel, and GP is not involved, there is not much chance of this project in this form ever happening.

[SamInTheLoop]

^ If that is old, pretty sure it's a version we've never seen before.....and strange that GP would add to their site after so many years (but not an unprecedented sort of thing).......previously (i know there's some confusion over 29 or 39 so lasalle, etc - for me as well, but....)......the big ~800' office tower proposal here on LaSalle last cycle was from owner/developer Hamilton Partners.....and the design was by Lagrange.......there were definitely renderings..........as a surprise to no one, this GP design is much better than what Lagrange worked up......

[Ned.B]

Interesting. I'd never heard of the Lagrange proposal. It looks like that came out around 2007, which I think means that the GP proposal came after...maybe around 2008 or 9. But I will have to check on that one.

[headcase]

Originally Posted by untitledreality

Parking fronting Grant Park? They should have their licenses revoked.

Couldn't let this go by the way side, it's a beautiful proposal, and I think Spertus showed that modern buildings can fit in on the streetwall.

SSDD

[Kngkyle]

I think it's pretty safe to say that, with all the new projects announced in the past two months, we have reached the same level of development as the pre-recession boom years. It will still be another year or two until we see a lot of these projects break ground, but the number and scale of projects that are in the pipeline is beyond what any of us would have imagined a few years ago. The skyline will be littered with cranes again by 2017.

[hawainpanda]

Originally Posted by Kngkyle

I think it's pretty safe to say that, with all the new projects announced in the past two months, we have reached the same level of development as the pre-recession boom years. It will still be another year or two until we see a lot of these projects break ground, but the number and scale of projects that are in the pipeline is beyond what any of us would have imagined a few years ago. The skyline will be littered with cranes again by 2017.

There's currently almost 30 project ongoing now so we're already in the beginning of a boom, I think most of the projects are relatively lower height currently which will change if some of the proposals move forward, ie all three serious super talls that are being proposed. I think the only diff between the last boom I'm seeing right now is that most of the constructions/proposals are residential, I think the last boom saw a higher percentage of office towers being built. I would love to start seeing 800feet+ office tower proposals

[emathias]

The Wells sidewalk canopies for 707 N Wells have come down, returning the sidewalk to pedestrians.

[J_M_Tungsten]

Today
North of the U.S. Bank on Chicago and Clark



Photo from here: http://www.bizjournals.com/twincitie...s-with.html#i1

[ardecila]

The Freedom Center can't easily be redeveloped for residential as it sits in a PMD. That stuff south of Chicago Ave is completely speculative apart from the fact that the Trib sees dollar signs there. The parcel north of Chicago is zoned for manufacturing, but it's not a PMD so it could, in theory, be rezoned. I'm sure Mike Holzer will start a campaign against this development regardless...

Really any development there needs to include a city-led master plan. The former bridge at Erie St needs to be rebuilt and the rail spur needs to be preserved in some form - it's the only possible connection between Metra's UP-N and UP-NW lines and Union Station, or some underground platforms in the vicinity. The city also needs to figure out how to bring high-capacity transit to the site. Two semi-frequent bus lines ain't enough.

Also, LOL at the Riverwalk running in front of the Prairie concrete plant. They are one of the busier plants in the country and they rely on river access to bring in raw materials. Bringing those materials in by truck would be a disaster to the neighborhood in terms of traffic and emissions.

[aaron38]

Originally Posted by ardecila

Really any development there needs to include a city-led master plan. The former bridge at Erie St needs to be rebuilt and the rail spur needs to be preserved in some form - it's the only possible connection between Metra's UP-N and UP-NW lines and Union Station, or some underground platforms in the vicinity. The city also needs to figure out how to bring high-capacity transit to the site. Two semi-frequent bus lines ain't enough.

It's going to be difficult to rebuild the Erie bridge and keep the rail spur at the same time. The clearance needed for pedestrians at the river's edge is much different than that for a functioning rail line. If the rail spur is removed, Erie street can stay at ground level until just before the river.

And I don't understand your comment about the rail spur. As of now there is only one derilict track south of Grand, terminating at the river. If that hasn't been tied into the Amtrack lines by now, would it ever be? And one track isn't very useful for regular passenger service. Everyone who needs to get from Ogilvie to Union Station today seems to manage. So why would a train on the UP-N/UP-NW line ever need to go to Union Station?
(But if one ever did really want to get UP-NW trains to Union Station, best place to do that is out at Cicero, just south of the Kennedy)

So once the Trib is done with their site south of Chicago Ave, doesn't all use of that spur vanish?

[HowardL]

Originally Posted by aaron38

So once the Trib is done with their site south of Chicago Ave, doesn't all use of that spur vanish?

I used to work at Freedom Center. The rail spur is only there to deliver newsprint rolls.

It's totally klugey. Move the printing presses elsewhere and the need for riverfront rail access vanishes. Poof. Just like that.

The rail lines along the western edge of the site are more mysterious to me. I got nothing.

[streetline]

Originally Posted by aaron38

It's going to be difficult to rebuild the Erie bridge and keep the rail spur at the same time. The clearance needed for pedestrians at the river's edge is much different than that for a functioning rail line. If the rail spur is removed, Erie street can stay at ground level until just before the river.

And I don't understand your comment about the rail spur. As of now there is only one derilict track south of Grand, terminating at the river. If that hasn't been tied into the Amtrack lines by now, would it ever be? And one track isn't very useful for regular passenger service. Everyone who needs to get from Ogilvie to Union Station today seems to manage. So why would a train on the UP-N/UP-NW line ever need to go to Union Station?
(But if one ever did really want to get UP-NW trains to Union Station, best place to do that is out at Cicero, just south of the Kennedy)

So once the Trib is done with their site south of Chicago Ave, doesn't all use of that spur vanish?

What remains of Erie street already slopes up from ground level (to meet the viaduct over the tracks that was torn down). Reduilding more or less what was there previously shouldn't be that hard. But I'd personally be more interested in a lightweight pedestrian and bike bridge, from the current park in river north to a twin park on the west side of the river (this is presuming that the PMD falls, if it doesn't then parks and pedestrian and bike infrastructure seems implausible).

And you are incorrect, there are two tracks south of Grand. One branch runs to the river and theoretically to points east on Carol St (and is used once a year to keep it licensed), and another runs down Jefferson to Kinzie where the Blommers Chocolate factory uses it. While Blommers also has rail access via the elevated tracks to their north, I expect they'd want to keep both spurs unless motivated to change.

I can see why Ardecila would want to keep the ROW available to accommodate a future connection to the Union station tracks or a portal to a future underground West Loop Transit Center. But I expect things could still be reconfigured to waste much less space by only keeping the ROW for a few adjacent tracks.

[aaron38]

Originally Posted by streetline

And you are incorrect, there are two tracks south of Grand. One branch runs to the river and theoretically to points east on Carol St (and is used once a year to keep it licensed), and another runs down Jefferson to Kinzie where the Blommers Chocolate factory uses it. While Blommers also has rail access via the elevated tracks to their north, I expect they'd want to keep both spurs unless motivated to change.

Yes, but that's a spur. Only a single track crosses Grand, and north of Chicago at the Prarie concrete plant, the line is again back to a single track. So as I said, there's limited use for passengers, have to take a lot of care with scheduling to get multiple trains in and out. For Amtrak schedules it could work. Service to Rockford maybe?

But they could go down to a single track ROW through the Trib site and deck over it. Would leave a lot of room for parking on the sub levels.

[streetline]

Originally Posted by aaron38

Yes, but that's a spur. Only a single track crosses Grand, and north of Chicago at the Prarie concrete plant, the line is again back to a single track. So as I said, there's limited use for passengers, have to take a lot of care with scheduling to get multiple trains in and out. For Amtrak schedules it could work. Service to Rockford maybe?

But they could go down to a single track ROW through the Trib site and deck over it. Would leave a lot of room for parking on the sub levels.

It currently necks down to one track at Grand, but there looks to be room for two all the way up to where it joins the main line near Ogden. And since we're talking about ROW for potential future projects, I'd consider that more important than the current tracks.

And, yes if the area is redeveloped, I'd hope/expect the tracks would be decked over, with streets above and parking and the riverwalk down at the ground level.

[ardecila]

The ROW is certainly wide enough for 2 tracks. With a 14' track center and 11' of space to either side, you're at 36' which is a common column spacing for a precast parking deck. It would not require anything extraordinary to deck over a 2-track rail line.

K Station is a good example, they preserved a path for trains to enter some future West Loop tunnel. Right now Fifield set up a temporary little dog park in the space intended for the rail line.

Interesting idea to build a pedestrian-only bridge at Erie instead of a full-fledged bridge... Erie would actually be a great east-west bike route if it crossed the river. Good candidate for a cycle track.

[Chicago Shawn]

Originally Posted by spyguy

Shawn is correct I believe in that this is probably pre-recession. There have been other unreleased designs for this site. In summary:

39 LaSalle = being converted to a Kimpton hotel
29 LaSalle = being converted to apartments (see here for rendering of the rooftop pool)

700 Chicago looks interesting. Didn't realize there were an additional 30 acres they were looking to redevelop in the future. And Viceroy will be stunning in real life.

Yes, as I mentioned this is the plan from pre-recession days. Its a good thing this one didn't happen as it would have ripped out a good portion of the Old New York Life Building at 39 S LaSalle.

Given there are 3 Jenny designed buildings in a row here on LaSalle, I feel this block is work preserving, even if 29 S is heavily altered from the original design. Especially since the apartment conversion will be pretty dense in its own right.


Viceroy is going to be great, chalk this up as another 'better than the pre-recession version' project. Reilly forced a PoMo design on the previous Cedar Hotel project by M Development. Looks like this revision went in under the PD for it was able to do a progressive design without aldermanic meddling.