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

[Natoma]

Hi all,

I'm a long time lurker and first time poster. I emailed the architect, Ismael Soto, to ask about these renderings. He said it was his entry for a "Zaha Hadid Architects competition", (possibly an internal competition?). Apparently it wasn't the winning entry and unfortunately, he "still doesn't know what Related plans to do with the site. Someday we will find out I guess."

Sorry to be the bringer of seemingly bad news.

[Fvn]

Originally Posted by Natoma

Hi all,

I'm a long time lurker and first time poster. I emailed the architect, Ismael Soto, to ask about these renderings. He said it was his entry for a "Zaha Hadid Architects competition", (possibly an internal competition?). Apparently it wasn't the winning entry and unfortunately, he "still doesn't know what Related plans to do with the site. Someday we will find out I guess."

Sorry to be the bringer of seemingly bad news.

well if it wasn't a winning entry that means that some entry did win (?) which means they may have a design which means that a possible announcement cant be too far off?

[marothisu]

Damn - unless he's trying to cover his ass. Either way it's a cool design. I hope the winning design is still a very good design and as Related said "architecturally significant"

[HomrQT]

Originally Posted by Rocket49

I certainly love your optimism.

To be honest, though, I've never understood the attraction of 400 N LSD as the site for a supertall.

People tend to buy a condo in a supertall at least in part for the views, and the view at night from upper floors at 400 N LSD would be pretty much pitch dark facing from 0 degrees north through 180 degrees south.

The upper floors of a supertall at the Thompson Center site, on the other hand, would offer great views in any direction both day and night.

I agree the Thompson Center site as well as other sites around the city would be better for a 2,000 footer than the "old spire site". I just think this site has momentum behind it because at one point a 2,000 foot building was seemingly about to be constructed here. Related has indicated they are potentially going to put something here that could be very tall. Also that 2,000 foot Gensler design came out. It just seems like this site is the closest to getting that done than anywhere else in the city right now. But I agree on the Thompson Center site.

[Notyrview]

Ok, you guys, I appreciate the #goals, but seriously, if NYC can't even launch a 2000 footer, with all its billionaire flight capital, it's highly unlikely that Chicago can. I suppose it's possible but it would take a developer with a massive personal fortune, a ton of vision and a very personal commitment to Chicago.

One wildcard are those plutocratic tax cuts, which are sure to spike the number of millionaires in the area, if not also increasing the ranks of the poor and sunsetting our already very dim democracy.

[Bonsai Tree]

Well, at least this wasn't a complete waste of time. I think we learned a lot about what Related wants to build on that site.

1. They don't want to build a 2,000 ft tower
2. The skyscraper will be around the height of the Sears Tower (1500 ft)
3. The skyscraper will use the same foundation as the Spire
4. Related might want to build 2 skyscrapers on the site
5. Someone other than Zaha Hadid won

[chris08876]

Originally Posted by Notyrview

Ok, you guys, I appreciate the #goals, but seriously, if NYC can't even launch a 2000 footer, with all its billionaire flight capital, it's highly unlikely that Chicago can. I suppose it's possible but it would take a developer with a massive personal fortune, a ton of vision and a very personal commitment to Chicago.

One wildcard are those plutocratic tax cuts, which are sure to spike the number of millionaires in the area, if not also increasing the ranks of the poor and sunsetting our already very dim democracy.

At some point, land prices depending on where the parcel is located will make such a tower feasible to cover the cost of such a tower. The total sellout of "X" building or total return per $/sqft depending on the total cost of the proposal will have to have enough space to make a decent return in a reasonable time frame.

A mixed use would be ideal for this.

[LouisVanDerWright]

I was going to say that part of the issue with NYC not launching anything beyond 1500' or so is probably related to how hard it is to assemble a site large enough to make a 2000' tall building feasible. You aren't gonna want to try for the first 2000' tower in the USA over a railyard like Hudson Yards, and you aren't going to do it on a tiny ass site like 432 Park or 111 w 57th.

If Chicago ever is able to turn around enough of the central area to get land values that justify larger towers like NYC, then it's possible Chicago could see a 2000'er, maybe even before NYC, but that's going to take another generation.

[Mr Downtown]

Originally Posted by chris08876

At some point, land prices depending on where the parcel is located will make such a tower feasible

I think you forget how inefficient such buildings become at that kind of height. Elevators and exit stairs start to occupy such large proportions of the floorspace, and concrete strength requirements increase more and more. Even at Hong Kong or Midtown Manhattan land values, only ego can justify going beyond about 1200 feet with a residential tower.

[Notyrview]

Originally Posted by Bonsai Tree

Well, at least this wasn't a complete waste of time. I think we learned a lot about what Related wants to build on that site.

1. They don't want to build a 2,000 ft tower
2. The skyscraper will be around the height of the Sears Tower (1500 ft)
3. The skyscraper will use the same foundation as the Spire
4. Related might want to build 2 skyscrapers on the site
5. Someone other than Zaha Hadid won

How do we know someone other than Hadid (RIP) won? Apologies if i missed a comment.

Nevermind, sigh, i scrolled back a few posts. Anyway, i'm sure Related will use all of its tax cuts to deliver value-engineered dookie bc capitalism is working so well!

[Chi-Sky21]

You can always just add a 800 ft spire to get ya there...problemo solved. Sure its the cheapo way to get there but i think its about time Chicago gets to screw some other cities out of the rankings with a spire!

[r18tdi]

Originally Posted by marothisu

Damn - unless he's trying to cover his ass.

I think he would have removed the image from his site if it was some kind of unintentional leak.

[IrishIllini]

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

I was going to say that part of the issue with NYC not launching anything beyond 1500' or so is probably related to how hard it is to assemble a site large enough to make a 2000' tall building feasible. You aren't gonna want to try for the first 2000' tower in the USA over a railyard like Hudson Yards, and you aren't going to do it on a tiny ass site like 432 Park or 111 w 57th.

If Chicago ever is able to turn around enough of the central area to get land values that justify larger towers like NYC, then it's possible Chicago could see a 2000'er, maybe even before NYC, but that's going to take another generation.

I don't know about a generation. Lots of variables, but if the current trend continues (hopefully accelerates) it shouldn't be that long until the Loop and the south end of River North are 24 hr places. Michigan Avenue could potentially get there too. We shall see!

[Khantilever]

Originally Posted by IrishIllini

I don't know about a generation. Lots of variables, but if the current trend continues (hopefully accelerates) it shouldn't be that long until the Loop and the south end of River North are 24 hr places. Michigan Avenue could potentially get there too. We shall see!

Yup, and Chicago has the second-highest central land values in the US. Couple that with relatively low construction costs and more flexible zoning, and we have a real shot at breaking that ceiling.

That said, other than the Thompson Center site what are some potential locations? I know there have been huge cancelled projects over the last few decades that never came to fruition - hopefully a few of those sites could still work. Either that or an enterprising developer with a lot of projects in the area might want to push further South and get things going in the area with an iconic tower.

[r18tdi]

Originally Posted by Khantilever

That said, other than the Thompson Center site what are some potential locations?

The PD covering the sites surrounding the old PO support a megatall.
The One Chicago Square block would be another good spot to go very tall. Maybe Rock N Roll MickyD's, if we're dreaming/speculating?

[Le Baron]

Originally Posted by Khantilever

Yup, and Chicago has the second-highest central land values in the US. Couple that with relatively low construction costs and more flexible zoning, and we have a real shot at breaking that ceiling.

That said, other than the Thompson Center site what are some potential locations? I know there have been huge cancelled projects over the last few decades that never came to fruition - hopefully a few of those sites could still work. Either that or an enterprising developer with a lot of projects in the area might want to push further South and get things going in the area with an iconic tower.

The prison and parking garage between Van Buren and Congress

[maru2501]

MCC not going anywhere

[Domer2019]

Originally Posted by Bonsai Tree

Well, at least this wasn't a complete waste of time. I think we learned a lot about what Related wants to build on that site.

5. Someone other than Zaha Hadid won

Are you sure about that?

Originally Posted by Natoma

Hi all,

I'm a long time lurker and first time poster. I emailed the architect, Ismael Soto, to ask about these renderings. He said it was his entry for a "Zaha Hadid Architects competition", (possibly an internal competition?). Apparently it wasn't the winning entry and unfortunately, he "still doesn't know what Related plans to do with the site. Someday we will find out I guess."

Sorry to be the bringer of seemingly bad news.

If the competition was internal, then "Zaha Hadid Architects" as a firm could have chosen another design to submit to Related (the winning design).

[chris08876]

Originally Posted by Mr Downtown

I think you forget how inefficient such buildings become at that kind of height. Elevators and exit stairs start to occupy such large proportions of the floorspace, and concrete strength requirements increase more and more. Even at Hong Kong or Midtown Manhattan land values, only ego can justify going beyond about 1200 feet with a residential tower.

That's why a mixed use is ideal. It really depends on the area, but I think for 400 N LSD, a hotel would be great. If the market is there, a hotel, and high end condos. If this was suppose near the sears, I'd say a hotel and office mix. It's all dependent on the market and risk assessments when it comes to condos. Could they sell? Maybe, but depending on the cost of the tower in general, and the prices, only a select few places can pull of units 25+ million or more.

Or... they can always do it the half ass way and use a nice spire.

This would be great.

Image from user "Bonsai Tree"

Sure its not 600m, but you guys would be lucky if you got this.

[Mr Downtown]

Originally Posted by chris08876

That's why a mixed use is ideal. It really depends on the area, but I think for 400 N LSD, a hotel would be great. If the market is there, a hotel, and high end condos.

It isn't.

Chicago hotels live off of Mag Mile shopping and conventions/trade shows. There's a reason more than 90 percent of all Chicago hotel rooms are within 600 feet of Michigan Avenue.

Hotel patrons don't pay a big premium for height/views, and hotel rooms make the elevatoring even less efficient. Usually a lot less, since you want separate elevators for hotel and condos.