CHICAGO | Highrise Projects & Construction, v7

[chicubs111]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

the loop proper (michigan, north branch, south branch, congress) is no longer the center of chicago skyscrapers it once was.

in 1999, chicago had 12 towers over 700', 6 of the them were in the loop proper (50%).

since 2000, chicago has built 14 towers over 700' (including U/C), only 2 of them have been built in the loop proper (14%).

so today, only 8 of chicago's 26 700+ footers are in the loop proper (31%).

Yes I realize that but considering why it no longer is since for the last 20 years the talk has been about the rebirth of the loop and the loop becoming a 24/7 type environment with all the added residential why wouldn't there be some more taller apt/condo buildings?...especially since the zoning and lack of nimbys would every complain about being too tall or too big in the central loop for the most part, wouldn't you want to take advantage of that? Perhaps the central loop isn't as appealing as they made it to be for city living?

[k1052]

Originally Posted by chicubs111

Yes I realize that but considering why it no longer is since for the last 20 years the talk has been about the rebirth of the loop and the loop becoming a 24/7 type environment with all the added residential why wouldn't there be some more taller apt/condo buildings?...especially since the zoning and lack of nimbys would every complain about being too tall or too big in the central loop for the most part, wouldn't you want to take advantage of that? Perhaps the central loop isn't as appealing as they made it to be for city living?

Rentals and hotels seem to be doing well in the loop and more old office buildings are getting converted. This is a different market than people who can drop a few million on a new high rise condo just because they feel like it. Those people are mostly in the Gold Coast or buying into a small number of prestige projects like Vista.

[dan ryan]

Originally Posted by k1052

Rentals and hotels seem to be doing well in the loop and more old office buildings are getting converted. This is a different market than people who can drop a few million on a new high rise condo just because they feel like it. Those people are mostly in the Gold Coast or buying into a small number of prestige projects like Vista.

Will the fact that there is no green space in the loop (not including the city's front yard) present a problem? Could that be remedied?

[Tom In Chicago]

Originally Posted by dan ryan

Will the fact that there is no green space in the loop present a problem? Could that be remedied?

I don't understand your questions. . .

. . .

[LouisVanDerWright]

Originally Posted by chicubs111

Yes I realize that but considering why it no longer is since for the last 20 years the talk has been about the rebirth of the loop and the loop becoming a 24/7 type environment with all the added residential why wouldn't there be some more taller apt/condo buildings?...especially since the zoning and lack of nimbys would every complain about being too tall or too big in the central loop for the most part, wouldn't you want to take advantage of that? Perhaps the central loop isn't as appealing as they made it to be for city living?

It's quite simple really, where are you going to out these new 700' buildings? Are you going to demolish world famous protoskyscrapers? Are you going to knock down 40 story towers that are less than 50 years old?

There are no spaces suitable for an economically feasible 700' tower in the loop and the few that remain are being landbanked by people with deep pockets who know it is just going to go up exponentially in value. I like the way the loop has been developing: historic stock being adaptively rehabbed punctuated by the occasional infill new tower. Let the developers tear up all the vacant land on the periphery so we can jack land values up enough to get a few more supertalls replacing gnarly garages or stuff like that Georgetown site.

[k1052]

Originally Posted by dan ryan

Will the fact that there is no green space in the loop (not including the city's front yard) present a problem? Could that be remedied?

Why would an enormous park right next to the loop not be included in that consideration? Not to mention the river walk or the plazas that draw numerous events.

[chicubs111]

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

It's quite simple really, where are you going to out these new 700' buildings? Are you going to demolish world famous protoskyscrapers? Are you going to knock down 40 story towers that are less than 50 years old?

There are no spaces suitable for an economically feasible 700' tower in the loop and the few that remain are being landbanked by people with deep pockets who know it is just going to go up exponentially in value. I like the way the loop has been developing: historic stock being adaptively rehabbed punctuated by the occasional infill new tower. Let the developers tear up all the vacant land on the periphery so we can jack land values up enough to get a few more supertalls replacing gnarly garages or stuff like that Georgetown site.

parking garages galore scattered amongst the loop can definilty be replaced with some more modest tall residential towers..just would think you would see more buildings like the legacy popup during the last 20 years. As far as supertalls we would need a rather sizable plot of land by loops standard to be feasible (ala thompson center or perhaps a rather big parking garage).

[BonoboZill4]

New and improved South Loop:

[LouisVanDerWright]

Originally Posted by chicubs111

parking garages galore scattered amongst the loop can definilty be replaced with some more modest tall residential towers..just would think you would see more buildings like the legacy popup during the last 20 years. As far as supertalls we would need a rather sizable plot of land by loops standard to be feasible (ala thompson center or perhaps a rather big parking garage).

Sure, they can be replaced which is why I mentioned them, but that doesn't mean it makes sense to replace them. A big 10 or 12 floor garage rakes in a lot of cash, it's not like the owners are in a hurry to knock that down just so they can squeeze more money out of the land. These structures are perfect long term assets for someone who thinks on a scale of decades and is just fine holding a cash flow producing property so their grandkids can cash in an build a new supertalls in 2040 or 2050.

Also towers like Legacy don't happen because they are too complicated and slender to be justified by today's economics. The only reason a giant rental tower like NEMA works is because it's on a big ass piece of land directly fronting the park. A rare chance to build something that's got guaranteed trophy frontage in perpetuity.

[gebs]

Originally Posted by BonoboZill4

[IMG]
New and improved South Loop:

Harry, do you have a similar picture from 2008-2010? The difference would be incredible. Depending on the year, there would be eight to ten buildings not in the shot.

[LouisVanDerWright]

Originally Posted by gebs

Harry, do you have a similar picture from 2008-2010? The difference would be incredible. Depending on the year, there would be eight to ten buildings not in the shot.

When I moved to Chicago there would be like 4 buildings over 15 floors in that shot...

[Skyguy_7]

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

Serious question, name one single major apartment project that has been proposed since the latest ARO increase. What we are about to see unfold in real time is the consequences of good intentions driving bad policy. Between what I just described and the DSA takeover of the NW side, expect a rapid ransacking of all downtown adjacent, moderately priced, neighborhoods in the next 5-10 years. Logan Square will likely have zero two flats left by like 2030 as everything is converted to mini mansions and all the demand from there will be pushed into the SW, near West, and near South sides.

The only hope for stopping what is the impending San Franciscoization of our core is Lightfoot pushing through some kind of zoning reform that addresses the problem.

Please Mods don't censor this. It needs to be seen.

[OrdoSeclorum]

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

Serious question, name one single major apartment project that has been proposed since the latest ARO increase. What we are about to see unfold in real time is the consequences of good intentions driving bad policy. Between what I just described and the DSA takeover of the NW side, expect a rapid ransacking of all downtown adjacent, moderately priced, neighborhoods in the next 5-10 years. Logan Square will likely have zero two flats left by like 2030 as everything is converted to mini mansions and all the demand from there will be pushed into the SW, near West, and near South sides.

If you look at this development map, there are more proposed developments with dozens of units than I can count. Many of them in the ARO Near North/Near West Pilot zone. I mean, all of Fulton Market is in that zone. If your position is that the ARO is stifling investment in Fulton Market, that is, ummm... unconvincing. If your position is more nuanced than it sounds, then I'd like to hear more fully formed analysis about why the current situation is so restrictive that the market can't adjust.

I generally think markets work pretty well when it comes to housing. And I'm sympathetic to the idea that government interference forces developers do ugly things as unintended consequences. Certainly burdensome regulations about setbacks and lawns and minimum lot sizes and parking requirements have made a lot of communities into hell-holes.

I don't know if the ARO is a good idea or not. I think doing something to ensure that people of all incomes can live in cities and enjoy the fruits of democracy and whatnot is a good idea. And I think doing a few *pilots* to see what the effects are seems like a good idea too.

[dan ryan]

delete

[gebs]

Accenture looks to be hiring 600 new employees and consolidating their operations into one building: 500 W Madison, which will then be known as Accenture tower. I wonder if that'll be in nomenclature only or if they'll be able to put up a logo (or at least their little > symbol)?

[Mr Downtown]

Renderings show an attic sign, and somewhere I read that the name change was effective today.

[SamInTheLoop]

300 N Michigan is on the agenda this month, as is the nearby inarguably undersized apartment tower to replact the garage at Randolph/Wabash (on the agenda as it falls under lakefront protection ordinance, not because it triggered a PD). Also, that proposal for a 12-story hotel with accompanying 6-story boutique office building in Fulton Market.

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by SamInTheLoop

The available evidence strongly now makes me think that it's likely Georgetown was not in fact serious about a high-rise redevelopment. Just look at this preposterous quote from their CEO below. "Quickly"? Georgetown purchased the property in 2011. "Better off" with just a retail re-tenanting? Yes, because if there's one thing that's clear about dense urban infill sites in great mixed-use areas in this era, it's that they are best developed/redeveloped/maintained as stand-alone single-use retail - of all property types.



"Georgetown initially planned to replace the building with a mixed-use high-rise but found the property had enough value as a retail space that they were better off focusing on quickly finding a new tenant, said CEO Adam Flatto

Translation: there's a huge amount of both rental and office supply coming online downtown, so lots of competition and no guarantee of strong demand for this location.

This site is small for an office tower and too much of a concrete jungle for Millennials to want to live. My girlfriend and I recently had an opportunity to buy a condo at State/Monroe, but we just decided we'd rather live in a medium-intensity neighborhood than directly on the second-busiest shopping street in the Midwest. Even for Millennials who are fine with the concrete jungle (and there are definitely some) what does this site offer in terms of amenities or nightlife? The only grocery store is Target, and the handful of bar/restaurants around here are either lunch-only places or heavily tourist-focused.

TBH the best long-term play for this site right now is probably hotel, but there's also a ton of new inventory coming online in the hotel sector, and - again - Millennial travelers probably want to be closer to the nightlife action in West Loop or River North.

My cynical take on this is that Georgetown will happily collect Primark's rent checks while it waits for this overseas concept to flounder in the Chicago market, like Topshop, Benetton, and plenty of others have in the past. That should take 5-8 years, by which point the hotel market (or the residential/office market) may be better positioned to accept a new high-rent midrise on State Street. The carrying costs were probably getting too high for Georgetown to bear, what with Fritz Kaegi getting ready to soak commercial property owners on taxes.

[SamInTheLoop]

^ Don't really agree with your assessments here:

Office? This site was never going to be office....I think even Georgetown knew that 8-9 years ago, as it made little sense even then. Always a resi and possibly resi/hotel play in terms of redevelopment.

Residential makes a lot of sense, for certain - more sense than you're giving it credit for, as most/all of the central/e loop apartment towers are doing very well. There is ample demand right now at this location. Just as one of many examples, the massive Block 37 apartment tower definitely has no problem remaining filled. Certainly other apartment developers remain bullish on this area, as there's a combined 500+ units just a couple blocks from here on the Plan Commission agenda this month. It's not a market demand issue for this area. A competent developer would have been able to pull off a resi project here in the last 8 years.

Hotel of course makes a lot of sense as well. Sure there's added competition in this sector too, but I really don't think that's the issue either. Again, a competent developer would have pulled off a hotel project here over the last 8 years.

Keep in mind that Georgetown bought the site in 2011. They've had all kind of time to build here. In fact, almost all (of what will soon become) the longest economic/commercial real estate market expansion on record.

Rather than back into why nothing has been built here through market explanations (which is what a lot of folks' default position here often is), I would heavily lean toward the simplest explanation in this specific instance: Owner/Developer ineptitude. It's a much more frequent actual explainer than a lot of people here reflexively assume, and it puzzles me a bit as to why that is.

PS: You're being very generous on your forecast for Primark's coming US (I would make this national, instead of just a local fizzle) burnout. I give them 3-4 years, tops.

[marothisu]

Looks like Joe Moreno approved a 16 story building in Wicker Park at the end of his tenure in April. The zoning at the time was for a max of 4 stories. But groups are calling on the new alderman to roll it back, but he doesn't want to yet. Sounds like a fun one. I wonder how many people there know that a 7 story, 43 unit building was permitted for new construction right next to this on the same parking lot in mid May.

https://blockclubchicago.org/2019/07...ed-their-fate/

In one of his final acts as leader of the 1st Ward, former Ald. Joe Moreno discreetly approved a massive 16-story, 168-unit development at the corner of Division Street and Ashland Avenue — and neighbors are not happy.

For years, the proposed zoning change at 1624 W. Division St. was rejected by neighbors who said the corner was already crowded with new developments, and the packed Blue Line trains couldn’t handle another influx of commuters.

But the plan received approval from the full City Council on April 10 — the final gathering of elected officials who served under former Mayor Rahm Emanuel, which included Moreno.

..

Varndell and other residents living near the Division Blue Line station say the trains are so crowded, they have altered their work schedules just so they can squeeze in before or after the morning rush. Otherwise, they’d have to wait for three or four trains before snagging a spot.

But La Spata said he’s not ready to “pull the plug.”

..

Sneed and other Wicker Park Committee board members have asked La Spata to use his aldermanic prerogative to retroactively downzone the property. While downzoning is perfectly legal, he doesn’t want to do it.

La Spata said he wants to assess whether Moreno’s move to approve the change on April 10 violated the Open Meetings Act.

“The challenge is, how do we work to modify this development in a way that comes across both legal and in a use of power that is going to be looked on favorably by all parties,” La Spata said. “We need a choice that is both legal and reputable.”

But Ald. Scott Waguespack (32nd) said he did not believe the Open Meetings Act had been violated on April 10.

“[It’s] not applicable, as the meeting was open,” he said. “[There’s] no requirement to post agenda with each and every item to be voted on in advance.”