HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > Proposals


    130 North Franklin in the SkyscraperPage Database

Building Data Page   • Comparison Diagram   • Chicago Skyscraper Diagram

Map Location
Chicago Projects & Construction Forum

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #561  
Old Posted Jan 14, 2022, 1:57 AM
rivernorthlurker rivernorthlurker is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Chicago
Posts: 570
Quote:
Originally Posted by JMKeynes View Post
Isn't this one of the sites that JP Morgan Chase is considering building on?
I don't think there's been any actual concrete news about that. If you got that from the forum that was probably just some posts by me speculating that they might consider building here as Tishman has a proposed design here (https://tishmanspeyer.com/properties/130-north-franklin) and Tishman is also the developer that is building Chase's new hq in NYC. And Chase said they want up to 1 million sqft. And Chicago recently gave Tishman until September, 24 2022 to start getting something built here or 'force it back to square one.' (https://www.chicagoarchitecture.org/...-blames-covid/)


Edit: Did a bit of searching and Tribune says Tishman is one 'making pitches' to Chase but not really sure the source or context on that.

https://www.chicagotribune.com/busin...m6y-story.html

Quote:

Those making pitches to Chase include Tishman Speyer for a vacant site at 130 N. Franklin St., and Hines for a site south of Willis Tower at 401 S. Wacker Drive. John Buck Co. proposes a site at 655 W. Madison St., along the east side of the Kennedy Expressway.

Other options include multiple sites in the Fulton Market district, including the longtime Bridgford Foods site at 170 N. Green St. owned by Clayco real estate development arm CRG.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #562  
Old Posted Jan 14, 2022, 2:04 AM
JMKeynes's Avatar
JMKeynes JMKeynes is offline
In the long run...
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: SW3
Posts: 3,160
Quote:
Originally Posted by rivernorthlurker View Post
I don't think there's been any actual concrete news about that. If you got that from the forum that was probably just some posts by me speculating that they might consider building here as Tishman has a proposed design here (https://tishmanspeyer.com/properties/130-north-franklin) and Tishman is also the developer that is building Chase's new hq in NYC. And Chase said they want up to 1 million sqft. And Chicago recently gave Tishman until September, 24 2022 to start getting something built here or 'force it back to square one.' (https://www.chicagoarchitecture.org/...-blames-covid/)


Edit: Did a bit of searching and Tribune says Tishman is one 'making pitches' to Chase but not really sure the source or context on that.

https://www.chicagotribune.com/busin...m6y-story.html
Thanks for the update.
__________________
"Men will still say, 'This was their finest hour.'"
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #563  
Old Posted Jan 14, 2022, 6:51 PM
left of center's Avatar
left of center left of center is offline
1st Ward
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: The Big Onion
Posts: 2,252
If Chase ends up choosing this lot, lets hope that the proposed building will end up being higher than 751 ft as initially proposed.

Do we know what the maximum height and density that would be allowed on this parcel is? I assume this is zoned DC-16/downtown core and has a pretty high FAR/height limits on it.
__________________
"Eventually, I think Chicago will be the most beautiful great city left in the world." -Frank Lloyd Wright
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #564  
Old Posted Jan 14, 2022, 7:25 PM
Suburban Shadow's Avatar
Suburban Shadow Suburban Shadow is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Da 'Burbs - Chicago
Posts: 86
130 N. Franklin is PD1293

The documents show base zoning of DC-16 would allow them a
1,046,112 sq. ft building.

They have some bonuses that allow a FAR of 20.502 which allows
1,340,463 sq. ft.

As for height, I thought anything over 500ft has to be approved by the City,
so I do not think there is an specific height limit.
__________________
Girder & Panel Construction Set - Circa 1975
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #565  
Old Posted Jan 14, 2022, 9:06 PM
Zapatan's Avatar
Zapatan Zapatan is offline
DENNAB
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: NA - Europe
Posts: 5,002
^^ Does that include lobby or mechanical too?

Salesforce Tower in SF is 1.4 MSF and One Vanderbilt in NYC is 1.75 MSF

1.34 could yield a ~1k foot office tower these days
__________________
Dump Trump 2020
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #566  
Old Posted Jan 14, 2022, 9:26 PM
Steely Dan's Avatar
Steely Dan Steely Dan is online now
devout Pizzatarian
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Lincoln Square, Chicago
Posts: 25,248
^ or FAR more likely in Chicago's case, it could end up being a 50 story, 727' building like the new BMO Tower, which has ~1.5M SF.

It's important to remember that Chicago hasn't built an office tower with a roof height north of 1,000' since 1974.
__________________
If a Pizza is baked in a forest, and no one is around to eat it, is it still delicious?

Last edited by Steely Dan; Jan 14, 2022 at 10:21 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #567  
Old Posted Jan 14, 2022, 10:15 PM
BVictor1's Avatar
BVictor1 BVictor1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 9,831
^^The developers can also purchase more FAR if they want or need. That's how the Neighborhood Opportunity Fund coffers get filled.
__________________
titanic1
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #568  
Old Posted Jan 14, 2022, 10:19 PM
munchymunch's Avatar
munchymunch munchymunch is offline
MPLSXCHI
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Omicron Persei 8
Posts: 1,068
Regardless of height, if they keep the kreuck+sexton design this would be my personal favorite of office buildings built in the past 10 years.
__________________
"I don't want to be interesting. I want to be good." -Ludwig Mies van der Rohe
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #569  
Old Posted Jan 15, 2022, 12:19 AM
Zapatan's Avatar
Zapatan Zapatan is offline
DENNAB
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: NA - Europe
Posts: 5,002
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Dan View Post
^ or FAR more likely in Chicago's case, it could end up being a 50 story, 727' building like the new BMO Tower, which has ~1.5M SF.
I may be exaggerating but the BMO site looks to be about twice the area of 130 N Franklin, it's a pretty fat tower.

I think 1.5 MSF would normally be a lot taller than that.


Quote:
It's important to remember that Chicago hasn't built an office tower with a roof height north of 1,000' since 1974.
Sure, but there's a first (or second) time for everything. Vista and OSC are among the tallest roofs in the city and were just completed. Maybe this trend can shift to offices too.
__________________
Dump Trump 2020
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #570  
Old Posted Jan 15, 2022, 12:31 AM
bhawk66 bhawk66 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Posts: 363
Not to be a Debbie Downer, Zap, but I think those days are over. There is just no need for office buildings of that height anymore. NY is an outlier. Times have changed. The work place has changed. Doubt we'll ever see another office building over 1000' in Chicago in our lifetime.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #571  
Old Posted Jan 15, 2022, 1:00 AM
Zapatan's Avatar
Zapatan Zapatan is offline
DENNAB
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: NA - Europe
Posts: 5,002
Quote:
Originally Posted by bhawk66 View Post
Not to be a Debbie Downer, Zap, but I think those days are over. There is just no need for office buildings of that height anymore. NY is an outlier. Times have changed. The work place has changed. Doubt we'll ever see another office building over 1000' in Chicago in our lifetime.
Maybe, but even places like SF and Philly have built ~1k office towers relatively recently.

There is a limit where buildings stop being economical after a certain height, but I think it's around the 1000 range.

Maybe Chase will go for a mixed use building?
__________________
Dump Trump 2020
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #572  
Old Posted Jan 15, 2022, 1:02 AM
Steely Dan's Avatar
Steely Dan Steely Dan is online now
devout Pizzatarian
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Lincoln Square, Chicago
Posts: 25,248
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zapatan View Post

I think 1.5 MSF would normally be a lot taller than that.
chicago has built 17 major office towers so far this century. here's how they shake out on height and square footage.


1. Salesforce Tower --- 2023 - 850' - 1.6M SF
2. 110 N Wacker ------ 2020 - 817' - 1.5m SF
3. 300 N LaSalle ------ 2008 - 785' - 1.3M SF
4. BCBS Tower -------- 2010 - 744' - 1.6M SF
5. River Point --------- 2017 - 732' - 1.0M SF
6. BMO Tower --------- 2021 - 727' - 1.5M SF
7. 150 N Riverside ---- 2017 - 724' - 1.2M SF
8. 111 S Wacker ------ 2005 - 681' - 1.5M SF
9. 71 S Wacker ------- 2005 - 679' - 1.8M SF
10. UBS Tower ------- 2001 - 652' - 1.4M SF
11. 155 N Wacker ---- 2009 - 638' - 1.2M SF
12. 353 N Clark ------ 2009 - 623' - 1.2M SF
13. Citadel Center --- 2003 - 580' - 1.5M SF
14. One S Dearborn - 2005 - 571 - 0.8M SF
15. CNA Center ------ 2018 - 517' - 0.8M SF
16. 191 N Wacker --- 2002 - 516' - 0.7M SF
17. 540 W Madison -- 2003 - 453' - 1.1M SF

source: SF figures are approximate and are pulled from a variety of online sources. height figures are CTBUH.


all of the above are 21st century variations on the "form follows finance" theme.

chicago office tower developers do not spend more than they have to to get a solid ROI.





Quote:
Originally Posted by Zapatan View Post

Maybe, but even places like SF and Philly have built ~1k office towers relatively recently.
that philly tower uses an egregiously tall spire to get over 1,000', and salesforce SF uses a 170' tall unoccupied rooftop video screen dealie to get there.

the occupied heights for those two towers are only 876' and 901', respectively.

chicago office tower developers have not been keen on paying for those kinds of non-returning height-increasing rooftop extravagances for roughly 3 decades now.





Quote:
Originally Posted by Zapatan View Post

Maybe Chase will go for a mixed use building?
highly unlikely.
__________________
If a Pizza is baked in a forest, and no one is around to eat it, is it still delicious?

Last edited by Steely Dan; Jan 15, 2022 at 3:54 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #573  
Old Posted Jan 15, 2022, 2:44 AM
chicubs111 chicubs111 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,202
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zapatan View Post
Maybe, but even places like SF and Philly have built ~1k office towers relatively recently.

There is a limit where buildings stop being economical after a certain height, but I think it's around the 1000 range.

Maybe Chase will go for a mixed use building?
^ 2 Prudential plaza is basically a 1000ft building... I cant see how Chicago developers are so keen on recycling the same designs over and over...I understand the bottom line is making a profit but times are changing regarding office space. The large floorplates with having company occupying whole floors is not as desirable with the Hybrid work environment. More boutique office space with perhaps smaller floorplates and higher ceiling heights are a very realistic possibility and we could start seeing buildings that are 1.2- 1.6 million square feet in the 900ft plus range.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #574  
Old Posted Jan 15, 2022, 9:37 AM
The Lurker The Lurker is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Great Lakes
Posts: 653
Merch Mart is colossal at 4 msf but only ~325' tall.
Old Post office is another great example. Obviously something on this site would have to be taller but you get my point.

OPO is ~2.5 msf and 95% leased already. Combine that with the towers on the river also performing well and all the stuff in Fulton Market and you have well over 10 msf absorbed in 5 years. There is clearly a case for another 2+ msf building in Chicago but no guarantee it would be a supertall or even close.
__________________
Lets go Brandon
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #575  
Old Posted Jan 15, 2022, 1:11 PM
chicubs111 chicubs111 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,202
I never realize 71 South wacker is 1.8 million sq ft...thats huge...Yea chicago is def super conservative on height relative to sq footage...if this was NY you basically add 200 ft to all those heights for that size space relative.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #576  
Old Posted Jan 16, 2022, 2:25 AM
Zapatan's Avatar
Zapatan Zapatan is offline
DENNAB
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: NA - Europe
Posts: 5,002
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Dan View Post
chicago has built 17 major office towers so far this century. here's how they shake out on height and square footage.
Chicago does have a lot of fat buildings (and lower ceilings) but it seems the lot for 130 N Franklin is pretty small, not sure how it stacks up exactly compared to the others.

Quote:
that philly tower uses an egregiously tall spire to get over 1,000', and salesforce SF uses a 170' tall unoccupied rooftop video screen dealie to get there.

the occupied heights for those two towers are only 876' and 901', respectively.

chicago office tower developers have not been keen on paying for those kinds of non-returning height-increasing rooftop extravagances for roughly 3 decades now.
True but vanity height is pretty common nowadays (and always sort of has been).

No building outside NYC or Chicago has an occupied floor past 300 meters, only the tallest buildings of LA and Houston get extremely close.

I'd still consider Salesfroce a legit 1k footer and the two Philly towers have a roof just under 1k (974' and 996' respectively)

Just saying that an office building like Salesforce or Comcast wouldn't be totally out of the question if the stars aligned right. If it can happen in those cities it can happen in Chicago.

Chase's new headquarters in NYC show us they like to ball out lol

Quote:
highly unlikely.
What would be their reasoning for not going mixed use?
__________________
Dump Trump 2020
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #577  
Old Posted Jan 16, 2022, 2:54 AM
Steely Dan's Avatar
Steely Dan Steely Dan is online now
devout Pizzatarian
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Lincoln Square, Chicago
Posts: 25,248
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zapatan View Post
Chicago does have a lot of fat buildings (and lower ceilings) but it seems the lot for 130 N Franklin is pretty small, not sure how it stacks up exactly compared to the others.
It's a half-block site in the loop. It is not small. It's actually quite large. A 1.3M SF office tower there will most likely end up in the same 600 - 800' zone that all other recent Chicago office towers of similar size have landed in.




Quote:
Originally Posted by Zapatan View Post
True but vanity height is pretty common nowadays (and always sort of has been).
Vanity height is actually extremely uncommon (more like completely non-existent) on every single major office tower built in Chicago over the past 3 decades.





Quote:
Originally Posted by Zapatan View Post
Just saying that an office building like Salesforce or Comcast wouldn't be totally out of the question if the stars aligned right. If it can happen in those cities it can happen in Chicago.
Nothing is ever totally out of the question, but smart people tend to make bets on the future that are informed by the events of the past.





Quote:
Originally Posted by Zapatan View Post
Chase's new headquarters in NYC show us they like to ball out
Chicago is not NYC, and any new office tower that Chase might occupy in Chicago will not be their corporate HQ tower.

And that also helps explain why a Salesforce SF or Comcast Philly outcome is unlikely here. Those examples were both companies sparing no expense to build big giant fancy and expensive HQ edifices to themselves in their hometowns.

Chicago has nowhere near that level of meaning and symbolism to Chase. They're just trying to keep up with the local Jones's (BofA & BMO).





Quote:
Originally Posted by Zapatan View Post
What would be their reasoning for not going mixed use?
It wouldn't have anything to do with their reasoning, office and residential simply aren't mixed together at large scale in Chicago anymore. The last major mixed office/residential towers built in Chicago are now over 30 years old. It is a model that chicago's contemporary office tower developers have entirely moved away from.
__________________
If a Pizza is baked in a forest, and no one is around to eat it, is it still delicious?

Last edited by Steely Dan; Jan 16, 2022 at 3:20 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #578  
Old Posted Jan 17, 2022, 3:26 AM
left of center's Avatar
left of center left of center is offline
1st Ward
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: The Big Onion
Posts: 2,252
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Dan View Post
It's a half-block site in the loop. It is not small. It's actually quite large. A 1.3M SF office tower there will most likely end up in the same 600 - 800' zone that all other recent Chicago office towers of similar size have landed in.
Is there one single owner of those two properties? I say two properties because they are bisected by Court Pl. I assume they are owned and being marketed by the same entity?

They are also not the same size and do not line up perfectly, as 123 N Wacker is narrower than 101 N Wacker. Although I suppose that shouldn't be too much of a problem, as any future development could use that extra space on the north parcel as an access drive/alley connection to Randolph.
__________________
"Eventually, I think Chicago will be the most beautiful great city left in the world." -Frank Lloyd Wright
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #579  
Old Posted Jan 17, 2022, 3:33 AM
bdurk bdurk is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2021
Location: Philly
Posts: 40
Is Trump Tower not an office building? I live in Philly so I kinda just always assumed it was an office building
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #580  
Old Posted Jan 17, 2022, 3:36 AM
Steely Dan's Avatar
Steely Dan Steely Dan is online now
devout Pizzatarian
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Lincoln Square, Chicago
Posts: 25,248
Quote:
Originally Posted by left of center View Post
Is there one single owner of those two properties? I say two properties because they are bisected by Court Pl. I assume they are owned and being marketed by the same entity?
Yes.

Both the the original and most recent proposals had the tower straddling both parcels, with a de-mapped Court Pl., and a plaza at the north end of the site.


Original:




Most Recent:







Quote:
Originally Posted by bdurk View Post
Is Trump Tower not an office building? I live in Philly so I kinda just always assumed it was an office building
No, it's a residential/hotel mixed-use tower. The first 12 or so levels are parking IIRC.
__________________
If a Pizza is baked in a forest, and no one is around to eat it, is it still delicious?

Last edited by Steely Dan; Jan 17, 2022 at 3:58 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > Proposals
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 5:38 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.