CHICAGO | General Developments

[Busy Bee]

Hope for the best

[ChicagoChicago]

^^^
Absolutely stunning.

[honte]

Originally Posted by BWChicago

Certainly nothing important...


Louis Sullivan's Gage Group facade.

That said, I don't know if Roosevelt is doing a proper reconstruction or just replacing the granite and plate glass front that was on there.

I'm not holding my breath. You can see by comparing your photo with Jibba's how accurate the earlier "restoration" to the south was. It's more accurate than what was there before, but I don't expect anything near the level of the Carson's building.

[Loopy]

.

[BWChicago]

Well, the only one Sullivan did was the terra cotta one. The other two were Holabird & Roche, who did the structures for all three. Since substantial ornament was salvaged from the Gage it could probably be recast; I doubt anyone would have kept the Holabird ornament. Given Roosevelt's treatment of the Auditorium and Fine Arts buildings I'm not gonna hold my breath, but being on Michigan Avenue and additionally having individual landmark status probably adds some pressure to do it right. And doing it right could also explain why it's taking so long... wishful thinking?

[denizen467]

It looks like there are 11 buildings in this project between Cermak and 25th, of which: 3 are still occupied; 6 will be torn down; and 2 are unoccupied but will not yet be torn down.

That's a lot of available land, so close to McCormick Place et al ...


http://www.chicagojournal.com/print....ubSectionID=60

-----------------------------------

Six Ickes buildings to go
Earlier plan envisioned rehab of Near South public housing site

By MICAH MAIDENBERG
Wednesday, March 25, 2009

The future of the Harold Ickes Homes, the public housing development lining State south of Cermak, has rarely been clear.

...

But the fate of more than half of the buildings at Ickes is now sealed, as CHA prepares to use around $3.3 million in federal stimulus dollars to tear down six of the eight buildings on site that are closed and vacant. Ninety-six units remain occupied in the last three open buildings.

...

[honte]

^ I do not support tearing down these buildings. I think it's a mistake. They have perfectly good bones and could be rehabilitated in a nice way, such as was done with Archer Courts. The location is stellar and this is one of the better chances in the CHA system of creating a true diversity of tenants.

The architects of the complex were SOM, by the way.

[VivaLFuego]

^ I actually also see the potential for a decent rehab of those buildings and their grounds (from an aesthetic standpoint... can't speak to the bones), but considering most peoples' attitudes towards any large mid-century development, let alone a blighty public housing project, I suppose we should just be thankful that nearby Hilliard survived to become an eventual landmark. Lathrop homes are probably perfectly salvagable too but of course those will also be toast in due time. Interestingly, there seem to be no near-term plans to tear down the Dearborn Courts to the south, so those might survive the whole Plan for Transformation.

[Abner]

Hmm. I don't agree about the aesthetics of the Ickes complex, but even if I did, I don't think I would invest much in trying to save them or any CHA projects in that style because of the incredibly negative connotations those buildings have. I hate the idea of using a building's unsavory past as an excuse to tear it down, but in the case of housing projects even I would make an exception. Leave one or two as a historic monument--in my dreams I love the concept of preserving one unoccupied and in its current dilapidated state as a memorial and a reminder, perhaps to be used someday as a small museum of poverty in Chicago--but that's all. Maybe I have less sympathy because I don't see the architectural merit in these buildings and I don't think one person in a hundred would. Maybe I would agree with saving them if they could be reskinned thoroughly enough to make them unrecognizable as former projects, I don't know.

[wrab]

^ I'm gonna side with honte & viva here & say that the buildings should stay in some form. But I understand your objection to the concept of these towers as it was implemented.

Originally Posted by Abner

.....(I)n my dreams I love the concept of preserving one unoccupied and in its current dilapidated state as a memorial and a reminder.....

Yeah - I had the same idea while looking at one of the partially-demolished Cabrini Green towers - most of the outer walls were gone, and you could see all of these bright, vivid colors inside, on the walls of the individual units. It looked poignant somehow, these individual personalities asserting themselves through different colors of paint. It really stopped me in my tracks. And I thought to myself, why not leave the core of one of these partially demolished towers behind, with all of these brightly-painted walls, as a testament to the individuals who passed through?

[honte]

Originally Posted by Abner

Hmm. I don't agree about the aesthetics of the Ickes complex, but even if I did, I don't think I would invest much in trying to save them or any CHA projects in that style because of the incredibly negative connotations those buildings have. I hate the idea of using a building's unsavory past as an excuse to tear it down, but in the case of housing projects even I would make an exception. Leave one or two as a historic monument--in my dreams I love the concept of preserving one unoccupied and in its current dilapidated state as a memorial and a reminder, perhaps to be used someday as a small museum of poverty in Chicago--but that's all. Maybe I have less sympathy because I don't see the architectural merit in these buildings and I don't think one person in a hundred would. Maybe I would agree with saving them if they could be reskinned thoroughly enough to make them unrecognizable as former projects, I don't know.

Have you seen Archer Courts before? It's right in the heart of Chinatown... a perfectly good adaptive reuse of the old typical housing projects. It's also a first-rate example of a design that successfully updated a building and injected a bit of new life (eg, not 100% preservation) but which did so with care and respect for the old. The end result is a complex better architecturally than the original, but true to its intentions. In fact, many of the gallery-style projects were intended to have glass-enclosed halls, but budget and other concerns prevented this.

In my opinion, the Archer Courts product is a far better than what could be done by tearing down and building anew. It just makes so much sense - wasting money tearing down and then wasting more money to erect new structures, when all that money could go into renovation. Sure, you have some code compliance issues, but not insurmountable ones.

Here is the NY Times article from 2003 about Archer Courts: http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/02/ga...pagewanted=all

_________

Viva, Dearborn Homes is undergoing this nasty PoMo renovation that will preserve it for the indefinite future. Hopefully in another 50 years, it will be restored to the way it's supposed to look. I'm very glad to see they are keeping it at all, which I think no one really expected - it's one of the few remaining developments of that nature in the City, the first high-rise housing project here, etc. Historic and not bad looking at all either.

[Ch.G, Ch.G]

Originally Posted by wrabbit

Yeah - I had the same idea while looking at one of the partially-demolished Cabrini Green towers - most of the outer walls were gone, and you could see all of these bright, vivid colors inside, on the walls of the individual units. It looked poignant somehow, these individual personalities asserting themselves through different colors of paint. It really stopped me in my tracks. And I thought to myself, why not leave the core of one of these partially demolished towers behind, with all of these brightly-painted walls, as a testament to the individuals who passed through?

This is sort of what they did with Archer Courts to, as honte noted, great effect.

[spyguy]

Burnham Pavilions in Millennium Park Meeting, Tuesday, April 7th

Join Alderman Brendan Reilly, The Burnham Plan Centennial Committee, The City of Chicago Department of Cultural Affairs, the Art Institute of Chicago and Friends of Downtown to learn about the temporary Burnham Pavilions in Millennium Park. These exciting exhibits were designed by international architects Zaha Hadid and Ben Van Berkel of UNStudio to commemorate the spirit of Chicago embodied in the Burnham Plan. They will open to the public June 19 and close on October 31, 2009. They are at the heart of a region-wide series of events, plans and projects designed to challenge metropolitan Chicago to continue its bold visionary planning tradition.

Chicago Cultural Center
78 East Washington Street
Preston Bradley Hall
Tuesday, April 7, 2009
5:30 to 6:30 p.m.
Free and Open to the Public

[TorancisOMP]

Here is the latest development by Wabash Development Group.
Sales Center: 2425 S. Wallace
Chicago, IL 60616

This development will consist of two condo towers Phase I and Phase III.
Phase II is shopping mall with retail and commercial square footage rental or sales. It also has 3 floors of customer parking. This particular lot is between S. Normal Ave and Wallace on the East and West and Archer Ave and W. 24th Place North and South.

If you are familiar with the Chinatown area, this project is on the Connie's Pizza restaurant and Hong Kong Market.

I will hope to get more information.

[jcchii]

^that's large

[wrab]

^ Here is a larger pic that I pulled from the Haylock Design website http://haylockdesign.com/chinatownchicago.html


http://webhosting.web.com/imagelib/s...astern%20Tower

So, basically a ginormous parking garage with some scrims attached and the tower mounted to the side.

[emathias]

Originally Posted by TorancisOMP

Here is the latest development by Wabash Development Group.
...

What's with the big, empty (wind-swept) plazas around all the buildings? How many people do they think are going to just hang out there? And so much parking? It looks like a lot of parking to me.

[Busy Bee]

Things That Make You Go Hmm

[the urban politician]

^ Are you kidding with the criticism?

What the hell else are you going to expect in that area of town? At least it's not a suburban strip mall with large swaths of surface parking. We should be lucky for something of this sort to go up. Bravo, I hope it's successful! I'm rooting for See Wong

[VivaLFuego]

Wait, so that would replace Connie's Pizza?
I do like the concept of some serious density there... it's certainly a.... well, unique site plan and configuration for Chicago.