HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > City Compilations


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #7661  
Old Posted May 4, 2017, 6:58 PM
Randomguy34's Avatar
Randomguy34 Randomguy34 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Chicago & Philly
Posts: 1,107
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVictor1 View Post
https://www.chicagoarchitecture.org/...evised-by-scb/

With a New Owner, Proposed North & Clark High Rise Being Revised by SCB
Here's hoping we don't get something half as ugly as the previous proposal
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7662  
Old Posted May 4, 2017, 8:12 PM
Randomguy34's Avatar
Randomguy34 Randomguy34 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Chicago & Philly
Posts: 1,107
In other news, the CMH redevelopment finally broke ground

Rahm, Developers Break Ground On Lincoln Common
https://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/2017...lincoln-common
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7663  
Old Posted May 4, 2017, 9:03 PM
BuildThemTaller BuildThemTaller is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Long Island City, NY
Posts: 491
Quote:
Originally Posted by Randomguy34 View Post
In other news, the CMH redevelopment finally broke ground

Rahm, Developers Break Ground On Lincoln Common
https://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/2017...lincoln-common
This is exciting to see get underway. It's been a loooooooooooooooong process and to the detriment of the community. How many businesses along Lincoln have gone under after the thousands of employees from Childrens Memorial left? How many millions of dollars in property fees was the newly-named Lurie's Childrens Hospital forced to pay while the property sat empty, awaiting approval. What a waste.

I do think and hope this turns out better than New City at North/Clyborn/Halsted. here is more density, less car-centric design, and it's a good mix of smaller and taller buildings.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7664  
Old Posted May 4, 2017, 11:30 PM
chicubs111 chicubs111 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hayward View Post
I was kind of hoping for something at least 60 stories for this very reason. Create some nice punctuation in the skyline from this view. Much like you see Aqua in the view.
I def was hoping for minimum the same thing...why isnt that we seems to get so conservative with height on prime spots in the city?..i fell like 10 years ago we would of been proposing something in the 700ft range here.. are not the views in demand on the higher floors..cant see why wouldn't want to go higher than that cluster of 450 to 550ft in that area..
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7665  
Old Posted May 5, 2017, 1:52 AM
rlw777 rlw777 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 1,688
^ The developer most certainly would like to build taller in that location but if I remember correctly with MILA there was push back on anything taller than Carbon & Carbide suggesting taller buildings would take away from some of the historic architecture.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7666  
Old Posted May 5, 2017, 2:37 AM
chicubs111 chicubs111 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,106
^ I vaguely remember that now too...its funny how people think that a building that is taller will somehow deter from historic architecture next to nearby buildings ... people are just so afraid of change ...what makes Chicago great is the ability to push the envelope with new architecture ...mixing old buildings next to new buildings is what makes it interesting!..the only standard we should push is Quality and cutting edge design!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7667  
Old Posted May 5, 2017, 3:46 AM
Mr Downtown's Avatar
Mr Downtown Mr Downtown is online now
Urbane observer
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,180
It's seldom outside forces making these decisions. Going taller doesn't always make financial sense.

You need more elevator shafts (costing you floorplate), you need stronger concrete, you have a longer construction period, you might need a tuned mass damper or additional frame stiffening. On most Chicago sites, the sweet spot seems to be between 40 and 50 stories.

Developers want to build and sell a project quickly and move on to another site, not see if they can squeeze in a few more floors for bragging rights before the next recession catches them out.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7668  
Old Posted May 5, 2017, 4:18 AM
BVictor1's Avatar
BVictor1 BVictor1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 9,610
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Downtown View Post
It's seldom outside forces making these decisions. Going taller doesn't always make financial sense.

You need more elevator shafts (costing you floorplate), you need stronger concrete, you have a longer construction period, you might need a tuned mass damper or additional frame stiffening. On most Chicago sites, the sweet spot seems to be between 40 and 50 stories.

Developers want to build and sell a project quickly and move on to another site, not see if they can squeeze in a few more floors for bragging rights before the next recession catches them out.
It's often that outside forces, like NIMBY's and alderman help to make and or force these decisions.

If more density and salable square footage were allowed, perhaps more financial sense could be made.

Developers may want to sell quickly, but the most time seems to be spent going the the bureaucracies of the approval process.

A number of developers have wanted to go taller than 40-50 floors, like the recent proposal for River North.
__________________
titanic1
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7669  
Old Posted May 5, 2017, 7:50 AM
denizen467 denizen467 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,212
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrandonJXN View Post
a tall, thin tower on Michigan and Randolph abutting Millennium Park Plaza.
There even was a render for this before the crash, as a small (2 units per floor?) addition just a tiny bit taller than Mill Pk Plaza. Not sure if it was going to operate separately (with an address of 151 N Michigan or 151 E Randolph) from MPP, or whether the south-facing units of MPP would become uber deluxe suites with additional bedrooms (because otherwise, they would lose all those windows). In any event it's ridiculously underutilized space right now, even as just one or two levels of retail.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7670  
Old Posted May 5, 2017, 5:06 PM
ithakas's Avatar
ithakas ithakas is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 799
Someone posted this at SSC, a nice look at River North's boom:


Source: HB Chicago, Flickr
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7671  
Old Posted May 5, 2017, 6:16 PM
maru2501's Avatar
maru2501 maru2501 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: chicago
Posts: 1,644
cool

great density. height still needed to NW someplace to drag the bulk outward
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7672  
Old Posted May 5, 2017, 6:31 PM
r18tdi's Avatar
r18tdi r18tdi is offline
Team Alinghi
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,450
Quote:
Originally Posted by ithakas View Post
Someone posted this at SSC, a nice look at River North's boom:
From Riverbend, I'd guess? Jarta?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7673  
Old Posted May 5, 2017, 6:34 PM
Notyrview Notyrview is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: New York City
Posts: 1,648
Wow beautiful shot
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7674  
Old Posted May 5, 2017, 9:03 PM
HomrQT's Avatar
HomrQT HomrQT is offline
All-American City Boy
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Forest Park / Uptown, Chicago
Posts: 1,837
Quote:
Originally Posted by harryc View Post

well poorly executed function of deceiving the masses
Yikes
__________________
1. 111 W 57 - Manhattan, New York - SHoP Architects - Photo
2. 9 Dekalb Ave - Brooklyn, New York - SHoP Architects - Photo
3. One Chicago Square - Chicago - HPA and Goettsch Partners - Photo
4. Chicago Board of Trade - Chicago - Holabird & Root - Photo
5. Cathedral of Learning - Pittsburgh - Charles Klauder - Photo
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7675  
Old Posted May 5, 2017, 9:18 PM
chicubs111 chicubs111 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,106
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVictor1 View Post
It's often that outside forces, like NIMBY's and alderman help to make and or force these decisions.

If more density and salable square footage were allowed, perhaps more financial sense could be made.

Developers may want to sell quickly, but the most time seems to be spent going the the bureaucracies of the approval process.

A number of developers have wanted to go taller than 40-50 floors, like the recent proposal for River North.
Exactly!...and how much longer would a taller thin building take to build versus a shorter squat building with the same number units?..I remember when Daley was pushing taller and thinner buildings in this city..oh well...dont want to get too OT here
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7676  
Old Posted May 5, 2017, 10:27 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: 1,909
Great shot, ithakas!

Quote:
Originally Posted by maru2501 View Post
cool

great density. height still needed to NW someplace to drag the bulk outward
Agreed. My fear is when River North is out of empty lots and demand forces developers to build taller, its not going to be the newish midrises from the past several boom cycles that are going to be demolished. Its going to be the historic lowrises. That part of town needs all the brick and stone it has to counter all the precast concrete and parking podiums.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7677  
Old Posted May 5, 2017, 10:55 PM
marothisu marothisu is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Manhattan
Posts: 5,200
Quote:
Originally Posted by left of center View Post
Great shot, ithakas!



Agreed. My fear is when River North is out of empty lots and demand forces developers to build taller, its not going to be the newish midrises from the past several boom cycles that are going to be demolished. Its going to be the historic lowrises. That part of town needs all the brick and stone it has to counter all the precast concrete and parking podiums.
I'll bet that some are demolished, but my hope is that they will build elsewhere. I think they've already stated that a little. Maybe not for the reason stated, but it's happening at least
__________________
Chicago Maps:
* New Construction https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer...B0&usp=sharing
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7678  
Old Posted May 6, 2017, 3:40 AM
The Best Forumer The Best Forumer is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 1,489
Quote:
Originally Posted by ithakas View Post
Someone posted this at SSC, a nice look at River North's boom:


Source: HB Chicago, Flickr
Wow. Nice shot. Mad props to Chicago. What's that building towards the right of center with the 4 cones at the top? It looks residential. Wish Houston had something like that. We mostly have boxes. Keep up the good work!
__________________
The suburbs are second-rate. Cookie-cutter houses, treeless yards, mediocre schools, and more crime than you think. Do your family a favor and move closer to the city.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7679  
Old Posted May 6, 2017, 5:55 AM
JK47 JK47 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 344
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Best Forumer View Post
Wow. Nice shot. Mad props to Chicago. What's that building towards the right of center with the 4 cones at the top? It looks residential. Wish Houston had something like that. We mostly have boxes. Keep up the good work!

That's 900 North Michigan. Combination of Residential (Condos) on the upper floors with Commercial Retail (a mall leaning more high-end) on the lower 6-7 floors on the east end and a Surgical Outpatient facility on the west end.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7680  
Old Posted May 6, 2017, 10:18 AM
kolchak's Avatar
kolchak kolchak is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 715
Quote:
Originally Posted by JK47 View Post
That's 900 North Michigan. Combination of Residential (Condos) on the upper floors with Commercial Retail (a mall leaning more high-end) on the lower 6-7 floors on the east end and a Surgical Outpatient facility on the west end.
Also the Four Seasons and a dozen floors of other office space.
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 > City Compilations
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 8:58 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.