CHICAGO | Highrise Projects & Construction, v7

[IrishIllini]

Thanks for sharing. I'm excited to see how all this shakes out. It'd be cool to have some height away from the lakefront. Hopefully this gets built and somehow the height finds a way to creep upward along the North Branch. I don't necessarily care to see anything taller than 10-15 stories along the river, but a few trophy towers in the 30-40 story range on Goose Island would actually be fairly cool IMO.

[MayorOfChicago]

I want to see a nice transit line cutting through that rendering (there's already a rail line there) and across and up Goose Island to the new Metra station and over the river near the proposed 606 route to around Cortland/Clyborn.

[J_M_Tungsten]

Wow, that would be a great cluster.

[Siriusly]

Originally Posted by IrishIllini

Thanks for sharing. I'm excited to see how all this shakes out. It'd be cool to have some height away from the lakefront. Hopefully this gets built and somehow the height finds a way to creep upward along the North Branch. I don't necessarily care to see anything taller than 10-15 stories along the river, but a few trophy towers in the 30-40 story range on Goose Island would actually be fairly cool IMO.

30 to 40 story "trophy" towers? Participation trophies?

[left of center]

The towers definitely do look taller. I say shoot for as much density as possible. Its all industrial land, so there aren't too many neighbors nearby that would complain about lost views. If anything, any nearby residents would probably be glad that drab industrial land is replaced with new shops and parks.

Not utilizing the existing rail spur off the UP line for transit would be a sin. I've said it before and I'll say it again, connect that with the Carroll Ave ROW and you'll have a rail line connecting Navy Pier, Streeterville and River North with River West, the new River District here, as well as Lincoln Yards further up river.

Originally Posted by IrishIllini

Thanks for sharing. I'm excited to see how all this shakes out. It'd be cool to have some height away from the lakefront. Hopefully this gets built and somehow the height finds a way to creep upward along the North Branch. I don't necessarily care to see anything taller than 10-15 stories along the river, but a few trophy towers in the 30-40 story range on Goose Island would actually be fairly cool IMO.

Mini-Manhattan?

[ChiHi]

Originally Posted by Investing In Chicago

Can somebody please point to an example of a parking podium they think is well done? I seriously can't think of a single one....

I've always thought The Contemporaine's garage was pretty well done.

[sentinel]

Originally Posted by BVictor1

The River District


Older renderings looking east




Newer image looking west with what appear to be taller buildings.

Wish they would just publicly release an updated rendering already.

[Siriusly]

Is this a 30 year plan sort of development or is this imminent like Riverline? I'm not familiar with this project at all. I guess it would have a thread already if it was more than a concept.

*Edit, just read about it on Curbed. I guess its visionary if it hinges on Amazon. This is crazy, since when does corporate headquarters require a city to build 30 high rises and form a new district? Wow, its like Olympic level development cities do.

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by Siriusly

*Edit, just read about it on Curbed. I guess its visionary if it hinges on Amazon. This is crazy, since when does corporate headquarters require a city to build 30 high rises and form a new district? Wow, its like Olympic level development cities do.

1) The city is not building a new high rise district. This is from the developer - who is obviously working alongside the city and says "yes, we'd like to work with Amazon on this if possible." The managers of the bid aren't the developers, it's the city.

2) They need 8+ million square feet. Do you understand how big that is? The new building that will go up at 110 N Wacker is going to be something like 1.6 million square feet at something like 800+ feet tall. So to suffice for what Amazon needs, you'd need at least 5 800 foot tall skyscrapers. They could do that, but then if you split that up, you're looking at building at least 10 new buildings just for them plus anything else that comes up whether it's new residential for those people, vendors who want to be nearby them that might warrant another office building, etc.

Regarding the actual renderings, it makes sense too why they'd have updated renderings. I don't know how much work you've done with clients, product managers, etc but people point out the stupidest shit during meetings when you give them some sort of rendering or mockup. You want to do as much as possible to cut down on those potentially stupid questions from the client or product managers - and this is one of the many things they have to do. I cannot even begin to tell you how many meetings I've been in with either some sort of mock up of a product where someone points out something really dumb even though you tell them it's just a visionary plan and not something final. You tell them to focus on the main part of it all, but then they start complaining about a color that they think is "just a tad bit too blue" even though you've told them 20 times it's not a final plan and it's used to show the main point. A lot of people lack creativity/vision and focus on the wrong things - you want to do as much as possible to just say "Look - this is how it could look." If you put a bunch of 15 story buildings in there, they're going to say "but but but those don't look tall enough to house what we need!" instead of them being smart enough to realize that they have some slack with what they could do.

[Mr Downtown]

Originally Posted by Investing In Chicago

Can somebody please point to an example of a parking podium they think is well done?

875 North Michigan?

[ardecila]

^ I see you're using the new name. :eyeroll:

777 N Michigan has to be the worst podium in the city, and at one of the most important intersections, too ugh.

[ardecila]

IMO, there are two good ways to treat a parking podium...

A) blend it into the building, with the same cladding, a smooth, "un-stepped" massing, and ideally liner units. This is the "denial" approach. Examples include John Hancock, Trump Tower, etc

B) embrace the reality of a parking garage and treat the variety, movement, and shapes of cars as a facade element in itself. This is the "honesty" approach. Examples include Contemporaine, Marina City, Ancora at Riverline, etc.

53/Cornell is bad because the podium is still simulating a building, but it's simulating a different building than the tower above it. It's trying to look like a glass highrise stacked on a brick midrise, which is nonsensical. It's the same reason that the first tower at Atrium Village looks so crappy.

[Fvn]

I like 1001 s states parking podium

[ChickeNES]

I dunno, I kinda like how it calls out to the apartments across the street:

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by ChickeNES

I dunno, I kinda like how it calls out to the apartments across the street:

If this is a new, revised design, it is markedly better. Still not sure if there are liner units on the podium, but at least the rose-gold spandrels on the tower link it with the pink brick on the podium, and the podium facade is nicely chopped up so it looks like a row of smaller buildings when you squint.

[harryc]

[the urban politician]

The Marina City parking podium is a work of genius.

[rgarri4]

Tower crane going up at Atrium Phase 2. Sorry for the low quality pix. I wonder if it will light up blue at night like the one for Phase 1.

[Investing In Chicago]

Originally Posted by ardecila

IMO, there are two good ways to treat a parking podium...

A) blend it into the building, with the same cladding, a smooth, "un-stepped" massing, and ideally liner units. This is the "denial" approach. Examples include John Hancock, Trump Tower, etc

B) embrace the reality of a parking garage and treat the variety, movement, and shapes of cars as a facade element in itself. This is the "honesty" approach. Examples include Contemporaine, Marina City, Ancora at Riverline, etc.

53/Cornell is bad because the podium is still simulating a building, but it's simulating a different building than the tower above it. It's trying to look like a glass highrise stacked on a brick midrise, which is nonsensical. It's the same reason that the first tower at Atrium Village looks so crappy.

Good reply...I guess I'm in the minority on this board, I absolutely hate your option B; I mean it's unique/interesting on Marina City but I wouldn't want any other buildings using that approach.
The other problem with parking podiums is that it typically forces a wider footprint to accommodate the parking ramp, I'm really sick of these developments taking up an entire city block (or close to it). I like my towers thin with no visible podium at all. I probably just prefer a little bit more fine grain than most here...
Someone gave the example of landmark west loop, perfect example, seems many here like the parking podium...I absolutely hate it. I'll get shit for this, but I dislike how Hancock meets Michigan Ave, I love the tower, but dislike the sunken plaza.

[Siriusly]

Originally Posted by marothisu

They need 8+ million square feet. Do you understand how big that is?

I am a Union Millwright, I work at the largest Steel Mills, Auto and Power Plants in the nation. I have a pretty good grip on the volume needed to accommodate 8 million sq. ft.

Now did I know Amazon required 8 million sq. ft. for a second headquarters? No. I haven't followed this development. I thought a moderately sized office park/campus would suffice. 1-2 towers and a couple mid-rises is what I was imagining. I'm just finding out the scope of this project. I am still amazed by the size of this project.