CHICAGO | General Developments

[SolarWind]

June 27, 2016

[SolarWind]

June 27, 2016

[UPChicago]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

^ To hell with that. Enough with the historical neighbor respecting argument.

I'm so tired of this 2-4 level density in all of Chicago's neighborhoods. The city NEEDS to be denser.

I'm not advocating for 2-4 levels, I'm advocating for it meeting up with neighboring buildings more cohesively and the taller portion being steeped back.

Originally Posted by Jibba

It's not the absolute size that's the problem. The proportions of the design elements are too large. Fineness in the facade would help relate it to the historic stock.

This is pretty much what I meant.

[streetline]

Originally Posted by SolarWind

June 27, 2016

Is it just me, or does the new simplified ramp seem to waste a lot of the space they just recovered from the river? With the tightly spaced columns underneath, it doesn't look they could even put retail or anything below.

[Tom Servo]

This is absolutely horrible. The obsession with "density" on this forum is bizarre. This is bad development and would do nothing but negatively change the character of Uptown. Let's not let Uptown become the next Logan Square.

Horrible.

[spyguy]

They're spending like $200M+ to renovate Wilson. We better get our money's worth with more TOD like this (though the design should be refined a bit) replacing unimportant lowrises rather than having crappy drive-thru restaurants like the Sonic and McD next door.

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by spyguy

They're spending like $200M+ to renovate Wilson. We better get our money's worth with more TOD like this (though the design should be refined a bit) replacing unimportant lowrises rather than having crappy drive-thru restaurants like the Sonic and McD next door.

Agreed.

I agree the design is crappy, but if it spurs more carless people into the area and gentrifiers move into Uptown, it's a winner. In fact, more money will go into rehabbing older Uptown buildings. This is what the anti-gentrifying anti-developer whiners don't seem to understand: if you want the neighborhood's building stock to be preserved, you MUST have an infusion of cash and lender's confidence. Otherwise, say hello to more strip malls, gas stations, McDonald's, auto repair shops, and street corner beggars.

Logan Square is a prime example of what needs to happen in many, many Chicago neighborhoods.

[Mikemak27]

A Lincoln Park developer wants to replace a 225 space parking garage at 2040 N Clark with a 10 unit condo building. It will stand 65 feet tall and have 28 parking spaces. The historic facade will be saved. Prices for the units will range from $1-$3 million. Local NIMBY's say that getting rid of the parking garage will have a massive negative impact on property values.
https://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/2016...ge-with-condos

[UPChicago]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

Hey Uptown, which do you want?

Ok yea cause one horribly designed development replacing retail is going to have any real affect on the problems facing uptown, spoiler........it's not. The historic buildings are not going anywhere so why not design something just as dense but to fit the character of the existing stock?

[urbanpln]

Originally Posted by Tom Servo

This is absolutely horrible. The obsession with "density" on this forum is bizarre. This is bad development and would do nothing but negatively change the character of Uptown. Let's not let Uptown become the next Logan Square.

Horrible.

I feel your pain brother, but this city could use another 750K people living within its boundaries. We don't have to destroy the character of the City's neighborhoods, but we do need more density. Chicago will not thrive without it.

[Kenmore]

On the plus side, the Uptown proposal appears rather preliminary and without details, so will likely see the parking garage replaced with a slightly less offensive design in the future. I wouldn't hold out much hope for good design as nearly all new construction in the area is total garbage.

[Kenmore]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

Logan Square is a prime example of what needs to happen in many, many Chicago neighborhoods.

meh, uptown still feels like a city neighborhood as opposed to a stop over playground for suburban hipsters before moving back to libertyville

[UPChicago]

I'm sorry but why are people making it seem like density and good design are mutually exclusive things? You HAVE to accept it regardless of how bad it is just because it's dense? GTFO

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by UPChicago

I'm sorry but why are people making it seem like density and good design are mutually exclusive things? You HAVE to accept it regardless of how bad it is just because it's dense? GTFO

I'll give it a pass. From the real estate world, midrises are sort of a new thing in Chicago only recently enabled by TOD. Previously you could really only erect them on the fringes of downtown, and the results were usually less than spectacular (see the West Loop). Outside of downtown, you would have to do them in a PD, and the agony of that process meant that developers would usually seek a legitimate highrise.

Now that the zoning code allows them on a wider range of sites, I hope to see more architects grappling with and solving these design problems.

I always liked this one by Booth Hansen. Since the parking is underground, it's a good example of what a parking-lite TOD building could look like. With some darker brick it would be

[Via Chicago]

Originally Posted by UPChicago

I'm sorry but why are people making it seem like density and good design are mutually exclusive things? You HAVE to accept it regardless of how bad it is just because it's dense? GTFO

Thank you. Wilson Yards is high density and a complete turd of a design too. A lot of good that did. I think we can do better as a city. Its really not asking a lot.

Im not here saying every new design needs to be some Jeanne Gang international award winner. But its like developers and architects have completely forgotten the basics when it comes to proportions and massing/scale. Why does everything have to appear so cartoonishly oversized? There are buildings from 100 years ago that are 2-3x as large in the neighborhood that dont feel half as overbearing and oppressive to the streetscape as that rendering does. Thats why people are protective of old buildings...because they trigger a warmness and welcoming aura that is utterly lacking in most lower/mid-end designs of today. Who would want to trade that for this? It looks like an office building for a failed biomedical tech startup circa 1998. We're designing buildings for humans to live in. Why does it look so sterile and stand-offish? Whats remotely welcoming or charming or human-scaled about it? What about it makes one want to say after a long day at work "ahhhhh, im home!"? Its all of the bad parts of modernism and none of the good. Id rather this remain a single story sports store in the short term if it means a better design in the longer term (something that will be at this corner for multiple generations).

Originally Posted by Kenmore

meh, uptown still feels like a city neighborhood as opposed to a stop over playground for suburban hipsters before moving back to libertyville

this too. i live and spend my time in uptown/edgewater by choice. this intersection in particular is one of the few that actually feels a bit NY and reminds me of bed stuy, with the architecture and diverse range of people and incomes and races all more or less living together (rather affordably too). whenever someone says uptown needing "fixing" it always seems to imply they just want it to look like a carbon copy of lakeview.

[UPChicago]

^Exactly, this location is a major opportunity for Uptown and it shouldn't be squandered with that development.

[Jibba]

I don't think anyone is arguing that the unit density nullifies concerns over the design; rather, some people are speaking theoretically about this (what they'd personally like to see in their ideal scenario) and others practically: What ends up being built is a result of the developer and the architect that they select (the architect behind this rendering has a portfolio mostly comprised of suburban industrial properties and utilitarian retail buildings).

If they are asking for bonuses that entail community involvement, there's a chance for a quid pro quo of additional development rights for aesthetic modifications (such as what happened at Belmont/Clark), but design by committee (or Alderman) has an equal chance of resulting in schlock.

[UPChicago]

Originally Posted by Jibba

I don't think anyone is arguing that the unit density nullifies concerns over the design; rather, some people are speaking theoretically about this (what they'd personally like to see in their ideal scenario) and others practically: What ends up being built is a result of the developer and the architect that they select (the architect behind this rendering has a portfolio mostly comprised of suburban industrial properties and utilitarian retail buildings).

If they are asking for bonuses that entail community involvement, there's a chance for a quid pro quo of additional development rights for aesthetic modifications (such as what happened at Belmont/Clark), but design by committee (or Alderman) has an equal chance of resulting in schlock.

I actually think that sums up the majority of the comments in support of the development.

Examples:

Originally Posted by the urban politician

^ To hell with that. Enough with the historical neighbor respecting argument.

I'm so tired of this 2-4 level density in all of Chicago's neighborhoods. The city NEEDS to be denser.

Originally Posted by Hayward

Kind of a clunker but I like the density.

Originally Posted by the urban politician

I agree the design is crappy, but if it spurs more carless people into the area and gentrifiers move into Uptown, it's a winner.

I agree with you though, if they can build it as of right there isn't going to be much consideration for design and/or input from the community frankly. And just to clarify I am for dense development there just with a little more thought.

[Kenmore]

Originally Posted by Via Chicago

Thank you. Wilson Yards is high density and a complete turd of a design too. A lot of good that did. I think we can do better as a city. Its really not asking a lot.

Im not here saying every new design needs to be some Jeanne Gang international award winner. But its like developers and architects have completely forgotten the basics when it comes to proportions and massing/scale. Why does everything have to appear so cartoonishly oversized? There are buildings from 100 years ago that are 2-3x as large in the neighborhood that dont feel half as overbearing and oppressive to the streetscape as that rendering does. Thats why people are protective of old buildings...because they trigger a warmness and welcoming aura that is utterly lacking in most lower/mid-end designs of today. Who would want to trade that for this? It looks like an office building for a failed biomedical tech startup circa 1998. We're designing buildings for humans to live in. Why does it look so sterile and stand-offish? Whats remotely welcoming or charming or human-scaled about it? What about it makes one want to say after a long day at work "ahhhhh, im home!"? Its all of the bad parts of modernism and none of the good. Id rather this remain a single story sports store in the short term if it means a better design in the longer term (something that will be at this corner for multiple generations).



this too. i live and spend my time in uptown/edgewater by choice. this intersection in particular is one of the few that actually feels a bit NY and reminds me of bed stuy, with the architecture and diverse range of people and incomes and races all more or less living together (rather affordably too). whenever someone says uptown needing "fixing" it always seems to imply they just want it to look like a carbon copy of lakeview.

yes and yes

As soon as I hear neighbors start going off about fixing uptown, a vaguely racist tirade about section 8 is usually right around the corner.

[Baronvonellis]

Yea, the great collection of midrises down the street on Wilson could have been their inspiration. They are large buildings, but still seem charming and human scaled, and well proportioned.

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.9654...7i13312!8i6656

Don't people move to cities because of the charming old neighborhoods. Who ever wants to living in a place that looks like an industrial park near O'hare?