HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     
Welcome to the SkyscraperPage Forum

Since 1999, the SkyscraperPage Forum has been one of the most active skyscraper enthusiast communities on the web. The global membership discusses development news and construction activity on projects from around the world, alongside discussions on urban design, architecture, transportation and many other topics. Welcome!

You are currently browsing as a guest. Register with the SkyscraperPage Forum and join this growing community of skyscraper enthusiasts. Registering has benefits such as fewer ads, the ability to post messages, private messaging and more.

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > General Development

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #25881  
Old Posted Sep 26, 2014, 10:48 PM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is offline
vertical
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: unconventionally bicoastal
Posts: 10,533
Quote:
Originally Posted by DePaul Bunyan View Post
You realize that would cost like, a billion dollars? And that the city doesn't have the money? And that it would really only benefit a few thousand people who live in the immediate vicinity? What is there to do along that stretch of lakefront, anyway, especially if you don't have a boat?
Toll it. Australian cities have funded tunnels all over the place using this method.
__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #25882  
Old Posted Sep 26, 2014, 11:29 PM
george's Avatar
george george is offline
dream fast
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: east village, chicago
Posts: 2,782
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiTownWonder View Post
is this taken from the new 111 west wacker?
Yes it is, killer views.
__________________
To have ambition was my ambition - Gang of Four
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #25883  
Old Posted Sep 27, 2014, 12:46 AM
mark0 mark0 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 6
Regarding New City: If its a planned development cant the zoning allow residential above a big box? Isn't the zoning essentially negotiated?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #25884  
Old Posted Sep 27, 2014, 12:50 AM
LouisVanDerWright LouisVanDerWright is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,389
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark0 View Post
Regarding New City: If its a planned development cant the zoning allow residential above a big box? Isn't the zoning essentially negotiated?
Yes, but you might be mixing comments about the Maxwell and New City. The Maxwell is an attractive building that had originally be planned with apartments above the retail which was nixed by stupid zoning requirements. New City was in a much more receptive zoning environment and ended up being fugly anyhow because the developer apparently has no taste.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #25885  
Old Posted Sep 27, 2014, 12:57 AM
mark0 mark0 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 6
I was responding to SamintheLoop earlier who stated " that was nothing short of an epic fail on the part of the city, not allowing the residential on top" - thanks for clarifying though. I wish the New City wasnt so poorly thought out. Its a tragedy such an important area is being redeveloped so badly. It would be nice to let it develop more city like, with more street grid, and traditional massing. I guess once the land goes institutional aka CHA, only large scale developers can play with it. I wonder if a large parcel like that ever gets divided up and sold off in smaller bits. The city would be better off for it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #25886  
Old Posted Sep 27, 2014, 3:08 AM
Mr Downtown's Avatar
Mr Downtown Mr Downtown is online now
Urbane observer
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,510
The city would be better off if developed in small parcels, but we're too impatient. The city wants to start collecting tax revenue, the developers want to get their money out of the project quickly, and we architecture buffs whine for decades about the area having scattershot development with ugly interim uses in between. Block 37, Finkl Steel, Michael Reese, and the "Riverside Park" site should be parceled out in hopes of getting some good solid singles and doubles instead of holding our breath for a grand slam.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #25887  
Old Posted Sep 27, 2014, 4:26 AM
the urban politician the urban politician is offline
The City
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Libertyville, IL
Posts: 10,515
^
I couldn't agree more!!!!

But as in all things, policy has increasingly been directed towards creating opportunity for BIG players rather than for smaller entrepreneurs. That has been the way of things in nearly every walk of life for far over a half a century.

I would love to see a large parcel broken up into standard city lots with zoning in place. Not sure why there are no vocal advocates for this.
__________________
If God is your imaginary friend, so be it. But don't try to make him mine.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #25888  
Old Posted Sep 28, 2014, 4:32 PM
Chicago Shawn's Avatar
Chicago Shawn Chicago Shawn is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,644
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark0 View Post
I was responding to SamintheLoop earlier who stated " that was nothing short of an epic fail on the part of the city, not allowing the residential on top" - thanks for clarifying though. I wish the New City wasnt so poorly thought out. Its a tragedy such an important area is being redeveloped so badly. It would be nice to let it develop more city like, with more street grid, and traditional massing. I guess once the land goes institutional aka CHA, only large scale developers can play with it. I wonder if a large parcel like that ever gets divided up and sold off in smaller bits. The city would be better off for it.
New City was a better design before the recession; two towers, one flat-ron style at the acute corner of Clyborn and Halsted. The site plan still had the internal courtyard but the design was overall more modern in scope.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #25889  
Old Posted Yesterday, 3:58 PM
SamInTheLoop SamInTheLoop is offline
you know where I'll be
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,979
^ No doubt. Large mixed-use - particularly right now large mixed-use with dominant or at least very significant retail component - is still quite challenging to pull off financing-wise right now.....however, it's interesting that I don't think they really downsized the retail much if at all. Dropping a residential tower made very little sense - both in the urban planning/design aspect, but quite frankly for the developers/equity partners financially as well. And of course, the VE that took place here was just abominable.

^^^, ^^ I really agree with both you guys on this. The bias toward handing these large, critical sites over in whole to a single developer for a slam dunk is fraught with risks - timing, multi property type cycles not working in favor, execution risk, etc etc - and we've seen these rear their ugly head in practice now extensively....time to rethink how these work. Also, very much agree with the city's bias toward making things nice and greasy (in fact, they go too far - perhaps much too far - and dabble in full activist corporate welfare) for you the bigger the player you are - corporation, developer, etc. But it's as if they compensate by making things all the more difficult the smaller the player you are - entrepreneurial, independent, owner/operator, start-up, etc etc....much better balance is needed. Chicago does indeed need to make things easier on small and independent businesses....
__________________
Post-Modern is Post-Mortem - Deal with it
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #25890  
Old Posted Yesterday, 4:08 PM
wierdaaron's Avatar
wierdaaron wierdaaron is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,215
There was talk a while ago about the Prudential Building (the old one) getting some kind of new retail or a plaza atop their ~15th floor setback, as well as a new restaurant on their 40th floor roof.

I haven't heard or seen any movement on that front, but I just noticed that now from the street level you can see some kind of structures have gone up on the lower setback.

Click for big.




The glass railings along the south and southeast corners are new, as far as I know, and there's a little awning thing like you might find at a small bar.

I'm hoping the earlier news wasn't misreported and they aren't only doing a rooftop restaurant at the lower level. A 40th floor rooftop would be amazing at that location.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #25891  
Old Posted Yesterday, 6:32 PM
Ryanrule Ryanrule is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by george View Post
Yes it is, killer views.
you have a place there?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #25892  
Old Posted Yesterday, 7:16 PM
r18tdi's Avatar
r18tdi r18tdi is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Chicago
Posts: 254
Quote:
Originally Posted by wierdaaron View Post
I haven't heard or seen any movement on that front, but I just noticed that now from the street level you can see some kind of structures have gone up on the lower setback.
Looks like window washing rigging to me.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #25893  
Old Posted Yesterday, 7:22 PM
wierdaaron's Avatar
wierdaaron wierdaaron is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,215
Oh the left side of the image, not the right.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #25894  
Old Posted Yesterday, 8:33 PM
wierdaaron's Avatar
wierdaaron wierdaaron is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,215
Doesn't someone here live in Aqua? They're doing some major-looking work to the south staircase from the motor court down to the lower ground level of LSE, but I can't tell what. It looks like maybe they're adding an elevator.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #25895  
Old Posted Yesterday, 9:05 PM
george's Avatar
george george is offline
dream fast
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: east village, chicago
Posts: 2,782
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryanrule View Post
you have a place there?
I don't have a place there, was looking with a client.



__________________
To have ambition was my ambition - Gang of Four
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #25896  
Old Posted Yesterday, 11:58 PM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is offline
vertical
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: unconventionally bicoastal
Posts: 10,533
Chinatown Library

__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...
Reply With Quote
     
     
End
   
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > General Development
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 5:57 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.