CHICAGO | General Developments

[Mr Downtown]

Well, it's hard to believe that private-market owners would have acted any differently, knowing that the site was more valuable as a tabula rasa. But for Mayor Daley to continue to claim to be "green" while demolishing so much embodied energy is rather ludicrous.

Alderman Fioretti is now ruminating about how the Michael Reese site should be a site for "hotel expansion" related to McCormick Place, an idea that I don't think is even in the same room as reality.

[Via Chicago]

Originally Posted by ardecila

And no, it won't be redeveloped into a massive dense community overnight. Lakeshore East/New Eastside has continued development pretty much continuously through several market cycles over the last 50 years. Central Station is newer, but it has developed much faster than LSE due to its mix of high-rises, mid-rises, and townhomes that fill up the land much more quickly than a high-rise community can.

Neither of those examples are particularly appealing. Both are essentially subdivisions, cut off from the rest of the urban fabric. Again, is that really the best we can do with MRH?

[Via Chicago]

Originally Posted by Mr Downtown

Well, it's hard to believe that private-market owners would have acted any differently, knowing that the site was more valuable as a tabula rasa. But for Mayor Daley to continue to claim to be "green" while demolishing so much embodied energy is rather ludicrous.

Yes, its possible a private developer would have done the same. But as I have said repeatedly, its the city's deaf ear...the rush to beat out any sort of preservation ruling that infuriates me. Its disgusting.

Plus, once something is landmarked than you can apply for state and federal funds to help with the preservation.

[lawfin]

Originally Posted by VivaLFuego

........

It's not like this city has any shortage, past or present, of huge of large desolate patches of nothing that came to exist due to government clear-cutting. Block 37 speaks for itself, but what about:....

In fact, when was the last large scale government-led clearance of large swaths of land that didn't result in decades of nothingness? UIC-Circle Campus?

As stated, there is no market pressure to redevelop MRH nor is there any such pressure anywhere in sight. This will be a blighted pocket of nothingness for decades, just like all the others before it. But hey, at least Heneghan got their contract, and when the time comes to make the really big deal there won't be anyone in the way.

I agree; but then I often agree with Viva

Originally Posted by ViaChicago

Yea, because Block 37 went so well by using that logic

The fact of the matter is there ISNT a legitimate plan for the site. You are very naive if you think the SOM design is still on the table. Who is going to pay for/develop it? ....... We're in the midst of one of the worst real-estate downturns ever, and the city is already having incredible difficulty absorbing the glut of condos and office space out there, which will continue for many years due to over-development. It could very well be decades before something goes up on this site. So why the rush to obliterate a heritage that could possibly be creatively re-used down the line? When we found out about the history of the buildings is irrelevant..we know NOW.

I agree....that is a rarity

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by Via Chicago

Neither of those examples are particularly appealing. Both are essentially subdivisions, cut off from the rest of the urban fabric. Again, is that really the best we can do with MRH?

Central station is cut off from the urban fabric? That's news to me. And LSE is quite possibly my favorite urban development--ever.

We can only hope that the MRH site becomes a continuation of Cental station style development (perhaps with a mixed use building or two), because a dense clusters of towers it will NOT be

[harryc]

Dec 3

And across the street - A hope for the Beige Precast - cover it in Ivy !

[the urban politician]

I'm sorry if this has already been discussed, but does anybody know why there is scaffolding around the building at 660 N Rush? I'm hoping that's not a planned demo

[Busy Bee]

Originally Posted by harryc

And across the street - A hope for the Beige Precast - cover it in Ivy !

What's the likelihood that sun bleaching will eventually have this precast virtually matching the old Indiana limestone? Surely they considered this environmental effect of light fading?

[BVictor1]

Originally Posted by ardecila

^^ All of the above happened in a era of big government-led redevelopment. The climate today favors the private sector. Daley would much rather flip this property to a developer with deep pockets than keep it under city ownership and have to deal with the political consequences and construction hassles of the redevelopment using city staff. He sold the parking meters and the Skyway to a private company, after all.

And no, it won't be redeveloped into a massive dense community overnight. Lakeshore East/New Eastside has continued development pretty much continuously through several market cycles over the last 50 years. Central Station is newer, but it has developed much faster than LSE due to its mix of high-rises, mid-rises, and townhomes that fill up the land much more quickly than a high-rise community can.

Block 37 was complicated by too many hands in the pot, with ComEd's spiderweb of power lines under the site and a new subway tunnel that everyone thought was a good idea until it came in hundreds of millions over budget. It's also such a visible project - directly across from City Hall and Daley Plaza - that it became a signature project for the mayor, which meant years' worth of red tape and complications.

First of all, the Skyway and meters weren't sold, they were leased to private entities, which is a little different.

It's true that both LSE and Central Station took time to development over several up and down periods. There were plans for LSE/Illinois Ceter dating back to the 1930's and there have been ideas for redeveloping IC land for about 50 years. Redeveloping MR will take time, but the city can probably get more money with the majoity of the property cleared than not. People have suddentl been up in arms because some of the MR buildings had "Gropius" involvement. Has that ever actually been proven? He may have "reviewed" some of the drawings, but It couldn't have been all that seeing as no one made any mention of it in the past or a big deal about it when they were built.

As for Block 37, I wonder how successful it'll become. I walked through there for the first time on Tuesday. I was neither totally blown away nor totally disappointed. We'll have to see what other stores they can least to and how unique they are to that location. If they can ever get a theatre open on the upper levels, hopefully it will allow the mall not to become another Chicago Place. Also I feel that if they can ever get the hotel and rental/condo tower developed, that will help that project. Maybe?!

[Loopy]

.

[spyguy]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

I'm sorry if this has already been discussed, but does anybody know why there is scaffolding around the building at 660 N Rush? I'm hoping that's not a planned demo

McCormick Double House

[BWChicago]

Originally Posted by BVictor1

Redeveloping MR will take time, but the city can probably get more money with the majoity of the property cleared than not. People have suddentl been up in arms because some of the MR buildings had "Gropius" involvement. Has that ever actually been proven? He may have "reviewed" some of the drawings, but It couldn't have been all that seeing as no one made any mention of it in the past or a big deal about it when they were built.

-If they are placed on the register, MRH would be eligible for tax credits in a rehab project. Not so if it's cleared.

-Yes, it's been proven. Grahm Balkany has done extensive research, you can see some of it at savemrh.com . Gropius was as much architect of these as any of his buildings. And it's not entirely new, just the extent. AIA Guide, for example, always mentioned his involvement with the plan.

[DIESELPOLO]

Hi everyone,

I follow Chicago development regularly and just wanted to know if there has been much progress on the CREATE initiative to alleviate freight traffic congestion and modernize the system. I mean, I've definitely read plenty of reports online, but maybe some of you fellow forumers could give me some insight. As a potential UIC graduate student (wish me luck!), it's a program of particular interest. Not nearly as glamorous as a TOD, but important just the same.

PS- and why does everyone hate the Elysian so much?! Wonky proportions aside, it's not horrible, no? Admittedly it brings into question architectural integrity, but I'd venture to say that it's far from an architectural abomination

[emathias]

Originally Posted by DIESELPOLO

Hi everyone,

I follow Chicago development regularly and just wanted to know if there has been much progress on the CREATE initiative ...

Please ask your CREATE question over on the Chicago Transit section since it's really more of a transportation subject.

[tintinex]

I have tickets to attend the opening party of the movie theaters at Roosevelt Collection in the South Loop. It's this Thursday night. I will take pics and post them here. The Movie theaters should be open this weekend to the public

[ChicagoChicago]

Originally Posted by migueltorres

I have tickets to attend the opening party of the movie theaters at Roosevelt Collection in the South Loop. It's this Thursday night. I will take pics and post them here. The Movie theaters should be open this weekend to the public

Just don't take any video. I'd hate to see you get arrested.

[tintinex]

Originally Posted by ChicagoChicago

Just don't take any video. I'd hate to see you get arrested.

I won't take any video, especially of the pre-screening of Avatar

[denizen467]

Interesting angle on urban development that we haven't discussed very much here - booting govts off of prime real estate when it's not essential to them.

------

http://cbs2chicago.com/local/water.r...2.1372342.html

Dec 15, 2009 10:23 pm US/Central
Government Agency Sits Downtown, Pays No Taxes
Building That Houses Metropolitan Water Reclamation District Headquarters On North Michigan Avenue Could Bring In More Than $5 Million A Year

Reporting Jay Levine

CHICAGO (CBS) Why does a government agency, whose primary task is performed far from the bright lights of the Magnificent Mile, need its headquarters right on it? As CBS 2 Chief Correspondent Jay Levine reports, its headquarters which cost over a million dollars a year to maintain, and take countless millions more off the tax rolls.

It's the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District, which operates one of the largest waste water treatment plants in the world in southwest suburban Stickney, with a billion dollar plus budget and 2,000 employees.

Six hundred of them in the squat, grey-stone five-story headquarters surrounded by sleek Gold Coast high-rises of North Michigan Avenue and in the seven floors it owns in a newer building across the street. Neither on the county tax rolls.

A government agency paying no taxes, sitting on a posh site like this?

"It's a head-scratcher they've maintained this location for this kind of use," said corporate real estate expert Allen Rogoway. "It's a county use, and the highest and best use for a location just off Michigan Avenue would seem to be commercial or residential."

Like the Ritz Carlton Apartment tower going up right next door, which the county assessor says will have a market value of $242 million; estimated annual tax revenues: over $5 million. The District headquarters brings in nothing.

"You're right, it's valuable real estate," said Water Reclamation District Commissioner Debra Shore. "It might make sense to put it back on the tax rolls."

Debra Shore has been a commissioner for just three years. The building has been here for more than 50, since 1955.

Protected by a private police force, with generous indoor parking and even a city-designated loading zone. Your tax dollars pay for that, too. CBS 2 didn't see much loading going on in the government cars parked there.

Sources say when the developers next door tried to buy the building back when real estate values were soaring, they were turned down flat.
Allen Rogoway is not only a commercial real estate expert, he's also a taxpayer.

"As a citizen of the city, I would ask the same questions and wonder why they weren't in another location," Rogoway said.

One commissioner has proposed moving everyone out to Stickney, where the District has plenty of space. Commissioner Shore wants to be near other government agencies.

"I think it makes sense for us to be in the central core somewhere, but it doesn't have to be a block off of Michigan Avenue," Shore said.

The problem is now is clearly NOT the time to sell real estate. But passing up a chance when they could've gotten top dollar not only cost them, it cost us; by keeping one of the most valuable pieces of property in Chicago off the tax rolls.

CBS 2 Political Producer Ed Marshall contributed to this report.

[emathias]

Originally Posted by denizen467

Interesting angle on urban development that we haven't discussed very much here - booting govts off of prime real estate when it's not essential to them.

------...

Maybe they could lease space in the CTA building.

I'm a little amused at the timing of the article - I kinda think the fact that the Ritz builders are having a helluva time with the Reclaimation people has a lot to do with the timing of the piece. Or maybe I'm just cynical. I do agree that prime spots should only rarely be monopolized by government agencies. Government should be centrally located, to be sure, but there should be reasonable and evaluations of costs.

[VivaLFuego]

Once that leap is made, one would naturally say the same thing about every parcel owned by any tax-exempt organization in a valuable place, not just government. Why should we the taxpayers subsidize church parking, used once per week (possibly more if they get to use it for tax-free valet parking), on a prime site?

In fact, given that this piece focuses only on MWRD and ignores not only every other piece of gov't-owned prime real estate, but all of the tax-exempt religious, hospital, and educational uses, would seem to be very strong support of emathias' cynicism regarding the motivation and timing. It's indeed an intersting legal and philosophical question to ponder, but it's on a much grander scale than MWRD.