CHICAGO | Post Office Redevelopment
Height: 2000 ft / 170 floors | 1000 ft x 2
Floor count: 170, 92, ?? Location: West Congress and South Canal Construction end: Architect: Antunovich Associates Developer: International Property Developers Phases One (center), Two (right), and Three (left): http://img825.imageshack.us/img825/8626/78zz.jpg Phase One (1000 feet, 92 floors): http://img29.imageshack.us/img29/1051/iqh1.jpg http://img21.imageshack.us/img21/4282/vrov.jpg http://img194.imageshack.us/img194/1402/81zo.jpg http://img542.imageshack.us/img542/4817/ozc2.jpg http://img802.imageshack.us/img802/1020/l8tm.jpg Work to redevelop old Chicago Post Office could start in September By David Roeder July 18, 2013 2:46PM Quote:
|
Here we go again?
Quote:
|
^ interesting concept, but that rendering is missing an image of flying pigs.
|
I love how they have one parcel saved for future development. "We don't want to get too ambitious. We'll save this bit for later."
Haha. O well, I wish them the best of luck. |
It'd be a great boost for motivating the City on building the Clinton Street Subway.
P.S. What would it look like in the skyline? |
What a joke...10 floors of retail alone is ridiculous. Oh, and I'm sure work will really start 90 days after approval. :rolleyes:
|
The developer did state that development will be staggered. Even this never comes to fruition, it's still nice to see something like this proposed.
|
Hell this vision is too ambitious for 2005, let alone now
|
The question is whether Lawrence Booth is chuckling under his breath as he makes these comments. Clearly he knows that this thing is a pipe dream, but is simply giddy to be getting paid for his designs as well as the free advertisement from Crains
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
12,000 parking spaces? That's almost offensive.
|
Quote:
Plus, in comparison, the Mall of America has 2.5 million square feet of retail space and over 20,000 parking spaces. This proposal has over 6 million square feet of retail and entertainment space and another 2 million square feet of office space. What concerns me most is that the article says the parking is free to shoppers. I don't think the city should allow that much free parking to be dumped on the market. A tax of either $2 or $4 per car would seem appropriate. If the retailers wanted to cover that with validations, that would be their choice, but the money could be used to improve either roads or transit near the area and would at least go part of the way toward keeping driving and transit competitive. |
LOL, old main is what, almost 3 million square feet? That looks so puny with it up against all those towers.
|
^^^ Seriously. Why don't they actually attempt to fill the old post office with stuff first, then see if they need more room!
|
Quote:
My guess is that the ONE rendering we've seen is an urban-design piece, and a very preliminary one. If you remember the watercolor renderings that SOM produced for Lakeshore East, 12 years ago? None of the buildings built today look like those in the rendering. You can pretty easily read Booth Hansen's intentions... they wanted to enclose the interchange/park as an enclosed urban space, like a massive version of Daley Plaza that you can't actually hang out in. All the buildings are designed in service of that idea, and it's still pretty clumsy. Best case scenario is that the renovation of the Post Office itself goes ahead as planned, with a handful of big-box retailers on the first/second floors and upper floors converted to parking. The article didn't identify a flag for the hotel, so I'm guessing there isn't one, which means it won't be getting built any time soon. |
Quote:
So, conjecture here, he thinks if he creates a huge splash and excitement and enough of a critical mass to attract more than just people who live downtown, he can make a go of it. Certainly, it falls into the "make no small plans" category, as well in the history of showmanship and boosterism that Chicago has. It seems hard to make work, but I have to admit I'd rather see people try and fail at things like this than build another set of beige skyscrapers with no visual interest and limited ability to draw attention from anyone other than retirees from Gurnee. |
Wow. All the grace of Presidential towers...with the urban planning of of a exuburban mall and the architectural originality of white bread. If only Mr. Davies could conceptualize something worth building, let alone something feasible.
|
Quote:
Nobody is ever going to financially back a development of that size in that area. |
Booth Hansen!
|
Quote:
Just because something is huge doesn't make it bold or visionary. What you have here, for example, is something mundane that's elevated to the level of ridiculous/absurd/out-of-touch because of its size. The project is entirely based (literally and figuratively) on retail. Has he not read the news about Roosevelt Collection? Block 37? Trump Tower's retail component? The demand for what he's proposing simply does not exist, and even if (or when) it were to there's clearly already enough space in the established shopping districts to absorb it all. There's an opportunity to do something really exciting with the site-- you have the river and the city's front entrance (Congress) right there. But this proposal doesn't appear to engage it in any way-- it does the opposite, really: with those huge walls of "retail" (and parking, no doubt), it cloisters itself off from these potentially amazing assets-- not to mention the rest of the city. |
Quote:
That said, if you get rid of some of the more fanciful things, such as the retail "bridge" over the river, you actually have the potential for some interesting results. For example, the positioning of the tall tower seems to have been selected to form a capstone to the view down the south branch of the river from the Apparel Mart and from the Riverside Plaza areas. If you removed the retail between the shorter tower on the NE corner of the Post Office plot and the largest tower, you'd end up with an arrangement that would still show off the art deco Post Office, but enhance the sensation of driving through something. And we don't really know if they've ignored the river or not because they don't show any details about how the buildings would meet it. It's not as though the city and river there are already beautifully matched there - it would be very difficult to make any sort of ideal river/city meld in that area that didn't end up feeling forced and out of place. After all, Congress is essentially a highway there, and it kind of divides off that part of the river from any hope of being an extension of Riverside Plaza and across the river, the Wacker extension and interface with Congress destroys the usability on that side, too. And I think you're not really facing reality if you think that a park surrounded by a highway, a train yard and across the river from a boring, pretty ugly new post office processing facility would be popular or beautiful or usable or in any way add to Chicago. The big parcel south of Roosevelt Rd is really the best bet for creating an interface between the City and the River. That's across from a railyard, but it's a much bigger drawing board and thus has more flexible possibilities. I'm not defending the drawing as it is, but I am saying that the core layout is at least has the potential for merit. As for your counter-examples, they're all too small. Roosevelt Collection is hard to get to for neighborhood residents on foot, and just isn't big enough to draw people from anywhere else. Even Block 37 should either have gone bigger or simply not been a mall. If it wasn't on State Street, it would have no hope at that size and even being on State Street, it barely even holds its own as far as generating critical mass. I think the Trump thing will work, eventually, they just have to figure out how it's supposed to work during the winter when nobody in their right mind would walk along that section of the river. |
I crave something though with more mixed heights and density. There is no reason for mega towers with mega podia separated by vast vacant greenspaces. And certainly no reason to build these gigantic clone towers 10 feet from one another, let alone on these Asian-scale shopping malls.
LSE, even Smith's Franklin Point plan or South River City were much more integrated plans that (at least attempted to) create neighborhoods. I don't get the sense at all that this would be any more fun to live in than the currently sterile corner of the Loop it already is. |
:previous: Exactly. This whole plan is just horrible and way too much for that area. The only component that seems reasonable is the 2mil sqft of office space. Anyway, I would prefer for the east side of the post office, facing the river, to be turned into open space like the space proposed for River Point. Then they should put about three towers, at various heights, to the west where the Holiday Inn is. 90, 80 and 60 or 70 fl towers would be nice.
|
Quote:
|
This whole plan is pretty ridiculous. It seems like he is basically hoping to create a condensed Michigan ave for the suburbs. "Come on down folks, bring your cars to Chicago. Dont worry about actually walking the streets and experiencing what Chicago has to offer, look at the pretty buildings and river from our 10 story bridge.. You'll love having almost experienced Chicago! Now go and drive your 12,000 cars back to the burbs..." I can appreciate that he is willing to invest in Chicago, and I love seeing buildings being built as much as the next guy, but this idea really is absurd.. He's not building a neighborhood by any means, he's building a tourist trap.
|
|
Quote:
Maybe if Trump had gotten the global elite buyers he wanted, there would be a built-in market for the goods of luxury retailers. Instead, Trump's units are merely going to well-paid Chicago executives, who probably don't have the desire to shop at Hermes or YSL on a regular basis (there's that Midwestern conservatism again!) From a design perspective, it would help Trump out a lot if the Wrigley Building plaza is converted into a retail arcade with a glass roof. It's much wider than European arcades, but they can mitigate that somewhat by encouraging the retailers to spill out into the plaza like a bazaar. That would in turn lure people from Pioneer Plaza down into Trump's area. |
if it is not already obvious to us all.
http://chicago.curbed.com/archives/2...-will-fail.php 1,001 Reasons That Bill Davies' Post Office Pipe Dream Will Fail Friday, July 22, 2011, by Mark Boyer ... |
I think its fair to give the guy a chance, at least he has vision.
|
|
I think this is the start of something possibly great. Almost never does a project of this scale retain it's original concept. It'll most likely change and grow into something more people will agree with. I say build build build! Until we can't build no more!
|
It's nice that people still think big when it comes to Chicago but of course this or anything like it will never be reality. As for the parking, any development that intends to poach people away from suburban shopping malls is gonna need it.
|
|
Wow. . . that's just awful. . .
. . . |
CHICAGO | Old Post Office Redevelopment | 2000 FT / 600 M | 120 FLOORS
Skyscrapers, retail part of massive Old Post Office plan
By: Alby Gallun July 21, 2011 (Crain's) — The owner of the Old Main Post Office has unveiled an audacious plan to transform the hulking structure and surrounding properties into a massive complex spanning the Chicago River that would include a shopping center, hotels, more than 1,000 residential units and the tallest skyscraper in North America. The 120-story tower is the centerpiece of a $3.5-billion, 16-million-square-foot development proposed by Bill Davies, the Englishman who paid $24 million two years ago for the post office, an empty landmark structure that straddles the Congress Parkway on the west side of the river. http://www.chicagorealestatedaily.co...maxw=368&q=100 Read more http://www.chicagorealestatedaily.co...#ixzz1SmBhasi3 Stay up-to-date on Chicago real estate with our free, daily e-newsletter A link to the PDF plans: http://204.248.60.17/wp-content/uplo...oth-Hansen.pdf Renderings from http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showpo...8&postcount=78 at SSC. http://img40.imageshack.us/img40/1568/post2hk.jpg http://img195.imageshack.us/img195/1967/post1n.jpg http://img688.imageshack.us/img688/5156/post3i.jpg http://img263.imageshack.us/img263/1902/post4u.jpg http://img851.imageshack.us/img851/8708/post1g.jpg http://img851.imageshack.us/img851/1279/post2f.jpg http://img809.imageshack.us/img809/342/post3x.jpg http://img228.imageshack.us/img228/4027/post6o.jpg |
I created a new thread in the proposed supertall/highrise section http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=192697 for the benefit of those who may not frequent Chicago threads. This is after all a major super tall proposal of potential worldwide interest, pipe dream or not.
|
I first heard of this project last night on Chicago tonight hearing only brief snippets about a 2,000 foot skyscraper at the Old Post Office site and was like WTF?! I immediately came on SSP and the project has been already discussed a bit on this thread: http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/show...48#post5355748.
My initial reaction is that a project of this insane scale seems like it belongs more in Dubai than Chicago. I like the concept of a mega project that has a tower that will top the Sears Tower (how many times have we heard that though with Chicago Spire, etc.) but it is really just a pipe dream. The ideas have a lot of potential to create a huge mixed use development that could bring vibrancy to that corner of the West Loop but there are also disturbing ideas like 12,000 parking spaces to lure in suburban shoppers. From a pragmatic standpoint maybe having 12K parking spots will lessen NIMBY opposition and the local Alderman Bob Fioretti who is known to pander to NIMBYs at times is apparently for the project (I assume he knows about the 2,000 foot skyscraper proposal and its not just a generic Old Post Office building remodel). The architecture as rendered is also quite ugly but might be very preliminary and could evolve to something better. It is also not clear if the 2,000 feet is with or without those proposed spires/antennas, 120 floors to me implies that the spires would be included in the height but I don't get the impression they have really worked or even thought out details like that yet. |
Put this plan in your pipe and smoke it.
|
See my reaction is actually completely the opposite (no disrespect of course). I was never too fond of Chicago Spire because I felt like it was ridiculously showy and belonged in a place like Las Vegas or Dubai. It didn't feel like industrial, structual, matter-of-fact Chicago. This tower on the other hand (I understand that the rendering is conceptual), if it's executed correctly, could be completely fantastic for this city and really fit the Chicago skyline.
Everyone from New York who denounced the Chicago Spire got thoroughly chastised and the NY vs. CHI debate was incited once again, but personally, and I love my city equally to Chicago, but I would not complain about ceding the nations-tallest title to Chicago for this building. Let's get it BUILT. :tup: |
While a pipe dream, I still love the ambition. I could care less about the design at this point because its merely conceptual and won't get built as shown, if at all. At the very least it gets the site on the development radar, gets people talking and with the drive for that much space (way beyond the demands of the market, but whatever, its not my money being wasted), it at least ensures the Post Office will be preserved in its entirety for the next couple of years, regardless of what happens. Preserving the old Post Office as is, is what I care about most. I hated the previous concept of ripping down 1/3 of the structure, so any plan that keeps the building gets my support.
Davies apparently has financing for phase 1, whether or not that comes to fruition, we shall see; but nonetheless it still preserves the old building for something else to come along. Lets just hope he's not a slum lord and lets it fall apart if nothing happens. |
Quote:
This comment especially irks me: Quote:
Yes, some of these features provide certain challenges, but good design is measured by how well the architect responds to those challenges. That's where the bold and visionary thinking comes into play. But none of that is on display here. Instead, the strategy is to ignore, cover up, isolate and obstruct. Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Why not at the Chicago Spire site?
|
never. gonna. happen.
|
I'd much rather they build the 2000' building using the Post Office as a base. None of the rest of that crap. They could spend that extra money cleaning the post office up.
|
This is something really cool I found online... wanted to share.
http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6005/...13810b60_b.jpg From: http://robfunderburk.blogspot.com/20...-for-time.html |
I say boot the retail.
Simply have hotels, residential, and office. Perhaps a small amount of service retail space is adequate (dry cleaner, coffee shop, bank) |
Well, we have to keep at least one 2,000 ft proposal current. It's the law...:)
I don't have a lot of faith in that tower getting built, but I don't think it's the best place on the skyline for the city's tallest anyway. The other towers meanwhile are getting lost in the proposal. The whole thing looks anti-urban. I don't like the multi-level parking scenario. |
Its placement on the skyline would throw off the aesthetics of Chicago's present urban geography. I'd much rather see the spire get built....
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 5:01 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.