SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/index.php)
-   General Development (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=86)
-   -   CHICAGO | Post Office Redevelopment (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=192697)

the urban politician Oct 6, 2016 7:56 PM

^ Well, you gotta start somewhere!

jpIllInoIs Oct 6, 2016 7:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim in Chicago (Post 7585998)
I'm guessing that's exploratory work. It will take a long time if they're using a portable power washer, pvc bucket and 4' ladder for the real job!


WRONG- Wrong- wrong...that's an 18' ladder! :haha:

Jim in Chicago Oct 6, 2016 8:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jpIllInoIs (Post 7586006)
WRONG- Wrong- wrong...that's an 18' ladder! :haha:

I also note that there are 5 guys standing around doing nothing, one guy actually doing something with a piece of equipment, and one guy watching him. This is indeed Chicago.

Ryanrule Oct 6, 2016 8:33 PM

arent all the blue hats office fucks?

the urban politician Oct 6, 2016 8:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim in Chicago (Post 7586036)
I also note that there are 5 guys standing around doing nothing, one guy actually doing something with a piece of equipment, and one guy watching him. This is indeed Chicago.

No, it's only Chicago if that's happening on the public dime.

This is a private entity

UPChicago Oct 6, 2016 8:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim in Chicago (Post 7586036)
I also note that there are 5 guys standing around doing nothing, one guy actually doing something with a piece of equipment, and one guy watching him. This is indeed Chicago.

Who's going to supervise the supervisor's supervisor?

ardecila Oct 6, 2016 11:14 PM

Guys, they've been working at the Post Office for months doing demo work and cleaning out the building, working around the clock, doing stuff you don't need a permit for.

The loading dock on Harrison has a constant stream of dumpsters coming and going. I don't think that photo is showing some kind of huge mobilization... the guys in hard hats are likely architects or managers on a site visit.

the urban politician Oct 7, 2016 12:27 AM

^ Are you kidding? In Chicago you need a permit to change a light bulb! I'm not even joking

denizen467 Oct 7, 2016 7:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UPChicago (Post 7586079)
Who's going to supervise the supervisor's supervisor?

At the least, nobody that nobody sent.

MultiModal Oct 7, 2016 1:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila (Post 7586224)
Guys, they've been working at the Post Office for months doing demo work and cleaning out the building, working around the clock, doing stuff you don't need a permit for.

The loading dock on Harrison has a constant stream of dumpsters coming and going. I don't think that photo is showing some kind of huge mobilization... the guys in hard hats are likely architects or managers on a site visit.

They have been doing demo work and asbestos abatement for a few months. I don't know anything about whether or not the had/need permits to do that work. Also, I heard that the cost of asbestos removal will end up being around $150 Million.

ardecila Oct 7, 2016 6:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MultiModal (Post 7586643)
They have been doing demo work and asbestos abatement for a few months. I don't know anything about whether or not the had/need permits to do that work. Also, I heard that the cost of asbestos removal will end up being around $150 Million.

You do need a demo permit, but that's basically a rubber stamp. I think Davies actually pulled that permit before the sale even closed, and they just transferred it over to the new owner.

It happens so fast that preservationists often don't hear about a demolition until it's already underway, hence the 90-day delay for orange-rated properties. In this case it's only interior demolition, so there was no historic review needed.

sentinel Oct 7, 2016 8:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MultiModal (Post 7586643)
They have been doing demo work and asbestos abatement for a few months. I don't know anything about whether or not the had/need permits to do that work. Also, I heard that the cost of asbestos removal will end up being around $150 Million.

I always knew it was gonna be a yuge amount, but $150 Million for the asbestos removal...good Lord.

the urban politician Oct 7, 2016 10:16 PM

^ I'm willing to bet the developers are in talks with a big fish as far as a tenant. I'm betting some day we will hear a big announcement, although probably not for a while

denizen467 Oct 8, 2016 9:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sentinel (Post 7587272)
I always knew it was gonna be a yuge amount, but $150 Million for the asbestos removal...good Lord.

Amazing, but good in a way. Most of it is labor costs presumably, so the trades (or just some kind of non unionized workers maybe) working in the city will see their families enriched by a large fraction of $150 million. Transfer of wealth from 601W to da neighborhoods and suburbs.

the urban politician Oct 8, 2016 12:17 PM

Is there any way to change that way outdated rendering associated with this thread?

sentinel Oct 8, 2016 1:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by denizen467 (Post 7587780)
Amazing, but good in a way. Most of it is labor costs presumably, so the trades (or just some kind of non unionized workers maybe) working in the city will see their families enriched by a large fraction of $150 million. Transfer of wealth from 601W to da neighborhoods and suburbs.

Sure, why not. I think you missed the pun in my original statement. And yes, it is amazing in a good way, especially considering I've been advocating for the redevelopment of this property, speaking privately with a number of developers and hospitality executive a full 2 years before Davies took over, and came very close in helping create a consortium of developers that wanted to bring this jewel back to life...but were always, ALWAYS incredibly concerned about the potential cost of one massive issue: asbestos abatement (which I've also brought up in this forum more than a couple of times, as well as in private conversations with fellow forumers). Fortunately, that issue is being dealt with in the best possible manner.

At the end of the day, I'm incredibly thrilled that this beautiful building is being redeveloped. Granted, not in the way that I and a number of other individuals had envisioned, but one cannot let personal bias cloud judgement, and I'm still very happy that this is finally happening. :yes:

KWILLSKYLINE Oct 8, 2016 6:15 PM

Any chance this foundation could support a highrise after the renovation? Or is this just one and done.? I understand the age difference but what about a block37 type of thing?

Mr Downtown Oct 8, 2016 7:53 PM

Undoubtedly Graham, Anderson, Probst & White was very conservative (by modern standards) when designing the building's foundations, but I'll guess 6-8 additional stories is about all you could put on top. Not worth the hassle with landmarks authorities when there are vacant or soft sites all around.

Chi-Sky21 Oct 10, 2016 4:31 PM

I know the site has changed hands multiple times but is there any way to get financial assistance from the government to remove it since it originally was a government building?

Kippis Oct 15, 2016 11:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chi-Sky21 (Post 7589288)
I know the site has changed hands multiple times but is there any way to get financial assistance from the government to remove it since it originally was a government building?

Doubtful. Like you mentioned, it's been in private hands since October 2009. Although such grants exist for individual property owners and not-for-profits, the US government does not have (I believe) any financial assistance programs for a for-profit corporation looking to abate and restore a historic building like this one.


All times are GMT. The time now is 5:07 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.