SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/index.php)
-   Proposals (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=361)
-   -   CHICAGO | 130 N Franklin | 751 FT | 51 FLOORS (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=199537)

the urban politician Mar 6, 2013 1:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila (Post 6039729)
It does, but it won't come to market for a long time if ever. With the exception of River Point, none of these projects seem to be moving forward.

Well, vintage office buildings in the east loop continue to be converted into other uses (apartments, dorms, hotels), including an announcement in today's Crains that yet another one (which is nearly 100% occupied) will be converted into a Hyatt Place.

While those were probably all Class C, still the conditions for a few new office towers seem to be brewing. Once vancancies reach that magic number and the lenders loosen up a bit more, perhaps we'll see 2 or 3 new towers over the next 4-5 years?

SamintheLoop?

Chicago_Forever Mar 6, 2013 1:46 PM

^
Quote:

Originally Posted by Justin_Chicago (Post 6035873)
Steven Fifield shares his observations on the state of downtown Chicago real estate. He predicts 5-6 million square feet of office space delivered between 2015-2018.


Read more: http://www.chicagobusiness.com/artic...#ixzz2MPvvo76c

Only time will tell.

Mr Downtown Mar 6, 2013 2:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the urban politician (Post 6039998)
the conditions for a few new office towers seem to be brewing.

I'm not quite so bullish. A lot of the new tech firms are squeezing people in at tables, not even cubicles, much less perimeter offices. Average square footage per worker has been declining steeply over the last decade. So I think the existing stock will absorb a lot of employment growth for a while, with only one new tower every three years or so, financed by churning the big law or accounting firms.

joeg1985 Mar 6, 2013 3:22 PM

Oh thank god! This building is much much better IMO. The "new rendering" was such a boring box. Lord knows we didn't need another one of those.

LouisVanDerWright Mar 6, 2013 4:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Downtown (Post 6040091)
I'm not quite so bullish. A lot of the new tech firms are squeezing people in at tables, not even cubicles, much less perimeter offices. Average square footage per worker has been declining steeply over the last decade. So I think the existing stock will absorb a lot of employment growth for a while, with only one new tower every three years or so, financed by churning the big law or accounting firms.

Part of this has to do with the age of the workforce. The number of "senior" workers at firms is declining and they are usually the ones who demand and want their own office. Meanwhile every space planner's goal seems to be "how many Millenials can I fit in a cubic yard" and they are packing and stacking them in. In fact, most Tenant's are not limited by their ability to pack more people into a space, but by the fact that most Class A office buildings are wary of deals that have more than 5, maybe 6, people per 1,000 square feet of space. Most Landlords do not want the massive overcrowding and resulting wear and tear that accompany's a 6 per 1,000 SF tenant. You have to go to Class B or C space to find someone who will allow it because, frankly, other class A Tenants don't like being located in the same building as a 5 or 6 per 1,000 SF Tenant.

So, to me, the same question in office applies to housing: What happens when the Millenials hit? This generation is facing 30-40% under/unemployment and huge numbers of them are living at home or with a roommate. What happens when they all finally get a good job and want to form their own household? You will see a RE boom. Same goes for the office; what happens when the economy recovers enough that Millenials start getting hired in droves? There is going to be a boom in demand for office space. That raises a further question, the average age of the workforce is dropping, what happens when that starts increasing again and suddenly you have a lot more "senior" workers in the workplace? You are going to see office plan densities drop and the number of SF required to house the workforce increase again. This won't be a return to 1970's style build outs, but it will have a noticeable impact over the next 20-30 years or so on office demand, IMO.

MayorOfChicago Mar 7, 2013 5:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Downtown (Post 6040091)
I'm not quite so bullish. A lot of the new tech firms are squeezing people in at tables, not even cubicles, much less perimeter offices. Average square footage per worker has been declining steeply over the last decade. So I think the existing stock will absorb a lot of employment growth for a while, with only one new tower every three years or so, financed by churning the big law or accounting firms.

Yeah, I have three friends currently downtown who have said their offices have been recently reconfigured to get rid of large cubes and offices and are now open floorplans for almost everyone in the company. One of them even has senior management in the new open designed plan with people sitting at desks with very little cutoff between people. It has allowed them to fit MANY more people into the area. They now have open windows throughout the floor and have increased greatly the number of conference rooms so people can still pow-wow and have privacy.

Our company just announced last week that we're also going towards the open-floor design. Our CEO was stating how it's been a HUGE push overall the past few years and will really increase going-forward. It apparently helps get the creative juices flowing and lets people interact much more. They're doing away with all offices along two sides of the building and increasing the number of conference rooms. Our offices are currently at capacity with people sitting in hallways since we're growing so fast - but this route will let the company increase workforce another 20% and not have to take on a single square foot above what we already have.

migueltorres Mar 7, 2013 9:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MayorOfChicago (Post 6041710)
Yeah, I have three friends currently downtown who have said their offices have been recently reconfigured to get rid of large cubes and offices and are now open floorplans for almost everyone in the company. One of them even has senior management in the new open designed plan with people sitting at desks with very little cutoff between people. It has allowed them to fit MANY more people into the area. They now have open windows throughout the floor and have increased greatly the number of conference rooms so people can still pow-wow and have privacy.

Our company just announced last week that we're also going towards the open-floor design. Our CEO was stating how it's been a HUGE push overall the past few years and will really increase going-forward. It apparently helps get the creative juices flowing and lets people interact much more. They're doing away with all offices along two sides of the building and increasing the number of conference rooms. Our offices are currently at capacity with people sitting in hallways since we're growing so fast - but this route will let the company increase workforce another 20% and not have to take on a single square foot above what we already have.

It's definitely a trend. It's occurring in my office too. from my cubicle I now have North, South and East views of downtown :tup:

george Mar 14, 2013 6:22 PM

Office space planning has really evolved. My office on N Michigan Ave in the 90's had the corner private offices and private offices infilled the perimeter window walls. The low rent district consisted of large desks, adjustable drafting tables with credenzas separated by wall dividers. All ran along the floor to ceiling window wall. That was old school.

Rizzo Mar 14, 2013 6:57 PM

Tall Cubicles are so old school. Most major office system manfuctures show open plan seating with low dividers. (Bench or table seating). Bosses are usually in their own clustered glass enclosures away from windows and the edges of the floorplan are left open for circulation for everyone to enjoy the view

I work in a very bright and airy open office where you can see everyone. I love it. Even better when you can look 150' down over the desks and out the window to a sweeping view of the lake.

Guiltyspark Jun 3, 2013 6:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hayward (Post 6051642)
Tall Cubicles are so old school. Most major office system manfuctures show open plan seating with low dividers. (Bench or table seating). Bosses are usually in their own clustered glass enclosures away from windows and the edges of the floorplan are left open for circulation for everyone to enjoy the view

I work in a very bright and airy open office where you can see everyone. I love it. Even better when you can look 150' down over the desks and out the window to a sweeping view of the lake.

Recent studies have shown these new plans to be horribly inefficient due to the number of visual and auditory distractions. It may be good for creative work, but for insurance and the like, not so much.

Rizzo Jun 4, 2013 5:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Guiltyspark (Post 6151426)
Recent studies have shown these new plans to be horribly inefficient due to the number of visual and auditory distractions. It may be good for creative work, but for insurance and the like, not so much.

Yes, the open office plan doesn't work for all companies, especially places that deal with privacy. But it's striking a balance between well daylit environments, good airflow, and sound control. Being in a tall enclosure with low ceilings and static air isn't good for productivity either.

Not all studies cover the age of employees. I'm willing to bet the younger generations are more adapted to open offices. It's a generation that is wired to their phones listening to music. It's not hard to put up that psychological wall around you and stay focused.

A well designed office will supplement plenty of small enclosed conference rooms for employees to handle private conversations.

I'm willing to accept a diminishing trend when furniture manufactures dominate their product line with high wall office systems, but they aren't.

Guiltyspark Jul 4, 2013 2:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hayward (Post 6152592)
Yes, the open office plan doesn't work for all companies, especially places that deal with privacy. But it's striking a balance between well daylit environments, good airflow, and sound control. Being in a tall enclosure with low ceilings and static air isn't good for productivity either.

Not all studies cover the age of employees. I'm willing to bet the younger generations are more adapted to open offices. It's a generation that is wired to their phones listening to music. It's not hard to put up that psychological wall around you and stay focused.

A well designed office will supplement plenty of small enclosed conference rooms for employees to handle private conversations.

I'm willing to accept a diminishing trend when furniture manufactures dominate their product line with high wall office systems, but they aren't.

Well I am 26 and still at University, so I have some perspective on that. When I was studying architecture in an open studio with 15 other students that I could bounce ideas around with, it was great. When I am at the library studying pharmacology and everyone else around me is talking, playing music and movies, it's not so great.

chris08876 Aug 29, 2014 4:53 PM

Any word on this project? Emporis states it as a stale proposal. I want to add it to YIMBY as we created a Chicago section, but I'm debating if I should add it or not?

rgolch Aug 29, 2014 5:34 PM

I think someone posted in the Highrise thread that they were doing soil testing. Anyone wanna confirm?

Skyguy_7 Aug 29, 2014 5:55 PM

^^ There has been ongoing soil testing at the site for two weeks, but it's really anyone's guess..
http://www.chicagoarchitecture.org/2...ew-skyscraper/

harryc Aug 29, 2014 6:39 PM

Yesterday
 

colemonkee Aug 30, 2014 12:42 AM

Harry, your are reliably consistent. That woman in the black top and polka-dotten skirt is HOT. ;)

munchymunch Aug 30, 2014 1:11 AM

Wait is that... Donald

wierdaaron Nov 10, 2014 8:10 PM

Has anyone heard anything about 130 N Franklin lately? I've been hearing it's moving forward but nothing about start/end dates.

http://picture.phorio.com/photo/5336...t,-Chicago.jpg

edit: Didn't know it had a thread already: http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=199537

sentinel Nov 11, 2014 6:59 PM

According to our beloved Aaron, 130 N. Franklin MIGHT start construction this coming Spring??

Aaron, do you know if the original K+S renderings are still legit?

wierdaaron Nov 11, 2014 7:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sentinel (Post 6803618)
Aaron, do you know if the original K+S renderings are still legit?

I think there's a few Aarons here, but I'm guessing I'm the only one who wrote a story about that building today so you might mean me.

http://chicago.curbed.com/archives/2...ng-forward.php

We had a knowledgeable source say that it was moving forward, Reilly's office wouldn't confirm, so it's technically a rumor still. I haven't seen any updated renders. I'm afraid that will get VE'd into a turquoise rectangle, but all of the firms involved (tishman speyer, kreuk & sexton, gensler, thornton tomasetti) are big fish with lots of signature building experience between them, so I'm hopeful it'll be built as-designed.

LouisVanDerWright Nov 11, 2014 7:10 PM

This is the baddest ass of all the images of the building:

http://chicago.curbed.com/uploads/Sc...52.12%20AM.png

From our friends at chicago.curbed.com

SamInTheLoop Nov 11, 2014 7:31 PM

^ Nice. Just as RiverPoint and 150 kicked off this office construction cycle at nearly the same time, I really think we're going to have 151 and 130 Franklin both join the party in similar fashion in the near future............the Randolph/Franklin cluster, a rapid-fire second act to the Confluence office cluster....

LouisVanDerWright Nov 11, 2014 8:22 PM

^^^ Yeah, with 150 N Riverside 60% leased, the other developers with projects in the pipeline are licking their chops and trying to get to the front of line for the next wave of leasing to hit the market. O'Donnell is probably kicking himself for not setting up the foundations to take even more floors than he has been rumored to add. He would be able to possibly lock out another tower from the market for another year or two if he had more space available. The leasing numbers for 150 N Riverside are extremely impressive so far, looks like adventurous design is winning out over middle of the road design in this cycle. Oh well, better to completely sell out a project early than aim too high and crash and burn.

Via Chicago Nov 11, 2014 8:31 PM

wish this tapered off at the top. as it stands looks too bulky/squat. i guess the "shard" thing has been done to death but it would still look a little more sleek.

nothing on this site will ever make up for losing the stock exchange, but not much that can be done about that in 2014. boring generic blue glass office tower it is!

LouisVanDerWright Nov 11, 2014 11:38 PM

At least this design has the potential to be at least a somewhat worth successor to the CSX. Obviously no landmark can ever totally make up for something unique that was lost, but Chicago at least has a habit of replacing priceless landmarks with new priceless landmarks. This building could turn out quite fantastic if they use a high quality facade system.

rlw777 Nov 12, 2014 3:15 AM

I hope they keep this design this may turn out to be quite the diverse cycle for office towers.

wierdaaron Nov 12, 2014 3:36 AM

I don't think I've been this in love with a new tower design in a while. The two river offices being built aren't bad-looking and I'm very excited about the confluence getting filled out finally, but they don't really speak to me as expressions of art the way this does.

The real tragedy is that this will get lost in the skyline from any vantage. It deserves a better stage, like the river or fronting the park, where people would get to experience it in context and not only looking straight up at it from the sidewalk below it.

I know Spertus made a lot of people start to think differently about aesthetics of material and nonconventional forms, and I hope this moves that school forward. I think it's a great response to the recent "sliced glass" trend a la One11, Optima, and Loews hotel, without being too purposely contrarian like post-modernism was to modernism.

I'm going to start wishlisting buildings for immediate demolition to give this thing more visibility.

ardecila Nov 12, 2014 3:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wierdaaron (Post 6804157)
The real tragedy is that this will get lost in the skyline from any vantage. It deserves a better stage, like the river or fronting the park, where people would get to experience it in context and not only looking straight up at it from the sidewalk below it.

155 N Wacker's parklet and 130's low-rise bustle should provide enough vantage from the north.

225 West Randolph also has a generous setback on the Franklin and Randolph sides, so there will be pretty good views of this thing.

munchymunch Nov 12, 2014 4:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wierdaaron (Post 6804157)
I don't think I've been this in love with a new tower design in a while. The two river offices being built aren't bad-looking and I'm very excited about the confluence getting filled out finally, but they don't really speak to me as expressions of art the way this does.


Yes it is quite sexy.

Did the person you talk to confirm the height? I'm just wondering about any design change, which would be disappointing in my mind.

wierdaaron Nov 12, 2014 4:23 AM

Yeah, 696 feet came from a good source.

That puts it shorter than River Point and 150 N Riverside, but taller than any residential building under construction now.

munchymunch Nov 12, 2014 4:30 AM

Well maybe this is why they are about to start.

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/reale...or-700-million

Nice profit of 700 million




I don't think there is a design change this video wasn't up a few months ago......http://www.tishmanspeyer.com/propert...north-franklin

It's visible in the skyline in the video, dope as hell.

the urban politician Nov 12, 2014 5:43 AM

^ Holy crap. That video was seriously awesome

chris08876 Nov 12, 2014 6:07 AM

Beginning felt like a scene from the game "Watchdogs". One of the better rendering videos I've seen. :D

Kngkyle Nov 12, 2014 7:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the urban politician (Post 6804292)
^ Holy crap. That video was seriously awesome

Agreed. Probably the best I've seen. The music is great too. :cheers:

Skyguy_7 Nov 12, 2014 1:38 PM

Oh damn! Thanks for posting :cheers: The video was produced in 2014, per the ending credits. It's clear; this proposal is in full-on marketing mode. Not a chance they're redesigning it, at least for the time being.

By the way, the profit Tishman made on 353 was $315 Million, which still ain't chump change.

chicubs111 Nov 12, 2014 2:00 PM

Def one of the best videos for a proposed building..very thorough..and music was great..lol

rlw777 Nov 12, 2014 2:25 PM

Yup great fantastic video here's a screen grab from the vid

http://i.imgur.com/HhIEadl.jpg

UPChicago Nov 12, 2014 3:17 PM

super excited for this one!

SamInTheLoop Nov 12, 2014 4:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skyguy_7 (Post 6804445)
Oh damn! Thanks for posting :cheers: The video was produced in 2014, per the ending credits. It's clear; this proposal is in full-on marketing mode. Not a chance they're redesigning it, at least for the time being.

By the way, the profit Tishman made on 353 was $315 Million, which still ain't chump change.


I think the difference between the 2010 and under contract 2014 sales price was a bit higher, as I haven't seen a final purchase price (or tentative, as it's still of course under contract, with I would assume a likely closing date sometime just prior to year-end).........all we know at the moment is the price is somewhat north of $700 mil......

Regardless, this is yet another very strong signal to the market (specifically to Buck, Tishman, Hines, others) that it is time to build, build, build (in addition to the two office towers already under construction)........will have more to say about this in the high-rise compilation thread.....

The Pimp Nov 12, 2014 6:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rlw777 (Post 6804494)
Yup great fantastic video here's a screen grab from the vid

http://i.imgur.com/HhIEadl.jpg

Clean and beautiful!

SamInTheLoop Nov 12, 2014 6:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wierdaaron (Post 6804216)
Yeah, 696 feet came from a good source.

That puts it shorter than River Point and 150 N Riverside, but taller than any residential building under construction now.


I don't doubt for a second that the 696' figure is that actual working height of the current design here. In the video on Tishman's website, you can clearly see that some of the shots from inside the rendered very high floor interior looking out over the cityscape are clearly showing a view from over 700' up (look at the angle looking down on 155 N Wacker, look at how it looks down over the way to 77 W Wacker....and mind you, this is from an actual occupied office floor, not from the top of the parapet or anything.....

....However, that doesn' mean a whole lot, they could have the vantage point off - its just a rendering....there's no law that says the height implied needs to be realistic, or it could be very realistic, and the height of the working design when the video was made earlier this year could have been taller. At the end of the day, the actual planned heights of these towers are in flux in the months before construction begins/financing package wrapped (150 Riverside, RiverPoint, 151 N Franklin), and as we know even in the months after construction begins (150 Riverside at minimum)............

ChiPsy Nov 12, 2014 8:34 PM

Fun video -- with a few revelations about the future:

Metra takes over the El stop at Washington & Wells (0:26)

Blondes (but no one else in town) develop a propensity to flip their hair (1:17, 2:02, and 3:34)

and Garrett Kelleher still visits from time to time (3:20) ;)

Tom Servo Nov 13, 2014 1:31 PM

Tishman Speyer kicks ass. Krueck+Sexton kicks dick.

http://www.ksarch.com/projects/130NF...es/image_4.jpg
ksarch.com

:tup::tup::tup::tup::tup:
:cheers::cheers::cheers::cheers:
:yes:

Skyguy_7 Jan 22, 2015 2:05 PM

Positive news here
 
http://www.chicagoarchitecture.org/2...orth-franklin/

Zapatan Jan 22, 2015 3:16 PM

Nice I like this one!

rlw777 Jan 22, 2015 4:13 PM

Awesome this one is a beauty

hawainpanda Jan 22, 2015 6:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skyguy_7 (Post 6884894)

not entirely sure how much that really means in regards tot he development of the building but agree with others, this building is fantastic, would love to see it and 151 N franklin fill in prime spaces in the loop that are currently parking lots

emathias Jan 22, 2015 6:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hayward (Post 6152592)
Yes, the open office plan doesn't work for all companies, especially places that deal with privacy. But it's striking a balance between well daylit environments, good airflow, and sound control. Being in a tall enclosure with low ceilings and static air isn't good for productivity either.

Not all studies cover the age of employees. I'm willing to bet the younger generations are more adapted to open offices. It's a generation that is wired to their phones listening to music. It's not hard to put up that psychological wall around you and stay focused.

A well designed office will supplement plenty of small enclosed conference rooms for employees to handle private conversations.

I'm willing to accept a diminishing trend when furniture manufactures dominate their product line with high wall office systems, but they aren't.

I'm 41, so not exactly the "younger generation," but I'm often more in line with the younger generation than people my age as far as preferences go.

I strongly prefer an open office plan. It's probably partly due to me working in the trading industry where that is pretty much the standard, but better air and light, easier identification of where people I need are, and easier for people who need me to find me all make it so much more efficient than high-wall cubes.

People talk about "distractions" and such, but the privacy of a high-walled cube also makes it easier for people to slack off, which, in my experience, more than offsets any improvement fewer distractions allow from an organization standpoint. And some "distractions" are actually beneficial to a business if they are keeping workers informed and working on the necessary parts of a project when they need to be. Isolation can make change harder simply because people are less aware of what others are doing.

This is going to sound bad, and I don't aim it any anyone in this thread, but it's also been my experience that the people who gripe the most about open plan offices are often the least-productive workers. The only real exception are people doing work that requires privacy, such as certain kinds of law, HR departments, executives, etc. And even then, in the case of executives when you're visible as an executive you can usually muster more out of your workers than you can if they never see you.

So, basically, better light, better air, and having actual line-of-sight of what your team is doing is a huge advantage that, in my experience, more than offsets the switching-costs of additional distractions and disruptions brought on by open-plan office layouts.

Ryanrule Jan 22, 2015 7:40 PM

the only people who like open floor plans are loudmouths in sales and marketing, and bosses who like to spy on employees instead of managing.


All times are GMT. The time now is 6:38 AM.

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