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)

ardecila Jun 19, 2014 5:49 PM

Does Chicago really have any large Federal employers in the suburbs? I'm not aware of any.

Chi-Sky21 Jun 19, 2014 5:54 PM

Yes, because i see NO PROBLEM with a large federal office situated right above a major expressway. Why not have a target just painted on the building?

BraveNewWorld Jun 19, 2014 6:14 PM

delete

BraveNewWorld Jun 19, 2014 6:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SamInTheLoop (Post 6624304)
^ Yeah, this is just for the post office building itself. This is precisely what Sterling Bay does - only this is by far their largest project yet. The $500 mil. price tag quoted actually doesn't surpise me. Redevelopment (this does not necessarily mean any new construction, this word is also often used in the adaptive reuse/complete rehab sense) of a 2.7 mil sf building into modern office space - this is going to take an awful lot of work. But, to LVDW's point, $500 mil. is the approximate construction cost (maybe just slightly higher), than the 1.1-1.2 mil sf new office towers that are about to begin construction. So you have the cost basis difference for your rental rate advantage - however, at the same time, the new towers and projects like these (the gut rehab of older industrial and/or unique extra large floor plate structures) are not - for the most part (obviously there are some exceptions) - attracting the same types of tenants, with the latter attracting technology and mainly old-line consumer product corporations, and of course the former your traditional law, financial, professional and business services firms that typically anchor or otherwise locate in new Class A tower construction.

^^^ Sears - I guess anything is possible, but that would probably be the most unexciting large corporate relocation to downtown ever - a company that is in the midst of its painful, slow-motion and likely irreversible death spiral....

Funny how something can change overnight from being a pipe dream to a very real project. Super excited about this now. Sterling Bay is not only the perfect - but maybe also the only - developer that I have a high level of confidence in to take on this project. Hopefully Davies' actual involvement in the redevelopment is quite passive, and he just collects his negotiated return from his contribution of the property. Sterling Bay needs to completely run this show. Of course just talking about the actual Post Office building itself. Any new construction is still firmly in the "concept/pipe dream" category. However, when the redevelopment of the Post Office is completed and occupied, and generating a lot of activity and new energy into this corner of downtown that sorely needs it - large new construction on the adjacent parcels could be entirely feasible.

While the new highrises may seem like a pipe dream, this deal gives this whole project a certain level of credibility, that means this whole thing might be a legitimate proposal. The development it will be bringing to downtown alone is enough to get excited.

Bottom line, this is big news!

hawainpanda Jun 20, 2014 3:01 PM

To be clear, I'm very much hoping that the redevelopment of the post office is done, but also realized with this building offering 3 million sqft of new office space, it would basically mean that we can expect it to heavily compete with new office constructions in the future and probably decrease the chances of new office construction as well. I may be overthinking this, but I would rather Chicago get new office towers that can add to the chicago skyline.

DonMendigo Jun 20, 2014 3:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hawainpanda (Post 6625977)
To be clear, I'm very much hoping that the redevelopment of the post office is done, but also realized with this building offering 3 million sqft of new office space, it would basically mean that we can expect it to heavily compete with new office constructions in the future and probably decrease the chances of new office construction as well. I may be overthinking this, but I would rather Chicago get new office towers that can add to the chicago skyline.

Got to disagree here. A development like this at this site would do a lot for Chicago. It pushes density/development/people in a new direction that really has potential. The area to the south/southwest of this is pretty underutilized and dying to be developed. Union station is right there. The blue line Clinton stop is right there. If anything, imagine how awesome it would be to see a highrise go up just to the east of the building and its canyon effect on the Chicago river looking south. That alone would be great.

The gaps in the loop/river north are extremely likely to get filled in with high rises eventually no matter what happens here. Plus, if I really can't see Walgreens pulling the trigger on anything downtown other than this venue. I just can't see them moving into a new skyscraper.

All of that said, it's always been my pipe dream that the post office gets redeveloped into a massive Chicago 1920s gangster themed casino. :D

SamInTheLoop Jun 20, 2014 3:32 PM

^^ To a certain extent some of that competition is inevitable (either direct and/or thru indirect market mechanisms), but see my post above re different types of tenants being attracted to historic adaptive re-use vs. trophy/class a new construction towers.....differences in target tenant set mean that these two different types of projects are not interchangeable.....they're far from direct substitutes, so competition overall is far from completely overlapping and direct...

^ Spot on regarding Walgreens not being a likely candidate to anchor (or for that matter completely occupy) a new tower - and it's not just Walgreens - it's really any company like Walgreens - large, old economy, publicly traded corporations - especially those in consumer products - and to some extent consumer services ex-financial as well - are just not good candidates in modern times to occupy expensive, brand new trophy/class a space - such corporations in aggregate just don't go for that type of expense these days, and their shareholders and wall st analysts (which is what really drives their strict cost controls) would largely frown at such 'lavish' expenditure for new real estate.....not to say there are not - and will not continue to be - exceptions to this 'rule' - there are always exceptions.....but in general, developers firmly realize that these types of companies are far from likely new tower anchors....

jdcpamba Jun 20, 2014 4:38 PM

To answer the poster's question about whether the federal government has any large offices in the suburbs, I believe the IRS has a decent sized presence by 355 and Butterfield Road.

ChiTownWonder Jun 21, 2014 4:35 PM

i don't think that i would want to see a megatall there anyway, for the sake of the skyline. it would stand out too much. yes the spire stands out too but at least its in the middle of the skyline not on the side like this one. i would love to see a supertall here though. maybe a 1200 footer and hopefully this could lead to a development in the south branch of the river and some taller buildings on south state street by the central station skyline, to sort of connect the two together.

Ch.G, Ch.G Jun 21, 2014 6:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SamInTheLoop (Post 6626026)
^ Spot on regarding Walgreens not being a likely candidate to anchor (or for that matter completely occupy) a new tower - and it's not just Walgreens - it's really any company like Walgreens - large, old economy, publicly traded corporations - especially those in consumer products - and to some extent consumer services ex-financial as well - are just not good candidates in modern times to occupy expensive, brand new trophy/class a space - such corporations in aggregate just don't go for that type of expense these days, and their shareholders and wall st analysts (which is what really drives their strict cost controls) would largely frown at such 'lavish' expenditure for new real estate.....not to say there are not - and will not continue to be - exceptions to this 'rule' - there are always exceptions.....but in general, developers firmly realize that these types of companies are far from likely new tower anchors....

You're probably right. I know the young and talented prefer the lifestyle an urban location would afford but I don't know that there are enough of them leaving or shying away from Walgreens to necessitate a move downtown, though I do think it would help them in the long-run. Hopefully, we're wrong.

LouisVanDerWright Jun 21, 2014 7:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ch.G, Ch.G (Post 6627161)
You're probably right. I know the young and talented prefer the lifestyle an urban location would afford but I don't know that there are enough of them leaving or shying away from Walgreens to necessitate a move downtown, though I do think it would help them in the long-run. Hopefully, we're wrong.

I think you might be misreading his post. He is not saying walgreens won't move downtown, he is saying they would never occupy a brand new tower because that simply doesn't make sense for them. They would be an excellent candidate to occupy the old post office or an older office building like the Sears. They just will never be willing to pay the obscene rents for a new construction class A+ building because their shareholders would revolt. The margins huge companies like walgreens operates on are surprisingly thin and paying 50% more rent on 1 million SF of office adds up quick.

ardecila Jun 22, 2014 2:11 AM

Walgreen shareholders are already threatening revolt...

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/artic...re-at-walgreen

Zapatan Jun 22, 2014 4:09 AM

I guess that's not really good news for this project :shrug:

SamInTheLoop Jun 22, 2014 7:31 PM

^ No, this is not necessarily bad news at all for the project.....this stuff seems to, for whatever reason, generate loads of suspect conclusions and confusion.....

wierdaaron Jun 22, 2014 8:38 PM

Not a business finance expert but the way Walgreens shareholders boss around the company like panicked chicken littles seems unusual to me.

Anyway, Walgreens and the post office have only recently crossed radars. I get they'd be just fine without a signature tenant like that, just as Merch survives (thrives, now) without it being known for just one tenant. I can't think of any huge companies who might want to move there, but can think of many smaller companies who'd jump on it.

What will be interesting to see is if that area, the "near west loop" (between the river and kennedy) starts connecting with the "actual west loop" (west of the kennedy, aka Sterling Bayland). The Post Office/Union Station/Olgilve area is kind of a weird disconnected chunk of city that separates several neighborhoods and keeps them from flowing together. Pumping some life into the Post Office could have a big impact on the city's ecology as a whole.

This all makes me wonder why the Sears Tower area has been so bland, since that's an awful lot of people in one square block who you'd think would support a local scene a lot more vibrant than the one it has now. Everything around there seems to cater to it more as a tourist destination than the workplace of umpteen thousand high paid professionals. Maybe the people who work there don't go outside for lunch because they're three elevators away from the street.

ardecila Jun 22, 2014 9:21 PM

Yeah the southwest Loop is still kinda sleepy. My only theory is that Madison and Washington have the highest pedestrian traffic because of the historical presence of Daley Plaza, Marshall Fields, and now Millennium Park (which all draw suburbanites from the Metra stations). All other east-west streets are kinda service-oriented, none moreso than Van Buren.

It's also the downtown manifestation of the North Side favored quarter... With few exceptions the north side is prosperous and successful out to Lake Forest and Barrington while the South Side is pretty poor-to-middle class out to New Lenox and Peotone. Recent development in the South Loop, University Village, and Hyde Park have been glimmers of hope but southward gentrification is still very much in its infancy.

untitledreality Jun 22, 2014 11:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wierdaaron (Post 6627897)
This all makes me wonder why the Sears Tower area has been so bland.

No one lives around there. For the most part, the SW corner of the loop is an urban office park.

wierdaaron Jun 23, 2014 12:25 AM

^True. River North probably took off because there was a crush of residents and workers. I guess that area might change eventually with that new development on Van Buren and Wells.

rlw777 Jun 23, 2014 1:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila (Post 6627923)
Yeah the southwest Loop is still kinda sleepy. My only theory is that Madison and Washington have the highest pedestrian traffic because of the historical presence of Daley Plaza, Marshall Fields, and now Millennium Park (which all draw suburbanites from the Metra stations). All other east-west streets are kinda service-oriented, none moreso than Van Buren.

It's also the downtown manifestation of the North Side favored quarter... With few exceptions the north side is prosperous and successful out to Lake Forest and Barrington while the South Side is pretty poor-to-middle class out to New Lenox and Peotone. Recent development in the South Loop, University Village, and Hyde Park have been glimmers of hope but southward gentrification is still very much in its infancy.

Southwest loop is less attractive for many reasons.

1) the rail yard
2) electrical station across from river city
2) poor public transit
3) poor integration to the street grid (I am looking at you dearborn park)
4) the Freeway

Just doing something about the rail yard (perhaps stacking several of those lines underground to allow room for building over top) and building a new metra station there could set off some real development in the south loop and perhaps encourage Davies to build big at old main.

LouisVanDerWright Jun 23, 2014 4:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zapatan (Post 6627571)
I guess that's not really good news for this project :shrug:

Not necessarily, it could actually be good news for the Walgreens rumor. All that article is saying is that Walgreens shareholders are demanding a shakeup of business practices and the management team is scrambling to deliver on those demands. That could indicate that this rumor is one of those "big shakeups" they plan to deliver to their shareholders. They could be planning to take significantly less space with a much high density and thereby cut costs with lower RE costs.

le_brew Jun 28, 2014 12:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila (Post 6624732)
Does Chicago really have any large Federal employers in the suburbs? I'm not aware of any.

US census bureau regional office (one among about 12 nationally) is located in oak brook. when the 10 year decennial approaches, they expand considerably, temporarily (for abt 4 years) to a centralized locale downtown. i worked for them last time; we were anchored at citicorp ctr.

whether they've considered relocation to a permanent large facility? that's beyond me.

correction: they downsized to six regional offices, so this is a relatively large gov't presence in suburbs.

denizen467 Jun 28, 2014 4:18 AM

^ Also I think there's some bigass US post office facility out in Carol Stream or Palatine or somewhere. But then I highly doubt the Old Main Post Office would be redeveloped for use by ... a post office.


Argonne?

munchymunch Jul 7, 2014 2:31 AM

A little more info
 
http://www.rejournals.com/2014/07/03...n-post-office/

Quote:

With $500 million going towards the first phase of renovations, Sterling Bay and IPDNA’s vision is to convert the property into 2.7-million-square-feet of modern office space and retail amenities. Gloor says they are hoping to start construction fourth quarter of this year. “It’s a gut rehab, so literally an all new building system, windows, and roof. Everything in the building is going to be brand new. We’re restoring the main lobby entrance, which is beautiful.” As for the next phases, and how much they will cost, of revamping the historic post office, Gloor said they were not sure when they would begin.

As far as prospective tenants go, Gloor said that there is an enormous amount of interest in the building from a variety of office tenants. Gloor says that construction on the building will take about two and a half to three years, and estimates early 2018 for the revamping of the once prominent post office to open to the public.
from ReJournal

ardecila Jul 7, 2014 4:06 AM

That's nice and all, but where does Sterling get $500M without a single tenant commitment?

Setting a date to start work sounds pretty damn rosy unless Sterling is on the cusp with several tenants (or one massive one).

LouisVanDerWright Jul 7, 2014 4:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila (Post 6643973)
That's nice and all, but where does Sterling get $500M without a single tenant commitment?

Setting a date to start work sounds pretty damn rosy unless Sterling is on the cusp with several tenants (or one massive one).

Yeah, either it is a load of bullshit or there is something they are not telling us. My guess is that if they have really set the hook with Walgreen then we are going to hear about it before they break ground on full scale rehab of this building. The chatter on this project continues to get intriguingly more positive IMO. I don't want to get my hopes up, but Sterling Bay isn't a group that tends to bandy about specific project start dates unless they have something hot on their hands.

In fact, they've likely been involved with this project for a long time prior to the recent public announcement of their JV with Davies. If you notice, not a peep of their interest in partnering with Davies was leaked until they had already inked a deal. I doubt they'd be claiming they are getting started this year unless they had some anchor tenants in the bag and contingent term sheets for the financing from lenders.

PS: It is also worth noting that Sterling Bay has filled up Fulton Market Cold Storage. They certainly seemed to have the edge over just about everyone in the market with the project and it is likely there are a lot of other tenants clamoring to sign a deal with Sterling Bay. The prospect overflow alone from FMCS could be enough to start driving this project.

LouisVanDerWright Jul 7, 2014 4:36 AM

Sorry for the double post, but related question: Does the Old Post Office lobby run the entire N-S length of the building? If so this renovation could result in an excellent new pedestrian connection between the Near West Loop and the bullshit DS zoning to the south. I have a feeling a little rezoning will be in order for this area after Sterling Bay fills this place up.

ardecila Jul 7, 2014 6:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright (Post 6643984)
Sorry for the double post, but related question: Does the Old Post Office lobby run the entire N-S length of the building? If so this renovation could result in an excellent new pedestrian connection between the Near West Loop and the bullshit DS zoning to the south. I have a feeling a little rezoning will be in order for this area after Sterling Bay fills this place up.

No... the ground floor was basically a large open staging area with truck docks and such, plus conveyors to upper levels for mail processing. Plus the ground floor is divided in two by the Eisenhower tunnel, so you can't have a continuous N-S passage unless you go up a level (or maybe down).


Here's a cool tidbit: sometime in 2012, Davies' team did tests on window restoration. These old steel windows are becoming rare, but I believe they are protected at the Post Office by some deed restrictions that were written when USPS first sold the building.

restored window at center
http://chicagowindowexpert.com/wp-co...view-uspo1.jpg
src

LouisVanDerWright Jul 7, 2014 1:08 PM

^^^ Ah, makes sense, it would be nice if they constructed some kind of Merch Mart like arcade through the second floor of the building (perhaps they are planning this anyhow as a part of the retail component?) that would allow pedestrians to cross the expressway without being subjected to the grody underpasses in that area.



Also, that window looks totally baller. I never noticed that they were essentially triple hung steel frames before. Even that little glimmer of shiny steel (is it stainless steel?) foretells things to come. This building will probably have a 1 Prudential like transformation from grimy to virtually brand new!

rigby Jul 7, 2014 5:00 PM

If Sterling Bay is involved it ,with his history and reputation than this is more than speculation. Looking forward to what's in store for this property.

ardecila Jul 7, 2014 6:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright (Post 6644101)
^^^ Ah, makes sense, it would be nice if they constructed some kind of Merch Mart like arcade through the second floor of the building (perhaps they are planning this anyhow as a part of the retail component?) that would allow pedestrians to cross the expressway without being subjected to the grody underpasses in that area.



Also, that window looks totally baller. I never noticed that they were essentially triple hung steel frames before. Even that little glimmer of shiny steel (is it stainless steel?) foretells things to come. This building will probably have a 1 Prudential like transformation from grimy to virtually brand new!

I agree with this, but I think the main pedestrian corridor will be along the river in the new liner building (or along the riverwalk at the lower level). It does look like they will make some improvements to the Canal underpass, and turn those truck loading areas into plazas.

The window is not stainless steel, just plain old rolled steel. I believe the restored unit was powder-coated though.

LouisVanDerWright Jul 8, 2014 3:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila (Post 6644472)
I agree with this, but I think the main pedestrian corridor will be along the river in the new liner building (or along the riverwalk at the lower level). It does look like they will make some improvements to the Canal underpass, and turn those truck loading areas into plazas.

The window is not stainless steel, just plain old rolled steel. I believe the restored unit was powder-coated though.

What kind of powder coating? Like a grey or is there some kind of clear coat they can do?

ardecila Jul 8, 2014 3:26 AM

Closeup view. The color is not what I would choose...

http://chicagowindowexpert.com/wp-co...botcorner1.gif
src

ChiTownWonder Jul 8, 2014 6:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila (Post 6645211)
Closeup view. The color is not what I would choose...

http://chicagowindowexpert.com/wp-co...botcorner1.gif
src

That purple is tacky, but it is an improvement nonetheless. i would have choose an olive green to sort of mimic the old oxidized bronze used in the skyscrapers of that era

Also they are calling this renovation phase one, does that include the tower also planed for phase one in the beginning?

SamInTheLoop Jul 8, 2014 7:51 PM

^ Those towers are still very much firmly grounded in make-believe. This is an adaptive re-use of the existing ex-post office building.

ChiTownWonder Jul 15, 2014 7:19 AM

Quote:

At one point, he envisioned a complex of high-rises, hotel rooms, apartments, stores, restaurants and entertainment venues surrounding a 120-story skyscraper that would have been the tallest in North America. Much of that fell by the wayside as Mr. Davies struggled to attract tenants and financing.
this makes it seem like the new Towers are now out of the plan, but...

Quote:

Sterling Bay's involvement also brings credibility to a project some have dismissed as a pipe dream. It already has pulled expectations back into the real world, focusing initially on a $500 million office-and-retail redevelopment of the post office building itself. That seems far more doable than Mr. Davies' grandiose original vision of a $3.5 billion, 16-million-square-foot extravaganza sprawling over 20 acres.
the first part of the paragraph makes it sound like the original huge proposal is still on as it is, just the project had switched to more successful management. but reading the rest of the paragraph it sounds like the author has dismissed the idea of the surrounding areas being developed.

so what gives? :???: i know this is a step by step ordeal, but are the developers still interested in the original humongous plan, or have they given up on it after the first try failed?

More here vvv
http://www.chicagobusiness.com/artic...ld-post-office

Mr Downtown Jul 15, 2014 2:55 PM

The original huge plan was never anything more than a fever dream.

Steely Dan Jul 15, 2014 3:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChiTownWonder (Post 6655015)
so what gives? :???: i know this is a step by step ordeal, but are the developers still interested in the original humongous plan, or have they given up on it after the first try failed?

what part of the term "pipe dream" do you not understand?


_________________________________________________________________


as it is now more than clear that this is just a massive redevelopment plan of the old post office structure itself for now, i'm moving this thread out of the highrise proposal sub-forum and into the general development sub-forum to avoid any further confusion by those who thought the super-tall pipe dream plans were ever anything more than pipe dreams.

wierdaaron Jul 15, 2014 3:36 PM

It's not entirely outside the realm of possibility that if the Sterling Bay redevelopment is wildly popular they might think about expansion down the road, but I'd wager that they've taken all that stuff off the table in their minds to focus on the first thing first. My guess is we'll see a 600 W Chicago style refactor into flexible office space and maybe some restaurant or retail spaces along the street, but they'll leave the building shell itself intact.

They might be thinking about something like Merch Mart's food court or Illinois Center's tangled indoor pedestrian walkways, but that could be a bit outdated.

LouisVanDerWright Jul 15, 2014 4:29 PM

Yeah, there WILL be highrises on the surrounding lots, but certainly not anytime soon and they will probably look absolutely nothing like the pipe dream renderings proposed by Davies. Until the 2.7 million SF of the Post Office building itself is fully or mostly leased, I doubt there will be any talk of towers unless they maybe try to sneak a hotel or a apartments in on the sliver of land next to the building by the river. 2.7 million SF is a TON of space and could take quite a while to lease even if Walgreens comes an gobbles up half of it. Keep in mind that this is almost as big as River Point and 400 N Riverside combined.


Quote:

They might be thinking about something like Merch Mart's food court or Illinois Center's tangled indoor pedestrian walkways, but that could be a bit outdated.
You know I think we will probably see an entirely different model here. This is a very unique site and I am excited to see what Sterling Bay will do to make this building more practical. I was always bothered by the talk of butchering up this block of space with couryards or light courts, they simply don't make floorplates like this anymore. Once we chop it up, we never get any more space like this. Sterling Bay will likely keep it almost exactly as is and find creative ways to make it efficient for office use.

After seeing what they are doing with Fulton Cold Storage, I am convinced that they will find a way to make it work out. The common areas in that building look like they will be pretty flashy and they didn't even have a sexy art deco multi story lobby to work off of.

BraveNewWorld Jul 15, 2014 6:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steely Dan (Post 6655316)
what part of the term "pipe dream" do you not understand?


_________________________________________________________________


as it is now more than clear that this is just a massive redevelopment plan of the old post office structure itself for now, i'm moving this thread out of the highrise proposal sub-forum and into the general development sub-forum to avoid any further confusion by those who thought the super-tall pipe dream plans were ever anything more than pipe dreams.

I don't know, Sterling spoke about the expansion plans and said they would probably come after the redevelopment. The 300m expansion might be under actual consideration, and more then a pipe dream.

Steely Dan Jul 15, 2014 6:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BraveNewWorld (Post 6655776)
I don't know, Sterling spoke about the expansion plans and said they would probably come after the redevelopment. The 300m expansion might be under actual consideration, and more then a pipe dream.

if anything ever comes from those plans, then we can have that conversation 10 or 20 or however many years from now.

in the meantime, this is currently a project to renovate and reopen the old abandoned post office structure.

we can put the talk of a 2,000' tall adjacent skyscraper to bed for a good long while, perhaps forever.

ChiTownWonder Jul 16, 2014 4:59 AM

I honestly don't care what goes there anymore (to an extent), as long as it gets developed. This is a huge piece of land near the famous loop that is totally underutilized. develop the area and maybe it can be the start of a new neighborhood, River South:tup:

EDIT: I don't feel the same about the Chicago Spire site, that is a very special piece of land, and something very special should be done there

munchymunch Aug 6, 2014 2:32 AM

http://www.dailyherald.com/article/2...ess/140809223/


from the article
Quote:

Walgreen executives talked with staffers from Gov. Pat Quinn's office about making the Old Main Post Office site in Chicago's Loop its new headquarters, but the discussions have not gone any further, said a source who asked to remain anonymous. Tax incentives were not yet on the table, the source told the Daily Herald in May.

Walgreen, which has about 3,500 workers here, already is in the state's Edge tax credit program after officials signed a deal a couple of years ago to invest about $75 million to expand its Deerfield campus and add about 500 workers.

Walgreen spokesman Michael Polzin said in May that the company had no plans to move, but added: "We are always conducting due diligence on our corporate footprint and have done studies in the past. But we are not engaged with developers on any new locations for our corporate headquarters as part of that due process."

Busy Bee Aug 6, 2014 2:48 AM

At this point I think there's a 1/3 chance they move downtown, a 1/3 chance they stay in Deerfield and a 1/3 chance they move to Switzerland to avoid paying taxes.

ChiTownWonder Aug 6, 2014 3:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Busy Bee (Post 6681722)
At this point I think there's a 1/3 chance they move downtown, a 1/3 chance they stay in Deerfield and a 1/3 chance they move to Switzerland to avoid paying taxes.

I hope they move to Chicago. it would be nice to have more large well known company HQ's in the city. there are too many company HQ's in the suburbs. not only that but it might make for a potential supertall on the site?

XIII Aug 6, 2014 6:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Busy Bee (Post 6681722)
At this point I think there's a 1/3 chance they move downtown, a 1/3 chance they stay in Deerfield and a 1/3 chance they move to Switzerland to avoid paying taxes.

I wouldn't go putting your money on that Swiss move.
News Story

Its looking like Deerfield or downtown for them. A REALLY smart move as 25% of their income comes from US public health programs.

SamInTheLoop Aug 6, 2014 1:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Busy Bee (Post 6681722)
At this point I think there's a 1/3 chance they move downtown, a 1/3 chance they stay in Deerfield and a 1/3 chance they move to Switzerland to avoid paying taxes.



I can tell there is still confusion about what these corporate tax inversions are about - this was not a potential operational HQ move - it was essentially little more than a prospective move on paper strictly for tax purposes - not a move that really impacts real estate decisions of its operational HQ (the HQ that actually employees thousands of employees and occupies probably one million sq ft + of real estate.......what I'm saying is there was a 40% chance of them inverting, a 2/3 chance of them moving downtown and a 1/3 chance of them staying in the suburbs.....(these are not supposed to add up to 100%!)

Moot now, but I think they made the smart decision as well (although has nothing to do with where their operational HQ will be 4 years from now)......

emathias Aug 6, 2014 2:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by XIII (Post 6681867)
...
Its looking like Deerfield or downtown for them. A REALLY smart move as 25% of their income comes from US public health programs.

Not to mention that I'm not a big fan of boycotts, but I would personally have stopped using Walgreens if they had inverted. Seeing how little I really care about boycotting places relative to some of the people I know, I'm sure I wouldn't have been alone.

rgolch Aug 6, 2014 4:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SamInTheLoop (Post 6681946)
I can tell there is still confusion about what these corporate tax inversions are about - this was not a potential operational HQ move - it was essentially little more than a prospective move on paper strictly for tax purposes - not a move that really impacts real estate decisions of its operational HQ.

That may be true for other inversion, but that was absolutely NOT the case in the Walgreens situation. There was ABSOLUTELY a power grab by Stefano Pessina to wrest control of the combined company, and stockholders and investor definitely wanted him to control the entity. If you read any of the recent business news regarding what's be happening, there have been a few recent departures at Walgreens to allow some Alliance people to have representation. They didn't move because they realized it would be a PR nightmare.

LouisVanDerWright Aug 6, 2014 7:42 PM

Yeah, at this point who knows where Walgreen ends up, but I can certainly see the appeal of the Old Post Office. It's probably pretty much 50/50 at this point. Hopefully there will be an announcement soon.


All times are GMT. The time now is 9:52 PM.

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