A few new renderings?
 

I don't remember seeing these before:

http://chicago.curbed.com/2016/8/17/...und-next-month

And it sound like the developer has confirmed the previously reported September ground breaking target. :cheers:

I never before noticed that a little stream will run through the development. Nice

seems like maybe a river water situation

Long time lurker, first time poster...I was just curious if anyone has heard if a grocery store was being considered as one of the retail components or would the options along Roosevelt be the solution although not really in the immediate area? Seems like all the units being added with this project could warrant that. Maybe down the road in the later phases?

Welcome!

It's way too soon for that. Developers don't usually release the names of perspective tenants.

^ No, but announcing generically that there will be larger-scale retail tenant spaces, or even announcing that a key amenity like a grocery store will be included, is not unusual.

It's a good question - some real critical mass of residential is building up between Clark and the river. Maybe not enough for a full-scale grocery store, what with Target and others nearby, but some kind of limited market could be a successful component down the road.

I would say it is very likely, although perhaps not in the first phase. We wont know for awhile still.

I asked Ralph Johnson about that at last night's Friends of Downtown event and he was vague. Apparently he wanted to have the guy from Lend Lease (sitting in the back) speak up, but he didn't. Johnson just said such retail spaces might be closer to Roosevelt, and also said that master plans evolve.

It would be nice if that big open space between Roosevelt and 18th were actually turned into a park. Also build a big brick wall along the other side of the river to block the rail yards from view.

:koko:
You must be joking.
Have you not been paying attention to the premium development along Chicago's downtown riverfront over the past 20 years?
And as for the wall of the rail yards. Well thats just disrespectful of all things that made Chicago great and continue to be great about the city. Why not put a christo sheet over the 21st street bridge?

Huh? What? :koko:

There's a park 1/4 mile to the east buy the name of Grant.

Love the boardwalk along the river. Good choice to have a natural tapering from land to water.

From the south end of River City, it's a .76 mile walk to Grant Park. It's a full mile to the nearest athletic field.

That's why I fought the British School change so fiercely.

Riverline Site

http://i.imgur.com/hrzM9Ucl.jpg


Why's the whole area covered in a smoothed-over layer smashed up bricks and debris? It looks intentionally put there. Why?

I forget what it's specifically called, but I believe the bricks are there to support the weight of the caisson rigs.

Someone else on here can chime in with a better explanation. :cheers:

The site has been leveled - makes drilling holes straight down much easier ;-) . also covers up the numerous holes from where stuff was dug up (see pile on the left of your shot).

(nice color btw).

I dont like the look of those load bearing angled columns that meet at the ground... UGH.

I believe the debris is called "brickbat" which is basically just a term for brick rubble usually re purposed from demo jobs. The process of clearing out and leveling the site with brickbat is called "potholing" which is self explanatory. You don't want your multi million dollar equipment sinking in a soft spot and tipping over.

And this is what happens when you don't take the extra precautions to set them evenly in soft ground (of course, drilling into bedrock always helps)

http://archpaper.com/2016/08/san-fra...tower-sinking/

Permit issued yesterday for the foundation of one of the buildings.... 27 stories, 452 units :)

^ Nice. 'Bout time!

Yep. For anyone wondering too, it's Building D, which is basically at Polk & Wells right near where 801 S Financial is U/C (http://chicago.curbed.com/2016/3/25/...wer-south-loop).

The article talks about 33 stories and more units. Downsizing?

I think you're getting confused. Riverline is not 801 S Financial Pl. Riverline, at least this building is 720 S Wells. I was providing a link to 801 S Financial so people will remember what that project was (which is a floor or two off the ground now).

There's new signage up just West of the corner of Wells and Harrison. It's big, eye catching and a beauty of a rendering!

^^^Is the rendering one we haven't seen before?

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/reale...ouch-the-river

It's the top one on Bvic's post, above

Are you sure? The permit is for a 27 story building. The first two from his pics above are under 20 stories.

They're talking about what's in the rendering that's on a banner up at the site, not the permitted building.

Kinda reminds me of Parco Vittoria in Milan. The lowrise portions at least.

http://www.interimmobili.it/public/gallery/P1/10.jpg

Source: http://www.interimmobili.it

Nice renders this is really going to change the south loop and trigger the beginning of a whole new side of Chicago. This project is like adding downtown Evanston in one parcel of land lol (I'm exaggerating) but can you guys imagine what related Midwest has in stored on the much bigger parcel south of this, going to be like a city within a city.

^^^^^^
http://sf.curbed.com/2016/8/9/124167...ng-sf-building

https://s21.postimg.org/9i7lndz7r/Cr...Uk_AAw8t_L.jpg

Will be interesting to see what the owners of Harrison & Wells do - hopefully go big.

IMO, this is slightly underwhelming for the area. Shame they really can't really capitalize on this location ( The huge, elongated tract on which this is being built on) . 7,000 units would be the sweet spot as opposed to 3,700. Given the walkability of the area, in the CBD or on the fringes of it, would be worthwhile.

Gonna have to go and disagree completely. There isn't even enough infrastructure in place to manage 3700 new units let alone 7000. 7000 units would cause such a clusterfuck in new traffic on very small and out of the way routes. That would create so many problems, also the demand for 7000 units wouldn't fulfill the potential of the area. There is no demand for 7000 units there, therefore there isn't a missed potential.

Agree with this... infrastructure can follow... people adapt... for god's sake, it's in walking distance to everything...

If I was to move back home, this neighborhood would be up near the top of places to live....
:tup:

Ok trying to determine the population density...

13 acres = 0.0203 square miles;
3700 units. Let's conservatively say 1.5 residents per unit. That's 5,550 residents.
5,550/0.0203 = 274,000 people per square mile.

Assuming my math is correct... isn't this plenty dense?

IIRC, that's denser than most of the tracts in the Upper East Side. This is not even taking into account that the Harrison/Wells site also has potential to be pretty dense

Has nothing to do with density, but how developers in general don't capitalize on the idea that many people want units close to the CBD or in the CBD, without paying an extraordinary amount. A project like this could cater to millennials, couples, your everyday office worker who is in the area. Essentially a great location for affordable housing.

I believe the demand is there to make a project in the range of 3.7k + feasible, and one that caters to people who live outside of the CBD (who would love to live there but can't afford the rent/unit.

For the time table that this project has (isn't it 2023-25 tentatively), a much larger project could work, in which, the phases would absorb "X" amount of units sold, and move on to the next phase.

Its great project, don't get me wrong, but I just think its another example of developers in America not catering enough to make a dent in the housing crisis and/or making our cities accessible to people who would like to live there. Aggressive marketing and sales is the key.

A project like this wouldn't really be a burden on the infrastructure assuming it has limited parking and caters to those who walk or take the bus.

If you build it, they will come. Developers don't need to sell 100% of the units right away. They often take the risk of waiting; in some cases, towers can take years to fill up.

I'm not saying short term, but over a decade. Essentially the time line of the project and a little after. The demand is there. If they price these units at a reasonable price that caters to your people or couples making 60-120k, they will sell units easily.

^ You can't apply a New York lens to Chicago. It's a very different market, there is not a bottomless well of demand for highrise living with zero lake views. CMK has been operating here for decades, and in the South Loop specifically.

Let's compare two previous mega-developments in Chicago, Lakeshore East and Central Station. Both are on the lakefront, both are similar size, and both are Loop-adjacent. Central Station embraced a mix of housing types, with highrises alongside townhouse developments and a few midrises thrown in. Lakeshore East went all-in on highrises.

Today, Central Station is pretty much complete while Lakeshore East will not be finished for another decade or two. Each project that Magellan does at Lakeshore East is a whole new battle with community groups, lenders, investors, etc. If a recession hits, you're not gonna build more highrises, period. On the other hand, if your master plan includes some lower-density phases, you might be able to get those off the ground even during lean times and keep your company in business.

Let's say in Chicago there are X number of people looking to buy a highrise condo, Y number of people looking to rent an apartment, and Z people looking to buy a townhouse. If you build only highrises, then your pool of customers is limited to only X+Y. If you mix up the housing types and include townhouses, your pool of customers just increased to include Z as well. Diversifying the housing types (and lowering overall density somewhat) raises your total pool of customers and, to some extent, insulates you against various kinds of risk.

The tracts in UES vary a bit - most of them are over 100,000 ppsm, but a few are under. There's a few around 90,000 ppsm which would be almost the densest in downtown Chicago and there's a few around 60,000 ppsm which would be equivalent to downtown Chicago. However, there's numerous UES tracts at 125,000 - 200,000 ppsm.

The difference between UES and this is the amount of commercial, business, and retail though. Riverline doesn't have THAT much planned - at least compared to pretty much any avenue in UES. No comparison really at that point. Population density is nice, but if you have density and not a lot of retail, commercial, etc then it's kind of lost. People live in dense areas for a reason - sure one reason is for the proximity to work but also the ability to have a lot of mercantile options right around.

I mean quite honestly - if I had the choice of living in a place that was 15,000 ppsm with a lot of restaurants, bars, etc right around versus a place with 125,000 ppsm with not that much in the way of restaurants, bars, etc I'd take the 15,000 ppsm area in a heart beat with no hesitation.

^ Just because Riverline doesn't have much retail doesn't mean there isn't enough retail (or potential retail) easily within walking distance.

Also, I'm not understanding the complaints about lack of density. This project is plenty dense. It has lots of highrises on a small sliver of land, and of course it has townhomes. I like that. Townhomes break up the density, create sightlines, and humanize the space. They add to the variety of housing types, and create eyes on the street in the way that towers with podia don't. This mix creates a civilized atmosphere, and I like that Chicago has this instead of those Chinese cities with their cut and paste rows of highrises.

Yeah, there is some commercial/retail within walking distance. I never said that - just saying you can't compare an immediate area (i.e. walk downstairs and have options right away) with a lack of retail/commercial to an area like Upper East Side no matter how dense it is.

Anyway, if the math on that is correct and it would be around 275,000 ppsm, then that's very dense by any first world standard.

The article still mentions that Phase 1 will be the 29 story apartment building, 18 story condo building, and 62 townhomes.

Also looks like the Riverline website has some actual content on it now: http://www.riverlinechicago.com/

https://s17.postimg.org/63f33f0ov/co...background.jpg
https://s18.postimg.org/9yvxqfdop/image1.jpghttps://s18.postimg.org/pt1ytjstl/riverwalk.png

Looks like the article also give some bits of information for Related's plot of land:

There is plenty of retail already by Riverline that desperately needs demand to fill up. There is 500,000 sf of it in the River City mall that has sat vacant for decades. It's owned by Marc realty and they will be quick to capitalize on it once the demand is there.

^ Plus I'm betting ground level retail will start humming across the street on Wells St once the demand is there