SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/index.php)
-   Proposals (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=361)
-   -   CHICAGO | Tribune Tower Addition | 1,422 FT | 113 FLOORS (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=231808)

Ned.B Jan 25, 2018 6:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 10023 (Post 8060204)
Does the same developer own the southern half of the site?

Yes, but due to the view corridor easement across the site, anything built there can pretty much only be as tall as the 1920s printing plant building behind the historic tower. Chances are the amenities podium for the hotel will go there.

JK47 Jan 25, 2018 7:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 10023 (Post 8060211)
Hedge funds, private equity, media firms, etc.

That's what I meant by boutique offices, and there is a market for super prime locations, for companies whose very picky and highly paid employees prefer them. That's why there is tons of office space in Mayfair or Park Avenue. It's a different niche, but it exists.


Anyone involved in any kind of trading is going to want to be in the Loop in order to be as close as they physically can be to either the exchanges or high density fiber. I can't see them moving to a site if it penalizes them in terms of how fast they can execute trades vis a vie competitors with more proximate locations. Likewise law firms probably aren't going to find that area to be very attractive due to its distance from the Daley Center and Federal Plaza, unless of course there's a significant discount to the rent they currently pay.

Khantilever Jan 25, 2018 7:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UPChicago (Post 8060492)
I think a statement like that implies that a spire is a sure bet but I don't think the majority of his work has spires and I think Burj Khalifa and Kingdom Tower are outliers because the purpose of their design is to be tall almost above all other functions.

I would be very surprised if there is a significant spire here. Given the sensitive location there are strong incentives for them to limit the height - not extend it for vanity’s sake.

What’s more, if we take them at their word that it will be a foot shorter than Trump, what would be the point of spending millions on a spire to only barely miss the #2 spot in Chicago?

LA21st Jan 25, 2018 7:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Downtown (Post 8060280)
Fierce NIMBY responses? Where the hell do you get that from?

10023, very little market for office space here. Too far from the train stations; not even convenient to the L. Remember that several buildings in this area (900 N. Michigan, 645 St. Clair, London Guaranty, 75 E. Wacker, IBM, Tribune, Trump prior to construction) have gone from office to hotel or residential.

Its across the river from Illinois Center/Loop and a short walk (3-4 blocks) from the Grand and State subway station. Office space doesn't make sense everywhere in downtown Chicago, but I think it does here.

left of center Jan 25, 2018 7:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 10023 (Post 8060781)
Question for the industry folks - has there been some recent leap forward in technology that makes these tall, narrow residential buildings much easier and cheaper to build?

They seem to have sprouted all over Midtown in a short span of time, and now there are like half a dozen active supertall developments or proposals in Chicago.

I would assume its because land values have gotten high enough to make construction of such towers economically feasible. Tall and thin towers are typically pretty cost prohibitive since the elevator core tends to take up more square footage of each floor plate the taller the tower is, and keeping it thin reduces the overall space on each floor to work with. Not to mention the additional engineering it takes to build a super tall tower compared to a mid size one.

Just my two cents.

phanta721 Jan 25, 2018 8:00 PM

1/25/18
 
https://i.imgur.com/8q3UaGRl.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/oU98n8kl.jpg

Mr Downtown Jan 25, 2018 8:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LA21st (Post 8060864)
Its across the river from Illinois Center/Loop and a short walk (3-4 blocks) from the Grand and State subway station.

The submarket where office vacancy rates are between 12 and 15 percent, by far the highest in the CBD.

maru2501 Jan 25, 2018 8:58 PM

inclusion of a hotel element is smart at that spot. I always recall the Intercon expansion and Waldorf proposal as missed chances. River is where it's at

maru2501 Jan 25, 2018 9:00 PM

and rgarri4, that modeling is awesome, thanks

amazing the city is not far away at all from looking just like that

LA21st Jan 25, 2018 9:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Downtown (Post 8060921)
The submarket where office vacancy rates are between 12 and 15 percent, by far the highest in the CBD.

I was just saying I dont think transit is a problem, imo.

Mr Saturn64 Jan 25, 2018 9:10 PM

Holy shit! Didn't see this coming! When I went to Chicago, the Tribune Tower was definitely my favorite skyscraper. I loved the way it formed a perfect pair with Wrigley, and a perfect trio with Wrigley and Hotel Intercontinental. I remember seeing on the diagrams that there was going to be an addition to Hotel Intercontinental (which would've been dope), but I didn't expect this. I'm hoping that whatever gets built can be a great building while also respecting the historic aspects of the Tribune Tower.

emathias Jan 25, 2018 9:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Downtown (Post 8060280)
...
10023, very little market for office space here. Too far from the train stations; not even convenient to the L. Remember that several buildings in this area (900 N. Michigan, 645 St. Clair, London Guaranty, 75 E. Wacker, IBM, Tribune, Trump prior to construction) have gone from office to hotel or residential.

I think that the office space along Michigan that was built decades ago was built under the assumption that the 1968 plan for a subway from the West Loop under Monroe, splitting north under Columbus/Fairbanks was going to get built. It's still one of the most obvious needs for mass transit in all of Chicago and yet never seems to have political support to make happen. Until/unless that plan or one very similar involving grade-separated transit happens, office will not be a popular choice in the Mag Mile corridor.

Mr Downtown Jan 25, 2018 10:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LA21st (Post 8061030)
I was just saying I dont think transit is a problem, imo.

But it is, because the Red Line only serves the city lakefront. Office growth for the last 30 years has been pulled to the West Loop to be near the two important suburban stations (the other two Metra stations don't serve the suburbs executives favor nowadays) and the expressways. That's pulled office space away from the L lines, creating a problem for city residents.

Freefall Jan 25, 2018 10:38 PM

I'm with Chance, I'd love to live in Trib Tower

UPChicago Jan 25, 2018 10:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Khantilever (Post 8060844)
I would be very surprised if there is a significant spire here. Given the sensitive location there are strong incentives for them to limit the height - not extend it for vanity’s sake.

What’s more, if we take them at their word that it will be a foot shorter than Trump, what would be the point of spending millions on a spire to only barely miss the #2 spot in Chicago?

I tend to agree but my point was there is no substantive reason to expect that there will or won’t be a spire based solely on the architect.

r18tdi Jan 25, 2018 11:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ned.B (Post 8060786)
Yes, but due to the view corridor easement across the site, anything built there can pretty much only be as tall as the 1920s printing plant building behind the historic tower. Chances are the amenities podium for the hotel will go there.

That's what I was thinking, parking deck for landmark building's condos topped bu amenity space would make the most sense.

Fvn Jan 25, 2018 11:35 PM

A lot of AS+GG's newest work doesn't have spires... but given the height and their past it wouldn't be surprising it it has one. However there is a trend for tall skinny buildings not to have spires, 111 w 57th, central park tower, 432 park ave (maybe that's just a nyc thing though).

Zapatan Jan 25, 2018 11:56 PM

Awesome :cheers:

But 1 foot shy of TTC spire? Really? :frog:

Also, I wonder if this will affect Related's development on the spire site, i.e. push them to go higher or something.

left of center Jan 26, 2018 12:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zapatan (Post 8061280)
But 1 foot shy of TTC spire? Really? :frog:

As someone mentioned earlier, it will probably end up taller than TTC. They just haven't announced that yet to not pique the interest/rage of the POTUS. No point in drawing any unwanted attention to this project until the design is finalized and the alderman is fully on board.

chris08876 Jan 26, 2018 2:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by left of center (Post 8061297)
As someone mentioned earlier, it will probably end up taller than TTC. They just haven't announced that yet to not pique the interest/rage of the POTUS. No point in drawing any unwanted attention to this project until the design is finalized and the alderman is fully on board.

Still early. For all we know, the units could could be raised or lowered. 220 hotel rooms and 158 condo units as of now. Ideally, given the area, they should shoot for more hotel units. Those 158 condo units will most likely be very expensive, and depending on the market, it may very well fluctuate. I have optimism in Chicago selling them.

Hopefully a reveal by summer. That's ages away though in terms of skyscraper suspense. Hell, raise the hotel units, add a couple of floors, and make it the tallest to the roof IMO. Why aim for 2nd.


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:37 PM.

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