Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Wow, pretty neat. This is a lot of building for a relatively small site, although the PD already authorizes an FAR of 32, which is absolutely insane.
I love that swoop of glass along Lake Shore Drive on the top of the podium. Very dynamic. Maybe a running track there, or a fancy restaurant... |
Quote:
. |
I think the towers look great. I'm not sure about the height, smaller towers looks 900-1000 ft maybe just reaching the supertall mark. I'm kinda bummed about the taller tower, this is a great site for the next leading tower in the western hemisphere. In the rendering it looks like 1400-1500. I was hoping for 1650+ to have something Chicago has not had. Also does anyone know if this Architect is affiliated with Related in any form. Overall this needs to get built, maybe just a tad bit of a height increase even though we don't know the official height yet.
|
Quote:
https://www.520w28.com/ |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
I’m alright with a less-than-tallest tower as long as it’s architecturally significant. Whether this is the actual plan or merely a proposal following Related’s guidelines, it looks like we’re not getting something that tall.
Unfortunately, that means we’re not likely to surpass the Sears anytime soon; apart from this parcel, the next-best opportunity is probably whatever replaces the Thompson Center. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
I assume this means at the least that Zaha Hadid Architects participated in a design competition for the site.
|
Quote:
Whether or not it won said design competition is an entirely different ball of of wax, though this can give us some potential hints about the scale of the development that related might be envisioning for the site, and in that particular regard it's quite promising. And it could all be a whole big box of nothing, too. |
Related has not responded to a series of tweets I sent them asking about specific parts of the rendering.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
I'll take practically anything over that hole in the ground |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
To be honest, though, I've never understood the attraction of 400 N LSD as the site for a supertall. People tend to buy a condo in a supertall at least in part for the views, and the view at night from upper floors at 400 N LSD would be pretty much pitch dark facing from 0 degrees north through 180 degrees south. The upper floors of a supertall at the Thompson Center site, on the other hand, would offer great views in any direction both day and night. |
Hi all,
I'm a long time lurker and first time poster. I emailed the architect, Ismael Soto, to ask about these renderings. He said it was his entry for a "Zaha Hadid Architects competition", (possibly an internal competition?). Apparently it wasn't the winning entry and unfortunately, he "still doesn't know what Related plans to do with the site. Someday we will find out I guess." Sorry to be the bringer of seemingly bad news. |
Quote:
|
Damn - unless he's trying to cover his ass. Either way it's a cool design. I hope the winning design is still a very good design and as Related said "architecturally significant"
|
Quote:
|
Ok, you guys, I appreciate the #goals, but seriously, if NYC can't even launch a 2000 footer, with all its billionaire flight capital, it's highly unlikely that Chicago can. I suppose it's possible but it would take a developer with a massive personal fortune, a ton of vision and a very personal commitment to Chicago.
One wildcard are those plutocratic tax cuts, which are sure to spike the number of millionaires in the area, if not also increasing the ranks of the poor and sunsetting our already very dim democracy. |
Well, at least this wasn't a complete waste of time. I think we learned a lot about what Related wants to build on that site.
1. They don't want to build a 2,000 ft tower 2. The skyscraper will be around the height of the Sears Tower (1500 ft) 3. The skyscraper will use the same foundation as the Spire 4. Related might want to build 2 skyscrapers on the site 5. Someone other than Zaha Hadid won :shrug: |
Quote:
A mixed use would be ideal for this. |
I was going to say that part of the issue with NYC not launching anything beyond 1500' or so is probably related to how hard it is to assemble a site large enough to make a 2000' tall building feasible. You aren't gonna want to try for the first 2000' tower in the USA over a railyard like Hudson Yards, and you aren't going to do it on a tiny ass site like 432 Park or 111 w 57th.
If Chicago ever is able to turn around enough of the central area to get land values that justify larger towers like NYC, then it's possible Chicago could see a 2000'er, maybe even before NYC, but that's going to take another generation. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Nevermind, sigh, i scrolled back a few posts. Anyway, i'm sure Related will use all of its tax cuts to deliver value-engineered dookie bc capitalism is working so well! |
You can always just add a 800 ft spire to get ya there...problemo solved. Sure its the cheapo way to get there but i think its about time Chicago gets to screw some other cities out of the rankings with a spire!
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
That said, other than the Thompson Center site what are some potential locations? I know there have been huge cancelled projects over the last few decades that never came to fruition - hopefully a few of those sites could still work. Either that or an enterprising developer with a lot of projects in the area might want to push further South and get things going in the area with an iconic tower. |
Quote:
The One Chicago Square block would be another good spot to go very tall. Maybe Rock N Roll MickyD's, if we're dreaming/speculating? |
Quote:
The prison and parking garage between Van Buren and Congress |
MCC not going anywhere
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
Or... they can always do it the half ass way and use a nice spire. This would be great. Image from user "Bonsai Tree" Sure its not 600m, but you guys would be lucky if you got this. |
Quote:
It isn't. Chicago hotels live off of Mag Mile shopping and conventions/trade shows. There's a reason more than 90 percent of all Chicago hotel rooms are within 600 feet of Michigan Avenue. Hotel patrons don't pay a big premium for height/views, and hotel rooms make the elevatoring even less efficient. Usually a lot less, since you want separate elevators for hotel and condos. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
The only major advantage that 400 LSD may have over various other locations is potential access to the lakefront path and Navy Pier when the new Ped bridge gets built (will Dusable Park have a ramp?). Not small perks but not likely to draw in a slew of high-end clients either except unless if you are a major outdoor bike/run enthusiast. Is that a bigger plus than being close to Michigan Ave for high-end buyers? Doubtful....... I think the best lots for a supertall are the south of NBC Tower lot and the Nordstrom/Northbridge lots off of Wabash if reimagined correctly. Which last I saw latest plans seemed completely underwhelming. If the Renaissance on Wacker were ever torn down and some slender tall tower could be built on the lot those could provide some great vistas and locations as well. |
Quote:
|
In my opinion, saying a 2,000-foot tower at 400 North Lake Shore Drive is not feasible or not possible is ridiculous, especially when you consider that the Chicago Spire had sales contracts on 30% of its supply of condos, accounting for around 360 units. In a normal scenario, the developer would have been able to secure a full construction loan. Yes, those condos were sold during the height of a real estate bubble but there is no reason in my mind why a new developer would not be able to build a 2,000-foot tower. That said I think it is highly unlikely and personally undesirable to see a 2,000-foot tower in that location.
|
Quote:
:sly::sly::sly::sly::sly::sly: |
^^^^
Wasn't the Waldorf project canceled due to financing issues? What a shame that proposal occurred during the recession or before things really went sour (due to the burning bag of poop left after Bushy Bush left). This was one of my favorite proposals back in the day for Chicago. Elegant, smooth, and classy, right by the river. It's only a shame this couldn't have been proposed at a better time, like now for example. |
Why a project like 7 south dearborn is not considered? This is a mixed-use tower, which could be perfect for 400 N LSD place.;)
http://static.wixstatic.com/media/06...0_0.00_jpg_srz |
Why do people keep posting on this useless thread where nothing is happening, nothing is close to happening, especially when so much more interesting stuff is happening elsewhere in the city?
|
Quote:
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 3:12 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.