CHICAGO | Tribune Tower Addition | 1,442 FT | 113 FLOORS

[Khantilever]

Originally Posted by UPChicago

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?

[BVictor1]

^Remember, there's a protected view corridor from the east for Trib Tower, that's why this proposal is to the north of the site.

[F1 Tommy]

This will be amazing at that location if they do it.

[10023]

Does the same developer own the southern half of the site?

[Steely Dan]

Smith + Gill?

1,388'?

chicago?



YES PLEASE!

[camdoodlebop]

the image is too large for me to upload but here is the full panorama shot from the presentation:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1zEH...ew?usp=sharing

[left of center]

Originally Posted by camdoodlebop

the image is too large for me to upload but here is the full panorama shot from the presentation:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1zEH...ew?usp=sharing

I like that they intentionally added a fully completed Vista in that rendering, to somewhat mute the massive impact it will have on the skyline and keep potential NIMBY's from going into a full meltdown

Very smart on their part.

[aaron38]

Originally Posted by 10023

Does the same developer own the southern half of the site?

It's not clear to me. The map doesn't label the southern 2/3rds at all. But from this quote, it sounds like the entire lot is being replaced.

The current plans contemplate 365 parking spaces, which Reilly said would not be a substantial increase on the number of spaces currently in the Tribune outdoor lot. The new skyscraper would include an additional 500 parking spaces, located on the second through eighth floors. But Reilly said he has pushed to reduce the number of parking spaces, citing an abundance of nearby public transportation.

[spyguy]

Reilly comes across as reasonable in the article. Height, density, and program seemed fine to him while he was against too much parking.

Anyways, can't wait to see the models of this thing from AS+GG. The fact that this is reported as being nearly exactly the same height as Trump Tower is also quite interesting...

[BVictor1]

Originally Posted by 10023

Does the same developer own the southern half of the site?

Yes. The entire vacant lot, but there's a view corridor that protects sight lines of Tribune Tower down Ogden Slip. That's why the new tower is proposed to the north part of the site.

[OhioGuy]

Originally Posted by BVictor1

Yes. The entire vacant lot, but there's a view corridor that protects the view of Tribune Tower down Ogden Slip. That's why the new tower is proposed to the north part of the site.

There’s a big blank wall from the NBC Tower on the southern side of that lot. Do you know if any development on the southern side of the lot can be as high as that blank wall? Or would doing so impede on the views down the Ogden Slip between Lake Shore Drive and the Tribune Tower? Just wondering how high they can go on that southern portion of the lot before it impacts the protected view.

[BVictor1]

Originally Posted by OhioGuy

There’s a big blank wall from the NBC Tower on the southern side of that lot. Do you know if any development on the southern side of the lot can be as high as that blank wall? Or would doing so impede on the views down the Ogden Slip between Lake Shore Drive and the Tribune Tower? Just wondering how high they can go on that southern portion of the lot before it impacts the protected view.

The short portion of NBC where you're talking about is the view corridor. The lots north and south are out of the way.

The blank wall is the north face of NBC, the south face is upper east North Water Street.

[OhioGuy]

Originally Posted by BVictor1

The short portion of NBC where you're talking about is the view corridor. The lots north and south are out of the way.

The blank wall is the north face of NBC, the south face is upper east North Water Street.

Yup, I just wasn’t sure if the base of this proposed tower could extend south to meet up level with the blank wall from the NBC Tower, as long as the new tower is situated on the north end of the lot to keep the site line open? Or if constructing any structure on the south end of the lot above the street level of Illinois Street and Cityfront Plaza Drive would compromise the site line too much?

[Ned.B]

Originally Posted by 10023

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.

[r18tdi]

Originally Posted by Ned.B

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.

[aaron38]

Skyline is going to get real crowded from my vantage point. This new Tribune Tower should pop up between Trump and OBP (marked here by the cranes). With Vista between Trump and Aon, (and Wolf Point South) a big central clump is forming.

[/QUOTE]

[chris08876]

From the article, it looks like this might have some fierce NIMBY responses.

Let's just say its to the roof, its a game changer, really for the U.S.. Not many "to the roof" super talls rising outside of the East Coast past the 1300 ft mark.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by chris08876

From the article, it looks like this might have some fierce NIMBY responses.

NIMBYism in chicago amounts to jack shit if the alderman's wheels have been adequately greased.

and it sounds like they may have been in this case.

Originally Posted by chris08876

Let's just say its to the roof, its a game changer, really for the U.S.. Not many "too the roof" super talls rising outside of the East Coast past the 1300 ft mark.

in fact there is only one "to the roof" 1,300'+ skyscraper anywhere in the western hemisphere outside of NYC: the sears tower.

[10023]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

NIMBYism in chicago amounts to jack shit if the alderman's wheels have been adequately greased.

This is a fantastic quote.

So... are we looking at Chicago's version of 432 Park here?

Unfortunately, I don't want to be a wet blanket, but I think we're looking at a market reckoning before this one can possibly hit its pre-sale numbers and secure financing, especially with so much else in the pipeline.

[left of center]

Originally Posted by 10023

Unfortunately, I don't want to be a wet blanket, but I think we're looking at a market reckoning before this one can possibly hit its pre-sale numbers and secure financing, especially with so much else in the pipeline.

I agree with this. Even with the tower being mostly apartments, the economy is going to start cooling down in a few years after so many years of growth, especially with the last several years being red hot.

It seems the developers have already acknowledged this, hence why it wouldn't start until after 2020 when the Tribune Tower conversion is complete. There's a lot on the pipeline now, and rents are slowing downtown since renters have a lot more choice. Add in the fact that we may be nearing a recession in the next 24 months, planning for delivery in 2022 or after makes sense.

Its getting built, just not in this real estate cycle.