HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > Proposals


    130 North Franklin in the SkyscraperPage Database

Building Data Page   • Comparison Diagram   • Chicago Skyscraper Diagram

Map Location
Chicago Projects & Construction Forum

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #401  
Old Posted Feb 3, 2017, 2:03 AM
chicubs111 chicubs111 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,223
wasn't it someone on this forum that mentioned that 130 had a tenant lined up like 3 months ago but we never knew exactly who it was?.. It seemed that 130 was pretty much a go by all means?... I feel like it has dropped a bit in the confidence scale...just a tad
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #402  
Old Posted Feb 3, 2017, 2:12 AM
Kngkyle Kngkyle is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,804
Quote:
Originally Posted by chicubs111 View Post
wasn't it someone on this forum that mentioned that 130 had a tenant lined up like 3 months ago but we never knew exactly who it was?.. It seemed that 130 was pretty much a go by all means?... I feel like it has dropped a bit in the confidence scale...just a tad
It was mentioned that Sidley was close to signing a deal but they ended up just renewing their lease.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #403  
Old Posted Feb 3, 2017, 10:23 AM
KWILLSKYLINE's Avatar
KWILLSKYLINE KWILLSKYLINE is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Chicago
Posts: 625
So if these are the two main buildings future "major" tenants are considering, (this and 110 wacker), can we assume that wolf point is going on the back burner until the next cycle?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #404  
Old Posted Feb 3, 2017, 1:08 PM
BVictor1's Avatar
BVictor1 BVictor1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 9,972
Quote:
Originally Posted by KWILLSKYLINE View Post
So if these are the two main buildings future "major" tenants are considering, (this and 110 wacker), can we assume that wolf point is going on the back burner until the next cycle?
I don't think we can assume anything. Currently Wolf Point South isn't an option or active proposal.

Because that project is being phased, the next tower they're thinking about is the east building. We don't know the programatic makeup of the south tower at this point..
__________________
titanic1
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #405  
Old Posted Feb 3, 2017, 7:25 PM
SamInTheLoop SamInTheLoop is offline
you know where I'll be
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,378
One thing I've heard re 130 is that Tishman has been quite keen to go spec, but that the current arrangements it has with the lender/lender group it is currently working with are preventing it......
__________________
It's simple, really - try not to design or build trash.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #406  
Old Posted Feb 3, 2017, 7:43 PM
TimeAgain TimeAgain is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 204
Quote:
Originally Posted by KWILLSKYLINE View Post
So if these are the two main buildings future "major" tenants are considering, (this and 110 wacker), can we assume that wolf point is going on the back burner until the next cycle?
Which Wolf Point? South? That's years off. East is what's next.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #407  
Old Posted Feb 3, 2017, 8:52 PM
the urban politician the urban politician is offline
The City
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Chicago region
Posts: 21,375
Quote:
Originally Posted by SamInTheLoop View Post
One thing I've heard re 130 is that Tishman has been quite keen to go spec, but that the current arrangements it has with the lender/lender group it is currently working with are preventing it......
I am also planning to build a 700 ft tall skyscraper on spec.

....But alas my arrangement with lenders is also preventing it
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #408  
Old Posted Feb 3, 2017, 9:01 PM
Skyguy_7 Skyguy_7 is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,657
^Only 700? My 1,800' spec tower is in its final stages. Only pending loan, location, plans, tenants but I'm confident in it coming to fruition this cycle or next.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #409  
Old Posted Feb 3, 2017, 9:10 PM
Notyrview Notyrview is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: New York City
Posts: 1,648
Mine would be in the east loop, 1400 ft, 70% affordable housing and designed by Jean Nouvel.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #410  
Old Posted Feb 3, 2017, 10:11 PM
UPChicago's Avatar
UPChicago UPChicago is offline
Vote for me for Mayor!
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Chicago
Posts: 786
Quote:
Originally Posted by Notyrview View Post
Mine would be in the east loop, 1400 ft, 70% affordable housing and designed by Jean Nouvel.
LOL I don't think that's how it works you guys are a mess
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #411  
Old Posted Feb 6, 2017, 4:27 PM
SamInTheLoop SamInTheLoop is offline
you know where I'll be
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,378
Quote:
Originally Posted by the urban politician View Post
I am also planning to build a 700 ft tall skyscraper on spec.

....But alas my arrangement with lenders is also preventing it

lol.

Yes, yes - mine too.

While I realize how that sounded, I suppose I should expound:

Tishman Speyer has other options here. Strong, Long-term relationships with specific banks and loan officers are important, though Tishman is a very large and experienced outfit. They presumably can take advantage of equity relationships to meaningfully boost total equity contribution and thus meaningfully reduce loan-to-value ratio. They can draw on a large amount of other debt sources that are out there and competing in the market - shop around at other traditional banks outside of the group they're working with, as well as foreign banks, debt funds, non-bank financial firms, etc. They could also launch the project on equity, with an eye toward arranging a loan partway through construction (closer to beginning than end), once they have landed an anchor - which may be easier once prospective anchors see the project physically progressing, and they're thus more confident in it, and the developer. Tishman has the means and the options to pull this off on spec if they really want to (if they don't in fact land a pre-construction anchor in the near-term). Whether they themselves are comfortable with the specific risk profile of that action is another matter. What I've also heard is that the bank/bank group they've been working with is taking into consideration some other spec projects elsewhere that they currently are working on....other prospective debt capital sources may not weight that factor as heavily......
__________________
It's simple, really - try not to design or build trash.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #412  
Old Posted Mar 16, 2017, 1:42 AM
chicubs111 chicubs111 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,223
Im Starting to get a bit worried about this one ...Felt very confident that this would be able to land a tenant just seems like too much competition may been joining the market now... Just posted article about 110 North wacker tower possibly starting in October
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #413  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2017, 2:40 PM
rlw777 rlw777 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 1,761
I think 110 N Wacker and BofA just killed the chances of this one getting off the ground in the foreseeable future. I was really hoping to see this K&S design get built.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #414  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2017, 3:52 PM
KWILLSKYLINE's Avatar
KWILLSKYLINE KWILLSKYLINE is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Chicago
Posts: 625
Quote:
Originally Posted by rlw777 View Post
I think 110 N Wacker and BofA just killed the chances of this one getting off the ground in the foreseeable future. I was really hoping to see this K&S design get built.
Never say never, I'm sure there's still a bunch of mega-companies out there looking for a good chunk of a building. Especially one this good looking with alot of space avaiable with a great location.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #415  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2017, 11:25 PM
Kngkyle Kngkyle is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,804
Quote:
Originally Posted by rlw777 View Post
I think 110 N Wacker and BofA just killed the chances of this one getting off the ground in the foreseeable future. I was really hoping to see this K&S design get built.
The site is far too well located to sit vacant for another decade. Something will be built, it's just a question of what. The site is also huge.. they could easily build something - hotel/apartments/condos - on half of the site and still be able to build a 1m+ sqft office tower on the other half. I always thought the current proposal did a rather poor job at maximizing the sites potential. The tower itself only takes up 1/2 the space. The rest is wasted on a podium and some park space.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #416  
Old Posted Jun 14, 2017, 4:12 PM
Skyguy_7 Skyguy_7 is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,657


Ground-breaking ceremony taking place today









Just kidding, it's a film production crew. Maybe someday....
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #417  
Old Posted Jun 14, 2017, 5:14 PM
KWILLSKYLINE's Avatar
KWILLSKYLINE KWILLSKYLINE is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Chicago
Posts: 625
you tingled the hairs on the back of my neck for a second or two. I cant believe they havn't turned it back into a parking lot yet to make some extra money. maybe they still have something in the works.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #418  
Old Posted Jun 15, 2017, 2:27 PM
SamInTheLoop SamInTheLoop is offline
you know where I'll be
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,378
^ Same here.

This project is very much still being actively marketed to prospective anchor tenants........they are out there....
__________________
It's simple, really - try not to design or build trash.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #419  
Old Posted Jun 15, 2017, 3:05 PM
emathias emathias is offline
Adoptive Chicagoan
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: River North, Chicago, Illinois
Posts: 5,157
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kngkyle View Post
...
I always thought the current proposal did a rather poor job at maximizing the sites potential. The tower itself only takes up 1/2 the space. The rest is wasted on a podium and some park space.
I agree. The building itself is nice enough, but the use of the space is very poor. I would much rather see the site used in halves, with the Court Place alleyway maintained. I'm surprised the City is willing to let that alley go. Alley's are important spaces and, IMHO, their use should be enhanced instead of removed. A more clever treatment of the entire site might create four buildings on the site, with the southernmost one addressing Washington or the Franklin/Washington corner, and similarly with the Randolph-facing side, but then the two center ones "facing" Court place, which could be converted to shared street style plaza with potential seating and sculptures. It could be all different uses, too. Maybe residential on Washington to synergize with the 200 W Washington condo building, commercial office space for the two buildings oriented to Court, and hotel on Randolph which could serve both business needs and the Randolph theatre and food scenes to the east and west, respectively. If they really wanted to be able to span the block, they could create a building with a tall arch-space over Court (I'm thinking 10+ stories high), which would look cool, enable large floorplates on upper floors, but preserve Court.

Improved landscaping of Court at the Wacker end could create a pleasant pedestrian passthrough and result in the kind of interesting, human-scaled public space that keep cities interesting. I'm thinking something comparable to Paternoster Square and pedestrian feeder alleys in London, or a mini version of the way Madrid's Calle de la Montera connects Gran Via with Puerta del Sol. During holiday seasons the space could have themed events or markets to liven up what is really one of the most boring parts of the Loop. With the General Growth building going away, the proximity of the cool public space associated with its replacement could end up turning the NW corner of the Loop area into one of the best parts, giving people something to walk over to from the west end of the Riverwalk.
__________________
I like travel and photography - check out my Flickr page.
CURRENT GEAR: Nikon Z6, Nikon Z 14-30mm f4 S, Nikon Z 24-70mm f/4 S, Nikon 50mm f1.4G
STOLEN GEAR: (during riots of 5/30/2020) Nikon D750, Nikon 14-24mm F2.8G, Nikon 85mm f1.8G, Nikon 50mm f1.4D
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #420  
Old Posted Jun 15, 2017, 3:44 PM
headcase's Avatar
headcase headcase is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: East Village, Chicago
Posts: 455
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kngkyle View Post
The site is far too well located to sit vacant for another decade. Something will be built, it's just a question of what. The site is also huge.. they could easily build something - hotel/apartments/condos - on half of the site and still be able to build a 1m+ sqft office tower on the other half. I always thought the current proposal did a rather poor job at maximizing the sites potential. The tower itself only takes up 1/2 the space. The rest is wasted on a podium and some park space.
If I remember correctly, it's because the same developer or management company (or someone else) owns one of the buildings adjacent to the lowrise portion of the building, and they are preserving the views for that property.

SSDD
__________________
He was constantly reminded of how startlingly different a place the world was when viewed from a point only three feet to the left.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > Proposals
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 3:19 AM.

     

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