HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > Skyscraper & Highrise Construction


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #121  
Old Posted Feb 3, 2018, 6:31 AM
left of center's Avatar
left of center left of center is offline
1st Ward
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: The Big Onion
Posts: 2,338
Quote:
Originally Posted by aaron38 View Post
Why not? I'd hope to avoid mega developments. But why shouldn't the Damen Green equal the Addison Red?
No I totally agree. The West Side could definitely use a nightlife node, as it currently lacks one, really.

Quote:
Originally Posted by KWillChicago View Post
I would love for that neighborhood to turn into it's own district but theres no way the neigbors would ever let that happen.
What neighbors? Start with the lots immediately adjacent to the UC. Those lots are surrounded by other lots. To the south there is Malcom X College and some project housing. There is derelict housing to the west and some retail to the east. Maybe the condo/apartments north of Warren/Washington might put up a fight, but there really isn't that many of them yet to really make the alderman give too much notice to them. And honestly, if it brings retail to the neighborhood, I could see a lot of those neighbors be in support of any development to their south.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #122  
Old Posted Feb 3, 2018, 12:33 PM
cannedairspray cannedairspray is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 2,210
Quote:
Originally Posted by the urban politician View Post
We rarely do underground parking like DC does.
And an unofficial height limit sure isn't going to incentivize developers to foot the the bill for that, either.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #123  
Old Posted Feb 3, 2018, 3:08 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 OhioGuy View Post
Height limits suck. I live in DC. I’m so tired of uniform height block after block after block. The land is so valuable that every developer builds up to the height allowed along that street. With the land becoming increasingly valuable in the West Loop, I suspect any attempt to cap it at a particular height will lead to too much height uniformity there as well.
I disagree. Although I love high rises, I really liked DC’s built environment during the years I lived there. What a neat city
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #124  
Old Posted Feb 3, 2018, 3:20 PM
Fvn Fvn is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 694
Quote:
Originally Posted by the urban politician View Post
I disagree. Although I love high rises, I really liked DC’s built environment during the years I lived there. What a neat city
I agree. And lot's of green space too (not just the mall)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #125  
Old Posted Feb 3, 2018, 4:20 PM
Investing In Chicago Investing In Chicago is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 1,209
Quote:
Originally Posted by KWillChicago View Post
I would love for that neighborhood to turn into it's own district but theres no way the neigbors would ever let that happen.
I'm utterly confused, who are these "neighbors" you speak of? The sea of surface lots? the city college?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #126  
Old Posted Feb 3, 2018, 4:47 PM
harryc's Avatar
harryc harryc is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Oak Park, Il
Posts: 14,984
Quote:
Originally Posted by aaron38 View Post
Why not? I'd hope to avoid mega developments. But why shouldn't the Damen Green equal the Addison Red?
Damen and Lake ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Investing In Chicago View Post
I'm utterly confused, who are these "neighbors" you speak of? The sea of surface lots? the city college?
There is already a fair amount of high density housing there
__________________
Harry C - Urbanize Chicago- My Flickr stream HRC_OakPark
The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either. B Franklin.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #127  
Old Posted Feb 3, 2018, 8:22 PM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is offline
TL;DR
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: the city o'wind
Posts: 15,672
Quote:
Originally Posted by OhioGuy View Post
Height limits suck. I live in DC. I’m so tired of uniform height block after block after block. The land is so valuable that every developer builds up to the height allowed along that street. With the land becoming increasingly valuable in the West Loop, I suspect any attempt to cap it at a particular height will lead to too much height uniformity there as well.
Do you feel the same way about Paris or Berlin? Uniformity of height isn’t a bad thing if buildings share a tasteful architectural language.

There’s no shortage of land in the West Loop to develop, that’s why we’re seeing so many proposals. It’ll be a long time before development pressures “force” developers to build tall. Related is just trying to grab valuable skyline views so they can charge higher-than-market rents.
__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #128  
Old Posted Feb 4, 2018, 1:15 AM
aaron38's Avatar
aaron38 aaron38 is offline
312
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Palatine
Posts: 4,092
And why not? That's the bonus of having the Kennedy in the front yard. To be above it and have the view. The heights will drop off sharply to the west. But there should be a tower or two at each cta station.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #129  
Old Posted Mar 17, 2018, 12:54 AM
spyguy's Avatar
spyguy spyguy is offline
THAT Guy
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 5,949
"Updated plans"

Community Meeting Notice for Proposed Development located at 900 West Randolph/170 North Peoria.

TUESDAY, MARCH 27, 2018 6:00 PM @ Haymarket Pub & Brewery
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #130  
Old Posted Mar 27, 2018, 7:18 PM
BVictor1's Avatar
BVictor1 BVictor1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 9,971
Building height reduced from 51 to 43 stories (570 ft to 495 ft)

• Proposal includes funding for new public space along Randolph Street, consistent with the concepts proposed in the West Loop Design Guidelines (see image from the Guidelines)



FYI, 495' is the same height as 727 W. Madison.
__________________
titanic1
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #131  
Old Posted Mar 27, 2018, 7:22 PM
Randomguy34's Avatar
Randomguy34 Randomguy34 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Chicago & Philly
Posts: 1,715
Not surprised, 495 ft is still a really good compromise this far west.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #132  
Old Posted Mar 27, 2018, 9:37 PM
The Best Forumer's Avatar
The Best Forumer The Best Forumer is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 2,755
Quote:
Originally Posted by spyguy View Post
Community Meeting Notice for Proposed Development located at 900 West Randolph/170 North Peoria.

TUESDAY, MARCH 27, 2018 6:00 PM @ Haymarket Pub & Brewery
are you going?
__________________
The suburbs are second-rate. Cookie-cutter houses, treeless yards, mediocre schools, and more crime than you think. Do your family a favor and move closer to the city.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #133  
Old Posted Mar 27, 2018, 11:32 PM
left of center's Avatar
left of center left of center is offline
1st Ward
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: The Big Onion
Posts: 2,338
I'm surprised it was nerfed by only 75 feet.

That said, would've been nice if this was over 500 feet, lol.

Hopefully the community meeting doesn't cause the developers to shorten the height of this building further.
__________________
"Eventually, I think Chicago will be the most beautiful great city left in the world." -Frank Lloyd Wright
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #134  
Old Posted Mar 28, 2018, 2:38 AM
rlw777 rlw777 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 1,761
For anyone interested. There are pictures up on the neighbors of West loop Facebook page. Here

The most interesting part is it looks like they want to put Randolph on a road diet to increase room for pedestrians
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #135  
Old Posted Mar 28, 2018, 2:53 AM
left of center's Avatar
left of center left of center is offline
1st Ward
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: The Big Onion
Posts: 2,338
• The building height would be reduced by 15% to 43 stories (495 ft), with the floor plate increased to maintain the square footage.

Ugh, I thought this city learned. Tall and skinny > short and fat. It allows for more sunlight and more attractive buildings. I mean, if we are keeping the square footage the exact same (and thus, the number of units and number of new residents to the neighborhood with the same amount of increased traffic and whatever else these dregs of society complain about), what exactly is the point of shortening the building? How does this benefit the local neighborhood NIMBYs/Alderbeast exactly?
__________________
"Eventually, I think Chicago will be the most beautiful great city left in the world." -Frank Lloyd Wright
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #136  
Old Posted Mar 28, 2018, 2:59 AM
Fvn Fvn is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 694
Making it thinner and keeping its current hight would be better than shortening it at this point.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #137  
Old Posted Mar 28, 2018, 3:01 AM
the urban politician the urban politician is offline
The City
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Chicago region
Posts: 21,375
Quote:
Originally Posted by left of center View Post
• The building height would be reduced by 15% to 43 stories (495 ft), with the floor plate increased to maintain the square footage.

Ugh, I thought this city learned. Tall and skinny > short and fat. It allows for more sunlight and more attractive buildings. I mean, if we are keeping the square footage the exact same (and thus, the number of units and number of new residents to the neighborhood with the same amount of increased traffic and whatever else these dregs of society complain about), what exactly is the point of shortening the building? How does this benefit the local neighborhood NIMBYs/Alderbeast exactly?
Because NIMBYs are buttheads.

Anyhow, I’m a fan of canyons so it’s all good. Look at the Loop—all canyons, and it’s a hoot! Dandy place to spend an afternoon
__________________
The only thing better than a V10 is a V12
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #138  
Old Posted Mar 28, 2018, 4:30 AM
BVictor1's Avatar
BVictor1 BVictor1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 9,971
The overall tower was widened by four feet to accommodate for the height reduction.

The number of units and the FAR are unchanged.



__________________
titanic1
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #139  
Old Posted Mar 28, 2018, 4:59 AM
KWillChicago's Avatar
KWillChicago KWillChicago is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,043
Im being picky but the shortening is a bummer. I can only imagine more complaints are on their way. I really like this one. Hope it doesn't get butchered.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #140  
Old Posted Mar 28, 2018, 5:13 AM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is offline
TL;DR
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: the city o'wind
Posts: 15,672
The renderings of the road diet on Randolph appear to show the first block of Randolph, between the Kennedy and Halsted (in front of Related's other proposal). That block was always weird because the service drives are difficult to access... the westbound drive conflicts with the Kennedy exit ramp, and the eastbound ramp loops around to dump people on Court Place.
__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...
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 > Skyscraper & Highrise Construction
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:41 AM.

     

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