CHICAGO | Highrise Projects & Construction, v7

[BVictor1]

Originally Posted by Briguy

If sterling bay isn't include 330 (the porch) in their OWN neighborhood future development rendering I would bet that thing is dead. They just bought all that land between sangamon/green/wayman/metra so I bet that gets grouped in with the 330 site. Look out for a MASSIVE massive project. They might even be able to vacate that stub of Peoria (ideally they'd just rebuild the metra crossing though.)

Hmmm...

The purchase of a vacant 2.7-acre site could tee up another huge development in the trendy corridor.

It also connects two other Sterling Bay-owned parcels: The property is adjacent to an office building Sterling Bay has under construction at 345 N. Morgan St. and across the street from a development site it owns at 330 N. Green St.

Colliers International... began marketing the vacant lot for sale last fall as a blank slate for a developer to build as much as 1.3 million square feet,

It would be fun if 330 was on hold so a PD could be created (like Ned B. said) and amended to include that parcel. Combined and including a decent amount of green space... Bonus up the wazoo... Maybe a two-tower scheme (I'm just thinking), or one and a signature tower... even better. "The Porch" was to be about 670,000 sq ft + 1.3M...

[Zapatan]

Originally Posted by lakeshoredrive

I'm hopeful that we will see a tall building that is above 800 feet break ground this year. I'm really gunning for Tribune East Tower to start this year...

So the possible ones could be:

- Tribune East Tower
- LSE Parcel I
- North Tower for 400 N LSD

Any others I am missing? I think those are the only proposals that are above 800 feet in height.

As far as over 800 I can't think of anything else aside from NEMA II which isn't a concrete proposal yet, maybe Chase's potential mystery tower. There's the Casino tower proposal at 78 but not sure how legit that is / it's more of an observation tower, although it is 1000'.

I'm looking forward to developments like 78 site, Lincoln Yards, Halstead etc. just as much since they'd provide a large quantity of high-rises outside of the downtown core. Not sure where those really stand though or if anything would get going this year.

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by Briguy

If sterling bay isn't include 330 (the porch) in their OWN neighborhood future development rendering I would bet that thing is dead. They just bought all that land between sangamon/green/wayman/metra so I bet that gets grouped in with the 330 site. Look out for a MASSIVE massive project. They might even be able to vacate that stub of Peoria (ideally they'd just rebuild the metra crossing though.)

There's too many grade crossings as it is. I keep banging the drum for elevating Metra up on a viaduct ramping down just enough to clear the Halsted overpass, but I guess nobody cares that our emerging 2nd CBD has a huge access barrier to the north?

At the very least they should rebuild the old Sangamon bridge, the approaches are still there.

[Rizzo]

^ Agree 100%
It’s about to get more crowded against the tracks and it’s my understanding metra has problems with people/ drivers crossing the tracks in front of trains

[Steely Dan]

the mere fact that we still have 8 at-grade street crossing of a major commuter rail/amtrak ROW this freaking close to downtown in 2022 is a pretty damning indictment of this city's track record of transportation investment. any other alpha city would've cleaned that shit up ages ago.

incidentally, i also recently learned in another thread that chicago is the only US city left that still has at-grade street crossings on its heavy rail rapid transit system.

[BVictor1]

Bridgford Site

Down but not destroyed... And I hope it's preserved.

02.21.22

[Chi-Sky21]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

the mere fact that we still have 8 at-grade street crossing of a major commuter rail/amtrak ROW this freaking close to downtown in 2022 is a pretty damning indictment of this city's track record of transportation investment. any other alpha city would've cleaned that shit up ages ago.

incidentally, i also recently learned in another thread that chicago is the only US city left that still has at-grade street crossings on its heavy rail rapid transit system.

While I agree this one spot should not have at grade, a lot of other cities do not have the same amount of rail lines through them and ours were built long before this was even a concern. I mean even for Fulton Market this was not even a concern until this development took place.

[OhioGuy]

Originally Posted by ardecila

There's too many grade crossings as it is. I keep banging the drum for elevating Metra up on a viaduct ramping down just enough to clear the Halsted overpass, but I guess nobody cares that our emerging 2nd CBD has a huge access barrier to the north?

At the very least they should rebuild the old Sangamon bridge, the approaches are still there.

A large federal infrastructure bill but no serious planning by the city and/or Metra means a wasted opportunity. *sigh*

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by Rizzo

^ Agree 100%
It’s about to get more crowded against the tracks and it’s my understanding metra has problems with people/ drivers crossing the tracks in front of trains

Their solution is better crossing gates. Sigh.

https://chicago.suntimes.com/city-ha...ance-committee

I'm not sure how they will actually "improve" the crossings. Metra is pretty vague about this except to cite "increased pedestrian activity" as the reason for the project. The gold standard in the US for pedestrians at grade crossings is like this example on Caltrain in SF: they put up railings and pedestrian gates to corral pedestrians and discourage illegal crossings. Not sure if Metra will do anything that extensive, since they have nothing else like that on the network currently. They could also put up 4-quadrant gates, but those are usually reserved for rural areas where trains approach at high speeds of >80mph.

[harryc]

Originally Posted by ardecila

Their solution is better crossing gates. Sigh.

https://chicago.suntimes.com/city-ha...ance-committee
.

The solution is responsibility - we live, work, and play next to dangerous road and rail lines all our lives. Those who can not muster the intelligence and wisdom to do so safely should be removed from the gene pool.

For those cars stuck at crossings - well there is a train right there - going faster than you.

[The Lurker]

I have a solution / pipe dream. Deck over Kinzie from halsted to Racine and stretches of Carroll and elevate the N-S streets, creating a mini multi-level street grid and eliminating rail crossings. Loading bays and parking entrances are situated at grade, pedestrian entrances and retail at street level. New developments can conceal multiple levels of parking below street level addressing parking concerns while maximizing activity at street level

[Randomguy34]

Zoning app for 401 S Wacker is being uploaded. There were rumors on the forum that this would be a supertall, and Chase had considered this a site for their new HQ. Checking throughout the day to see when the PDF is uploaded: https://chicago.legistar.com/Legisla...vanced&Search=

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by Randomguy34

Zoning app for 401 S Wacker is being uploaded. There were rumors on the forum that this would be a supertall, and Chase had considered this a site for their new HQ. Checking throughout the day to see when the PDF is uploaded: https://chicago.legistar.com/Legisla...vanced&Search=

I'm eagerly awaiting this.


In other related news, there is a new zoning app up to replace the current building at 1026-44 W Jackson with a new 11 story 72 unit building with 113 parking spaces (wtf?) at 135 feet high. Apparently no ground floor commercial/retail (UGH). Architect is SGW and Belgravia is the developer. This is a block away from their currently U/C building CA6.

Current building is 2 stories tall from the Bays corporation - the ones who make those english muffins:
https://www.google.com/maps/place/10...!4d-87.6534126


Yay to new height but massive boo to that much parking so close to the train and no ground floor commercial/retail.

[BVictor1]

^^You two have me excited about this and I'm trying to keep my expectations low.

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by marothisu

I'm eagerly awaiting this.


In other related news, there is a new zoning app up to replace the current building at 1026-44 W Jackson with a new 11 story 72 unit building with 113 parking spaces (wtf?) at 135 feet high. Apparently no ground floor commercial/retail (UGH). Architect is SGW and Belgravia is the developer. This is a block away from their currently U/C building CA6.

Current building is 2 stories tall from the Bays corporation - the ones who make those english muffins:
https://www.google.com/maps/place/10...!4d-87.6534126


Yay to new height but massive boo to that much parking so close to the train and no ground floor commercial/retail.

^ Well, it has all of the characteristics of a high end condo project. Love um or hate um, those millionaires like to have a place for their Jaguars, Audi RS7s, and Aston Martin Vantages

[thegoatman]

there should be commercial space there tho. come on, the west loop has more foot traffic than the loop these days

[Chi-Sky21]

Originally Posted by marothisu

I'm eagerly awaiting this.


In other related news, there is a new zoning app up to replace the current building at 1026-44 W Jackson with a new 11 story 72 unit building with 113 parking spaces (wtf?) at 135 feet high. Apparently no ground floor commercial/retail (UGH). Architect is SGW and Belgravia is the developer. This is a block away from their currently U/C building CA6.

Current building is 2 stories tall from the Bays corporation - the ones who make those english muffins:
https://www.google.com/maps/place/10...!4d-87.6534126


Yay to new height but massive boo to that much parking so close to the train and no ground floor commercial/retail.

Can't be worse than the building next door to it....yuck.

[ithakas]

Originally Posted by marothisu

I'm eagerly awaiting this.


In other related news, there is a new zoning app up to replace the current building at 1026-44 W Jackson with a new 11 story 72 unit building with 113 parking spaces (wtf?) at 135 feet high. Apparently no ground floor commercial/retail (UGH). Architect is SGW and Belgravia is the developer. This is a block away from their currently U/C building CA6.

I'd prefer there be ground floor retail but I really like what this team came up with for CA6 nearby (we'll see how the brick masonry turns out...). I imagine this will be a similar project.

[rgarri4]

Originally Posted by marothisu

I'm eagerly awaiting this.


In other related news, there is a new zoning app up to replace the current building at 1026-44 W Jackson with a new 11 story 72 unit building with 113 parking spaces (wtf?) at 135 feet high. Apparently no ground floor commercial/retail (UGH). Architect is SGW and Belgravia is the developer. This is a block away from their currently U/C building CA6.

Current building is 2 stories tall from the Bays corporation - the ones who make those english muffins:
https://www.google.com/maps/place/10...!4d-87.6534126


Yay to new height but massive boo to that much parking so close to the train and no ground floor commercial/retail.

My rendering studio did the renderings for this project (we also did CA6). I'll post them once I have permission. But for now they are telling me not yet.

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

^ Well, it has all of the characteristics of a high end condo project. Love um or hate um, those millionaires like to have a place for their Jaguars, Audi RS7s, and Aston Martin Vantages

Well, I'm not mad at that as much as I am about the no commercial/retail at all on the ground floor. Not going to lie. That's more upsetting to me than the parking.

Originally Posted by rgarri4

My rendering studio did the renderings for this project (we also did CA6). I'll post them once I have permission. But for now they are telling me not yet.

Very nice. Does it look good? Does it look any different than other Belgravia projects?