CHICAGO | 400 N Lake Shore Drive | 851 FT & 765 FT | 73 & ? FLOORS - Page 66

BVictor1 · #**1301** Posted **Jan 28, 2019, 6:17 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by AMWChicago

Is this a good omen that construction will begin in this cycle, or something that could force a lame design or doom this Related??

https://www.chicagoarchitecture.org/...e-replacement/

It's not yet approved. The alderman is seemingly holding things until after the election.

r18tdi · #**1302** Posted **Jan 28, 2019, 6:41 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by AMWChicago

Is this a good omen that construction will begin in this cycle, or something that could force a lame design or doom this Related??

https://www.chicagoarchitecture.org/...e-replacement/

I could be wrong, but this might be the City's way of lighting a fire under the DuSable Park portion of the plan. The wording is hard to decipher...

UPChicago · #**1303** Posted **Jan 28, 2019, 10:24 PM**

A lot of times when a zoning change is requested and approved the developer has a certain amount of time to develop the plan before it reverts to its original zoning, I don't think this has anything to do with any pressure from the city rather just a technicality in the zoning ordinance.

BonoboZill4 · #**1304** Posted **Feb 2, 2019, 10:02 PM**

Nothing of note to see :/

Hourstrooper · #**1305** Posted **Feb 2, 2019, 10:07 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by BonoboZill4

Nothing of note to see :/

After the elections this thing should hopefully get going, if Reilly doesn't keep asking for more changes aka money.

Investing In Chicago · #**1306** Posted **Feb 2, 2019, 10:19 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zapatan

People may have mixed feelings about Reilly but at the end of the day he basically set Related up to combine the towers and build something taller.

Think about it, the height was never a problem. The podium was, and the hotel portion. If they remove the hotel portion from one of the towers it would give them more incentive to combine the two, and build one really tall tower.

This is such a perfect opportunity for a new tallest and I really hope they don't f*ck it up royally.

2 towers at this location is so much better than one taller building. Your obsession with height is rather strange.

Skyguy_7 · #**1307** Posted **Feb 3, 2019, 1:24 AM**

^ I’d have to agree; it is becoming quite old, even for a skyscraper forum. Most posts are devoid of substance. You should challenge yourself to go a week without writing a post that includes the words “tall” “tallest” “feet” “meters” “roof” “parapet” “height”.

What are your thoughts on the proposed building materials for this project?

the urban politician · #**1308** Posted **Feb 3, 2019, 3:08 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zapatan

It's a skyscraper forum, what do you expect?

I expect people to have a civilized discussion about design, urban environment, context, density, walkability, economic benefits, etc. Not a bunch of folks going around to each thread opining “Gee whiz I sure do wish it could be 1000 feet tall......golly gosh!”. Thankfully 90% of this forum consists of thoughtful people who take all factors into context and aren’t obsessed with one, single parameter

Hourstrooper · #**1309** Posted **Feb 3, 2019, 3:17 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zapatan

People may have mixed feelings about Reilly but at the end of the day he basically set Related up to combine the towers and build something taller.

Think about it, the height was never a problem. The podium was, and the hotel portion. If they remove the hotel portion from one of the towers it would give them more incentive to combine the two, and build one really tall tower.

This is such a perfect opportunity for a new tallest and I really hope they don't f*ck it up royally.

agreed we will find out soon!

cozy · #**1310** Posted **Feb 3, 2019, 11:41 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by the urban politician

I expect people to have a civilized discussion about design, urban environment, context, density, walkability, economic benefits, etc. Not a bunch of folks going around to each thread opining “Gee whiz I sure do wish it could be 1000 feet tall......golly gosh!”. Thankfully 90% of this forum consists of thoughtful people who take all factors into context and aren’t obsessed with one, single parameter

15k posts since '04.. im a new member and even i know some people on this forum like tall buildings. Not sure how this comes as a surprise to you.

I don't see anything fundamentally wrong with expressing to like-minded individuals that you would enjoy seeing X number of feet in a development. If you'd like to express your opinion on, for example, the riverwalk design; that is equally as acceptable, and arguably a more important factor throughout the development - nobody is going to berate you for mentioning it. Positive vibes!

the urban politician · #**1311** Posted **Feb 3, 2019, 2:52 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by cozy

15k posts since '04.. im a new member and even i know some people on this forum like tall buildings. Not sure how this comes as a surprise to you.

I don't see anything fundamentally wrong with expressing to like-minded individuals that you would enjoy seeing X number of feet in a development. If you'd like to express your opinion on, for example, the riverwalk design; that is equally as acceptable, and arguably a more important factor throughout the development - nobody is going to berate you for mentioning it. Positive vibes!

Let’s not kid ourselves, Zapatan has done far more than “expressing to like minded individuals” or “mentioning” his obsession with height on occasion. He has worn the issue down to a nub in some threads, and to no avail. Developers have their reasons, so it sort of seems pointless.

Anyhow, it’s all good. I love tall buildings too, but if a building isn’t 1000 ft tall I sure would hope more people would take a breather and not make such a big deal over it.

Northwest · #**1312** Posted **Feb 3, 2019, 4:20 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by BonoboZill4

Nothing of note to see :/

I always wondered why Case Foundation didn't yank that last cassion sleeve out of the ground. It seems like a hazard to leave behind, and well, its worth money.
Maybe I have OCD but that thing has bothered me for more than a decade now, and I cringe every time I see it.
Even worse, it appears to be sitting at an angle and not perfectly vertical. WHY?? It makes me want to drink.

pilsenarch · #**1313** Posted **Feb 3, 2019, 5:10 PM**

Count me in the 'not-height-obsessed-crowd' but it is worth noting that there are very few sites more ripe for a supertall than this one... particularly since wolf point is now off the table...

It is at the mouth of the river and is surrounded by a surprisingly non-nimbyish neighborhood... stars rarely align for such height potential...

BonoboZill4 · #**1314** Posted **Feb 3, 2019, 5:50 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zapatan

Funny, I was just reading through the Salesforce and OCS threads and I seem to be one of the few people not obsessed with the height of those projects. Not sure what your issue with me is or why you keep singling me out but I don't appreciate it at all.

Yea, this. It's called seizing opportunities.

Yeah... you're quite tame when it comes to the height rants that occur here. It's usually randos that come once a month that make the long supertall-based whine fests

BonoboZill4 · #**1315** Posted **Feb 4, 2019, 3:38 AM**

Alright lads and ladettes. It's time to discuss the hypocrisy(at least as to how I see it) of Alderman Reilly's stance against the base of this suspended proposal, as if he's protecting the fabric of the neighborhood, but also have garbage like this out there:

This tower is a tragedy. I've never seen such disregard for human eyesight than this disgusting base of a "building". Even if these disgusting, hideous, and naueating .... things(not even sure what the hell else to call them) weren't on the corners, it would still be probably the ugliest windowless, brick base in the city. If 400 LSD's base was too "bunker-like", then what on earth is this thing? And it's far from the only one in the city. Imagine if these towers don't get off the ground because the cycle chills, and it's because of that? I'd actually be mortified, because as I was walking from Michigan Avenue to the Ogden slip, I could see how beautiful this area is actually becoming, albeit quiet. Add in 6 more towers in the key lots between the Tribune site and LSD and you have a damn wonderful re-imagining of that City Centre masterplan.

Anyway, sorry for the rant...

BonoboZill4 · #**1316** Posted **Feb 4, 2019, 3:39 AM**

Also, is that trash even real brick?

r18tdi · #**1317** Posted **Feb 7, 2019, 3:56 PM**

So according to the Plan Commission notice, the newly introduced PD amendment extends the expiration date to May 6, 2020.

SteelMonkey · #**1318** Posted **Feb 7, 2019, 4:34 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by BonoboZill4

Also, is that trash even real brick?

The building itself looks embarrassed having to perch itself above that car sarcophagus.

AMWChicago · #**1319** Posted **Feb 7, 2019, 4:43 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by r18tdi

So according to the Plan Commission notice, the newly introduced PD amendment extends the expiration date to May 6, 2020.

Could you explain what that means exactly? I might be behind on some posts that would fill in context.

r18tdi · #**1320** Posted **Feb 7, 2019, 4:55 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by AMWChicago

Could you explain what that means exactly? I might be behind on some posts that would fill in context.

It was touched on last page and here.