CHICAGO | One Chicago | 971 FT & 574 FT | 78 & 49 FLOORS

[aaron38]

I'd prefer if the glass was charcoal instead of the ubiquitous blue. And if those architectural panels were more than just lower floor accents. Feels like a triple down the line rather than a home run. But it'll look great from street level with all that activity.
Build it.

[BVictor1]

Not a whole lot a negative comments, in fact, a number of supporters.

[the urban politician]

Has there been any constructive feedback?

By constructive I mean all useful comments that don’t include “Its too tall! Too much traffic! My cat wont get sunlight! Children will die!” nonsense that should largely be disregarded as whiny white noise at this point.

I’m curious what the intelligent and thoughtful people had to say.

[left of center]

Oh man, so deco! Love it!

BVic, any vocal NIMBYS at the meeting? Were most people for or against?

I have a feeling that this developer wants to hit the 1,000 ft mark, based on the Crains article. The fact that the alderman wants to mimic 57th St. in New York also bodes well. Dollars to donuts this pans out as a super tall. My only concern is whether this current cycle will last long enough to see it through. Last thing we want is another Waterview Tower in River North.

Whats the earliest this would break ground? Mid 2019? It'll definitely be pushing it. I feel the housing/equities market may crest sometime next year. (Think happy thoughts! Think happy thoughts!)

[left of center]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

Has there been any constructive feedback?

By constructive I mean all useful comments that don’t include “Its too tall! Too much traffic! My cat wont get sunlight! Children will die!” nonsense that should largely be disregarded as whiny white noise at this point.

I’m curious what the intelligent and thoughtful people had to say.

Vitamin D deficiency in cats is the issue of our day in modern American cities

[Chicago_Forever]

^^ More importantly, did they give a timeline for groundbreaking? I thought I had heard or read somewhere that they wanted to be in the ground sometime next fall. Also, the Crains article stated that HP is designing the shorter tower/podium and it shows. That part of the project could really use some help. I’d really like to see a reduction in parking too.

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by Randomguy34

A DNAInfo reporter quoted Hopkins saying he "wants this to be an "impetus" for an improved Chicago Ave. It should be like 57th in New York."
https://twitter.com/DavidLMatthews/s...79526539431936

That's a good sign so far.

Good sign they want to improve Chicago Ave, but 57th Street? LOL. No thanks. 57th Street is full of a bunch of extremely expensive condos that are empty from foreign millionaires/billionaires just driving prices up. Maybe more like 86th street on UWS or something with more modern architecture or something.

[Stunnies23]

Go to Aldermanhopkins.com/onechicagosquare

There you can voice your support for the project. I told him to approve as presented tonight, as quickly as possible.

Half of the comments were from NIMBYS concerned about parking, traffic, and views.
The other half were generally supportive of the project. We can win this battle for sure!

[left of center]

Originally Posted by Stunnies23

Go to Aldermanhopkins.com/onechicagosquare

There you can voice your support for the project. I told him to approve as presented tonight, as quickly as possible.

Half of the comments were from NIMBYS concerned about parking, traffic, and views.
The other half were generally supportive of the project. We can win this battle for sure!

It asks for an address. Somehow I don't think Brian Hopkins will care much about the opinion of someone who lives in the 1st ward. Either way, I sent my supportive response in.

[Mikelacey45]

Originally Posted by Stunnies23

Go to Aldermanhopkins.com/onechicagosquare

There you can voice your support for the project. I told him to approve as presented tonight, as quickly as possible.

Half of the comments were from NIMBYS concerned about parking, traffic, and views.
The other half were generally supportive of the project. We can win this battle for sure!

Exactly

[TimeAgain]

The new height is utterly disappointing, but it's still beautiful.

[rlw777]

Originally Posted by Randomguy34

A DNAInfo reporter quoted Hopkins saying he "wants this to be an "impetus" for an improved Chicago Ave. It should be like 57th in New York."
https://twitter.com/DavidLMatthews/s...79526539431936

That's a good sign so far.

Chicago Ave. becoming like 57th St. in NYC??

Hell I would be happy if this project simply became an impetus for someone doing something with that commieblock Asbury Plaza and it's shittastic parking garage.

[rlw777]

Originally Posted by TimeAgain

The new height is utterly disappointing, but it's still beautiful.

There is no confirmed new height. Roof height doesn't mean that building height has been changed.

[Stunnies23]

Originally Posted by left of center

It asks for an address. Somehow I don't think Brian Hopkins will care much about the opinion of someone who lives in the 1st ward. Either way, I sent my supportive response in.

Fake an address in the 2nd ward, Gold Coast portion of his district. Most of the people asking questions at the presentation were from the 42nd ward since this lot is a tendril located in Riley's ward.

[spyguy]

-I like the main tower, though it could use some sort of additional setback or crown at the top (especially fitting across from Holy Name)
-The second tower is an after thought and could use some work. Hopefully they can find a way to add some visual interest rather than just have a glass slab
-The podium is a bit of a mess. This is the area that needs the most improvement. The "randomness" of the Dearborn and Chicago Avenue facing sides do not work. The corner on State and Chicago is also not great IMO
-The little plaza really has no use except for maybe wedding photos? A place to sit and eat outside next to this flagship grocery store would be better, maybe with some public art/sculpture
-Programming sounds exciting. This will pump a huge amount of energy into the streets

Overall, it's a great project (much better than I would have hoped for this highly anticipated lot) that could use some refinements.

[LouisVanDerWright]

^^^ The Little "plaza" will also be a great place to get pummeled by 100 MPH winds directed and concentrated off the lake. Like sitting on the North side of the Hancock when the wind is out of the NNE during a Lake Effect Snow stop.

[BVictor1]

One Chicago Square Meeting

October 24, 2017

-15.98 FAR

-1.5 million sq ft

-795 apartments (900 sq ft avg)

-75 condos (2,700 sq ft avg)

-900 parking (225 for Holy Name)

-40,000 sq ft of boutique office.

-3 levels of underground parking

-50% of first floor for internal; loading

-250 person event space on 3rd floor of main tower
-2 floors of office above event space
-8-9 spa
-45,000 sq ft activated roof top (run by spa)

-base finished in stone (limestone)

-plan to run fountain in winter?

-interior turntable for delivery trucks

-$8,000,000 in annual taxes (where there's none now

-$7.7million paid into trust

-Density bonus $12,000,000 (80% to neighborhood opportunity) (10% adopt-a-landmark) (10% for neighborhood)

-affordable units (offsite)

-tuned mass damper

-$740,000,000 (project estimated cost)

-Rental $4.00 per sq ft.

-Break Ground September 2018?

[BVictor1]

Truth be told... I was very, very shocked by the tone in the room tonight. The typical NIMBY bitching and moaning that you'd normally hear was at a minimum.

Ys, traffic was an issue, but there were a number of residents who supported. There were a few who brought up the height, but the developer handled it.

I think the majority know that as of right, the developer can build something quite significant.

I heard a number of people praise the design (pre meeting start).

I think there will be minimal overall change.


And regarding the height... 1,011' is what's allowed by the PD. Let's remember that this developer increased the height of 9 West Walton several times.

[ethereal_reality]

Maybe I missed it earlier in the thread, but has anyone posted a link to the website yet-


ONE CHICAGO SQUARE

I just realized all it has so far is this title page. sorry

[cannedairspray]

Originally Posted by Halsted & Villagio

From that one angle you posted they look a little alike but overall nope - not seeing it. Flat tops - check. Set backs - check. But that can be said for a lot of buildings. The size, number of set-backs, texture, window treatment, glazing and statement this building makes is totally different from Wolf Point S. This building harkens back to deco or thereabouts and is a new take classical design. It evokes thoughts of a modern/deco Chicago Empire State Building... or something along those lines

This is actually surreal.