CHICAGO | Highrise Projects & Construction, v7

[SamInTheLoop]

Originally Posted by harryc

Technically the caissons are long gone - only the piers remain.

Caissons are the steel tubes used when installing piers in our viscous clay, they are removed and re-used.

So I could have been long using incorrect terminology, but my understanding was always that caissons, drilled shafts and drilled piers are interchangeable terms and refer to the actual foundations themselves. And caisson sleeves (and probably other interchangeable terms) are what are removed. Wrong?

[chicubs111]

Originally Posted by SamInTheLoop

It is a mystery. Still don't get it. I think they might have gotten some push back potentially above a certain height, but from my point of view the developer just simply left 150-250 units on the table (maybe 20-25 stories). Just to not go through what would probably be a fairly run-of-the-mill entitlement process (don't see a groundswell of controoversy likely for a project of this nature in this location).

Just a weird calculus.

Why do you think there would of been push back even at a taller height as this location ?.....i never could understand the rationale behind push back on height especially the most ridiculous claim that shouldn't even been warranted by any alderman about blocking someones views. The loop of all places in the city shouldn't even have have any inkling of problems for going tall... the fact that alderman Reilly keeps playing this game even in places like the loop is reason why alderman in this city are so corrupted.

[skysoar]

I agree with you concerning Loop heights being over- scrutinized. Also with land ultimately becoming less available in the Loop, I would think building taller would be the only feasible option.

[LouisVanDerWright]

Originally Posted by SamInTheLoop

It is a mystery. Still don't get it. I think they might have gotten some push back potentially above a certain height, but from my point of view the developer just simply left 150-250 units on the table (maybe 20-25 stories). Just to not go through what would probably be a fairly run-of-the-mill entitlement process (don't see a groundswell of controoversy likely for a project of this nature in this location).

Just a weird calculus.

Originally Posted by chicubs111

Why do you think there would of been push back even at a taller height as this location ?.....i never could understand the rationale behind push back on height especially the most ridiculous claim that shouldn't even been warranted by any alderman about blocking someones views. The loop of all places in the city shouldn't even have have any inkling of problems for going tall... the fact that alderman Reilly keeps playing this game even in places like the loop is reason why alderman in this city are so corrupted.

Guys, my post on this got deleted, probably because some trolls who can't behave showed up, but the answer is obvious:

What massive financial burden is introduced whenever you secure a zoning change even if its through a "run of the mill entitlement process" in an area where such a project "couldn't possibly be contraversial"?

Since we apparently aren't allowed to mention it, let's just say it includes three letters: A, R, and O...

Of course I continue to not be believed about this, but have you noticed that there have been virtually no residential rezoning requests now for like almost two years? The only ones that show up are already in the planning process or extremely high end projects like Tribune... It's not a cooincidence.

[SamInTheLoop]

Originally Posted by chicubs111

Why do you think there would of been push back even at a taller height as this location ?.....i never could understand the rationale behind push back on height especially the most ridiculous claim that shouldn't even been warranted by any alderman about blocking someones views. The loop of all places in the city shouldn't even have have any inkling of problems for going tall... the fact that alderman Reilly keeps playing this game even in places like the loop is reason why alderman in this city are so corrupted.

You’re opening question would appear to be asked and answered. I was not taking that position, but was stating the reality there would likely be some pushback/tougher negotiation for entitlements above a certain size (which again might not really come into play until it got up to ~45-50 stories).

[maru2501]

I do see a future where some smaller, non-landmarked type buildings on the Loop's eastern side and demolished for taller thin towers.. maybe next boom

[BVictor1]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

very interesting.

though the article says that the other 2 buildings in the PD have veto power over any potential redevelopment of the site, and with one of those buildings being the god-awful 200 N dearborn condo tower, my guess is that the west-facing units there will fight tooth and nail to stop any tall development on the site from ever being built.

Any building on that site would be as tall or taller than them anyway as of right per current zoning.

[chicubs111]

CBRE closes sale of 52,000-SF retail asset in Chicago

another article

"Located at the corner of Clark and Lake in Chicago’s Loop, the property includes an open-air courtyard and comprises 20,755 square feet on the ground floor, 18,991 square feet on the second floor and a 12,288-square-foot fitness center on the third floor. The land is 20,755 square feet.

The property is zoned PD 375, with the underlying zoning being DC-16, the highest zoning Chicago offers and the only zoning with unlimited FAR.

With its location in the CBD and immediate access to amenities such as the Riverwalk, State Street retail corridor, theater district and an abundance of restaurants, the property could be a strong candidate for development into a mixed-use tower."

So underlying zoning is DC-16 ...but there is veto power from neighbor property if they dont approve of the proposed building here?...Kinda crazy..give the developer this incredible zoning opportunity to build tall but then have this group squash it from whatever reason they feel necessary?....smh

https://www.rejournals.com/cbre-clos...icago-20191115

[bhawk66]

Originally Posted by maru2501

I do see a future where some smaller, non-landmarked type buildings on the Loop's eastern side and demolished for taller thin towers.. maybe next boom

Not sure we'll see ANY new tall towers in the loop this cycle or the next. Many current office building owners in the Loop have already/recently voiced their concerns about current AND upcoming vacancies due mainly to the office developments on the near west side. Combined with a growing trend of companies desiring more unified (large floor plates) spaces. Should be interesting to see how the '20's pan out.

[chicubs111]

^ be nice to see the loop core trend even more residential...i feel like there has be some momentum lost in that trend in the last 10 years or since legacy was built.

[RedCorsair87]

I would LOVE to see more Loop residential. I don't care if it's all luxury and I could never afford it, but it would certainly help transform the area into a full-fledge neighborhood.

[LouisVanDerWright]

Originally Posted by chicubs111

^ be nice to see the loop core trend even more residential...i feel like there has be some momentum lost in that trend in the last 10 years or since legacy was built.

This is exactly how that happens. Every cycle creates new supply of new class A buildings. This naturally leaves behind a trail of now C or D class buildings in it's wake that are now vulnerable to adaptive reuse. This is gradually changing the nature of the East Loop.

Originally Posted by bhawk66

Not sure we'll see ANY new tall towers in the loop this cycle or the next. Many current office building owners in the Loop have already/recently voiced their concerns about current AND upcoming vacancies due mainly to the office developments on the near west side. Combined with a growing trend of companies desiring more unified (large floor plates) spaces. Should be interesting to see how the '20's pan out.

[MorganChi]

I remember a couple years ago there was going to be a planned tower there I don’t remember the height but I think it was definitely in the 900 range. I’m excited to hear this news. I can def see a 800-900 footer there. Imagine the Thompson building get demolish and that property available for two or one super tall. That would be crazy man

Originally Posted by chicubs111

CBRE closes sale of 52,000-SF retail asset in Chicago

another article

"Located at the corner of Clark and Lake in Chicago’s Loop, the property includes an open-air courtyard and comprises 20,755 square feet on the ground floor, 18,991 square feet on the second floor and a 12,288-square-foot fitness center on the third floor. The land is 20,755 square feet.

The property is zoned PD 375, with the underlying zoning being DC-16, the highest zoning Chicago offers and the only zoning with unlimited FAR.

With its location in the CBD and immediate access to amenities such as the Riverwalk, State Street retail corridor, theater district and an abundance of restaurants, the property could be a strong candidate for development into a mixed-use tower."

So underlying zoning is DC-16 ...but there is veto power from neighbor property if they dont approve of the proposed building here?...Kinda crazy..give the developer this incredible zoning opportunity to build tall but then have this group squash it from whatever reason they feel necessary?....smh

https://www.rejournals.com/cbre-clos...icago-20191115

[Freefall]

Originally Posted by MorganChi

I remember a couple years ago there was going to be a planned tower there I don’t remember the height but I think it was definitely in the 900 range. I’m excited to hear this news. I can def see a 800-900 footer there. Imagine the Thompson building get demolish and that property available for two or one super tall. That would be crazy man

"...it will appeal to myriad uses—including office, retail, food and beverage."

Hmm... think they forgot a couple other uses

[dan ryan]

I don't think the Thompson Center will get torn down which makes me very happy.

[PittsburghPA]

Nov 16

Fulton East



167 N Green

[MorganChi]

Originally Posted by dan ryan

I don't think the Thompson Center will get torn down which makes me very happy.

Maybe but I don’t see the state putting any funds towards fixing it that’s why I believe it will be gone or bought by someone.

[SolarWind]

November 15, 2019













More renderings:
http://www.roszak.com/#/60-east-randolph/

[KWillChicago]

^What a frickin waste of a prime 60 floor location.

[chicubs111]

Originally Posted by KWillChicago

^What a frickin waste of a prime 60 floor location.

I know...my sentiments exactly...that view could been epic and filled that gap perfectly in that skyline shot with a 60 plus story tower...smh...so damn conservative