HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > City Compilations


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #21901  
Old Posted Dec 8, 2022, 4:34 AM
colemonkee's Avatar
colemonkee colemonkee is offline
Ridin' into the sunset
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 9,093
Oh wow!
__________________
"Then each time Fleetwood would be not so much overcome by remorse as bedazzled at having been shown the secret backlands of wealth, and how sooner or later it depended on some act of murder, seldom limited to once."

Against the Day, Thomas Pynchon
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #21902  
Old Posted Dec 8, 2022, 6:58 AM
BVictor1's Avatar
BVictor1 BVictor1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 10,390
Quote:
Originally Posted by Randomguy34 View Post
Holy fuck! The holidays are early this year

357 N. Green St: https://www.chicago.gov/content/dam/...AFT_121422.pdf
Ho! Ho! Ho! indeed













__________________
titanic1
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #21903  
Old Posted Dec 8, 2022, 3:36 PM
rivernorthlurker rivernorthlurker is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,107
Quote:
Originally Posted by ardecila View Post
The Onni plan at 357 N Green will close off that high-speed rail corridor for good... the building core is right in the way, so they can't even cut it though later.

Those Spanish steps are awesome, though. A connection from Halsted down to Kinzie is needed...
Can you point me to info about the high speed rail corridor you're referencing. Eg plans and path?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #21904  
Old Posted Dec 8, 2022, 3:52 PM
moorhosj1 moorhosj1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Posts: 411
Quote:
Originally Posted by rivernorthlurker View Post
Can you point me to info about the high speed rail corridor you're referencing. Eg plans and path?
Not OP, but I assume it is the CrossRail Chicago proposal for high-speed trains from McCormick to O'Hare.

https://www.hsrail.org/midwest/crossrail-chicago
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #21905  
Old Posted Dec 8, 2022, 4:43 PM
BrinChi BrinChi is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 436
I'm curious about that as well. Were they reserving space for new HSR track between K2 and 354 N Union? I don't see how new tracks would go further west.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #21906  
Old Posted Dec 8, 2022, 4:54 PM
west-town-brad west-town-brad is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 965
It's amazing to see how far the west loop has come, in less time, than the south loop. When did the south loop redevelopment start, maybe 1990s? West Loop redevelopment was only kicking off around 2010 if memory serves.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #21907  
Old Posted Dec 8, 2022, 5:32 PM
Klippenstein's Avatar
Klippenstein Klippenstein is offline
Rust Belt Motherland
 
Join Date: Apr 2021
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 760
Quote:
Originally Posted by rivernorthlurker View Post
Can you point me to info about the high speed rail corridor you're referencing. Eg plans and path?
I asked this question before when ardecila brought it up. The explanation is here.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ardecila View Post
Easier to sketch it than to explain verbally. Rail corridor and tunnel portal shown in purple with the Blue Line tunnels shown in blue. The K Station PD was pretty good about preserving the corridor for future rail and not putting buildings or deep foundations in the way - K2 preserved a strip of land, Echelon/Alta stair-stepped their podiums around the curved part of the tunnel, and the Jewel just decked over it with a wide span.

West of Halsted is a different set of PDs with different developers, and I'm not sure the city ever preserved that part of the corridor. Sterling Bay started 360 N Green with a design that clearly blocked the corridor, and now they have switched to one where the corridor is effectively preserved with a pocket park so maybe that's a good sign...

I also showed in yellow a separate plan to add a 4th track into Union Station. That is more likely to happen before we get a tunnel, and K Station also preserved some land for that.

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #21908  
Old Posted Dec 8, 2022, 6:24 PM
Randomguy34's Avatar
Randomguy34 Randomguy34 is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Chicago & Philly
Posts: 2,342
Quote:
Originally Posted by twister244 View Post
With these new proposals - I feel even more convinced it's only a matter of time before we get something really tall proposed in the area. Whether it gets built is another story.
Yeah, most of the large lots and easy to develop sites in Fulton Market now have active proposals or were recently bought up by developers. This means future development will start having to resort to teardowns and building on smaller parcels. The economics of doing so are going to push developers to build taller in order to make up costs and maximize site usage
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #21909  
Old Posted Dec 8, 2022, 6:53 PM
nomarandlee's Avatar
nomarandlee nomarandlee is offline
My Mind Has Left My Body
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,328
Well if it is an issue of a new building at 357 N Green and the potential for a HSR or vital 4th track then I consider it kind of a no brainer. I diminished building or just a scrapping of the project is preferable.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #21910  
Old Posted Dec 8, 2022, 7:04 PM
rivernorthlurker rivernorthlurker is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,107
Quote:
Originally Posted by moorhosj1 View Post
Not OP, but I assume it is the CrossRail Chicago proposal for high-speed trains from McCormick to O'Hare.

https://www.hsrail.org/midwest/crossrail-chicago
Thanks!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Klippenstein View Post
I asked this question before when ardecila brought it up. The explanation is here.
Much appreciated thanks. I can't find any reference to that pink tunnel though in any plans online. Is there any literature from which Ardecila is referencing and he is getting his diagram? I checked the PDF from moorhosj1 but admit I don't understand all the budget items.

It would be pretty incredible to think the entire viability of that rail line would be hanging on the whim of a developer in this way. Could the building be rejected for this reason by the planning commission? As mentioned it seems the other buildings made accommodations.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #21911  
Old Posted Dec 8, 2022, 7:13 PM
rivernorthlurker rivernorthlurker is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,107
357 N Green

Also, interestingly the slide deck makes mention of buried track that apparently already exists there on the site, right where Arcedila's diagram described potential future plans.



And their plan describes pedestrian flow underneath the building aligned with that old track as well as the future potential track described by Arcedila. I'm not sure how exactly 'precise' this is though and if it is north or south. The elevator core cuts pretty close right to that point but obviously the pedestrian path can't pass through the core... (nor a train)

What an interesting site and set of construction problems.



Reply With Quote
     
     
  #21912  
Old Posted Dec 8, 2022, 9:05 PM
SamInTheLoop SamInTheLoop is offline
you know where I'll be
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,535
Wow - 357 Green is really nice. The others, not so much, but at least mostly residential, as the combination of weak office market conditions and the relaxed stance toward residential in the area are combining to steer in that direction.
__________________
It's simple, really - try not to design or build trash.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #21913  
Old Posted Dec 9, 2022, 3:17 AM
thegoatman thegoatman is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Oct 2021
Posts: 646
wayyy too much parking in these proposals. 339 spaces? 5 floors of parking? nah. Atleast its hidden well.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #21914  
Old Posted Dec 9, 2022, 3:50 AM
Klippenstein's Avatar
Klippenstein Klippenstein is offline
Rust Belt Motherland
 
Join Date: Apr 2021
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 760
Quote:
Originally Posted by rivernorthlurker View Post
And their plan describes pedestrian flow underneath the building aligned with that old track as well as the future potential track described by Arcedila. I'm not sure how exactly 'precise' this is though and if it is north or south. The elevator core cuts pretty close right to that point but obviously the pedestrian path can't pass through the core... (nor a train)

What an interesting site and set of construction problems.
If you look at the Ground Floor Plan you can see very clearly that the ROW would need to go right through the elevator cores. So this current design is blocking the HSR ROW.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #21915  
Old Posted Dec 9, 2022, 10:03 AM
gandalf612 gandalf612 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: Andersonville, Chicago
Posts: 244
Quote:
Originally Posted by Klippenstein View Post
If you look at the Ground Floor Plan you can see very clearly that the ROW would need to go right through the elevator cores. So this current design is blocking the HSR ROW.
Meh, there's currently no clear funding for the HSR, if it ever actually happens they can just tear down the highway for it
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #21916  
Old Posted Dec 9, 2022, 7:49 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: 2,567
Giving up a ROW, especially one that has forced many other developments to maintain it, would be pretty foolish. There is no funding now, but about about in 10, 20, 30 years? If there is a building blocking the way, you essentially reduce the chances of potential HSR to zero.
__________________
"Eventually, I think Chicago will be the most beautiful great city left in the world." -Frank Lloyd Wright
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #21917  
Old Posted Dec 9, 2022, 9:17 PM
Briguy Briguy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2020
Posts: 162
Quote:
Originally Posted by left of center View Post
Giving up a ROW, especially one that has forced many other developments to maintain it, would be pretty foolish. There is no funding now, but about about in 10, 20, 30 years? If there is a building blocking the way, you essentially reduce the chances of potential HSR to zero.
They simply need to reconfigure union to be through-running, then this tunnel is unnecessary. HSR uses old mail platforms under OPO. Would be way cheaper than boring a whole new tunnel, and then what,
? this is simply a bypass of union station. Where even would a new HSR rail platform be if the tunnel ends up running under Clinton, which is where it would end up based on that drawing?

Union needs a total rebuild to allow at least half the track to through-run, then you get your Indianapolis-Milwaukee ohare-McCormick, Cleveland-Madison, one seat HSR route. Would involve a LOT of work with that massive building atop.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #21918  
Old Posted Dec 9, 2022, 9:56 PM
Randomguy34's Avatar
Randomguy34 Randomguy34 is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Chicago & Philly
Posts: 2,342
^ There would still be a desire to have a separate ROW for HSR, even if most of Union Station is converted for through-running. The Metra tracks are street-level from Canal all the way to Racine, which is not good for any potential >200 mph HSR service. One could bury all four of the Metra tracks, but that would be more costly than building a separate tunnel for only two HSR tracks.

Preserving the ROW would ultimately be for a new West Loop Transportation Center, which would be integrated with Ogilvie & Union Station. The tunnel would be multi-leveld and allow CTA trains & buses to use the tunnel. So if any chance of a HSR tunnel is thwarted, then direct CTA connection is also gone as well






https://www.hsrail.org/its-time-fix-union-station
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #21919  
Old Posted Dec 10, 2022, 6:07 AM
streetline streetline is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 251
Quote:
Originally Posted by r18tdi View Post
I like this so much! The infill projects on the slim lots on this part of Randolph are just killing it.

This is the kind of fine grained density I'd love to see built on more vacant/parking lots within a couple of miles of the loop or half a mile of an El station:
  • 40-80ft wide lots
  • 8-15 stories tall
  • Built to the lot line
  • No visible podium (hopefully that remains true with this one, it has a parking floor, but it looks like it might be well blended in)
  • Zero curb cuts (unless you count Couch Pl, which is practically an alley)


Quote:
Originally Posted by Randomguy34 View Post
Holy fuck! The holidays are early this year


420 N. May St: https://www.chicago.gov/content/dam/...T_12.14.22.pdf


357 N. Green St: https://www.chicago.gov/content/dam/...AFT_121422.pdf


400 N. Morgan St, 370 N. Morgan St, 401 N. Morgan St: https://www.chicago.gov/content/dam/...T%20121422.pdf
420 N May looks impressively tall for being that far west, but I suppose that if they build the new west loop Metra station it'll be conveniently close to it. And I'm glad they're keeping the facades along May Street, even if it's only as a facade-ectomy.



357 N Green is interesting in that they're talking about a pedestrian & bike connection from Green to Halstead. That sort of connection would be great to have since there's a 4 block gap between Hubbard and Fulton where there's no route east or west that both crosses and connects to Halstead, I just wish it could be continued all the way east to DesPlaines (it seems like a real planning failure that there are going to be two buildings with bridges between Halsted and the Jewel on DesPlaines, but afaik they're each private and for those building's residents only).

And obviously if this would really block the HSR corridor, that would also be a planning failure that should be prevented. One potential building's design decisions can't be allowed to dictate an entire regions' transportation planning.


I notice they're planning on knocking down the part of 401 N Morgan (aka Morgan Manufacturing) at the NE corner of Morgan and Kinzie which currently houses the Tabu restaurant and replacing it with green space and a fountain. I think I might prefer they leave that to maintain the street wall on Kinzie and avoid knocking down any more of that old factory building than they already did to create Morgan Manufacturing. They could still build their tower over the parking lot as planned and have room for a smaller green space.

And if they want to get creative with additional public space, they might look at lighting and decorating those mid-block private "existing ancillary access" tunnels under the Metra tracks to make them an attractive pedestrian route through the development (somewhat like the "mews" or "paseo" other nearby developments are trying); I think Morgan Manufacturing sometimes does things like that on a temporary basis for events already.


Taken together, I like a lot of aspects of these developments, and am excited for how much is planned on Kinzie. That street is transitioning from mostly vacant lots and single story industrial to mostly towers at a wild pace if everything planned gets built.

Last edited by streetline; Dec 10, 2022 at 2:12 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #21920  
Old Posted Dec 10, 2022, 4:50 PM
Rizzo Rizzo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 7,280
The ROW should be maintained exactly by principle since we’ve required all other projects to acknowledge it.

But HSR with a grade approach into a busy downtown is fading into irrelevance in my opinion. Those concepts were at a time of a growing convention industry, and concentrated tourism and central business district with meetings all day, everyday. With more remote work, in-person meetings are down for business travel, tourism has dispersed widely in the central core and up into the neighborhoods, and convention traffic is much weaker.

Our focus should be on modernizing the blue line and considerations of livability for unused ROW corridors with pedestrian paths and plazas
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 > City Compilations
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 3:18 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.