CHICAGO | General Developments - Page 2043

AlpacaObsessor · #**40841** Posted **Apr 9, 2018, 6:17 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by r18tdi

yeah, looks like it's gonna be this.

curbed

o o f

10023 · #**40842** Posted **Apr 9, 2018, 7:26 PM**

So, are they actually going to get rid of those stupid “frontage roads” along Randolph?

https://chicago.curbed.com/2018/3/28...d-tucker-adjmi

Personally I think bike lanes are actually pretty dangerous there (prepare for a lot of cyclist vs. drunk person collisions), but huge wide sidewalks with outdoor seating and plenty of tree cover would be awesome.

Can some developer pony up for mature plane trees?

left of center · #**40843** Posted **Apr 9, 2018, 8:26 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by r18tdi

Yeah, looks like it's gonna be this.

Curbed

I wouldn't mind this development so much if it just didn't have PARKING right in front of it. Ugh, what the hell?

marothisu · #**40844** Posted **Apr 9, 2018, 10:13 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by left of center

I wouldn't mind this development so much if it just didn't have PARKING right in front of it. Ugh, what the hell?

Yeah that's weird - related but not, this actually reminds me of when I was in China about 11 months ago. In the city of Shenyang (in NE China - city about the same size as NYC) near where I was staying was very urban - it looked a lot like Manhattan in a way - tons of stores and high rises/skyscrapers creating a canyon as far as the eye can see. It was actually the most similar experience to the wider N-S avenues of Manhattan I had by far while in China though not definitely exactly the same. The weird thing is that there were a few shorter buildings in the mix that really oddly had a few parking spaces in front - imagine Manhattan and then imagine that. It was odd, but didn't detract from the urban experience at all. Of course this is way different but thought I'd mention it.

Picture: https://imgur.com/CR9AcnL
On the same street, but I can't find the pic with a better canyon effect: https://imgur.com/tN8vZNS

It was weird as it all of a sudden changed from high rise set up with normal sidewalks, to this one side of one block like the first picture, then back again to how it was which is why I took the picture.

marothisu · #**40845** Posted **Apr 10, 2018, 1:29 PM**

Article about the new hotel (Found) at 613 N Wells (Wells & Ontario) that was once an SRO. Mostly from the lobby. A few of the lobby pictures remind me of Freehand Hostel on Ohio. I think the concept in a way is similar to Freehand in that it's kind of a "higher end" hostel. Shared rooms start at $24/night and the private rooms with Queen sized bed are $109/night. The last picture in the album is of the exterior.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/lifest...422-story.html

Exterior: http://www.trbimg.com/img-5acbecc1/t.../1150/1150x647

Before: https://www.google.com/maps/place/61...!4d-87.6337741

west-town-brad · #**40846** Posted **Apr 10, 2018, 1:53 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila

This is sacrilege. For the price, Redhot Ranch makes hands-down the best fries in the city, and the minimalist hot dogs (mustard, onions, peppers only) are also delicious.

I also love Margie’s Candies, and I hope it stays around forever as a time-warp to 1960s malt shoppes (my god, the hot fudge!) However, it is a family business, and if it were ever to close, that building could make a wonderful plaza now that it’s started to be framed by midrise buildings. Apart from Margie’s itself, the building isn’t too remarkable. They could remove parking and widen sidewalks on the Milwaukee and Armitage sides so it doesn’t feel cut off from the surrounding neighborhood, and do farmers markets and gatherings there, where organizers can capture the stream of people off the L.

Margie's Building: http://www.outpostinv.com/the-milwest/

Like I said, stalled rehab. The rehab started about 2 years ago... been at a standstill since about 1 year ago... also they got a permit for a large rooftop billboard recently though nothing has been installed yet.

SolarWind · #**40847** Posted **Apr 12, 2018, 3:48 AM**

April 10, 2018

Jibba · #**40848** Posted **Apr 12, 2018, 4:42 PM**

Prtizker rowhouses on Clark:

r18tdi · #**40849** Posted **Apr 12, 2018, 4:54 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jibba

Prtizker rowhouses on Clark:

"Rentals from $13,500 to over $15,000."

Investing In Chicago · #**40850** Posted **Apr 12, 2018, 5:12 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by r18tdi

"Rentals from $13,500 to over $15,000."

I have a hunch that most here dislike this project, but I like it a lot, and wish projects like this were peppered throughout the City.

...And for 4,000 sq ft. the rental prices seem in line with the market.

Vlajos · #**40851** Posted **Apr 12, 2018, 5:36 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Investing In Chicago

I have a hunch that most here dislike this project, but I like it a lot, and wish projects like this were peppered throughout the City.

...And for 4,000 sq ft. the rental prices seem in line with the market.

I think it looks really nice too. If Ms. Pritzker can't rent them at whatever the target is, I'm sure she can afford to drop the rent a bit.

Rizzo · #**40852** Posted **Apr 12, 2018, 9:27 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Investing In Chicago

I have a hunch that most here dislike this project, but I like it a lot, and wish projects like this were peppered throughout the City.

...And for 4,000 sq ft. the rental prices seem in line with the market.

Count me in agreement. These look way better than I expected.

wchicity · #**40853** Posted **Apr 12, 2018, 9:31 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Investing In Chicago

I have a hunch that most here dislike this project, but I like it a lot, and wish projects like this were peppered throughout the City.

...And for 4,000 sq ft. the rental prices seem in line with the market.

I actually think they look pretty great. I do wish that something with higher density went here, considering its prime location on Clark.

mark0 · #**40854** Posted **Apr 12, 2018, 9:33 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Investing In Chicago

I have a hunch that most here dislike this project, but I like it a lot, and wish projects like this were peppered throughout the City.

...And for 4,000 sq ft. the rental prices seem in line with the market.

I love them, love the style, the concept, everything about it except location - Clark is an extremely busy street, this isnt a cute old 19th century scaled side street like the upper east side of Manhattan or tree lined Gold Coast streets.

the urban politician · #**40855** Posted **Apr 12, 2018, 9:51 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jibba

Prtizker rowhouses on Clark:

More of this, please!

The darker colored cornice is really nice. Better than the lighter color depicted in the renderings

Kumdogmillionaire · #**40856** Posted **Apr 12, 2018, 10:08 PM**

Not my favorite place for a low density project, but at least they executed it well

marothisu · #**40857** Posted **Apr 12, 2018, 10:21 PM**

They look pretty nice and fit in with the area. I used to live nearby and liked the rowhome architecture around the general area.

Rizzo · #**40858** Posted **Apr 12, 2018, 10:46 PM**

I’ve said this before, but I like the height and density diversity of River North and Gold Coast. A nice mixture of fine grain and coarse grain architecture so it’s not so monotonous.

These are actually appropriate for context to some historic rowhomes nearby. So it’s not like it’s a wasted opportunity.

Once every lot, or non-heritage low density building is redeveloped into something better, I wouldn’t care how restrictive the neighborhood is to new development. Essentially we’ll be left with a bunch of newer buildings that have maximized their land use to the greatest extent and a solid collection of historic buildings

Exhausting the available real estate will help redevelopment and bumping density in areas that collar the downtown.

marothisu · #**40859** Posted **Apr 13, 2018, 12:08 AM**

Okay. So I am done with my renovation permit map - it spans from January 1, 2017 until yesterday:

https://drive.google.com/open?id=13a...5D&usp=sharing

Now, as alluded to in another post, the April Zoning Board of Approvals meeting agenda for the 27th it out. Some of the interesting (to me) projects. We've already talked about the new 10 story, 62 unit building for 1417-19 S Wabash and the new 15 story, 199 unit building at 45-59 e 14th st.

*1966-68 N Milwaukee Ave: Not sure how this one fits in exactly as it's the address of that Clayco building currently U/C here. It says a new 5 story, 16 unit building with ground floor retail

* 3172-78 S Archer (Archer and Paulina): New 4 story, 24 unit building with ground floor retail. Currently a run down vacant looking building and crappy small junkyard looking thing. Semi near the Ashland Orange Line stop

https://www.google.com/maps/place/31...9!4d-87.668091

* 2404 W Moffat (Moffat & Western). Vacant lot near the Western Blue Line stop. Proposed new building - 4 floors, 7 units and ground floor retail.

https://www.google.com/maps/place/24...!4d-87.6875147

* 839 W Agatite: I believe this is a currently vacant site next to the JDL Cuneo high rise in Uptown. New building of 4 stories, 20 units.

https://www.google.com/maps/place/83...5!4d-87.650824

* 6109-15 N Elston: 2 buildings of 6 units each (12 total units). Currently a 1 story building.

https://www.google.com/maps/place/61...7!4d-87.781487

* 1620 W Grand Ave (Near Ashland): This 1 story building - new 4 story building with 8 units:

https://www.google.com/maps/place/16...!4d-87.6679717

LouisVanDerWright · #**40860** Posted **Apr 13, 2018, 2:02 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jibba

Prtizker rowhouses on Clark:

Reposting these pics again to highlight how correct this development is, see below:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Investing In Chicago

I have a hunch that most here dislike this project, but I like it a lot, and wish projects like this were peppered throughout the City.

...And for 4,000 sq ft. the rental prices seem in line with the market.

Actually I don't think anyone is going to disagree with you on this project save for the appropriateness of the location. Saying you think most people won't like this suggests you aren't actually paying attention when people criticize stuff like One Bennett Park. The problem is not the style as much as it is the execution of the style. These townhomes are solid limestone with a appropriately scaled and detailed cornice. Even the color of the cornice is correct for Italinate rowhomes of this style. The only thing they did funky was that they terminated the bay windows one story early, I don't get this. Is it to create a terrace at the top floor? It's awkward and not appropriate for this style, I'd much rather have a bay window than a balcony in my master bedroom.

When people criticize bullshit like OBP its not because we think Deco is a bad style or are morally opposed to Art Deco or anything like that. It's because a big developer like Related who has a track record of cheaping out on literally everything will only do a disservice to the style. They are not committed to the materials or details and then you end up with all the defining features that MAKE the style stripped leaving what is no more than a Hong Kong concrete commie block with some lines stamped in the concrete to look like bricks. These townhomes have texture, they have visual depth, they have detailing, they have all the elements necessary to execute the style. OBP has the massing right and that's it, everything else about that design is totally bunk and a mockery of the intended style.