CHICAGO | General Developments

[denizen467]

Originally Posted by Chicago Shawn

The floating walkway has already been approved by the Army Corp of Engineers. This was told to me by a CDOT official a while back.

Where would this go? Any idea why they wouldn't anchor it to the riverbed? Is it cheaper or is it just because it's more interesting that way?

[honte]

Thanks Spyguy, yes that's what I was talking about in the 300 N. LaSalle thread. I wasn't sure of the exact address.

This is one of the few recladding projects citywide that I think will have a positive outcome. When people constantly say this building is fugly, I've always had to say, "Well, Loebl, Schlossman, and Bennet was a great firm and the building has a nice form, but something went wrong with the materials..." Now hopefully it should be better appreciated.

Ironically, one of the oldest Loebl + Schlossman designs (and their earliest high-rise, to my knowledge), the Fashion Trades Building, is also being reclad right now. It's right around the corner, also visible from the Sears Tower. But this one is being ruined. It was a nice Art Deco building and there will soon be nothing of the old design left. The new glass looks tacky too.

[Nowhereman1280]

Originally Posted by denizen467

Where would this go? Any idea why they wouldn't anchor it to the riverbed? Is it cheaper or is it just because it's more interesting that way?

I'm fairly certain that they wouldn't anchor it to the riverbed because of the already restricted flow of the river by all of walls/development boxing it in. If you suddenly lined the side of the river with a structure consisting of hundreds of piles for ten or fifteen feet out into the river, then it would become a massive ice trap, which is never good. Granted, I don't know how much the river ever really freezes over anymore, but if it ever did, a few hundred feet by ten or fifteen feet of piles would certainly become and ice trap when the ice breaks in the spring and could possibly create Ice dams, which are dangerous and a pain in the ass to get rid of. I don't know for sure however, I've never really noticed whether they keep the river open or not, do they icebreak it? Even so, I imagine large amounts of ice would flow down in chunks from further up river and get hung up on any structure relying on piles.

[Mr Downtown]

I've never really noticed whether they keep the river open or not, do they icebreak it?

Yes, there's a fireboat that runs back and forth when needed.

[Tom Servo]

Wow this looks great! Let's hope it turns out this clean.

[woodrow]

As I was walking by the Lakeview East Chamber of Commerce office today, I noticed renderings for the new Dominnic's / condo tower where the old Broadway Dominic's stood. I think I like it. BIG

Really trying to emphasize the horizontal aspect of this large piece of property. Mainly glass, with buff colored brick and what appear to be white or off-white horizontal panels. The building is 5 levels and steps back on levels 3,4,and 5. Long balconies facing Broadway. The grocery store takes up most of the first (and second?) level with at least two more retail spaces. I couldn't tell from the renderings where the loading dock was located. May be a problem

Sorry my description is crappy. Recap. Emphasis on the horizontal, buff brick (only on level one, not much on Broadway) Very glassy, and horizontal panels, set-backs on condo floors and long, sweeping balconies (terraces or verndas).

Oh, and build it. I am tired of dragging my ass up to Treasure Island or Jewel.

[Taft]

Originally Posted by woodrow

As I was walking by the Lakeview East Chamber of Commerce office today, I noticed renderings for the new Dominnic's / condo tower where the old Broadway Dominic's stood. I think I like it. BIG

Really trying to emphasize the horizontal aspect of this large piece of property. Mainly glass, with buff colored brick and what appear to be white or off-white horizontal panels. The building is 5 levels and steps back on levels 3,4,and 5. Long balconies facing Broadway. The grocery store takes up most of the first (and second?) level with at least two more retail spaces. I couldn't tell from the renderings where the loading dock was located. May be a problem

Sorry my description is crappy. Recap. Emphasis on the horizontal, buff brick (only on level one, not much on Broadway) Very glassy, and horizontal panels, set-backs on condo floors and long, sweeping balconies (terraces or verndas).

Oh, and build it. I am tired of dragging my ass up to Treasure Island or Jewel.

Sounds all right. I always thought the old Dominick's use of that land was a waste. It will be nice to see a multistory, multi use building going up on the site, even if it isn't perfect.

I'm with you: put it up already! I miss my neighborhood grocery.

Taft

[the urban politician]

^ Just out of curiosity, how did the old Dominick's use of land take place? I'm I right to assume it was set back with a parking lot out front?

[honte]

^ Almost. It was set side-to-side on a narrow lot with big box turned 90 degrees and a parking lot to the south.

Some time in the past, someone in their infinite wisdom rezoned Broadway for commerical, despite the fact that it was a mix of commercial storefronts, flats, and houses. I'm going to bet this was during the major zoning rewrite in the 1950s. So in several places, historic buildings came down for parking. The concept of mixed residential/commercial districts was nearly forgotten to Chicago's zoning planners until the last decade.

In this case, the building looked to be c. 1970s, so I am not certain exactly what was on that site historically, but I'm pretty sure it would have been a collection of smaller Victorian-era structures.

They are still having preservation problems along Broadway due to this commercial zoning to this day.

[the urban politician]

^ Ahh, well given that description, I believe I've seen that Dominick's. Holy shit, it burned down?

Anyhow, it was a suburban nightmare so it's good to see that it will be replaced by something 1,000 times better

[denizen467]

You may be able to see how it looked on Google Maps's satellite photo. Was it the large structure north of the Broadway parking lot between Wellington and Barry?

Those satellite photo sites can be frustrating when they're a few years behind, but the flip side of the coin is that they can also act as a sort of wayback machine..

[brian_b]

^ Yes that's exactly it. I used to live a couple blocks away and shopped there frequently. While it wasn't exactly the best use of a large lot, it was definitely good for the neighborhood.

[Busy Bee]

An older article I dug on the project... do we know if Hartshorne Plunkard is still designing this?

Oct. 24, 2006
By Brandon Glenn

New Lakeview Dominick's proposed for old site
Building where store burned down last year also would have condos

(Crain’s) — A 65-foot-high mixed-use building featuring a 40,000-square-foot Dominick’s Finer Foods and three floors of condominiums could go up at the Lakeview site where a Dominick’s burned down last year.

Alderman Tom Tunney (44th) confirmed the early plans for the property at 3012 N. Broadway, which is set to be purchased by developer Michael O’Connor of Dionysius LLC. The previous Dominick’s at the site was gutted by an accidental fire in June 2005.

“The community has told me very clearly that a full-service supermarket is desperately needed in that area,” Mr. Tunney said.

The plans call for the grocery store to occupy the building’s first floor and about half of the second floor, Mr. Tunney said. The other half of the second floor would be devoted to parking, as would an underground floor.

The building would be topped by three stories, or about 45 units, of condominiums, Mr. Tunney said.

Mr. O’Connor said his deal to purchase the site “hasn’t closed yet, but the contract is hard.” He would buy the property from the DiMatteo family, whose ancestor Dominick founded the grocery store chain. Dominick’s is now owned by Pleasanton, Calif.-based Safeway Inc.

A representative from the DiMatteo family’s real estate arm did not return a call seeking comment.

Mr. O’Connor declined to provide specifics on the plans before a Thursday night meeting with local residents.

Mr. O’Connor and the project’s architects, Chicago firm Hartshorne Plunkard Architecture, plan to present detailed plans at the Thursday meeting at Our Lady of Mt. Carmel Church in Lakeview.

“We’ve talked to community members to get an idea of what are the key concerns of the community, and come up with a plan to get something they’ll embrace and like,” Mr. O’Connor said.

He said he’s still negotiating an agreement with Dominick’s to lease part of the site. “We’re very close but nothing’s been finalized yet,” he said.

A Dominick’s spokeswoman did not return a call seeking comment.

A key piece of the project would be a zoning change Mr. O’Connor is seeking. Buildings on the property are currently prohibited from exceeding 50 feet in height; Mr. O’Connor hopes for a zoning change to allow buildings to reach 65 feet.

Mr. O’Connor will ask for support for the zoning change from a community group, South East Lake View Neighbors, at the Thursday meeting. The zoning change must pass the City Council, Mr. Tunney said. After that, Mr. O’Connor would be eligible to begin construction.

Mr. Tunney said he will reserve judgment on the zoning request until he sees the presentation. The City Council almost always follows the wishes of the local alderman in zoning matters in his or her ward.

A representative from the neighborhood group did not return a call seeking comment.

Mr. Tunney said he hopes that if the zoning change is approved, construction starts next spring. The project would take between 12 and 18 months to complete, he said.

Maureen Martino, executive director or the Lakeview East Chamber of Commerce, echoed Mr. Tunney in saying the supermarket’s return would be welcome.

“We’re very ecstatic that they’re coming back,” she said. The grocery store “was very missed in the community,” she said.

[pip]

There was a tiny blub in the SunTimes weekly real estate section last week about this proposal. There will be 80 condos, I believe, and a full service supermarket on the land of the supermarket that I watched burn down.

I came to an interesting conclusion last week. When talking to people about this proposal everyone did not care or were glad that there will be condos on this parcel of land and they were definetly all glad there will be a supermarket. Than through a friend I met someone from some Lakeview Action group or something. I asked him what he thought of this proposal - he wanted less density and more parking. He was so anti condo on this site it was strange.

So he was the only one I met who does not like this proposal and apparently the group he belongs too. The conslusion I came to is that these NIMBY groups do not represent what the average person thinks. The average person does not give a shit and they want things to be able to walk too and good transit. These NIMBY groups are well organized and are very vocal about this anti development stance which is why the group formed here on SSP and SSC is so very important. There needs to be two voices. Also maybe the city does realize that these NIMBY groups are fringe groups and that is why they are always losing. Still they are a scary prospect and definetly need a counter voice since we cannot count on forever the City siding with our opinions.

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by pip

There was a tiny blub in the SunTimes weekly real estate section last week about this proposal. There will be 80 condos, I believe, and a full service supermarket on the land of the supermarket that I watched burn down.

I came to an interesting conclusion last week. When talking to people about this proposal everyone did not care or were glad that there will be condos on this parcel of land and they were definetly all glad there will be a supermarket. Than through a friend I met someone from some Lakeview Action group or something. I asked him what he thought of this proposal - he wanted less density and more parking. He was so anti condo on this site it was strange.

So he was the only one I met who does not like this proposal and apparently the group he belongs too. The conslusion I came to is that these NIMBY groups do not represent what the average person thinks. The average person does not give a shit and they want things to be able to walk too and good transit. These NIMBY groups are well organized and are very vocal about this anti development stance which is why the group formed here on SSP and SSC is so very important. There needs to be two voices. Also maybe the city does realize that these NIMBY groups are fringe groups and that is why they are always losing. Still they are a scary prospect and definetly need a counter voice since we cannot count on forever the City siding with our opinions.

^ A great post, pip. And I wholeheartedly agree that we need a counter-voice to these community groups. CBP is a great start, but ultimately it would be nice to have 'branches' of CBP within several communities, just to focus on that community in particular and act as the voice of reason opposing these fringe NIMBY groups.

I imagine (and I'm doubtful this would come to fruition any time soon, but who knows) some offshoots of CBP in various neighborhoods that come up with some development recommendations for that particular hood that promote density, walking, and transit use while preserving (and adding to) the hood's architectural beauty. These plans get submitted to the Alderman's office along with signatures of local residents in support of it.

Something like this in the South Loop would be great, to counteract the silly density limits imposed by current interpretations of the Central Area Plan. I honestly think it is this older generation of middle-aged types that are more anti-density and addicted to their cars, but I believe a younger generation (35 and younger) is more willing to adapt to a changing urban lifestyle and can embrace the benefits that density has to offer.

[the urban politician]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/classi...realestate-hed
Retail, residential to mix in S. Shore
Neighborhood ready for `spark'

By Jeanette Almada
Special to the Tribune
Published January 21, 2007

A mixed-use development with 34 condominiums is planned for a vacant city-owned parcel on the northeast corner of 71st Street and Paxton Avenue in the South Shore neighborhood.

The development entity, Doc Toast LLC, has agreed to pay the city the appraised market-rate value for the land--$275,000 for the 25,193-square-foot tract at 2204-24 E. 71st St.

The LLC is a partnership between Chicago-area rehabber Herschel Tolson; attorney and investor William Lowry; and Oak Park-based architect and builder John Schiess of Metropolis Architects and Builders.

Schiess has designed and built custom-houses in neighborhoods including North Kenwood, Pilsen and Humboldt Park. And Metropolis has designed several projects that are underway or completed in Oak Park, such as Opera Club Condominiums, Madison Square Townhomes and Maple Square Townhomes.

"On this corner of the South Shore neighborhood, we think we will be a catalyst for change. It is an area that is idling, just waiting for a spark. I see a big transformation on [71st Street] in the next three to five years," Schiess said.

"There are great storefronts with great character, 1920s and '30s architecture that need rehab more than new construction. There are plenty of vacant lots but the streetscape is just great, and those lots can be used for parking to support new retail. There is enough new housing in the periphery ... we looked at that and said `boy, the people who live in this housing will really need services,'" Schiess said.

The Chicago Community Development Commission approved the land sale in December. City Council approval is expected in February, Schiess said.

The developer will build 26 two-bed, 2 1/2- bath units with 970 to 1,100 square feet; two 912-square-foot 1-bed, 1 1/2-bath condos and six 1,100- to 1,166-square-foot three-bed, 2 1/2-bath units. They will be priced from $250,000 to $275,000.

The building will have 8,600 square feet of ground-floor retail space, Schiess said. A restaurateur has submitted a letter to the developer expressing interesting in opening a sit-down pancake house there.

"We are looking for a tenant that can offer services, a food pantry type of place that will meet needs of condo owners or a bookstore," Schiess said.

The developer will sell the units through an independent realty agent, from an on-site sales center that will open in early spring. Construction is expected to begin in early summer, Schiess said.

[the urban politician]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/classi...realestate-hed
Non-profit group to build mixed-used project in Brighton Park

By Jeanette Almada
Special to the Tribune
Published January 21, 2007

A non-profit community organization will build a mixed-use project in the Brighton Park neighborhood that will include office space and housing for seniors.

The Back of the Yards Neighborhood Council won approval to build the project from the December ChicagoPlan Commission, which oversees large developments.

The non-profit group will build the mixed-use project on a 15,770-square-foot site on the east side of Spaulding Avenue near 47th Street.

Residential housing is just north of that site, a few light industrial building are to the south and west and a city-approved business planned development is slated just to the southeast.

The developer will raze two buildings a brick two-story commercial building at 3256 W. 47th St., and a vacant two-story residential building at 3246 W. 47th St., to make way for an eight-story building.

"We hope to begin demolition in early spring," said Marina Rey, executive director of the Back of the Yard Neighborhood Council.

The eight-story building will have 60 units of unassisted housing for seniors on floors three through eight, according to Alex Thompson, vice president of Chicago-based Recon Development LTD, which has been hired as consultant on the project.

Back of the Yards Neighborhood Council will move its office to the second floor of the building from 1751 W. 47th St.

Along with a theater/dance center/gymnasium and a day-care center with room for 125 children, the first floor will have a center with a meeting room and offices for the senior portion of the building, said Thompson. "We are talking to seniors property managers" to oversee those operations.

Back of the Yards Neighborhood Council has created an entity called Brighton Park Seniors Neighborhood Council to develop the project, Thompson said. It is seeking low-income housing tax credits from the Chicago Department of Housing and the Illinois Housing Development Authority, Thompson said.

It also will seek Tax Increment Financing for the project, though the amount of assistance has not been determined, Thompson said.

Chicago-based KLLM Architects has designed the building.

"We hope to have all of the financing in place by spring and will begin construction then," Thompson said.

[LA21st]

Wow, that is great for both projects. Im always in favor of new mixed use projects in the neighborhoods, more so with the Southside though. How many floors for the S.Shore development? Probably 3-4 since they dont mention it.

[LA21st]

The Brighton Park project is only 2 blocks south of the Orange Line Kedzie stop too.

[VivaLFuego]

^ Great.

And the 71st/Paxton development is right on the Metra Electric, of course.

So much potential for more TOD all around the city....since the city isn't taking the lead, it would be awesome if more private developers really focused on utlizing our transit infrastructure.