HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > Skyscraper & Highrise Construction


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #581  
Old Posted Dec 15, 2020, 11:33 PM
Toasty Joe Toasty Joe is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2020
Location: Wicker Park, Chicago, IL
Posts: 383
I like the darker color and the SW corner shot of the podium looks decent. North side of the podium (facing the park) is a let down after seeing the old rendering but overall a slight improvement in my opinion... I feel like the old tower would've looked dated in a few years
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #582  
Old Posted Dec 16, 2020, 12:21 AM
SamInTheLoop SamInTheLoop is offline
you know where I'll be
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,379
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kumdogmillionaire View Post
Looks like the base got heavily VE'd. Not surprising

I would say that it did not necessarily get VE'd (just going by the previous publicly released renderings - can't speak to any previous unreleased versions), as those renderings were very likely just placeholders. If they were just pretty drawings and not actually planned version of the tower, then there's nothing to really VE. Correct me if I'm wrong and they had started out working on blueprints corresponding to them.

Also, is this still Perkins and Will? I like it (judged on its own). Nice tower.
__________________
It's simple, really - try not to design or build trash.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #583  
Old Posted Dec 16, 2020, 1:11 AM
rlw777 rlw777 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 1,764
Quote:
Originally Posted by SamInTheLoop View Post
I would say that it did not necessarily get VE'd (just going by the previous publicly released renderings - can't speak to any previous unreleased versions), as those renderings were very likely just placeholders. If they were just pretty drawings and not actually planned version of the tower, then there's nothing to really VE. Correct me if I'm wrong and they had started out working on blueprints corresponding to them.

Also, is this still Perkins and Will? I like it (judged on its own). Nice tower.
Nah for the lack of active use on the park side of the podium alone this is trash.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #584  
Old Posted Dec 16, 2020, 1:27 AM
RedCorsair87 RedCorsair87 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 515
Disappointing. I really liked the V columns along the river, the similar base to The Cooper, and the unsymmetrical, serrated facade. I also liked how the whole development was supposed to be a small white city within the city (World's Fair reference?)

On the positive side, was there a height increase?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #585  
Old Posted Dec 16, 2020, 2:30 AM
jbermingham123's Avatar
jbermingham123 jbermingham123 is offline
Registered (Nimby Ab)User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: At a computer, wasting my life on a skyscraper website
Posts: 576
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedCorsair87 View Post
a small white city within the city
Isnt this area called Lincoln Park?
__________________
Anything not forbidden by the laws of physics is achievable, given the right knowledge
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #586  
Old Posted Dec 16, 2020, 3:00 AM
chris08876's Avatar
chris08876 chris08876 is offline
NYC/NJ/Miami-Dade
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Riverview Estates Fairway (PA)
Posts: 41,157
Underwhelming.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #587  
Old Posted Dec 16, 2020, 3:13 AM
Bombardier Bombardier is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 445
Annnnnnnndddddd, we're back in Chicago. The original placeholder was more like Miami.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #588  
Old Posted Dec 16, 2020, 4:06 AM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is offline
TL;DR
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: the city o'wind
Posts: 15,738
I'm guessing the inclusion of condos caused the parking need to get bigger, so the garage "ate up" the liner units on the podium and the upper reaches of the loggia along the river.

Unfortunately I don't think it's possible to sell condos for the foreseeable future without parking - it seemed for a little while that this truism of the Chicago market would die off with the growth of TOD, but Covid has dealt a serious setback to this progress. It does seem like the rentals will largely be free of parking, however.
__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #589  
Old Posted Dec 16, 2020, 1:49 PM
BuildThemTaller BuildThemTaller is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Long Island City, NY
Posts: 805
Quote:
Originally Posted by PittsburghPA View Post
Doesn't look to be that much different from the original massing and design to me. The part jutting out over the riverwalk has been reworked.

EDIT: I'm noticing more changes, like a reduction in balconies and flattening of the serrations. Whatever, just happy this development is progressing more or less as planned. If they are going to invest in one building, I would prefer it to be the tallest one along Harrison. That one is going to make or brake the design of the whole plot. As it is, the extension of the riverwalk south of Congress and renovations to River City are huge wins. The design of this new tower is ok. If the facade is good, it'll be a fine addition. In the renders, I can't quite tell but it looks like painted concrete.

Last edited by BuildThemTaller; Dec 16, 2020 at 2:01 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #590  
Old Posted Dec 16, 2020, 2:35 PM
Handro Handro is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,178
That sucks. Losing the v columns and flattening the base really cheapen the look of this thing. And isn't Lendlease responsible for the VE monstrosity at 855 W Madison?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #591  
Old Posted Dec 16, 2020, 3:19 PM
the urban politician the urban politician is offline
The City
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Chicago region
Posts: 21,375
I actually think the modified tower doesn't look too bad.

I always hate podia, but even this podium isn't too horrible.
__________________
The only thing better than a V10 is a V12
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #592  
Old Posted Dec 16, 2020, 3:52 PM
southoftheloop southoftheloop is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 99
The revised tower would be fine elsewhere, but it's directly fronting the river, and an increasingly trafficked stretch of river...this plot of land deserves better imo.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #593  
Old Posted Dec 16, 2020, 7:52 PM
r18tdi's Avatar
r18tdi r18tdi is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,937
I generally prefer darker towers over lighter ones, but this redesign is pretty underwhelming. The podium treatment is awkward and I miss the angles of the previous design. I think the facade comparisons to 845 Madison are fair -- and not flattering (same architect maybe?).

What happened to the requirement that the riverwalk had to be "open to the air above?" I believe that influenced the taller height of the previous loggia (and 110 wacker).

On the plus side, there's no way they're going to sell enough condos to make this happen any time soon.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #594  
Old Posted Dec 16, 2020, 8:23 PM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is offline
TL;DR
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: the city o'wind
Posts: 15,738
Quote:
Originally Posted by r18tdi View Post
What happened to the requirement that the riverwalk had to be "open to the air above?" I believe that influenced the taller height of the previous loggia (and 110 wacker).
I think this requirement was only formalized in 2019, the 30' requirement has been around forever but it was vaguely defined. The Riverline PD was approved before 2019 so they can encroach into the setback to the extent that the PD allows them to.

I'm not sure how a site like 110 Wacker would be handled under the current guidelines. It may not be developable.
__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #595  
Old Posted Dec 16, 2020, 8:37 PM
Ned.B Ned.B is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 572
Quote:
Originally Posted by ardecila View Post
I'm guessing the inclusion of condos caused the parking need to get bigger, so the garage "ate up" the liner units on the podium and the upper reaches of the loggia along the river.
I'm not sure that greater parking was really driving this. The prior garage was 5 floors behind the liner units. Now there are only 2 or 3 floors.

The PD only called for 3 floors open over the riverwalk. It looks like they are still providing that minimum. Even so I wonder if this requires a PD amendment since things like the liner units are written into the PD.

Edit: nevermind on the first part, looking at the renderings again now I can see all 5 levels of the garage.

Last edited by Ned.B; Dec 16, 2020 at 10:17 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #596  
Old Posted Dec 17, 2020, 5:02 PM
VKChaz VKChaz is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: California
Posts: 519
Quote:
Originally Posted by rlw777 View Post
Nah for the lack of active use on the park side of the podium alone this is trash.
Really disappointing. I assume the rest will undergo a similar change. The original plan was very river oriented, made to look like it organically grew from the river. This almost turns its back from the river and treats it like an inconvenience. Park for residents and obligatory riverwalk? - check
Thing is, there is a disconnect. Many would like a grand and public riverfront. But we rely on developers with no such incentive. Whatever is enough to get renters or buyers is enough. If this development had included office components, there might be incentive to do something more interesting to meet the needs of workers and create a statement that would lure companies that want to be part of that image and appeal to new employees.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #597  
Old Posted Dec 17, 2020, 7:10 PM
rlw777 rlw777 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 1,764
Quote:
Originally Posted by VKChaz View Post
Really disappointing. I assume the rest will undergo a similar change. The original plan was very river oriented, made to look like it organically grew from the river. This almost turns its back from the river and treats it like an inconvenience. Park for residents and obligatory riverwalk? - check
Thing is, there is a disconnect. Many would like a grand and public riverfront. But we rely on developers with no such incentive. Whatever is enough to get renters or buyers is enough. If this development had included office components, there might be incentive to do something more interesting to meet the needs of workers and create a statement that would lure companies that want to be part of that image and appeal to new employees.
It will be extra awful if they do this to the rest of the development. I would think that making the park more attractive would actually make this development more attractive to residents. A park surrounded by the blank walls of parking podiums during the day and constantly bathed in harsh light from parking garages at night isn't attracting anyone. I get that condos might require more parking but there are other solutions to getting more parking.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #598  
Old Posted Dec 21, 2020, 6:01 AM
Little_T Little_T is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 14
I'm so tired of seeing the grandeur of an original development proposal followed by the actual proposal. I personally loved the Miamiesque design of this building along with the V supports at the river. This version, if it is the final version, is basically a yawn that protrudes over a river walk. No one will point at this building and say "Wow, look at that. What a cool building. I'd love to live there." Sure, once it's built people may say "I'd love to live there" but it won't happen because of how the building looks but rather where the building is located. Such a shame.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #599  
Old Posted Feb 18, 2021, 4:11 PM
CrazyCres's Avatar
CrazyCres CrazyCres is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Behind You
Posts: 324
The Reed is now selling units and the website got an Update

https://thereedsouthbank.com/
https://www.chicagoarchitecture.org/...chicago-river/

Also if you click the link below and scroll to the bottom you'll see a new site plan

https://thereedsouthbank.com/southbank/

and a nice drawing
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #600  
Old Posted Feb 18, 2021, 4:20 PM
ORD2010 ORD2010 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrazyCres View Post
The Reed is now selling units and the website got an Update

https://thereedsouthbank.com/
https://www.chicagoarchitecture.org/...chicago-river/

Also if you click the link below and scroll to the bottom you'll see a new site plan

https://thereedsouthbank.com/southbank/

and a nice drawing

Seems like we lost the nice original design of the tallest tower, not loving how this is going.
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 > Skyscraper & Highrise Construction
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 3:20 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.