CHICAGO | General Developments

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by i_am_hydrogen

It should be the price, yes. I would love to see suffocating Hong Kong-style density in LSE. Many people who live in high-rise buildings, however, cling to the illusory notion that their views ought not to be blocked. (This, shadows, and increased traffic are the primary underpinnings of NIMBY movements.) With this concern in mind, LSE was no doubt designed to preserve the views of each building to the greatest extent possible.

If you CAN use design to preserve peoples' views, why wouldn't you want to? That's a huge selling point that helps LSE's ability to price units very highly without having any sort of convenient access to transit or retail.

Also, that map is a little old... there won't be any parkhomes near the market, but there will be parkhomes between Aqua and Tides


Site Map (PDF)

[Mojava]

Originally Posted by J_M_Tungsten

Would another developer care about blocking another buildings view? I'm always seeing new buildings though out the country build over peoples views. Isn't that the price of living in a major city?

I believe the same developer (Magellan) owns all of LSE so there isnt an issue of different developers caring about other buildings views. Magellan had this site plan (or something similar) since the start. People bought into certain buildings, and paid a premium for it, knowing their views would be unobstructed.

[J_M_Tungsten]

O ok, yea I'm not saying their views should be obstructed, it just shouldn't be a reason to build smaller buildings in front of another building. Also, my sympathy for the rich people who lose their views on their investment is very low.

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by ardecila

Site Map (PDF)

^ Is that a curb cut I see along E Benton Place? Looking at the way it's laid out, I'm seeing evidence of a planned drive though. Hmmm..

Not sure if that's good or bad.

[ardecila]

I don't think it's bad exactly. The building is far from being one of those god-awful drive through banks in South Loop or River North. There aren't any curb cuts on Benton or Field currently, so it's not like there's an issue with too many curb cuts.

However, I believe the curb cuts are for parking or possibly loading-dock functions, not a drive through. Plans may have changed, but the model photo below shows a garage door there and no big "P" sign, indicating a loading dock.


(The signs in the model still say Treasure Island, but I don't think the design has changed)

[J_M_Tungsten]

I definitely like the design of this. It should help as far as bringing some more activity to the area. Lake shore east is such a unique area, almost a sunken subdivision within the city.

[NYC2ATX]

Originally Posted by J_M_Tungsten

Would another developer care about blocking another buildings view? I'm always seeing new buildings though out the country build over peoples views. Isn't that the price of living in a major city?

Well yes, it is. I see that often over here in NY. This is a master planned development, however, and they designed to be an appealing and secluded niche within the city. Buildings right on top of one another doesn't fit the bill here, and I think that many people chose to buy here based on that notion that the bigger plan was already in place, and they didn't have to worry about something unforseen blocking their view in the future, no pun intended.

[emathias]

Originally Posted by emathias

They are a casting from Emporis data.

I'm not going to pull Toronto's data because, frankly, I'm not that interested in Toronto and it takes me a little while to clean up the data from the format I get it in.

But, here's one more Chicago table:

By 5-year period, from the current 1,000 tallest finished or u/c buildings, the total number of floors built. I don't have consistent enough square footage or units, but floors are available on nearly 100% of the buildings. In hindsight, I should have included demolished buildings in my pull, too, but I just didn't think of it until now.

1890-1894 125
1895-1899 54
1900-1904 74
1905-1909 221
1910-1914 503
1915-1919 101
1920-1924 466
1925-1929 2841
1930-1934 635
1935-1939 34
1940-1944 0
1945-1949 36
1950-1954 632
1955-1959 609
1960-1964 2049
1965-1969 2964
1970-1974 3119
1975-1979 889
1980-1984 1543
1985-1989 1802
1990-1994 1289
1995-1999 302
2000-2004 2190
2005-2009 3173

I don't remember for sure, but since I created this list in mid-late 2008, I likely lincluded the Spire and Waterview in these floor counts. If they don't get finished, that drops the 2005-2009 count down below 3,000 floors, meaning we didn't exceed the 1970-1974 boom. In a bigger picture, assuming 20010-2014 isn't as big as the past 5 years, this boom is a pale shadow of the 1960-1974 building boom in Chicago if measured by floor-count.

[tintinex]

[wrab]

^ Oh wow, the wraps are off! Already dark out now, so I'll have to wait until tomorrow to see it for myself.

How did it look to you in person/what were your impressions?

[tintinex]

Originally Posted by wrabbit

^ Oh wow, the wraps are off! Already dark out now, so I'll have to wait until tomorrow to see it for myself.

How did it look to you in person/what were your impressions?

I loved the details, it definitely looks like they put a lot of effort into it. I didn't cross the street because I was walking fast since I didn't have a jacket on (quick trip to block 37 from my office to see if there was anything new).

There are still those black panels in the bottom so we can't get the full effect yet, but I certainly think it's a win.

I'll try to take more pics tomorrow, this time I'll bring my jacket

[denizen467]

While we wait for more Sullivan Center pics, here is something from the opposite end of the spectrum: Rare photos can be taken of the Cabrini-Green white coming down on Division - all the windows are out but demolition isn't fully underway, so you can see into all the rooms at a single glance. Almost like a dollhouse.

[ardecila]

Maybe I'm just being snooty, but I've lived in Chicago long enough to remember what the CPS decorations looked like BEFORE the restoration, and honestly, I don't really see the huge change that you guys see. Sure, I'd much rather have the ornamentation visible instead of hidden, and I'm glad that it's not gonna fall off when a pigeon lands on it, but it doesn't really look much different than it did before.

Freed resisted doing any of the major restorations, like moving the canopy along Madison back to its original position, installing prism glass in the transoms, or re-casting all of the funky ornament that spilled out of its panels to lap up onto the cornice, over the glass panes, and even onto the wires holding up the canopy. What's left is just a patching job to the ornament that was there before, but a patching job that cost $12 million with most of the changes and improvements being made in out-of-sight places.

For all the fuss and the years-long presence of sidewalk sheds, I expected something a bit more... dramatic.

----

Oh, and did I mention that Freed has almost no tenants for Sullivan Center? That coupled with the loss of Block 37 has got to be a massive disappointment for Freed management. Hopefully they don't go bankrupt, and even if they don't, I wouldn't blame them if they decided to flee back to the suburbs and never return. Urban development is a tricky, tricky business, especially when your first urban projects are easily among the city's most complex buildings, Block 37 because of the rat's nest of power lines and the subway project, and Sullivan Center because of the preservation issues and leasing difficulties.

Freed was in talks with a "major supermarket chain" a few months ago; here's to hoping that the chain is Roundy's and that the talks were successful.

[torsodog]

Wow, some talk about the market at Lakeshore East here! I've lived in the north side of The Buckingham for nearly two years now, and I've been getting incredible tired of looking down at that dirt lot. Glad to see that something might start being built there soon.

[woodrow]

Originally Posted by ardecila

. . . Maybe I'm just being snooty, . . . .


. . . For all the fuss and the years-long presence of sidewalk sheds, I expected something a bit more... dramatic. . . . .



. . .Oh, and did I mention that Freed has almost no tenants for Sullivan Center? . . . .

Yes you are being snooty. And that's okay.

I'm okay about the canopy, but would have liked to see the prism glass. I'm Waiting to see how it all finishes up. The big difference is the paint finishes and the crispness of the details. Would LOVE to have the escutcheons back.

Sullivan Center retail? - SUCKS - one tenant
Sullivan Center commercial - ROCKS - or is pretty solid.

They will get the retail, I believe (hope?). I am glad Freed got so much commercial lined up before the real estate market meltdown.

[wrab]

Originally Posted by ardecila

Maybe I'm just being snooty, but I've lived in Chicago long enough to remember what the CPS decorations looked like BEFORE the restoration, and honestly, I don't really see the huge change that you guys see. Sure, I'd much rather have the ornamentation visible instead of hidden, and I'm glad that it's not gonna fall off when a pigeon lands on it, but it doesn't really look much different than it did before.

Freed resisted doing any of the major restorations, like moving the canopy along Madison back to its original position, installing prism glass in the transoms, or re-casting all of the funky ornament that spilled out of its panels to lap up onto the cornice, over the glass panes, and even onto the wires holding up the canopy. What's left is just a patching job to the ornament that was there before, but a patching job that cost $12 million with most of the changes and improvements being made in out-of-sight places.

For all the fuss and the years-long presence of sidewalk sheds, I expected something a bit more... dramatic.

----

Oh, and did I mention that Freed has almost no tenants for Sullivan Center? That coupled with the loss of Block 37 has got to be a massive disappointment for Freed management. Hopefully they don't go bankrupt, and even if they don't, I wouldn't blame them if they decided to flee back to the suburbs and never return. Urban development is a tricky, tricky business, especially when your first urban projects are easily among the city's most complex buildings, Block 37 because of the rat's nest of power lines and the subway project, and Sullivan Center because of the preservation issues and leasing difficulties.

Freed was in talks with a "major supermarket chain" a few months ago; here's to hoping that the chain is Roundy's and that the talks were successful.

I'll be having my first look at the restored northern portion this afternoon, but what I've seen of the southern portion is a richer, darker (almost black) green. I do know that much of the restoration is, as you note, not visible to the casual observer, but anything that keeps the facade in good working order is a plus in my book.

Mostly, I'm just glad that we can all see that crazy facade again.

Restoring the cartouches & canopies would have been awesome. Perhaps some future Sullivan-crazy owner will undertake this. We did get the new cornice though in phase one of the restoration.

I keep hearing rumbles about the CAF maybe moving into SC if they decide to vacate their current digs?

[Busy Bee]

^Now that wouldn't be half bad.

[Tom In Chicago]

Originally Posted by torsodog

Wow, some talk about the market at Lakeshore East here! I've lived in the north side of The Buckingham for nearly two years now, and I've been getting incredible tired of looking down at that dirt lot. Glad to see that something might start being built there soon.

Yeah. . . I'm at ODE facing west and was woken up a few weeks ago by the diesel motors. . . finally something getting done down there. . .

. . .

[BWChicago]

Well it's a restoration, it SHOULDN'T look dramatically different. Unlike the stuff on Wabash, this didn't have layer upon layer of paint on it. It still had a few layers though, the detail is sharper now. The point was to fix the totally inadequate, out-of-square structure and take care of the deteriorating paint, rust, and corrosion. So everything is clean, freshly and accurately finished, and the defects that were there originally, like casting voids and poor fits, have been fixed. If what's there is in better condition than it was when it was put up, I'm happy.

That said, I am very disappointed the funding to do the work all the way wasn't there, so they had to settle for this largely arbitrary 1935 period restoration. (Another point - if it's supposed to be like 1935, why are they using 1900 paint colors? As you said in November, it's an obvious copout. IHPA's point was supposedly to not create false history, but this is neither the 1900 appearance nor the 1935 - absolutely false.) The canopy siting is especially disappointing, since that makes restoring the missing parts all the more difficult to do in the future. It's unfortunate that they couldn't have taken it as close as possible to original.

What we're left with is:

-From 1899-1906: Cast iron, Original-style awnings
-From 1928-1935: Cornice, Canopy, Transoms, Double-hung windows on turret
-From 1940s: Missing 500 pieces of Cast Iron
-From 1961s: Southernmost Holabird & Root bays

So how is this true to the development history? It's obviously what was most feasible with funding; call a spade a spade.

[wrab]

I think that they aimed for something as pure as they could within budget. That would entail stripping away as many post-Sullivan additions/altercations as possible.

I know that with the paint they had a lot of confidence in their sampling & research. The point though wouldn't be to recreate a specific time in the building's life but rather to realign the building with Sullivan's concept of it.

But yeah, if Freed had gotten more bucks for it then it would've been great to take it to the next level.