CHICAGO | The Row (900 W Randolph) | 495 FT | 43 FLOORS

[k1052]

Lol. Shocking.

Probably get a shorter fatter version but still above their height ask.

[r18tdi]

Originally Posted by gebs

Tonight on another episode of "Of Course This Is Happening" with Obvi McEyeroll:

Fulton Market groups oppose developer's 43-story tower

"While we appreciate these aspects of the proposal, the project's density at this location would create significant adverse impacts on traffic congestion and demand on local amenities..."

Density? Lol, it's only 300 units.

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by gebs

Tonight on another episode of "Of Course This Is Happening" with Obvi McEyeroll:

Fulton Market groups oppose developer's 43-story tower

"Two influential neighborhood groups have voiced their opposition to a 43-story condominium tower that Related Midwest wants to build in the heart of the West Loop neighborhood, saying it's too tall, among other things. At 495 feet, the high-rise at 170 N. Peoria St. would be the tallest structure in the Fulton Market District, dwarfing the historic low-rise industrial buildings nearby."

"After much thought and discussion with our members, WLCO and its members believe the zoning change request is materially out of character with the existing and proposed developments of the Fulton Market/West Loop neighborhood," Carla Agostinelli, executive director of the neighborhood group, wrote in a May 8 letter to Ald. Walter Burnett, 27th, who represents the area in the City Council. "It (is) WLCO's recommendation that the height of the Planned Development exceed no more than 200 feet."

They shouldn't have proposed anything that tall at that location to begin with. We all saw this coming

[XIII]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

They shouldn't have proposed anything that tall at that location to begin with. We all saw this coming

What did Related think this is, some sort of city that was the birthplace of the skyscraper or something?
Silly out-of-towners. Sure showed them!

[Skyguy_7]

“Adverse demand on local amenities” WTF?

WTF?

W.T.F.?

“Adverse demand” creates jobs. In a booming city, there is no downside to adverse demand. These nimbys have no bearing on free market economics. I think I’m gonna be sick.

[left of center]

Lol, the balls on WLCO. The developers already reduced the height by almost 200 feet, and now they want it reduced by another 300 feet? Who do these people think they are? Their royal highnesses can all go back to Naperville where tall and troublesome developments are nowhere to be seen.

And frankly, these people don't even know what they are arguing about. It appears that they think that the height of tall buildings is what will cause traffic and parking problems, as opposed to the unit count. If Related dropped the height of the tower to their ridiculous demand of 200' but kept the unit count the same (as they did when the 570' version of this tower got a haircut), would they really be appeased? Are they that dense? (Rhetorical question, we all know the answer)

[left of center]

Originally Posted by Skyguy_7

“Adverse demand on local amenities” WTF?

WTF?

W.T.F.?

“Adverse demand” creates jobs. In a booming city, there is no downside to adverse demand. These nimbys have no bearing on free market economics. I think I’m gonna be sick.

Lol

Yeah, that "adverse demand" is what brings in all the restaurants and bars that make the West Loop such a thriving place and probably is what brought these very same people to the neighborhood in the first place.

[Rocket49]

I have a feeling the developer’s aim was to have a 200’ to 250’ tall building but asked for 400’ as a negocition tactic.

The NIMBYers can declare a “victory” by reducing the building’s height by several hundred feet and the developer gets the 200’ tall building they were aiming for.

Had the developer asked for 200’, no doubt the NIMBYers would have demanded it be no taller than 100’

[left of center]

Originally Posted by Rocket49

I have a feeling the developer’s aim was to have a 200’ to 250’ tall building but asked for 400’ as a negocition tactic.

The NIMBYers can declare a “victory” by reducing the building’s height by several hundred feet and the developer gets the 200’ tall building they were aiming for.

Had the developer asked for 200’, no doubt the NIMBYers would have demanded it be no taller than 100’

The developers asked for 570' and it was reduced it to 495'

The NIMBYs are now asking for another, further reduction. This reduction would essentially trim the building's height by 65% from the initial proposal, which is ridiculous and entirely unrealistic. The NIMBYs already have their 'victory', and the developers already conceded the height they factored it as a negotiation tactic. At this point, the neighborhood groups are basically just sh*tting on this development.

[AlpacaObsessor]

Just sent an email to WLCO (though I doubt they'll pay much attention to it considering I used my Lincoln Park address):

I would like to voice my strong opposition regarding your comments on Midwest Related's proposal for 900 W Randolph. As somebody who truly believes that the key to creating vibrant neighborhoods lies in density, I am incredibly confused by your comment that the proposal would create 'significant adverse effects on local amenities.' The entire point of a city is to create a built environment in which large amounts of people live in a concentrated area in order to support a tangentially large number of businesses in a concentrated area, which requires DENSITY. This adverse demand is what creates jobs and new businesses. If I may be quite frank, if all you are concerned about is automobile traffic and capping building heights, I would suggest you move to Naperville.

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by Rocket49

I have a feeling the developer’s aim was to have a 200’ to 250’ tall building but asked for 400’ as a negocition tactic.

The NIMBYers can declare a “victory” by reducing the building’s height by several hundred feet and the developer gets the 200’ tall building they were aiming for.

Had the developer asked for 200’, no doubt the NIMBYers would have demanded it be no taller than 100’

A standard move. This is probably true. But they are probably shooting for 300 ft. They’ll send the Alderman on an all expense paid trip to the Bahamas, donate to his campaign fund, and bada bing! Approved at 300ft

[donnie]

This project has gone from " gorgeous !" to ok still lovely to Fu** You!

Thnx NIMBYs

[RedCorsair87]

I would love to see a taller version of this in a red similar to 'Big Red' next too one of our many black skyscrapers. They would look fantastic together.

[r18tdi]

Burnett has broken with WLCO in the past. There are number of projects that went ahead without their letter of support. They already got their pound of flesh, we'll see if they require two.

[k1052]

Originally Posted by r18tdi

Burnett has broken with WLCO in the past. There are number of projects that went ahead without their letter of support. They already got their pound of flesh, we'll see if they require two.

Yep, they don't really have a lot of influence with him especially if a developer has already made changes in their direction.

Maybe this gets another trim but doubt it's major.

[Kumdogmillionaire]

As I've mentioned in the past, they know they are losing the battle anyway. The West Loop is moving on without them, and they are crying and digging in their heels like children who aren't getting exactly what they asked for from Santa. I didn't make a comment yet on the letter they wrote because tbh, it doesn't mean much

[Chi-Sky21]

Not to sound Nimby but i really wish they would keep Randolph lower rise buildings west of Halsted or Green. They should put all this stuff up at Lake st and north of that. I know its only a half block away but this will kinda ruin the feel of Randolph St for me.

[ardecila]

Meh, I still kinda agree with WLCO on this one. I've already explained why I think a true midrise neighborhood is valuable in Chicago. We don't really have any other one. Every other fast-growing neighborhood has either been restricted by neighborhood-scale zoning (Lakeview, Wicker Park) or turned into a weird mix of highrises and 2-story buildings (South Loop) as large projects soak up all the demand.

On the flip-side I am a bit disappointed when neighborhood-style development encroaches into the West Loop. Those six-flats on Green would be at home in Ravenswood but not in the West Loop. They're really only saved by their repetition, which reminds me of New York tenements.

[Kumdogmillionaire]

You've made this point a million times in the past, but I genuinely don't see the logic in it. Why do we "need" a mid-rise neighborhood?

[BVictor1]

Originally Posted by ardecila

Meh, I still kinda agree with WLCO on this one. I've already explained why I think a true midrise neighborhood is valuable in Chicago. We don't really have any other one. Every other fast-growing neighborhood has either been restricted by neighborhood-scale zoning (Lakeview, Wicker Park) or turned into a weird mix of highrises and 2-story buildings (South Loop) as large projects soak up all the demand.

On the flip-side I am a bit disappointed when neighborhood-style development encroaches into the West Loop. Those six-flats on Green would be at home in Ravenswood but not in the West Loop. They're really only saved by their repetition, which reminds me of New York tenements.

Feel free to put that middies neighborhood elsewhere. This is downtown and screw that...