CHICAGO | BMO Tower | 727 FT | 50 FLOORS

[-Nick-]

Taken in the afternoon 1/12/2021.

[SIGSEGV]

Originally Posted by -Nick-

Taken in the afternoon 1/13/2021.

A post from the future!

[mark0]

Originally Posted by RedCorsair87

We really built a lot of this "style" this cycle. In One Chicago, 300N Michigan, The Paragon, River Point, 150 Riverside, and WPE. Am I missing anything? Some are certainly better than others.

Is there any other US city seeing this large of a percentage of new buildings with blue glass recently constructed?

Nashville. I was there 5 years ago and it was just starting. This year Ive been back and forth to FL a few times driving through and I swear the skyline has more than doubled since 2015, almost all blue glass boxes. A few with McHugh Construction tower cranes too!

[BuildThemTaller]

Originally Posted by mark0

Nashville. I was there 5 years ago and it was just starting. This year Ive been back and forth to FL a few times driving through and I swear the skyline has more than doubled since 2015, almost all blue glass boxes. A few with McHugh Construction tower cranes too!

I invite you to search for images of Hudson Yards in New York City. It's not even halfway complete. At least in Chicago, these buildings are spread throughout a city awash in stone, black, brown, beige, white, and other colors. Honestly, the addition of these blue glass boxes in Chicago are mostly welcome to change up the color palette.

[PittsburghPA]

1-15. The crane must have just jumped as now I can see it from my apartment in Fulton River District peeking above Presidential Towers.

[Skyguy_7]

Originally Posted by mark0

Nashville. I was there 5 years ago and it was just starting. This year Ive been back and forth to FL a few times driving through and I swear the skyline has more than doubled since 2015, almost all blue glass boxes. A few with McHugh Construction tower cranes too!

I was just there last week. The number of cranes spread throughout the downtown area is insane. 40+ tower cranes. Many sites just a few floors out of the ground. I was watching a new Marcus Lemonis show on CNBC the other day which had a parking lot owner on it who sold his downtown surface lot for 3 million two years ago. It just changed hands again for $6 million.

BTT you make a good point- Our new blue glass towers are relatively well-spread throughout the city. I'd still take a HY development here any day!

[r18tdi]

Originally Posted by mark0

Nashville.

Indeed, I was there in October and thought the amount of high-rise construction was nuts.

[Skyguy_7]

This is just a visual observation from yesterday... the core is (4) floors above the final setback. The impact of this tower in its surrounding neighborhood is yuge. Especially from the expressways.

Mods, can one of you throw a few renderings on page #1 of this thread?

[ardecila]

Does anyone know when they plan to start renovation of the upper floors of Union Station into the two-flag hotel?

I'm guessing this is on ice until after Covid at least, nobody is starting hotel construction these days. And Amtrak's ongoing feud with Metra over the station doesn't help either (one of the arguments is actually that Metra feels entitled to some of Amtrak's reserved parking spaces in the BMO Tower garage).

That said, I'd love to be proved wrong if anyone's heard anything about the hotels lately.

[colemonkee]

^ Hotel construction is not totally dead. There are two large hotels going up in downtown LA, one that started pretty much during the pandemic. I think a lot of developers are looking 24-48 months down the line when the pandemic will (hopefully) have subsided.

[SIGSEGV]

Amtrak travel via roomettes may be one of the safer ways to travel nowadays, especially the roomettes with bathrooms...

[Ned.B]

I'm not exactly an insider, but it's my understanding the hotel is pretty dead, and has been for two years. Prior to Covid the hotel market was already beginning to slip and the deal stalled over disagreements on the value of the space. Not that it might not still come back, but it will probably be reworked if it does.

Any work in the station areas are mostly stalled as well for about the same 2 years. The original plan was that the developer would contribute to the renovation of the concourse, but this project hasn't turned out to be the sort of profit generator for that to be in the developer's interest. Metra similarly hasn't been in a financial position to contribute to improvements, and no federal aid has materialized for the project. Here's to hoping that this current presidential administration and congress will prove to much more favorable to transportation projects and Amtrak funding and something will get done.

[harryc]

Jan 19



Jan 21

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by Ned.B

I'm not exactly an insider, but it's my understanding the hotel is pretty dead, and has been for two years. Prior to Covid the hotel market was already beginning to slip and the deal stalled over disagreements on the value of the space. Not that it might not still come back, but it will probably be reworked if it does.

Any work in the station areas are mostly stalled as well for about the same 2 years. The original plan was that the developer would contribute to the renovation of the concourse, but this project hasn't turned out to be the sort of profit generator for that to be in the developer's interest. Metra similarly hasn't been in a financial position to contribute to improvements, and no federal aid has materialized for the project. Here's to hoping that this current presidential administration and congress will prove to much more favorable to transportation projects and Amtrak funding and something will get done.

I mean, BMO Tower itself should be a pretty big profit generator. Isn't the whole point that the tower funds improvements to the station somehow?

I'm actually curious what the ownership structure of this tower is. Did Amtrak sell the land outright to Riverside, or is it a 99-year ground lease? Or is Amtrak somehow a full partner in the deal by contributing land in exchange for a % ownership of the improvements (aka the tower itself).

[BVictor1]

01.21.21

[Skyguy_7]

Originally Posted by harryc

Jan 19

I did not expect to see her from this angle. Very nice

[SamInTheLoop]

Originally Posted by Ned.B

I'm not exactly an insider, but it's my understanding the hotel is pretty dead, and has been for two years. Prior to Covid the hotel market was already beginning to slip and the deal stalled over disagreements on the value of the space. Not that it might not still come back, but it will probably be reworked if it does.

Any work in the station areas are mostly stalled as well for about the same 2 years. The original plan was that the developer would contribute to the renovation of the concourse, but this project hasn't turned out to be the sort of profit generator for that to be in the developer's interest. Metra similarly hasn't been in a financial position to contribute to improvements, and no federal aid has materialized for the project. Here's to hoping that this current presidential administration and congress will prove to much more favorable to transportation projects and Amtrak funding and something will get done.

I mean, if we can't get a strong investment in Amtrak and related transportation projects now, forget about it.

[SamInTheLoop]

Originally Posted by ardecila

I mean, BMO Tower itself should be a pretty big profit generator. Isn't the whole point that the tower funds improvements to the station somehow?

I'm actually curious what the ownership structure of this tower is. Did Amtrak sell the land outright to Riverside, or is it a 99-year ground lease? Or is Amtrak somehow a full partner in the deal by contributing land in exchange for a % ownership of the improvements (aka the tower itself).

I really don't know many details of the the development, what's stipulated in the PD and any other agreements with Amtrack and the city.

However, I'm cautious about assuming anything other than Riverside and Convexity underwriting the hotel phase of the development to be able to stand on its own (with of course whatever Amtrack/public/historic tax credits etc are planned to be part of the financing). In fact, I'd doubt the financing of the office tower and Union Station redevelopment itself will be linked in any way (other than very indirectly - if the tower is very successful, and further bolsters the developers' financial position/track record/reputation etc.....maybe it provides some benefit in terms of the financing terms they'll land for the hotel/station redevelopment). Could be wrong, but this is my guess about how they're approaching these projects.

One thing I would like to know is what are the obligations Riverside/Convexity have in terms of getting the hotel project done. Anyone know? I hope they are significant in terms of timing, penalties, etc. Extra important in a case like this project to put in place framework to dissuade a developer from getting the project who is really mainly just interested in one phase of the development, and for which it would not be a difficult decision to walk away from the other phase(s). Not asserting that is at all the case with Riverside/Convexity - but it's easy to envision such a scenario for projects like this, and public safeguards insisted by Amtrack, the city, etc to this effect are important.

[SamInTheLoop]

Originally Posted by colemonkee

^ Hotel construction is not totally dead. There are two large hotels going up in downtown LA, one that started pretty much during the pandemic. I think a lot of developers are looking 24-48 months down the line when the pandemic will (hopefully) have subsided.

Agree, and I've been pleasantly surprised locally with some of the hotel projects that are launching - 300 N Michigan after its initially, pre-pandemic delayed construction start, 800 W Lake, apparently this year parcel O in Lakeshore East finally, I may be missing something? This is where it gets interesting in terms of the cyclical timing for developers. The most lucrative projects, all things being equal, will tend to be those that deliver in the earliest years of a new cycle. A decent amount of development comes down to timing, so large bets are being placed, and I admire developers that are taking on this risk with respect to early-cycle timing. One of the projects I've been most disappointed did not get off the ground this past cycle is 330 N Clark. Hopefully Friedman Properties (and if it's partnering again with White Lodging on this one as it has for some of their other River North Hotel projects) has a taste for a little higher risk appetite as well and launches very early in the cycle.

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by SamInTheLoop

I really don't know many details of the the development, what's stipulated in the PD and any other agreements with Amtrack and the city.

However, I'm cautious about assuming anything other than Riverside and Convexity underwriting the hotel phase of the development to be able to stand on its own (with of course whatever Amtrack/public/historic tax credits etc are planned to be part of the financing). In fact, I'd doubt the financing of the office tower and Union Station redevelopment itself will be linked in any way (other than very indirectly - if the tower is very successful, and further bolsters the developers' financial position/track record/reputation etc.....maybe it provides some benefit in terms of the financing terms they'll land for the hotel/station redevelopment). Could be wrong, but this is my guess about how they're approaching these projects.

One thing I would like to know is what are the obligations Riverside/Convexity have in terms of getting the hotel project done. Anyone know? I hope they are significant in terms of timing, penalties, etc. Extra important in a case like this project to put in place framework to dissuade a developer from getting the project who is really mainly just interested in one phase of the development, and for which it would not be a difficult decision to walk away from the other phase(s). Not asserting that is at all the case with Riverside/Convexity - but it's easy to envision such a scenario for projects like this, and public safeguards insisted by Amtrack, the city, etc to this effect are important.

The PD is just a zoning document, it doesn't specify the structure of the deal. There may be an RDA or some other agreement spelling this out, but I'm not aware of anything that's been finalized.

I doubt Amtrak surrendered their garage for free, so either they got paid for it outright or they are in the deal as a partner. Whatever proceeds come out of this flowing to Amtrak should be re-invested in the station.

I mean, I guess it's possible they were strong-armed into giving up their garage for free but I highly doubt it. Amtrak's top brass is stubborn as a mule.

EDIT: actually the PD does specify that Amtrak continues to be the property owner and Riverside the developer. So there's either a ground lease (which Amtrak should be paid for) or Amtrak is entitled to some of the financial returns from the building. Ground lease being the less risky move for Amtrak.