CHICAGO | General Developments

[BWChicago]

Originally Posted by aic4ever

Also, as far as the deed restrictions, in our other work, it has generally seemed to prove easier to tear down a Landmarked building than it is to renovate it. For instance the planned development process with the Esquire, which was very close to moving forward and hit issues not related to Landmarks, versus the incredibly time consuming Landmark permitting process with the Three Arts Club that eventually gave concerned neighbors enough time to rally the troops and kill the deal even after NDA had long since approved it. While the tear down is one giant hurdle to jump, it is only one hurdle, rather than the many involved in a rehab. Also, considering only parts of the building are landmarked; facade, lobby and executive offices, it seems it would be even easier to do since the whole building is not landmarked.

The Esquire wasn't a landmark, for one thing, Chicago or National Register. There have only been a handful of Chicago landmarks demolished. The Post Office is not locally designated, either. It is on the National Register. And deed covenants are a whole different animal than landmarking, in the Register or local. Also, with the Esquire or Three Arts, you'd be dealing with the Chicago Landmarks Commission, not the Illinois Historic Preservation Agency. You run into these deed restrictions particularly since the post office was a federal building. Good luck getting deed covenants struck down.

[wrab]

Can Chicago Landmarks and/or Landmarks Illinois even register a federal property on federal land?

(Edit: I meant "Illinois Historic Preservation Agency", not "Landmarks Illinois" - thank you, BWChicago.)

[aic4ever]

Originally Posted by BWChicago

The Esquire wasn't a landmark, for one thing, Chicago or National Register. There have only been a handful of Chicago landmarks demolished. The Post Office is not locally designated, either. It is on the National Register. And deed covenants are a whole different animal than landmarking, in the Register or local. Also, with the Esquire or Three Arts, you'd be dealing with the Chicago Landmarks Commission, not the Illinois Historic Preservation Agency. You run into these deed restrictions particularly since the post office was a federal building. Good luck getting deed covenants struck down.

Esquire is a "Red" building in terms of demolition, meaning it requires an approved planned development prior to approval for demolition, along with I believe, a 90-Day wait on the demolition permit. Perhaps you are correct that it is not officially designated, but CLC was indeed involved with this process in some respect, whether it was officially designated or not.

As to the Three Arts Club, it is listed with all three agencies. CLC has Landmarked the Facade and the First Floor. The building is additionally listed with both IHPA and NHS. We wrangled back and forth between the City and Landmarks for a year, and never even got as far as dealing with State or Federal levels, though by some respects, they would have been easy enough to deal with by virtue of the fact that most of their restrictions are much more largely design related, whereas CLC has quite a lot of influence in how a building is not only renovated, but also how it is zoned and permitted for its use, the latter issues being the primary hangup, and ultimately probably why a judged deemed CLC illegal not too long ago.

[BWChicago]

Originally Posted by wrabbit

Can Chicago Landmarks and/or Landmarks Illinois even register a federal property on federal land?

Hm, good question. But don't confuse Landmarks Illinois (statewide advocacy organization) with the Illinois Historic Preservation Agency (State Historic Preservation Office).

[aic4ever]

Originally Posted by VivaLFuego

Interesting to hear the insider perspective on this. Ideally the bolded passage would give decision-makers and activists some pause about the need for reconsidering the current procedures in place, since it seems most do-gooder activist types who slow down development would actually prefer the reverse be true - even a less-than-ideal renovation being preferable to demolition.

aic4ever, do you have any thoughts on the amendments to the Planned Development process that Reilly just pushed through that would (allegedly) make it easier to rehab old buildings (landmarked or not) through the PD process?

I'm not familiar with those revisions. Link?

[bnk]

Has this video been posted here yet?

• Video Link

[J_M_Tungsten]

I have never seen that before, thanks for posting! Its weird to see the Tribune Tower, Wrigley Building, and the old water tower stand out so well in the sky!

[spyguy]

Originally Posted by jc5680

No clue what is going there though.

http://www3.timeoutny.com/chicago/bl...t-for-chicago/

A BLT for Chicago? Not quite…
By David Tamarkin

...News came today that we may get a taste of BLT—but not from chef Tourondel. Instead, his longtime collaborator, chef Stephen Wambach, who was the chef de cuisine at BLT Steak, is beating him to the punch. Wambach is opening an as-of-yet-unnamed restaurant at 112 West Hubbard Street. The concept: “Traditional-meets-progressive.” (We were hoping for “BLT-meets-Chicago,” but we’ll take what we can get.)

[lalucedm]

Do you think there's some way that our new $6 billion west side transit hub could be integrated into the old post office building? The location is 2-3 blocks off, so it's a pie in the sky idea obviously.

BUT, hypothetically... if space in the center portions of the tower were used for ticketing, concessions, and retail, perhaps a few offices (like in the Merchandise Mart), then the taller north and south wings could be used for other purposes - office or residential, most likely - and it all would be connected to the massive underground hub in the same complex. Underground passageways would have to be built to Union Station, of course, as well.

It would, of course, make for the biggest bureaucratic mess anybody has ever seen: a private company would have to deal with 1) the city to develop the complex, as well as 2) the IHPA, due to the covenant, 3) federal landmarks organizations, due to National historic status, perhaps, 3) IDOT, because the Eisenhower runs under the site, 4) the CTA, because the Blue Line subway runs under the site, and 5) Metra? or other railways?, because their tracks run under the site. Not to mention have to deal with these organizations in other capacities in order to integrate the other planned transit routes that are ultimately to be integrated into the new hub, such as the Monroe Street busway.

However, it could be amazing, could it not? It could be something like the old Penn Station, Gare du Nord in Paris, or Grand Central, if completed well.

[Nowhereman1280]

If anyone is in the South Loop and has a camera, you should snag some photos of Studio Gang's shiny new Columbia College Film School, its nearly complete on the outside and looking like its going to be a truly excellent building. Can't wait to see the glass (modeled after the colorful "test screen" we all used to see when stations went off the air at night) lit up from the inside at night.

Also, I am getting really excited because, especially after seeing that Businessweek article, I think Studio Gang may actually make it big and bring a new wave of Chicago design back onto the scene.

Also, I discovered another new Studio Gang project in Chicago today that is already underway. Some of you may have noticed that the entire Lincoln Park South Pond is fenced off. Well Studio Gang I believe are the ones responsible for that. I think they have been commissioned to redesign the pond and include a brand new boardwalk as well as 2 permanent pavilions which will be used for community meetings and outdoor classes. Here is the pavilion design from Gang's website:

[ardecila]

A wood lamella roof - cool. It looks like this one will be using laminated wood to make those curved shapes, rather than the straight lines of standard lumber, making the pavilion a "laminated lamella".

[FlashingLights]

Maybe part of the post office could be used as a dance club. I know it's not a prime area for a club but still the floor space is huge. There would have to be some other mixed development in it that would be used in the day. Or some floor could be converted for banquets (although there are large amounts of those in area especially old south loop hotels.)

[wrab]

Originally Posted by Nowhereman1280

If anyone is in the South Loop and has a camera, you should snag some photos of Studio Gang's shiny new Columbia College Film School, its nearly complete on the outside and looking like its going to be a truly excellent building. Can't wait to see the glass (modeled after the colorful "test screen" we all used to see when stations went off the air at night) lit up from the inside at night.

Also, I am getting really excited because, especially after seeing that Businessweek article, I think Studio Gang may actually make it big and bring a new wave of Chicago design back onto the scene.

Also, I discovered another new Studio Gang project in Chicago today that is already underway. Some of you may have noticed that the entire Lincoln Park South Pond is fenced off. Well Studio Gang I believe are the ones responsible for that. I think they have been commissioned to redesign the pond and include a brand new boardwalk as well as 2 permanent pavilions which will be used for community meetings and outdoor classes. Here is the pavilion design from Gang's website:

Great - that was fast, too - I didn't even realize that they'd broken ground yet on the Media Production Center. I'm gonna head over there in a couple of hours to see if I can snap a few pics.

Apparently, S/G hasn't needed to lay off any staff during the downturn - a very good sign. Expect their currency to take off exponentially once Aqua opens and the project hits the media circuit.

[aic4ever]

The Core & Shell at Rush & Walton is now done, and Lululemon is beginning their buildout. I know Viva expressed some displeasure while it was still being built. Thoughts now that it's done?

[VivaLFuego]

Originally Posted by aic4ever

I'm not familiar with those revisions. Link?

I don't have a link to the actual language of the amendment. Here's a press release I got via Ald Reilly's mailing list:

This past week, the Committee on Zoning voted unanimously to approve Alderman Reilly's ordinance for full City Council passage next month.

Specifically, this proposed ordinance expands the Elective Planned Development Thresholds - Section 17-8-0600 adding an additional category for historic structures, allowing those owners to take advantage of the Planned Development process. Currently, if a historic structure does not meet the elective thresholds, redevelopment is restricted to its zoning classification.

The purpose of the ordinance is to broaden the possibilities for redevelopment and reuse of structures with historic status or actual landmark status. Alderman Reilly has growing concerns over treasured, older building stock in the ward facing high vacancy rates due to their obsolescence. The city cannot afford for these important buildings to ultimately be abandoned and left to deteriorate because their zoning does not allow for the flexibility necessary for redevelopment.

With this amendment, owners seeking to redevelop their property can seek relief from zoning restrictions while providing for public process and community input as these changes to the urban landscape occur. That community process and points negotiated can then be codified in a Planned Development Ordinance providing certainty for the city and community that these structures will be preserved and re-used. In many instances, we do not have opportunity for that level of community input and negotiation, absent the Planned Development process.

Originally Posted by aic4ever

The Core & Shell at Rush & Walton is now done, and Lululemon is beginning their buildout. I know Viva expressed some displeasure while it was still being built. Thoughts now that it's done?

When I was down there a week ago, the blank wall along Walton was pretty unpleasant and oppressive - has the trellis system you were describing been installed yet? The landscaping along the wall and in sidewalk planters should help blunt the starkness significantly.
Incidentally, this project, as well as the impending doom of the 2 nice Victorian rowhomes next door, are precisely the sorts of things that I -hope- Reilly had in mind at averting with the ordinance.

[BWChicago]

In Loyola/Rogers Park News, Loyola is demolishing these two great commercial structures at Sheridan and Albion (across from Chipotle) for some as-yet-unannounced redevelopment. Somehow neither of these buildings were even ON the Chicago Historic Resources Survey.

[wrab]

Studio/GANG's Columbia College Media Center, 9/2. I chose the worst possible time (mid-afternoon) to snap these pics, but you get the idea. Despite what these photos might indicate, the project is going to be very photogenic.

[aic4ever]

Originally Posted by VivaLFuego

I don't have a link to the actual language of the amendment. Here's a press release I got via Ald Reilly's mailing list:




When I was down there a week ago, the blank wall along Walton was pretty unpleasant and oppressive - has the trellis system you were describing been installed yet? The landscaping along the wall and in sidewalk planters should help blunt the starkness significantly.
Incidentally, this project, as well as the impending doom of the 2 nice Victorian rowhomes next door, are precisely the sorts of things that I -hope- Reilly had in mind at averting with the ordinance.

I think easing the ability to rezone is a fantastic step. That was a major hindrance in the reuse of existing buildings.

The landscaping at Rush & Walton, along with the trellis system, all went in on Monday. I think it looks pretty good. Will be a while until the plantings grow up the trellis, but you'll get the idea.

[Nowhereman1280]

Originally Posted by BWChicago

In Loyola/Rogers Park News, Loyola is demolishing these two great commercial structures at Sheridan and Albion (across from Chipotle) for some as-yet-unannounced redevelopment. Somehow neither of these buildings were even ON the Chicago Historic Resources Survey.

Its not unannounced, but there haven't been renders released yet. That block is phase two or three of the Loyola Station Project which includes the Morgan, the parking garage with CVS on the block next to the Morgan, that block, and the end of the next block north from the parking garage. Originally Loyola tried to get permission to combine the building they are currently making way for with the Loyola El stop and also bridge across the El to the newly vacant 4th plot where the 4+1 was up until February. However, now the plan is just more buildings similar to the Morgan. There should be a pretty decent density boost over the existing puny structures (both of which are in pretty rough structural shape, the old flower shop on the corner is particularly bad with the whole first floor having been gut-rehabed in the 70's).

Edit: Here is the bid solicitation for the Second Phase straight from Loyola's website:

http://www.luc.edu/tif/PDFs/tif_phase2.pdf

[BWChicago]

Originally Posted by Nowhereman1280

Its not unannounced, but there haven't been renders released yet. That block is phase two or three of the Loyola Station Project which includes the Morgan, the parking garage with CVS on the block next to the Morgan, that block, and the end of the next block north from the parking garage. Originally Loyola tried to get permission to combine the building they are currently making way for with the Loyola El stop and also bridge across the El to the newly vacant 4th plot where the 4+1 was up until February. However, now the plan is just more buildings similar to the Morgan. There should be a pretty decent density boost over the existing puny structures (both of which are in pretty rough structural shape, the old flower shop on the corner is particularly bad with the whole first floor having been gut-rehabed in the 70's).

Edit: Here is the bid solicitation for the Second Phase straight from Loyola's website:

http://www.luc.edu/tif/PDFs/tif_phase2.pdf

That bridge idea would have been interesting, but I can't imagine it would have worked too well. I think most of the density is going to be coming from the giant vacant lot behind, these two had a relatively small footprint. Can't speak to the structure, of course, but they don't look like they're falling down. Sheridan around Loyola is turning into a stripmall with apartments above.