CHICAGO | Highrise Projects & Construction, v7

[LouisVanDerWright]

Originally Posted by PittsburghPA

Across the street at The Hudson rent prices are market rate for any high income neighborhood in Chicago..

Exactly, these guys are just reflexively making excuses for "the free market" as if every square inch of land East of the river isn't exhorbinently valuable.

This parcel is literally across the street from a giant building full of tech startups, they will have no problem filling it at the same $3/SF+ rents as any other building along the Chicago corridor. Parking podia should be outright illegal and all I can say about the beige is: it literally costs exactly the same to paint the concrete grey or charcoal, colors hipsters apparently love, as it does beige. That's got nothing to do with budget.

And BTW, I absolutely would risk my capital spending a few bucks a square foot more to make a not ass ugly building in this location. Also, LoL to the notion that anyone living here will have any idea what Cabrini Green is/was unless they go see Candyman...

Originally Posted by left of center

lol TUP, are you calling yourself out?

No, Boomers just have a difficult time using the interwebs.

[PittsburghPA]

Originally Posted by bcp

Best of luck renting those north facing units...tons of risk there on the bleeding edge

Once again...The Hudson. Building isn't hurting the last time I was there a few weeks ago.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by maru2501

it is better than a weed lot

Depends on how good the weed in the weed lot is

[kolchak]

Originally Posted by bcp

Best of luck renting those north facing units...tons of risk there on the bleeding edge

Especially in an ugly building.

[k1052]

Downtown occupancy rate is about 95%, rents are headed up, and landlords have slowed leasing at new builds so everything doesn't turn over around the same time. Ok the building is a turd from a design perspective but in this market it's very much a leasable turd at good rents.

[PittsburghPA]

This is a hilarious discussion...to not want to develop this area is wild. Also since when has a rendering looked better than the finished product? I'm sure the limestone finish will look fine.

[kolchak]

Originally Posted by PittsburghPA

This is a hilarious discussion...to not want to develop this area is wild. Also since when has a rendering looked better than the finished product? I'm sure the limestone finish will look fine.

I didn't read any comment that said this area shouldn't be developed. It started with criticism of the design (looking at proposals and evaluating them is a big part of this forum) and ended with commentary discussing the pros and cons of moving forward with this specific proposal.

Some people said that buildings expanding the urban footprint are desireable as long as those projects are economically attractive and present low risk to developers. Other people here have said this design sucks. It doesn't mean we want to handcuff new development - just that the design could be better.

But this is the way of the internet. You say you don't like a design and then are branded as naive for not understanding the economics. Then your opinion is conflated with one that is anti-development though that was never said.

[LouisVanDerWright]

Yeah, it's a total joke to pretend that this is the same Cabrini as 10 or 20 years ago. This is prime class A apartment territory now. It should be held to the same standards as any other part of downtown...

It's funny, you don't hear the same nonsense about buildings going up in the Western part of the West Loop or the South Loop. Those areas were just as crime ridden and even adjacent to projects (West of Union Park was all projects at one point).

Seems to me that there is a certain perception of Cabrini that is triggering these comments of "it's a marginal area, be forgiving on the design". From an economic perspective this area is no different than buildings going up on Union Park or Wabash and Cermak. What's with the dated perception of what is now essentially a giant vacant lot as some hot bed of crime or skid row?

[Chicagoguy]

What ever happened to 40 West Oak? I wasn’t able to find much news on this since last year.

“The proposal recently received approval from the Chicago Plan Commission, and additionally received approval on the zoning change for the site. The total project cost is approximately $165 million, with construction expected to commence sometime in 2021.“

https://chicagoyimby.com/2020/12/app...velopment.html

[SamInTheLoop]

^ One can only hope it died a slow and agonizing death.

Was this the worst Lagrange ever? No. Does that matter? No.
All Lagrange proposals deserve a death on the drawing boards.
They're garbage. We deserve so much better.

[LouisVanDerWright]

Originally Posted by Chicagoguy

What ever happened to 40 West Oak? I wasn’t able to find much news on this since last year.

“The proposal recently received approval from the Chicago Plan Commission, and additionally received approval on the zoning change for the site. The total project cost is approximately $165 million, with construction expected to commence sometime in 2021.“

https://chicagoyimby.com/2020/12/app...velopment.html

Too close to Cabrini. Cancelled due to poverty and don't you DARE question the design or this entire area will collapse into a ghetto!

[the urban politician]

^ What straw man are you guys arguing against?

I was the one who most vehemently attacked the design of 808 Cleveland by saying this about it 2 pages back:

Originally Posted by the urban politician

^ That podium makes shit look like a cherry sundae

Seriously, 1999 called and........naw, it's SO BAD that even 1999 doesn't want that design back

808 Cleveland is NOT in a low-income area, not even close, even if it's next to those Cabrini Green rowhomes. It certainly can justify more expense spent towards better design....I mean that's obvious.

But in a part of the city where there is virtually no hope of getting the high rents needed to justify expenditure on more expensive materials, one cannot (and would be an ignorant ass to) criticize a developer for going with cheaper materials. If a tower like this were being built in Roseland, for argument's sake, most people would just be happy that anything at all were getting built there.

[marothisu]

A new construction permit was issued for the caissons for 166 N Aberdeen. This is a planned 21 story building with 224 units and 70 parking spaces.

Rendering via Chicago YIMBY and SCB (https://chicagoyimby.com/2020/12/dem...en-street.html)



Nothing to write home about, per almost usual. What was there before:
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8846...7i16384!8i8192

[harryc]

Originally Posted by marothisu

A new construction permit was issued for the caissons for 166 N Aberdeen. This is a planned 21 story building with 224 units and 70 parking spaces.
...snip...
Nothing to write home about, per almost usual. What was there before:
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8846...7i16384!8i8192

That's where I used to go to get bulk pizza rounds ( the white cardboard ) for our annual gingerbread house event.

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by marothisu

Nothing to write home about, per almost usual.

I think it's a pretty handsome tower actually. The massing is neat with the interlocking wedges and the facade system is a nice change of pace after a bunch of blue glass curtainwalls. Lots of depth and complexity. The base is just ok but it seems to do a decent job of concealing the parking (probably on Level 2/3?)

I'm guessing it will turn out similar to 5252 S Cornell, which everyone on SSP seemed to like...

Interestingly there is also a small 6-story building fronting May that is part of this project. The tower and the midrise will share a parking podium. So that's two "missing teeth" that this project will fill in.

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by ardecila

I think it's a pretty handsome tower actually. The massing is neat with the interlocking wedges and the facade system is a nice change of pace after a bunch of blue glass curtainwalls. Lots of depth and complexity. The base is just ok but it seems to do a decent job of concealing the parking (probably on Level 2/3?)

I'm guessing it will turn out similar to 5252 S Cornell, which everyone on SSP seemed to like...

Interestingly there is also a small 6-story building fronting May that is part of this project. The tower and the midrise will share a parking podium. So that's two "missing teeth" that this project will fill in.

It might just be the rendering not being the greatest quality. You might be right by the end of it though in real life. Good to see these things start anyway. Today the West Loop as we know it today has over 32K or 33K people. I bet by 2030 at this rate it's going to have over 40K people..

[kolchak]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

^ What straw man are you guys arguing against?

I was the one who most vehemently attacked the design of 808 Cleveland by saying this about it 2 pages back:



808 Cleveland is NOT in a low-income area, not even close, even if it's next to those Cabrini Green rowhomes. It certainly can justify more expense spent towards better design....I mean that's obvious.

But in a part of the city where there is virtually no hope of getting the high rents needed to justify expenditure on more expensive materials, one cannot (and would be an ignorant ass to) criticize a developer for going with cheaper materials. If a tower like this were being built in Roseland, for argument's sake, most people would just be happy that anything at all were getting built there.

Sorry for being an "ignorant ass," but isn't this a relative question? Something gets built that is so poorly constructed that it does little more than make some short term profit for the builder without moving the bar higher for the community. That's short term profit over long term investment and its not helpful either. It is also a way future slums are created in the first place. Start with crappy buildings, wait for the newness to wear off and the materials to rot... I think we have enough examples of this in Chicago already.

[BVictor1]

There was a meeting about 400 N. Elizabeth.

There have been some changes:

-parking is has been reduced to 130 from 210 and from 2 above levels to one below

-building went from 19 to 16 floors and 275’ — about a 40’ reduction

There was some bitching about the height and use. It was reiterated that this is a part of the extended central area and that taller buildings have been approved nearby. Certainly some pushback by the city and the alderman stated in his opening comments that the West Loop has become a pivitol part of the region.

[southoftheloop]

Build it!

[the urban politician]

^ Wow, thanks for the updates BV

Less parking, moving it below ground, and pushing back on NIMBY's......way to go. I think that this Alderman should.....(?run for mayor??)....stay as Alderman for the West Loop so that more projects can get pushed through