[TheBigHurt]

I love the proximity to the Cell.

[Steely Dan]

* posts deleted *


all talk of national politics, including barack obama and the DNC temporarily relocating to chicago should go in a different thread.

all talk about the 2016 olympic bid should go in the 2016 olympic bid thread.

all talk of the potential CME/NYMEX merger should go in the CME/NYMEX merger thread.




this thread is for disucssion of any and all non-highrise urban development anywhere in chicagoland.

[Ch.G, Ch.G]

* posts deleted *


all talk of national politics, including barack obama and the DNC temporarily relocating to chicago should go in a different thread.

all talk about the 2016 olympic bid should go in the 2016 olympic bid thread.

all talk of the potential CME/NYMEX merger should go in the CME/NYMEX merger thread.




this thread is for disucssion of any and all non-highrise urban development anywhere in chicagoland.

What if we want to talk about all three--

wait for it--

IN THE SAME THREAD?

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[aaron38]

The pace of suburban activity has fallen to a near standstill. I've been waiting for the Focus Development TOD project in Palatine to start for a year now. I just called, and they've pushed groundbreaking out again to this fall. If they launch on that date, they'll be 18 months behind their original schedule, which to me sounds like a large hit to a firm's bottom line.

Another delay is better than a cancelation, but I'm starting to worry about the health of this one. Hopefully Focus can ride this out.

[VivaLFuego]

The pace of suburban activity has fallen to a near standstill. I've been waiting for the Focus Development TOD project in Palatine to start for a year now. I just called, and they've pushed groundbreaking out again to this fall. If they launch on that date, they'll be 18 months behind their original schedule, which to me sounds like a large hit to a firm's bottom line.

Another delay is better than a cancelation, but I'm starting to worry about the health of this one. Hopefully Focus can ride this out.

Judging by the construction bid postings at chicagorealestatedaily, there is still a stream of suburban projects in the pipeline, but nothing too major. 50 units here, 100 units there, 20000sq ft retail here.... I think I've seen TODs posted for construction in Oak Lawn and Lombard, among others, as well as a few midrise things out by Oak Brook.

A couple very large office/industrial parks under construction though, like up in Antioch.

[Steely Dan]

What if we want to talk about all three--

wait for it--

IN THE SAME THREAD?

if that's your desire, then you're on the wrong internet forum.

try this one instead: http://www.skyscrapercity.com/forumdisplay.php?f=104.

[Ch.G, Ch.G]

if that's your desire, then you're on the wrong internet forum.

try this one instead: http://www.skyscrapercity.com/forumdisplay.php?f=104.

That's okay: I made one within SSP boundaries that should be exempt from the heavy hand.

Stormy, husky, brawling: musings on Chicago (http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?p=3619310#post3619310)

[cbotnyse]

These are installed all along the southern part of the main branch.

http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f21/cbotnyse/my%20photos/DSC_0043-1.jpg

[Busy Bee]

Jeez, I hope those aren't permanent.

[honte]

Derr, what's that thing over there by the river where you can walk? Oh, a River...walk? Man, these Chicagoans sure are sophitacated.

[photolitherland]

wow, it looks something someone put there for a temporary thing like a county fair, it looks terrible right there on those stairs but whatever.

[cbotnyse]

I don't think they are that bad actually. I urge you to see them in person. The signs are inviting and without them, I think maybe people would never even walk down there.

[chibuddy16]

here's some encouraging news with the central station towers, I'm not sure if Grant Park 3 is approved but it looks like the project is still a go!!!!

http://www.suntimes.com/business/roeder/1015762,CST-FIN-central20.article

[Mr Downtown]

Grant Park 3 & 4 were approved--in principle--by Plan Commission yesterday. More specifically, the PD was amended to raise the height limits to 780 and 900 feet respectively. The actual final designs will be approved administratively.

[i_am_hydrogen]

Grant Park 4? But it hasn't even been designed...

[Eventually...Chicago]

^^^ exactly, they just ammended the terms of the planned development as Mr. Downtown said, the design will be approved when the project is reviewed for zoning approval.

[Mr Downtown]

Exactly. This puzzled one of the commissioners, too, who asked where the elevation drawings were. The action was simply raising the height limits in the PD, which had been administratively increased (as a minor amendment) from 400 feet to 650 feet and then to 750 feet. So things like Central Station's purchase of the air rights over Indiana Avenue (for the cantilevered part of the tower) weren't even discussed.

[honte]

^ Alliance, there's your "in" to fight the design without fighting the height: Go complain about the shadows cast on the sidewalk from the cantilever. ;)

[Breezyfingers]

Kinsgbury Plaza recently installed a little riverwalk as well. It continues past tthe Eastbank Club and ends at the Kinzie Street bridge.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3157/2595936377_95584651cb_o.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3289/2596768660_becc089586_o.jpg

[Eventually...Chicago]

Exactly. This puzzled one of the commissioners, too, who asked where the elevation drawings were. The action was simply raising the height limits in the PD, which had been administratively increased (as a minor amendment) from 400 feet to 650 feet and then to 750 feet. So things like Central Station's purchase of the air rights over Indiana Avenue (for the cantilevered part of the tower) weren't even discussed.

It really is amazing how alderman don't understand the least bit about zoning, building, or, more generally, planning. And yet, that is their only real power.

[i_am_hydrogen]

Exactly. This puzzled one of the commissioners, too, who asked where the elevation drawings were. The action was simply raising the height limits in the PD, which had been administratively increased (as a minor amendment) from 400 feet to 650 feet and then to 750 feet. So things like Central Station's purchase of the air rights over Indiana Avenue (for the cantilevered part of the tower) weren't even discussed.

So would this be considered spot zoning? What zoning classification did these two parcels have before the amendment to the PD?

[Mr Downtown]

Aldermen? This was Plan Commission, not City Council.

Spot zoning? That's usually more about allowing an apartment building or gas station in the middle of an all-single-family zone. It's not something that would really apply to anything in the Central Area. Well, I guess if the alderman downzoned a lot at Adams/Desplaines to single-family, that could also be challenged as spot zoning.

Central Station was probably mostly M2-3 before the PD was approved in 1990. Unlike most PDs, which spell out the details of a specific planned building, the Central Station PD obligated them to prepare a plan that would regulate the development. That plan set a height limit of 400 feet for this area, and said they would "minimize shadows on public or private open space." The 2004 Near South Community Plan repeated the 400-foot limit. But in the years since then, Central Station had sought and received "minor amendment" letters from DPD allowing them to go to 650 feet, and then to 750 feet. So to their attorney, the increase to 900 feet was merely another minor change, rather than 2.5 times the height that was allowed in the PD and the plan. Density, by the way, is entirely irrelevant to this debate because the increase in height is not adding any more units. They're presumably just bigger and more profitable condos.

[BVictor1]

Aldermen? This was Plan Commission, not City Council.

Spot zoning? That's usually more about allowing an apartment building or gas station in the middle of an all-single-family zone. It's not something that would really apply to anything in the Central Area. Well, I guess if the alderman downzoned a lot at Adams/Desplaines to single-family, that could also be challenged as spot zoning.

Central Station was probably mostly M2-3 before the PD was approved in 1990. Unlike most PDs, which spell out the details of a specific planned building, the Central Station PD obligated them to prepare a plan that would regulate the development. That plan set a height limit of 400 feet for this area, and said they would "minimize shadows on public or private open space." The 2004 Near South Community Plan repeated the 400-foot limit. But in the years since then, Central Station had sought and received "minor amendment" letters from DPD allowing them to go to 650 feet, and then to 750 feet. So to their attorney, the increase to 900 feet was merely another minor change, rather than 2.5 times the height that was allowed in the PD and the plan. Density, by the way, is entirely irrelevant to this debate because the increase in height is not adding any more units. They're presumably just bigger and more profitable condos.

Only a few people in the world care about shadows, you being one of them.

[Mr Downtown]

Please cite any recognized authority on urban design who doesn't think one of the most basic principles in a northern climate is to not shadow public parks and plazas. It was so important to planners that it was included as one of the nine development regulations in Central Station's master plan.

[BVictor1]

Please cite any recognized authority on urban design who doesn't think one of the most basic principles in a northern climate is to not shadow public parks and plazas. It was so important to planners that it was included as one of the nine development regulations in Central Station's master plan.


Please cite any recognized authority who considers a case of melanoma good for you.

I understand your argument, but you're just wrong.

Daley Plaza (shaded)
Connors Park (shaded)
Seneca Park (shaded)

Grant Park is over 300 acres, and you know that only a small portion would be shaded.

[Chicago Shawn]

^^As mentioned above plenty of successful urban spaces in this city are shadded most of the day. In fact after plan commission I noticed the sun was still able to reach the Dearborn Street in the heart of the Loop, depsite all of the high-rises.

If keeping sun in Grant Park is so important, then we should start cutting down the trees, which shade most of the park.

Central Park in NYC, one of the world's most famous parks and a heavily coveted public space is shaded by a tree canopy throughout most of it, and is ringed by high-rises; the tallest of which are at the SOUTH end of the park.

I am sorry but the argument over shaddows in DOWNTOWN are BS. Go out to the lakefront or Solidarity Drive for your Vitaman D, or perhaps out to the outter neighborhoods or suburbs, and be sure to stay away from the trees.

[honte]

I would argue that the "placement of the shadows" from GP4 is actually desirable. The park is unshaded in the summer mornings when most people crave the sun (shadows going toward Wabash). By the time the city is hot and sweaty, the shadows have moved into the park, giving people shade. It should work out nicely. At the least, it makes a bit more sense than having the tallest building at the corner of Columbus and Roosevelt.

Plus, is there even anything planted in the South end of Grant Park?? ;)

[Chicago Shawn]

I would argue that the "placement of the shadows" from GP4 is actually desirable. The park is unshaded in the summer mornings when most people crave the sun (shadows going toward Wabash). By the time the city is hot and sweaty, the shadows have moved into the park, giving people shade. It should work out nicely. At the least, it makes a bit more sense than having the tallest building at the corner of Columbus and Roosevelt.

Plus, is there even anything planted in the South end of Grant Park?? ;)

Exactly. I like the shadows in 90+ degree weather. And, the land being shadowed was added to Grant Park by Foggelson. It was not in the park before Central Station's development began. So really, what is the issue here? Its just trying to grab some justification of the South Loop NIMBYs getting all pissy because thier Bible of the Near South Plan has been violated. I am sure when the 16th/18th Street overpasses to LSD come up for consideration they will forget about that part of thier precious plan.

[the urban politician]

Please cite any recognized authority on urban design who doesn't think one of the most basic principles in a northern climate is to not shadow public parks and plazas.

^ All of my favorite parks & plazas in the world are very well shaded. Ever heard of trees?

Pathetically weak argument. Give it up

[cbotnyse]

Doesn't 600 N. LSD significantly shade Ohio St beach? where were the urban designers on that one?

[the urban politician]

^ Now see, there's a difference between a beach and a park/plaza.

Beach--sunbathing, playing in the sun, beach volleyball in the warm sand

Park/Plaza--relax, enjoy the respite from the city, sit in the shade & read a book

[VivaLFuego]

The concept that successful cities with happy residents are those with large unshaded open spaces is....dated. That's not to say open space is bad, but a great deal of damage to the urban fabric was done to U.S. cities from 1950-1970 in the name of creating pleasant open space. Open space was so valued that surface parking lots were considered a valuable improvement: not only solving the parking crisis on our packed streets, but allowing more light and a less crowded feel (see the travesty that is the Hyde Park parking lot betwen Harper Court and Lake Park Ave).

The advantage of tall and slender is that the shadows will also be so shaped: while casting a long shadow, it will function as more of a sundial, with a particular spot only be shaded for a short period in contrast to a solid 400-foot wall where the shadow would last several hours. Further, in the context of this specific location, no one uses the park between 11th and Roosevelt anyway, let alone in the dead of winter when there actually would be shadow for a large portion of the day.

Neighborhoods need some level of open space, particularly and especially playgrounds for children. But the concept that shadows ruin and rot a neighborhood resulted from a spurious correlation that, 50 years ago, was somehow deemed a causal relationship.

There are plenty of very dense cities throughout (northern) Europe that immediately prove otherwise, not even getting into the converse U.S. examples. I challenge MrD and other direct-sunlight proponents to cite an example of when the elimination/prevention of density, in and of itself, either improved livability or saved a neighborhood from deterioration. It's an incredibly tough relationship to prove, and ultimate will just reduce to differing personal preferences.

[VivaLFuego]

Doesn't 600 N. LSD significantly shade Ohio St beach? where were the urban designers on that one?

Some elements of SOAR and Lake Point Towers did actually try to make a pretty big stink about it, but Natarus, bless his screwball heart, could at least be counted on not to pander - in contrast to his successor who got elected on a nearly explicit platform of ultimate and supreme pandering.

[Mr Downtown]

Downtown Chicago has fewer than eight days a year over 90 degrees, and fewer than 50 when shade would be preferred by any park users.

Urban design professionals distinguish between shade, which is generally a good thing to provide in part of an open space, and shadowing, which is always thought to diminish the quality of such a place.

William H. Whyte spent decades studying how people use—and refuse to use—plazas in New York. His work was made the basis of Manhattan’s current zoning rules. The Municipal Art Society mounted a huge protest and forced the redesign of Time Warner Center on Columbus Circle because it would shadow part of Central Park. The more access to sun, the better, and if there is a southern exposure, it should be made the most of. . . People do like warmth. In summer, they will generally sit in the sun as well as the shade. Only in very hot weather—ninety degrees or more—will the sunny spots be vacant. . . .Where the winters are long and the sun sets low in the sky, people cherish what sunlight there is. William H. Whyte, City: Rediscovering the Center, pp. 133-134

We know this in Chicago, too. It’s why Chase Plaza is so much better used than Daley Plaza. Go to Federal Plaza one lunch hour and observe where people actually choose to sit. San Francisco followed Manhattan’s lead in the mid-80s, and set up elaborate formulas for the location and height of new buildings to protect the city’s public spaces from shadowing. A city’s public parks, plazas, and playgrounds . . . . are a precious resource that should be protected from building shadows during periods of active use. Richard Hedman, Fundamentals of Urban Design, p. 119

A plaza should be located so as to receive as much sunlight as its surrounding environment will permit. Clare Cooper Marcus and Carolyn Francis, editors, People Places: Design Guidelines for Urban Open Space, p. 25

You can always count on Christopher Alexander to put it succinctly: People use open space if it is sunny, and do not use it if it isn’t, in all but desert climates. Christopher Alexander, A Pattern Language, p. 514

VivaLFuego’s discussion of density and Hyde Park demolition is rather off-topic. No change in density or unit count was being proposed at Central Station. The number of units stays exactly the same, as does the distance between the buildings, whether the buildings are 650 feet or 900 feet.

[honte]

I, for one, will only sit in the shade in a plaza or park. Never have sunbathed in my entire life, nor had any desire to do so. Perhaps it was just too dark in the shade for Whyte to notice people like me through his heavily tinted glasses.

Grant Park, worst case scenario, will be 10% shaded. The 10% of the morons in this city like me who don't crave the sun can sit there while the rest of the city gets skin cancer. Great arrangement.

[honte]

Some elements of SOAR and Lake Point Towers did actually try to make a pretty big stink about it, but Natarus, bless his screwball heart, could at least be counted on not to pander - in contrast to his successor who got elected on a nearly explicit platform of ultimate and supreme pandering.

Yes, exactly, there were lots of sun studies and other things done to check this. San Francisco came up a lot in the debate.

Personally, I thought Natarus should have done more to appease them - in the form of insisting on a taller, more slender tower. (This was long before "tall and thin" was a city mantra.) But perhaps he saw through the argument to realize that most people only wanted to protect their views of the Lake and really only wanted a short, squat building there.

[BVictor1]

Downtown Chicago has fewer than eight days a year over 90 degrees, and fewer than 50 when shade would be preferred by any park users.

Urban design professionals distinguish between shade, which is generally a good thing to provide in part of an open space, and shadowing, which is always thought to diminish the quality of such a place.

William H. Whyte spent decades studying how people use—and refuse to use—plazas in New York. His work was made the basis of Manhattan’s current zoning rules. The Municipal Art Society mounted a huge protest and forced the redesign of Time Warner Center on Columbus Circle because it would shadow part of Central Park. The more access to sun, the better, and if there is a southern exposure, it should be made the most of. . . People do like warmth. In summer, they will generally sit in the sun as well as the shade. Only in very hot weather—ninety degrees or more—will the sunny spots be vacant. . . .Where the winters are long and the sun sets low in the sky, people cherish what sunlight there is. William H. Whyte, City: Rediscovering the Center, pp. 133-134

We know this in Chicago, too. It’s why Chase Plaza is so much better used than Daley Plaza. Go to Federal Plaza one lunch hour and observe where people actually choose to sit. San Francisco followed Manhattan’s lead in the mid-80s, and set up elaborate formulas for the location and height of new buildings to protect the city’s public spaces from shadowing. A city’s public parks, plazas, and playgrounds . . . . are a precious resource that should be protected from building shadows during periods of active use. Richard Hedman, Fundamentals of Urban Design, p. 119

A plaza should be located so as to receive as much sunlight as its surrounding environment will permit. Clare Cooper Marcus and Carolyn Francis, editors, People Places: Design Guidelines for Urban Open Space, p. 25

You can always count on Christopher Alexander to put it succinctly: People use open space if it is sunny, and do not use it if it isn’t, in all but desert climates. Christopher Alexander, A Pattern Language, p. 514

VivaLFuego’s discussion of density and Hyde Park demolition is rather off-topic. No change in density or unit count was being proposed at Central Station. The number of units stays exactly the same, as does the distance between the buildings, whether the buildings are 650 feet or 900 feet.

Well, people have 320 acres to "choose" to sit in at Grant Park. They will be able to sit in the shaded shadow section or the bright sunny area.

[BVictor1]

I, for one, will only sit in the shade in a plaza or park. Never have sunbathed in my entire life, nor had any desire to do so. Perhaps it was just too dark in the shade for Whyte to notice people like me through his heavily tinted glasses.

Grant Park, worst case scenario, will be 10% shaded. The 10% of the morons in this city like me who don't crave the sun can sit there while the rest of the city gets skin cancer. Great arrangement.

I agree.

[BVictor1]

Downtown Chicago has fewer than eight days a year over 90 degrees, and fewer than 50 when shade would be preferred by any park users.

You're giving averages.

And it's called global warming so the averages you stated will change.

[honte]

^ I'm curious what you think makes this structure so important. If you can answer this question in the 'General Developments' thread, I'd appreciate it.

TUP asked me above, in the transit thread, to explain why a Mies van der Rohe "shack" is of importance. I am going to try very briefly to do so here, in a limited amount of time.

First, it should be noted that almost every architectural historian who has lived past 1950 would agree that Mies was one of the three most important modern architects to have lived. Like him or hate him, you cannot deny this. Further, it is impossible to ignore the influence his work had on the profession, in virtually every corner of the globe.

Second, with that groundwork laid, it's important to understand what Mies was truly after in his work. One of the overriding missions in his career was to define / discover / identify a form of building that was appropriate to modern times. This went far beyond the aesthetic to much more philosophical roots: What does it mean to build, what impact does building have on society, how does building reflect technology and the time of its construction, how can the architect elevate building to the sublime realm of art? Mies wanted to find an inherent "language" in architecture, appropriate to modern times, that would be as solid and lasting as that of the Romans or ancient Greeks, and if you look at what's going on around us, in many respects he did just that.

As such, Mies's work - perhaps more than any other architect - must be seen as a continuum, requiring as much of our focus as Mies the man put into it. Something as mundane to the average civilian as the orientation of a wide-flange column could have serious philosophical meaning in his work, and Mies was the kind of guy who would spend days or weeks or years studying a simple problem like that. It is up to us to reach a level of comprehension deep enough before we judge it.

IIT was Mies's laboratory. It cannot be seen as a merely collection of Mies buildings, but rather must be seen as a whole composition. He spent several years just designing the master plan and not even building structures, something he called the "biggest decision I ever had to make." The arrangement of the buildings, the way they interact with one another, is in many regards as important as the buildings themselves. To remove a building in his hand from that composition, however minor, is to rob the composition of its richness. Plus, there is something great at IIT about seeing true masterpieces such as Crown Hall or the Commons along with the constantly evolving ideas that produced them. You might consider these small, minor buildings as "follies," as I said earlier, or maybe like "B-Sides and Outtakes" from your favorite band's re-release album.

Third, this "test cell" reveals some unique things about Mies's language and evolution of that language. I haven't seen the original plans (yet) nor do I know how much of what we're seeing is original (probably everything). But there are unique details on the building (the brick bond, the roof detail, the door) that I believe have a lot to say for those truly interested in understanding this man, and there are many such people. They flock to the IIT campus every day.

For these reasons (and others I'll probably regret forgetting at the moment) I have no doubt that the building is worth preserving. I hope this answered your question. I highly recommend Phyllis Lambert's essays in Mies in America, which address a lot of this in painstaking detail.

[spyguy]

http://featuresblogs.chicagotribune.com/theskyline/2008/06/zaha-hadid-van.html#more

Zaha Hadid, Ben van Berkel to design Burnham Plan centennial pavilions in Millennium Park

By Blair Kamin

Two internationally renowned architects, including Pritzker Architecture Prize winner Zaha Hadid, will design temporary pavilions in Millennium Park to serve as focal points for next year’s regionwide celebration of the 100th anniversary of the Burnham Plan, the visionary document that changed the face of Chicago.

[Ch.G, Ch.G]

^

o m f g :D :D :D :D :D :D :D

[Nowhereman1280]

Good post Honte, I really need to get out and explore IIT in greater detail sometime this summer!

[honte]

^ Thanks. Please try to read those few chapters before you go down there. I think you will find the experience even more enriching if you do that first.

__________

Splendid, splendid news on the Hadid and UNStudio commissions!!! Those two names were in my top 10, or maybe 5, designers I'd like to work here. I am so psyched.

Terribly pity that these buildings cannot be saved and relocated somewhere for some function. Who knows, we might have the next Barcelona Pavilion on our hands? The pavilions could be taken to the "shady" south end of Grant Park, or maybe out to the west side somewhere. They could even be moved to a vacant double-lot (perfect size) and used to kick-start in-fill development in that neighborhood. There's got to be something to keep Chicago from never having a permanent work by these designers (and a way not to waste nearly $1M and all of the energy / materials put into them)!

Chicago has an incredibly long list of demolished fair buildings that should probably be still with us - it's either awesome or depressing, depending on your viewpoint. I think it's time to get out of this habit, both for the benefit of the city's architecture and also for environmental reasons. Temporary structures just don't make a lot of sense, even if the materials are cheap and mostly recycled.

At the very least, I hope these buildings inspire the next Christopher Carley to hire one of these great designers, just as the MAM inspired him to begin the project now known as the Chicago Spire.

[ardecila]

Plans call for [the pavilions] to be disassembled and recycled into public art by Chicago artist Dan Peterman.

I guess the pavilions will be kept, in one form or another...

[honte]

^ Is that good enough?

[Ch.G, Ch.G]

^ Is that good enough?

No. But, considering the architects and what they're like to produce, I can't imagine there won't be an outcry to preserve.

[honte]

^ I was joking to a friend that we should throw them on a barge and dump them over by the House of Tomorrow.

I think you are correct that the public would want to save them. But how much more interesting - and successful - it might be if this were the idea from the beginning?

[Nowhereman1280]

^ I was joking to a friend that we should throw them on a barge and dump them over by the House of Tomorrow.


^^^ What? This sounds interesting... Oo oo! Tell us the story papa Honte!!!

[wrabbit]

Hadid also did a temporary serpentine pavillion recently in London.

^ I was joking to a friend that we should throw them on a barge and dump them over by the House of Tomorrow.

I think you are correct that the public would want to save them. But how much more interesting - and successful - it might be if this were the idea from the beginning?

Certainly seems more green, less wasteful & more economical to adapt or re-use, even if as installation art, though a residence at the Dunes/Beverly Shores could be awesome -like the Island of Misfit Toys, but for buildings instead of toys (ref is to the stop-action production of Rudolph the Red-nosed Reindeer, for those who've never seen the reruns :) )

[honte]

^^^ What? This sounds interesting... Oo oo! Tell us the story papa Honte!!!

Not sure I am reading your post correctly, but most of the expo. houses from the '33 fair are still in existence. They got carted all over the place. Several of them were taken by barge down to the Lake Michigan shore in Indiana, and until recently, were sitting there rotting. Indiana has a cool new program that is encouraging people to restore them, and that's been happening slowly now for the last few years.

The House of Tomorrow is like finding the old phoenix when you finally come upon it in person - or, it was for me. At that time, it wasn't as well documented whether or not it survived. Quite a treat!

One of the others is out in Glen Ellyn and there are some more out there somewhere. I once tried to locate all of them. Keck's crystal house was demolished, however, to my knowledge.

[Nowhereman1280]

Ah, I was indeed asking you to tell me the story behind that. So are there a bunch of these houses in the dunes? I might be camping down there in a month or so, it would be sweet to go check them out while I am there!

[wrabbit]

Ah, I was indeed asking you to tell me the story behind that. So are there a bunch of these houses in the dunes? I might be camping down there in a month or so, it would be sweet to go check them out while I am there!

Here ya go:

Over 70 years of wind, sand and surf have battered the five World's Fair houses located along Lake Front Drive in Beverly Shores, but their uniqueness has weathered the elements. With the theme of a Century of Progress, the houses were built for the 1933 Chicago World's Fair to demonstrate modern architectural design, experimental materials, and new technologies such as central air conditioning and dishwashers.

The houses were brought to the dunes by barge in 1935 by real estate developer Robert Bartlett. Bartlett hoped that the high profile houses would entice buyers to his new resort community of Beverly Shores. Today the houses are listed on the National Register of Historic Places. One is still occupied under a special park reservation program, known as "Reservations of Use," while the others have been leased to the Historic Landmarks Foundation of Indiana, a statewide nonprofit preservation organization. Through this organization, private individuals or families have leased the homes and are rehabilitating them.

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y150/wjcordier/tomorrow1.jpg
http://www.nps.gov/archive/indu/history/Century_of_Progress_homes.htm

If you do get out that way, please post your impressions - haven't scouted them out yet myself.

[Chicago Shawn]

I went out to Beverly Shores about 3 weeks ago. The houses are in BAD shape, but are all under renovation by the National Park Service. I have a few photos that I will post in due time...



And AMAZING news on the pavilions. I assume there will be a push to save these buildings and make give them a permanent use.

[Via Chicago]

It would nice to see the pavillions saved, but somewhere other than Grant Park. The last thing we need is something else crammed in there thats supposed to be "temporary" (ala Petrillo)

[ethereal_reality]

Maybe eventually incorporate them into the renovation of Navy Pier.

Can you imagine cutting edge architecture being a draw at Navy Pier
instead of cheap trinkets and cheap fast food.

[mcfinley]

Hadn't heard of Corn Products International before today, but Chicagoland loses another multibillion dollar company via corporate takeover. Article from the NY Times.

Bunge to Acquire Corn Products for $4.4 Billion (http://dealbook.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/06/23/bunge-to-swallow-corn-products-for-44-billion/?ref=business)

Bunge said Monday that it would buy Corn Products International for $4.4 billion in stock, as the fertilizer and oilseed processor seeks to better compete against other American agricultural giants.

The takeover of one of the United States’s oldest agribusinesses is yet another sign of food producers seeking to take advantage of a rise in food prices. Many in the sector are scrambling to find bigger scale to meet soaring demand across the world.

It also represents the growing clout of international businesses. Despite being headquartered in White Plains, N.Y., Bunge’s roots are in Amsterdam, Bermuda and Brazil...

[Chicagoguy]

Does anyone have any updated photos of the new Barneys Department Store building in the Gold Coast? Does anyone know what might move into the old Barneys Building across the street?

[LA21st]

Seems to be some demolition work at Irving Park and Sheridan on the NE and NW corners. Anyone know what is going on?

[Chicago Shawn]

Ah, I was indeed asking you to tell me the story behind that. So are there a bunch of these houses in the dunes? I might be camping down there in a month or so, it would be sweet to go check them out while I am there!

There is a campground entrance about 600 feet south of the Beverly Shores station on the South Shore Line. I am going to start recommending it as an option to folks who want to spend a day in the city without the costs of a hotel or driving and parking, (those of course who like to camp).

[honte]

Seems to be some demolition work at Irving Park and Sheridan on the NE and NW corners. Anyone know what is going on?

You're kidding...? Both corners at once? Isn't that where the Holiday Club is located? It's a very large building.

This intersection was about to become "whole" again with the replacement of the gas station on the SE... I hope these are not corner-eroding developments on the north side.

_________

Just got back from Hyde Park and I am pleased to report that Helmut Jahn's new utility plant is looking great. It's much, much larger than I was expecting... something like 5 or 6 residential stories in equivalent height. It should be finished in about 2-3 months, I am guessing. The cladding and general appearance closely resemble his other recent works around town - just taller and boxier.

[VivaLFuego]

For reference, Sheridan/Irving:
http://maps.live.com/default.aspx?v=2&FORM=LMLTCP&cp=qzs54s7pvx9x&style=b&lvl=2&tilt=-90&dir=0&alt=-1000&scene=11371031&phx=0&phy=0&phscl=1&encType=1

I hope he misspoke and meant the SE corner where that mid-rise was planned.

[jstush04]

I hope he meant the NE corner only, cuz I park in the gas station lot (shhh), and I doubt it about the NW corner since I believe Holiday just went through some renovations. or maybe they were made an offer they couldn't refuse...

[spyguy]

Seems to be some demolition work at Irving Park and Sheridan on the NE and NW corners. Anyone know what is going on?

I think Thorek owns the NE building, which makes the demolition even more depressing.

[Nowhereman1280]

^^^ I drive by there pretty often, I'll check it out next time I'm up there...

[Patel]

Some nice green work where I work

http://www.dailyherald.com/story/?id=209060&src=5



Lake to heat, cool Elgin's Sherman Hospital

http://i.dailyherald.com/stories/76/76697.jpg
Sherman Hospital in Elgin is building the nation's largest geothermal lake to heat and cool the $310 million facility.

http://i.dailyherald.com/stories/76/76699.jpg
Workers lay loops of two-inch pipe in the lake Tuesday. About 150 miles of pipe will rest on the lake's bottom.





By Harry Hitzeman | Daily Herald Staff

Published: 6/18/2008 12:07 AM

Long before gasoline topped $4 a gallon and "going green" became chic, Sherman Health officials made the environment and efficiency a priority.

Tuesday afternoon, hospital officials showcased a 15-acre geothermal lake -- the largest in the nation -- that will heat and cool the 225-bed facility under construction at Big Timber and Randall roads in Elgin.

The system will save an estimated $1 million a year in energy costs and ultimately contain about 150 miles of looped tubes at the bottom of an 18-foot-deep lake.

"It doesn't get any greener than this," said Warren Lloyd, vice president at the Rock Island-based KJWW Engineering Consultants, which designed Sherman's lake.

In the winter, the system and its geothermal heat pumps will pull the Earth's natural heat from the lake into the $310 million facility.

A mixture of water and non-toxic antifreeze circulates through the loop and carries the heat to the hospital.

Then an electric-powered compressor and a heat exchanger will concentrate the energy into heat that is later blown through vents just like a furnace.

But unlike a furnace, no natural gas is burned.

"The hospital is heating itself. That's a strange thing to say, but it's part of the energy savings," said Charles Burnidge, an Elgin architect and member of Sherman's board of directors.

Burnidge said Sherman officials explored and chose the geothermal option long before the first shovel was planted in June 2006.

Burnidge also noted all of the private rooms have a view of the nearby forest and lake, which will be surrounded by a walking path and stocked with fish.

In the summer, the system is reversed.

The loops draw excess heat from the building and allow it to be absorbed by the lake water. It's more efficient than a traditional air-conditioner.

The system cools in the same way that a refrigerator keeps food cool -- by drawing heat from the interior, not by blowing in cold air, said John Kelly, executive director Of the Washington, D.C.-based Geothermal Heat Pump Consortium Inc.

"People don't understand how the system works. It seems like magic, but it's really not," Kelly said.

Tuesday, crews in rafts installed a few of the nearly 2,500 loops in the lake.

This work will be completed in about six weeks; the hospital is slated to open in late 2009.

Christine Priester, Sherman spokeswoman, said students will be able to take field trips to learn how the geothermal lake works after the hospital is completed in late 2009.

"We have people calling (us) from all over the world. There's a hospital in Nigeria looking to take a tour because they're thinking about this as well," she said.



http://www.suburbanchicagonews.com/couriernews/news/1011295,3_1_EL18_A1SHERMAN_S1.article#

Cool project heating up at new Sherman site
Sherman uses man-made lake for heat, cooling


June 18, 2008



By CIGI ROSS Staff Writer
ELGIN -- Sherman Hospital took another step toward completion of its economically friendly new building at Randall and Big Timber roads on Tuesday.

...

http://www.thefutureofsherman.com/images/photo_gallery/aerial/full_size/303.jpg

http://www.thefutureofsherman.com/images/photo_gallery/aerial/full_size/311.jpg

http://www.thefutureofsherman.com/gallery_aerial_view.php?id=jun08


http://www.thefutureofsherman.com/energy_faq.php

...
Sherman's geothermal lake will be one of the largest - if not the largest -lake loop heat-pump systems in the world.
...

[pip]

I think Thorek owns the NE building, which makes the demolition even more depressing.

Yup bad news and they do own it. Thorek is the worst when it comes to Urban Development. Look at what they have done to Irving Park rd. in their area. It just plain old sucks. The building is being raised and according to Thorek the space will be be 'green space' lol means empty, until they decicde what to do with it.

Technically it is in Schiller's Ward and not Tunney.

While Schiller is controversial and in many ways I don't like her, in some respects I do like her ideals and often I like her planning with regards to teardowns. They don't happen often in her Ward. She is more about preservation. Uptown does, which is mostly her ward, go more for rehabs then destroy and build new. But this Thorek thing is screwed up. It will be a continues parking lot for several blocks because the hospital is undecided.

[VivaLFuego]

^That's really awful. So they're just gonna tear it down and let it set as an empty lot indefinitely? That intersection will now be 3/4 awful instead of only 1/2 awful. Sigh. At least the site is zoned B1-5 (FAR 5.0) so if they ever get around to developing it, it will be a rather dense project.

[spyguy]

Lynn Becker (http://arcchicago.blogspot.com/2008/06/preservation-chicago-protests-22nd.html) reports that Preservation Chicago is trying to stop the demolition of a building at 2131 W. 22nd Place (follow the link for photos).

[OhioGuy]

This morning as I walked to the Addison red line stop, I observed crews doing soil testing next to an abandoned apartment building. It's the building that runs north/south on the north side of the intersection of Addison & Reta, sandwiched between a parking lot to the west and a police station to the east. They were doing soil testing in two spots that I could see, one on the east side of the building and one on the west. Does anyone know if there are plans to demolish the building and construct something new there?

[honte]

^ Yes, that's another kind of sad one. The Police Station is going to expand... the community was able to finally convince the city that the existing station can be reused, but this building is the casualty. It was designed by the same architect that did the old Cook County Hospital.

[VivaLFuego]

Eesh....lots of demolition news in a short amount of time.

[OhioGuy]

^ Yes, that's another kind of sad one. The Police Station is going to expand...

I had actually wondered whether the police station might be taking over that space, but I was hoping they weren't.

[aaron38]

The Daily Herald had an article today that the redevelopment plans for Randhurst Mall in Mt. Prospect have been changed. The original plans called for mixed use development, with condos over first floor retail, to try and create an instant downtown, probably similar to what they did at the Glenview airbase.

But the plans have changed, and now they've dropped the residential component, and it'll basically just be redeveloped as an outdoor lifestyle center mall.

I think this may actually be good news, as it'll mean new condos have to stay clustered in downtown Mt. Prospect and Arlington Heights, around the Metra stations and those existing walkable areas.

[LaSalle.St.Station]

took a ride down sheridan road today thru the north shore......what a loss...
total destruction of what should have been a preservation district. Sad thing is economics and time will destroy these newer cheaper bigger crapnopolies......

[ardecila]

Did you go down Sheridan Road, or up? As I found out today, you can't really go down (at least in Wilmette). :hell:

[Breezyfingers]

Some new green space at K Station.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3011/2618306374_5264255dd2_o.jpg

[Nowhereman1280]

^^^ Hey that's not half bad! At least we are getting a decent park with all the crapitecture...

Re Sheridan Road: I'm not very upset at all that they destroyed those mansions, the majority of them weren't anything special. To see a real Mansion district with really elaborate and ornate mansions, head up to Milwaukee and take Lake Drive all the way up from downtown until it ends near the county line. It literally its 4000 sqft+ mansions the whole way, which is about 8 miles...

Having grown up just past the end of Lake Drive in Milwaukee, most of the mansions along Sheridan seem like glorified 3 flats...

[Chicagoguy]

I went by the new Barney's New York building at Rush and Oak and I was wondering if anyone knew when it was scheduled to be finished. I heard at one time they wanted to be moved in before Christmas season. Also has anyone heard what may move into the old Barneys building?

[BVictor1]

took a ride down sheridan road today thru the north shore......what a loss...
total destruction of what should have been a preservation district. Sad thing is economics and time will destroy these newer cheaper bigger crapnopolies......

I agree.

I hate those crap towers along Sheridan Rd.

[BVictor1]

http://featuresblogs.chicagotribune.com/theskyline/2008/06/new-study-chica.html




Chicago ranks first in architecture and design, according to study



I don't put much stock in studies, but this one is hard to ignore: It rates Chicago the top U.S. city for architecture and design.

The survey comes from the North American division of a worldwide architecural firm--the division is based in New York--so it's hard to say the fix was in for Chicago.

http://featuresblogs.chicagotribune.com/theskyline/images/2008/06/27/chicago_skyline.jpg



The study includes a Zogby poll, which found that 87 percent of the Chicago residents surveyed rated the architecture of their city as excellent or good.

Guess they haven't seen any of our hideous three-flat condos.

A spokeswoman for the firm that did the study, RMJM Hillier, denied in an interview that the survey is an attention-getting stunt. "We wanted to do something to spark a dialogue," she said. "It's quite serious."

The firm does not have a Chicago office.

Here's a news release about the study:

New York, NY (June 26, 2008) — Chicago is the best city for architecture and design according to an independent study conducted by one of the world’s leading architectural practices.

Looking at ten criteria including architecture awards, “green” design and public transit systems, RMJM Hillier, the North American division of the worldwide architecture firm RMJM, selected 10 cities leading the way in design policy and practice. Then the firm commissioned public opinion and research firm Zogby International to interview over 1000 residents of those cities on architecture and design issues and incorporated those results into the research to determine the final rankings.

Chicago came out on top with New York and Boston taking second and third place respectively.

Eighty-seven percent of Chicago residents polled think that the architecture in their city is excellent or good, versus 63% of New Yorkers and 64% of Bostonians, according to the Zogby poll which was one of the factors that determined rankings.

The Top Ten Cities for Design:

1. Chicago, IL

2. New York, NY

3. Boston, MA

4. Los Angeles, CA

5. Portland, OR

6. San Francisco, CA

7. Seattle, WA

8. Denver, CO

9. Philadelphia, PA

10. Washington, D.C.

“Good design makes better communities by boosting the economy, creating jobs, and, particularly today, sponsoring environmental strategies,” said Peter Schubert, AIA, design director of RMJM Hillier. “We conducted this study to see which cities are the most forward-thinking in their planning and development strategies and to applaud those that are doing it right.”

"Architecture and design are such significant parts of Chicago's business and cultural communities; walking down the street, you hear people talking about buildings just as often as you hear them talking about the Cubs or Sox," said Zurich Esposito, executive vice president of AIA Chicago. "Studies like this compel us to learn more about what people are doing in other cities - across the country or around the globe. It's all part of learning from each other and creating an international design dialogue."

The study also names three “Cities to Watch:” Minneapolis, Minnesota; Baltimore, Maryland; and Phoenix, Arizona.

To read the study, click here:

Download americas_best_cities_for_design___rmjm_hillier.pdf

[wrabbit]

^ Great press for Chicago. Articles like this are good for "architourism" business, which seems to have burgeoned here in recent years.

Bottom line: building well now & taking good care of what we already have are vitally important to Chicago's lucrative tourism & hospitality industries.

[ardecila]

I'm not really a big fan of the park at K Station. First, it meets the Desplaines overpass in a very odd way - the dirt just stops and there's a sheer drop to "true ground level", instead of building an attractive retaining wall on the overpass.

Second, because of the design, you can stand in the park and still see underneath the support pillars of the Desplaines overpass, which is a dead space of gravel, puddles, and trash - a space that is now completely sheltered, and perfect for homeless people.

Third, the stair-stepped slope of the earth there rules out any sort of frisbee, or baseball tossing, or any other kind of sport, since the ground is too uneven. All this grassy area is maybe good for picnics or sunbathing, and that's about it.

Now - the design here seems like the result of some serious budget constraints. The city (or FRDA, the neighborhood group) probably asked for a park, and Fifield grudgingly gave them an useless piece of land with grass, some trees and a path. The playground and sail pavilion are nice, though.

[Chicago Shawn]

I agree.

I hate those crap towers along Sheridan Rd.

I belive he was referring to the McMansion garbage that has replaced tear downs in the North Shore suburbs.


As far as Sherman Hospital, I just cannot get too exicted about it. I am glad they set out to do a greener building, but really moving the hospital out into the edge of town on a greenfield site and designing it around the car is not really "Green". The geo-thermal loops could have been bored into the ground just as easily and have the same results without wasting 15 acres of land near a Metra Station for the stupid lake. It just gets me a little irritated when something that only goes half way to being a great example of a Green Building gets so much praise.

[spyguy]

http://www.insideonline.com/site/epage/64629_162.htm

New development for auto dealer detailed
By Lindsey Reiser

If all goes according to plan for Jim Letchinger, president and founder of JDL Development Corporation, the face of Wells Street will be changing very soon.

...The site in question has two lots on either side of Wells Street between Scott and Goethe, the east lot being substantially larger than the west. As for Letchinger’s plans for the west lot, the residents had relatively few queries. The area facing Wells Street will be reserved for a one-story retail building with a “green” roof, which will have trees and shrubs visible to passers-by on the street. The area on Scott will host six single-family homes, which JDL projects to sell for $2.5 million each.

...JDL also intends to put in retail units on the east site, hoping the spacious area afforded by the larger lot will draw in high-quality labels, a plan with which the residents also have few qualms. However, in order to compensate for the small number of private units to be erected on Scott, Letchinger must increase the number of residential units he had also planned to build on the east lot. With the residences above and the retail below, this new building will be 131ft tall, rather than the 80 ft on which local residents had originally signed off, but it has a twist.

[Patel]

I belive he was referring to the McMansion garbage that has replaced tear downs in the North Shore suburbs.


As far as Sherman Hospital, I just cannot get too exicted about it. I am glad they set out to do a greener building, but really moving the hospital out into the edge of town on a greenfield site and designing it around the car is not really "Green". The geo-thermal loops could have been bored into the ground just as easily and have the same results without wasting 15 acres of land near a Metra Station for the stupid lake. It just gets me a little irritated when something that only goes half way to being a great example of a Green Building gets so much praise.

If you think that the greenfield site is was going to remain green forever you are not familar with the growth in the Elgin area. In 15 years Sherman Hosptal will be in the center of Elgin not on the edge of town. Nothing is going to stop those fields from being turned over to development. Not even the most willful NIABY can stop it.

[Marcu]

http://www.insideonline.com/site/epage/64629_162.htm

New development for auto dealer detailed
By Lindsey Reiser

If all goes according to plan for Jim Letchinger, president and founder of JDL Development Corporation, the face of Wells Street will be changing very soon.

...The site in question has two lots on either side of Wells Street between Scott and Goethe, the east lot being substantially larger than the west. As for Letchinger’s plans for the west lot, the residents had relatively few queries. The area facing Wells Street will be reserved for a one-story retail building with a “green” roof, which will have trees and shrubs visible to passers-by on the street. The area on Scott will host six single-family homes, which JDL projects to sell for $2.5 million each.

...JDL also intends to put in retail units on the east site, hoping the spacious area afforded by the larger lot will draw in high-quality labels, a plan with which the residents also have few qualms. However, in order to compensate for the small number of private units to be erected on Scott, Letchinger must increase the number of residential units he had also planned to build on the east lot. With the residences above and the retail below, this new building will be 131ft tall, rather than the 80 ft on which local residents had originally signed off, but it has a twist.

Is this a joke? What a horrible use of land 1 mile from the Loop and 3 blocks from the el. I'd rather keep the lots and hope for something better down the road. I guess the developer just didn't want to deal with the Old Town NIMBYs. Either that or he has absolutely no clue what he's doing.

[the urban politician]

^ You must have failed to notice the 131 ft building he's also planning to erect.
After reading the whole article it seems like this developer is playing his cards right. Going straight the community and getting them involved from the start doesn't sound like a bad way to get them to swallow a little bit of density

[VivaLFuego]

http://www.insideonline.com/site/epage/64629_162.htm

New development for auto dealer detailed
By Lindsey Reiser

If all goes according to plan for Jim Letchinger, president and founder of JDL Development Corporation, the face of Wells Street will be changing very soon.

...The site in question has two lots on either side of Wells Street between Scott and Goethe, the east lot being substantially larger than the west. As for Letchinger’s plans for the west lot, the residents had relatively few queries. The area facing Wells Street will be reserved for a one-story retail building with a “green” roof, which will have trees and shrubs visible to passers-by on the street. The area on Scott will host six single-family homes, which JDL projects to sell for $2.5 million each.

...JDL also intends to put in retail units on the east site, hoping the spacious area afforded by the larger lot will draw in high-quality labels, a plan with which the residents also have few qualms. However, in order to compensate for the small number of private units to be erected on Scott, Letchinger must increase the number of residential units he had also planned to build on the east lot. With the residences above and the retail below, this new building will be 131ft tall, rather than the 80 ft on which local residents had originally signed off, but it has a twist.

Who can I contact in support of the developer's idea of an apartment tower? Of course, unless you're the right kind of neighbor, you don't get notified about any of these meetings...

I can deal with the 1 story retail on the west side if there is some serious density (200 apartments definitely counts) on the east side. There is ample room on the site to set back the ~12 story tower so as not to block views or sunlight. It's a solid idea and the developer is being generous in offering this design to the neighbors to appease all interests.

[the urban politician]

On a side note, Chicago as a city needs to do something about this "guest parking" phantom fear that its residents are beginning to have. "How will we accommodate the guests of these new residents? More parking!"

Seriously, the city needs to kill that argument with one swift blow. I'm thinking an across the board ordinance that puts a parking cap on all projects in at least certain parts of the city.

[ardecila]

There aren't any plans for development near LaSalle/Maple, are there? It seems like there are a lot of surface lots there that need to go.

[spyguy]

I can deal with the 1 story retail on the west side if there is some serious density (200 apartments definitely counts) on the east side. There is ample room on the site to set back the ~12 story tower so as not to block views or sunlight. It's a solid idea and the developer is being generous in offering this design to the neighbors to appease all interests.

Maybe I didn't read the article too carefully, but what about the building closer Goethe - I think it's a Cadillac dealership now (Tower Oldsmobile before?); is that going to be demolished too or is that not part of the plan?

[Marcu]

^ You must have failed to notice the 131 ft building he's also planning to erect.
After reading the whole article it seems like this developer is playing his cards right. Going straight the community and getting them involved from the start doesn't sound like a bad way to get them to swallow a little bit of density

Thanks for the correction. Did a cursory read and only noticed the single family homes. But in any case, why not put some rental units above the retail as well?

[VivaLFuego]

Maybe I didn't read the article too carefully, but what about the building closer Goethe - I think it's a Cadillac dealership now (Tower Oldsmobile before?); is that going to be demolished too or is that not part of the plan?

Yeah, it would replace that. The auto dealership actually has some really nice terra cotta facade details, which hopefully will be saved one way or another even if not for use on the replacement structure.

[VivaLFuego]

There aren't any plans for development near LaSalle/Maple, are there? It seems like there are a lot of surface lots there that need to go.

Those are church parking lots, meaning tax exempt, meaning no rush to develop, really, due to low carrying costs and unclear opportunity costs (of course, they also make money on the side on Friday and Saturday nights by letting the valets park there). This city likes to subsidize parking for churchgoers.

Even if the churches got ambitious and tried a ground-lease a la what Beitler failed with up in Edgewater, Reilly would surely cut them down to size, or at least ensure that some other functional real estate were torn down to make way for more parking.

[honte]

Yeah, it would replace that. The auto dealership actually has some really nice terra cotta facade details, which hopefully will be saved one way or another even if not for use on the replacement structure.

So, let me get this straight: The plan is to replace the cool, one-story historic structure with a one-story retail function that easily could have been put into the existing building?

[VivaLFuego]

So, let me get this straight: The plan is to replace the cool, one-story historic structure with a one-story retail function that easily could have been put into the existing building?

Apparently! Welcome to the 43rd Ward.

If the developer isn't reusing that facade, I'd be shocked if Urban Artifacts and other such scavengers weren't all over it... I'd be more shocked if it indeed wound up in the scrap heap.

Having been inside the dealership, there's really nothing of any architectural interest whatsoever in the interior at this point; it's been stripped all the way down, so any ornamentation that may have been there is long gone.

For anyone curious what we're talking about, here's a street view:
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&geocode=&q=wells+and+division,+chicago+il&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=46.812293,68.378906&ie=UTF8&ll=41.908362,-87.63427&spn=0.010811,0.016694&t=h&z=16&layer=c&cbll=41.905335,-87.63452&panoid=2A_hiE8ODyJwKjfu0ii2pw&cbp=1,74.33453628254955,,0,-6.578791292421789
Some pretty great stuff.

[honte]

^ Sorry, but bits and pieces sitting in a vulture's resale shop doesn't cut it for me... I am holding out for facade reuse or (gasp) just doing the sensible thing and rehabbing the existing building.

Isn't JDL the one who is doing the old firehouse rehab in conjuction with the new tower? Why can't they work out something like that over here? Hell, they could even get a density bonus that lets 'em stick it to the NIMBYs.

We've talked about this building before in this thread. Just in case people don't connect it with the past discussion, this building was designed by Roy France, a Chicago architect who went on to be one of the major designers of famous Art Deco hotels at Miami Beach.

[ardecila]

I didn't realize that JDL's site extends all the way up to Goethe... At 131 feet tall, a building that long is monolithic. I hope JDL chooses a good architect. Their track record suggests that they'll pick a traditional style, which isn't necessarily a bad thing...

[Eventually...Chicago]

^^^ There just seems to be too much value in that facade. You figure the one story retail is actually a rehab for that building. If not, it seems to be a terrible development decision. It seems like if would be far far easier just to rehab that building. It would definitely be quicker, meaning you can start positive cash flow sooner.