[Steely Dan]

here's our first published news of another big one in chicago. this one has been rumored about for some time, but it looks like it might be on it's way toward becoming a reality.


http://img116.imageshack.us/img116/5923/parkmichigan9dy.jpg



http://www.suntimes.com/output/business/cst-fin-condos26_fin.html
South Loop skyline looks up

June 26, 2006

BY DAVID ROEDER Business Reporter Advertisement

Tall and thin is in for downtown building proposals, and the latest one to reflect that would create a visual highlight for the south edge of Chicago’s skyline.

Developers and architects are completing plans for an 80-story building at 830 S. Michigan. It would be built behind a 19th century YWCA to be preserved for the sake of the historic Michigan Avenue streetwall's appearance.

Warren Barr and his Renaissant Development Group are responsible for the estimated $200 million project, which calls for construction of 376 residential condominiums. Also part of the plan is construction of a 10-story building immediately west on Wabash.

James Carroll, chief financial officer for Renaissant, said the project will tap demand for condos that have guaranteed views of Grant Park and Lake Michigan. Another aim, he said, is to attract commercial tenants to a neighborhood where they have been slow to arrive.

The old eight-story YWCA will be gutted for an upscale restaurant and a spa, Carroll said. He also said a specialty grocer is negotiating for space in the Wabash building. The architecture is by Chicago firm Pappageorge/Haymes Ltd.

Carroll said the city's planning department and Ald. Madeline Haithcock, whose 2nd Ward includes the South Loop, have expressed preliminary support for the project. The building's slender profile fits a preference city officials have shown for tall and thin buildings.

City Hall's most vocal proponent of that approach is Samuel Assefa, Mayor Daley's deputy chief of staff for economic development, and it has been echoed in the zoning reviews of the planning department. The best example of that process is the 62-story One Museum Park building under construction at the southwest corner of Roosevelt and Columbus, another Pappageorge design.

It's taller and sleeker than the developers originally proposed because city officials pushed them to provide an architectural landmark for the south end of Grant Park.

The 830 S. Michigan building, to be marketed as Park Michigan, would be Chicago's tallest south of Van Buren. At about 850 feet, it would rank as the ninth tallest among the city's buildings that are current or under construction, between the Two Prudential Plaza and AT&T Corporate Center office buildings.

Renaissant is due to present its plans at a community meeting Thursday at Jones College Prep, 606 S. State. The meeting starts at 6:30 p.m. Unless major objections surface, Renaissant then would submit its zoning application to the City Council.

Carroll said he hopes construction can start in the third quarter of 2007, with unit delivery in late 2009. The pace will depend on pre-sales. Prices should range from about $325,000 to penthouses worth more than $2 million, Carroll said.

One community leader who has seen the plans had unreserved praise. Bob O'Neill, president of the Grant Park Advisory Council, said the tall and thin trend produces attractive buildings that block less sunlight. "Chicago, Hong Kong and New York are the great skylines of the world. We need to keep creating ours so it looks dynamic," O'Neill said.

Renaissant acquired the property in April, paying $13 million, according to Cook County records. The seller was the Johnson family, publisher of Ebony and Jet magazines, whose offices are next door.

Barr's company also plans two other condo towers in that neighborhood, 40 stories at 1000 S. Michigan and 19 stories at 1255 S. State.

[honte]

Here's what I said in the Boom Rundown forum.

:thrasher: This kicks ass. Preservation + tall tower + decent retail. Let's send Sam Assefa some flowers. Seriously.


The 830 S. Michigan building, to be marketed as Park Michigan, would be Chicago's tallest south of Van Buren. At about 850 feet, it would rank as the ninth tallest among the city's buildings that are current or under construction, between the Two Prudential Plaza and AT&T Corporate Center office buildings.[/B]


The above is incorrect. The building would be tied for 11th tallest, by these criteria, and provided other things don't start first.

[rgolch]

... and Ald. Madeline Haithcock, whose 2nd Ward includes the South Loop, have expressed preliminary support for the project.





Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't she intially oppose this project? She must have gotten strong-armed by Daley.

:whip:

[aaron38]

Ah, so this is the 'just announced' 80 story building from yesterday's AP Chicago skyscraper article.

It'll be nice to see renderings of this, and a new skyline rendering showing this, OMP and the Columbian.

[STR]

This thing has a chance to leave a huge mark as well as be a catalyst for a new cluster. A 21st century JHC of the southside.

http://img367.imageshack.us/img367/365/it7.th.jpg (http://img367.imageshack.us/my.php?image=it7.jpg)

[rgolch]

^^ STR's models really show how important this one would be in framing the south portion of the skyline. Can you do a with and without in the same post to really give us an idea.

The urban streetwall will be breathtaking from grant and millen. park in 2010.

[spyguy]

This will definitely be an important marker for that side of the skyline. I can't wait to see some renderings - remember from before, "thin is in" :)

[BVictor1]

$200 million sounds awfully low. I'm trying to get renderings now. If I can't get them I will just have to snap pictures of the presentation boards.

[Fabb]

It's taller and sleeker than the developers originally proposed because city officials pushed them to provide an architectural landmark for the south end of Grant Park.

That's promising.

[windyDC]

CLTV just showed a small black and white rendering of the building(east elevation). Couldn't see much detail but it looks pretty good. Definately tall and thin. They usually replay the stories every half hour so they might show it again.

[Steely Dan]

^ i've heard rumors that it vaguely resembles a slimmer, slighty shorter version of philly's comcast center, which is currently under construction. from what you were able to see, is there any truth to that?

[jcchii]

I swear I just came in here to hope that STR would soon put up a model, even if it were just a black box, and lo and behold there it is

[BVictor1]

CLTV just showed a small black and white rendering of the building(east elevation). Couldn't see much detail but it looks pretty good. Definately tall and thin. They usually replay the stories every half hour so they might show it again.

I have a rendering that I will post later. I have to convert it first :)

[spyguy]

I'll wait for that one :yes:

[windyDC]

^ i've heard rumors that it vaguely resembles a slimmer, slighty shorter version of philly's comcast center, which is currently under construction. from what you were able to see, is there any truth to that?

That comparison didn't come to mind but now that you mention it I could see some vague similarities in the overall form. This definately looks thinner. But it was only up for maybe 10-15 seconds and it was small. We will get a much better idea when BVic posts the rendering.:cheers:

[Rivernorth]

very cool to see this get underway... hopefully this will really help increase pedestrian traffic and activity in the south loop... even michigan avenue gets pretty sparse south of congress. those south loop colleges help quite a bit, though.

the tower itself will also help "bring in" the museum campus skyline and link it somewhat with the actual Loop skyline... hopefully other towers sprout around 830 south michigan, ala JHC and Sears when they were built.

[BVictor1]

What I have so far... I've seen better, more beautiful renderings of this tower, and I will do my best to obtain them.

https://extranet.emporis.com/files/transfer/6/2006/06/469160.jpg

https://extranet.emporis.com/files/transfer/6/2006/06/469161.jpg

[bnk]

:previous:

Waterview like.

I am in love.:banana:

[spyguy]

Looks really tall from there. Thanks a lot!

BTW, where'd that second picture come from? It's very impressive.

[gvpeto]

That is Bueno!

[SevenSevenThree]

I really like the massing of this tower. It actually doesnt overwhelm the surrounding area. And if my eyes arent going bad, I like the stepbacks it has on the present building. Detailed renderings, when released, should be quite impressive. I really like what Im seeing so far. Thanks.

Slightly Off Topic: Sorry in advance but what is that large development in the background on the river?

That second picture seems to alot of massing for future towers. Let the march south continue.

One more edit: Is the roof at an angle?

[honte]

What I have so far... I've seen better, more beautiful renderings of this tower, and I will do my best to obtain them.


Thanks a lot, BVictor... it seems pleasant and tasteful, although not especially memorable yet. Hopefully some refinements will make the difference.

Concerning the second photo, Chicago looks so small from that perspective, almost palm-sized! Everything in that photo is so massive, it's hard to get a grasp on the scale...

[Loopy]

Slightly Off Topic: Sorry in advance but what is that large development in the background on the river?

That is Riverside Park (now called "Riverside District") planned development.

[SevenSevenThree]

That is Riverside Park (now called "Riverside District") planned development.

Ah, so thats Riverside Park. Thanks.


Continue Park Michigan discussion...

[bnk]

I have always wanted to catch a new biggie come alive in the making.

Could this be it?

:shrug:

[Loopy]

I'm dying to see the South and West elevations to see how this thing ties together the YWCA, the 10 story podium and the tower.

[Rocket1]

The above is incorrect. The building would be tied for 12th tallest, by these criteria, and provided other things don't start first.
Tied for 12th?

At 850', it would be tied for 11th tallest.

[HK Chicago]

Rendering looks good, better than I expected out of the firm. Definitely took the lead of Waterview but I definitely like the crown setbacks on this one better... could be really good (maybe great), can't wait to see more.

[Chi_Coruscant]

Thanks for the rendering, BVictor. I like the 2nd shot but I like to critique a bit: 340TP looks a bit taller than Aqua and its twin tower. Another aspect: it is interesting to see the planned 4-high rise towers at One Museum Park. According to BVictor (I may be wrong), 3rd or 4th tower could be 100' taller than OMP u/c.

[SevenSevenThree]

An email I received...

830 SOUTH MICHIGAN

There is a public meeting on Thursday, June 29, 2006 at 6:30 p.m. ( Jones College Prep, 606 S. State St.) on a very important high-rise to be built on Grant Park at 830 S. Michigan. This is planned to be a tall, slender tower. We have worked for a long time to convince the communities and others that it would be much better to have a taller, thinner, elegant building on Grant Park's south end that help shape the skyline and balance the high-rises at the north end of the symmetrical Grant Park. The 830 S. Michigan tower is planned to be over 70 stories.

With 830 S. Michigan, 1000 S. Michigan, and the One Museum Park high-rises on Roosevelt Road at the south end and the Legacy, Heritage at Millennium Park and 340 E. Randolph and the Aqua and potential Aon condominiums at the north end, Grant Park is one of the hottest real estate markets for condominiums in tall elegant buildings with unobstructed views of Grant Park and Lake Michigan. There are also many condo conversions on Michigan avenue like eh Metropolitan Tower.

We are promoting Grant Park as a community and we want to activate it with more residents and help frame the park symmetrically from Roosevelt Road to Randolph with tall slender, well-designed high-rises that create the landmarks of tomorrow. These types of buildings: will block less light, shape the skyline ( one of the top skylines in the world) and growing, are environmentally-friendly using very little land and having access to public transit and pedestrian friendly design. These Grant Park buildings need to be cutting-edge in design as they will be viewed by millions of people enjoying the lakefront and driving Lake Shore Drive and there will not be any buildings obstructing the views of them. Their design is very important as they will be very visible for generations.

Currently the site is an ugly, asphalt surface parking lot on Wabash and a derelict historic building on Michigan Avenue that will be renovated. We believe that by promoting tall high-rises downtown on Grant Park, we can energize and attract more retail and energy to the once sleepy south Grant Park area. This will also help make the area more safe.

Also, as part of the project the historic YWCA building on Michigan Avenue will be renovated. It is currently derelict. A new grocery store and restaurant are also part of the project.

Thank you,



Anyone still going to attend this meeting?

I wanted to go but the lovely measles is not being kind to me. Damned viruses.

[Steely Dan]

What I have so far... I've seen better, more beautiful renderings of this tower, and I will do my best to obtain them.
https://extranet.emporis.com/files/transfer/6/2006/06/469160.jpg


nice work victor. i don't really see any comcast center connection, as was rumored earlier, but that's fine. this tower has got potential all its own. thin is most definitely in.

the image above has now been added to page 1 of the rundown thread.

[BVictor1]

Anyone still going to attend this meeting?

Hell yessssss. I think that everyone of us who can attend, should attend. We can't just talk about things and say what should happen and would like to see happen. We need to show action and be proactive.

I hope that many of you who support this project can come to the meeting. This tower needs to be built.

[rgolch]

STR, you taking notes...... ??

[honte]

Tied for 12th?

At 850', it would be tied for 11th tallest.

Yes, technically, you are correct. Sorry - I typed that quickly. What I meant was that there would be 12 buildings that tall, or taller, in the city. I'll go back and correct my first post, since it's too prominent to ignore.

Let's just hope that Mandarin of FS gets underway, and then we'll all be right.

[Chicago Shawn]

Hell yessssss. I think that everyone of us who can attend, should attend. We can't just talk about things and say what should happen and would like to see happen. We need to show action and be proactive.

I hope that many of you who support this project can come to the meeting. This tower needs to be built.


I can't go because of an exam that I have at the same time. But I am urging everyone to go to this meeting. The purpose of this meeting is for Ald. Hiethcock to gauge the public feelings on this project. She wanted to chop this building down to 40 stories eairlier because of local community opposition, and she will demand the project is scaled down if opposition occurs, because don't forget next year is election year, and she needs to be the 'savoir' proctecting the 'intrests' in the neighborhood from "out of scale, overbearing development". The NIMBYs have already expressed prevoius opposition to this project, especially our friends in Printer's Row, Dearborn Park and 910 S. Michigan (which probably has the heighest concentartion of complianing NIMBY bitches in the city). The NIMBYs will use this meeting to run thier mouths, and once a few start complaining, the whole room is filled the deludge of NIMBY 'concerns': traffic, views, light, shaddows, traffic, density, noise, traffic, lack of privacy, local school overcrowding, setting a precident for the area, traffic, wind, terrosim target......And any of the other bullshit claims.

If little support is shown, this project will be scaled back, so if you want this building to happen, and have thursday evening free, go there and some words of support. Lie about living in the area if you have to, but make yourself heard, even if its just a few words. Ald. Heithcock needs to be shown voters like this building at its full height and they see it as an asset to the community.

[trvlr70]

Wow! I just heard the news. How wonderful and exciting for the South Loop.

I think the units would sell better if the city covered all the RR tracks in Grant Park.

[Loopy]

In addition to attending the meeting, you should email and call Alderman Madeline Haithcock.

Don't forget to kiss some ass if you are emailing. Thank her for her past support of development in the South Loop. Mention that she has been instrumental in preserving historic buildings and promoting cutting edge development, and that Park Michigan is both. Mention explicitly that you support the height of the building. If you live in her Ward, mention that. If you don't, don't. On the "Subject" line of the mesage write something like "I support "Park Michigan", 830 S Michigan" or something like that.

When you call her office, leave a clear message of support on one of the voicemail boxes. If you get a human, don't expect much interest on their end, just tell them that you want to send the Alderman a message of support for the Park Michigan development at 830 S Michigan. Explicitly say the words; "I support it". They won't ask you if you live in her ward. If you do, mention it.

mhaithcock@cityofchicago.org

Phone: 312-913-0222

Community Meeting
Thursday, June 29th 6:30 PM (Come early to see the the model and renderings)
Jones College Prep
606 South State Street (at Harrison)

[Urbanthony]

It was good to meet many of you last Thursday. I live across the street from 830 on wabash, and will definitely be at this meeting to show community support for the project. I'll also email Alderman Haithcock. We need more ground level retail/restaurants in the area. The taller the better on this one.

[Loopy]

Yes, please come and try to speak a few words of support at the meeting. The fact that you live across the street should have a lot of influence.

Welcome to the forum.

[honte]

In addition to attending the meeting, you should email and call Alderman Madeline Haithcock.

Just sent an e-mail message... I hope everyone does the same.

[kazpmk]

That new rendering looks great. It looks similar to Waterview Tower.

[headcase]

It was good to meet many of you last Thursday. I live across the street from 830 on wabash, and will definitely be at this meeting to show community support for the project. I'll also email Alderman Haithcock. We need more ground level retail/restaurants in the area. The taller the better on this one.


Good to see you online. I fully attend on being there, and will try and catch up with you.

Loopy, are you going to be in attendance? I would love to put a face with the name.

[aaron38]

With the setbacks and sloped roof, the top almost looks like a head and shoulders, a statue standing guard facing the lake.

I like it, looks good.

[Steely Dan]

^ sloped roof? i don't see a sloped roof in the rendering.

[aaron38]

Look at the pinacle on the east (Mich Ave) side and look at how the roof line slopes down towards the west. The west side of all setbacks is noticeably shorter than the east side.
By counting floors it looks to be a 6-7 story difference between west and east sides.

That seems too much to be an artifact of the rendering angle.

[Steely Dan]

^ i was reading that as merely perspective distortion due to the rendering angle. it sure looks to me like it's got a flat roof.

[Loopy]

^^http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vanishing_point

[sentinel]

Look at the pinacle on the east (Mich Ave) side and look at how the roof line slopes down towards the west. The west side of all setbacks is noticeably shorter than the east side.
By counting floors it looks to be a 6-7 story difference between west and east sides.

That seems too much to be an artifact of the rendering angle.

I think it's just the angle that the building is seen from. It seems more exaggerated than it would be in real life. I don't believe it's a sloped rooftop.

[Fabb]

It's a beautiful project. Not very innovative, but a classic.

[honte]

With the setbacks and sloped roof, the top almost looks like a head and shoulders, a statue standing guard facing the lake.

That's what I always thought about the Sears Tower, coming in from the West Side. I'm sure I'm not alone. "City of Big Shoulders," you get my drift.

Anyway, you're right that there is some "local vocabulary" in use and a dialog starting here, and I love that stuff. The Sears Tower and Bankers' Building always did that for me in the same way, when seen from Federal Plaza.

[the urban politician]

Just sent an e-mail message... I hope everyone does the same.

^ I also sent an email in support.

[Norsider]

This might be a bit OT, but since it involves south loop development, hopefully it's worth a comment:

I feel like Chicago needs to demo the circular on ramps for the Ike east of the river. Since there is a stop light about 200 meters from where these ramps are, it makes absolutely no sense why valuable real estate should be wasted on infrastructure for high speed merging . There is no reason why anyone getting on or off the IKE couldn't just turn on/from Clark St. at the stoplight. Like a fart at the dinner table, those stupid access ramps stop the flow of the city dead in its tracks. I am almost willing to guarantee that if you built up those blocks, the "Riverside Whatever" development to the south would become significantly more valuable.

[HK Chicago]

^ the interior of the ramps are official city parks, benches and all... so the space does get some use.

dang, I waited years to make this lame 1000th post.

[emoney]

I know that chicago's planning peeps are going thin to win or whatever, but looking at the diagram drawing it looks too thin I like buildings with at least a little girth. I guess I will have to wait for a more detailed rendering

[BVictor1]

I just received this email. This is why we have to show our numbers and support this project.


From: South Loop
To: southloopneighbors@gmail.com
Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2006 9:03 AM
Subject: 830 S. Michigan Ave. Meeting - Jones Prep - 6/29


Renaissant Development is proposing an 80-story building, 850 feet
tall, at 830 South Michigan. A public meeting will be held on this
Thursday night at Jones HS, beginning at 6.30. We encourage all South
Loop Neighbors to attend and make their concerns known, particularly
to Alderman Haithcock.

This new building would straddle the alley, preserving only the front
40 feet of the old YWCA building fronting Michigan. It would contain
376 condos and 34,000 square feet of retail space, plus parking for
both.

South Loop Neighbors and the Department of Planning and Development
worked for four years on the Near South Community Plan, adopted in
2004 with the alderman's support, to guide development in our
neighborhood. Both that plan and the draft guidelines for the
Michigan Avenue landmark district would only allow a building 425
feet tall--HALF the height this developer proposes!

Our alderman is very responsive to objections from the community, but
she must hear them loud and clear at this meeting! I encourage you
to ask why our two-year-old plan is being ignored so completely in
discussions of this development.

If you cannot attend this meeting, PLEASE send an email or letter to
Alderman Haithcock expressing your concerns.

[honte]

I encourage you
to ask why our two-year-old plan is being ignored so completely in
discussions of this development.

Because it's completely arbitrary, selfish, narrow-minded, and better suited for downtown Boise?

What really pisses me off is that the only real issue (namely, why is only 40 feet of the YWCA being preserved?) is going to be completely abused by these people to serve their own misguided and greedy interests.

[VivaLFuego]

Because it's completely arbitrary, selfish, narrow-minded, and better suited for downtown Boise?

What really pisses me off is that the only real issue (namely, why is only 40 feet of the YWCA being preserved?) is going to be completely abused by these people to serve their own misguided and greedy interests.

Not sure about the structure of the YMCA building, but if the facade gets the total treatment, that'd be great. The building is a boarded-up bombed-out mess now, so anything towards preserving part of me seems like a step in the right direction.

Also, a natural counter argument is the same as Carley's with Fordham Spire....would you rather a short chunky building with the same number of units blocking more light, or have a tall skinny landmark tower?

[Loopy]

I know that chicago's planning peeps are going thin to win or whatever, but looking at the diagram drawing it looks too thin I like buildings with at least a little girth. I guess I will have to wait for a more detailed rendering

Well, they're saying "thin is in" down at City Hall. Like it or not, this going to be the look of most of our future supertalls.

The idea is, of course, that tall thin buildings are less visually disruptive at the street level than shorter, more squat buildings. They are also touted as being less obstructive when viewed from the upper floors of nearby tall buildings.

I have two concerns about "tall and thin":

One is that it means that we will likely be seeing more pedestal buildings. "Tall and thin" works wonders for occupied space, but parking still requires a more spacious plan. We may see a lot of beanstalks growing out of cowpies in the future. I hope that there will be enough tall towers with fully integrated designs to offset this.

Secondly, I am worried that it will also mean less streetwall construction. Developers will be allowed to build taller if they set the building back from the property lines. The resulting plazas will be welcome to the homeless and skateboard communities, but will do nothing to enhance or focus life on the sidewalks, the cultural arteries of our city.

[Loopy]

What really pisses me off is that the only real issue (namely, why is only 40 feet of the YWCA being preserved?) is going to be completely abused by these people to serve their own misguided and greedy interests.

It was a residence hotel, a flophouse, if you will. There is nothing inside to preserve except a bunch of 6X10 sleeping chambers.

[Loopy]

I just received this email. This is why we have to show our numbers and support this project.

Renaissant Development is proposing an 80-story building, 850 feet
tall, at 830 South Michigan. A public meeting will be held on this
Thursday night at Jones HS, beginning at 6.30. We encourage all South
Loop Neighbors to attend and make their concerns known, particularly
to Alderman Haithcock.

This new building would straddle the alley, preserving only the front
40 feet of the old YWCA building fronting Michigan. It would contain
376 condos and 34,000 square feet of retail space, plus parking for
both.

South Loop Neighbors and the Department of Planning and Development
worked for four years on the Near South Community Plan, adopted in
2004 with the alderman's support, to guide development in our
neighborhood. Both that plan and the draft guidelines for the
Michigan Avenue landmark district would only allow a building 425
feet tall--HALF the height this developer proposes!

Our alderman is very responsive to objections from the community, but
she must hear them loud and clear at this meeting! I encourage you
to ask why our two-year-old plan is being ignored so completely in
discussions of this development.

Again we have NIMBY's posing as preservationists.

There is NOTHING in the ass end of this building worth saving except a bunch of ratty sleeping chambers.

http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/4844/backstraight9iv8ie.jpg

[Loopy]

Edit: Don't ask.

[honte]

It was a residence hotel, a flophouse, if you will. There is nothing inside to preserve except a bunch of 6X10 sleeping chambers.

Fair enough. I haven't seen the inside, so I can't comment on that.

Don't get me wrong. I think this is nearly a perfect proposal as-is. What concerns me, however, is the co-opting of the landmark cause as a veil for NIMBYism, and also the facadectomy treatment as the "ideal" solution to development vs. preservation issues.

In this case, the lot is huge, the developer is clearly ready to build tall, and there doesn't seem to be too much to gain from keeping only the facade. So, keeping the whole building doesn't seem too difficult. The risks to this trend, obviously, are that 1) we end up with a bunch of Disneyland facade landmarks that are only skin-deep, with no real soul or occupyable space (this is certainly happening quite frequently already), and 2) that the precedent is set when a true "3-D Landmark" (e.g. NY Life) cannot be saved because it would be "discriminatory."

[spyguy]

Speaking of preservation, does that section of Michigan Avenue currently look like this 1907 photo?

http://img255.imageshack.us/img255/2948/n0049204yp.jpg

Not really, huh. Tall(er) buildings overtook what was once an area full of lowrise buildings and mansions. But we still love the streetwall, don't we?

Times are changing, and from the looks of it, there doesn't seem to be much worth preserving except for the Michigan Avenue facing facade.

Just saying...

Edit:
http://img507.imageshack.us/img507/407/115111419162812614uy.jpg
http://img507.imageshack.us/img507/7886/115111419162824211fs.jpg

Adding a new building will dramatically change the skyline but I don't think it will take any more away from the streetwall than the stuff above and buildings like Smurfit-Stone, the Heritage, the addition to the Hilton building, Park 1000, Spertus, etc. and even going further up, the glassy addition to the Hard Rock Hotel.

[Loopy]

Fair enough. I haven't seen the inside, so I can't comment on that.

Don't get me wrong. I think this is nearly a perfect proposal as-is. What concerns me, however, is the co-opting of the landmark cause as a veil for NIMBYism, and also the facadectomy treatment as the "ideal" solution to development vs. preservation issues.

In this case, the lot is huge, the developer is clearly ready to build tall, and there doesn't seem to be too much to gain from keeping only the facade. So, keeping the whole building doesn't seem too difficult. The risks to this trend, obviously, are that 1) we end up with a bunch of Disneyland facade landmarks that are only skin-deep, with no real soul or occupyable space (this is certainly happening quite frequently already), and 2) that the precedent is set when a true "3-D Landmark" (e.g. NY Life) cannot be saved because it would be "discriminatory."

We are in total agreement on facadectomies. There are very few successful examples.

But that's democracy for you. If you can't muster the fortitude to tear something down to build something better, the solution is rarely to preserve the structure in question. What happens is the "committee" decides to try to have it both ways. Voila, Facadectomy!

[Loopy]

Nice find Spyguy.. Here is what it looks like now:

YWCA in the center flanked by Crane Plumbing on the left and Johnson Publishing on the right.

I will shut up now.

http://img76.imageshack.us/img76/2221/frontangle4kh3xm.jpg

[Tom In Chicago]

Be careful what you say at these neighborhood meetings. . . you could be doing more harm than good. . . take it from me. . . I'm the biggest a$$hole on the forums here in Chicago and I can assure you that the developers will have a sobering rebuttle to the South Loop NIMBYs complaints. . . I'd try not to say anything unless I lived in that ward. . . and since Natarus is my alderman there's nothing for me to complain about :)

[honte]

Be careful what you say at these neighborhood meetings. . . you could be doing more harm than good. . . take it from me. . . I'm the biggest a$$hole on the forums here in Chicago and I can assure you that the developers will have a sobering rebuttle to the South Loop NIMBYs complaints. . . I'd try not to say anything unless I lived in that ward. . . and since Natarus is my alderman there's nothing for me to complain about :)

Was anyone here present at the similar meeting that took place for Skybridge, way back in the '90s? That was awesome.

For those who weren't, the developer, Moran, and Ralph Johnson were there... there was a scale model of Halsted Street, with a blank hole where Skybridge is now. The developer came in with this giant block - polystyrene, I think it was - and shoved it down in the hole. "This is what we could build with the current zoning." Johnson brings out this beautiful model of Skybridge. "This is what we'd like to give you."

I hope Renaissant is equally wise.

[Tom In Chicago]

^Exactly. . . it's far more in their interest that it get built. . . not ours :)

[BVictor1]

Fair enough. I haven't seen the inside, so I can't comment on that.

Don't get me wrong. I think this is nearly a perfect proposal as-is. What concerns me, however, is the co-opting of the landmark cause as a veil for NIMBYism, and also the facadectomy treatment as the "ideal" solution to development vs. preservation issues.

In this case, the lot is huge, the developer is clearly ready to build tall, and there doesn't seem to be too much to gain from keeping only the facade. So, keeping the whole building doesn't seem too difficult. The risks to this trend, obviously, are that 1) we end up with a bunch of Disneyland facade landmarks that are only skin-deep, with no real soul or occupyable space (this is certainly happening quite frequently already), and 2) that the precedent is set when a true "3-D Landmark" (e.g. NY Life) cannot be saved because it would be "discriminatory."


This is what I've found out from a source of mine about what will be done with the YWCA Building on Michigan...


"There would be active uses the entire width and height of the façade of the
YWCA. The main entrance to the project uses the center entry of the façade,
and the entire second floor along the façade is the upper lobby. Back on the
ground to the right of the lobby entrance would be the restaurant to the
left the spa. The Spa also takes the 3rd floor of the façade. The 4th floor
and above of the facade are residential units. Stepping back from the façade
above the cornice line are 2 more levels of units. These would not be
apparent along Michigan Ave. because of their step back nature. Only the
Façade will be kept and restored. The structure behind is in terrible
disrepair. The first floor would be dropped to the level of Michigan Ave. to
activate the sidewalk with access from the 3 uses - lobby, restaurant and
spa. Sidewalk dining is proposed. The original structure has the first floor
above the sidewalk level but the façade lends itself to the drop in first
floor level."

[spyguy]

The structure behind is in terrible disrepair.

I thought that was the case.

Thanks for the info.

[Loopy]

Only the Façade will be kept and restored. The structure behind is in terrible disrepair.

This is a good example of the rare case of a justified facadectomy. Often they are done when the whole building merits saving. But this building just doesn't have anything of value between its walls.

[CGII]

Here's a diagram I made of 830 Michigan as soon as I saw the rendering yesterday. Maybe it'll provide some insight on how this might look:
http://img237.imageshack.us/img237/7586/803michi9kw.gif

http://img237.imageshack.us/img237/3005/803michiscaled4kx.gif


Even though it seems like a really typical, breadbox blue glass residential high rise, I really love it. It's massed very well, includes preservation, will leave a great profile on the skyline and is just beautiful in how it emphasizes the verticality.

[SimbyHeart]

lOOK'S AWSOME, BUT MORE BLUE! HOW ABOUT SOME BLACK,SILVER,METALLIC COLORS.

[BVictor1]

Here's a diagram I made of 830 Michigan as soon as I saw the rendering yesterday. Maybe it'll provide some insight on how this might look:
http://img237.imageshack.us/img237/7586/803michi9kw.gif

http://img237.imageshack.us/img237/3005/803michiscaled4kx.gif


Even though it seems like a really typical, breadbox blue glass residential high rise, I really love it. It's massed very well, includes preservation, will leave a great profile on the skyline and is just beautiful in how it emphasizes the verticality.

Thanks for the model, just one notable correction. The building that will be preserved on Michigan, the color of the brick is actually red. The blue color is in fact paint.

[chicubs111]

Tower tension
Will ‘tall and slender’ high-rise at 830 S. Michigan frame Grant Park, or overwhelm Boul Mich?

By BILL MAYEROFF, Contributing Writer


Rendering courtesy of Renaissant Development
"Tall and thin" is the development mantra for the proposed 80-story building at 830 S. Michigan.

SOUTH LOOP
Plans for an 80-story high-rise condominium building at 830 S. Michigan Ave., described by its backers as "tall and slender," will be unveiled Thursday night at a community meeting at Jones College Prep. Some South Loop residents, though, worry that the building will overwhelm its Boul Mich neighbors in the Michigan Avenue Landmark District.

Bob O’Neill, president of the Grant Park Advisory Council, supports the project, and said this week that the design will frame Grant Park.

"When you’re in the park, the beautiful skyline ends at Congress," O’Neill said. "It also balances out the Aon Center [at 200 E. Randolph]."

Though the building would be nearly twice the size of others in the area, O’Neill believes it will promote development in the area.

"I think it’s really in the public’s best interest," he said. "This particular building will set a precedent for development in the south Grant Park area." O’Neill thinks the proposed high-rise will lead to more buildings of that size in the area.

The building, according to Warren Barr of the Renaissant Development Group, will be 80 stories with nearly 35,000 square feet of retail space—including a 9,000-square-foot restaurant, a grocery store, and a spa—as well as 376 residential units.

"We’re building 376 units, which is exactly what the zoning allows," said Barr. Barr said the tall, thin design will block less light than shorter and wider designs.

"The [Chicago Department of Planning and Development] pushed us to go with a taller, slender building," Barr said.

But not everyone is as excited about a new skyscraper in the South Loop as O’Neill and Barr. Dennis McClendon, a member of South Loop Neighbors, believes the building will not fit in with its surroundings.

"I don’t think it’s going to fit in at all," McClendon said. McClendon says the building is taller than what is currently allowed in that spot by the Michigan Avenue Landmark District, which would limit the building to 425 feet.

"This proposal is almost double the height that is to be allowable in that spot," McClendon said. A spokesperson for the Commission on Chicago Landmarks could not be reached for comment.

Paulette Boyd, president of South Loop Neighbors, is also skeptical about how the building will work in that spot.

"It certainly would provide a huge shadow," she said. "We’re looking at something that’s double anything in that area south of Congress." Both she and McClendon are afraid a building of that size will cast shadows across Grant Park.

Boyd has not seen any drawings of the proposed high-rise, but she would prefer to see a development that stays within the limits imposed by the Michigan Avenue Landmark District.

"I just kind of have to wait and see what [the developers’] plans are," Boyd said. "And nothing this tall has ever been proposed."

But O’Neill isn’t worried about shadows. Like Barr, he believes the proposed design will actually allow in more light than a shorter, wider building.

"By being thinner and taller, it lets more light in," O’Neill said. "I think this really is a win-win-win situation."

In addition to allowing more light, O’Neill said the proposed high-rise will take up a smaller plot of land than a shorter, wider building, which allows more green space around it.

"The lot that is there right now is hideous," O’Neill said.

Jeff Key, president of the Greater South Loop Association, also supports the project, and agrees with O’Neill’s assertion that the building will frame the park.

"There’s something lopsided about Grant Park," Key said. "Grant Park was originally planned to be surrounded by tall buildings."

Key added that he thinks that some residents react too quickly when they hear a tall building is being proposed.

"I think people have this knee-jerk reaction to a tall building if it’s in the South Loop," he said. Key added that a tall and thin building will be more attractive and allow more light than something short and wide.

The project lies in the 2nd Ward; Alderman Madeline Haithcock did not return calls for comment.

Area residents will get to see drawings of the proposed high-rise tonight at 6:30 p.m. at Jones College Prep, 606 S. State St.

http://www.chicagojournal.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&SubSectionID=60&ArticleID=1880&TM=83155.09

[trvlr70]

I like the part about it balancing out Aon. But, I think a taller OMP would have been a better choice.

[Loopy]

Well it looks like South Loop Neighbors has completed their transition into a full blown NIMBY organization. Greater South Loop Association supports it. Grant Park Advisory Council supports it. It seems that they want to make the whole of the South Loop as quaint and charming as Printers Row.

From: Chicago Journal June 29, 2006

http://www.chicagojournal.com/main....880&TM=34185.01

Tower tension

Will ‘tall and slender’ high-rise at 830 S. Michigan frame Grant Park, or overwhelm Boul Mich?

By BILL MAYEROFF, Contributing Writer

SOUTH LOOP
Plans for an 80-story high-rise condominium building at 830 S. Michigan Ave., described by its backers as "tall and slender," will be unveiled Thursday night at a community meeting at Jones College Prep. Some South Loop residents, though, worry that the building will overwhelm its Boul Mich neighbors in the Michigan Avenue Landmark District.

Bob O’Neill, president of the Grant Park Advisory Council, supports the project, and said this week that the design will frame Grant Park.

"When you’re in the park, the beautiful skyline ends at Congress," O’Neill said. "It also balances out the Aon Center [at 200 E. Randolph]."

Though the building would be nearly twice the size of others in the area, O’Neill believes it will promote development in the area.

"I think it’s really in the public’s best interest," he said. "This particular building will set a precedent for development in the south Grant Park area." O’Neill thinks the proposed high-rise will lead to more buildings of that size in the area.

The building, according to Warren Barr of the Renaissant Development Group, will be 80 stories with nearly 35,000 square feet of retail space—including a 9,000-square-foot restaurant, a grocery store, and a spa—as well as 376 residential units.

"We’re building 376 units, which is exactly what the zoning allows," said Barr. Barr said the tall, thin design will block less light than shorter and wider designs.

"The [Chicago Department of Planning and Development] pushed us to go with a taller, slender building," Barr said.

But not everyone is as excited about a new skyscraper in the South Loop as O’Neill and Barr. Dennis McClendon, a member of South Loop Neighbors, believes the building will not fit in with its surroundings.

"I don’t think it’s going to fit in at all," McClendon said. McClendon says the building is taller than what is currently allowed in that spot by the Michigan Avenue Landmark District, which would limit the building to 425 feet.

"This proposal is almost double the height that is to be allowable in that spot," McClendon said. A spokesperson for the Commission on Chicago Landmarks could not be reached for comment.

Paulette Boyd, president of South Loop Neighbors, is also skeptical about how the building will work in that spot.

"It certainly would provide a huge shadow," she said. "We’re looking at something that’s double anything in that area south of Congress." Both she and McClendon are afraid a building of that size will cast shadows across Grant Park.

Boyd has not seen any drawings of the proposed high-rise, but she would prefer to see a development that stays within the limits imposed by the Michigan Avenue Landmark District.

"I just kind of have to wait and see what [the developers’] plans are," Boyd said. "And nothing this tall has ever been proposed."

But O’Neill isn’t worried about shadows. Like Barr, he believes the proposed design will actually allow in more light than a shorter, wider building.

"By being thinner and taller, it lets more light in," O’Neill said. "I think this really is a win-win-win situation."

In addition to allowing more light, O’Neill said the proposed high-rise will take up a smaller plot of land than a shorter, wider building, which allows more green space around it.

"The lot that is there right now is hideous," O’Neill said.

Jeff Key, president of the Greater South Loop Association, also supports the project, and agrees with O’Neill’s assertion that the building will frame the park.

"There’s something lopsided about Grant Park," Key said. "Grant Park was originally planned to be surrounded by tall buildings."

Key added that he thinks that some residents react too quickly when they hear a tall building is being proposed.

"I think people have this knee-jerk reaction to a tall building if it’s in the South Loop," he said. Key added that a tall and thin building will be more attractive and allow more light than something short and wide.

The project lies in the 2nd Ward; Alderman Madeline Haithcock did not return calls for comment.

Area residents will get to see drawings of the proposed high-rise tonight at 6:30 p.m. at Jones College Prep, 606 S. State St.

[Chicago Shawn]

^South Loop Nieghbors have been a full blown NIMBY organization for quite some time. Greater South Loop Association and the South Loop Planning board are the voices of reason which have balanced the scale in favor of previous developements in the area. South Loop Neighbors completly opposed the Lannar Project and Burnham Pointe on Polk Street because Peter Ziv is one of SLN's board members, who by the way uses homeless people to picket and show an 'opposition mass' to new development (or so I am told). SLN suffers from a major case of the shut the door behind them mentality.

[spyguy]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/entertainment/chi-0606280350jun29,1,5882035.story?ctrack=1&cset=true

`Vancouver-ization' moving along South Michigan Avenue

By Blair Kamin
Tribune architecture critic
Published June 29, 2006

The "Vancouver-ization" of Chicago continues, but not without questions from preservationists about how it will affect the city's famed cliff of historic buildings along Michigan Avenue.

Vancouver is known for its tall and thin residential towers, a building type that recently has found favor at City Hall. The idea, a departure from short and squat high-rises, is to create more elegant profiles and block less sunlight. It sounds simple enough, but rare is the development proposal that doesn't provoke controversy.

Questions about the latest example of the trend will be aired at a public hearing at 6:30 p.m. Thursday at Jones College Prep, 606 S. State St. It's a proposal for an 80-story condominium tower at 830 S. Michigan Ave., developed by Oak Brook-based Renaissant Development Group and designed by the Chicago architectural firm of Pappageorge/Haymes Ltd.

The tower would rise behind the current site of an old, seven-story YWCA that is part of the Historic Michigan Boulevard District, a row of buildings protected by official city landmark status that runs from Randolph Street on the north to 11th Street on the south.

Designed by John Van Osdel Ii, the nephew of pioneering Chicago architect John Mills Van Osdel and completed in 1895, the now-vacant YWCA originally served as a residential hotel that provided inexpensive lodging for traveling and self-supporting working women.

Even so, as a city report on the Michigan Avenue district points out, it offered a high-quality design, with an eclectic facade of pressed-brick, stone and terra cotta, that masked its "charitable, non-profit identity."

Triangular bays on its upper floors provided residents with unobstructed views of Lake Michigan -- the very quality that is drawing developers to remake the South Michigan area today with new high-rises.

According to James Carroll, chief financial officer for Renaissant, the facade of the YWCA will be restored, but the rest of the building will be torn down and replaced. Preservationists typically oppose such treatments, terming them a "facade-echtomy" because they save only the skin of the building.

New floors housing condominiums and mechanical equipment will be built atop the reconstructed building, said Robert Braziunas, a senior project manager for Pappageorge/Haymes. The reconstructed building also will house a spa and restaurant.

The slim condominium tower will be clad in a skin of glass and aluminum. Concrete exterior walls will "most likely not" be used, Carroll said.

Jim Peters, director of preservation planning for the Landmarks Preservation Council of Illinois, a non-profit advocacy group, expressed concern about the proposed terraces, which would have horizontal proportions like the neighboring Johnson Publishing Co. building at 820 S. Michigan Ave.

The terraces "look kind of clumsy," he said, noting that most buildings in the Michigan Avenue district are composed of vertical forms and widely spaced windows that are "punched" into their masonry facades.

Peters also questioned whether there was anything in the building worth preserving, saying that it is one of the oldest YWCA's in the country and one of the oldest buildings in the Michigan Avenue district.

But Braziunas said the terraced look of the new floors would prevent passersby from being able to see them, at least from directly across the street. The terraces would be visible from Grant Park and Lake Shore Drive, he said. Yet he added that they are designed with an eye toward lightness and mixing in with the tower's modern design.

"The key is to keep it light and make it seem like it's not a heavy object behind the facade," he said. "That's in the spirit of the tower itself."

[Steely Dan]

^ boy, there sure seems to be a lot of build-up up to this meeting tonight...... more build-up than usual anyway.

unfortunately, i get the privelege of working late at the office tonight, so i'm gonna miss out on all the fun. i'll be anxiously awaiting reports of how the meeting went.

[Tom In Chicago]

The term "Vancouverisation" is kind of misleading in this case considering the fact that many of these new towers are twice the height of anything in Vancouver. . . but what do I know. . . I'm no Blair Kamin. . .

[Tom In Chicago]

I have an appointment tonight and won't be able to attend either, but perhaps we could all get together after the meeting to suss out what transpired. . . any takers?

[Steely Dan]

The term "Vancouverisation" is kind of misleading in this case considering the fact that many of these new towers are twice the height of anything in Vancouver. . . but what do I know. . . I'm no Blair Kamin. . .

apparently you ain't no good old american either, as any flag-waving yank knows that any word that ends with the suffix "-ization" is ALWAYS spelled with a "Z"*. ;)


* - and we also know that the letter in question is always pronounced "zee".

[Tom In Chicago]

zed?

[sentinel]

The term "Vancouverisation" is kind of misleading in this case considering the fact that many of these new towers are twice the height of anything in Vancouver. . . but what do I know. . . I'm no Blair Kamin. . .

Blair Kamin is no Blair Kamin; at times his reputation precedes his abilities as a genuine critic of architecture. He's no Muschamp.

[Loopy]

Just what sort of architectural wonders do these preservationists expect to find inside of a 100 year old flophouse?

[Chicago Shawn]

I have an appointment tonight and won't be able to attend either, but perhaps we could all get together after the meeting to suss out what transpired. . . any takers?


That actually sounds like a good idea. By a stroke of luck, I will be attending the NIMBY circus tonight, and will likley need a couple of stiff drinks to calm my nerves.

[chicubs111]

It funny how blair says that Vancouver has tall thin buildings and chicago is trying to somewhat imitate that recently ...but since vancouver only has a few skyscrapers over 500ft it just seems so funny how they use vancouver as a comparison to chicago...kinda of mind boggling :koko: :shrug:

[BVictor1]

Another email from a southloop resident against the proposal. I believe the man is also quoted in the Journal article above.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Dennis McClendon <dmcclendon@rcn.com>
To: southlooplist@yahoogroups.com
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 09:10:33 -0500
Subject: Re: [southlooplist] What are you doing Thursday night?
pinemanor401 wrote:

> Hay – If you have been thinking about going to Weather Mark Tavern in
> South Loop Chicago… this Thursday night June 29th is the night to go.


I don't care what folks do afterward, but at 6.30 tonight I hope all
South Loop residents will be at Jones HS to let our alderman know
what we think of a planned 80-story building looming over the 7-store
YWCA building at 830 South Michigan. That's TWICE the height the
Near South Community Plan and the Michigan Avenue Design Guidelines
say should be allowed there

[honte]

Just what sort of architectural wonders do these preservationists expect to find inside of a 100 year old flophouse?

Look before you leap... I think his comments about the interior were called for. The exterior makes it evident that this is no ordinary "flophouse." (I realize you have apparently been inside, which I have not. But almost certainly Jim Peters has not either. He's a very level-headed guy.)

LPCI got burned with their opposition to the Legacy project; I doubt they'll make the same mistake here. And with the 1000 S. Michigan project, they were calling openly for a thinner, taller building "in keeping" with the existing tall point towers on Michigan. Well, with this project, they got what they wanted, and I do not think you'll find an enemy there.

As far as Peters' comments about the exterior of the building and its terraces, that's hogwash. I don't think preservationists should be architecture critics.

[BVictor1]

A link to the SOUTHLOOP PLAN: look over it


http://egov.cityofchicago.org/city/webportal/portalContentItemAction.do?BV_SessionID=@@@@0949199790.1151602142@@@@&BV_EngineID=cccdaddieghgeflcefecelldffhdffn.0&contentOID=536898268&contenTypeName=COC_EDITORIAL&topChannelName=Dept&blockName=Planning+And+Development%2FCommunity+Plans%2FI+Want+To&context=dept&channelId=0&programId=0&entityName=Planning+And+Development&deptMainCategoryOID=-536886455



A link to the STATE, WABASH AND MICHIGAN PLAN

http://egov.cityofchicago.org/city/webportal/portalContentItemAction.do?BV_SessionID=@@@@0949199790.1151602142@@@@&BV_EngineID=cccdaddieghgeflcefecelldffhdffn.0&contentOID=536907002&contenTypeName=COC_EDITORIAL&topChannelName=Dept&blockName=Planning+And+Development%2FCommunity+Plans%2FI+Want+To&context=dept&channelId=0&programId=0&entityName=Planning+And+Development&deptMainCategoryOID=-536886455

[Loopy]

Well, THAT was interesting.

Tonight's community comment meeting regarding Park Michigan was a smashing success! I just want to let everyone know that this project is definitely on the rails. We'll pick apart the details later when the rest of our soldiers return to their keyboards.

There was a modest turnout, maybe 150 people. New renderings were displayed on easels in front, but no model yet. The meeting began on time and with a very positive vibe. Warren Barr was applauded after being introduced and applauded again more vigorously when he finished his presentation.

Q and A was pretty positive and uneventful, except for when the South Loop Neighbors representative, Peter Ziv, appeared to have some sort of seizure. There were also some wingnuts from a Board of Directors of one of Renaissant's other developments, protesting a leaky roof or something (if I was their attorney I'd be sending them their retainer back in the mail tommorrow).

Alderman Madeline Haithcock delivered the coup de grace, offering more or less total support for the project.

Not a bad night.

[honte]

Well, THAT was interesting.

Tonight's community comment meeting regarding Park Michigan was a smashing success!

Kick ass! Thanks for the update, Loopy, and to all in the audience for helping get this thing off on the right foot.

[rds989]

Thanks for the update, Loopy. I'm guessing the lack of posts from the others is due to after-party socializing.

Wrap it up guys, I need some photos!!!!

[VivaLFuego]

The renderings look great, and its a well thought-out project.....this one is on a fast track to get built, I hope they can start sales ASAP.

[jcchii]

good news.

build it!

[Chi_Coruscant]

Thanks for the updates on tonight's meeting. I am wondering if the developer provides the description on 830 S. Mich's exterior. I am assuming it will be glassy.

[Loopy]

Thanks for the updates on tonight's meeting. I am wondering if the developer provides the description on 830 S. Mich's exterior. I am assuming it will be glassy.

Glassy, yes. But they said that there has been no decision yet whether it will be curtainwall or exposed frame.

[honte]

I like the part about it balancing out Aon. But, I think a taller OMP would have been a better choice.

True. However, I think in color, height, and profile, this building will balance the Legacy project very nicely.

[Chicago Shawn]

...