SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/index.php)
-   Skyscraper & Highrise Construction (http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/forumdisplay.php?f=103)
-   -   CHICAGO | 1000M (1000 S. Michigan) | 832 FT | 76 FLOORS (http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=218947)

b0soleil Oct 29, 2015 12:04 AM

I'm also out of town! Argh... I can't play my, I live a few blocks from here and blah blah card...


Can we get a show of hands on who can be there and volunteers on taking some of the points below? (ideally 1 or more people per point, rather than 1 person taking multiple points so it sounds good.) (anyone want to post in the general highrise section to see if we can get help?)

A few things that might help.

1. If each person raises their hand and makes 1 point (don't bother framing it as a question, no one else will.) (the nimbies will be direct in their complaints and numerous. We need to be direct and each take a very simple point. Sway and give voice to the reasonable people (or at least those who also could benefit from the building) and also make enough counter noise that the alderman feels that there is some neighborhood support.

a. Something to the effect of: I live in the neighborhood and looking around I think there is a large, silent majority that's not represented. I for one support this project, the taxes it brings in, and the vibrance it brings to our community rather than an empty parking lot. (the others of us then need to clap and hopefully others in the crowd will join in.)

b. Something to the effect of: Every additional floor brings in over $50k in taxes. Every 10 stories is $500k. Every 20 stories is $1mil. Who here is willing to make up for that lost income by increasing their OWN property taxes to pay for a shorter building?

c. (right after b.) I never thought about it that way... but if it's going to be pretty tall, better to make it 20 stories taller and get us $1mil in extra taxes for our schools than 20 stories shorter.

d. This building could be iconic and what the neighborhood needs to draw the same property values as on the north side of the park. Those who lose their views might lose a bit of property value, though it's not like this was going to be an empty lot forever. Everyone else's property value goes up because the neighborhood becomes hotter and more upscale! (let's get some of the nimbies who don't lose a view to think in terms of their immediate pocket book.)

e. (if there are enough of us) I'm sick of these crappy empty lots. I'm for a cool building that brings people, $$, and cache to the neighborhood. What I want is more retail space.

2. Anyone can talk to the developers in advance? Both 113 E. Roosevelt and the 1326 S. michigan developers didn't know what made the neighborhood tick. (giving benefits such as smaller units allowing for a more diverse income set or paying into the affordable housing fund isn't actually a positive for most of the nimbies (and one of them even went so far as to say that.).

It's about this raising the property values of the area like Aqua or 340 E. Randolph for Lakeshore East. It's about creating retail space on Michigan and keeping traffic congestion to a minimum via the wabash car entrance design. It's about mix use that will expose more people to the neighborhood who will then actually consider buying there in the future (and hence raising property values). It's about creating more options in that area of the south loop that brings more people to consider it as a neighborhood when buying (and hence increasing value for everyone.)

BVictor1 Oct 29, 2015 1:37 AM

^Aqua or 340 E. Randolph aren't in Streeterville.

munchymunch Oct 30, 2015 1:20 AM

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CShh4ujUcAAfMfx.jpg



85th floor roof deck :uhh:


358 condos

148 apartments


3 year build time



from David Matthews twitter

munchymunch Oct 30, 2015 1:29 AM

Apparent total shit storm

https://twitter.com/BlairKamin

BVictor1 Oct 30, 2015 1:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by munchymunch (Post 7216614)
Apparent total shit storm

https://twitter.com/BlairKamin

Bunch of NIMBY fucktards...

1000 South Michigan Ave
Sub A is the parking lot
Sub B
is 1006 S. Michigan
1000’
506 dwelling
358 condo
148 apartments
ground floor retail
598 parking
leed certified
just under 23,000 sq ft
$385,000,000
$105M in taxes over 10 years
5 million in transfer taxes because of condos
stacked cubes/volumes
20’ from 910 N. Michigan
residential begins on 2nd floor
100’ in depth for the tower
1001’ 6”
condos to 84th floor

too tall…
shadows in the park…

glass
concrete structure
11’6 in condo
10’ in apartments
3 years construction
1 year pre-sales

munchymunch Oct 30, 2015 1:58 AM

Guess you could go. ;)


Any idea if burns supports the project? Or when they plan to get started?

Kngkyle Oct 30, 2015 1:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by munchymunch (Post 7216639)
Guess you could go. ;)


Any idea if burns supports the project? Or when they plan to get started?

1 year of pre-sales implies that we're at least probably ~18 months away from any construction start.

BVictor1 Oct 30, 2015 3:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by munchymunch (Post 7216639)
Guess you could go. ;)


Any idea if burns supports the project? Or when they plan to get started?

I skipped class :rolleyes:;)

Burns stated that he supported the Essex project, and I honestly believe that he supports the one also. However, this is within the Michigan Avenue Landmarks District, so we'll have to deal with their decision too.

Feel free to contact landmarks to voice your support.

http://www.cityofchicago.org/city/en...ommission.html
Commission on Chicago Landmarks
Contact: 312.744.3200

HowardL Oct 30, 2015 3:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by munchymunch (Post 7216605)

This rendering is interesting to me. Usually a proposed tall building will attempt to make itself look shorter in renderings to perhaps appease the NIMBY dildos.

This one seems to be doing just the opposite. Aon and Trump both look slightly stumpy while this beauty just fucking soars.

BVictor1 Oct 30, 2015 3:48 AM

https://im1.shutterfly.com/media/47a...D720/ry%3D480/

Steely Dan Oct 30, 2015 4:05 AM

^ Once again, thanks for all of the great info!



Quote:

Originally Posted by BVictor1 (Post 7216633)
20’ from 910 N. Michigan

What does this mean? Did you mean 910 S. Michigan?





Quote:

Originally Posted by BVictor1 (Post 7216633)
1001’ 6”
condos to 84th floor

So, should the title of this thread be changed to "1,002 FEET" and "84 FLOORS"?

BVictor1 Oct 30, 2015 4:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steely Dan (Post 7216750)
^ Once again, thanks for all of the great info!




What does this mean? Did you mean 910 S. Michigan?






So, should the title of this thread be changed to "1,002 FEET" and "84 FLOORS"?

Yes, I meant 910 S. Michigan

The floor could remains the same, but the height should be adjusted to 1,002' for now. That's what the diagram showed this evening.

SamInTheLoop Oct 30, 2015 12:19 PM

Grizzly didn't cover it........should have come prepared for rabid elephant last night........nothing new I suppose, but the sheer ignorance on display last night (mainly thinking here with respect to density, traffic, parking, and congestion-at-large) was truly breathtaking........there are so, so, so many unit owners at the 910 building that do not really belong living in downtown Chicago.....just a very anti-urban, know-nothing sentiment on display in general........

To Burns' credit, however, he did serve up several reality-checks for the NIMBYs throughout the evening.......I have to say that, although I'm as skeptical as ever of all aldergoblins, digesting all his comments through the meeting, he at least projected an urban/density/growth (you know, this is what cities are, and this is what they do) sensibility - more so, in fact, then perhaps any other alderman I can recall personally recall at the moment...........so, that's a good sign, at least........

Skyguy_7 Oct 30, 2015 1:19 PM

^Thanks to those who attended last night's meeting. Great to know we have a voice of reason amid the NIMBY cowards.

Quick little anecdote on 910 S. Mich. My company worked on the rehab years ago when the building switched to condos. The GC was a real piece of work, so bad that he put a couple companies on the project out of business. This being in Chicago, there are plenty of available methods to respond to such a person. Needless to say, late one night on a dark street he found himself face to face with two problem "fixers" yeilding crowbars. They went for his knees and when he tossed them his wallet, they threw it back and continued whoopin ass. Ah, the Chicago way.
:cheers:

pilsenarch Oct 30, 2015 1:23 PM

so, I'm curious, did you guys speak up (I assume you did) and what was the response of the crowd?

rlw777 Oct 30, 2015 1:53 PM

Sky High Towers Proposed for Michigan Avenue Draw Tough Crowd at Meeting - DNAinfo

Can we call this one "Big Jahn"?

Loopy Oct 30, 2015 2:12 PM

Was Helmut "Genghis" Jahn presenting?

Steely Dan Oct 30, 2015 2:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rlw777 (Post 7216998)
Can we call this one "Big Jahn"?

yes. yes we can.

rlw777 Oct 30, 2015 2:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steely Dan (Post 7217032)
yes. yes we can.

Awesome!:tup:

Randomguy34 Oct 30, 2015 7:05 PM

Clearer north view rendering per DNAInfo. I can't wait to see what the view from Grant Park will look like with all the new towers after I graduate.

https://assets.dnainfo.com/generated...extralarge.jpg
http://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/20151...owd-at-meeting


All times are GMT. The time now is 1:35 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.