CHICAGO | Highrise Projects & Construction - Page 334

HomrQT · #**6661** Posted: **Dec 4, 2011, 2:38 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joe Zekas

Watch a four-minute video of the four-day erection of the tower crane at K2 from start to finish, and another video of the pouring of the first columns at K2.

Good stuff Joe, thanks for sharing!

lawfin · #**6662** Posted: **Dec 6, 2011, 8:56 PM**

Spyguy, I wonder if you could do some sleuthing apparently from the posts on FB for the bradley st. proposal in lakeview there was been a a redesdign there were models or pics at the gill st. event last week. Think you could score them.

spyguy · #**6663** Posted: **Dec 7, 2011, 2:30 AM**

^I don't have them but give how much attention this project is getting I'm sure the Alderman or some community group will post them soon enough.

Apparently the proposal for a 190 unit, 26 story tower next to the old firehouse at Illinois and Franklin has been revived and thankfully redesigned.

J_M_Tungsten · #**6664** Posted: **Dec 7, 2011, 2:42 AM**

Interesting. Do they plan on restoring the firehouse?

Hayward · #**6665** Posted: **Dec 7, 2011, 2:48 AM**

^ Is that parking entrance on an alley?

I'm stunned. Thank you. I hate how on many other buildings there is a garage entrance along sidewalk frontage. Doesn't appear to be the case here.

the urban politician · #**6666** Posted: **Dec 7, 2011, 10:04 PM**

I'm surprised that a building of this size only has 190 units

the urban politician · #**6667** Posted: **Dec 8, 2011, 8:22 PM**

A long time ago a perspective of the triple hotel project u/c at Clark and Illinois was posted looking from a different direction than what is listed on page 1 of this thread. There is a perspective looking at it from the southeast.

I really want to see that perspective again, is there anybody here who has access to it and can post it? Thanks in advance

ardecila · #**6668** Posted: **Dec 8, 2011, 8:49 PM**

No prob bob, it's pretty damn urban from this angle

the urban politician · #**6669** Posted: **Dec 8, 2011, 9:00 PM**

^ Gracias

Chicagoguy · #**6670** Posted: **Dec 9, 2011, 3:47 PM**

I am curious but does anyone know what came of the meeting/vote last night on the Maryville proposal in Uptown, Lighthouse at Montrose Harbor.

spyguy · #**6671** Posted: **Dec 11, 2011, 9:44 PM**

A proposed amendment to Residential Business Planned Development No. 1116
and Lake Michigan and Chicago Lakefront Protection Application No. 606
submitted by M & R Development LLC for the property generally located at 73
East Lake Street and 171 North Wabash Avenue. The applicant proposes to
rezone the site from Residential Business Planned Development No. 1116 to
Residential Business Planned Development No. 1116 as amended. The
applicant proposes to construct a 42-story residential building with 332 dwelling
units, ground floor retail space and 183 on site accessory parking spaces within
Sub-area A. Sub-Area B will be improved with an 8-story office and commercial
building with 56 on-site accessory parking spaces to be constructed as a future
Phase II project. The site is located in the Private Use Zone of the Lake Michigan and Chicago Lakefront Protection District.

J_M_Tungsten · #**6672** Posted: **Dec 12, 2011, 1:10 AM**

^^^ yes please.

Alliance · #**6673** Posted: **Dec 12, 2011, 3:08 AM**

Thats very very bland...

Hayward · #**6674** Posted: **Dec 12, 2011, 4:05 AM**

^ I agree. Needs a lot of improvement.

In other development, Wells Street apartments in oldtown.

J_M_Tungsten · #**6675** Posted: **Dec 12, 2011, 5:08 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alliance

Thats very very bland...

I'm just going to make the assumption that you think it's better than the 3 level, POS parking structure that's there now.

Hayward · #**6676** Posted: **Dec 12, 2011, 5:19 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by J_M_Tungsten

I'm just going to make the assumption that you think it's better than the 3 level, POS parking structure that's there now.

J_M_Tungsten, your comment is unnecessary. I'm sure everyone here appreciates the garage going away. But it's no excuse for mediocre design.

BTW, does anyone know the history behind the building the garage sits on top of? I heard it's one of the few remaining original buildings after the Chicago fire.

J_M_Tungsten · #**6677** Posted: **Dec 12, 2011, 5:35 AM**

Well it seems, Hayward, that no matter what is put out, people have negative comments about it. I don't find anything wrong with this design. I say it's right, you say it's wrong; who's right? At least explain what you mean when you say "needs improvement"? It replaces a parking structure, is well designed to the area, and will add more people and retail to the area. Seems perfect to me.

Tom Servo · #**6678** Posted: **Dec 12, 2011, 5:50 AM**

i'd rather have bland than bad. just saying...

Hayward · #**6679** Posted: **Dec 12, 2011, 5:50 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by J_M_Tungsten

Well it seems, Hayward, that no matter what is put out, people have negative comments about it. I don't find anything wrong with this design. I say it's right, you say it's wrong; who's right? At least explain what you mean when you say "needs improvement"? It replaces a parking structure, is well designed to the area, and will add more people and retail to the area. Seems perfect to me.

Ok.

Alliance · #**6680** Posted: **Dec 12, 2011, 6:05 AM**

^^^ That glass on the Old Town building is going to be much more prominent than I expected. Thats a good thing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom Servo

i'd rather have bland than bad. just saying...

Touché.

Quote:

Originally Posted by J_M_Tungsten

I'm just going to make the assumption that you think it's better than the 3 level, POS parking structure that's there now.

It may shock you to know I'm really here because I think the entirety of Chicago should be demolished in favor or 2 story parking garages. 3 stories is just too dense.

Given the fact that almost ANYTHING is better than a parking garage, (save surface lot and landfill) I see no problem in expecting that a contextual, well-designed, and stimulating building replace it instead of being inherently satisfied with any building. A well designed building will add density and retail too. What needs improvement is its a sterile glass box who's most engrossing feature seems to be a retractable wall that reveals an indoor to outdoor pool. The rest of the building is flat with seemingly random/kitschy elements (like tiny setbacks, a quaint roof, or a spandrel grid) that are too meek to make any real impact on the design yet so glaringly present as to distract from any attempt at cohesiveness or simplicity. It reminds me of 215 W Wash which I don't think came out well at all.

Its also, for me, a big a step back from the previous design we had for this site (which in itself didnt really amaze me in any way):