CHICAGO | Highrise Projects & Construction - Page 342

Ktulured55 · #**6821** Posted: **Jan 7, 2012, 2:17 PM**

I haven't been on here in a couple of years. Whatever happened with the Chicago Spire project? Still on hold? Was trying to find news on here about it...

HomrQT · #**6822** Posted: **Jan 7, 2012, 3:26 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ktulured55

I haven't been on here in a couple of years. Whatever happened with the Chicago Spire project? Still on hold? Was trying to find news on here about it...

Unfortunately that project was canceled a long time ago.

F1 Tommy · #**6823** Posted: **Jan 7, 2012, 9:23 PM**

Latest photo today from south of the loop. Roosevelt University does add more color. Also an industry and skyline shot along with a new park.

Ch.G, Ch.G · #**6824** Posted: **Jan 7, 2012, 10:41 PM**

Whoa. Awesome shots. That's not a side of the skyline I'm used to seeing. It looks super eclectic.

FlashingLights · #**6825** Posted: **Jan 7, 2012, 11:21 PM**

look at the pittsfield building sticking out all balling in that pic lol

to think it was the tallest building in chicago for awhile

HomrQT · #**6826** Posted: **Jan 8, 2012, 12:04 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by FlashingLights

look at the pittsfield building sticking out all balling in that pic lol

to think it was the tallest building in chicago for awhile

It's certainly not the biggest building in the city anymore, but still one of my favorites. Just gorgeous.

J_M_Tungsten · #**6827** Posted: **Jan 8, 2012, 12:10 PM**

Great shots! I can't believe that was taken in January, in Chicago!

spyguy · #**6828** Posted: **Jan 8, 2012, 6:49 PM**

Now 25 and 10 stories tall. I wonder if this is what the NIMBYs had in mind.

Old

New

ardecila · #**6829** Posted: **Jan 8, 2012, 11:15 PM**

YES I LOVE IT. Taller and oriented along Halsted instead of Bradley. This is so awesome. The developer's basically flipping the bird to the NIMBYs in the area while making the project better for the city and the neighborhood.

I wonder if there's any change in the unit count?

untitledreality · #**6830** Posted: **Jan 9, 2012, 3:05 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila

YES I LOVE IT. Taller and oriented along Halsted instead of Bradley. This is so awesome. The developer's basically flipping the bird to the NIMBYs in the area while making the project better for the city and the neighborhood.

BOOM!!! This project fixed all of its massing and alignment issues in one fell swoop. It is hard to tell from these basic elevations, but if the materiality of the podium has been changed to better match the contemporary towers this project took a fantastic 180.

Kudos to these guys for having some serious balls

J_M_Tungsten · #**6831** Posted: **Jan 9, 2012, 4:48 AM**

So is this an example of positive NIMBY-ism?

Hayward · #**6832** Posted: **Jan 9, 2012, 4:53 AM**

Ooo, Much better. I also think that rooftop area will be more pleasant with the lowrise piece giving a bit more human scale. The base looks resolved

untitledreality · #**6833** Posted: **Jan 9, 2012, 6:38 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hayward

The base looks resolved

Glad to see that common sense finally prevailed and the loading docks were moved off of Bradley and onto Halsted.

ardecila · #**6834** Posted: **Jan 9, 2012, 10:58 AM**

^^ Why do we think it's more acceptable to have loading docks on major streets with strong pedestrian traffic than on side streets? Ideally, side streets are where you want the curb cuts, since it is least disruptive there. If you have the space on the lot, you can even design the loading dock to be fully enclosed to reduce the noise.

Nowhereman1280 · #**6835** Posted: **Jan 9, 2012, 3:22 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila

YES I LOVE IT. Taller and oriented along Halsted instead of Bradley. This is so awesome. The developer's basically flipping the bird to the NIMBYs in the area while making the project better for the city and the neighborhood.

I wonder if there's any change in the unit count?

BAHAHAHAHAHA. This is exactly what I wanted. It was also exactly what that one guy on the facebook group kept advocating that they chased away and then he stormed off and left the group. I wonder if the NIMBY's listened to him or if the developer was watching the group for ideas? Anyhow, fucking hilarious.

Quote:

Originally Posted by J_M_Tungsten

So is this an example of positive NIMBY-ism?

Yes and no. The NIMBY's were mostly bad until some people from here and a handful of other sane minds joined in and started advocating EXACTLY what the design has been changed to.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila

^^ Why do we think it's more acceptable to have loading docks on major streets with strong pedestrian traffic than on side streets? Ideally, side streets are where you want the curb cuts, since it is least disruptive there. If you have the space on the lot, you can even design the loading dock to be fully enclosed to reduce the noise.

Well that's the toughest part about this site. Neither Grace nor Bradley is really fit for a loading dock. Either street would be hell to navigate with a truck and both are pretty quiet streets. Unfortunately I don't think there is any choice for this site but to put the dock entrance on Halsted.

At the same time I don't think it's that big of a deal because it is a residential building and therefore the dock will probably be pretty quiet. Maybe with one or two trucks a day.

HomrQT · #**6836** Posted: **Jan 9, 2012, 5:16 PM**

Not that I disagree with the new proposal, but can anyone tell me why a tall thin tower is better than a shorter, fuller massing?

Nowhereman1280 · #**6837** Posted: **Jan 9, 2012, 6:20 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by HomrQT

Not that I disagree with the new proposal, but can anyone tell me why a tall thin tower is better than a shorter, fuller massing?

The original site plan was a giant "L" shaped building built to 15 floors along Grace, the West Lot line, and a portion of Bradley. This would have turned Grace into a ridiculous canyon as Grace is an extremely skinny street and would have had a 15 foot building adjoining a 1 story building on Grace and a 2 story building on Bradley along the West lot line which is hardly respectful to the neighborhood. The new design shifts as much of the massing as possible off the side streets and onto Halsted/Broadway which is a much wider, more commercial, street. This has the added benefit of changing what would have been a wall blocking all downtown views from 828 W Grace and Gill Park into a minor infringement on their view corridors while at the same time making the apartments on the upper floors more lucrative as they will now have full lake views as there is a wall of 15-18 story buildings along the lake that block the lower floor views.

I see this as a win for everyone. The 3-4 floor podium is much more respectful to the existing massing along Bradley and Grace, the developer gets more lucrative units, the NIMBY's get to keep their views, and we get a more handsome, taller, tower added to our skyline.

HomrQT · #**6838** Posted: **Jan 9, 2012, 6:50 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nowhereman1280

The original site plan was a giant "L" shaped building built to 15 floors along Grace, the West Lot line, and a portion of Bradley. This would have turned Grace into a ridiculous canyon as Grace is an extremely skinny street and would have had a 15 foot building adjoining a 1 story building on Grace and a 2 story building on Bradley along the West lot line which is hardly respectful to the neighborhood. The new design shifts as much of the massing as possible off the side streets and onto Halsted/Broadway which is a much wider, more commercial, street. This has the added benefit of changing what would have been a wall blocking all downtown views from 828 W Grace and Gill Park into a minor infringement on their view corridors while at the same time making the apartments on the upper floors more lucrative as they will now have full lake views as there is a wall of 15-18 story buildings along the lake that block the lower floor views.

I see this as a win for everyone. The 3-4 floor podium is much more respectful to the existing massing along Bradley and Grace, the developer gets more lucrative units, the NIMBY's get to keep their views, and we get a more handsome, taller, tower added to our skyline.

Roger that. I didn't realize open air space could be beneficial. I also didn't notice the little 2 story box next door. Thanks for the explanation.

Hayward · #**6839** Posted: **Jan 9, 2012, 6:52 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by HomrQT

Not that I disagree with the new proposal, but can anyone tell me why a tall thin tower is better than a shorter, fuller massing?

It seemed too squat and massive IMO. I have no problem with a series of similar height or massed midrises in a row so as long as they vary in design. But when it's one giant building, it's a bit heavy. This looks more like multiple buildings which I like.

Nowhereman1280 · #**6840** Posted: **Jan 9, 2012, 7:04 PM**

^^^ Good point about how it seems to break up the massing more.

Quote:

Originally Posted by HomrQT

Roger that. I didn't realize open air space could be beneficial. I also didn't notice the little 2 story box next door. Thanks for the explanation.

Yep, back in the glory days of the boom there was a lot of discussion about how the "taller/thinner" trend was making for a more pleasant built environment. This is very much along those lines.