HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     
Welcome to the SkyscraperPage Forum

Since 1999, the SkyscraperPage Forum has been one of the most active skyscraper enthusiast communities on the web. The global membership discusses development news and construction activity on projects from around the world, alongside discussions on urban design, architecture, transportation and many other topics. Welcome!

You are currently browsing as a guest. Register with the SkyscraperPage Forum and join this growing community of skyscraper enthusiasts. Registering has benefits such as fewer ads, the ability to post messages, private messaging and more.

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > City Compilations

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #6821  
Old Posted Jan 7, 2012, 11:21 PM
FlashingLights FlashingLights is offline
Chicago Kid
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Chicago, IL, St. Charles, IL
Posts: 175
look at the pittsfield building sticking out all balling in that pic lol

to think it was the tallest building in chicago for awhile
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6822  
Old Posted Jan 8, 2012, 12:04 PM
HomrQT's Avatar
HomrQT HomrQT is offline
All-American City Boy
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Forest Park / Uptown, Chicago
Posts: 716
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlashingLights View Post
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.
__________________
“Chicago ain't no sissy town.”
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6823  
Old Posted Jan 8, 2012, 12:10 PM
J_M_Tungsten's Avatar
J_M_Tungsten J_M_Tungsten is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,580
Great shots! I can't believe that was taken in January, in Chicago!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6824  
Old Posted Jan 8, 2012, 6:49 PM
spyguy's Avatar
spyguy spyguy is offline
THAT Guy
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 5,033
3750 N Halsted changes

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

Old

New
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6825  
Old Posted Jan 8, 2012, 11:15 PM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is online now
vertical
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: unconventionally bicoastal
Posts: 10,508
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?
__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6826  
Old Posted Jan 9, 2012, 3:05 AM
untitledreality untitledreality is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 845
Quote:
Originally Posted by ardecila View Post
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
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6827  
Old Posted Jan 9, 2012, 4:48 AM
J_M_Tungsten's Avatar
J_M_Tungsten J_M_Tungsten is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,580
So is this an example of positive NIMBY-ism?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6828  
Old Posted Jan 9, 2012, 4:53 AM
Hayward's Avatar
Hayward Hayward is offline
High above the Gold Coast
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 6,302
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
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6829  
Old Posted Jan 9, 2012, 6:38 AM
untitledreality untitledreality is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 845
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hayward View Post
The base looks resolved
Glad to see that common sense finally prevailed and the loading docks were moved off of Bradley and onto Halsted.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6830  
Old Posted Jan 9, 2012, 10:58 AM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is online now
vertical
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: unconventionally bicoastal
Posts: 10,508
^^ 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.
__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6831  
Old Posted Jan 9, 2012, 3:22 PM
Nowhereman1280 Nowhereman1280 is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Pungent Onion, Illinois
Posts: 8,538
Quote:
Originally Posted by ardecila View Post
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 View Post
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 View Post
^^ 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.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6832  
Old Posted Jan 9, 2012, 5:16 PM
HomrQT's Avatar
HomrQT HomrQT is offline
All-American City Boy
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Forest Park / Uptown, Chicago
Posts: 716
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?
__________________
“Chicago ain't no sissy town.”
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6833  
Old Posted Jan 9, 2012, 6:20 PM
Nowhereman1280 Nowhereman1280 is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Pungent Onion, Illinois
Posts: 8,538
Quote:
Originally Posted by HomrQT View Post
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.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6834  
Old Posted Jan 9, 2012, 6:50 PM
HomrQT's Avatar
HomrQT HomrQT is offline
All-American City Boy
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Forest Park / Uptown, Chicago
Posts: 716
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nowhereman1280 View Post
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.
__________________
“Chicago ain't no sissy town.”
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6835  
Old Posted Jan 9, 2012, 6:52 PM
Hayward's Avatar
Hayward Hayward is offline
High above the Gold Coast
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 6,302
Quote:
Originally Posted by HomrQT View Post
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.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6836  
Old Posted Jan 9, 2012, 7:04 PM
Nowhereman1280 Nowhereman1280 is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Pungent Onion, Illinois
Posts: 8,538
^^^ Good point about how it seems to break up the massing more.

Quote:
Originally Posted by HomrQT View Post
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.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6837  
Old Posted Jan 9, 2012, 8:47 PM
untitledreality untitledreality is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 845
Quote:
Originally Posted by ardecila View Post
^^ 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.
Nowhereman already touched on it, but Bradley is just unfit for navigating large trucks in and out of a loading dock. It is a narrow, quiet, all residential one way street and the proposed changes would have been incredibly disruptive imo. Halsted has the width, is a major artery and judging by the revised site plan posted on curbed it seems that the docks were consolidated to a single entryway along with the switch to Halsted.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6838  
Old Posted Jan 9, 2012, 8:56 PM
markh9's Avatar
markh9 markh9 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Chicago
Posts: 127
Not my shot - found it here. Interesting perspective (80th floor of Aon), particularly as it relates to the CityFront Plaza/Optima/Ronald McDonald.

I would LOVE to see the Trib sell their parking lot so a tower could fill in that last gap. Lord knows they could use the scratch...

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6839  
Old Posted Jan 9, 2012, 9:50 PM
george's Avatar
george george is offline
dream fast
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: east village, chicago
Posts: 2,762
Great perspective north of the river. Good find, markh9.
__________________
To have ambition was my ambition - Gang of Four
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6840  
Old Posted Jan 9, 2012, 10:11 PM
harryc's Avatar
harryc harryc is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Oak Park, Il
Posts: 5,900
Quote:
Originally Posted by untitledreality View Post
Nowhereman already touched on it, but Bradley is just unfit for navigating large trucks in and out of a loading dock. It is a narrow, quiet, all residential one way street and the proposed changes would have been incredibly disruptive imo. Halsted has the width, is a major artery and judging by the revised site plan posted on curbed it seems that the docks were consolidated to a single entryway along with the switch to Halsted.
It's been a few decades, but IIRC Bradley is unfit for navigating large cars on many days, and whenever there is >8" of snow.
__________________
Harry C --- Picassa ---- Prarie School Traveler
The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either. B Franklin.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
   
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > City Compilations
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 6:04 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.