EVANSTON | 708 Church St. (Fountain Square Tower) | 409 FT| 35 FLOORS

[BVictor1]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/o...,6940293.story

Evanston tower developer may scale back plans
By Emily S. Achenbaum | Tribune reporter
11:24 PM CDT, March 25, 2008

Developers plan to shorten the controversial Evanston tower and offer a modified proposal for the skyscraper in two weeks.

The proposed condominium tower, 49 stories of glass and steel in the heart of downtown, would be nearly twice as tall as any building in Evanston and the tallest in Chicago's suburbs. While some have lauded the idea as a forward-thinking and energizing piece of architecture, many have rallied against the plan, in part because of its height.

[aaron38]

The developer may be getting two birds with one stone here.
If a weaker condo market made a 49 story tower harder to sell out, you don't really want to advertise that you're shortening the tower because you can't sell it.

But if you say you're shortening it to bow to public pressure, and that units will now be at a premium... Now you drive pre-sales because people think the building will sell out.

In a weak market, better to be downsized politically than economically, if you follow me.

[Chicago Shawn]

Originally Posted by Chicago3rd

I think all those who don't want it need to pay extra taxes to pay for the loss of tax revenue.

Agree 100%. I debated this issue with a preservationist in Evanston who complained about the high taxes she pays. I will be stoking this issue on the 8th. Yes, I am not an Evanston Resident, but I still reside in Cook County and do 100% of my shopping here. As such, my sales tax and everyone's sales tax went up TWICE. Once for RTA service, which Evanston gets a shitload of, without of course an increase in the Real Estate Transfer tax for CTA Pensions; so us Chicagoans now provide a higher subsidy than Evanstonians. Sales Tax is going up again in April for the Cook County budget balance. And taxes will likely be going up again when our stalled state legislator passes a capitol funding plan. Without 1.3 billion in matching state funds we loose 4.1 billion federal dollars for infrustructure rebuilding.

We need to utilize our infrastructure better, a Fountain Square is one of many projects that should be built throughout the metropolitan area where it makes sense. I had a chance to meet Julie Hammos yesterday, who represents Evanston in the state legislator and the champion of pushing the transit bill through Springfield; and asked her if the new capital funding bill could have provisions holding municipalities responsible for proper land use policies if state money is used for projects in their communities in order to ensure our tax money is not wasted. She wants me to contact her office with ideas on how that could be implemented. I will use fountain square as an example.

[BVictor1]

If you want a real laugh from a daily dose of crap, check out this website...

http://evanstoncrd.org/

[BVictor1]

http://www.evanstonnow.com/business/...k-on-the-radio

The condo tower proposed for Evanston's Fountain Square is up for discussion on Outside the Loop Radio, tonight at 6 p.m. on WLUW, 88.7-FM.

Host Mike Stephen interviews Evanston Now publisher Bill Smith.

The show's also streamed live on the web and available for later listening from the show's website.

[Marcu]

^ Gracias

[BVictor1]

UPDATE

A bit of news on this tower. I along with Chicago Shawn attended (another) a planning and development meeting for 708 Church Street, which is commonly known as the Fountain Square Tower. Here's what we learned:

-The tower was reduced in height by 11 floors from 49 to 38 stories. A 22% decrease.

-Height was reduced from 523' to 421'. A 20% decrease.

There will be another meeting on this project on May 7th at 6:30pm at Evanstons Civic Center.

I was planning to speak up again but said I would wait until the next meeting so that I could get my thoughts together. When my name was called, a few people started yelling out because they know I'm from Chicago. They said that I didn't have the right to speak. I had to kindly inform them that it was a PUBLIC meeting, and that I had every right to speak. Several of the commissioners stated that it was a public meeting as so long as you stated your name and address, anyone who wished to speak could, after all it's public. They said that they wanted as much information and imput as possible.

If anyone is temped to attend or wants to see this tower built, I encourage to go to the next meeting to voice you opinion and support.

Well thought out comments are recommended.

[BVictor1]

http://www.evanstonnow.com/business/...planned-height

Tower developers shrink planned height

Submitted by Bill Smith on Tue, 04/08/2008 - 7:14pm.
The developers of the proposed Fountain Square tower trimmed the building's height in a new proposal for the project presented to the Evanston Planning and Development Committee this evening.

[Busy Bee]

What a bitter pill.

[Dr. Taco]

^ hey, i was expecting them to cut the height in half. so, i guess 20% isnt so bad. But it looks stubby in that model now. sigh

[Steely Dan]

i don't care about the height reduction, what's important here is design, and it looks as though the purity of the wedge form has been disappointingly thrown out the window. though i do like the way the building rises straight up from the sidewalk on the northeast corner, if only it did that on all sides.

[Steely Dan]

from the tribune: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/l...,7323196.story


Planned tower for Evanston gets shorter but is still long on opposition
The new blueprint calls for 38 stories, down from 49

By Deborah Horan | Tribune reporter
12:33 AM CDT, April 9, 2008

Responding in part to popular demand, developers on Tuesday unveiled a redesigned—and far shorter—tower for a downtown Evanston condominium project whose original 523-foot height had sparked opposition from some residents.

The new blueprint calls for 38 stories, down from 49, bringing it to 421 feet. The number of condominium units would remain unchanged at 218, according to the revised plan.

[mcfinley]

Sigh,

So, how are they maintaining the number of condo units? I can't tell from the render, but is it significantly broader to make up for the loss in height or are they planning on eating into the retail space?

[CenIL_LA]

"Planned tower for Evanston gets shorter but is still long on opposition"

Yeah no kidding, I was hoping it would get down to maybe 3 floors tall. I was wanting the existing businesses to be able to relocate there, whatever room is available afterwards the condos can go into. I dont like the height, I dont want people looking at my uncleaned gutters and missing tiles on my roof so they know I live here, but I am actually a pig fit for a lesser suburb. This is bad for Evanston. Sorry for sarcasm but people need to stop being so shallow. People living in this highrise have to look at the crap on the ground as well. They never get to complain or prevent it though.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by mcfinley

Sigh,
I can't tell from the render, but is it significantly broader to make up for the loss in height?

yes, the base is much chunkier to accommodate the units in the 11 floors that were chopped from the tower. from what i can see in the image victor posted, there now seems to be 3 building volumes: the 4 story podium that is built out to all the lot lines, then a midrise rectangular block volume that rises to ~20 stories, and then the wedge shaped form from the old scheme that rises the full 38 floors and is engaged with the block form on its lower levels. though without seeing the new model from other angles, i could be wrong on that. maybe victor can chime in and tell us more about the new building design because he was there at the meeting last night and likely got a good look at the model.

[BVictor1]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

yes, the base is much chunkier to accommodate the units in the 11 floors that were chopped from the tower. from what i can see in the image victor posted, there now seems to be 3 building volumes: the 4 story podium that is built out to all the lot lines, then a midrise rectangular block volume that rises to ~20 stories, and then the wedge shaped form from the old scheme that rises the full 38 floors and is engaged with the block form on its lower levels. though without seeing the new model from other angles, i could be wrong on that. maybe victor can chime in and tell us more about the new building design because he was there at the meeting last night and likely got a good look at the model.

I took photos of the model that I will try to post soon. Been busy all day trying to get "info on other projects".

[Steely Dan]

^ cool, i eagerly await more visual info about this project's redesign.

[stormkingfan]

I know the bldg plan had been scaled down, but regarding the poll at the beginning of thread: Screw it! Build 'em both!

[aaron38]

Blair Kamin chimed in on this as well. He's not happy with the change.

At least the previous version promised to be tall and thin, though it was conspicuously underdetailed and thus looked bland despite its overwhelming height. The new model, by comparison, is short and squat, as if the architect, Chicago's Laurence Booth, were saying to those opponents who argued that Version 1.0 was too tall: "You're making this worse, not better, by objecting to the height."

Are the architects and developers responding creatively to community feedback or are they offering up a bad alternative in the hope that their original plan will look better by comparison?
http://featuresblogs.chicagotribune.com/theskyline/

[BVictor1]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

^ cool, i eagerly await more visual info about this project's redesign.

Here you go: