HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

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


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #9961  
Old Posted Dec 12, 2017, 8:55 PM
Skyguy_7 Skyguy_7 is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,657
Quote:
Originally Posted by KWillChicago View Post
KG's idea to sell the place for an extra 5 mil?
*Post with thoughtfulness*.....
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9962  
Old Posted Dec 12, 2017, 10:35 PM
JK47 JK47 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 365
Quote:
Originally Posted by Near North Resident View Post
so it would be in high demand so lets build it 10 years from now?



some logic there...

Is it really adding capacity to the Brown line though? It sounded like the Brown line was constraining capacity growth on the Red due to the crossing track. The Brown Line however would still be constrained by the Wells St Junction which is always backing up during morning commutes due to trains "waiting for signal clearance."
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9963  
Old Posted Dec 12, 2017, 10:51 PM
Randomguy34's Avatar
Randomguy34 Randomguy34 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Chicago & Philly
Posts: 2,349
This will be exciting!

Developer plans three office towers, movie theater at former Coyne College site
https://chicago.curbed.com/2017/12/1...fice-high-rise

More details from NOWL's facebook says that:
Quote:
Three of the structures will be office with ground floor retail: 330 N. Green (20 stories @ 295 ft total height), 333 N. Green (19 stories @ 280 ft total height), and 360 N. Green (21 stories @ 298 ft total height)
....
Each building will include hundreds of parking spaces
https://www.facebook.com/neighborsof...type=3&theater
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9964  
Old Posted Dec 12, 2017, 10:55 PM
r18tdi's Avatar
r18tdi r18tdi is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,421
Quote:
Originally Posted by Randomguy34 View Post
This will be exciting!

Developer plans three office towers, movie theater at former Coyne College site
https://chicago.curbed.com/2017/12/1...fice-high-rise

More details from NOWL's facebook says that:

https://www.facebook.com/neighborsof...type=3&theater
Sweeeet. So odd that Crain's would cover the 12 story apartment project (see Gen Development thread) but ignore this story which was discussed at the same meeting?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9965  
Old Posted Dec 12, 2017, 11:07 PM
Randomguy34's Avatar
Randomguy34 Randomguy34 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Chicago & Philly
Posts: 2,349
Quote:
Originally Posted by r18tdi View Post
Sweeeet. So odd that Crain's would cover the 12 story apartment project (see Gen Development thread) but ignore this story which was discussed at the same meeting?
Maybe Crain's is still working on the article for the Coyne Colelge site? The Curbed article says there were no renderings since Sterling Bay didn't want them shown to the public yet. Fortunately, LG was fine with showing their 10 story project early.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9966  
Old Posted Dec 13, 2017, 12:26 AM
left of center's Avatar
left of center left of center is offline
1st Ward
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: The Big Onion
Posts: 2,569
Wow, that somewhat out of the way stretch of the West Loop is really going to lose its gritty, industrial vibe very quickly. A movie theater would be awesome. They were discussing putting one in on the old Fannie May candies site (current Target) years back, but that never materialized. I think the neighborhood can definitely support one.

I wonder, with three new office towers, if it wouldn't be a bad idea to open up a station on the UPW line that runs adjacent to the properties. Might be a bit too close to Ogilvie though?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9967  
Old Posted Dec 13, 2017, 12:39 AM
Randomguy34's Avatar
Randomguy34 Randomguy34 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Chicago & Philly
Posts: 2,349
Quote:
Originally Posted by left of center View Post
I wonder, with three new office towers, if it wouldn't be a bad idea to open up a station on the UPW line that runs adjacent to the properties. Might be a bit too close to Ogilvie though?
In a Crain's article about a month back, Metra said they were planning to build a station on the UPW line near Ogden Ave.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9968  
Old Posted Dec 13, 2017, 2:20 AM
left of center's Avatar
left of center left of center is offline
1st Ward
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: The Big Onion
Posts: 2,569
You're right, found it:

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/reale...-fulton-market

Quote:
The developers said city planning officials have discussed the addition of a new Metra station near the northwest corner of Fulton Market.

A Metra spokesman said the city requested that the transit company's ongoing reconfiguration of a switching location just west of Fulton Market not preclude the possibility of a new station being built nearby at Ashland Avenue, though it has not had specific meetings about adding the station.

Burnett could not be reached for comment, and a spokesman for the Department of Planning and Development didn't provide a comment.
The promotional image shows a planned Metra station at Ogden & Kinzie, even though the article states Ashland. I think Ogden would be a smarter location (Racine even better) since it would be closer to the heart of Fulton Market.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9969  
Old Posted Dec 13, 2017, 3:26 AM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is offline
TL;DR
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: the city o'wind
Posts: 16,356
I would expect the station to serve the Milwaukee District lines, not UP-W. There's plenty of room for platforms along those tracks, while the UP-W runs on an elevated viaduct with a sheer dropoff.

Also, stations have length... they could easily build a station between Ogden and Ashland with entrances to both streets. Full length Metra platforms are between 900'-1000' long, it's only 1500' between Ogden-Ashland. For regional connections, I think a station close to Ashland is ideal. People working or attending classes in the IMD have a convenient bus transfer, etc. It's also a good median point between the existing stops at Western and Union Station, and provides access to the growing creative sector in the Fulton Industrial Corridor (Goose Island, Intelligentsia, CB2 etc etc)

Eventually if the whole corridor grows into a dense employment corridor, the city could build a streetcar or busway from Canal-Western providing frequent local service.
__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9970  
Old Posted Dec 13, 2017, 5:26 AM
spyguy's Avatar
spyguy spyguy is offline
THAT Guy
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 5,949
Quote:
Originally Posted by Randomguy34 View Post
This will be exciting!

Developer plans three office towers, movie theater at former Coyne College site
https://chicago.curbed.com/2017/12/1...fice-high-rise

More details from NOWL's facebook says that:

https://www.facebook.com/neighborsof...type=3&theater
While SOM + Gensler sounds good, and this seems like a reasonable plan for the area, I'm not too thrilled by the idea of "hundreds" of parking spots in each building. The parking podium on the proposed 333 N Green tower doesn't inspire a lot of confidence.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9971  
Old Posted Dec 13, 2017, 2:18 PM
the urban politician the urban politician is offline
The City
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Chicago region
Posts: 21,375
^ Yeah I found that bothersome too, I’m hoping it was just a misunderstanding of parking spots in total?

Also, does the TOD ordinance apply to office buildings as well? So far it seems like only apartment developers have taken advantage of the density bonuses and parking reductions.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9972  
Old Posted Dec 13, 2017, 3:11 PM
LouisVanDerWright LouisVanDerWright is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 7,443
There is no parking requirement for office. So no.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9973  
Old Posted Dec 13, 2017, 3:53 PM
Chi-Sky21 Chi-Sky21 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,285
Not to go all NIMBY BUT. Going to bring a lot of congestion to that area. They should really look into sinking those tracks from about Ada all the way in. They would open up a lot of the road connectivity in the area.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9974  
Old Posted Dec 13, 2017, 4:29 PM
killaviews's Avatar
killaviews killaviews is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Chicago
Posts: 492
Coyne is a third of a mile away from the Blue Line Grand stop. Not the prettiest walk, though. But still easy to get to.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9975  
Old Posted Dec 13, 2017, 5:09 PM
k1052 k1052 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,235
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chi-Sky21 View Post
Not to go all NIMBY BUT. Going to bring a lot of congestion to that area. They should really look into sinking those tracks from about Ada all the way in. They would open up a lot of the road connectivity in the area.
Meh. Kinzie is pretty dead west of Desplaines even at rush. Fulton isn't very usable due to the streetscape project which will (finally) wrap in 2019 I think.

Just spend more effort on the pedestrian experience and connections to bus/rail.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9976  
Old Posted Dec 13, 2017, 5:13 PM
PKDickman PKDickman is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 565
Quote:
Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright View Post
There is no parking requirement for office. So no.
Offices have a parking requirement. and any B,C,M,D in the Transit zone can get parking reductions.

Office buildings can't get a density increase because they have no density, they can get an increase in bulk, however.

In fact, because it is poorly written, parking garages in the transit zone could get an increase in bulk.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9977  
Old Posted Dec 13, 2017, 5:47 PM
VKChaz VKChaz is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: California
Posts: 569
Quote:
Originally Posted by the urban politician View Post
^ Yeah I found that bothersome too, I’m hoping it was just a misunderstanding of parking spots in total?

Also, does the TOD ordinance apply to office buildings as well? So far it seems like only apartment developers have taken advantage of the density bonuses and parking reductions.
Just directionally, this doesn't feel right. Though parking is of course available in the heart of the CBD, driving clearly isn't intended to be the preferred means of transportation. But in this case, what is the developer's intent? .... is it to market this location as an alternative where employees can easily drive to work...? I imagine there is a market for that sort of thing, but besides the congestion question, it feels at odds with the intent of a CBD to have large auto-oriented offices on the fringes.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9978  
Old Posted Dec 13, 2017, 6:01 PM
i_am_hydrogen i_am_hydrogen is offline
tilted & shifted
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 4,608
Reilly Rejects Lakeshore East Parcel "IJKL" Proposal

Reilly Rejects Lakeshore East Parcel "IJKL" Proposal

Dear Neighbor:

I am writing to provide you with an update regarding LendLease and Magellan Development Group's proposed development of parcels "I, J, K & L" in Planned Development #70 that governs zoning in the Lakeshore East neighborhood.

The initial community meeting attracted over 1,000 residents and lasted more than three hours. In addition - to ensure every resident was afforded an opportunity to raise concerns - I required the Developer to host individual public meetings with every residential building in the neighborhood. Two members of my staff attended every meeting and took very detailed notes.

My office also received hundreds of letters, emails, and calls objecting to the proposal. In addition, I asked every condominium association in Lakeshore East to send me their "punch-lists" of concerns and suggestions related to the project.

After carefully reviewing substantial neighborhood feedback; cataloguing my own concerns regarding the proposal; and after discussions with the City Department of Planning & Development; I have determined this project will not move forward.

My office has informed Magellan & LendLease that their proposal for sites "I, J, K & L" is rejected and will not move forward in its current form.

There are a number of issues that must be resolved by a future proposal for this development site. Some (not all) of those issues include:

Provide more usable, contiguous & active open green space that will serve as a real public benefit to the surrounding neighborhood;

Eliminate the grand staircase & associated zigzag pedestrian path and replace it with a more subtle, meandering path - to allow for the addition of usable green space & reduction of hardscape/pedestrian infrastructure;

Relocate the proposed upper-level Harbor Drive pedestrian access point to the new open green space to improve sight-lines: moving it further north on Harbor & away from the Parkshore's garage and driveway egress;

Address security concerns (especially at the lower access road level) by proposing a staffed guard station on the lower level to monitor pedestrian traffic and activity - as well as regular security patrols throughout the site;

Better define solutions ensuring there are no conflicts between garage access, loading and the proposed pedestrian and bicycle traffic that would occur at the lower level access road that leads toward the Lakefront;

Install fencing between the lower Lake Shore Drive public right-of-way and the property line of sites "I, J, K & L" - while creating one centralized access portal between Magellan site & Lakefront (similar to the required improvements Wanda Vista will make to Riverwalk access at Field Drive);

Properly secure this lower-level Lakefront access portal with the installation of way-finding signage, improved lighting and surveillance cameras that can tie-in to the City's OEMC security camera network; and

Reassess the positioning of towers on the podium and make a greater effort to ensure distances between newly proposed towers and existing buildings are more consistent with setbacks that currently govern the site.

I have shared these concerns (and others) with the Development Team and have explained that they must be properly addressed in any future plans for the site. Once my office receives an updated proposal for this site, we will promptly notify neighborhood residents and proceed with our transparent community process.

It is my pleasure to serve as your Alderman. If we can be of assistance, please do not hesitate to contact us. I strongly encourage you to sign-up for our weekly e-newsletter at: www.ward42chicago.com for future neighborhood updates.

Sincerely,
__________________
flickr
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9979  
Old Posted Dec 13, 2017, 6:08 PM
Bonsai Tree's Avatar
Bonsai Tree Bonsai Tree is offline
Small but Mighty
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 343
God this guy is fucking stupid. . .
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9980  
Old Posted Dec 13, 2017, 6:21 PM
Randomguy34's Avatar
Randomguy34 Randomguy34 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Chicago & Philly
Posts: 2,349
^ This proposal is about 1,000 units less than what the original LSE plan had in mind, and significantly more green space. I've given up on Reilly ever approving anything dense
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 11:19 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.