CHICAGO | General Developments

[ChiPhi]

^^^
It's just a really depressing place. I can't believe that it would be zoned as such. I also can't imagine what the people who live in the Maxwell will do with themselves. Who wants to live in a neighborhood with absolutely nothing but warehouses and empty lots. What is the parking ratio in this development again? Cuz I'm not sure it is even safe to walk through this neighborhood at night let alone enjoyable. I suppose the nearby UIC campus should help (as well as the loop and south loop residents), but the numerous box stores don't seem conducive to a heavy enough density of traffic to make the place a safe place to travel through at night. beyond that, what do you guys think of the market for pedestrian-oriented shops lining the street along this stretch?

Also, Burberry:



I understand the concerns about Michigan Ave becoming a chintzy strip of branded faux-architecture, but I'm not too concerned about the Burberry for two reasons. First, it is a re-appropriation of the Burberry brand, not a giant Burberry bag. The former I would place in the same vein as 80's pomo architecture which, if a bit overwrought at times, can be executed quite well. I think this building does a good job incorporating an immediately recognizable theme onto a standard box building. Second, the placement of a flagship for a brand like Burberry in Chicago reinforces its global status. While other luxury brands only open small boutiques on Oak or sometimes Michigan, (compared to the flagships of NY, LA, Paris, London, Tokyo, or Hong Kong) Burberry has confirmed the status of Michigan Ave as a global shopping destination. Of course, I would have preferred Burberry to treat design like Prada, hiring some of my favorite architects (Rem Koolhaas and Herzog De Meuron).

[Rizzo]

Originally Posted by ChiPhi

^^^
It's just a really depressing place. I can't believe that it would be zoned as such. I also can't imagine what the people who live in the Maxwell will do with themselves. Who wants to live in a neighborhood with absolutely nothing but warehouses and empty lots. What is the parking ratio in this development again? Cuz I'm not sure it is even safe to walk through this neighborhood at night let alone enjoyable. I suppose the nearby UIC campus should help (as well as the loop and south loop residents), but the numerous box stores don't seem conducive to a heavy enough density of traffic to make the place a safe place to travel through at night. beyond that, what do you guys think of the market for pedestrian-oriented shops lining the street along this stretch?

Also, Burberry:



I understand the concerns about Michigan Ave becoming a chintzy strip of branded faux-architecture, but I'm not too concerned about the Burberry for two reasons. First, it is a re-appropriation of the Burberry brand, not a giant Burberry bag. The former I would place in the same vein as 80's pomo architecture which, if a bit overwrought at times, can be executed quite well. I think this building does a good job incorporating an immediately recognizable theme onto a standard box building. Second, the placement of a flagship for a brand like Burberry in Chicago reinforces its global status. While other luxury brands only open small boutiques on Oak or sometimes Michigan, (compared to the flagships of NY, LA, Paris, London, Tokyo, or Hong Kong) Burberry has confirmed the status of Michigan Ave as a global shopping destination. Of course, I would have preferred Burberry to treat design like Prada, hiring some of my favorite architects (Rem Koolhaas and Herzog De Meuron).

I think with the exception of some updates to more newish building on Michigan ave the street will be frozen in place for awhile. So don't expect anything groundbreaking soon. I'm a little more upset right now with my own street turning into an outdoor shopping mall with these consistent storefront designs. The Esquire beast is getting huge. The new addition should have been totally different architecture.

[Ch.G, Ch.G]

Originally Posted by Hayward

I think with the exception of some updates to more newish building on Michigan ave the street will be frozen in place for awhile. So don't expect anything groundbreaking soon. I'm a little more upset right now with my own street turning into an outdoor shopping mall with these consistent storefront designs. The Esquire beast is getting huge. The new addition should have been totally different architecture.

If that green wall planned for the InterContinental goes through and is as successful as the renderings envision, it will have a dramatic effect on the Michigan Avenue pedestrian experience; it could even be a destination in its own right.

Concerning the Burberry store, I'm ambivalent. I agree with Mr. Downtown that this isn't the "innovative" architecture for which we usually reserve the kind of praise that's already been lavished on it. Rather, Burberry used a prototype that was slightly reworked to meet some of the needs of the site. (See their Beijing store.)

As far as this approach goes, it's not a bad design at all, especially compared to, for example, Best Buy, McDonald's, or, like Mr. Downtown said, Rainforest Cafe. And, for the time being anyway, there are few enough of this style of Burberry flagships around (and even then enough variation between them) that it doesn't take much away from Chicago's uniqueness. But it is also not the kind of architecture a lot of us think Michigan Avenue deserves, that is, Renzo Piano, Toyo Ito, or HdM designing a specific store for Hermes, Mikimoto, and Prada. I think the only example we have on Michigan Avenue of this kind of architecture is SCB's beautiful Crate & Barrel flagship.

Still, for the vast majority of people, the design will be fresh and exciting. Ideally, it will give staid Michigan Avenue a jolt of energy and open people's minds about the kind of architecture that's possible for that area without setting a precedent for more prototype architecture.

[ardecila]

^^ BCJ also designed a unique non-prototype for Apple.

Unfortunately, that design seems like BCJ was thinking "conservative Midwestern city" the whole time. Same goes for the Barneys flagship on Oak.

Say what you will about Burberry, but the new store is not conservative (even if the fashions are).

[Kippis]

Not sure if this is the appropriate place to post this, but I heard today through the grapevine that the Fisk and Crawford coal plants have been shuttered for good. Either way, it's good news for Pilsen and Little Village; hopefully these communities can preserve and take advantage of these two (IMO) wonderful examples of industrial architecture.

[Beta_Magellan]

The Tribune article on this was posted a few hours ago. Crawford shut down on Wednesday, Fisk earlier today.

I’ve been inside Crawford and it has some nice details and touches inside—as Kippis said, it’s a fine example of industrial architecture from its period. Not sure about preservation, though—they seem kind of hard to reuse. I’m guessing they’ll stay standing for a long time, though, if only for the local area’s economy.

[Rizzo]

It really sucks about the loss of jobs, but moving forward can be difficult. And this is technology of the past no longer appropriate for a city looking to the future.

As far as preservation, it should absolutely be considered. But I see reuse of these buildings a very long way down the road. There will have to be hundreds of millions invested into environmental cleanup between both facilities. Plus removal of equipment and demolition of portions that cannot be reused.

I still hope that possibly the older structures can someday provide utility to the neighborhood residents. But when you think of the size of these buildings, the operational costs and maintenance could potentially be very high.

Doing a walkthrough before closure can be depressing. I've been in two GM plants that once produced parts made of iron and cast in sand molds. These plants would later be cannibalized by new modern plants with lost-foam casting and aluminum. Forward thinking: More fuel efficient cars, clean and efficient manufacturing, less costly...and unfortunately less employees.

[denizen467]

The award for Slowest Street Reconstruction Project of the Decade (category: side street in a supporting role) can now be awarded, at last, with streetlights installed and striping being done today on Kingsbury between North and Scott, along with Scott's short realignment to Halsted. (It's as though they promised to finish by the end of the summer and decided to refuse to finish a day sooner than the end of August.) Crucially, two-way traffic has been reintroduced. Honestly speaking, the streetlights look kind of nice, and there are tons of sidewalk punchouts for large planters or tree roots.

And it's not a moment too soon, as the star-destroyer-from-precast-big-box-hell concrete edifices(*) of Buy Buy Baby and Petsmart are ready to have their giant surface lot poured with concrete. All we can do is hope the ensuing parade of Lincoln Park SUVs will only be a catalyst towards a future residential neighborhood full of SoNo-like towers.

(*) Google satellite view has a bird's-eye angle showing early erection of the precast, and you would be forgiven for thinking Cook County Jail was relocating there. If the windowless/doorless walls aren't actually fire code violations, they at least evoke the frontier fortress designs of Presidential Towers or McClurg Court Center from decades ago in their respective neighborhoods.

[ardecila]

This sucks, but I think it's problematic to blame developers for building stuff like this when the project had to go through multiple stages of city review and nobody told them "no". The zoning that allowed this development is the real tragedy, not the development itself.

We can't expect every developer to come into the city with a fully-formed concept of how to do good urban infill (especially when so many of them cut their teeth in the burbs) nor can we expect them to pass up a profitable opportunity because the urbanistic result is poor. If we want better development, it has to be enforced with well-written zoning codes and development review. Big-box and parking has its place in the city, but not in a dense mixed-use area just off the Red Line.

[Rizzo]

Another demo / replacement on Rush St. Book-ended by a major renovation and the new Starbucks it was only a matter of time before the Jilly's / backroom place was destined for a rebuild.

http://blog.chicagoarchitecture.info...=Google+Reader


The Bad:
Exst. Building has some ornament that adds architectural interest. Proper maintenance / restoration could have made it presentable. The floor count, depth and detail contribute to the neighborhood character. The replacement lacks much of this visual interest. It's neutral to any number of tenants.

Demolition will contribute to loss of affordable space, and therefore reduce the diversity of tenants. Many service business would have difficulty finding space in the neighborhood designed for high end retailers. Maybe it's not a problem...not entirely certain.

The Good
Modern (as in meeting needs of retailers) will upgrade neighborhood space into the 21st century, possibly attracting more big name boutiques

Personal Recommendations
Increase floor count for additional tenants. 34 E. Oak is a great example. No one would be opposed to a 4-5 story building. on a small narrow lot. Count me as 1 YIMBY, I look down onto it.

Improve architecture so it's not a generic, bland building. Architecture is part of the neighborhood desirability. Why should we permit something that isn't architecture?

[ardecila]

Aren't there some low-ceilinged spaces in the neighborhood that are undesirable except to neighborhood retail? Several of the 20s-era apartment buildings have this type of space, occupied by dry cleaners, nail salons, etc.

Also, neighborhood needs can be met by destination retail. Starbucks is opening a store on Oak, but I doubt their prices will be drastically higher than other locations. They must be expecting high traffic, but they've built a second floor space so that neighborhood residents can spend time there without being disturbed by flocks of takeout customers.

[denizen467]

^^ Hayward I like your presentation-style analysis. How about a Hayward thought process for the concrete turd on the opposite side of the street, on the nw corner of Oak and Rush. Do you know how long that nondescript bank has been in that space? Now there's a use I'd like to see help soak up upper floor retail space, in a place like Esquire (or a redeveloped Cedar Hotel, etc.).

[the urban politician]

Damn, discussion has really slowed down in the Chicago threads.

Is there really that little going on? Bummer.

[pip]

Originally Posted by Hayward

Another demo / replacement on Rush St. Book-ended by a major renovation and the new Starbucks it was only a matter of time before the Jilly's / backroom place was destined for a rebuild.

http://blog.chicagoarchitecture.info...=Google+Reader


The Bad:
Exst. Building has some ornament that adds architectural interest. Proper maintenance / restoration could have made it presentable. The floor count, depth and detail contribute to the neighborhood character. The replacement lacks much of this visual interest. It's neutral to any number of tenants.

Demolition will contribute to loss of affordable space, and therefore reduce the diversity of tenants. Many service business would have difficulty finding space in the neighborhood designed for high end retailers. Maybe it's not a problem...not entirely certain.

The Good
Modern (as in meeting needs of retailers) will upgrade neighborhood space into the 21st century, possibly attracting more big name boutiques

Personal Recommendations
Increase floor count for additional tenants. 34 E. Oak is a great example. No one would be opposed to a 4-5 story building. on a small narrow lot. Count me as 1 YIMBY, I look down onto it.

Improve architecture so it's not a generic, bland building. Architecture is part of the neighborhood desirability. Why should we permit something that isn't architecture?

omg Chicago, can you at least preserve one nice old building in River North? Just one, come on. This is another 4+1 in the making. Yeah it may look good for ten years but that's about it.

[denizen467]

^^ Tup, relax, it's probably just end-of-summer + long-weekend doldrums, with people out of town or just taking a break from the forums. In actuality I don't think development activity has fallen off in any major way.

[emathias]

Originally Posted by denizen467

^^ Tup, relax, it's probably just end-of-summer + long-weekend doldrums, with people out of town or just taking a break from the forums. In actuality I don't think development activity has fallen off in any major way.

Yeah, I mentioned this in the highrise thread, but Staybridge Suites construction has resumed.

[Rizzo]

denizen467, thanks for the nice words. It's a very difficult situation over in the Rush and Oak area. I've heard residents say they're pleased with the new investment but concerned some of the businesses that have long given that area identity are being lost. (though that's happened for quite some time) Some people worry the neighborhood is heading toward an unsustainable future by focusing exclusively on retail where the restaurants and bars tend to be more forgiving when the economy is hurting. That's why we've all been happy with the Esquire because it offers up some unique space to support dining and entertainment establishments.

The crowd tends to be a bit older at Jilly's and BackRoom than I am, but I personally feel they need to stay. I remember the first time I moved to Chicago and heard the jazz filling up the alley on my way to the back entrance of my apartment. It was the first time I felt I had really made it to Chicago. Ever since, I've been greeted by music every time I come home at night. I can't imagine it falling silent.

[spyguy]

http://esadesign.com/on_the_boards/700_s_clinton/

700 S Clinton
This remarkable structure is designed specifically for high technology trading companies. The 30,000 SF property is conveniently located within walking distance of the ‘Loop’ financial district, near the intersection of Clinton and Harrison Streets. It is one block from the CTA blue line station and immediately accessible to all expressways without having to negotiate heavy Loop traffic. The 150,000 SF, eight-story building is planned to have an extraordinary selection of amenities and technical infrastructure to support complex trading operations. It is also planned to be a cutting edge, environmentally conscious development with solar, geothermal, daylighting and rainwater collection systems


Printers Row
The conceptual design for this mixed use development in Printer’s Row was framed by the site’s narrow footprint.
The elegant, simple architectural response uses glass, concrete, and steel, which make a contemporary statement while respecting the character of the surrounding neighborhood.

Every unit features a balcony and views of the skyline, as well as access to a roof-top garden. These balconies swoop out from the building’s sides to create a gracefully curving profile, providing a distinctive identity against the skyline.

[simon07]

Originally Posted by spyguy

http://esadesign.com/on_the_boards/700_s_clinton/

700 S Clinton
This remarkable structure is designed specifically for high technology trading companies. The 30,000 SF property is conveniently located within walking distance of the ‘Loop’ financial district, near the intersection of Clinton and Harrison Streets. It is one block from the CTA blue line station and immediately accessible to all expressways without having to negotiate heavy Loop traffic. The 150,000 SF, eight-story building is planned to have an extraordinary selection of amenities and technical infrastructure to support complex trading operations. It is also planned to be a cutting edge, environmentally conscious development with solar, geothermal, daylighting and rainwater collection systems


Printers Row
The conceptual design for this mixed use development in Printer’s Row was framed by the site’s narrow footprint.
The elegant, simple architectural response uses glass, concrete, and steel, which make a contemporary statement while respecting the character of the surrounding neighborhood.

Every unit features a balcony and views of the skyline, as well as access to a roof-top garden. These balconies swoop out from the building’s sides to create a gracefully curving profile, providing a distinctive identity against the skyline.

Development is creeping south..I love it. These two proposal look amazing. Plus add in the golub tower on 9th and state, the maxwell on canal and taylor, the amli proposal on clark and polk and what you have is the slow expansion outward.

[Mr Downtown]

A drawing is not development.

That said, it looks nice, though I suspect that since it's in the Landmark District it will need to lose 8 or 10 floors to not overwhelm the Transportation Building.