HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > Proposals



201 North Columbus Drive in the SkyscraperPage Database

Building Data Page   • Comparison Diagram   • Chicago Skyscraper Diagram
Chicago Projects & Construction Forum
            
View Full Map

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #181  
Old Posted Jun 24, 2017, 8:56 PM
chicubs111 chicubs111 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 909
Quote:
Originally Posted by Randomguy34 View Post
Recall that the Marquee at Block 37 was able to fit 700 units for a 400 ft tower. It wouldn't be too difficult to image a 700 ft tower with 640 units and 626 hotel rooms.
^ Yea but Marquee takes up like a city block ...this site seems somewhat snug?..I would love to see something over 800 ft here...its definitely doable with those number of units ...hopefully some type of pinnacle rooftop would be nice break for a change.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #182  
Old Posted Jun 26, 2017, 4:32 PM
MakeChicagoGreatAgai MakeChicagoGreatAgai is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 37
The previous proposal was 60 floors with 574 apartments and 684 hotel rooms and now we're getting a proposal that is "as many as 640 residential units and 626 hotel rooms." I'm guessing 65 floors or less.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #183  
Old Posted Jun 26, 2017, 7:31 PM
Kumdogmillionaire Kumdogmillionaire is offline
SUSPENDED
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Chicago
Posts: 939
Quote:
Originally Posted by MakeChicagoGreatAgai View Post
The previous proposal was 60 floors with 574 apartments and 684 hotel rooms and now we're getting a proposal that is "as many as 640 residential units and 626 hotel rooms." I'm guessing 65 floors or less.
The size of the floor plates is really what matters here. If they take up the whole site on these floor plates you are correct, but the leaked mock-up of the building sites implies it make take up less of the site than the previous proposal for site O
__________________
For you - Bane
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #184  
Old Posted Jun 26, 2017, 9:17 PM
r18tdi's Avatar
r18tdi r18tdi is offline
Team Alinghi
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,076
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kumdogmillionaire View Post
The size of the floor plates is really what matters here. If they take up the whole site on these floor plates you are correct, but the leaked mock-up of the building sites implies it make take up less of the site than the previous proposal for site O
Agreed, but the economics of going very tall and skinny wouldn't make much sense here. It's not like it's going to have amazing views -- the site is pretty boxed-in.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #185  
Old Posted Jun 27, 2017, 1:48 AM
left of center's Avatar
left of center left of center is online now
1st Ward
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: The Big Onion
Posts: 1,680
They could justify going tall if they wanted more units to have a view of LSE park, since the other 3 directions are going to be hundreds of feet of sheer wall. This wouldn't matter for the hotel as much as it would for the apartments of course. Assuming the service corridor between the Lancaster and North Harbor Tower/Parkshore was preserved, there would be some lake views as well from that vantage. Such views could command higher leases, which could make building taller more cost effective. This is all speculative, of course.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #186  
Old Posted Jun 27, 2017, 1:52 PM
SamInTheLoop SamInTheLoop is offline
you know where I'll be
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,742
^ But they aren't......I think this tower will still definitely be less than 700', which is fine. Most important is the density. This is a dense - and appropriately so - project. Over 600 apartment units and over 600 hotel rooms? Yes, please.

I just hope this one is planned for this cycle still. I've been very curious what's taken so long for Magellan to get going on this one.......they easily could have started 1, 2, 3, or 4 years ago, and it would have been a smashing success.
__________________
Post-Modern is Post-Mortem - Deal with it
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #187  
Old Posted Jun 27, 2017, 4:20 PM
Chi-Sky21 Chi-Sky21 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Chicago
Posts: 727
With the limited views at O why are they putting the density here instead of the lots with WAY better views? Doesn't make much sense to me.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #188  
Old Posted Jun 27, 2017, 5:05 PM
BuildThemTaller BuildThemTaller is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 253
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chi-Sky21 View Post
With the limited views at O why are they putting the density here instead of the lots with WAY better views? Doesn't make much sense to me.
But it makes total sense. The lots with the best views will command the highest prices per square foot as hotels, rentals, and condos. This lot is closest to the rest of the city, the convention spaces, and has the worst views. It's going to be ideal for a large number of hotel room keys and small, affordable (ish) apartments.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #189  
Old Posted Jun 27, 2017, 5:05 PM
SamInTheLoop SamInTheLoop is offline
you know where I'll be
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,742
^ Location. Location. Location. O is the best-located parcel in LSE for very high density.

Also, I think you may be conflating density and height - at least to an extent....
__________________
Post-Modern is Post-Mortem - Deal with it
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #190  
Old Posted Jun 27, 2017, 6:01 PM
Chi-Sky21 Chi-Sky21 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Chicago
Posts: 727
It makes sense to keep the hotel there but i think they would be better off to increase each of the other buildings density and height, nothing huge. Also, make some of it condo. I would think you would find it easy to find people who want to own at those other lots. But whatever...as long as it looks nice i do not really care. I just feel those other lots are not being planned to their full potential.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #191  
Old Posted Jun 27, 2017, 6:35 PM
gebs's Avatar
gebs gebs is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: South Loop
Posts: 287
At the risk of going too far off-topic, I get the feeling a lot of members of this site played a LOT of SimCity 2000 as kids. Or play its far more complex, graphically-enhanced version today.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #192  
Old Posted Jun 27, 2017, 8:52 PM
LouisVanDerWright LouisVanDerWright is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 4,337
Quote:
Originally Posted by gebs View Post
At the risk of going too far off-topic, I get the feeling a lot of members of this site played a LOT of SimCity 2000 as kids. Or play its far more complex, graphically-enhanced version today.
I know I did, even Sim City Classic. I play the real life Sim City today doing little developments of my own. Everyone who played Sim City wants to build the biggest skyscraper on earth.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #193  
Old Posted Jun 27, 2017, 11:03 PM
Kumdogmillionaire Kumdogmillionaire is offline
SUSPENDED
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Chicago
Posts: 939
Cities: Skylines is now all the rage. Much improved version of that game, and absolutely my guilty pleasure when I have time.

Anyway, back to the building at hand, I am finally understanding why the density would be slated for this site instead of the of ones along the lake. Still kind of bummed we didn't get a supertall and a nice open park in that remaining lot, but obviously that would have been much less economical.
__________________
For you - Bane
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #194  
Old Posted Jul 10, 2017, 11:32 PM
ithakas's Avatar
ithakas ithakas is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 773
Updated rendering via Curbed: https://twitter.com/curbedchicago/st...54226818580482


Curbed Chicago
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #195  
Old Posted Jul 10, 2017, 11:51 PM
rlw777 rlw777 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 1,459
2 more from David Matthews of DNAInfo



Reply With Quote
     
     
  #196  
Old Posted Jul 11, 2017, 12:03 AM
KWILLSKYLINE's Avatar
KWILLSKYLINE KWILLSKYLINE is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Chicago
Posts: 625
^^^ kind of reminds me of Lowes with the serback balcanies.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #197  
Old Posted Jul 11, 2017, 12:20 AM
the urban politician the urban politician is online now
The City
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Libertyville, IL
Posts: 14,883
Doesn't seem much different from the original proposal
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #198  
Old Posted Jul 11, 2017, 12:58 AM
chicubs111 chicubs111 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 909
^ So wait im confused...is this the twin tower that was mentioned?..I thought there were 4 buildings to be shown during this presentation...Feel like only seen 3??
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #199  
Old Posted Jul 11, 2017, 1:50 AM
James_Mac's Avatar
James_Mac James_Mac is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Lakeshore East
Posts: 166


Note that they've visually separated the two hotels and the apartments. Above the podium, the part with the distinct lines on the left is one hotel, the part with the distinct grid is another, and then the apartments are the bits with balconies above that. Also, a little hard to tell, but the apartment part sticks out over the hotel part on the west and east.

EDIT: See below for details.

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #200  
Old Posted Jul 11, 2017, 1:51 AM
James_Mac's Avatar
James_Mac James_Mac is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Lakeshore East
Posts: 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by chicubs111 View Post
^ So wait im confused...is this the twin tower that was mentioned?..I thought there were 4 buildings to be shown during this presentation...Feel like only seen 3??
There are three on the corner lot and one on Block O. Two of the buildings on the corner lot look similar (and similarly unmemorable).
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 > Proposals
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 3:06 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.