HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > General Development

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #13541  
Old Posted Oct 3, 2011, 4:06 PM
i_am_hydrogen i_am_hydrogen is offline
tilted & shifted
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 4,531
Hayward - You rule. Thanks.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13542  
Old Posted Oct 3, 2011, 4:18 PM
george's Avatar
george george is offline
dream fast
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: east village, chicago
Posts: 3,274
Great updates, Hayward, thanks for those. That was quite a bike hike.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13543  
Old Posted Oct 3, 2011, 4:32 PM
Nowhereman1280 Nowhereman1280 is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Pungent Onion, Illinois
Posts: 8,495
Quote:
Originally Posted by ardecila View Post
Tons of new residential units going into an area with serious gridlock = lots of new people on the Red Line and on the buses, or walking to where they need to go.
Bingo

Quote:
Originally Posted by Segun View Post
unfortunately developers haven't gotten the point.
Well what I am saying is that I think they are starting to. Just look at the Shops on Fremont or whatever it's called. They nixed the ground level parking. I'm willing to bet they realized it could take up to 20 minutes to get from one Side of the North/Clybourn clusterF*3k to another by car during rush and that no one is going to brave that to visit their store. It's only going to get worse as Sono East is finished and throws another 400 people or so into the mix every day and not to mention once Cabrini starts to redevelop in earnest and dumps a few thousand more people into the area.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13544  
Old Posted Oct 3, 2011, 6:08 PM
lawfin lawfin is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,697
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nowhereman1280 View Post
I don't really get why people think this area is that anti-urban. Sure it's no Armitage Ave, but aside from half a dozen medium sized parking lots and streets that really need a complete reconstruction (haven't been improved from their industrial state), it's not really that bad. There is probably many times more parking spaces per store along Michigan Ave than there is along North Ave. With the new developments going in that lack any significant amount of surface parking and filling in a lot of open lots / lowrise industrial buildings, the area will really begin to take on the dense, vibrant, feel that attracts more highrises a la Sono.
I hope you are right and I am wrong. But when I see this at the corner

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=North%...=12,52.93,,0,0


and this type stuff up the street

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=North%...1,273.1,,0,4.8

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=North%...11,294.13,,0,0

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=North%...=11,263.2,,0,0

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=North%...&cbp=11,0,,0,0

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=North%...=11,57.82,,0,0


I get the rage inside about at best delayed opportunity and at worst lost opportunity. If thos examples would go midrise ~4-7 stories or so it would go along way to being more urban and I think better for the city as well
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13545  
Old Posted Oct 3, 2011, 6:37 PM
lawfin lawfin is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,697
Quote:
Originally Posted by Segun View Post
Yes, calling it completely suburban is a mistake, similar to calling Los Angeles suburban. Its way too dense and busy to be compared to Skokie. As a transit user who worked near Old Orchard at one time, I was one of maybe 4 pedestrians per day who walked the sidewalks over there. There is steady stream of pedestrians near North and Clybourn, unfortunately developers haven't gotten the point.
Well I was focusing on the built form of particular areas not the surrounding neighborhoods. Clearly the areas surrounding North / Clybourn are much denser etc than surrounding skokie. I don't think I characterized the area as completely suburban. Nonetheless the built form of those certain highrise parcels resemble one another; they both lack what some of called the fine grained character that goes a long way to establishing what I think most on this board would characterize as urban.

The more recent development around North / Clybourn has been much better that development 15-10 years ago I really hope that trajectory continues and the area does develop into a full blown urban district
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13546  
Old Posted Oct 3, 2011, 7:11 PM
Nowhereman1280 Nowhereman1280 is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Pungent Onion, Illinois
Posts: 8,495
Quote:
Originally Posted by lawfin View Post
I hope you are right and I am wrong. But when I see this at the corner

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=North%...=12,52.93,,0,0


and this type stuff up the street

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=North%...1,273.1,,0,4.8

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=North%...11,294.13,,0,0

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=North%...=11,263.2,,0,0

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=North%...&cbp=11,0,,0,0

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=North%...=11,57.82,,0,0


I get the rage inside about at best delayed opportunity and at worst lost opportunity. If thos examples would go midrise ~4-7 stories or so it would go along way to being more urban and I think better for the city as well
I agree, but a lot of those buildings were built when this was still a risky area of the city to invest in. I look at those strip malls as future parcels just waiting for a nice midrise or even highrise to be built on them. Same goes for several of the vacant lots and parking lots you've highlighted, they are just waiting for future development. The supply of open land here is rapidly dwindling at which point the owners of these blighting properties will cash in and tear down the strip mall for the new highest and best use of the land.

And, as much as I hate to admit it, those strip malls are partially responsible for creating the critical mass that has attracted such a dense retail scene in the area. At least they aren't condo lots with deeded parking where they can never be removed.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13547  
Old Posted Oct 4, 2011, 2:53 AM
EarlyBuyer's Avatar
EarlyBuyer EarlyBuyer is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Chicago
Posts: 885
Great update Hayward, thanks for the shots!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13548  
Old Posted Oct 4, 2011, 11:27 AM
denizen467 denizen467 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,209
Awesome bike tour of the city, Hayward.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13549  
Old Posted Oct 4, 2011, 6:23 PM
spyguy's Avatar
spyguy spyguy is offline
THAT Guy
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 5,610
^Yeah, great updates and variety.

Pizza Hut replacement at Division and Ashland
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13550  
Old Posted Oct 4, 2011, 6:35 PM
nicksplace27 nicksplace27 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Chicago
Posts: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by spyguy View Post
^Yeah, great updates and variety.

Pizza Hut replacement at Division and Ashland


Really, for such forward thinking density, they had to draw up literally the shittiest rendering I have ever seen. This looks like was done on microsoft paint! With two shades of grey and thats it. Good luck convincing bucktown to approve more density if this is the final design.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13551  
Old Posted Oct 4, 2011, 7:03 PM
Nowhereman1280 Nowhereman1280 is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Pungent Onion, Illinois
Posts: 8,495
Since when does poor quality rendering = poor quality design?

I think the design of that is quite pleasing and a great fit for the neighborhood. Much better than a two story drive-in bank...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13552  
Old Posted Oct 4, 2011, 7:07 PM
BWChicago's Avatar
BWChicago BWChicago is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 480
Quote:
Originally Posted by nicksplace27 View Post


Really, for such forward thinking density, they had to draw up literally the shittiest rendering I have ever seen. This looks like was done on microsoft paint! With two shades of grey and thats it. Good luck convincing bucktown to approve more density if this is the final design.
I doubt it's final. The whole plan has been put together quite quickly. August 9 was when EVA made a statement against a single-story bank, then this idea popped up September 21, and it's two weeks after that. This can't be more than a placeholder.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13553  
Old Posted Oct 4, 2011, 7:53 PM
Buckman821's Avatar
Buckman821 Buckman821 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 427
I actually think that design is great. Way way WAY above average for Chicago neighborhood infill, which, as Nowhereman frequently points out, is generally piss poor.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13554  
Old Posted Oct 4, 2011, 8:59 PM
Nowhereman1280 Nowhereman1280 is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Pungent Onion, Illinois
Posts: 8,495
^^^ It's hard not to notice when everything they are building in Milwaukee looks like the rendering above...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13555  
Old Posted Oct 4, 2011, 9:30 PM
george's Avatar
george george is offline
dream fast
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: east village, chicago
Posts: 3,274
Quote:
Originally Posted by nicksplace27 View Post


Really, for such forward thinking density, they had to draw up literally the shittiest rendering I have ever seen. This looks like was done on microsoft paint! With two shades of grey and thats it. Good luck convincing bucktown to approve more density if this is the final design.
Thanks, spyguy, nice find? This is a b&w version of the original color rendering which is much more convincing. It's an early preliminary concept which will be refined down the road. It does represent the height, 79'11" and density.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13556  
Old Posted Oct 4, 2011, 10:11 PM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is offline
atomic
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: the city o'wind
Posts: 12,671
Quote:
Originally Posted by george View Post
Thanks, spyguy, nice find? This is a b&w version of the original color rendering which is much more convincing. It's an early preliminary concept which will be refined down the road. It does represent the height, 79'11" and density.
It's not a black and white image; the bollards in the lower right are yellow, and the curb ramps seem to be reddish. That means the monochrome on the building is intentional.

Personally, I've always preferred to do SketchUp renderings in the most subdued colors possible. It doesn't have a sophisticated rendering engine, so it renders materials in a really horrid cartoonish way. (Some people like the aesthetic, but I don't).

As for the design: bravo. Modern, but simple and unassuming. The little notch on the corner indicates the significance of the Division/Ashland intersection without resorting to crazy antics. Plus, the building somehow incorporates a drive-thru, but it seems to be extremely hidden.

MOAR PLZ
__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13557  
Old Posted Oct 4, 2011, 11:22 PM
J_M_Tungsten's Avatar
J_M_Tungsten J_M_Tungsten is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,304
It will balance out the western side of the street nicely.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13558  
Old Posted Oct 5, 2011, 12:31 AM
Hayward's Avatar
Hayward Hayward is offline
North Center
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 6,690
The rendering...or sketchup 3d view it appears has a monochrome feel to avoid people nitpicking at details this early in the game. It just gives basic info

Number of floors, lots of glazing, location of entrance. I'm sure we'll see updated views later on.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13559  
Old Posted Oct 5, 2011, 12:33 AM
Hayward's Avatar
Hayward Hayward is offline
North Center
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 6,690
Thanks all btw for the nice comments.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13560  
Old Posted Oct 5, 2011, 1:18 AM
Ch.G, Ch.G's Avatar
Ch.G, Ch.G Ch.G, Ch.G is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,138
Quote:
Originally Posted by ardecila View Post
As for the design: bravo. Modern, but simple and unassuming. The little notch on the corner indicates the significance of the Division/Ashland intersection without resorting to crazy antics. Plus, the building somehow incorporates a drive-thru, but it seems to be extremely hidden.

MOAR PLZ
THANK YOU. The only people who I imagine would take issue with the design are those who simply don't like the modernist aesthetic (according to which the design does everything right).
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 > General Development
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 5:14 AM.

     

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