CHICAGO | River Point | 730 FT | 52 FLOORS - Page 42

lawfin · #**821** Posted **Apr 26, 2012, 8:20 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

i don't know, if they can actually get it built at 650', then that's pretty par for the course for major office towers in chicago over the past 2 decades.

major office towers since 1993:

300 North LaSalle - 785 ft
Blue Cross Blue Shield - 743 ft
111 South Wacker Drive - 681 ft
Hyatt Center - 679 ft
UBS Tower - 651 ft
155 North Wacker - 638 ft
353 North Clark - 624 ft
Citadel Center - 580 ft
1 South Dearborn - 571 ft
191 North Wacker Drive - 516 ft
ABN AMRO Plaza I - 453 ft

Yeah it would fall squarely in the middle there. I don't know I guess just the render struck me as sort of stout.

emathias · #**822** Posted **Apr 26, 2012, 8:24 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by i_am_hydrogen

The outdoor area surrounding the building is intriguing. It has the potential to create new pathways and vantage points on the city in the same vein as Trump Tower.

I like the new train cars, too. :-)

Seriously, though, why does the parks area need to be elevated so far above the level of Lake Street? It looks like it's almost 10 feet above the Lake Street grade.

jc5680 · #**823** Posted **Apr 26, 2012, 8:54 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by emathias

Seriously, though, why does the parks area need to be elevated so far above the level of Lake Street? It looks like it's almost 10 feet above the Lake Street grade.

Depends on what your are looking at. The model(?) looks like it is above grade, but the rendering below has it at grade-and even connecting with lake.

Buckman821 · #**824** Posted **Apr 26, 2012, 8:57 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jc5680

but the rendering below has it at grade-and even connecting with lake.

No. I think you are just failing to perceive that significant flight of stairs because it is head on. This is definitely draw back. Furthermore the tower definitely doesn't look as nice as it did in the last go round.

Having said all that, the optimism is palpable. After all the talk of these potential office starts, and Waterview and Staybridge springing back to life, several cranes all over downtown...feels good man.

EDIT: I guess it depends what you mean by "connecting" but i dont see any incongruities. To me it seems that both views show only a small stretch (maybe 25-30 ft) connecting while most of Lake will be greeted with a big blank wall. Right next to that connecting stretch there will be a flight of stairs which heads up to the west and a long ramp which heads up to the east.

Steely Dan · #**825** Posted **Apr 26, 2012, 9:01 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jc5680

Depends on what your are looking at. The model(?) looks like it is above grade, but the rendering below has it at grade-and even connecting with lake.

good catch, there do appear to be some incongruities between the rendering and the model with regards to how the plaza relates to the elevation of lake street. my guess is that the rendering is cheating via some escher-esque illusion.

emathias · #**826** Posted **Apr 26, 2012, 9:03 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Buckman821

... and Staybridge springing back to life, ...

Do you know something? I hadn't heard anything was actually started there.

Buckman821 · #**827** Posted **Apr 26, 2012, 9:11 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by emathias

Do you know something? I hadn't heard anything was actually started there.

I don't want to derail the thread but the noteholder recently announced that he cleared all the claims and now holds full title and expects delivery in 2013, but no, nothing has started.

scalziand · #**828** Posted **Apr 26, 2012, 10:40 PM**

It's disappointing how little the new plaza design addresses the riverwalk.

The older plan actually integrated the riverwalk in a pleasing way. Did it have to be cut because of the Metra tracks?

Ch.G, Ch.G · #**829** Posted **Apr 27, 2012, 12:02 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by emathias

Seriously, though, why does the parks area need to be elevated so far above the level of Lake Street? It looks like it's almost 10 feet above the Lake Street grade.

It looks like a huge podium. Ugh. These have got to stop.

ChiPhi · #**830** Posted **Apr 27, 2012, 12:19 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by scalziand

It's disappointing how little the new plaza design addresses the riverwalk.

The older plan actually integrated the riverwalk in a pleasing way. Did it have to be cut because of the Metra tracks?

It looks like the old design had more green space at river level while this one has more at the building level. It is really hard to tell what is going on with this weird rendering. Also, can anyone tell what is going on with that space towards the bottom right. It looks like it might be some retail. Given the success that Trump has had with his river walk retail, I highly doubt that.

The biggest loss is the loss of the secondary building to the North of the main building that would have made the end of the river nicer...

2PRUROCKS! · #**831** Posted **Apr 27, 2012, 12:28 AM**

Wow, alot of negativity for what I think is one of the best proposals out right now. I will agree that I like the orginal height better, but this will still be the tallest building west of the river by 50ft! The model and rendering don't totally match up as others have said. It will be interesting to see how it actally gets flushed out. This is my favorite office proposal in a long time.

ChiPhi · #**832** Posted **Apr 27, 2012, 12:42 AM**

^^^
Thanks for putting this in perspective. It is probably my favorite proposal out there right now...

ardecila · #**833** Posted **Apr 27, 2012, 12:46 AM**

This is a very confusing move... why would Hines revive an old, failed proposal when they are retained by the Kennedys to develop the much more prominent Wolf Point that is literally a stone's throw away?

This says two things:
1) Hines thinks leasing at 444 West Lake will be easier, probably because of its location near the Metra stations.
2) Hines does not foresee office leasing at Wolf Point anytime soon, and will move forward the residential and/or hotel parts of that project.

3 (Maybe) A pedestrian bridge on the alignment from the Burnham Plan is a faint (instead of nonexistent) possibility. The elevated plaza is already essentially a bridge approach.

ChiPhi · #**834** Posted **Apr 27, 2012, 1:19 AM**

^^^
I'm going to guess Hines is simply trying to put its beak in as many places as possible. They must figure the more options for possible tenants, the better.

Anyways, this was never a "failed" proposal, but a stale proposal. It seems Hines was just sitting on the place until they could find a tenant; now they've rescaled it to make it seem like a better option.

ardecila · #**835** Posted **Apr 27, 2012, 1:36 AM**

I'd say it failed; Hines had TWO big anchor tenants on the line (William Blair and Baker McKenzie) but couldn't seal the deal, even with 2/3 of the space fully leased. You can't ask for a better situation than that.

ChiPhi · #**836** Posted **Apr 27, 2012, 1:53 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila

I'd say it failed; Hines had TWO big anchor tenants on the line (William Blair and Baker McKenzie) but couldn't seal the deal, even with 2/3 of the space fully leased. You can't ask for a better situation than that.

You can ask for a better situation than the two anchor tenants backing out

... I'm just kidding. This is all semantics anyways. Point is, they have revived the project from whatever state it was in (stale or failed) and now we get to salivate and hope it gets built...

BraveNewWorld · #**837** Posted **Apr 27, 2012, 2:03 AM**

Guys please tell me this is getting built, i absolutely love this building. It looks like this proposal was revived, what have you heard so far ?

untitledreality · #**838** Posted **Apr 27, 2012, 4:13 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChiPhi

The biggest loss is the loss of the secondary building to the North of the main building that would have made the end of the river nicer...

I believe that was always a "Phase II" option for this project... which considering the podium and the tower have essentially remained unchanged, should mean that a second tower could still be a future possibility.

emathias · #**839** Posted **Apr 27, 2012, 4:36 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila

...
3 (Maybe) A pedestrian bridge on the alignment from the Burnham Plan is a faint (instead of nonexistent) possibility. The elevated plaza is already essentially a bridge approach.[/I]

I've thought for a long time that the City needs to make Canal raised between Lake and Kinzie. If that happened, then an elevated podium might be able to be integrated. I also think the City should make a bridge between Wolf Point and Canal. I always envisioned it over the railroad tracks going due west as an extension of the Mart Drive, but I guess it would make more sense to connect to Fulton since Fulton actually is a real street that connects to the grid already. That'd be a lot more than a pedestrian bridge, but both that area and Wolf Point would realistically need more more, better roadways to prevent total chaos - Kinzie by itself can't handle existing traffic, let alone new traffic generated by K station and this building and Wolf Point. At a minimum, the City will need to connect Clinton to Grand and turn at least one lane of the Orleans bridge southbound.

Alliance · #**840** Posted **Apr 27, 2012, 4:45 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila

I'd say it failed; Hines had TWO big anchor tenants on the line (William Blair and Baker McKenzie) but couldn't seal the deal, even with 2/3 of the space fully leased. You can't ask for a better situation than that.

You can ask for the global economy not to be collapsing...you know...to get a loan?