HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > Highrise & Supertall Proposals

    

130 North Franklin in the SkyscraperPage Database

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

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #401  
Old Posted Feb 2, 2017, 9:43 PM
JK47 JK47 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skyguy_7 View Post
..crosspost..



130 would obviously be the best option here, with 110 N Wacker many years out considering it's occupied and demo duration and Sears upgrade at least two years from completion. 130 is only 2+ years out and it would be hard to ignore its aesthetic appeal, not to mention the BofA agreement would be large enough to perhaps get naming rights.

Willis Tower doesn't have any large blocks of contiguous space available for a year or two. We'd wanted to bring another 400 or so workers into the Tower and were looking to boost our space by another 100,000 or so square feet. There was zero availability within the next year or two for large contiguous spaces (so nothing north of 200,000) and the unoccupied spaces were not that attractive. If they're going to try and shoehorn 500,000 square feet worth of space into Willis Tower then it's going to likely be in scattered spaces unless they wait a few years for non-renewing tenants (not sure who, United is that largest tenant atm with about 900,000 square feet leased).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #402  
Old Posted Feb 3, 2017, 1:51 AM
BVictor1's Avatar
BVictor1 BVictor1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 8,605
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skyguy_7 View Post
..crosspost..



130 would obviously be the best option here, with 110 N Wacker many years out considering it's occupied and demo duration and Sears upgrade at least two years from completion. 130 is only 2+ years out and it would be hard to ignore its aesthetic appeal, not to mention the BofA agreement would be large enough to perhaps get naming rights.
Is 130 the best option? It all depends on when BofA leases expire.
__________________
titanic1
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #403  
Old Posted Feb 3, 2017, 2:03 AM
chicubs111 chicubs111 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 833
wasn't it someone on this forum that mentioned that 130 had a tenant lined up like 3 months ago but we never knew exactly who it was?.. It seemed that 130 was pretty much a go by all means?... I feel like it has dropped a bit in the confidence scale...just a tad
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #404  
Old Posted Feb 3, 2017, 2:12 AM
Kngkyle Kngkyle is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Chicago/New York
Posts: 2,063
Quote:
Originally Posted by chicubs111 View Post
wasn't it someone on this forum that mentioned that 130 had a tenant lined up like 3 months ago but we never knew exactly who it was?.. It seemed that 130 was pretty much a go by all means?... I feel like it has dropped a bit in the confidence scale...just a tad
It was mentioned that Sidley was close to signing a deal but they ended up just renewing their lease.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #405  
Old Posted Feb 3, 2017, 10:23 AM
KWILLSKYLINE's Avatar
KWILLSKYLINE KWILLSKYLINE is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Chicago
Posts: 476
So if these are the two main buildings future "major" tenants are considering, (this and 110 wacker), can we assume that wolf point is going on the back burner until the next cycle?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #406  
Old Posted Feb 3, 2017, 1:08 PM
BVictor1's Avatar
BVictor1 BVictor1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 8,605
Quote:
Originally Posted by KWILLSKYLINE View Post
So if these are the two main buildings future "major" tenants are considering, (this and 110 wacker), can we assume that wolf point is going on the back burner until the next cycle?
I don't think we can assume anything. Currently Wolf Point South isn't an option or active proposal.

Because that project is being phased, the next tower they're thinking about is the east building. We don't know the programatic makeup of the south tower at this point..
__________________
titanic1
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #407  
Old Posted Feb 3, 2017, 7:25 PM
SamInTheLoop SamInTheLoop is offline
you know where I'll be
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,684
One thing I've heard re 130 is that Tishman has been quite keen to go spec, but that the current arrangements it has with the lender/lender group it is currently working with are preventing it......
__________________
Post-Modern is Post-Mortem - Deal with it
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #408  
Old Posted Feb 3, 2017, 7:43 PM
TimeAgain TimeAgain is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by KWILLSKYLINE View Post
So if these are the two main buildings future "major" tenants are considering, (this and 110 wacker), can we assume that wolf point is going on the back burner until the next cycle?
Which Wolf Point? South? That's years off. East is what's next.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #409  
Old Posted Feb 3, 2017, 8:52 PM
the urban politician the urban politician is online now
The City
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Libertyville, IL
Posts: 12,595
Quote:
Originally Posted by SamInTheLoop View Post
One thing I've heard re 130 is that Tishman has been quite keen to go spec, but that the current arrangements it has with the lender/lender group it is currently working with are preventing it......
I am also planning to build a 700 ft tall skyscraper on spec.

....But alas my arrangement with lenders is also preventing it
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #410  
Old Posted Feb 3, 2017, 9:01 PM
Skyguy_7's Avatar
Skyguy_7 Skyguy_7 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,487
^Only 700? My 1,800' spec tower is in its final stages. Only pending loan, location, plans, tenants but I'm confident in it coming to fruition this cycle or next.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #411  
Old Posted Feb 3, 2017, 9:10 PM
Notyrview's Avatar
Notyrview Notyrview is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: New York City
Posts: 901
Mine would be in the east loop, 1400 ft, 70% affordable housing and designed by Jean Nouvel.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #412  
Old Posted Feb 3, 2017, 10:11 PM
UPChicago's Avatar
UPChicago UPChicago is offline
Vote for me for Mayor!
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Chicago
Posts: 566
Quote:
Originally Posted by Notyrview View Post
Mine would be in the east loop, 1400 ft, 70% affordable housing and designed by Jean Nouvel.
LOL I don't think that's how it works you guys are a mess
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #413  
Old Posted Feb 6, 2017, 4:27 PM
SamInTheLoop SamInTheLoop is offline
you know where I'll be
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,684
Quote:
Originally Posted by the urban politician View Post
I am also planning to build a 700 ft tall skyscraper on spec.

....But alas my arrangement with lenders is also preventing it

lol.

Yes, yes - mine too.

While I realize how that sounded, I suppose I should expound:

Tishman Speyer has other options here. Strong, Long-term relationships with specific banks and loan officers are important, though Tishman is a very large and experienced outfit. They presumably can take advantage of equity relationships to meaningfully boost total equity contribution and thus meaningfully reduce loan-to-value ratio. They can draw on a large amount of other debt sources that are out there and competing in the market - shop around at other traditional banks outside of the group they're working with, as well as foreign banks, debt funds, non-bank financial firms, etc. They could also launch the project on equity, with an eye toward arranging a loan partway through construction (closer to beginning than end), once they have landed an anchor - which may be easier once prospective anchors see the project physically progressing, and they're thus more confident in it, and the developer. Tishman has the means and the options to pull this off on spec if they really want to (if they don't in fact land a pre-construction anchor in the near-term). Whether they themselves are comfortable with the specific risk profile of that action is another matter. What I've also heard is that the bank/bank group they've been working with is taking into consideration some other spec projects elsewhere that they currently are working on....other prospective debt capital sources may not weight that factor as heavily......
__________________
Post-Modern is Post-Mortem - Deal with it
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #414  
Old Posted Mar 16, 2017, 1:42 AM
chicubs111 chicubs111 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 833
Im Starting to get a bit worried about this one ...Felt very confident that this would be able to land a tenant just seems like too much competition may been joining the market now... Just posted article about 110 North wacker tower possibly starting in October
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #415  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2017, 2:40 PM
rlw777 rlw777 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 1,220
I think 110 N Wacker and BofA just killed the chances of this one getting off the ground in the foreseeable future. I was really hoping to see this K&S design get built.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #416  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2017, 3:52 PM
KWILLSKYLINE's Avatar
KWILLSKYLINE KWILLSKYLINE is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Chicago
Posts: 476
Quote:
Originally Posted by rlw777 View Post
I think 110 N Wacker and BofA just killed the chances of this one getting off the ground in the foreseeable future. I was really hoping to see this K&S design get built.
Never say never, I'm sure there's still a bunch of mega-companies out there looking for a good chunk of a building. Especially one this good looking with alot of space avaiable with a great location.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #417  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2017, 11:25 PM
Kngkyle Kngkyle is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Chicago/New York
Posts: 2,063
Quote:
Originally Posted by rlw777 View Post
I think 110 N Wacker and BofA just killed the chances of this one getting off the ground in the foreseeable future. I was really hoping to see this K&S design get built.
The site is far too well located to sit vacant for another decade. Something will be built, it's just a question of what. The site is also huge.. they could easily build something - hotel/apartments/condos - on half of the site and still be able to build a 1m+ sqft office tower on the other half. I always thought the current proposal did a rather poor job at maximizing the sites potential. The tower itself only takes up 1/2 the space. The rest is wasted on a podium and some park space.
Reply With Quote
     
     
End
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > Highrise & Supertall Proposals
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 3:38 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.