HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Buildings & Architecture > Never Built & Visionary Projects > Cancelled Project Threads Archive

    

740 North Rush in the SkyscraperPage Database

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

 

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #81  
Old Posted Mar 11, 2017, 1:31 AM
ithakas's Avatar
ithakas ithakas is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 734
He wants it killed because he feels there's too much traffic in the area, and I want it killed because there's too little historic character and scale in the area.

But we all want this proposal to be killed, so why argue?

This proposal represents the worst aspects of development in Chicago – too little regard for preservation, too little regard for street level presence.

I wonder if there's a smart way to incentivize minimal parking in the area covered by the Neighborhood Opportunity Fund bonus density program?

I love what TOD is doing for the neighborhoods, but at this point it seems like the area from Cermak to North, west to Halsted should be prohibitive to excess parking storage.
     
     
  #82  
Old Posted Mar 11, 2017, 1:41 AM
munchymunch's Avatar
munchymunch munchymunch is offline
MPLSXCHI
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Omicron Persei 8
Posts: 1,025
I don't want Reilly to look back at this thinking it was because it was the congestion. I hope this doesn't become a running theme of these proposals being blocked because of whining residents who don't want to walk 5 blocks to work. I hope people make it clear that this should be blocked because it's lack of respect to historic buildings. There are still plenty of sites around here with lots of potential.
__________________
"I don't want to be interesting. I want to be good." -Ludwig Mies van der Rohe
     
     
  #83  
Old Posted Mar 11, 2017, 2:00 AM
the urban politician the urban politician is online now
The City
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Libertyville, IL
Posts: 13,145
Yeah I think we all agree the demo of the historic buildings plus the podium are nonstarters. Who cares about the old geezer NIMBYs, that's their battle to block it based on congestion.

But I would say that increased NIMBY pressure east of State can be thanked for all this development we've seen of the parking lots and 1 story buildings further west.
     
     
  #84  
Old Posted Mar 11, 2017, 3:43 AM
harryc's Avatar
harryc harryc is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Oak Park, Il
Posts: 8,449
This intricate piece of urban fabric will soon be lost to a bland uniform podium.

April 2014
__________________
Harry C --- Chicago rep for SkyRise Cities ---- My Flickr stream HRC_OakPark
The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either. B Franklin.
     
     
  #85  
Old Posted Mar 11, 2017, 12:10 PM
stylusx stylusx is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by ithakas View Post
He wants it killed because he feels there's too much traffic in the area, and I want it killed because there's too little historic character and scale in the area.

But we all want this proposal to be killed, so why argue?

This proposal represents the worst aspects of development in Chicago – too little regard for preservation, too little regard for street level presence.

I wonder if there's a smart way to incentivize minimal parking in the area covered by the Neighborhood Opportunity Fund bonus density program?

I love what TOD is doing for the neighborhoods, but at this point it seems like the area from Cermak to North, west to Halsted should be prohibitive to excess parking storage.
On THAT...we can agree.
     
     
  #86  
Old Posted Mar 11, 2017, 2:23 PM
pilsenarch pilsenarch is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 624
No, you don't agree with that. You've stated in the past, in classic NIMBY fashion, that we need more parking, not less...

anyway, the complete ignorance of urban planning and city development that you always project in your once every few year statements worrying about the horrors of congestion outside your downtown condo and your, most likely, concern over losing your views, is not only tiresome but dangerous in its misinformation spewing...
     
     
  #87  
Old Posted Mar 11, 2017, 2:27 PM
the urban politician the urban politician is online now
The City
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Libertyville, IL
Posts: 13,145
^ Some people either didn't get the memo or are in denial of the fact that adding more parking increases congestion.

But that is what happens when NIMBYs decide that they can be do-it-yourself urban planners, and that they know better than the experts.
     
     
  #88  
Old Posted Mar 11, 2017, 3:49 PM
stylusx stylusx is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by pilsenarch View Post
No, you don't agree with that. You've stated in the past, in classic NIMBY fashion, that we need more parking, not less...

anyway, the complete ignorance of urban planning and city development that you always project in your once every few year statements worrying about the horrors of congestion outside your downtown condo and your, most likely, concern over losing your views, is not only tiresome but dangerous in its misinformation spewing...
Actually, my view wouldn't be affected at all. Also, I walk everywhere in the City and the driving part is only an observation as well. Alderman Reilly, in 2014 discussed/opined that the lack of parking would force people to use public transportation. I don't see that happening. I do see more taxi activity and huge volumes of Uber traffic more than making up for the additional cars that parking would attract.

One big factor discussed the last time this proposal came up is ...where will the taxis and cars queue up? It would require a cut out (curb cut) that has not been allowed in that area. (in the past several years, condos have had their curb cut requests denied...even for handicapped access)

Now you may call that "misinformation spewing?" But these are simple facts and considerations that have nixed this project before. We'll see. The ad hominem stuff is the only tiresome thing here.
     
     
  #89  
Old Posted Mar 11, 2017, 8:23 PM
Kumdogmillionaire's Avatar
Kumdogmillionaire Kumdogmillionaire is offline
Development Shill
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Chicago
Posts: 394
This building is pretty mediocre in design, and in being built tears down some wonderful historical buildings. I say "death to this project!" please
__________________
For you - Bane
     
     
  #90  
Old Posted Mar 13, 2017, 10:56 PM
BVictor1's Avatar
BVictor1 BVictor1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 8,836
SOM are the architects
__________________
titanic1
     
     
  #91  
Old Posted Mar 13, 2017, 10:58 PM
BVictor1's Avatar
BVictor1 BVictor1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 8,836
Giordano's Building at 740 Rush stays

The Carillon is the name of the tower.
__________________
titanic1
     
     
  #92  
Old Posted Mar 13, 2017, 11:25 PM
harryc's Avatar
harryc harryc is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Oak Park, Il
Posts: 8,449
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVictor1 View Post
Giordano's Building at 740 Rush stays

The Carillon is the name of the tower.
Facade only - right ?
__________________
Harry C --- Chicago rep for SkyRise Cities ---- My Flickr stream HRC_OakPark
The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either. B Franklin.
     
     
  #93  
Old Posted Mar 13, 2017, 11:29 PM
rlw777 rlw777 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 1,294
Images from DNAinfo's @DavidLMatthews on twitter







     
     
  #94  
Old Posted Mar 13, 2017, 11:29 PM
BVictor1's Avatar
BVictor1 BVictor1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 8,836
Quote:
Originally Posted by harryc View Post
Facade only - right ?
The east-west 5 bays stay.
__________________
titanic1
     
     
  #95  
Old Posted Mar 13, 2017, 11:30 PM
munchymunch's Avatar
munchymunch munchymunch is offline
MPLSXCHI
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Omicron Persei 8
Posts: 1,025
edit: Posted above


I Like it.
__________________
"I don't want to be interesting. I want to be good." -Ludwig Mies van der Rohe
     
     
  #96  
Old Posted Mar 13, 2017, 11:32 PM
chicubs111 chicubs111 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 853
I take back everything that was said..build it!... a lesson for us to not judge from just 1 picture
     
     
  #97  
Old Posted Mar 13, 2017, 11:35 PM
Halsted & Villagio Halsted & Villagio is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 40
Was there any discussion of the row homes?.... either a) building around them, or b) moving them?

Or is their fate pretty much sealed by an inevitable date with the wrecking ball?


Btw, I do like the new renders.


.
     
     
  #98  
Old Posted Mar 13, 2017, 11:43 PM
BVictor1's Avatar
BVictor1 BVictor1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 8,836
__________________
titanic1
     
     
  #99  
Old Posted Mar 13, 2017, 11:54 PM
BVictor1's Avatar
BVictor1 BVictor1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 8,836
Quote:
Originally Posted by Halsted & Villagio View Post
Was there any discussion of the row homes?.... either a) building around them, or b) moving them?

Or is their fate pretty much sealed by an inevitable date with the wrecking ball?


Btw, I do like the new renders.


.
Fate sealed
__________________
titanic1
     
     
  #100  
Old Posted Mar 14, 2017, 12:01 AM
LouisVanDerWright LouisVanDerWright is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 3,509
Wow, that's much more interesting than the initial images suggested. What is the purpose of the encasing trellis structure? Is that to mask an armada of balconies? Quite interesting.
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
 

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Buildings & Architecture > Never Built & Visionary Projects > Cancelled Project Threads Archive
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 5:34 PM.

     

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