CHICAGO | Highrise Projects & Construction, v7

[Jibba]

Originally Posted by Via Chicago

again, how flippantly one of the only remaining post fire buildings in the loop can be dismissed is beyond me

Don't presume that I'm being flippant--I'm looking at this discerningly. I can only see it having value as an emblem of post-fire initiative, but that's dubious. It isn't particularly architecturally significant, and, as the article you linked to notes, it was built quickly and cheaply. We often deride the hasty results of scrappy, opportunistic developers today; what makes this one any different, aside from it being old? Were it the oldest extant building in the Loop, it would be distinct, and only for that attribute (in which case, it would be very much worthy of preservation).

[Via Chicago]

Originally Posted by Jibba

Don't presume that I'm being flippant--I'm looking at this discerningly. I can only see it having value as an emblem of post-fire initiative, but that's dubious. It isn't particularly architecturally significant, and, as the article you linked to notes, it was built quickly and cheaply. We often deride the hasty results of scrappy, opportunistic developers today; what makes this one any different, aside from it being old? Were it the oldest extant building in the Loop, it would be distinct, and only for that attribute (in which case, it would be very much worthy of preservation).

quick and cheap is not a demerit by itself. the fact that it is still standing and structurally sound 150 years later is a testament to that. if we can still say that about the cheap schlock going up today in the same amount of time than i guess we can have that debate.

i find it elegant, brooding, and a reminder of the old Chicago which is all too rapidly being thrown under the bus. it contributes to the fine grained street level experience. does a building need to be a landmark to consider it worthy of appreciating? we have a city filled with thousands of 2 flats, bungalows, and other similar type "workers cottages". they werent built for nobility, they were built for the everyday working man. are they not worthy of our respect? are those not the types of buildings and architecture Chicago for so long prided itself on?

yes, something happens to a building when it is allowed to age. it gains character. and theres no way to fake it, it takes time. and the way buildings from this era weather is distinctly different than the way glass and steel modern construction does. one gets better. the other does not.

frankly there is no need for ANY vintage building to be demolished in this city given what we have to work with, and how rare and distinctive what we have is from the rest of the United States, and the world for that matter. if we keep it up however we will not have much left to distinctly call our own.

[SolarWind]

December 8, 2015

[SolarWind]

December 8, 2015

[maru2501]

thanks for the updates, solarwind. A lot of these in the current crop are going to have a nice impact on their areas

[Near North Resident]

Originally Posted by r18tdi

Thanks for the info re: 167 N. Wells.

Next is looking pretty bad (well, even worse) with the glass going in. Are the ceilings like 7" or something?

probably a little higher than 7 inches

[SolarWind]

December 8, 2015







^ In the backgroud, Next at 347 West Chestnut and 750 N Hudson's tower crane

[SolarWind]

December 8, 2015

[SolarWind]

December 8, 2015

[SolarWind]

December 8, 2015

[the urban politician]

Regarding Ed Debevic's and the Gino's project, it will be pretty neat to see 2 skyscrapers going up right across the street from eachother. Talk about an instant canyon!

I wonder what it was like to walk around the Loop in the late 19th century and just see so much transformation so fast. Despite how much things are booming of late, I don't think anything we are witnessing now would compare to that.

[maru2501]

^does either have ground floor restaurant space?

[LouisVanDerWright]

Via, I don't necessarily disagree with what you are saying except for this:

Originally Posted by Via Chicago

and the way buildings from this era weather is distinctly different than the way glass and steel modern construction does. one gets better. the other does not.

You are falling into a similar thought pattern to the one you are arguing against. There is merely a huge bias against buildings from the modern era because they tend to be either new or nearing the peak of their first depreciation cycle. The buildings that have been very well maintained from the modern era have no problem aging gracefully.

Evidence: Daley Center, IBM Building, 860-880, Hancock, Sears, Marina City, and even examples from the 80's and 90's like Swisshotel or 333 W Wacker.

I actually think of the Amalgamated Bank building as a fairly nice, fine grained, building of the modern era and hate the proposal that recently showed up here to deface it. If it's not going to be torn down for something bigger, then they should at least make an attempt at retaining the character of the original design. We will not be getting any more Amalgamated Bank buildings just as we aren't getting any more buildings like the one you are lamenting on Lake.

[LouisVanDerWright]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

Regarding Ed Debevic's and the Gino's project, it will be pretty neat to see 2 skyscrapers going up right across the street from eachother. Talk about an instant canyon!

I wonder what it was like to walk around the Loop in the late 19th century and just see so much transformation so fast. Despite how much things are booming of late, I don't think anything we are witnessing now would compare to that.

I don't know, this boom is becoming a lot more interesting than the last one. It's not about the glamour projects, it's about the rapid transformation on the small scale. There are entire parts of town that I would hardly recognize 5 years ago already. There are 3 or 4 big four or five floor buildings under construction on formerly vacant lots along the Kennedy. There are skyscrapers going up at Fullerton and California. Not just a one off or something, but multiple mid rises under construction along Milwaukee Ave from Fullerton in to downtown.

The breadth of this boom is becoming overwhelming and rates are still going to stay relatively low for what looks like years at this point. Obviously things are starting to get a bit frothy, but there is also a real demographic need here given the unique size and position of the Millennial age group. I'm already just as interested in the crop of skyscrapers (which have a generally higher quality than the last boom of beige boxes) in this boom as the last despite the smaller size and impact of the previous crop. There are a lot of buildings going up in locations that were almost unheard of before. That is very interesting and I think much more like the growth patterns that we only saw once before: when the city was first constructed. We are not confined to the North Side and very core of downtown anymore. There are vast tracts of land to gobble up immediately proximate to the CBD and the market is dealing with that supply at a much quicker rate over a much larger area than before. Like I said, when you have multiple skyscrapers proposed and under construction in freaking Logan Square, you know something is up. What would you have thought of that if someone said that would happen even 7 years ago? They'd be laughed at.

[sentinel]

Stellar photo tour, SolarWind - thank you.

[J_M_Tungsten]

Originally Posted by SolarWind

December 8, 2015

Difficult to process all of the photos! Nice work SW!

What's up with the concrete perimeter on this one?

[Rizzo]

^ Strange. I'm curious as well.

[BrinChi]

Originally Posted by Ned.B

An 18 story Viceroy Hotel by Goettsch Partners. The Cedar Hotel facade is being disassembled and stored, and will be reconstructed as the podium for the new building.

I just can't believe it's more efficient to do it this way. These people must be really good at puzzles.

[UrbanLibertine]

All of these projects seem to be cruising except Walton, which is moving at a snail's pace.

[ithakas]

Originally Posted by UrbanLibertine

All of these projects seem to be cruising except Walton, which is moving at a snail's pace.

From my understanding 9 Walton is building underground parking, which could explain both the long timeline on getting above ground and the concrete perimeter (only tracking construction in Chicago I'm not sure on these points – don't think I've seen a project with underground parking since I started following).