CHICAGO | Highrise Projects & Construction, v7

[KWILLSKYLINE]

I like it. I think it will blend in well with the new modern looking museum across the street.
The real question is when is that horrendous Giordanos parking lot going to go, god that was a soar eye spot to see everytime I walked to Mr. Greeks.

[marothisu]

Why does nobody ever blame a developer for a dumbed down design? The developer is the client. For the life of me i don't understand how it's always an architects problem for a developer making them dumb down designs

[pilsenarch]

Originally Posted by marothisu

Why does nobody ever blame a developer for a dumbed down design? The developer is the client. For the life of me i don't understand how it's always an architects problem for a developer making them dumb down designs

Yes, in this case, that was exactly the issue... the very inexperienced developer kept on insisting on dumbing it down to save as much $ as possible...

[FrankLloydWrong]

Originally Posted by marothisu

Why does nobody ever blame a developer for a dumbed down design? The developer is the client. For the life of me i don't understand how it's always an architects problem for a developer making them dumb down designs

1000x This^. As someone that works in the design world, I can't tell you how many times a client has ruined a good design. Design doesn't happen in a vacuum. It starts and stops with the client. If the client is willing to pay for good design, then good design is what you get.

[the urban politician]

The parking is already low, but I wonder if they could have gone lower being that this is a TOD

[emathias]

Renovation of 676 N Lasalle in the foreground, with the Ed Dubevick's and Gino's East towers in the right rear.

[LouisVanDerWright]

This book is getting rediculous, particularly in the West Loop which will never become an extension of downtown or a good place to locate major corporate offices at any point in the near future. Clearly Sam was right about that.

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by FrankLloydWrong

1000x This^. As someone that works in the design world, I can't tell you how many times a client has ruined a good design. Design doesn't happen in a vacuum. It starts and stops with the client. If the client is willing to pay for good design, then good design is what you get.

Originally Posted by pilsenarch

Yes, in this case, that was exactly the issue... the very inexperienced developer kept on insisting on dumbing it down to save as much $ as possible...

I have a few architect friends who have told me this many times. In fact even the clients who have the money end up sometimes wanting various aspects dumbed down a little bit. I've seen my friends' work and the progression starting with something awesome and at the end the client wants something very mediocre.

I worked as a consultant for many years until fairly recently - but I still work with consultants. Although it wasn't for architecture or building, I know that it's all controlled by similar forces. A lot of that is economics, budget, margins, etc. Can't tell you how many times I've been on things that have had to be dumbed down only because the company who's paying for the work didn't want to take a risk, or couldn't afford it, or implementing what we suggested would not hit within their timeline. I've also been in on work many times where the stuff being implemented is far below the actual potential skill set of who is working on it. But at the end of the day, it's who is paying. Firms can only do so much, but at the end of the day it's up to the person paying for the work to sign off on it. It's also really common to have a client who has no idea about most of the things they hired a firm to do and then still tell that firm they're wrong and not want to listen to them.

I just for the life of me will never understand people giving an architecture firm crap and never the developer. Especially in this case - we all know that BKL is capable of good architecture. It should be blatantly obvious it's the developer at fault for having a mediocre design. It's kind of crazy how many people actually think somebody like an architecture firm takes no direction from a developer on something funded mostly by a developer. There's only so much you can do without pissing off a client and them abandoning you.

[pilsenarch]

Originally Posted by marothisu

I have a few architect friends who have told me this many times. In fact even the clients who have the money end up sometimes wanting various aspects dumbed down a little bit. I've seen my friends' work and the progression starting with something awesome and at the end the client wants something very mediocre.

I worked as a consultant for many years until fairly recently - but I still work with consultants. Although it wasn't for architecture or building, I know that it's all controlled by similar forces. A lot of that is economics, budget, margins, etc. Can't tell you how many times I've been on things that have had to be dumbed down only because the company who's paying for the work didn't want to take a risk, or couldn't afford it, or implementing what we suggested would not hit within their timeline. I've also been in on work many times where the stuff being implemented is far below the actual potential skill set of who is working on it. But at the end of the day, it's who is paying. Firms can only do so much, but at the end of the day it's up to the person paying for the work to sign off on it. It's also really common to have a client who has no idea about most of the things they hired a firm to do and then still tell that firm they're wrong and not want to listen to them.

I just for the life of me will never understand people giving an architecture firm crap and never the developer. Especially in this case - we all know that BKL is capable of good architecture. It should be blatantly obvious it's the developer at fault for having a mediocre design. It's kind of crazy how many people actually think somebody like an architecture firm takes no direction from a developer on something funded mostly by a developer. There's only so much you can do without pissing off a client and them abandoning you.

marthisu, this is all correct... the only thing that I would add is that like any other halfway-decent professional, one of the most important jobs an architect has to perform is education... of course, this can be challenging with a developer client that just wants you to shut up and crank out the drawings (block 37 being my best example of total developer fail)... the other depressing thing is how many architects don't even try to educate, either because of a lack of will or talent...

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by KWILLSKYLINE

I like it. I think it will blend in well with the new modern looking museum across the street.
The real question is when is that horrendous Giordanos parking lot going to go, god that was a soar eye spot to see everytime I walked to Mr. Greeks.

I think the new Circle Interchange flyover ramp will crimp any development on this parcel for the foreseeable future. Really the best play here would be office... take advantage of Blue Line access and UIC partnerships. Maybe academic space for UIC? Dorms might work too.

[J_M_Tungsten]

Today

Northwestern, I believe


I forget about this one. Turned out nice




465 N. Park

[spyguy]

The developers of 171 N Abderdeen are a proposing a new 20 story building across the street at 166 N Abderdeen.

236 apartments, 80 parking spots (although no parking is required), 5,000 sf retail. Architect is SCB.

Meeting info:
WEDNESDAY, APRIL 26, 2017 6PM-7:30PM
CATALYST RANCH
656 W. RANDOLPH

[Randomguy34]

NOWL wrote a blog post a few months back about the project. No images we included, but there wasn't really any disdain for the project

On Monday, January 09, 2017, architects Gary Kohn, Vladimir Andrejevic, and Basil Souder of SCB (Solomon Cordwell Buenz) along with Todd Mullen and Michael Lerner of MCZ Development presented a proposed 20-story (~238 ft.) residential and retail building for the property at 166 N. Aberdeen – formerly Fabbri Sausage Manufacturing .... The structure façade proposed for 166 N. Aberdeen would consist of brick, glass, and “architectural panels”. The structure features an opposing-angled setback and green-space at the podium level. .... Proposed amenities include a pool, roof deck, sky garden, 1,100 square foot dog run, exercise room and club room.

Committee Feedback
- Architecture – the proposed angled set-back design was viewed positively as a unique aesthetic feature. Positive comments were also heard regarding the green space “Sky Garden”. However, unanimously, the group voiced concern for the building height, suggesting, instead, that the building height not exceed 150 feet (the approximate height of the building at 1000 W. Fulton -a.k.a. The Google Building).
- Residential Units – it was noted that the plan does not include 3-bedroom units and that, generally, the area does not have adequate residential offerings for families.
- Traffic Study – the group is interested in the results of the K.L.O.A. traffic study and the subsequent plans to address local traffic flow issues.

http://neighborsofwestloop.com/166-n-aberdeen/

[ChiHi]

Is the Red Roof Inn in Streeterville getting torn down as part of the construction next door? Saw it was all boarded up and fenced off this morning. Although not an iconic building or anything it's at least one of the few buildings left in the area with some character to it at street level.

[Rizzo]

Originally Posted by ChiHi

Is the Red Roof Inn in Streeterville getting torn down as part of the construction next door? Saw it was all boarded up and fenced off this morning. Although not an iconic building or anything it's at least one of the few buildings left in the area with some character to it at street level.

Total renovation of the building starting March 1st according to their website. Nothing should change on the exterior

[emathias]

They broke ground on 675 N Wells this morning.

[KWILLSKYLINE]

Originally Posted by emathias

They broke ground on 675 N Wells this morning.

Glad another parking lot and two billboards bites the dust. It's a shame 800 n. wells got cancelled. I know alot of folks here didn't care for it but, I personally think it would have been a great addition to this Wells street boom thats happening right now. Driving down last friday, north Wells is turning into it's own little mini high-rise canyon. I hope they keep developing that area.

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by KWILLSKYLINE

Glad another parking lot and two billboards bites the dust. It's a shame 800 n. wells got cancelled. I know alot of folks here didn't care for it but, I personally think it would have been a great addition to this Wells street boom thats happening right now. Driving down last friday, north Wells is turning into it's own little mini high-rise canyon. I hope they keep developing that area.

Well, something will get built there. It already has zoning entitlements.

I also look forward to some of the densification going on in Old Town, also on Wells St.

[BuildThemTaller]

Originally Posted by KWILLSKYLINE

Glad another parking lot and two billboards bites the dust. It's a shame 800 n. wells got cancelled. I know alot of folks here didn't care for it but, I personally think it would have been a great addition to this Wells street boom thats happening right now. Driving down last friday, north Wells is turning into it's own little mini high-rise canyon. I hope they keep developing that area.

That's great news about 675 N Wells. It's another parking lot gone and it will partially hide that beige terribleness next to the HoJo Tower.

I find it hard to imagine that 808 N Wells will last long as an empty lot. It's right next to the L and in one of the hottest development areas of the city. Does anyone know what the existing zoning is on that place? How high could a new proposal go as-of-right?

[maru2501]

pretty close to Franklin being the new frontier