CHICAGO | General Developments - Page 2153

harryc · #**43041** Posted **Oct 8, 2018, 2:29 AM**

Sept 26

harryc · #**43042** Posted **Oct 8, 2018, 1:59 PM**

Sept 28

Oct 3

r18tdi · #**43043** Posted **Oct 8, 2018, 5:00 PM**

I kinda like how Twelve01 just threw up its hands and decided not to go with the fake warehouse look. The design is lukewarm, but partial credit awarded for variety.

ChiShawn · #**43044** Posted **Oct 9, 2018, 6:03 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by marothisu

* 3647 N Southport (Southport & ~Waveland). 4 stories, 18 units with ground floor retail

If only they were knocking down the CVS next door instead. Terrible street presence.

King of Chicago · #**43045** Posted **Oct 9, 2018, 7:12 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by bnk

Any pics of this building yet?

https://www.chicagobusiness.com/comm...strict-gateway

October 05, 2018 06:00 AM |

Big office building planned for Fulton Market District gateway

Thor Equities wants to put a 20-story glass-and-steel office building on a full city block at the doorstep to the Fulton Market District.

Danny Ecker

Thor Equities recently bought the building that houses the Mid nightclub at the gateway to the Fulton Market District, completing a full city block ownership by the New York investor.

A New York investor wants to put a 20-story glass-and-steel office building on the doorstep to the Fulton Market District after acquiring the final piece of a full city block, according to sources familiar with the plans.

Thor Equities has shared a proposal with West Loop neighborhood groups for a roughly 400,000 square foot building spanning the entire block bounded by Fulton, Green, Halsted and Wayman Streets, sources said.

The Skidmore, Owings & Merrill-designed building would include about 350,000 square feet of offices, with the remainder used for retail that would likely feature a restaurant owned by country music group Rascal Flatts.

This sounds terrible...this block has a lot of fine-grained old brick building stock, which we would lose if they tear down the ENTIRE BLOCK.

Not to mention the tackiness of the "Rascall Flatts" country music group.

I hate to be a nimby, but this might be an actual moment where I have to join them....I also cant bear to lose the MID...great venue. Its losing these kind of establishments that causes what makes Chicago awesome to be lost.

LouisVanDerWright · #**43046** Posted **Oct 9, 2018, 8:25 PM**

^^^ I agree, go back to NYC you shitheads. This block should not be torn down...

marothisu · #**43047** Posted **Oct 9, 2018, 8:42 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

^^^ I agree, go back to NYC you shitheads. This block should not be torn down...

The fishmarket there (Isaacson) was actually good. It's too bad this has had to happen. Yeah it would be an increase of height, but at a loss of a few good businesses and entertainment. Though I think you'll find the residents of the neighborhood split about The Mid, but not the other stuff. Still, The Mid > Rascal Flatts.

tjp · #**43048** Posted **Oct 9, 2018, 8:55 PM**

Yeah, I feel like the Rascal Flatts thing is very bad for Fulton Markets' cool factor...

rgarri4 · #**43049** Posted **Oct 9, 2018, 9:20 PM**

I used to go to the MID like every weekend. Only venue to see the DJs I actually liked without children all over the place. So many good memories there. Really going to miss that place.

marothisu · #**43050** Posted **Oct 9, 2018, 9:22 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by rgarri4

I used to go to the MID like every weekend. Only venue to see the DJs I actually liked without children all over the place. So many good memories there. Really going to miss that place.

Luckily Smart Bar is still around, LOL. At least last time I went in late May it was awesome (because of the music)

mark0 · #**43051** Posted **Oct 9, 2018, 10:10 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

^^^ I agree, go back to NYC you shitheads. This block should not be torn down...

I think a huge part of the problem is that all money literally flows from the stroke of a pen in NYC now days, and you see it in every industry, almost everyone is now owned or partially owned by PE firms from NY or PE firms that lever borrowed funds from NY. It's a real problem IMHO for the greater economy to be so concentrated. The lack of regional banking diversity is a very bad thing long term.

Via Chicago · #**43052** Posted **Oct 9, 2018, 10:27 PM**

architecturally, the old Isaacson building is no loss. the ones to the West would be IMO. i would have thought the Fulton landmark district would have captured these, but appears not...

why were these not protected?? never even occurred to me they wouldnt have been

im against this project if it means losing those.

the urban politician · #**43053** Posted **Oct 9, 2018, 10:41 PM**

I think it’s fine if it’s all being replaced by such a huge project.

I think a lot of preservation has gone on and is still going on in this district. We do still need more density

Busy Bee · #**43054** Posted **Oct 9, 2018, 11:12 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by mark0

I think a huge part of the problem is that all money literally flows from the stroke of a pen in NYC now days, and you see it in every industry, almost everyone is now owned or partially owned by PE firms from NY or PE firms that lever borrowed funds from NY. It's a real problem IMHO for the greater economy to be so concentrated. The lack of regional banking diversity is a very bad thing long term.

Just because so many private equity firms are geographically located in NY doesn't seem so relevant to me, though I understand your concern. What do I know I could be wrong though.

harryc · #**43055** Posted **Oct 9, 2018, 11:40 PM**

Sept 26

Mr Downtown · #**43056** Posted **Oct 10, 2018, 12:06 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Via Chicago

why were these [prosaic warehouses] not protected??

Because you can only stretch the landmark criteria so far before you tumble into absurdity. Which of these criteria does this building exhibit?

(Critical Part of City’s Heritage) Its value as an example of the architectural, cultural, economic, historic, social, or other aspect of the heritage of the City of Chicago, State of Illinois, or the United States.

(Significant Historic Event) Its location as a site of a significant historic event which may or may not have taken place within or involved the use of any existing improvements.

(Significant Person) Its identification with a person or persons who significantly contributed to the architectural, cultural, economic, historic, social, or other aspect of the development of the City of Chicago, State of Illinois, or the United States.

(Important Architecture) Its exemplification of an architectural type or style distinguished by innovation, rarity, uniqueness, or overall quality of design, detail, materials, or craftsmanship.

(Important Architect) Its identification as the work of an architect, designer, engineer, or builder whose individual work is significant in the history or development of the City of Chicago, State of Illinois, or the United States.

(Distinctive Theme as a District) Its representation of an architectural, cultural, economic, historic, social or other theme expressed through distinctive area, districts, places, buildings, structures, works of art, or other objects that may or may not be contiguous.

(Unique Visual Feature) Its unique location or distinctive physical appearance or presence representing an established and familiar visual feature of a neighborhood, community, or the City of Chicago.

the urban politician · #**43057** Posted **Oct 10, 2018, 12:53 AM**

Interest rates are rising fast, folks. Just bumped 2 weeks ago, and a couple of more bumps along the way.

Pretty soon some recently announced projects just won't pencil in. I finally see a significant slow down to the boom on its way.

Of course, not a bad thing--a chance for a bit of absorption perhaps.

Via Chicago · #**43058** Posted **Oct 10, 2018, 1:41 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Downtown

Because you can only stretch the landmark criteria so far before you tumble into absurdity. Which of these criteria does this building exhibit?

(Critical Part of City’s Heritage) Its value as an example of the architectural, cultural, economic, historic, social, or other aspect of the heritage of the City of Chicago, State of Illinois, or the United States.

(Significant Historic Event) Its location as a site of a significant historic event which may or may not have taken place within or involved the use of any existing improvements.

(Significant Person) Its identification with a person or persons who significantly contributed to the architectural, cultural, economic, historic, social, or other aspect of the development of the City of Chicago, State of Illinois, or the United States.

(Important Architecture) Its exemplification of an architectural type or style distinguished by innovation, rarity, uniqueness, or overall quality of design, detail, materials, or craftsmanship.

(Important Architect) Its identification as the work of an architect, designer, engineer, or builder whose individual work is significant in the history or development of the City of Chicago, State of Illinois, or the United States.

(Distinctive Theme as a District) Its representation of an architectural, cultural, economic, historic, social or other theme expressed through distinctive area, districts, places, buildings, structures, works of art, or other objects that may or may not be contiguous.

(Unique Visual Feature) Its unique location or distinctive physical appearance or presence representing an established and familiar visual feature of a neighborhood, community, or the City of Chicago.

Since we're talking about a District (one the building literally forms the gateway to), I don't see why 6 wouldn't apply. How is it any different from numerous other landmarked buildings immediately nearby? How does a historical meatpacking district benefit from having a historical 100 year old meatpacking building demolished and replaced with a glassy highrise? If preserving this building is absurd, than the notion of the district is absurd.

RedCorsair87 · #**43059** Posted **Oct 10, 2018, 1:53 AM**

Punch some windows into the street facing side and update the first floor and that building will look great. There are enough 1 story buildings and parking lots in the WL to build on. No reason to tear something like this down.

Kumdogmillionaire · #**43060** Posted **Oct 10, 2018, 2:57 AM**

Hardly a loss... those are some ugly and mostly abandoned buildings from what I can tell. What I'm more concerned about is if what replaces them is worthwhile. The Rascal Flats bar is embarrassing in its own right, and definitely makes this a harder pill to swallow, but I'm hardly going to stand in the way of a big development that could further solidify the West Loops business growth that is being centered right around that area.

If the tower's design is shit, then I'd be against it out of principle of it needing to at least be better than what it is replacing, otherwise why try and at all?