CHICAGO | Highrise Projects & Construction - Page 151

Chicago Shawn · #**3001** Posted: **Nov 21, 2009, 3:33 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Downtown

Because the developer is asking permission to change the zoning. In some nations, it's considered permissible for citizens to discuss the wisdom of pending legislation.

Yes, but when politics are involved, wisdom is often ignored in order to pander to the selfish demands of a few.

What is the wisdom of limiting height and density two blocks from Ogilvie Transportation Center and in a area that has been designated for the expansion of the CBD?

Ordo_ · #**3002** Posted: **Nov 21, 2009, 3:46 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chicago Shawn

Yes, but when politics are involved, wisdom is often ignored in order to pander to the selfish demands of a few.

Welcome to democratic government. If you want to be heard, be loud.

jpIllInoIs · #**3003** Posted: **Nov 21, 2009, 4:36 PM**

UGH when will this ever end???

http://www.chicagotribune.com/busine...,1574002.story

Block 37 developer Joseph Freed and Associates loses control of retail project
Bank of America wins ruling appointing CB Richard Ellis as receiver; Freed vows to appeal

By Julie Wernau and Sandra M. Jones

Tribune reporters

November 21, 2009

In a major setback to its urban ambitions, Joseph Freed and Associates LLC lost control of the long-troubled Block 37 project just as the first stores prepared to open.

Cook County Circuit Judge Margaret Brennan ruled Friday that Freed didn't have the means to see the cash-strapped project through to completion and instead placed it in the hands of a receiver, CB Richard Ellis, a real estate broker and property manager. Freed vowed to appeal.

"We strongly disagree with the court's ruling," said Larry Freed, president of Joseph Freed. "We are the only developer in two decades to move Block 37 forward."

Freed said the mall developer "will fight to protect our rights, reputation and investment."

A partial certificate of occupancy was issued Friday, and Freed will continue to operate the property over the weekend. Workers were mopping the underground pedway on Friday evening, and some people were walking through. Freed said the area will be open to the public, along with some retailers, Saturday. He said he had approximately 70 percent of the project committed, with a mix of retailers.

.......

Shirley Norton, a spokeswoman for Charlotte, N.C.-based Bank of America, said the bank was pleased with the ruling but declined further comment.

Bank of America has agreed to see the project through to completion.

ardecila · #**3004** Posted: **Nov 21, 2009, 8:31 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chicago Shawn

Yes, but when politics are involved, wisdom is often ignored in order to pander to the selfish demands of a few.

What is the wisdom of limiting height and density two blocks from Ogilvie Transportation Center and in a area that has been designated for the expansion of the CBD?

Well, this is a residential project, not an office project. It's been zoned for office growth, and FRDA thinks it should be reserved for an office development. I don't see anything wrong with that, although if FRDA wants an office building, then the height of this proposal shouldn't matter. Of course, the city hasn't done anything to slow residential development in the West Loop east of the Kennedy, with K Station and the stuff along Lake, RD659, 565 Quincy, and a ton of other projects.

the urban politician · #**3005** Posted: **Nov 21, 2009, 8:44 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Downtown

Because the developer is asking permission to change the zoning. In some nations, it's considered permissible for citizens to discuss the wisdom of pending legislation.

^ What part about "tyrannical rule of a tiny minority" do you not get?

Chicago Shawn · #**3006** Posted: **Nov 22, 2009, 4:13 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila

Well, this is a residential project, not an office project. It's been zoned for office growth, and FRDA thinks it should be reserved for an office development. I don't see anything wrong with that, although if FRDA wants an office building, then the height of this proposal shouldn't matter. Of course, the city hasn't done anything to slow residential development in the West Loop east of the Kennedy, with K Station and the stuff along Lake, RD659, 565 Quincy, and a ton of other projects.

I don't disagree with that at all, it should be a commercial development or mixed-use; but the boat for commercial development in this economy sailed a long time ago. FRDA contradicts itself though by wanting office and demanding a height cap, because office floor to floor heights are 13 feet minimum. If the project was converted to office and shrank 11 floors to 25 stories, it would still be taller than 300 feet.

Mr Downtown · #**3007** Posted: **Nov 22, 2009, 9:04 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by the urban politician

^ What part about "tyrannical rule of a tiny minority" do you not get?

The part where they actually affect the outcome in any way.

Has any downtown project ever been changed by the objections of a neighborhood group? When was the last time the Plan Commission voted not to approve a project??

the urban politician · #**3008** Posted: **Nov 22, 2009, 9:55 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Downtown

Has any downtown project ever been changed by the objections of a neighborhood group? When was the last time the Plan Commission voted not to approve a project??

^ Kind of hard for the Plan Commission to vote on a project when the Alderman yanks it from the agenda, don't you think? Or perhaps the developers didn't bother applying because they knew where the Alderman stood.

How about that tower proposed a few years back next to that Mag Mile cathedral (blanking on the name)? NIMBY's bitched and Natarus caved. After all, how DARE they build a tower next to Michigan Avenue!

How about Library Tower--it was significantly downsized by NIMBY opposition. What about 65 E Goethe--initially in the 30+ story range, but NIMBIFIED to its current 8 or so stories. What about 1320 N Lakeshore Dr, which Gold Coast neighors fight to keep a vacant lot in perpetuity despite its obviously prominent location and granted zoning for a highrise building?

Kinda pointless to go after Plan Commission approval when the Alderman announces that he "will not approve a zoning change", don't ya think?

viewguysf · #**3009** Posted: **Nov 22, 2009, 10:10 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by the urban politician

How about that tower proposed a few years back next to that Mag Mile cathedral (blanking on the name)? NIMBY's bitched and Natarus caved. After all, how DARE they build a tower next to Michigan Avenue!

http://www.saintjamescathedral.org/home.asp

emathias · #**3010** Posted: **Nov 22, 2009, 11:25 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by viewguysf

http://www.saintjamescathedral.org/home.asp

No, that one was approved, just didn't get built for economic reasons. The one he's referring to is probably the Fourth Presbyterian one.

the urban politician · #**3011** Posted: **Nov 23, 2009, 1:13 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by emathias

No, that one was approved, just didn't get built for economic reasons. The one he's referring to is probably the Fourth Presbyterian one.

^ Yep, that's the one

spyguy · #**3012** Posted: **Nov 24, 2009, 2:41 PM**

http://featuresblogs.chicagotribune....ent=FeedBurner

Roosevelt University to construct 32-story building; school says it will be 2nd-tallest in U.S. behind University of Pittsburgh's
By William Lee

Officials at Roosevelt University are moving forward with a plan to build what they say would be the second-tallest university building in the nation.

Construction on the 32-story, $110 million building is set to begin in February on the site of the old Herman Crown Center in the 400 block of South Wabash Avenue. The groundbreaking will begin once demolition of the old building is complete, with the center itself slated to open in January 2012, officials said.

...Approved by the board of trustees this summer, the center is being paid for by the sale of $180 million in bonds.

Ch.G, Ch.G · #**3013** Posted: **Nov 24, 2009, 2:43 PM**

Great news. Is that the retro SCB design posted a few months back?

i_am_hydrogen · #**3014** Posted: **Nov 24, 2009, 3:08 PM**

Foundation work has begun in earnest at LP2520. There has been a lot of activity in the last few weeks.

Nowhereman1280 · #**3015** Posted: **Nov 24, 2009, 3:36 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ch.G, Ch.G

Great news. Is that the retro SCB design posted a few months back?

I think its this one:

chicagoismynewblog

Dr. Taco · #**3016** Posted: **Nov 24, 2009, 3:41 PM**

i hope so

Steely Dan · #**3017** Posted: **Nov 24, 2009, 3:51 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nowhereman1280

I think its this one:

chicagoismynewblog

yep, that's the one.

and hydrogen, kamin's article mentioned that it would stand 469' tall, so you can plug in a preliminary height figure for it now on the page 1 list.

wrab · #**3018** Posted: **Nov 24, 2009, 4:04 PM**

I'm hoping that the curtain wall will make a good backdrop for Auditorium Building's tower. That'll be a great view, BTW - looking out at the Sullivan.

Busy Bee · #**3019** Posted: **Nov 24, 2009, 4:09 PM**

This is great news. I was hoping RU wouldn't keep this one on the back burner for another decade. I admire that school's ambition.

VivaLFuego · #**3020** Posted: **Nov 24, 2009, 5:07 PM**

The 300+' foot dormitory proposal on the parking lot to the north - that was a private proposal, right? Was that one also approved by the Plan Commission or was it just a public proposal? I always got these two proposals a bit mixed up.