CHICAGO | Highrise Projects & Construction

[SamInTheLoop]

Something in Chicago Journal yesterday about additional community meetings for this South Loop rental proposal. Mr. Downtown may very well have more, if any new details given. I'm pretty excited actually for this one. Looks like a great infill project to me, nice density, I like the design and height for the area. In the article Golub mentioned - I think - that a PD will be working its way through the approval process this year.......hopefully construction start I'd like to think by this time next year at latest.............the only thing is, for such a large site on State, it would be nice if the retail space were maybe doubled to 19,000 sq ft or so, but overall I'm looking forward to the return of residential construction in the South Loop with this one (AMLI's new project on S Clark, not so much......)

[Nowhereman1280]

^^^ Here is a bigger rendering than the smallish thumbnail we last saw courtesy of Curbed:


chicago.curbed.com

I like it. Another lot bites the dust. Also, as a kicker, apparently it has a low parking ratio of 392 units (nice density) to 241 spaces.

[lawfin]

Originally Posted by Nowhereman1280

^^^ Here is a bigger rendering than the smallish thumbnail we last saw courtesy of Curbed:


chicago.curbed.com

I like it. Another lot bites the dust. Also, as a kicker, apparently it has a low parking ratio of 392 units (nice density) to 241 spaces.

Not too bad, that AMli proposal referenced by Sam is an adomination however, The rework Hayward did actually made it somewhat tolerable turning a true turd into something marginally acceptable

[Mr Downtown]

I haven't posted any renderings because the skin is a long way from being final. I raised some urban design issues regarding wind downwash onto the sidewalk that both developer and architect—to their credit—seem to be taking quite seriously. As one of them told me, it's not to their benefit for their retail to be the building everyone avoids walking past. So it's possible we may see balconies on this (not my preferred solution, I hasten to add), and almost certainly will see a different treatment at the fifth floor level where the tower meets the base to help break up the wind downwash.

Folks at the South Loop Neighbors meeting last week seemed pretty OK with it. Enrique Perez raised the bloody flag of less-than-one parking space per unit. To him and the couple from 901 who came only to make sure it wouldn't block any of their lake views, interrupted the speaker to determine that, and then left the meeting...you're the reason we can't have nice things.

[ChiPhi]

Originally Posted by Mr Downtown

I raised some urban design issues regarding wind downwash onto the sidewalk that both developer and architect—to their credit—seem to be taking quite seriously. As one of them told me, it's not to their benefit for their retail to be the building everyone avoids walking past. So it's possible we may see balconies on this (not my preferred solution, I hasten to add), and almost certainly will see a different treatment at the fifth floor level where the tower meets the base to help break up the wind downwash.

How does wind downwash work and what is it?

Originally Posted by Mr Downtown

you're the reason we can't have nice things.

HAHAHAHA... perfect comment. I wish you had stood up and said that at the meeting.

[Mr Downtown]

Tall buildings catch the winds at higher levels and direct it down the façade toward the ground. This is most problematic on façades that are west-facing (in Chicago due to prevailing wind direction); that are next to low-rise areas (for better or worse, this site is); and that are smooth-sided (because there's nothing to create eddys and break up the windflow). The problems at IBM Plaza are legendary, and in the South Loop we know this problem all too well from Two East Eighth.

[Mr Downtown]

Signage news:

One East Wacker got a Kemper sign sometime earlier this week.

The Santa Fe sign atop the Railway Exchange building is becoming a (smaller) Motorola sign:

[jdcpamba]

Interesting to see how the tower pans out at 9th and State. Obviously the developer has a completely opposite opinion of building apartments in the South Loop than Fifield. See the following video posted through yochicago. Regardless of your thoughts, kind of an interesting video to watch for hard-core real estate development enthusiasts.

http://yochicago.com/quote-of-the-da...rtments/26539/

[ardecila]

Oh no... How can this happen? The Santa Fe sign is a Chicago landmark. Hamilton Partners didn't even take the sign down when BNSF moved out. It would be one thing if we were talking about some speculative office tower from the 60s, but this building's history is indelibly connected to the railroad industry (and the architectural industry, I might add).

Also, Motorola's only leasing one floor and is keeping 95% of operations in the suburbs. Let's hope to God they don't get a subsidy.

Originally Posted by Mr Downtown

Signage news:

One East Wacker got a Kemper sign sometime earlier this week.

The Santa Fe sign atop the Railway Exchange building is becoming a (smaller) Motorola sign:

Mr. D, what is the nature of the podium on the Golub proposal? Is the facade lined with residential units like One East Eighth? I'm worried that the podium is at too small of a scale for the street and the party-colored facade will soon look dated. An exposed blank parking wall would be a huge insult to one of the city's most well-known streets, which has so far avoided any kind of blank parking podia (Library Tower only has a few floors of parking and I can't think of anything else)

[Mr Downtown]

I haven't studied Golub's parking podium in detail, but it won't have liner townhouses. It will be essentially the same as State Place, except with modernist curtain wall rather than neotrad façades (there was actually a modernist design for State Place, but that's another story). Of course, like every other building designed in 2008-2012, it has to have randomized or at least checkerboarded glass. I don't know how they're handling ventilation. It would be nice if they would set some panes six inches out from the others, creating a screen wall that way, but I suspect it's just that some of the panels are dark louvers.

[Hayward]

Originally Posted by Mr Downtown

I haven't posted any renderings because the skin is a long way from being final. I raised some urban design issues regarding wind downwash onto the sidewalk that both developer and architect—to their credit—seem to be taking quite seriously. As one of them told me, it's not to their benefit for their retail to be the building everyone avoids walking past. So it's possible we may see balconies on this (not my preferred solution, I hasten to add), and almost certainly will see a different treatment at the fifth floor level where the tower meets the base to help break up the wind downwash.

A glass canopy would be nice. Expensive to build and then the fees...but very nice.

[Busy Bee]

Originally Posted by ardecila

Oh no... How can this happen? The Santa Fe sign is a Chicago landmark. Hamilton Partners didn't even take the sign down when BNSF moved out. It would be one thing if we were talking about some speculative office tower from the 60s, but this building's history is indelibly connected to the railroad industry (and the architectural industry, I might add).

Yeah this is total bullshit and quite sad. Lets just take the Tip Top Tap sign down for a new shiny Nokia one. And while were at it get rid of that silly old Wrigley Field marquee and replace it with a plastic jumbo-tron. In reality I suppose the Santa Fe sign was less beloved - probably closer to the TORCO sign, more ubiquitous than landmark.

EDIT: For the record Ardecila I'd put Magikist squarely in that camp of, while not landmarks that one could reasonable argue as being worth preserving, does put a knot in the stomach when you see them disappear.

[Beta_Magellan]

Originally Posted by Mr Downtown

The Santa Fe sign atop the Railway Exchange building is becoming a (smaller) Motorola sign

Well, this is heartbreaking. Don’t have much to add from what ardecila already said, but it’s not shocking that this is going through. I’m honestly more surprised those cheesy BoA signs haven’t popped back up on the Wabash Street bridge.

[the urban politician]

^ Frankly, why should anybody care about the Santa Fe sign, or any sign for that matter? Probably the only major one that is distinctive is the Wrigley Field sign.

[Busy Bee]

As a side note to the Motorola news, if they are going to replace the Santa Fe, I'd almost rather see a bigger 'M' Motorola logo sign than that low slung wordmark. It just doesnt make a good sign.

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

^ Frankly, why should anybody care about the Santa Fe sign, or any sign for that matter? Probably the only major one that is distinctive is the Wrigley Field sign.

It's a landmark piece of Chicago's skyline that has been there for over 50 years. Management so staked their identity to Santa Fe that the building kept the name AND the sign, even after the eponymous railroad moved out, because people literally used it as a landmark, a reference point for moving through the city.

Plus, to add insult to injury, we now have to deal with the name of a failing, laughingstock company on our skyline. And, as Busy Bee points out, it's not even a well-designed version of the Motorola logo and does not include the M bird.

In a larger sense, Motorola's decision to stake their identity to the Santa Fe Building does not speak well for the company's progress and innovation in an industry that depends on it. That's Motorola's problem, but it's no less bone-headed.

[simon07]

Looks like demolition has begun on the retail and 8 story/4 building apartment project. Yesterday there were comed crews on site and today there was a bobcat and crews in the parking lot and a giant hole blown through the brick wall. Looks like this one is going. Also it looks like the glass replacement next to the spertus institute on south Michigan ave is also happening. So much for south loop land being worthless.

[ChiPhi]

Originally Posted by ardecila

It's a landmark piece of Chicago's skyline that has been there for over 50 years. Management so staked their identity to Santa Fe that the building kept the name AND the sign, even after the eponymous railroad moved out, because people literally used it as a landmark, a reference point for moving through the city.

Plus, to add insult to injury, we now have to deal with the name of a failing, laughingstock company on our skyline. And, as Busy Bee points out, it's not even a well-designed version of the Motorola logo and does not include the M bird.

The loss of the Santa Fe sign is absolute BS. I cannot believe what Motorolla is doing here, especially considering there are two major architectural firms with HQs in the building (Goettsch and SOM) who could have, as tenents, voiced their opinions against this. Well, another day, another Chicago landmark gone...

Originally Posted by Mr Downtown

Tall buildings catch the winds at higher levels and direct it down the façade toward the ground. This is most problematic on façades that are west-facing (in Chicago due to prevailing wind direction); that are next to low-rise areas (for better or worse, this site is); and that are smooth-sided (because there's nothing to create eddys and break up the windflow). The problems at IBM Plaza are legendary, and in the South Loop we know this problem all too well from Two East Eighth.

I'd seen people talk about wind downwash before, but never actually knew what it was. Glad to accrue some knowledge. Maybe some day that god awful Dearborn Park development will disappear and we will see a real urban development there and it won't be a lone highrise. This of course, will never happen b/c these are condos and not rentals, but it is still my pipe dream for Chicago.

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by ardecila

Plus, to add insult to injury, we now have to deal with the name of a failing, laughingstock company on our skyline. And, as Busy Bee points out, it's not even a well-designed version of the Motorola logo and does not include the M bird.

^ I'm not sure what you're talking about.

Motorola Solutions is moving into the Santa Fe building. They are the portion of the company that is much more successful. They are not a failing laughingstock.

Actually, Moto Mobility, the spinoff that was acquired by Google, is what you're referring to. Actually, I have heard that they are also doing somewhat better.

[ChiPhi]

^^^
It seems like the Motorolla Mobility brand is the one that people know and whether or not Solutions is the one that will be moving into the building(it is), the products that the general public buys, the cell phones etc, will reflect on Chicago. It kind of sucks, but whatever.