CHICAGO | Highrise Projects & Construction - Page 385

SamInTheLoop · #**7681** Posted: **May 2, 2012, 2:27 PM**

^^ ^ That's what I immediately thought of as well - that really sucks if BKL is now out of the mix with this one.......here's to hoping Fifield opts for someone beyond the usual suspects for the design, (for one example, BKL), and if they do fall back on P/H, SCB, etc, hopefully they elevate their game.....

i_am_hydrogen · #**7682** Posted: **May 2, 2012, 2:33 PM**

BKL design, for those who forgot what it looks like:

Tom Servo · #**7683** Posted: **May 2, 2012, 2:59 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by i_am_hydrogen

BKL design, for those who forgot what it looks like:

I think I may have offered my opinion already... But if this gets built, that will be FUCKING cool and awesome for that intersection!

ChiPhi · #**7684** Posted: **May 2, 2012, 3:17 PM**

^^^
Meh, the reason that rendering looks so good imo is the exciting lines of the amenity floor. It seems like an okay glass tower, but there is not much else that separates it from other buildings. The balconies on the left portion do seem relatively interesting. An the way that the tower seems to wrap around the big box is a little silly - I want to diminish the appearance of the big box. But, of course, it is better than a lot of crap that has been (and will be) built.

Also, just so we are clear, from the Crain's article Buckman posted:

Quote:

CEO Steve Fifield says no deal has been finalized with Jewel.

“We do not have a signed contract,” Mr. Fifield says. “We know that they are going to review it and decide in the next 30 days what they're going to do.”

I almost hope fifield doesn't get it, they don't exactly have a history of the best designs at k-stuff...

ChiPhi · #**7685** Posted: **May 2, 2012, 3:19 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by the urban politician

^ I don't know if this has been mentioned or not, but 2 days ago I saw that they were drilling caissons for that NWU Ambulatory surgical tower in Streeterville.

Does anyone have pics of the reno (or is it new construction) or at least an address? I can't find anything online...

ChiPhi · #**7686** Posted: **May 2, 2012, 3:28 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila

Wonderful.... more mediocre design, this time at one of the city's most significant locations!

Outside of Chicago, Related is actually known as a proponent of great design. Apparently those NY execs think we are stupid midwestern bumble fucks unable of appreciating good design. In NY, they did a bunch of great RAMSA stuff, the Time Warner Center (by David Childs), and are working on Hudson Yards. Go here and in the pull down menu for location, compare NY to Chicago. It is depressing. Other than some affordable and strip malls they've done, it is all more than acceptable...

Buckman821 · #**7687** Posted: **May 2, 2012, 3:29 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SamInTheLoop

^^ ^ That's what I immediately thought of as well - that really sucks if BKL is now out of the mix with this one.......here's to hoping Fifield opts for someone beyond the usual suspects for the design, (for one example, BKL), and if they do fall back on P/H, SCB, etc, hopefully they elevate their game.....

Doubt it. This news is really a bummer. I would've MUCH rather had Magellan win this bid.

I don't really mind K Station since its in a sort of weird location but this is much, much different. This site deserves much more.

Nowhereman1280 · #**7688** Posted: **May 2, 2012, 3:36 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SamInTheLoop

^^ ^ That's what I immediately thought of as well - that really sucks if BKL is now out of the mix with this one.......here's to hoping Fifield opts for someone beyond the usual suspects for the design, (for one example, BKL), and if they do fall back on P/H, SCB, etc, hopefully they elevate their game.....

I dunno, Fifield seems to be gradually getting with the picture. Their K-designs have gotten progressively less shitty at a pretty rapid clip and K2 could even turn out to be a good design (thank god because it's such a prominent site).

Hopefully they will use this opportunity and prime site (K-station is less than prime) to bump it up a notch and show that they are now premier developers offering a premium product and a premium location. I've gotten the sense from the interviews I've seen of them that they are looking to really step up their game. So I'm cautiously optimistic on this one.

Meanwhile I'm caustiously pessimistic that Related might try to get their grimey hands on the Spire site so they can shit out another mediocre POS. That site has so much potential especially considering that the existing foundations are impossible to remove (cassions are a huge obstacle for redevelopment sometimes). Then again, knowing Related, The'll probably leak some awesome rendering of a octagonal building that transitions to a hexagon and then a square or something only to replace it with a shitty blue box a few months later.

BraveNewWorld · #**7689** Posted: **May 2, 2012, 3:40 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChiPhi

Outside of Chicago, Related is actually known as a proponent of great design. Apparently those NY execs think we are stupid midwestern bumble fucks unable of appreciating good design. In NY, they did a bunch of great RAMSA stuff, the Time Warner Center (by David Childs), and are working on Hudson Yards. Go here and in the pull down menu for location, compare NY to Chicago. It is depressing. Other than some affordable and strip malls they've done, it is all more than acceptable...

They have done some great stuff in Chicago like 340 on the park, and Park Tower.

10023 · #**7690** Posted: **May 2, 2012, 4:56 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChiPhi

Outside of Chicago, Related is actually known as a proponent of great design. Apparently those NY execs think we are stupid midwestern bumble fucks unable of appreciating good design. In NY, they did a bunch of great RAMSA stuff, the Time Warner Center (by David Childs), and are working on Hudson Yards. Go here and in the pull down menu for location, compare NY to Chicago. It is depressing. Other than some affordable and strip malls they've done, it is all more than acceptable...

They also can't get the square footage prices they can get in New york.

Nowhereman1280 · #**7691** Posted: **May 2, 2012, 5:29 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by 10023

They also can't get the square footage prices they can get in New york.

They also don't have to pay inflated land, materials, and labor costs like they do in NYC...

Its no excuse. If prices aren't high enough to justify radical high rises, then one would expect that they could still justify handsome lowrises and midrises which is certainly not the case.

Hayward · #**7692** Posted: **May 2, 2012, 5:54 PM**

Deck is being all smashed up on that Lake Street garage. I can see it from my office. I'll snag a photo.

ChiPhi · #**7693** Posted: **May 2, 2012, 6:09 PM**

^^^
How long do you guys think before construction starts? I'd love to see some Caissons get in before the summer ends...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nowhereman1280

They also don't have to pay inflated land, materials, and labor costs like they do in NYC...

Its no excuse. If prices aren't high enough to justify radical high rises, then one would expect that they could still justify handsome lowrises and midrises which is certainly not the case.

The Chicago market certainly would not have supported a limestone covered skyscraper like 15 CPW in lieu of a LaGrange (Related didn't actually do that, but the example is acceptable I think because the developers netted a billion, I've heard, on that), but Aqua proved that good design from good local architects (I can't imagine starchitect fees would be supported by the Chicago market) can be supported (if not rewarded) in Chicago's market. The problem is, many developers fear, I think, that the cost of design (or the risk of design) is too much for this market. If only Aqua had come at the beginning of the boom, say it finished in '02 or so, we may have seen some better design throughout the boom...

the urban politician · #**7694** Posted: **May 2, 2012, 9:30 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Buckman821

Fifield picked for Gold Coast apartment/Jewel project

By: Ryan Ori May 02, 2012

http://www.chicagorealestatedaily.co...#ixzz1tiYbrrMK

Does this mean that the BKL design we saw is out? I can't remember the context of that rendering now but I'm guessing it might have been associated with magellan.

^ Isn't this project as of right?

In other words, despite hack Reilly's hackiness over this project last year, this does not require a zoning change nor would it be a PD, no?

10023 · #**7695** Posted: **May 2, 2012, 10:34 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nowhereman1280

They also don't have to pay inflated land, materials, and labor costs like they do in NYC...

Its no excuse. If prices aren't high enough to justify radical high rises, then one would expect that they could still justify handsome lowrises and midrises which is certainly not the case.

Unfortunately it all comes down to the customer, and money can't buy taste.

You would hope that the success of buildings like Trump Tower and Aqua would show developers that trophy architecture can create meaningful value, but the "mass market" is an ugly place.

ChiPhi · #**7696** Posted: **May 3, 2012, 12:39 AM**

^^^
Unfortunately Trump Tower hasn't actually been a success by most accounts. I don't remember where but I seem to remember him saying he will probably never make a profit on the project. It seems to be general knowledge that he won't make a profit even if I am remembering that incorrectly. That has more to do with the height than the design. As far as design goes, the tower is elegant (and wonderfully contextual), but not all that daring. Aqua was hugely successful and hopefully that sort of architecture will set a benchmark for what Chicagoans really want.

The legacy is also really nice, the best SCB building I've ever seen (and one of my favorite towers in Chicago)... I have no idea how successful that one was.

Alliance · #**7697** Posted: **May 3, 2012, 12:42 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChiPhi

Related is actually known as a proponent of great design.

I strongly disagree with this. They're pretty consistent across the board and its nothing special, which is what we're getting.

BraveNewWorld · #**7698** Posted: **May 3, 2012, 2:45 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChiPhi

^^^
Unfortunately Trump Tower hasn't actually been a success by most accounts. I don't remember where but I seem to remember him saying he will probably never make a profit on the project. It seems to be general knowledge that he won't make a profit even if I am remembering that incorrectly. That has more to do with the height than the design. As far as design goes, the tower is elegant (and wonderfully contextual), but not all that daring. Aqua was hugely successful and hopefully that sort of architecture will set a benchmark for what Chicagoans really want.

The legacy is also really nice, the best SCB building I've ever seen (and one of my favorite towers in Chicago)... I have no idea how successful that one was.

I actually read an article on that. Trump said that it wasn't his best investment, but it also definitely wasn't his worst. Sales were fairly good, but not great.

Mr Downtown · #**7699** Posted: **May 3, 2012, 3:40 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by the urban politician

^ Isn't this project as of right?

Requires at least an amendment of the Sandburg Village PD, and may also require one because of its height. I forget the trigger; I think it's 300 feet.

Chicagoguy · #**7700** Posted: **May 3, 2012, 5:32 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChiPhi

^^^
Unfortunately Trump Tower hasn't actually been a success by most accounts. I don't remember where but I seem to remember him saying he will probably never make a profit on the project. It seems to be general knowledge that he won't make a profit even if I am remembering that incorrectly. That has more to do with the height than the design. As far as design goes, the tower is elegant (and wonderfully contextual), but not all that daring. Aqua was hugely successful and hopefully that sort of architecture will set a benchmark for what Chicagoans really want.

The legacy is also really nice, the best SCB building I've ever seen (and one of my favorite towers in Chicago)... I have no idea how successful that one was.

I truly enjoy The Legacy as well. Last I heard it was only about 50 to 60% sold though. I know two or three months back they get an extension granted on their loan (or something like that) and they changed real estate firms to better market their unsold units. I actually toured the model units and the company was planning to do a total redo on the model units to boost new customer sales. It is a great building, but they have stayed pretty firm on price. The units I saw remaining ranged from 600's to high 2 million.