Central Station - 900'/83 fl (Pro); 790'/73 fl (App); 734'/65 fl (T/O); 620'/54 fl (U/C)

[goonsta]

Originally posted by spyguy:

Central Station - One of the largest developments in Chicago. The first phase of construction consisted of rows of luxury townhouses with the first tower being finished in 2002. Ten towers have been completed since then.

Once completed this massive community will help define the southern portion of Grant Park as well as extend Chicago's skyline southward.

Named after the former demolished station sitting on its plot.
http://img503.imageshack.us/img503/6714/2899267pz.th.jpg (http://img503.imageshack.us/my.php?image=2899267pz.jpg)

Area map showing it's proximity to Grant Park, Lake Michigan, and the Museum Campus (after which many towers are named for).
http://img502.imageshack.us/img502/3996/central3hw.png

Existing area (I will not post individual buildings mainly for the fact that the first towers are all rather plain by most standards but will be overshadowed by taller and glassier buildings)

Six Month Time Lapse photo by Jaroslaw and Dan in Chicago:
http://img504.imageshack.us/img504/4828/29ml.jpg
http://img502.imageshack.us/img502/3192/17cq.jpg
http://img502.imageshack.us/img502/9853/171105r79fe.jpg
http://img504.imageshack.us/img504/8050/nearsouth27may20068do.jpg
http://img509.imageshack.us/img509/2708/centralstation0cz.gif

Tower Name/ Height/ Floors/ Completion Date
Sky55 129 m 40 2005
Museum Tower 125 m 38 2006
Museum Pointe 88 m 26 2005
Museum Park Tower 1 85 m 20 2002
Prairie Pointe 83 m 24 2006
Prairie District Tower 80 m 23 2003
The Lofts at Museum Park II 80 m 21 2006
Museum Park Place 79 m 23 2007
Lakeside Tower 73 m 19 2006
Museum Park Tower 2 72 m 21 2003
The Lofts at Museum Park I 57 m 15 2004
Lakeside on the Park 53 m 14 2005
Prairie House 52 m 14 2003
One Museum Park 224 m 65 2007
One Museum Park West 189 m 54
1600 Museum Park 110 m 30
1400 Museum Park 105 m 32 2007
Museum Park Place 2 100m 31
1201 South Michigan 189 m 60
1200 South Indiana 53
1251 South Indiana 34

Completed
Under Construction
Approved
Proposed

Completed
Sky55
http://img509.imageshack.us/img509/841/2418424im.jpg

Museum Tower
http://img509.imageshack.us/img509/3900/6324museumtower4be.jpg

Prairie Pointe
http://img509.imageshack.us/img509/5997/3025050en.jpg

The Lofts at Museum Park II
http://img509.imageshack.us/img509/3287/6324theloftsatmuseumparkii1jv.jpg

Museum Park Place
http://img509.imageshack.us/img509/4674/6324museumparkplace3to.jpg

Lakeside Tower
http://img509.imageshack.us/img509/6274/3024829ir.jpg


Under Construction:
One Museum Park (T/O)
http://img509.imageshack.us/img509/7569/6324onemuseumpark6tr.jpg

One Museum Park West
http://img411.imageshack.us/img411/7800/ompwpl0.jpg

With One Museum Park
http://img523.imageshack.us/img523/676/omp1jb.jpg

1600 Museum Park
http://img353.imageshack.us/img353/8796/4453756pt.jpg

1400 Museum Park
http://img509.imageshack.us/img509/8978/63241400museumpark6tu.jpg

Museum Park Place 2
http://img338.imageshack.us/img338/9379/museumparkplaceiidg7.jpg


Approved:
Grant Park Tower III (second from the right)
http://img517.imageshack.us/img517/5728/centralstationgrantparkbs6.jpg
Grant Park Tower IV (far right)
http://img517.imageshack.us/img517/5728/centralstationgrantparkbs6.jpg

Proposed:

[geoff_diamond]

It's quite the development. That's for sure. I remember that are being an empty field like it was yesterday!

[Frumie]

Here's an interesting piece on the history, development obstacles, etc. of the Central Illinois Development:

http://www.centralstationsouthloop.com/pdf_news.pdf

[northsidesoxfan]

Christmas Day 2005 snapshots of Central Station construction follow.

http://images.snapfish.com/345949857%7Ffp336%3Enu%3D3248%3E9%3A9%3E937%3EWSNRCG%3D323342%3C4%3B5745nu0mrj

http://images.snapfish.com/345949857%7Ffp338%3Enu%3D3248%3E9%3A9%3E937%3EWSNRCG%3D323342%3C4%3B5747nu0mrj

http://images.snapfish.com/345949857%7Ffp335%3Enu%3D3248%3E9%3A9%3E937%3EWSNRCG%3D323342%3C4%3B5748nu0mrj

http://images.snapfish.com/345949857%7Ffp336%3Enu%3D3248%3E9%3A9%3E937%3EWSNRCG%3D323342%3C4%3B5765nu0mrj

http://images.snapfish.com/345949857%7Ffp338%3Enu%3D3248%3E9%3A9%3E937%3EWSNRCG%3D323342%3C4%3B5768nu0mrj

Admit it! They are not going to cover these tracks anytime soon.

http://images.snapfish.com/345949857%7Ffp337%3Enu%3D3248%3E9%3A9%3E937%3EWSNRCG%3D323342%3C4%3B576%3Bnu0mrj


http://images.snapfish.com/345949857%7Ffp338%3Enu%3D3248%3E9%3A9%3E937%3EWSNRCG%3D323342%3C4%3B5773nu0mrj

http://images.snapfish.com/345949857%7Ffp336%3Enu%3D3248%3E9%3A9%3E937%3EWSNRCG%3D323342%3C4%3B5774nu0mrj

http://images.snapfish.com/345949857%7Ffp337%3Enu%3D3248%3E9%3A9%3E937%3EWSNRCG%3D323342%3C4%3B5777nu0mrj

[ChicagoLover]

I'm so happy about development in this area. Generally decent architecture (with the exception of the cookie-cutter brick condo tower, although that's not all that bad either. I like the mix of townhouses and towers, although the general lack of an allowance retail in the area is a disappointment.

[rgolch]

I haven't looked into this neighborhood that much. Obviously, its making an impact on the skyline by framing the southern end of grant park. But what will be the transit options for residents in central station. I presume CTA buses will begin to run in there.

[Rascacielos]

I haven't looked into this neighborhood that much. Obviously, its making an impact on the skyline by framing the southern end of grant park. But what will be the transit options for residents in central station. I presume CTA buses will begin to run in there.

For those who live close to Roosevelt, they can just go a couple blocks over to the Roosevelt El station (Red, Orange and Green lines). For the rest of us who live a little farther south, there are plenty of buses (1, 3, 4, 129, 62, 29, etc.)

[BVictor1]

Here are some model shots of 1600 Museum Park.

The western face.
http://images.snapfish.com/346353854%7Ffp335%3Enu%3D3238%3E868%3E492%3EWSNRCG%3D323353%3A939%3C7%3Cnu0mrj

View to the south.
http://images.snapfish.com/346353854%7Ffp335%3Enu%3D3238%3E868%3E492%3EWSNRCG%3D323353%3A8%3C8628nu0mrj

Eastern facade with a small pocket park on the southeast corner.
http://images.snapfish.com/346353854%7Ffp335%3Enu%3D3238%3E868%3E492%3EWSNRCG%3D323353%3A939%3C89nu0mrj

View to the north along the eastern base.
http://images.snapfish.com/346353854%7Ffp335%3Enu%3D3238%3E868%3E492%3EWSNRCG%3D323353%3A948367nu0mrj

The southern face.
http://images.snapfish.com/346353854%7Ffp335%3Enu%3D3238%3E868%3E492%3EWSNRCG%3D323353%3A939%3C9%3Anu0mrj

The base along Prairie Avenue.
http://images.snapfish.com/346353854%7Ffp335%3Enu%3D3238%3E868%3E492%3EWSNRCG%3D323353%3A8%3C863%3Bnu0mrj

Top of the structure along the eastern face.
http://images.snapfish.com/346353854%7Ffp335%3Enu%3D3238%3E868%3E492%3EWSNRCG%3D323353%3A8%3C8644nu0mrj

[edsg25]

Admit it! They are not going to cover these tracks anytime soon.


*************

You'd think some of those considerable number of condo owners whose units face east would be interested in covering the tracks in partnership with the city. It would not only improve their views, but property values as well.

[BVictor1]

Admit it! They are not going to cover these tracks anytime soon.


*************

You'd think some of those considerable number of condo owners whose units face east would be interested in covering the tracks in partnership with the city. It would not only improve their views, but property values as well.


It's probably years and years down the pipeline. Honestly I don't care if they don't cover them. I've loved trains all my life and I'd be a little sad if they covered all of the tracks.

[edsg25]

Here's a fascinating question that nobody probably can answer:

I wonder....

How much could you have picked up a mansion on Prairie Avenue when the district was in its greatest state of disrepair?

Wouldn't you love to know how little some of that property could have gone for in the, say, 1960's?

[BVictor1]

Here's a fascinating question that nobody probably can answer:

I wonder....

How much could you have picked up a mansion on Prairie Avenue when the district was in its greatest state of disrepair?

Wouldn't you love to know how little some of that property could have gone for in the, say, 1960's?

I have no idea of what the prices were, but I'm sure that they were ass cheap. I always wonder what the area would look like today if those mansions were still there. All the ones that have been torn down were gone before I was born. I've only seen pictures and read the display plaques that once lined the fences over there.

[edsg25]

It's probably years and years down the pipeline. Honestly I don't care if they don't cover them. I've loved trains all my life and I'd be a little sad if they covered all of the tracks.

My guess....the tracks get covered and the South Side gets its own version of the Inner Drive with a wall of condos facing the lake from McCPl to Hyde Pk

[forumly_chgoman]

My guess....the tracks get covered and the South Side gets its own version of the Inner Drive with a wall of condos facing the lake from McCPl to Hyde Pk

more than likely bout 25-30 years off though to completion......hell i'll be only bouit 60.......thems were the days

[edsg25]

more than likely bout 25-30 years off though to completion......hell i'll be only bouit 60.......thems were the days

no doubt it would be time consuming...however, i can see the street (Inner S. Lake Shore Drive) being a real possiblity in the not too distant future. There is no connecting lake front street on the South Side.

If you think about it, the type of buildings that would go up on such a stretch would far exceed the North Side lakefront (LSD, Clark, LPW, Lakeview, Sheridan, etc.). While there are vintage old brick buildings on this stetch, the vast majority of structures were built in the 50's, 60's, 70's, etc....often bland in architecture and, though having an eye for luxury, built during a time when there were few condos....and thus few of the amenities associated with them. These went up as rental bldg's.

Even with demand, I can't imagine with a chance to "do it over" on the South Side, that things would look like the North Side. Lining high risecondos one after the other (as would be the case on the North Side (from North Ave...where downtown stops and North Side starts...clear up to Devon) is not the style today. If such developments were to go up on the South Side, they would maximize views and would not be one atop the other.

[Chi_Coruscant]

It would be nice for Central Station to have 1,000' highrise. There are already existing or uc 1,000' highrise for most parts of the Loop. Now is a high time for South of the Loop to have one. It brings a balance in the Loop in general.

[Adam186]

I'm guestimating one will be announced later this year or early 07'. I didn't hear this from anyone so don't ask. :)

[The Urban Politician]

The base along Prairie Avenue.
http://images.snapfish.com/346353854%7Ffp335%3Enu%3D3238%3E868%3E492%3EWSNRCG%3D323353%3A8%3C863%3Bnu0mrj

^ Tweety says:

'I taut I taw ground-level retail'

'I did, I did taw ground-level retail'

[SkokieSwift]

I'm guestimating one will be announced later this year or early 07'. I didn't hear this from anyone so don't ask. :)

Perhaps the museum park tower @ Roosevelt & Michigan? That would be the perfect spot...

[Rascacielos]

It looks like Case started work at the 1720 S. Michigan site today.

[Chi_Coruscant]

Posted by our main sleuth, BVictor @ SSP:

Also Steely, I have obtained much better renderings for 1600 Museum Park. I don't know if you want to place them side-by-side or not.

https://extranet.emporis.com/files/transfer/6/2006/03/445375.jpg
https://extranet.emporis.com/files/transfer/6/2006/03/445375.jpg

https://extranet.emporis.com/files/transfer/6/2006/03/445378.jpg
https://extranet.emporis.com/files/transfer/6/2006/03/445378.jpg

[Chicagotom]

Museum Tower
http://images.snapfish.com/34664784%3B%7Ffp339%3Enu%3D3233%3E4%3B7%3E544%3E23244%3B7635365ot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/346647%3B42%7Ffp345%3Enu%3D3233%3E4%3B7%3E544%3E23244%3B7635367ot1lsi

Museum Park from State Street
http://images.snapfish.com/346647%3B42%7Ffp342%3Enu%3D3279%3E%3A85%3E266%3EWSNRCG%3D32335%3A85778%3B%3Anu0mrj

1400 Museum Park Site
http://images.snapfish.com/346647%3B42%7Ffp343%3Enu%3D3279%3E%3A85%3E266%3EWSNRCG%3D32335%3A85778%3B%3Cnu0mrj

16th Street - Lakeview tower and Prairie Tower
http://images.snapfish.com/346647%3B42%7Ffp339%3Enu%3D3279%3E%3A85%3E266%3EWSNRCG%3D32335%3A8577924nu0mrj

Its a terrible angle on Lakeview. I'll get some more over the weekend.

Also I walked down to 18th and Prairie. There is a city permit on that 60s building for 2 highrise towers and townhomes total of 560 units.

[Chi_Coruscant]

Great shots, Chicagotom. Did you get a chance to look at 1720 S Mich site? Rascacielos stated earlier that Case started work today.

[Chicagotom]

I did but I ran out of batteries. There are 2 Case cranes on the site. I'll get back down there and take some of the site tommorow.

[Chicagotom]

Marquee Michigan Avenue Site Cleared
http://images.snapfish.com/3466486%3C%3B%7Ffp343%3Enu%3D3279%3E%3A85%3E266%3EWSNRCG%3D32335%3A8577923nu0mrj

[geoff_diamond]

I'm glad they put retail at the base of 1600 Museum Park, but, I question the success that businesses there will be able to have - the buildings still seems a bit isolated to me.

[Chicagotom]

http://images.snapfish.com/346654943%7Ffp344%3Enu%3D3233%3E4%3C3%3E77%3B%3E23244%3C386%3C785ot1lsi

[NaptownBoy]

I read somewhere that Chicaago was getting the worlds tallest. Is that true?

[The Urban Politician]

I read somewhere that Chicaago was getting the worlds tallest. Is that true?

^ No.

North America's tallest.

Tallest in the Western Hemisphere.

Tallest in Christendom.

Whatever...

[STR]

http://images.snapfish.com/346654943%7Ffp344%3Enu%3D3233%3E4%3C3%3E77%3B%3E23244%3C386%3C785ot1lsi

That's a beautiful building. Central Station is turning out so much better than Lakeshore East.

[STR]

Central Station
http://img367.imageshack.us/img367/9805/it1.th.jpg (http://img367.imageshack.us/my.php?image=it1.jpg) http://img367.imageshack.us/img367/606/it8.th.jpg (http://img367.imageshack.us/my.php?image=it8.jpg) http://img367.imageshack.us/img367/4071/it11.th.jpg (http://img367.imageshack.us/my.php?image=it11.jpg)

http://img367.imageshack.us/img367/2914/it9.jpg

[edsg25]

I'm finding this a little scary: when I look at pictures of the Near South Side, I'm thinking I'm looking at pictures of the Near North Side. Who would have thunk it!! Damn, this city is changing!

[The Urban Politician]

I'm finding this a little scary: when I look at pictures of the Near South Side, I'm thinking I'm looking at pictures of the Near North Side. Who would have thunk it!! Damn, this city is changing!

^ Right on.

That's what we're shooting for

[BVictor1]

Here are the renderings for the 2 Lagrange towers for 18th and Prairie. A page for Emporis has yet to be set up. Here's a bit of info on the project


North Tower: 1634-1736 South Prairie
Roughly 45 stories
450'

South Tower: 220-236 East 18th Street
Roughly 35 stories
380'

Prairie Avenue Elevation
http://images.snapfish.com/346697637%7Ffp344%3Enu%3D3238%3E868%3E492%3EWSNRCG%3D3233623%3B469%3A3nu0mrj

Aaerial Perspective Looking Northwest
http://images.snapfish.com/346697637%7Ffp344%3Enu%3D3238%3E868%3E492%3EWSNRCG%3D3233623%3B54%3A66nu0mrj

Prairie Avenue Elevation(south tower)
http://images.snapfish.com/346697637%7Ffp346%3Enu%3D3238%3E868%3E492%3EWSNRCG%3D3233623%3B4699%3Cnu0mrj

Prairie Avenue Elevation (north tower)
http://images.snapfish.com/346697637%7Ffp344%3Enu%3D3238%3E868%3E492%3EWSNRCG%3D3233623%3B4%3B4%3A5nu0mrj

Prairie Avenue North Entry View
http://images.snapfish.com/346697637%7Ffp339%3Enu%3D3238%3E868%3E492%3EWSNRCG%3D3233623%3B59%3C24nu0mrj

Prairie Avenue South Entry View
http://images.snapfish.com/346697637%7Ffp33%3B%3Enu%3D3238%3E868%3E492%3EWSNRCG%3D3233623%3B59%3C25nu0mrj

bonappetit...

[Chi_Coruscant]

I like them! They look much better plus more interesting than Ritz Carlton rendering.

[Loopy]

Thank you BVictor1.

Very nice! Should give Central Station a little competition in the aesthetics department.

I like how they were able to conceal the parking behind the townhomes.

[spyguy]

Should we put this in the South Loop thread instead? Looks sweet either way.

[geoff_diamond]

These are fucking fantastic. I just wish they were closer to downtown so more ppl could enjoy them!

[Chicagotom]

Technically it's outside of the Central Station development borders. I like the designs. Bvictor were did you find these.

[BVictor1]

Technically it's outside of the Central Station development borders. I like the designs. Bvictor were did you find these.

Well, Prairie Point is further south and it's apart of the Central Station develoment. 1600 Museum Park is 1/2 a block to the south, so it's really not outside the zone.

[wrabbit]

Heck yeah! Great idea to slope the balconies - enhances sight lines from inside the units & gives the building a distinctive, marketable shape.

[Chicagotom]

It's cool with me to keep it here. I think they Rock! Can't wait to see the existing building come down.

I dont think it fits in the South Loop Developement thread. We need a Near South Development Thread. Roosevelt and Cermak, The Lake and Clark

Here are the official boarders of Central Station. http://www.centralstationsouthloop.com/dev_location.htm

It zigs and zags south of 16th street. Praire Point Tower is just to the north, 1600 Museum is just across the street and Museum Park Place is further South at their all in CS.

[wickedestcity]

i like these alot !!!

[forumly_chgoman]

I am a little confused are these officially part of the central station development if so are they replacing earlier designs or are these new designs for lots outside central station proper?

[spyguy]

Outside I think.

[Rascacielos]

It's cool with me to keep it here. I think they Rock! Can't wait to see the existing building come down.

I dont think it fits in the South Loop Developement thread. We need a Near South Development Thread. Roosevelt and Cermak, The Lake and Clark

Here are the official boarders of Central Station. http://www.centralstationsouthloop.com/dev_location.htm

It zigs and zags south of 16th street. Praire Point Tower is just to the north, 1600 Museum is just across the street and Museum Park Place is further South at their all in CS.

This is taken directly from the Central Station page you linked to:

"Central Station is located at the southern foot of Grant Park and is bordered by Roosevelt Road on the north, Michigan Avenue to the west, Lake Shore Drive to the east and McCormick Place to the south."

[Chicagotom]

Ok, I was looking at the highlighted area of the map.

Roosevelt Road to the North and Lakeshore drive to East. The Western border is the Eastside of Michigan Avenue starting at Roosevelt Road - South to 14th Street, then it jogs to Indiana and the Eastside of Indiana to 16th Street, then it jogs to Praire Ave (except for the lot that Prairie Point Tower is on) South to 18th and it jogs to Calumet Ave south to maybe the RR Donley building.

[Chicagotom]

Sky 55

I noticed some interest in Sky 55 in a few threads so here are few.

http://images.snapfish.com/346724566%7Ffp339%3Enu%3D3279%3E%3A85%3E266%3EWSNRCG%3D323362985%3B96%3Cnu0mrj

http://images.snapfish.com/346724566%7Ffp342%3Enu%3D3279%3E%3A85%3E266%3EWSNRCG%3D3233629866748nu0mrj

http://images.snapfish.com/346724566%7Ffp342%3Enu%3D3233%3E538%3E792%3E23245388833%3B3ot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/346724566%7Ffp344%3Enu%3D3233%3E538%3E792%3E23245388833%3B5ot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/346724566%7Ffp346%3Enu%3D3233%3E538%3E792%3E23245388833%3B9ot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/346724566%7Ffp33%3B%3Enu%3D3233%3E538%3E792%3E23245388833%3B%3Bot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/346724566%7Ffp343%3Enu%3D3233%3E538%3E87%3B%3E232453896%3C7%3C5ot1lsi

[Chicagotom]

Lagrange Towers. Bvictor had the renderings of a 35 and 45 story towers at 18th and Prairie. This is whats on the site today

http://images.snapfish.com/346724566%7Ffp344%3Enu%3D3279%3E%3A85%3E266%3EWSNRCG%3D323362985%3B975nu0mrj

Thats Prairie Point to the north
http://images.snapfish.com/346724566%7Ffp342%3Enu%3D3279%3E%3A85%3E266%3EWSNRCG%3D323362985%3B976nu0mrj

Glessner House is across the street and Museum Park Place is just in site
http://images.snapfish.com/346724566%7Ffp342%3Enu%3D3279%3E%3A85%3E266%3EWSNRCG%3D323362985%3B977nu0mrj

http://images.snapfish.com/346724566%7Ffp345%3Enu%3D3279%3E%3A85%3E266%3EWSNRCG%3D3233629866759nu0mrj

http://images.snapfish.com/346724566%7Ffp33%3A%3Enu%3D3233%3E538%3E792%3E23245388833%3A%3Bot1lsi

[i_am_hydrogen]

Some Central Station photos I took Monday (4/10):

Museum Park Place
http://www.museumparkplace.com/images/pic_home_01.jpg

http://img146.imageshack.us/img146/395/museumparkplace24bh.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img147.imageshack.us/img147/4960/museumparkplace6zc.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

Museum Tower
http://img101.imageshack.us/img101/9516/museumtower9fe.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

For those outside of Chicago who may not know, Central Station is more than just a group of high-rise condo projects. It also consists of brand new residential neighborhoods. Some of the infill is quite attractive.

E. 18th and Prairie
http://img224.imageshack.us/img224/7512/18thandprairie9ap.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img137.imageshack.us/img137/2807/qualityinfill19xp.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img126.imageshack.us/img126/337/qualityinfill20di.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img137.imageshack.us/img137/3213/street4od.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

Sky55 in the background.
http://img134.imageshack.us/img134/4820/parkview1ii.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img126.imageshack.us/img126/6788/modernrows5gw.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img224.imageshack.us/img224/4397/infillhomes5wx.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img159.imageshack.us/img159/5733/niceview9jv.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

On the way back to the Loop.
http://img142.imageshack.us/img142/6458/viewfromcentralstation5ov.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

[ChicagoLover]

Lookin' good. Lookin' real good.

[mohammed wong]

some of central station is too monotonous and sterile,
rowhouses should or could have some differences in them does extra style or design cost that much, sure some rowhouses are the same,
but in rows in that long it doesnt look good atleast in that style,

im not a huge fan of faux historic,
i think they are overdoing it with this style,
i hope the developers and people break out this slump soon,
not all bad, just not great

[mohammed wong]

[QUOTE=hydrogen]

http://img137.imageshack.us/img137/3213/street4od.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
this is pretty bland and pukey



http://img126.imageshack.us/img126/6788/modernrows5gw.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
not bad but a bit long with the same style



http://img224.imageshack.us/img224/4397/infillhomes5wx.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
:sleepy:

[NWside]

Wong... you're worse than Tyra Banks. What can please you?

Edit* I meant Naomi Campbell... Eh, you get the point

[mohammed wong]

Wong... you're worse than Tyra Banks. What can please you?

Edit* I meant Naomi Campbell... Eh, you get the point

i guess on this board its crazy to not like all new construction,

they do an okay job, but its just disgusting how much of the old is disappearing also,

central station is infill, but i miss the good old days when individual plots were built by different people,
they give too big a plot to one certain developer and this is what you get
bland monotony,

i guess i should just have no standards, yeah thats better, :sleepy:

[The Urban Politician]

^ I actually agree with our eternal crybaby here ( I kid, Wong, I kid ;) ) regarding the monotomy, although I also think some of the townhomes were well done.

But I am comforted by the fact that the thousands of rowhouses built in London in the late 19th/early 20th centuries for "commoners" were decried as lowly and "monotonous" but are now considered gems worth millions.

[UrbanSophist]

Well, I guess we'll find out in a hundred years how this all plays out.

[geoff_diamond]

Well, I guess if large-scale redevelopment bothers anyone here, they're free to move elsewhere to a place where it's not happening. Perhaps give Detroit a try? I hear it's lovely this time of year. Personally, I'll take bland infill over empty or decaying any day.

[ChicagoLover]

I don't understand your perspective on this, Wong. You say you don't like faux historical, and you don't like massive redevelopment, yet you look back nostalgically to development in Chicago's past. But much if not most of the development in Chicago's past involved (1) copying architectural styles from previous periods, and (2) mass redevelopment with identical and/or very similar rowhouses or tracthomes.

Look at the original Central Station website that has not been updated. The developers clearly envisioned most of the development to be completed with traditional styling. Now look at what's gone up -- a mixture of traditionally styled townhouses and (generally) modernist condominium towers. Sky55 came out wonderfully, as did Museum Park Lofts II next to it, in my opinion. I wouldn't call this development monotonous in the least. Besides, the new Prairie Avenue townhouse/mansions are well varied and look gorgeous in my opinion.

I don't mind rows of identically styled rowhouses nearly as far as the eye can see. I like the urban feel that gives -- the repitition ad infinitum produces a sense of "bigness" -- going on seemingly forever or more than one can easily comprehend -- that reflects that aspect of urbanity that I like.

[mohammed wong]

I don't understand your perspective on this, Wong. You say you don't like faux historical, and you don't like massive redevelopment, yet you look back nostalgically to development in Chicago's past. But much if not most of the development in Chicago's past involved (1) copying architectural styles from previous periods, and (2) mass redevelopment with identical and/or very similar rowhouses or tracthomes.

Look at the original Central Station website that has not been updated. The developers clearly envisioned most of the development to be completed with traditional styling. Now look at what's gone up -- a mixture of traditionally styled townhouses and (generally) modernist condominium towers. Sky55 came out wonderfully, as did Museum Park Lofts II next to it, in my opinion. I wouldn't call this development monotonous in the least. Besides, the new Prairie Avenue townhouse/mansions are well varied and look gorgeous in my opinion.

I don't mind rows of identically styled rowhouses nearly as far as the eye can see. I like the urban feel that gives -- the repitition ad infinitum produces a sense of "bigness" -- going on seemingly forever or more than one can easily comprehend -- that reflects that aspect of urbanity that I like.


alot of chicago though isnt super monotonous and individual plots were developed by individual people, which i guess isnt realistic due to the high cost of land....
some of this stuff isnt too bad, i just think its overly residential without a good mix of retail in there at all,
i mean an occasional 7 eleven or something would be nice on the corner or what not, but the occasional bar or retail place inside a residential neigborhood is going the way of the dinosaur, ESPECIALLY when the artful dodger is knocked down, i think chicago is moving in the wrong direction when it separates the residential from its retail TOO MUCH,

dont get me wrong, its not that bad, and some of them are pretty cool,
but IMHO a little more variety would be nice,
Im sure alot of this will age well, i like older better, and true alot of the blocks had alot of the same designs, but will small differences however, alot of chicagos greystones are similar but not IDENTICAL,
same goes for the bungalows, sure many are similar/identical,
but not monotonous.
to me its an eyesore when i look down a street and i see twenty or more townhomes the exact EXACT same.

And as you can see many mansions were torn down that were unique, true similar in style but different, some survived which is great, but it would be nice if some rich muckey mucks bought some of the plots and had new mansions built, in either old style or new,
its just too planned for me, but hey its just my opinion.

[Chicagotom]

View North from Tower 3 of Grant Park
http://images.snapfish.com/3468%3A4593%7Ffp345%3Enu%3D3279%3E%3A85%3E266%3EWSNRCG%3D3233679636%3B88nu0mrj

Museum Tower (4) http://images.snapfish.com/3468%3A459%3A%7Ffp343%3Enu%3D3279%3E%3A85%3E266%3EWSNRCG%3D32336796797%3B%3Anu0mrj

http://images.snapfish.com/3468%3A4689%7Ffp33%3A%3Enu%3D3279%3E%3A85%3E266%3EWSNRCG%3D323367968%3A62%3Cnu0mrj

http://images.snapfish.com/3468%3A4774%7Ffp33%3A%3Enu%3D3279%3E%3A85%3E266%3EWSNRCG%3D3233679694534nu0mrj

[UrbanSophist]

Museum Tower (4) http://images.snapfish.com/3468%3A459%3A%7Ffp343%3Enu%3D3279%3E%3A85%3E266%3EWSNRCG%3D32336796797%3B%3Anu0mrj

http://images.snapfish.com/3468%3A4689%7Ffp33%3A%3Enu%3D3279%3E%3A85%3E266%3EWSNRCG%3D323367968%3A62%3Cnu0mrj

http://images.snapfish.com/3468%3A4774%7Ffp33%3A%3Enu%3D3279%3E%3A85%3E266%3EWSNRCG%3D3233679694534nu0mrj

Wow. These almost look like renderings. I am very pleased with this tower!

[forumly_chgoman]

I have a question concenring the lot at the corner of Roosevelt and Mich. I was riding my bike north up Mich, sonething I have not done in awhile and was wondering if there any plans to put anything in that lot right at the corner. Currently there seems to be a trailer there, it is the lot I beleive that is in front of sky55 (I think that is the building just south of roosevelt at michigan.

Is this lot to remain empty, or is there palns to put a tower there as well??

[Chicagotom]

There are two towers planned for the north 1/2 of the block bound by Roosevelt, Indiana, 13th Street and Michigan Avenue. Both will be over 50 floors and rumor has it that the one on at Roosevelt and Indiana will release for sale in September this year. Some have speculated that the Michigan and Roosevelt building may have a hotel component to it and that they may be seeking a much taller tower. Personally I would like to see something over 80 floors.

Currently there is Sky 55 - 39 floors 1251 S Indiana - floors stories red brick and an 11 story red brick building on Michigan that is age restricted (senior housing).

[forumly_chgoman]

Yeah that would be cool, as I was standing there waiting for the light to change I thought this lot is too good a spot not to develop, my only fear was that sky55 might have sighline rights or something....but since I think this is an apt building as oppossed to a condo that is prob less likely.

The specualtion concerning a taller tower is there any substance to it or just idle speculation???

thanks for the reply

[forumly_chgoman]

I think these two building may be what you were referring to

1201 South Michigan


Do you have an update for the content on this page?
[Write to Emporis] [Become a photographer]

Identification
Official name 1201 South Michigan
Emporis Building Number 133768

Location
Address *
Bordering street #1 East Roosevelt Road
Bordering street #2 South Michigan Avenue
Postcode *
Complex Central Station
Neighborhood Near South Side
District Downtown
City Chicago
Country U.S.A.

Technical Data
Height (struct.) 189 m 620 ft
Floors (OG) 60


1200 South Indiana


Do you have an update for the content on this page?
[Write to Emporis] [Become a photographer]

Identification
Official name 1200 South Indiana
Emporis Building Number 133769

Location
Address *
Bordering street #1 East Roosevelt Road
Bordering street #2 South Indiana Avenue
Postcode *
Complex Central Station
Neighborhood Near South Side
District Downtown
City Chicago
Country U.S.A.

Technical Data
Floors (OG) 53

I would think even as currently propose these would be between 550 - 650 ft or so.

[The Urban Politician]

I hope Central Station gets an office building. It would be too bad if that whole area becomes entirely residential.

[i_am_hydrogen]

I took this shot a few weeks back--dig the cluster:
http://img201.imageshack.us/img201/6951/csbw2hw9.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

[Loopy]

Edit: Was asking a question that was answered by a more careful reading of parent post.

[forumly_chgoman]

Woah....cool B/W effect it almost doen't look real. WHere were you roosevlet and State???? or a little furhter west


It'll be more impressive if the two building at roose / mich and indiana / mich get built
as well as MPW, 1MP....though they might be invisible from this vantage

[Chi_Coruscant]

^^I recall that there was a post @ SSP months ago that the third building will be 100ft taller than One Museum Park.

I could be wrong.

[ChicagoSkyline]

Is museum park tower complete?
I like it alot...:drool:http://images.snapfish.com/3468%3A459%3A%7Ffp343%3Enu%3D3279%3E%3A85%3E266%3EWSNRCG%3D32336796797%3B%3Anu0mrj

[forumly_chgoman]

Its really kind of sick ya'know....once Central Station is complete....its skyline alone will humble all but a few skyline in America......especially if these rumors of a building taller than 1mp prove true

[ChicagoSkyline]

Its really kind of sick ya'know....once Central Station is complete....its skyline alone will humble all but a few skyline in America......especially if these rumors of a building taller than 1mp prove true

Yea, I think that Central Station skyline will soon rival Rivernorth....
Just check out this distant Central Station skyline by NYGirl:
http://img246.imageshack.us/img246/2489/p1010510ig0.jpg

a building taller than 1mp prove true
Really! :runaway:

[Chicagotom]

I noticed a crane on the site of 1400 MP this weekend.

[Chicagoago]

God I hope the real estate issues in the country right now don't slaughter all these proposed buildings.

[spyguy]

So someone said that OMPW would begin (soon) after the new year.

[richardsonhomebuyers]

Bovis has been ordering so many sets of drawings for OMPW I would think it has to start soon.

[Jaroslaw]

Any photo updates on OMP? Thanks.

[i_am_hydrogen]

Taken this morning

http://img177.imageshack.us/img177/9669/southcenstaci3.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

[skyscraperman]

The way central station is progressing chicago will have a second skyline like new york although central station is no lower manhatten it is certainly turning into a second skyline that gets your attention as you drive to or from the loop, after one museum park tops out a 734'tower south of the loop will look enormous plus after all the other towers get built there it will be impressive.

[edsg25]

The way central station is progressing chicago will have a second skyline like new york although central station is no lower manhatten it is certainly turning into a second skyline that gets your attention as you drive to or from the loop, after one museum park tops out a 734'tower south of the loop will look enormous plus after all the other towers get built there it will be impressive.

i would tend to look at chicago as one big skyline, far diffferent from New York's Midtown and Downtown. Those two are miles apart and will never join. The Chicago model has been the expanding downtown, starting with the Loop and going on to incorporate the overflow of the Mag Mile/Streeterville, River North, Old Town, Gold Coast, West Loop, South Loop, Central Station, etc. If I were driving south on Lake Shore Drive, as far as I'm concerned, I would be "downtown" from North Ave. to Cermak.

[The Urban Politician]

^ I agree. They will all be united into one giant heap of steel and concrete

[skyscraperman]

['''

[skyscraperman]

..

[skyscraperman]

i would tend to look at chicago as one big skyline, far diffferent from New York's Midtown and Downtown. Those two are miles apart and will never join. The Chicago model has been the expanding downtown, starting with the Loop and going on to incorporate the overflow of the Mag Mile/Streeterville, River North, Old Town, Gold Coast, West Loop, South Loop, Central Station, etc. If I were driving south on Lake Shore Drive, as far as I'm concerned, I would be "downtown" from North Ave. to Cermak.

different what are you talking about;chicago is the second largest downtown in the unted states chicago is similar to new york in a lot of ways one being competition in building height, 2) the tallest buildings in chicago are standing in the same position as new yorks are, the sears tower empire state bldg.-aon center and the chrysler- john hancock and citicorp center ect. ect. sure chicagos layout is different but the idea is the same going along south to central station from the loop the buildings shrink in height then rise again in central station just like new york and if theybuild tall in the gap between the loop and central station making one huge skyline then new york will do the same and if they dont they will eventually or counter with something else.its an old rivalry its fun on both sides.

[geoff_diamond]

If only it were that simple skyscraperman.

As much as it pains me to say... the "me too, me too" mentality is something that only Chicago possesses, not New York. If we connect our two skylines (not that I'm conceding to the fact that we even have two skylines) New York would never feel inclined to do the same just because we did.

Highrise development is a market-driven phenomenon, not a political event. The City of New York could never just make a decision to unite Lower and Midtown Manhatten - even if they wanted to.

Quantitatively - let's assume they did want to. If we consider the "void" between Midtown and Lower Manhatten to be approximately from 30th Street (a generous southern boundary of Midtown) to the Chambers/Brooklyn Bridge area you're already talking about a distance of 2.5 miles, or roughly 45 blocks. So, even if you're talking about nothing more than a shoestring connection between the Midtown and Lower skylines, no fewer than 45 towers would need to be constructed (and more likely somewhere between 60 and 90).

Sorry. Just felt like playing devil's advocate and this seemed like a good way to do it.

[wickedestcity]

the distance between modtown and downtown mannhattan is more like downtown chicago and downtown evanston. the central station is barley but yet still is connects to the southloop

[ardecila]

No.... Downtown Evanston is 11 miles from the Loop. (I checked it on Google Earth)

North Avenue to Cermak is 4 miles, the exact same distance as Times Square to Battery Park. Just throught that was kinda cool.

[edsg25]

different what are you talking about;chicago is the second largest downtown in the unted states chicago is similar to new york in a lot of ways one being competition in building height, 2) the tallest buildings in chicago are standing in the same position as new yorks are, the sears tower empire state bldg.-aon center and the chrysler- john hancock and citicorp center ect. ect. sure chicagos layout is different but the idea is the same going along south to central station from the loop the buildings shrink in height then rise again in central station just like new york and if theybuild tall in the gap between the loop and central station making one huge skyline then new york will do the same and if they dont they will eventually or counter with something else.its an old rivalry its fun on both sides.

what the heck are you talking about? did you think I was putting Chicago in a lesser light than New York? If so, you sure have me wrong...I'm the biggest, most obnoxious Chicago booster there is. Am I misunderstandingyou or did you really think that what I wrote was any sort of put down to Chicago (it was, in fact, the opposite)

All I was saying was that New York's two CBD's are separated by considerable real estate that will never be bridged. Midtown will stay Midtown and Downtown will stay Downtown. Chicago, on the other hand, had its two most important centers (the Loop and Mag Mile/Streeterville) adjacent to each other. Their destiny was to join into one super sized downtown and drag a number of other high rise communities around them into it.

Personally I prefer Chicago's single center to New York's dual centers.

[urban_addict]

why all the comparisons between new york and chicago? new york will never be like chicago and chicago will never be like new york. they are two completely different cities that only share few similarities: skyscrapers, trains, taxis and the same continent. i can't think of any city on this planet that compares itself to new york all the time. i'd like to go on point that chicago is better, cleaner and will def be more modern.

[ardecila]

Actually, in terms of architectural and urban forms and scale, we are probably the closest American city to New York. At least, that's what I've noticed. We are much more like NY than LA or Atlanta, for example. That's why the age-old Chicago/NYC comparisons are valid.

Now - *whips* - back on topic! Chicago will have a large, unified skyline. 'Nuff said.

[edsg25]

Actually, in terms of architectural and urban forms and scale, we are probably the closest American city to New York. At least, that's what I've noticed. We are much more like NY than LA or Atlanta, for example. That's why the age-old Chicago/NYC comparisons are valid.

Now - *whips* - back on topic! Chicago will have a large, unified skyline. 'Nuff said.

Perhaps among the major "skyline cities", Chicago may be more similiar to San Francisco than any other city.

Both Chicago and San Francisco have only one major core.....and that one core is dominant not only over city and metro area, but in the case of both cities remains a very select hub by any measure.

Contrast this with:

Manhattan: Downtown and Midtown
LA: downtown and any number of hubs like Century City, Wilshire Corridor, etc.
Atlanta: downtown, midtown
Houston: downtown, Galleria area
Boston: downtown, back bay

[forumly_chgoman]

Umm...maybe edsg...but really if you look at heights a place like Uptown or more accuratley sheridan road between say foster and granville...actually quite a good spread kinda puts those other city's non-central hubs to shame...granted the non-cnetral hubs in chI are not anything like MT, LMHT, but to say Chicago is uninodal I think is simplistic.....I agree.....and noone sane could argue that Chi is overwhelmingly centralised but there are nodes elsewhere that compare favorably with other multinodes except perhaps NYC


I really hate these NYC / CHI comparison and I generally shy away but I just had to disagree with your premise here edsg

[forumly_chgoman]

No.... Downtown Evanston is 11 miles from the Loop. (I checked it on Google Earth)

North Avenue to Cermak is 4 miles, the exact same distance as Times Square to Battery Park. Just throught that was kinda cool.

DT evanston is at least 11 miles from the loop....there is a sign at Clark and Pratt that points south and says DT 9.5 miles....I live right there......you cannot tell me that clark and pratt are only 1.5 mile to DT evanston

In fact my girlfriend often rides her bike or in winter drives ( Booooo......I know..I know I tell her take the metra or the L, but she is oriiginally from the 'burbs and old habits die hard) she measure the distance from our house to DT evanston where she works to be ~3.5 miles, we live about 2 blocks west of clark so from DT Evanston its gotta be at closer to 13 miles..Google earth is not always very exact, I have verified before

[ardecila]

edsg25: No, but here's what I see: San Francisco is so topographically different from Chicago that the two cities can never feel the same. Comparing Manhattan and areas of Chicago may be a stretch, but Brooklyn and Queens are incredibly similar to the non-central areas of Chicago. The houses are very similar architecturally, street grids with transit, similarly-sized blocks, positions of schools, parks, libraries, etc. The streetscapes in NYC are closer to the ones here than any other city.

If you just look at the shape of the skyline, then your comparison to SF is valid (assuming you don't count the mountains in the skyline!)

[edsg25]

Umm...maybe edsg...but really if you look at heights a place like Uptown or more accuratley sheridan road between say foster and granville...actually quite a good spread kinda puts those other city's non-central hubs to shame...granted the non-cnetral hubs in chI are not anything like MT, LMHT, but to say Chicago is uninodal I think is simplistic.....I agree.....and noone sane could argue that Chi is overwhelmingly centralised but there are nodes elsewhere that compare favorably with other multinodes except perhaps NYC


I really hate these NYC / CHI comparison and I generally shy away but I just had to disagree with your premise here edsg

Couple points here:

I tend to exclude strictly residential high rise zones (when removed from the center of the city) as being hubs. Thus, to me, the high rises that march northward along the lakefront from North Avenue...on Clark, LPW, Lakeview, the Drive, and Sheridan...on up to Devon aren't hubs.

Second...Like most of you, I see no need for gratuitous NY/Chgo comparisons. However, there are many places where comparison is warranted. Population aside (in deference to LA), New York and Chicago still remain the two best examples of the hustling, bustling "big city". In fact, nothing really compares: neither SF or Boston have the population, LA the traditional city layout, Philly the "buzz", to match the Big Apple and the Wild Onion.

And in the (relative) privacy of the Chicago forum, and speaking strictly from personal opinion and with no allusions of being factual, the New York-Chicago rivalry/comparison thing bothers me little because I honestly think Chicago kicks ass when compared to New York. To me, ours is the ultimate American city, by far, the one place in the nation where critical mass and all you'd expect in a phenominal urban center comes in a package that is inviting, and usable, and incredibly beautiful. Chicago proves that a big city can be enthralling...and still be livable. If that is offensive to some, I'm sorry. And if others disagree with me...that's fine. They are entitled to their opinions as much as I am.

[SkylineHeaven]

Central Station skyline updates::cheers:
http://static.flickr.com/107/304959197_00a522ce48_o.jpg

Scroll----------------------------->
http://static.flickr.com/120/306024071_6d40e62451_o.jpg

[SkylineHeaven]

http://static.flickr.com/102/306751405_752827e871_b.jpg

[SkylineHeaven]

:bow:
Lakeshore East projects, Chicago loop projects and central station project all in one on 11/26!:)
Scoll----------------------->
http://static.flickr.com/116/306652832_da0b86347e_o.jpg

[SkylineHeaven]

http://static.flickr.com/115/308873747_c0f77dba6b_b.jpg

[i_am_hydrogen]

A shot I took from the Sears Tower a couple weeks ago.

http://img180.imageshack.us/img180/2069/centralstation1ld.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

[The Urban Politician]

I like what you did with page 1 of this thread, Hydrogen.

Very thorough, and great pics

[i_am_hydrogen]

I like what you did with page 1 of this thread, Hydrogen.

Very thorough, and great pics

Thanks, TUP, but all the credit goes to spyguy for creating such an amazingly comprehensive post of Central Station info.

[Chi649]

from 3-4

http://img261.imageshack.us/img261/1587/dsc07178resizedoc0.jpg

http://img261.imageshack.us/img261/6229/dsc07180resizedeg2.jpg

[Chi649]

3-11

http://img463.imageshack.us/img463/7966/dsc07324dv5.jpg

http://img470.imageshack.us/img470/3082/dsc07336wo3.jpg

http://img457.imageshack.us/img457/7623/dsc07352us1.jpg

[High Life on LSD]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/classified/realestate/realestate/chi-0703220499mar25,0,7127399.story?coll=chi-classifiedrealestate-hed


By Jeanette Almada
Special to the Tribune

March 25, 2007

Construction of the 30-story, 302-unit, $125 million Museum Park Place II will begin this summer, after construction delays have driven up the cost.

In 2003, when the city approved a 260-unit, 27-story project, the developer expected the cost to be $80 million. By 2006, the city had approved increases for the project, allowing 28 stories and 272 units.

In efforts to make economic sense of the project as construction costs escalate, the developer has won city approval to increase the project's size to 30 stories with 302 units.

"It is not interest costs that are too high, and there is plenty of money available from lenders. It is the lack of suppliers and bidders that is driving the cost of these projects higher," Ron Shipka Sr., a principal at The Enterprise Cos., said last week.

Enterprise is a partner with Fogelson Properties and Cleveland-based Forest City Enterprises in developing Museum Park Place I and II as part of the nearly 8,000-unit Central Station townhouse, apartment and condominium project, still under way on 80 acres that were once the site of the Illinois Central Depot.

The second phase of Museum Park Place will go up at 1801-1935 S. Calumet Ave., but will bear the address 1901 S. Calumet Ave. when completed, Shipka said.

The developer will build 264 of the units as condos, with eight townhouses at the base of the tower, Shipka said. The developer will build 725-square-foot 1-bedroom units to 1,600-square-foot 2-bedroom units, and is pricing them from $225,000 to $570,000, according to Shipka.

"We are nearly finished with Museum Park Place I," Shipka said. Of 198 units built in that 22-story building at 1841 S. Calumet, the developer has closed on 185 units. Those 1-bedroom and 2-bedroom units, with a range of 1,050 to 1,700 square feet of space, have sold for prices from $250,000 to $500,000 according to Shipka.

Museum Park Place I and II have identical amenities that include rooftop sun deck, community room and a fitness center.

"We hope to start building Phase II this summer, and expect to finish the project in about 20 months [fall 2008]," Shipka said.
Copyright © 2007, Chicago Tribune

[Chicagotom]

Yeah,
I saw this in the real estate section of the CT this weekend. When this one break ground Enterprise will have 5 projects under construction at one time:OMP,OMPW,1400MP,1600MP and Museum Pointe 2. Can you imagine the drain on $$ waiting for these to started closing.

[Chi649]

From a few days ago

http://img519.imageshack.us/img519/107/img1105re9.jpg


http://img514.imageshack.us/img514/5199/img1119rq8.jpg


I also think this is in Central Station, maybe looking southwest?
http://img519.imageshack.us/img519/7088/img1108hs9.jpg

[Loopy]

Wow, you actually got out of your car this time!

Great shots. Thanks.

[Chi649]

Wow, you actually got out of your car this time!

Great shots. Thanks.lol, actually they were taken by my friend. I would not only get out of my car but I would practically climb these buildings if it meant I could take pictures from them. Unfortunately, I have no access :ohno:

[edsg25]

http://img514.imageshack.us/img514/5199/img1119rq8.jpg


Good grief! There really is a skyline growing south of Roosevelt Road!

[Chicagotom]

From a few days ago

I also think this is in Central Station, maybe looking southwest?
http://img519.imageshack.us/img519/7088/img1108hs9.jpg

Actullaly this is a shot between Vetro at Wells and Harrison more not Central Station

[Chi649]

^^ Thanks

[ErmDiego]

Yeah,
I saw this in the real estate section of the CT this weekend. When this one break ground Enterprise will have 5 projects under construction at one time:OMP,OMPW,1400MP,1600MP and Museum Pointe 2. Can you imagine the drain on $$ waiting for these to started closing.

They really need to do something about the fugly red stripes of the building and the townhome exposed concrete exterior. If you walk by, the finish of the exposed concrete on the Townhomes looks hideous and poorly done. They should put a cap around it, matching the finish material of the building or stainless trim. Also, why are many of the windows already showing different tints, that ruin the look?

[BVictor1]

They really need to do something about the fugly red stripes of the building and the townhome exposed concrete exterior. If you walk by, the finish of the exposed concrete on the Townhomes looks hideous and poorly done. They should put a cap around it, matching the finish material of the building or stainless trim. Also, why are many of the windows already showing different tints, that ruin the look?


I noticed the purple tent on some of the east facing windows.

The red stripes are the best feature of the tower. Bold statement instead of some dumb turrets.

[Mr Downtown]

The red stripes are the best feature of the tower. Bold statement instead of some dumb turrets.

Yeah, if you thought 70s supergraphics were a "bold statement." Mere decoration is not the Chicago way, and painted decoration is the last refuge of a lazy architect. And they're not dark enough. They'll look pink within three years.

[Sir Isaac Newton]

I hated the red stripes at first, but I have to admit, they are starting to grow on me....

[CHIsentinel]

Yeah, if you thought 70s supergraphics were a "bold statement." Mere decoration is not the Chicago way, and painted decoration is the last refuge of a lazy architect. And they're not dark enough. They'll look pink within three years.

Then please explain Sullivan's decoration on the Carson's building on State, or Wright's decorative glass windows or Howell and Hood's decoration on the Tribune Tower. That's a lazy statement if you believe that decorative elaborations on buildings, either chiseled, drilled, welded or painted are not important, or that such decoration just as whimsy, where it doesn't enhance the function of the building isn't important to the history of Chicago architecture.

[Chi649]

Those red stripes look great. So what if painted decoration is the main decorative element of the building? Visually it is very appealing and frankly this city needs more color. We don't need to go crazy with the color but a little more would be nice. Oh well, everybody's got their opinion I guess.

[Chicagotom]

Is there anything in ErmDiego's life that he likes. It sure hasn't come accross from his posts. I wait daily for the downer critique on the South Loop.

As for the Red Stripes - Oh wait that's the beer. I don't mind them.

[ErmDiego]

Is there anything in ErmDiego's life that he likes. It sure hasn't come accross from his posts. I wait daily for the downer critique on the South Loop.

As for the Red Stripes - Oh wait that's the beer. I don't mind them.

There are a lot of great details and highrises I like. I look at the finished project, especially in the South Loop while others get their excitement from just seeing the inannimate renderings and buildings in contruction. Your pictures are terriffic. While that is fun to watch, at the end of the day, people live in the buildings. You would think with the advances in technology, youd think we would be building better, but it seems developers are just building cheaper and pocketing the money.

Why do you have a problem with pointing out problems with the construction? On you next route of photo session, grab a photo of the first floor at Museum Park Place on Calumet and post it and we can discuss what I mean. I was merely pointing out obvious concrete quality flaws (some sort of perosity). If you can see this after 6 months, come back in three years when it looks really bad.

As to the stripes, they look ok to the Lake Shore drive side, from far away, but from the west side, with the western and southern light, the consensious of people who walk the neighborhood, is that the stripes are too stark. Central Station even admitted as such, claiming they had painted several test colors and were hoping this one was going to fade some.

[robituss]

I like the building, but in defense I think Ermdiego is right (not about the stripes). The townhomes and the exposed concrete slabs look sloppy, in finish and even appear a little uneven in places. They should have covered them, helped make it look more continuous with the rest of the building IMO.

Anyway, I have to get back to putting my Target furniture in visible sight, and using blankets for curtains so I can get back on his bad side.

[geoff_diamond]

It absolutely blows my mind that, as I look at these pictures, I stop to think that upon moving to Chicago five years ago only two of those towers (1130 and 1212) were standing. I loitered in front of Target for twenty minutes the other night and just marveled at that fact.

[Chi649]

One Museum Park
5-7-07

http://img523.imageshack.us/img523/9422/img1147ht4.jpg

[Chi649]

5-13-07

http://img379.imageshack.us/img379/665/dsc07756sk3.jpg


http://img264.imageshack.us/img264/1504/dsc07761pc9.jpg


http://img511.imageshack.us/img511/1769/dsc07762gw4.jpg


http://img171.imageshack.us/img171/6656/dsc07763qw3.jpg


http://img379.imageshack.us/img379/4934/dsc07764vg7.jpg


http://img171.imageshack.us/img171/7061/dsc07791pe3.jpg

[BorisMolotov]

Great shots. Are there any plans to build up around 900 S Clark. A lottta unused land.
And by the L tracks?

[Mr Downtown]

Of course. But not this week.

[BorisMolotov]

It would sure be great if we could build up this part of the skyline to stretch to Central Station.

[geoff_diamond]

I never thought I would say this, but... Soldier Field looks fucking amazing when you can't see the colonnade. At the risk of starting a huge debate - I honestly think that at this point, it's been so defiled that we'd be better off just dumping the colonnade and letting the new bowl shine in all its glory. Each piece of it really is beautiful in and of itself, but, together... ugh... not so much.

[i_am_hydrogen]

^Exactly. An old shot I took last fall:
http://img504.imageshack.us/img504/2419/soldierfieldandfieldmusxf1.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

[Sir Isaac Newton]

Great shots. Are there any plans to build up around 900 S Clark. A lottta unused land.
And by the L tracks?

Directly to the North of 900 Clark Lennar had plans to build 3 condo towers in the 35-40 story range and directly to the south the Curve was supposed to go up. Unfortunately, it seems like both proposals have at least been tabled, if not fully scrapped.

Also, just west/southwest of 900 Clark (you can only see a tiny snippet of this area) is where Roosevelt Collection will go up - and construction/prep has just recently started on this.

[Dallas star]

Oh I never realized that ^^

[spyguy]

I just wanted to post this image from the Central Station website to see if anyone had any comments about it.
http://img474.imageshack.us/img474/8121/masterplanvg2.jpg

[Frumie]

Design and site quibbles aside, Central Station at the south end of the park complex bookended by Lakeshore East to its north are two projects, when first proposed, I thought to be too ambitious to come to fruition. Together they are advancing the urbanization of the lake front. I remain excited by both.

[BVictor1]

I just wanted to post this image from the Central Station website to see if anyone had any comments about it.
http://img474.imageshack.us/img474/8121/masterplanvg2.jpg

Looks like there's still a highrise planned for where the sales center trailers are currently.

The townhomes are too cookie-cutter, no variety at all.

They still have the area over the tracks decked and landscaped. I also don't see the highrises that were supposed to cover the tracks further south.

What are your thoughts Spyguy?

[ardecila]

Well, we have some basic footprints for the towers between Michigan/Indiana. Those probably bear no relationship to the actual designs, but they are interesting.

[Loopy]

Well, we have some basic footprints for the towers between Michigan/Indiana. Those probably bear no relationship to the actual designs, but they are interesting.
They are indeed interesting, but I believe that there is already a mid-rise condo on Indiana within one of the footprints.

Also, their bulk doesn't jibe with a rumor I've heard recently about some narrow, single-loaded structures being studied for these parcels.

[RavenWolf55]

I like this project, it is a good addition to Chicago. I like One Museum Park East, but do any of you gentlemen think that from a aesthetic point of view One Museum Park East need a Spire?

[Chicagotom]

Shots from Sat.
http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l221/Mansmith_2006/DSC_0357.jpg

http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l221/Mansmith_2006/DSC_0356.jpg

Looking West from 14th and Indiana
http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l221/Mansmith_2006/DSC_0379.jpg

[NittanyBLUE2002]

http://img504.imageshack.us/img504/2419/soldierfieldandfieldmusxf1.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
^^ This has been my wallpaper for the last couple of weeks. Beautiful shot there, H.

[BVictor1]

Shots by Alex and posted by Kngkyle2. This is Grant park Tower 1 (corner of Indiana and Roosevelt). Remember, this can change.

These are from alex, I just reuploaded them to imageshack:

http://img19.imageshack.us/img19/4817/81989399ooa9wvgp0705071id9.jpg
http://img370.imageshack.us/img370/5190/81989655bmk0mngr0705071fb1.jpg
http://img370.imageshack.us/img370/8983/81989824vkes2suf0705071sa3.jpg

[The Urban Politician]

^ Wonderful.

My only problem is that it appears that Grant Park's entire southern wall will be blue.

[BVictor1]

^ Wonderful.

My only problem is that it appears that Grant Park's entire southern wall will be blue.

One Museum Park West will have green glass, and remember, this is very preliminary.

[geoff_diamond]

My god... I hope it doesn't change too much. That form is pretty damn seductive!!!

[Dale]

800-footer ?

[i_am_hydrogen]

What catches my eye almost more than the model is the sketch behind it (in the first photo). I like what appears to be a layering of variously oriented forms similar to OMP, though thinner. Looks promising.

[Chicagotom]

Clearly there are two other buildings being represented here. I wonder if this is the Norhtern face? That would make the one to the left OMPW and the massing to the Right is the final building at Michigan and Roosevelt

IMO that sweeping bow/sail should face north and be the front profile of the building.

[brett7three]

^ Wonderful.

My only problem is that it appears that Grant Park's entire southern wall will be blue.

Yes. It would be nice to see something other than "Blue Glass" during this construction boom.

[ardecila]

IMO that sweeping bow/sail should face north and be the front profile of the building.

I don't think so. By making the building asymmetrical, they introduce an unusual element to the streetwall. Nobody will appreciate the curve if it was on the northern face... it wouldn't be as noticable.

[jimbojoe45]

I'm a little confused as to the location of this building. At the SE corner of Roosevelt and Indiana is OMP2 right? so this building would be in the SW corner of Roosevelt and Indiana. But isn't that site already occupied?

[Flubnut]

Nope. The entire north half of the lot bordering Roosevelt, from Indiana to Michigan, is just a parking lot and some construction trailers. Plenty of room for 2 high-rises.

[Chi649]

7-21-07

http://img179.imageshack.us/img179/4972/dsc08358xi4.jpg

[wickedestcity]

What catches my eye almost more than the model is the sketch behind it (in the first photo). I like what appears to be a layering of variously oriented forms similar to OMP, though thinner. Looks promising.
that looks like what the tower may look like from the other direction

[BorisMolotov]

That sketch-outline of a tower in the drawings that you guys are talking about is OMP west.

[BVictor1]

The next phase of the Museum Parg/Grant Park Towers

Currently the top of Grant Park Tower 3 is coming in at 790'. There's an architectural finish that appears to surpass that number by 10'-15'. Hopefully they will grow some balls and push this baby higher.

Grant Park Tower 4 will be about 900'. Again, hopefully this will change. I know for a fact that these towers have been reduced somewhat. One of the people from the development/architectural team showed me preliminary stuff that had both these towers about 200' taller.

Sorry for the quality, but they are scans of copies, so there isn't much improvement that can be made.

http://img464.imageshack.us/img464/2287/80157948xp4.jpg

http://img401.imageshack.us/img401/5918/26847001oe0.jpg

http://img187.imageshack.us/img187/2624/39206723zn9.jpg

http://img482.imageshack.us/img482/9872/76692685qo3.jpg

http://img297.imageshack.us/img297/8433/61219960gb6.jpg

http://img297.imageshack.us/img297/890/36093019dd0.jpg

http://img521.imageshack.us/img521/2219/78725482fa5.jpg

http://img521.imageshack.us/img521/4593/31570081jz6.jpg

http://img183.imageshack.us/img183/298/11nr0.jpg

http://img521.imageshack.us/img521/1516/10hi4.jpg

http://img521.imageshack.us/img521/347/13ge3.jpg

[Chicagotom]

Well Done Bvic, Well Done. 790 is good 900 is better. I love it. Looks like you grabbed rest of the Muse Park Plan. :banana: :banana:

Grant Park Tower 3 & 4
A few things that I didn't notice in the original rendering that we had a month ago:
1. The Northern face has a distinctive wave (look at the west elevation).
2. The Bow is defiantly facing East.
3. Looks like a townhouses in the first pic. Where are these? - Bvic
4. Tower 4 looks significantly taller and thinner than the massing rendering but not much more to go on. Any idea on the glass color on both buildings?

[Chitowner245]

Is it just me, or is OMP West U/C? I've been walking by it all week, and caissons have definitely begun to be drilled- saw it happen. Can someone with credibility on this site confirm this, cause I'm no authority.

[Helmet Yawn]

I like tower 3, but at the moment I can't remember what it reminds me of. P/H is not really known for its originality. Someone help me out here.

There isn't enough of tower 4 to comment on.

Again, it makes me question the whole planning of the '4 sites' along the south wall of Grant Park. Why was it deemed to be 4 parcels? Obviously because the economics of the deal suggested it. I mean why not 1 bigger parcel and a park space? Why not a proper "streetwall" like the one that occurs on Michigan Ave. or even the newly constructed streetwall adjacent to 840 Lakeshore Dr.?

I just have a bad feeling that it's going to all feel a little monotonous.....except one with blueish glass, one with greenish glass, one with grayish glass....etc.

.......but tower 3 is sexy....whoever came up with it originally.

[Flubnut]

Again, it makes me question the whole planning of the '4 sites' along the south wall of Grant Park. Why was it deemed to be 4 parcels? Obviously because the economics of the deal suggested it. I mean why not 1 bigger parcel and a park space? Why not a proper "streetwall" like the one that occurs on Michigan Ave. or even the newly constructed streetwall adjacent to 840 Lakeshore Dr.?

I just have a bad feeling that it's going to all feel a little monotonous.....except one with blueish glass, one with greenish glass, one with grayish glass....etc.

There's no 'street wall' along Randolph, so I don't think one is urgently needed along Roosevelt to balance things out. And while I like park space as well, isn't there enough right across the street?

I see your point about having the same firm designing the entire south wall of Grant Park, but I'm not sure you would get huge amounts of diversity with multiple firms either. All 4 buildings will be high-end, and these days that (almost) always means glass. The north wall has the advantage of being built over the last 60+ years, hence the diversity of the buildings. The south end will look nice when it's complete, but it certainly will look "new".

[The Urban Politician]

I like tower 3, but at the moment I can't remember what it reminds me of. P/H is not really known for its originality. Someone help me out here.

There isn't enough of tower 4 to comment on.

Again, it makes me question the whole planning of the '4 sites' along the south wall of Grant Park. Why was it deemed to be 4 parcels? Obviously because the economics of the deal suggested it. I mean why not 1 bigger parcel and a park space? Why not a proper "streetwall" like the one that occurs on Michigan Ave. or even the newly constructed streetwall adjacent to 840 Lakeshore Dr.?

I just have a bad feeling that it's going to all feel a little monotonous.....except one with blueish glass, one with greenish glass, one with grayish glass....etc.

.......but tower 3 is sexy....whoever came up with it originally.

^ I think the problem with the 'proper streetwall' argument is that if you look at Mich Ave, most of the buildings are relatively short. Having a streetwall of 700-900 foot buildings is a completely different ballgame and, while somewhat cool, would almost be too empowering.

All things considered, these buildings still maintain a streetwall in the 5-6 story (give or take) range, it's just that it won't look like a streetwall per say because the towers that emerge from the bases are just so damn tall

[wrabbit]

Thanks, BVic, for the sleuthwork. Exciting times!

I like tower 3, but at the moment I can't remember what it reminds me of. P/H is not really known for its originality. Someone help me out here.....

Perhaps this?
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y150/wjcordier/404096834_945962f6ab.jpg
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://farm1.static.flickr.com/162/404096834_945962f6ab.jpg&imgrefurl=http://cornedbeefhash.wordpress.com/2007/02/&h=375&w=500&sz=64&hl=en&start=77&um=1&tbnid=b8gjE3OWMhYMWM:&tbnh=98&tbnw=130&prev=/images%3Fq%3Ddubai%2Bhotel%26start%3D72%26ndsp%3D18%26svnum%3D100%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26client%3Dsafari%26rls%3Den%26sa%3DN

But I wouldn't call the PH design "derivative" of this.

[Chicagotom]

^ I think the problem with the 'proper streetwall' argument is that if you look at Mich Ave, most of the buildings are relatively short. Having a streetwall of 700-900 foot buildings is a completely different ballgame and, while somewhat cool, would almost be too empowering.

All things considered, these buildings still maintain a streetwall in the 5-6 story (give or take) range, it's just that it won't look like a streetwall per say because the towers that emerge from the bases are just so damn tall

Maybe there is another way to look at this. These buildings are forming a Park Wall not a Streetwall. The impact will be stunning standing at the Art Institute or Buckingham Fountain and looking south. That being said I am excited about the style and architectual diversity That these 4 buildings are bringing to the skyline.

[Mr Downtown]

Well, the real problem with the streetwall is that these will be residential buildings, which need windows on all sides.

I pushed for the original Central Station PD to include a requirement for this area to have a masonry streetwall that matched the Michigan Boulevard streetwall. But as it became evident that these would be solely residential buildings, that became harder to defend.

I rode past OMP the other night on Indiana. I think those curves on the western/southern façades are really sexy and I'm going to like the finished product a lot. This new one, I'm not so sure. I keep thinking of a woman in her fourth month of pregnancy.

[BVictor1]

Well, the real problem with the streetwall is that these will be residential buildings, which need windows on all sides.

I pushed for the original Central Station PD to include a requirement for this area to have a masonry streetwall that matched the Michigan Boulevard streetwall. But as it became evident that these would be solely residential buildings, that became harder to defend.

Why should it have been masonry?

Why should it have to match the Michigan Boulevard streetwall?

This is a new century you know...

I'm surprised that you didn't push for more variety in uses instead. More retail or hotel rooms.

[InTheLoopSam]

Well, the real problem with the streetwall is that these will be residential buildings, which need windows on all sides.

I pushed for the original Central Station PD to include a requirement for this area to have a masonry streetwall that matched the Michigan Boulevard streetwall. But as it became evident that these would be solely residential buildings, that became harder to defend.

I rode past OMP the other night on Indiana. I think those curves on the western/southern façades are really sexy and I'm going to like the finished product a lot. This new one, I'm not so sure. I keep thinking of a woman in her fourth month of pregnancy.


Masonry streetwall?? What the heck were you thinking? Thank goodness nobody listened to you!! (as I would hope is increasingly often the case with your architectural and urban design preferences (not to mention height) which are based on very outdated, obsolete concepts (note - you might want to stop reading the urban planning texts you edited!! - very 1980sish thinking!!). Come join us in the 21st century, Mr "'Downtown" - these are very exciting times indeed!

[InTheLoopSam]

BVic - thanks for posting the elevations! I generally like what I'm seeing here.
Although I had held out hope that Enterprise would get a clue and have another firm design these 2, I can't find much to complain about - P/H can indeed rise to the occassion when pushed it seems. I especially like the heights - and the positive force they will have in making it even more clear why the fantastic Park Michigan project should be built as currently proposed (for both its great and vital skyline and streetscape contribution)....

[mgk920]

Maybe there is another way to look at this. These buildings are forming a Park Wall not a Streetwall. The impact will be stunning standing at the Art Institute or Buckingham Fountain and looking south. That being said I am excited about the style and architectual diversity That these 4 buildings are bringing to the skyline.
This is kind of reminding me of the 'parkwall' around the south end of Central Park in Manhattan/NYC.

Mike

[Mr Downtown]

Why should it have been masonry?

To continue the formalism: dressed-up buildings facing the most formal large landscape in North America. So-so classicism ages more gracefully than so-so modernism.

This is a new century you know...
In 1989? And blind rejection of the old is no way to determine the best way to proceed.

I'm surprised that you didn't push for more variety in uses instead. More retail or hotel rooms.
At the time, the developer expected the Grant Park frontage to be office and hotel.

[The Urban Politician]

To continue the formalism: dressed-up buildings facing the most formal large landscape in North America. So-so classicism ages more gracefully than so-so modernism.

^ Modernism can't be formal?
"Dressed up buildings?" So-so classicism is "dressed up" in your book? Is the Columbian 'dressed up'?

So-so classicism ages more gracefully than so-so modernism? You know, Mr. D, nobody is going to put gargoyles, intricately carved terra-cotta panels, statues, and Sullivan-esque details on ANY of these 'so so' classical buildings, right? You need to stop looking at the older buildings along the Michigan Ave streetwall and pretend that something like that is ever going to get built today.

I'd take honest modernism over cheaply redone, gross outlines of classicism any day, and the largest formal landscape in North America deserves no less. I know you're taking a page from Blair Kamin by discussing the importance of 'being dressed to the ball' when you're a highrise along Grant Park, but I think he would disagree with you, along with most of the architectural community today.

Of course, if we're talking about something of the quality of the Harold Washington Library, then I'll agree with you.

[brett7three]

Love the waves on GP3. A nice compliment to Aqua to the north, albeit more subtle.

Any news on whent construction will start on GP3 and GP4?

[Chitowner245]

^ Might be a little while. They just started drilling at OMPW a couple weeks ago, and sales aren't what they were for OMP as of now. Wait til OMPW takes off a bit before expecting to hear anything.

[Chicagotom]

Over the last 5 years a project began sales once the preceding building began construction. That process went nuts during 2006 when they had 1400MP, 1600MP, OMP1 OMPW all on the market when they were completing Tower 4. If the trend stays true for Enterprise/Caldwell Banker on launching we could see something early next year for sales on GP3. I don't think that we will see anything construction on GP3 until the Fall of 2008 and 2009 for GP4.

[Chicagotom]

Here...I retried. I was real careful calculating the heights.

Please excuse the crowns...I was in a wierd mood.

http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e399/delta2094/Museum-Park-Development.jpg

:worship: :worship: :worship: :banana: :banana: :previous: :previous: :cheers: :cheers:
Finally - Alliance your are THE MAN! I am totally biased - but - this is the best contiguous set of building buildings in the City. Far surpassing Lakeshore East, River North or anything in Streeterville. The only thing that comes close is Marina Towers, IBM, Trump and the Wrigley Building.

[ardecila]

I can easily see that being a logo for Lollapalooza. The 4 Museum Park buildings, with a stage in the foreground.

[brett7three]

I can easily see that being a logo for Lollapalooza. The 4 Museum Park buildings, with a stage in the foreground.

Heck, it could become the logo for the Central Station Community..

And yes, it is beautiful... Hopefully, they haven't downscaled some of the buildings as I've heard in other forums.

[jpIllInoIs]

Central Station developer not deterred by soft sales climate

http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/chi-wed_notebook_0919sep19,0,570465.story

The developer of 795 units in two new South Loop luxury condominium towers overlooking Grant Park is forging ahead despite the turbulence in real estate markets around the country and softening demand in Chicago

Fogelson's 73- and 83-story towers are part of the 80-acre Central Station development, whose plans call for 8,000 units. So far, about 5,300 units have gone into development or been completed since 1990

Fogelson this month filed a request asking the city to allow each Grant Park tower to be an extra 100 feet high, not to add square footage or more units but to make the buildings taller and thinner, he explained. Together, the towers will have about 2.2 million square feet.

[i_am_hydrogen]

For those who periodically ask whether there are any plans to deck over the train tracks comes this, posted by Alliance at SSP. I'm as excited about this as I would be for another 600-700 foot proposal. Let's hope it happens.

Desmond stated the City will create an “extension of Grant Park” over the railroad tracks flanking South Wall-Central Station and Columbus Dr. His firm is sponsoring an international competition for the extension’s design and has narrowed its choice to three finalists.

He noted Metra likely will consolidate its tracks and relocate its Weldon Yard structure just north of 18th St., where train cars are washed, to a more ”under grade” location in Grant Park north of Roosevelt Rd., perhaps at 9th St. Another solution would have Metra continue to use the current structure but reduce its height to between 18 and 20 feet.

Desmond also announced the St. Charles Railroad will close its operations in March 2008.

[Chicagophotoshop]

^^thats great news. I cant help but think how much the world will be in awe if we complete everything proposed by 2016.

[Chicago2020]

By 2016, the railroad tracks will be covered, there will be atleast a 900' built at the south end of Grant Park and Queens Landing will be built

:soon:

[ChicagoSchool]

By 2016, the railroad tracks will be covered, there will be atleast a 900' built at the south end of Grant Park and Queens Landing will be built

:soon:

Agreed, as covering the RR's with park space will help sell the "south wall" condo units for the developers and thus generate tax $'s for da city...this project will be completed sooner rather than later, imo. Those newly planted trees will be well-grown by 2016.

[BVictor1]

I'm not going to start a new thread for this project. It is just a proposal that hasn't been approved. It's just the dream of the developers of Central Station. It would basically be the southern extension of Central Station.

Here are some massing renderings of what could be...

http://img230.imageshack.us/img230/6095/gateway2ue5.png

http://img230.imageshack.us/img230/9680/gateway1acf2.jpg

[Oaxaca_One]

Wow! Look at all that parkland over the railroad tracks!

If only...

[EastSider]

It looks like plans for an Olympic park...

[Second City]

Wow!! I love it...:drool:

[Chicago2020]

Where did those renderings come from???

And does anyone remember the very first rendering for Central Station???

[ZZ-II]

thx victor, the render looks pretty amazing :)

[i_am_hydrogen]

According to BVictor1, Grant Park 3 & 4 have been approved by the Planning Commission.

http://www.suntimes.com/business/roeder/1015762,CST-FIN-central20.article

Condo confidence
NEAR SOUTH SIDE |
Despite housing slowdown, developer says buyers still interested in Roosevelt Road high-rises

June 20, 2008Recommend

BY DAVID ROEDER droeder@suntimes.com

Reports of the death of the housing market in Chicago have been greatly exaggerated, the developer of the Near South Side's largest new neighborhood said Thursday.

Gerald Fogelson said he's still selling condominiums in his Central Station development and he has enough confidence to lay the groundwork for two new high-rises worth about $800 million.

By the end of the year, Fogelson said, he expects to sell more than $400 million in condos for 2008, a pace he said is down slightly from prior years.

.........The commission agreed that a building Fogelson plans for the southwest corner of Roosevelt and Indiana can be 790 feet, or 73 stories vs. the current allowance of 620 feet. He said he will start marketing the units next year and hopes to break ground in late 2009.............

[Helmet Yawn]

....and the Titanic was unsinkable.

[TOB1AS]

Is it just me, or are the renderings a lot lower then what they look like they would be in reality, considering the floor count? I just think they look very low comparing to the skyscrapers in the background. The tallest one looks about 80 floors in the first render, which, in that case, probably would be much taller in the second one.