South Loop Development News [Archive]

Chicagotom

March 16th, 2006, 12:34 AM

The ColumbiaCronicle.com
On-line edition
By Josh Kantarski
3/13/2006

Recently Centrum Properties Inc., a Chicago-based real estate firm, signed a contract allowing them to purchase an 11-acre plot of land at Roosevelt Road and Wells Street from the Walsh Group, a Chicago construction firm that owned the plot of land.

Centrum has proposed a 500,000-square-foot lifestyle shopping center. Potentially adding to the deluge of big box retail on the Loop?s south end and continuing its transformation from an impoverished neighborhood to a suburban-like shopping district. The center is expected to be an open-air mall with upscale retailers. Centrum could not be reached for comment.

The Chicago-based firm also plans on building 370 condos on that site. In the past, Centrum has been one of the busiest developers in Chicago with a notable presence in Lincoln Park. The firm built the North Avenue Collection, an area shopping center and is revamping the former Montgomery Ward and Co. headquarters into condos. Centrum most recently obtained the Grand Pier Center, a project located in Streeterville.

In the South Loop, Centrum has detailed a plan to build the lifestyle shopping center on the south end of the plot, on level with Roosevelt Road. At Roosevelt, the road is elevated 30 feet to make way for railroad tracks beneath. Centrum will wait longer to develop on the north end, extending to Polk Street, but plans are likely set for residential units.

One Chicago developer that has broken ground recently in the South Loop, JPS Interests, a small Chicago-based developer, established a retail locale at Canal Street and Roosevelt Road with a 320,000-square-foot shopping center. And while it may appear to some that Centrum?s plans for a larger lifestyle center could rival those of JPS?s development, that may not be true.

James Sweeney, an associate with JPS, said there was no rivalry between the retail locales, and the increased interest in development in the South Loop was a good thing for everyone involved.

?[JPS] looks at it with the idea that retail attracts other retail,? Sweeney said of the opportunities afforded by an increasingly retail-heavy South Loop.

Bonnie Sanchez-Carlson, president and executive director of the Near South Planning Board, agreed with Sweeney.

?Anytime a retailer has come into the South Loop, I?m pretty sure they know they?re not going to be a pioneer in here,? Sanchez-Carlson said. ?I know [retailers] have done their research beforehand. And a little competition is always good for retail.?

But while Sanchez-Carlson said that retail competition in the area was a good thing for businesses, she said the location of Centrum?s proposal was even better for the South Loop. She added, however, that she was unfamiliar with Centrum?s exact plans for development.

?I think it only makes perfect sense?with Roosevelt Road acting as the Roosevelt Road retail corridor?to have retail along Roosevelt Road and Clark Street, along with development on Wells Street,? Sanchez-Carlson said. Roosevelt Road and Clark Street are dominated primarily by Target, a national retailer, which opened there last fall.

However, plans for breaking ground on Centrum?s proposals are nowhere near completion.

Paul Bryant, a partner at Mid-America Real Estate Corp., an Oak Brook retail brokerage firm handling the leasing rights for Centrum?s property in the South Loop, said he could not discuss the retail companies interested in renting the space, nor could he discuss details of the relationship between Mid-America and Centrum because the plans for development have not gone before the city.

PrintersRowBoiler

March 16th, 2006, 01:41 AM

Wow those renderings look great! I think the second rendering looks misleading - it is very different in what it shows from the others. Actually, all of them contradict each other a little in different ways. Did you pull them out of the architect's dumpster SpyGuy?
A few notes - below the retail center under the 30' is a 3-story parking garage which is hidden. It will front the train tracks on the East and Wells Street on the West. It is hard to tell how you would get down there in these rendering but I am guessing it will be like Wacker Drive (North-South) with ramps in the middle. Second, it shows no signals on this plan, which they better provide. Third, it shows the bulidings on top of the sidewalks. The sidewalks I believe here are more generous. I also believe the development should include a major bus terminal. There is not much public transportation here.

To put this in perspective, Target is just east of this project across the tracks at the NWC of Clark and Roosevelt. Behind Target, AMLI is planning 3 story townhomes and a tower with apartments. I believe it will be about $1,100 for generous luxury studios.

The last picture shows the proposed park that Centrum has planned behind the theater (It is a multi-plex 12+ screens). There are nice cascading stairs bringing the pedestrians back down to grade from the 30' "platform."

PrintersRowBoiler

March 16th, 2006, 01:47 AM

Is anyone planning on attending the Burnham Pointe preview party tomorrow night? I was planning on attending but something has come up with work. Burhnam Pointe is a 32 story development that has stirred up much debate with the South Loop at the Northwest corner of Polk and Clark. I believe you can still sign up at
http://www.terrapingroup.com/burnhampointe/

The neighboring buliding to the left is driving this next website protesting the construction of the building as it is proposed.
www.polkstreetcanyon.com

Rumor is they have changed the footprint of the building. I was thinking of going with my checkbook but now I am just curious. If anyone does go, can they give an update?

Chicagotom

March 18th, 2006, 04:57 PM

Hey this is Chicago - what's a little casino-license and minority bid rigging scandal among friends. Sounds like a perfect match - Bathhouse John and Hinky Dink

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

DeBartolo in S. Loop parcel bid
$150 million for tract in stalled development

By Thomas A. Corfman
Tribune staff reporter
Published March 18, 2006

A real estate firm owned by former San Francisco 49ers owner Edward DeBartolo Jr. has a non-binding agreement to buy the retail portion of a proposed South Loop development that has been stalled by several problems, including ties to controversial Democratic fundraiser Antoin "Tony" Rezko.

The development arm of Tampa-based DeBartolo Holdings LLC would acquire about 17 acres of the 62-acre property, which is located along the south side of Roosevelt Road between Clark Street and the Chicago River.

The seller is a London-based affiliate of General Mediterranean Holding SA, a conglomerate controlled by Nadhmi Auchi, an Iraqi-born billionaire.

The price would be roughly $150 million, though it would be paid over time, based on the progress of the development, according to people familiar with the transaction.

General Mediterranean acquired the site in November for $130 million from a partnership that included Rezko and his former partner, developer Daniel Mahru.

As a part of that transaction, Rezko formed Heritage Development Partners LLC to manage the development. But that firm has not wooed any retailers to the long-delayed project, which was first disclosed in 2001 and would include more than 6,400 residential units if completed.

However, the failure to move forward may not have been the result of a lack of interest by prospective retail tenants as much as it has been the result of developer missteps and controversy.

"The demand there is going to be extremely strong, as retailers come to learn the quality of the market that's there," said Stanley Nitzberg, a principal in Oakbrook Terrace-based Mid-America Real Estate Corp., which is not involved in the transaction. "There's every reason that site can get developed."

The deal would give DeBartolo the rights to build about 670,000 square feet of retail space and a certain number of residential units, sources said.

Debartolo also would seek to win a badly needed tax increment financing subsidy from the Daley administration, which Rezko and Mahru were unable to obtain.

"If they want any TIF, they would seek it out themselves," said Michael Rumman, chief executive of Heritage Development Partners, who confirmed the deal.

DeBartolo expressed interest in the site a couple of years ago and held serious negotiations last summer.

Rezko and Mahru sold the site after a request for a $140 million TIF grant was stymied when Chicago officials found that a Rezko-owned company improperly operated Panda Express restaurants at O'Hare International Airport that were supposed to be controlled by a minority-owned firm under the city's set-aside program.

Edward Kobel, president and chief operating officer of DeBartolo Development, could not be reached for comment.

Rumman declined to comment on the financial terms, but said $150 million is "not even that accurate. There's a lot of variables associated with that."

The retail space would be located in more than a dozen buildings that would also include about 1,100 residential units, plans show. Rumman said the number of residential units DeBartolo would buy is still being negotiated, and that Rumman is exploring deals for other parts of the site.

"We have a number of parties that are talking to us about various transactions on the site," he said.

DeBartolo was chairman of Youngstrown, Ohio, based DeBartolo Realty Corp. when it was acquired in 1996 by Simon Property Group Inc. of Indianapolis.

He controlled the 49ers for 20 years until 1997, when he was implicated in a casino-license scandal that also involved former Louisiana Gov. Edwin Edwards.

----------

tcorfman@tribune.com

ChicagoLover

March 19th, 2006, 12:52 AM

The city shouldn't provide any TIF funds for this. There is enough development as it is downtown.

The Urban Politician

March 19th, 2006, 06:55 PM

I have heard that "groundbreaking" has begun for Library Tower. Anyone wanna confirm what's happening at that site?

Frumie

March 19th, 2006, 07:45 PM

The city shouldn't provide any TIF funds for this. There is enough development as it is downtown.
Do you have hard evidence to support this claim; what is it that developers and city hall have failed to notice? In short, what are the markers for "enough development"?

Loopy

March 19th, 2006, 08:46 PM

I attended the Greater South Loop Association monthly meeting yesterday.

On the agenda was a presentation of Centrum's Roosevelt Collection. I had attended another roll out of this project at a January South Loop Neighbors meeting. There were a few more details about how it all fits together. I won't go into it it here but I will be happy to answer anyone's questions.

There was another presentation by Amli Residential of a 45 story residential (rental) tower that will neighbor The Roosevelt Collection. It will be designed by Hirsch and Associates. It's an inoffensive glassy box set off of the street on Clark near the new 9th street "extension". There will be future town homes that have not been defined yet. Howard Hirsh presented.

The most interesting presentation was by Frankel and Giles of their first large new construction project.

This is what brought me out to the meeting. The buzz was that Lucien LaGrange had designed a pair of "twin towers" for 18th and Prairie.

I'll admit that that I'm not completely versed in Lucien's oeuvre. I always think of handsome beaux artsy towers that look like modern Blackstone Hotels when I think of Lucien.

When they pulled the model out of the box, I almost shit myself.

The project is two glass towers with recessed balconies. The towers flare out at the top at irregular angles and each tower has one dramatic cantelivering face that is more pitched out than the others. Together, the towers play off of each other nicely. Lucien calls them "Sky Dancers". They are different sizes too, 35 and 45 stories.

The group was largely made up of people who would live in the immediate vicinity of this development. The general feeling about the proposal was positive with a small amount of typical NIMBY bleating.

Although I took my camera, there was no opportunity to snap either the model or the renderings. They were brought out during the presentation, and hustled away immediately after. I asked if anything was available on the Web and the answer was "no". I will launch a campaign of begging and wheedling on Monday morning, so, we'll see.

spyguy

March 19th, 2006, 09:09 PM

Wow, so many developments. And the Lucien towers sound really awesome. Great work and thanks for attending.

Loopy

March 19th, 2006, 10:50 PM

I have heard that "groundbreaking" has begun for Library Tower. Anyone wanna confirm what's happening at that site?

There is no activity at this site as of this morning. The Sales Manager told me that groundbreaking is likely to occur in mid May.

ChicagoLover

March 20th, 2006, 12:16 AM

I believe that the most recent issue of Chicago Magazine reported that Library Tower construction was underway ("Deal Estate" section?).

Frumie asked how I would define "enough development." I'm sorry that I was so vague about this. I don't know how many housing units were added downtown in the last several years without TIF funding, but I know that Chicago is certainly not hurting for development overall. The Brookings Institute report showed Chicago at the very top in terms of residential growth downtown since 1970. The South Loop is one of the neighborhoods at the forefront of development these days. TIFs were originally intended to be used for blighted neighborhoods. Its hard to define the South Loop as blighted. I think development will occur at a healthy pace without the use of TIF funds.

Remember, if development would have occurred anyway without TIF in a particular case, then TIF is arguably a waste of money in that case. The city should only TIF where it thinks development is not imminent through private means say in the next 10 years.

Chicagotom

March 20th, 2006, 02:16 AM

I waked up to the Library Tower site this morning also. No construction.

But there are a few updates on other sites.

1620 S. Michigan is TO [151 ft - 12 - 2006]
The Columbian has reached 5 stories (all garage). [517 ft - 46 - 2007]
At the Vision site the 1st floor columns are being poured [??? ft - 19 - 2007]

Site preperation are well under way at
1720 South Michigan 36 floors 2007
Marquee Michigan Avenue [295 ft - 25 - 2007]

Spy Guy, Do you have a boundry for "south loop" Harrison to Cermak? River to the Lake?

Do we include Central Station? I know it has its own thread. Let us know.

spyguy

March 20th, 2006, 03:35 AM

No, I don't really have a boundary as I don't want this to be very strict. I would probably leave Central Station to its own thread (and OMP to its thread) and focus on all these other mega developments from Centrum, Amli, Concord, Frank and Giles, etc as well as those towers you mentioned (especially if they don't have their own thread).

Edit: Does anyone have any info on this tower? Is it a real proposal? It was under "Current Projects" on D2 Realty's site.

It's called the Curve:
http://img517.imageshack.us/img517/7571/clarktaylor9hi.jpg

Chicagotom

March 20th, 2006, 04:36 AM

Check that thing out. Looks like 35 or so stories, just north of the Target. Were did you get wind of this. I like it.

Chicagotom

March 20th, 2006, 04:36 AM

Picks up on the RiverCity curve.

ThirdCoast312

March 20th, 2006, 05:04 AM

It seems like recently Chicago is becoming a northern Miami in terms of Architecture and Tropical Flare. First Aqua and now this~!

Loopy

March 20th, 2006, 05:12 AM

Picks up on the RiverCity curve.

Yes!

Excellent observation!

PrintersRowBoiler

March 20th, 2006, 06:25 AM

Loopy

March 20th, 2006, 08:39 PM

If that is the tower, I am assuming that is the tower that AMLI is proposing... Do you know anything about that Loopy? Also, Loopy - any indication when groundbreaking is projected for the Roosevelt Collection, AMLI, or Concord Homes buildings?

This isn't Amli's tower. D2 bought 3 acres from Walsh just South of Amli's site. They announced 600 res units and 50,000 sf of retail. I'm not sure if that will all fit into "The Curve", so there might be another tower on the way from D2.

Amli's tower is a 40 story glassy trapezoid, set off of the street with future town homes planned. They hope to break ground this year, pending approval.

Concord's three tower proposal is very likely being reworked thanks to the NIMBY's at Folio Place and Dearborn Park I. (which begs the question: How do the residents of a development that is a world famous planning disaster become the arbiters of future planning decisions?).

Centrum expects to have a permit to do foundation work for Roosevelt Collection by the end of this year.

ChicagoLover

March 20th, 2006, 09:12 PM

Man they just keep coming at you! This is an absolutely amazing time for fans of Chicago skyscraper-dom.

Chicagotom

March 20th, 2006, 11:01 PM

Loopy

March 21st, 2006, 02:59 AM

Loopy

Here! here! I’m so sick and tired of the Printer Row and Dearborn Park Density Nazis. They built their walled in communities they should stay within them. The only good thing about Dearborn Park is that we can all look over them.

Will the 3 projects that were talking about, the Curve, Almi and Concord fill the section east of the Metra tracks and from Polk to the Target?

Will the Centrum work be to the West of the Metra track? Looks like it will include townhomes, major retail and a few towers. What do you know?

Centrum's project's are all on the West side of the tracks and over to Wells Street. In addition to the Roosevelt Collection, they have another future project on the north end of their parcel (still West of the tracks) that includes a fairly large tower and some more commercial.

D2. Amli, and Concord are developing the east side of the tracks over to Clark.

There is another strip of land between the river and Wells street that is owned by Cacciatore, but no developments have been announced for that yet.

Also, I should point out that Centrum is Co-Developers with Walsh, who own the land, and presumedly will be doing the construction. The other guys bought their sites straight out.

As for Dearborn Park, sigh, It's true that they were THE pioneer development in the South Loop. It's just such a strange paradox that they are now, well...in the way.

The whole "LaSalle Park" Development boom (D2, Amli, Concord,Centrum/Walsh) is now cut off from the 900, 1000, 1100 blocks of South Michigan and South Wabash. Residents of this booming area will have to walk several blocks out of their way, either up to Polk or down to Roosevelt to Access this development because the 9th and 11th street access is literally fenced off by Dearborn Park.

The new 11th street pedestrian bridge over the Metra tracks at Grant Park would be a natural pedestrian feeder for LaSalle Park, but unfortunately 11th street is interrupted by Dearborn Park.

I would hope that there will be a movement someday to restore a pedestrian throughway to 9th and 11th streets through Dearborn I. Ideas anyone?

Chi_Coruscant

March 21st, 2006, 04:52 AM

Edit: Does anyone have any info on this tower? Is it a real proposal? It was under "Current Projects" on D2 Realty's site.

It's called the Curve:
http://img517.imageshack.us/img517/7571/clarktaylor9hi.jpg
Click on Emporis' info on The Curve (http://www.emporis.com/en/wm/bu/?id=260908)

Interestingly, D2 Realty retains Helmut Jahn's service for Harrison/Wells site (fyi, it has nothing to do with The Curve).

Chicagotom

March 21st, 2006, 03:30 PM

Say it aint so!

Allison Riggio
Staff Writer

Michael Jarecki / The Chronicle
Standing next to an overhead projection, Alicia Berg, Columbia’s vice president of Campus Environment, speaks before a group of South Loop residents at Grace Place, 637 S. Dearborn St. Columbia plans on initially converting the site of Buddy Guy’s Legends into a parking lot.
A gathering of roughly 25 South Loop residents expressed approval of Columbia’s campus master plan at a March 6 South Loop Neighbors meeting, although some people still had reservations about aspects of the proposal.

Alicia Berg, Columbia’s vice president of Campus Environment presented the plan to the local nonprofit at Grace Place, 637 S. Dearborn St. One of the key points Berg outlined was the development of a new campus center at 8th Street and Wabash Avenue, currently the site of Buddy Guy’s Legends. The school plans to build a 14-story mixed-use space sometime after the end of Guy’s lease in May 2007. The campus center will allow for potential student performance areas, lounges and computer labs on the lower floors and add additional classroom space on the upper floors, Berg said.

Many residents were pleased with the plan to build on the location; some residents had even said the current condition of the blues club was somewhat of an eyesore.

“I hate to see [Buddy Guy’s] go because his music is great, but the building is awful,” said South Loop resident Loukia Verhage.

Since a budget has not been worked out yet for the campus center, it is too early to offer a time frame for construction, Berg said. She added that the college has plans to convert Buddy Guy’s Legends into a parking lot during the likely time gap after the club’s lease ends and before the college is financially ready to construct the campus center.

Concerns posed by the South Loop Neighbors focused primarily on the general aesthetics of the already densely populated Wabash Avenue. Some residents questioned why the school didn’t do more to address the issue of a lack of green space along the street in its master plan.

“We are not a rich school … and we just can’t afford to be building parks,” Berg said. “Part of our mission is to really be able to provide an affordable education. It’s very challenging to do that. If we could afford to [develop green space] we would.”

Along with their concerns, the South Loop Neighbors had a bit of advice to offer the college as well. Verhage offered an option for the school to consider when budgeting for the potentially $90 million development.

“I know [the school wants] Wabash to be Columbia College, but the fact of the matter is you have some high-end real estate that is there too,” Verhage said. “I just think it might be a really good idea to see how that can be worked together between the [college] and those [residencies]. You’ve got people who own million-dollar condos and penthouses, and you don’t know what source of revenue those people might be for you as far as donors.”

Many residents suggested that the college rent its street-level space to retailers as an alternate source of funding. According to Berg, there is a possibility of some retail space in the new campus center, but it isn’t always the best option for the school’s existing buildings.

“We don’t pay property taxes on academic space, and we do pay property taxes if we have a retail portion of a space,” Berg said. “[Additionally], we have such a [shortage] of space on campus that we really can’t afford to turn it over to a retail tenant. And we also like the street presence for ourselves, because we have all these galleries and things [as store-fronts].”

Mark Muenzer, vice president of the South Loop Neighbors, said that while some concerns certainly exist about the development, the group is generally pleased with what the college has done so far.

“Overall we’re very supportive of what they’ve planned,” Muenzer said. “It’s really wonderful to see Columbia stepping up to the plate and saying, ‘You know, we really want to be a part of this in creating some really funky [and] neat kind of ideas.’ [The area] needs an identity.”

Loopy

March 21st, 2006, 08:18 PM

^Yes, it's going to suck to lose Buddy Guys. He is without a doubt, one of the greatest performers to ever pick up an electric guitar. But there is more to the story than big bad Columbia letting Buddy's lease run out to pursue their selfish plans.

The property was previously owned by Isaac Tigrett of Hard Rock Cafe and House of Blues fame. He and Buddy had a falling out, and Tigrett donated the property to Columbia, probably out of spite.

Buddy Guy is a wealthy and shrewd businessman. If he wants to maintain a club in the South Loop, he will. Unfortunately, his last attempt to relocate in the South Loop (The Sam Isabel Building) coincided with a very expensive divorce. Now Buddy only has half as much money as God.

ChicagoLover

March 21st, 2006, 11:39 PM

^ Yes, I don't see this as a negative. Won't Buddy Guy simply find a new, probably better venue somewhere else (hopefully) in the South Loop. Meanwhile, Wabash Avenue will probably get a more attractive, higher density building.

pottebaum

March 22nd, 2006, 12:06 AM

But wait a sec....they're tearing it down for a parking lot?!

wickedestcity

March 22nd, 2006, 12:26 AM

nope buddyguys will never be the same :( the older venue has an old school charm that just cant be replicated

spyguy

March 22nd, 2006, 12:50 AM

But wait a sec....they're tearing it down for a parking lot?!

They'll eventually develop it into a 14 story building.

headcase

March 22nd, 2006, 01:08 AM

They'll eventually develop it into a 14 story building.

yeah, and eventually Block 37 will be the jewel of State st....

CBOTGuy

March 22nd, 2006, 03:22 AM

The Urban Politician

March 22nd, 2006, 04:36 AM

But wait a sec....they're tearing it down for a parking lot?!

^ Read the friggin article, dude.

It's going to be replaced, eventually, with a 14-story student center

Loopy

March 22nd, 2006, 05:55 AM

Buddy Guy's is ugly, I admit, but it is quintessiantly and without a doubt, authentic Chicago, and that is why I love it just the way it is. I think Buddy's helps the burgeoning and rapidly gentrifying South Loop keep some of its original flavor, and I knew something like this was coming quickly.

On another note, the photos from the Roosevelt Collection by Centrum are awesome. This is what I think developers should aim for, when applicable: low-level, multi-use "lifestlye" centers. Sure it's manufactured in a way, but it kind of harkens back to the European squares/markets of old, and it looks nicer and feels nicer than some of these other, in-your-face gaudy developments plaguing our area. As a future South Loop resident (my condo is being built as we speak), I would really like to see something like this in my area.

I know this thead is new, and Chicagotom's article is very recent as well, but does anyone have any idea or opinion of the likelihood of Centrum's proposals to pass. If they do, I hope they aren't altered too much. Those pics look amazing, and I'd really like to see them come to life. How soon can we expect to hear anything?

Centrum/Walsh's proposal for The Roosevelt Collection is very likely to be approved. It does not border on any other developed areas, and it has received very positive community support so far. But remember, it is only one part of a much more exciting larger concept, now known as "LaSalle Park".

LaSalle Park is defined by Roosevelt on the South, the Chicago river on the West, Polk Street on the North, and Clark Street on the East. Walsh owned most of this property, with a western strip owned by Cacciatore. In addition to The Roosevelt Collection, which is the sexiest development of the group, developers D2, Amli, Concord and Centrum (on another parcel) will be building numerous residential towers with town homes and street level commercial space.

This, along with the presently hobbled Riverside District across Roosevelt will create a coherent western boundary for the South Loop. It's not Potsdamer Platz, but I'll take it.

On the Buddy Guy's issue: I think all of the weeping and wailing about the loss of Buddy Guy's is a bunch of elitist nonsense. Buddy is in complete control of his own destiny, he is not a victim. If there is to be no more Buddy Guy's, than that is his decision.

mohammed wong

March 22nd, 2006, 08:01 AM

Centrum/Walsh's proposal for The Roosevelt Collection is very likely to be approved. It does not border on any other developed areas, and it has received very positive community support so far. But remember, it is only one part of a much more exciting larger concept, now known as "LaSalle Park".

LaSalle Park is defined by Roosevelt on the South, the Chicago river on the West, Polk Street on the North, and Clark Street on the East. Walsh owned most of this property, with a western strip owned by Cacciatore. In addition to The Roosevelt Collection, which is the sexiest development of the group, developers D2, Amli, Concord and Centrum (on another parcel) will be building numerous residential towers with town homes and street level commercial space.

This, along with the presently hobbled Riverside District across Roosevelt will create a coherent western boundary for the South Loop. It's not Potsdamer Platz, but I'll take it.

On the Buddy Guy's issue: I think all of the weeping and wailing about the loss of Buddy Guy's is a bunch of elitist nonsense. Buddy is in complete control of his own destiny, he is not a victim. If there is to be no more Buddy Guy's, than that is his decision.

eeehhhhh,

then nothing is special,
thats fine shit changes, fuck i like parking lots, they fucking rock....
bemoan nothing, every change and every destruction is good,
fuck it, why not level the green mill, level all history, fuck it,
fuck chicago,

Loopy

March 22nd, 2006, 08:29 AM

eeehhhhh,

then nothing is special,
thats fine shit changes, fuck i like parking lots, they fucking rock....
bemoan nothing, every change and every destruction is good,
fuck it, why not level the green mill, level all history, fuck it,
fuck chicago,

I live in this neighborhood.

I love Buddy Guy's and I love Columbia.

They both contribute to what I consider to be the fabric of our block on South Wabash.

The loss of Buddy Guy's is very similar to the loss of the Berghoff. If they don't want to continue here then fuck them, it's their choice. Don't blame Columbia, or "Gentrification". Buddy has known about this situation for about eight years. It's up to him to relocate or not. Not you.

mohammed wong

March 22nd, 2006, 05:37 PM

your probably right, i just feel that there isnt enough preservation efforts being waged in chicago in general and it makes me sick.

Chicagotom

March 23rd, 2006, 03:27 PM

Chicago Journal 3/22/2006

By HAYDN BUSH, Managing Editor

SOUTH LOOP
The deal to convert 63 acres of undeveloped land southwest of Roosevelt Road and Clark Street into a mixed-use residential and commercial development took a new twist this week, as the developers announced their intention to possibly sell off the retail portion of the sprawling development to DeBartolo Development, a national developer of shopping malls.

The Riverside Park development was originally crafted by Rezmar Development, helmed by Antoin Rezko, and had been revised last year in the hopes that construction would be under way this spring. But the original deal, which was dependent on roughly $140 million in tax increment financing funding from the city, fell apart last year after the Department of Planning and Development indicated it had concerns about providing TIF funding to Rezko, who had been accused of using minority front companies to land lucrative concessions contracts at O’Hare Airport.

In October, though, Rezmar sold its interests in the project to the British-based General Mediterranean Holding SA, while Rezko and former Rezmar project manager Michael Rumman stayed on as consultants, setting up the Heritage Development firm to manage Riverside Park for the new owners.

Michael Rumman, CEO of Heritage Development, confirmed Monday that Heritage is in talks to sell off the retail portion of the Riverside Park development—roughly 700,000 square feet—to Debartolo Development. Heritage Development, meanwhile, would still develop the roughly 4,600 residential units included in the blueprints.

"We’re at the dating stage," Rumman said of Heritage’s relationship with DeBartolo Development.

Rumman said that the overall site plan would be largely the same as the one completed last year, which focused on an upscale shopping center centered around an extension of LaSalle Street at Roosevelt Road, and would include a new public square at 13th Place and LaSalle Street, a riverfront park and a mix of town houses, high-rises, and park space in the largely residential section south of 14th Street. The new plan also offers two points of entry from Roosevelt Road, and divides LaSalle Street into a pair of one-way streets that would lead shoppers to the project’s underground parking garages. The plan also favors smaller, more exclusive "lifestyle retailers" over national chains and large anchor stores. While DeBartolo would have to stay within the zoning guidelines established in the planned development, Rumman acknowledged that the company may "tweak" the original blueprints.

Rumman also said DeBartolo would be free to pursue city subsidies, including TIF funding for the property, but said that Heritage is leaning against pursuing TIF dollars for the residential portion. Last year, the original developers, Rezmar, asked for upward of $140 million from the city to help build infrastructure on the barren land, which was created when the city straightened a portion of the adjacent Chicago River in the 1930s. As it stands right now, the site is essentially a green field with a mix of trees, weeds, and prairie but no power lines, sewers, or streets. But Rumman, while declining to elaborate, said that Heritage officials were worried about the implications of receiving TIF money.

"A TIF is not free money," Rumman said. "There are many obligations that come with a TIF."

All told, the project would still include 4,600 residential units, which largely would be built after the retail portion is completed. Rumman said he hopes to finish the first phase of construction by the fall of 2008 or the spring of 2009, adding that construction could still start this year.

"This is still an eight-year project," Rumman said.

Rumman declined to elaborate on how much Heritage Development plans to charge for the residential units, and also declined comment on whether the residential development would include any affordable housing.

"It’s premature to comment on the price," Rumman said.

Rumman added that he expects Heritage Development will be presenting an updated version of the Riverside Park plan to South Loop community groups in the coming months.

The Urban Politician

March 24th, 2006, 12:42 AM

eeehhhhh,

then nothing is special,
thats fine shit changes, fuck i like parking lots, they fucking rock....
bemoan nothing, every change and every destruction is good,
fuck it, why not level the green mill, level all history, fuck it,
fuck chicago,

^ Dude, take a chill pill. You're griping about an ugly old piece of shit building. Just because something was built before 1940 doesn't make it a landmark.

And Buddy Guy's? What can I tell you--as Loopy said, it's the owners choice to leave. Stop blaming for Chicago for changing. Maybe it's people like you who need to change...

dvidler

March 24th, 2006, 10:51 PM

Buddy Guys isnt going anywhere. Its moving a half block north to Balbo/Wabash. At least that is what the plans are.

Loopy

March 24th, 2006, 11:16 PM

Buddy Guys isnt going anywhere. Its moving a half block north to Balbo/Wabash. At least that is what the plans are.

If your talking about the "Sam Isabel Building" development, that's long been dead. The sign is still there and flapping in the wind.

No one really knows what Buddy is going to do.

Chi_Coruscant

March 25th, 2006, 12:14 AM

- edit

danthediscoman

March 25th, 2006, 12:58 AM

Chicagotom

March 25th, 2006, 02:31 AM

The Columbian
http://images.snapfish.com/346648246%7Ffp346%3Enu%3D3279%3E%3A85%3E266%3EWSNRCG%3D32335%3A85778%3B8nu0mrj

http://images.snapfish.com/346648246%7Ffp343%3Enu%3D3279%3E%3A85%3E266%3EWSNRCG%3D32335%3A85778%3B9nu0mrj

Vision on State
http://images.snapfish.com/346648246%7Ffp344%3Enu%3D3279%3E%3A85%3E266%3EWSNRCG%3D32335%3A85778%3B%3Bnu0mrj

Loopy

March 25th, 2006, 07:28 AM

Interesting. I just hope that the universities adding the student housing don't skimp on architectual appeal. We all know how the University Center turned out. :sleepy:

Also this is a little off topic but what in the world is that eyesore they just built at Harrison and Wabash?! Unbelievable. Hands down the worst low rise(I think its only 8-9 stories) ever built. Anyone seen it? If I was tall enough I would of walked up leaned over and puked all over the roof of it, anyways the moral of my story...not sure...but recent memory of the University Center makes me leary anytime I hear about these types of college housing projects.

I understand and appreciate the problems people have with University Center.

But, as someone who lives in this neighborhood, I am content with it.

It's massive, unoffensive, and forms a nice "t" intersection with Harrison. Plus, it maintains the student population in the South Loop that, in my opinion, is one of this neighborhood's better features.

I feel similarly about the building you cite at Wabash and Harrison.

As a long time fan of Bauhaus Brutalism, I don't mind this building.

Especially since it serves an important function in our neighborhood: providing housing for less than $400 a month.

I'm glad that the South Loop is still ugly. That's why I live here.

edsg25

March 25th, 2006, 09:45 AM

Does anyone know if our nation's most promient educationally oriented city, Boston, has anything comparable to University Center and the general growth of student population in the south Loop?

Has Boston been able to create a combined setting for multiple institutions the way that Chicago has....or is housing still based on individual institutions (i.e. proximity to Harvard, MIT, BU, BC, N'eastern, Tufts, etc.).

It would seem the Chicago model would be something Boston would dearly like to have...if they don't have it already.

Chicagotom

March 25th, 2006, 07:21 PM

The Chicago Loop Alliance
2005

Student Population
Over the last several years, Loop colleges have been transforming themselves from primarily commuter-based insitutions to more traditional college communities. One more recent example of this trend is the development of the University Center, located at 525 S. State Street. Also known as "Superdorm", the University Center provides housing for 2,000 students who attend nearby DePaul University, Roosevelt University, and Columbia College.

There are approximately 52,400 students in the Loop and South Loop in the fall of 2004, making the area the largest “college town” in Illinois and one of the largest in America (note this does not even include the University of Chicago-Illinois in the West Loop which has a student population of 25,000).

The Urban Politician

March 25th, 2006, 09:39 PM

The Urban Politician

March 25th, 2006, 09:40 PM

The Urban Politician

March 25th, 2006, 09:43 PM

I understand and appreciate the problems people have with University Center.

But, as someone who lives in this neighborhood, I am content with it.

It's massive, unoffensive, and forms a nice "t" intersection with Harrison. Plus, it maintains the student population in the South Loop that, in my opinion, is one of this neighborhood's better features.

I feel similarly about the building you cite at Wabash and Harrison.

As a long time fan of Bauhaus Brutalism, I don't mind this building.

Especially since it serves an important function in our neighborhood: providing housing for less than $400 a month.

I'm glad that the South Loop is still ugly. That's why I live here.

^ Cleverly written and TRUE!

Interestingly, a bit of ugliness is a part of the urban condition. Make everything too cute, flowery, and pearly, and you might as well move to Schaumburg or some sun-belt suburb.

That's why we need some grimy STREET VENDORS, damn it! Who cares if they fill the air with the smell of cooked meat and coffee? It's a city, for God's sake!

End of rant..

ChicagoLover

March 25th, 2006, 10:18 PM

How can someone not like the University Center? I don't get it. Sure, its not pathbreaking architecture, but its a really solid addition, IMO. I don't get it!?

http://housing.depaul.edu/UCC/UCbig.gif

Nice glassy rounded curves hug the corners. Well-proportioned. Well articulated, non-monotonous facade. Separation between a two-story base at street-level and the 'tower' allows it to address the street with human scale. What's the complaint?!?

I do agree that 600 South Wabash is ugly, but its not horribly ugly, a la Apparel Center, as it doesn't stick out too much.

spyguy

March 26th, 2006, 12:08 AM

Loopy

March 26th, 2006, 02:51 AM

^ Not sure. My understanding is that the UC is the largest dormitory on the planet. Can anyone corroborate this?

It is touted as the largest URBAN dormitory.

The Urban Politician

March 27th, 2006, 02:41 AM

I agree. I also like University Center.

Also, how are fake "grimy" vendors any different from fake Streets of Woodfield townsquare? I think more people (especially foreigners) are impressed that Chicago is so clean compared to other major US cities and that serves us well. If a group of businessmen see a hotdog vendor and trash on Michigan Avenue are they going to be impressed? Doesn't it say something about city management if we can beautify streets and keep them extra clean? Or should we sacrifice these things so a few can feel cool and urban because as we all know, having crap thrown all over the ground really makes a neighborhood desirable.

Keep the rats and alligators in New York I say :D

^ I never said I supported "fake" vendors. Real vendors will suffice, thank you.

Besides, everybody keeps complaining about the lack of abundant cheap eats downtown. A guy living downtown who wants coffee on his way to work has to either make it at home or buy it from Starbucks/Caribou--and that's sad.

Vendors will only increase people's options, not to mention enhance streetlife. I don't get how people don't see the advantages of their presence

UrbanSophist

March 27th, 2006, 04:25 AM

One thing I like about Humbolt Park in the summer, for example, is the street vendors. They definitely add to the street life scene.

So, I definitely would like to see little Vienna Beef stands all over the city. Actually, I was walking along Lake St. last summer and right by the L, there was a street vendor selling "red hots". It was in the middle of an industrial looking district, and people were lining up. Point: people would love 'em all over the city.

Of course, they can sell anything- not just hotdogs.

wickedestcity

March 27th, 2006, 05:58 PM

were exactly is it illegal to set up a stand? what are the exact boarders , anyone know ? the interesting thing is that when they passed this anti vending law and set its boundries, was prob a while ago when the "boarders" of downtown were not as extensive. and so i would bet that theres a large chunk of our "current" downtown that are not governed by this law. and would be prime location to set up shop on very corner for anyone with an enta-manure mind.

paytonc

March 28th, 2006, 04:38 AM

Personally, I wish that University Center and Library Tower maintained the ~10 story scale at State & Congress. Would've made for an intersection with an urban scale similar to a grand Parisian plaza, albeit without the nightmarish traffic circle.

Most of Boston's small colleges are west of the city center; the biggest cluster is around Northeastern, in the Fenway. I'm not aware of any collaborative dormitories there, since the scale of buildings is so much smaller.

I did actually Dumpster a bunch of drawings of Centrum's Roosevelt Collection. The little street they're building at the upper level will line up with Riverside Park's street. Cars turning off Roosevelt will descend into ramps in its median, like N/S Wacker, or enter at ground level from an extension of Wells Street. Three restaurants, capacity 180-330 seats, will also sit in the median. Two full floors of retail, with the theaters ringing the interior of the second floor. The 44-story tower entrance is at ground level, facing Wells at the NW corner, and a very large (50KSF) health club faces the park (ground level, north side of complex).

(How many health clubs can this city possibly support, anyhow? They seem almost as ubiquitous as branch banks and drugstores.)

I've never thought of South Loop Neighbors as being excessively NIMBY. A friend of mine sits on their planning board, and their concerns have been more about placement than sheer bulk. I mean, these people pretty much accepted Riverside Park outright -- and how NIMBY could they be to readily accept something that massive just over their shoulders?

Also, those who hate on Dearborn Park as a missed opportunity need to go back and re-read their history -- Lois Wille has a good book on the subject. At the time it was built, there was NO demand for market rate housing south of the river. The developers of that took a huge risk building even the safest, blandest product imaginable. The risk paid off in terms of securing the Loop's future, but the original investors just barely broke even (earning 0.5%). Dearborn Park is rightfully considered one of the signal achievements of Chicago's postwar planning efforts.
.pc

spyguy

March 28th, 2006, 04:47 AM

So are there two towers in the Roosevelt Collection or just one? :?

ChicagoLover

March 28th, 2006, 07:13 AM

Payton, I'm so glad you've become more active in the forum lately. I think we're all enriched by your knowledge and insight into these issues.

Two things: Have people kept up with the latest photos of Sky55? That tower is looking even better than I thought it would. Its come out so well that I wish it would have been placed right at the corner of Roosevelt and Michigan so that the view of it looking south on Michigan would not be obscured some day by another tower on the southeast corner of that intersection. Speaking of which, does anyone know the progress of plans for that space?

Loopy

March 28th, 2006, 07:51 PM

So are there two towers in the Roosevelt Collection or just one? :?

There is one tower planned for the North West end of The Roosevelt Collection project. Centrum is developing another tower on a parcel just north of the proposed 9th street "extension". bordered by Financial Place.

The Urban Politician

March 29th, 2006, 12:53 AM

Also, those who hate on Dearborn Park as a missed opportunity need to go back and re-read their history -- Lois Wille has a good book on the subject. At the time it was built, there was NO demand for market rate housing south of the river. The developers of that took a huge risk building even the safest, blandest product imaginable. The risk paid off in terms of securing the Loop's future, but the original investors just barely broke even (earning 0.5%). Dearborn Park is rightfully considered one of the signal achievements of Chicago's postwar planning efforts.
.pc

^ I'm one of the biggest "haters" on Dearborn Park but that is largely a cosmetic concern, and I totally acknowledge how much of a success it was for its time.

However, like all things, cities must change to improve themselves, and I believe that Dearborn Park is gradually going to become an obstacle for the south loop's continuing resurgence. It may even perhaps become an eyesore. I say this because of the way all of State St from Roosevelt to Polk is a blank wall. Everything is oriented inward, and other than the row of small wooden townhomes south of Roosevelt (which continue southward towards more inward-oriented homes), the development completely rejects one of Chicago's most prominent streets (State St). Also, Dearborn Park completely blocks off any potential east-west connections; these are aspects of the Chicago streetgrid that are sacred in my mind and help the city run efficiently. Dearborn Park, like any suburb, basically says "don't come in here".

That may have been great for the 70's, 80's, and 90's, when the south loop was a pit of hell, but it will only be a detriment to the south loop today. Cities change with time, but I fear that intense opposition from Dearborn Park residents will prevent this area from being redeveloped for a VERY long time, and that disturbs me.

PrintersRowBoiler

March 29th, 2006, 02:30 AM

Some fear that 9th Street will be extended through to Clark Street and through the new development. 9th Street is the only Street with right-of-way running through Dearborn Park between Polk and Roosevelt. It is built about 2/3 of the way through Dearborn Park. Extending it all the way would be great for residents of the proposed Concord Homes/AMLI Residential developments. It is horrible that someone would have to walk 2 blocks out of their way in a city like Chicago.

spyguy

April 2nd, 2006, 12:26 AM

Anyone have a rendering for that proposed 20-something story building called 900 South Clark? I think that's part of the Amli development.

Chi_Coruscant

April 2nd, 2006, 12:37 AM

Two things: Have people kept up with the latest photos of Sky55? That tower is looking even better than I thought it would.
I passed Sky55 this morning. Frankly, the rendering doesn't do justice. Sky55 is much better-looking than what we saw the drawing. Trust me.

Loopy

April 2nd, 2006, 06:05 AM

Anyone have a rendering for that proposed 20-something story building called 900 South Clark? I think that's part of the Amli development.

Amli's tower is 40-something stories, I thought. The rest of the Amli development is townhomes and retail. There might be another development between Amli and Concord on Clark, I haven't entirely grokked the whole thing yet.

spyguy

April 2nd, 2006, 06:51 AM

I just remember there were a few articles a while ago that talked about it. Perhaps the plans have changed? You'd probably know more than me.

spyguy

April 14th, 2006, 12:25 AM

April 19
7:00-8:30
Grace Place

Lennar representatives on the subject of the Clark-Polk development

***PDF Warning***
http://southloopneighbors.org/images/pdfs/SLN_April06.pdf
***

PrintersRowBoiler

April 14th, 2006, 06:56 AM

Loopy

April 14th, 2006, 11:19 PM

^Come early if you want to have time to look at the models and renderings. These meetings usually start promptly at the announced times and models will be mobbed afterwords.

The Urban Politician

April 15th, 2006, 01:54 AM

Lets get some CUAG representation here.

Please no silence--if the NIMBY's begin to act up, appropriately speak the virtues of density in this vibrant area next to one of the world's great financial districts.

Lets not let the NIMBY's fuck up this area!!!

Chicagotom

April 15th, 2006, 09:56 PM

I plan on going. This is at Grace Place - right?. Has anyone posted a rendering for this Clarke and Polk project? Ive not made any of the CUAG meetings but look forward to meeting.

PrintersRowBoiler

April 16th, 2006, 10:04 AM

There is no posted rendering. The site plan has changed numerous times.

Don't worry about the Nimby's. Even the worst hippy protesters like this development and it is well received.

BVictor1

April 16th, 2006, 08:00 PM

April 12th
https://extranet.emporis.com/files/transfer/6/2006/04/450994.jpg

https://extranet.emporis.com/files/transfer/6/2006/04/451017.jpg

Loopy

April 17th, 2006, 06:14 PM

There is no posted rendering. The site plan has changed numerous times.

Don't worry about the Nimby's. Even the worst hippy protesters like this development and it is well received.

There is a huge NIMBY reaction to this project. Look here:

http://polkstreetcanyon.com/

Perhaps you didn't recognize the developers new name: It was Concord Homes, it is now Lennar.

mohammed wong

April 17th, 2006, 07:06 PM

PrintersRowBoiler

April 17th, 2006, 08:37 PM

There is a huge NIMBY reaction to this project. Look here:

http://polkstreetcanyon.com/

Perhaps you didn't recognize the developers new name: It was Concord Homes, it is now Lennar.

I actually check that site on a regular basis. The site in question is right out my window. This site is primarily targeting the Terrapin Burnham Pointe Tower. It is a group of people who live in 124 W. Polk who are losing their views and are upset. They have actually applauded Condord/Lennar's efforts in sharing their plans with the community and getting their input and have said on that website that they like Concord's site. (Concord and Lennar are one and the same... I believe Lennar acquired Concord). Concord's new design fits what this "Nimby" group is requesting.

Loopy

April 17th, 2006, 11:33 PM

^Some of the Folio Place people and Dearbon Park Advisory Council people were whipped up to froth when Concord presented their last site configuration.

I am looking forward to the presentation. Have you heard any details about the new plan for the three towers?

headcase

April 17th, 2006, 11:48 PM

Dearborn Park, it's good that I don't have the money to buy a condo right now, I think I would move there just to be spiteful, and destroy the Advisory Council from the inside....

SSDD

BVictor1

April 18th, 2006, 12:01 AM

btw nice pics bvictor, what building is that?
(i dont hate all new construction just the more lackluster representatives :))

The picture with the stop sign is Museum Tower and the other image is of 1255 South Michigan (Sky55)

simulcra

April 18th, 2006, 12:56 AM

if only there were preservationists with the zealousness of the crazy nimbys
what a bunch of dumbasses,
its the fucking city, if you dont like density get OUT!
i also say in if you dont like history and nice architecture, GET OUT!
jesus christ, the artful dodger and numerous old buildings get knocked down,
and we dont have this amount of outpouring,
but OH NO, a tall building that creates a canyon, AW SHIT, this is the city,
its not supposed to be DENSE?!!??? huh?
these assholes live just south of downtown,
are they trying to save some nice old building?
NOPE, god i dont understand these people, they are the worst,

Your own argument leads itself to some contradictions. Have you ever considered that these NIMBY's *are* preservationists? They're preserving the atmosphere and the neighborhood of what they chose to move into and live with. They, in general, don't care about "old" buildings "worth" saving, simply because these buildings have no impact on their lives. Moreover, if you really like density so much, then you should look at your own arguments, because alot of historical buildings that get knocked down tend to be lower density than the new development (except I suppose in the rare case of a building being leveled for a parking lot). I could say to you "it's fucking CHICAGO and the US, if you like historical buildings, go to europe." Our culture here is on progress and moving forward. Just because *you* have different preferences from other people does not make other people a "bunch of fucking dumbasses."

I don't agree with their views, but then again, I don't live there nor have hundreds of thousands of dollars invested there in the form of a home, and I doubt you do too. While I personally would favor most any kind of development, some people who spent a million dollars thinking that their home would be in a relatively stable area of the city probably won't like any drastic changes. It was probably a bad idea to expect a stable environment in a part of the city undergoing massive change, but most people also think that leasing a car is a good idea, so most people aren't exactly the brightest in expectations down the line.

One more thing, this sounds more like an issue of overdevelopment than density. Or, to put it differently (with some exaggeration for the purpose of illustration), it's one thing to put a 1000 footer in the middle of Wicker Park (overdevelopment) versus put a lot of midrises there (density).

spyguy

April 18th, 2006, 12:58 AM

I was looking at the comments in Polk Street Canyon:

Yet Another Supporter of Burnham Pointe
April 17, 2006 | 5:08 pm

To respond to Ron – the aesthetic quality of residential high-rise architecture in Central Station and the South Loop is clearly improving by leaps and bounds. Gone are the days when designs had to be retro, neo-traditional, faux historical junk to get through city hall and appease the most simple-minded, unsophosticated of neighbors. Rater, today the best of contemporary innovation is being promoted, accepted and celebrated like never before in Chicago residential development. With each new building that arrises from Central Station, the quality of design has improved. The two newest additions, Sky55 and Museum Tower, are the highest quality to come out of that project yet. What’s more, the next buildings to rise – One Museum Park East, 1400 Museum Park, One Museum Park West and 1600 Museum Park are better still. In other places throughout the South Loop, high-quality progressive architecture is also making waves. Coming additions such as Vetro, 1620 Michigan, 1720 Michigan, 1401 State, 1555 Wabash and others will be brilliant additions. Even more exciting are prospects for the future – potentially more modern and innovative designs for the South Loop are on the horizon. Even the unmatched genious of Helmut Jahn is reportedly designing a South Loop condo tower!

What?! If that's true then that is amazing.

Chicagotom

April 20th, 2006, 06:07 AM

Did anyone else go to the meeting at Grace Place tonight?

3 buildings being proposed by Lenar Builders. The first on at the corner of Polk and Clark is to be 34 stories the other two are 40+. Only had a rendering of the 1st building. Fairly simple glass tower, 3 story parking garage on Polk with a roof top tennis court and green space, recessed and semi-recessed balconies. It was ok but it didn't wow me. But most anything is better than vacant land. The timeline sounded like tower 1 in 2009 and then the 2nd and 3rd towers completed by 2011. I have a feeling that if there is decent sales we could see this completed well before that.

The Folio Square NIMBYs were there. I think there dissention in their camp. One of the Folio owners seemed to give the developer their due for the setbacks and landscape elements on Polk and the Park on Clark.

We got a glimpse of the Almi building to the south of this project. It's a 25 story rental building. The renderings that were posted of it being a graceful S similar to River City seemed to have changed. Looks a bit more like a lighting bolt.

PrintersRowBoiler

April 20th, 2006, 06:08 AM

April 19
7:00-8:30
Grace Place

Lennar representatives on the subject of the Clark-Polk development

***PDF Warning***
http://southloopneighbors.org/images/pdfs/SLN_April06.pdf
***

I just came back from this meeting. It really was not clear if the neighborhood is welcome to the development at this time.

The project consists of 3 towers ranging from 34-40 stories tall. The first tower is at the SEC of Clark and Polk. It is anticipated to break ground next summer with sales/marketing starting this fall. The tower is approximately 100' x 100'. The developer is bending over backwards it seems trying to make everyone happy. They are dedicating right-of-way to the city to make a 3rd right turn lane off of Polk onto Clark and extending the walkway to include more grass and trees (38' from back of curb to the building corner). There is a 4 story parking lot that extends back towardst he tracks to shield the trains. The building is a modern yet simple glass structure. There really was no chance to take pictures of the renderings. They are including about a 28,000 SF park that will be open to the public between the buildings. The 3 buildings will be in a checkerboard pattern with the park in the middle.

After the presentation, a hippy nimby from Folio Square got up and recycled his speech regarding Burnham Pointe to many people's frustrations. It seemed he must have had the projects mixed up because many of his points contradicted the truth. I believe there was a handful of residents from Folio who clapped after he was done. The rather irritating lawyer for the developer became abrasive and tried to justify all of their development decisions. In all honesty, I truly believe that the city is the driving force behind the building configuration. It seems the only collective problem that the residents (including myself since I live kiddy-corner to the property) have is the lack of retail. The developer claims that they have tried to get retail to no avail. Although I think retail would work at this site, I think the developers proved tonight that they are doing everything they can to make the neighborhood happy. After all, they did go out of their way to present the plan tonight unlike some developers...

After the presentatio

PrintersRowBoiler

April 20th, 2006, 06:10 AM

spyguy

April 20th, 2006, 06:32 AM

Thanks for the update guys.

We got a glimpse of the Almi building to the south of this project. It's a 25 story rental building. The renderings that were posted of it being a graceful S similar to River City seemed to have changed. Looks a bit more like a lighting bolt.

Are you talking about that "Curve" building I posted in the beginning? I thought that was for D2 Realty, not AMLI?

Also, could you elaborate on "a lightning bolt"? I'm have trouble visualizing that as tower :)

Once again, thanks for attending

The Urban Politician

April 22nd, 2006, 03:06 AM

Thanks, guys.

So there will be NO retail at all for these buildings? I'm surprised.

Either way, that area probably needs more residential density before retailers will come in

simulcra

April 22nd, 2006, 03:49 AM

I haven't been following this thread too much, but my idea is that there needs to be *huge* amounts of residential density before retailers come in. Most people moving into the S.Loop will have cars or have easy access to amenities offered by the Loop and beyond.

I hope the S. Loop doesn't turn into a Le Corbusier-style high-rise suburbia :O

The Urban Politician

April 22nd, 2006, 06:38 PM

.I hope the S. Loop doesn't turn into a Le Corbusier-style high-rise suburbia :O

^ I don't see that happening.

So far a lot of retail is being built/planned in the south loop. Even Vetro, which is now u/c, will have ground floor retail

Loopy

April 22nd, 2006, 07:58 PM

II hope the S. Loop doesn't turn into a Le Corbusier-style high-rise suburbia :O
I am concerned about this as well.

Aside from reducing the height, it seems that the most common concession to NIMBYs made by developers of high-rises is to set the project back from the street. This ruins the cultural concentration that is acheived by using streetwall planning.

Chicago's new "tall and thin" ethos may also contribute to an increasing "Le Corbusier Effect". By setting towers back from the property line, developers are now allowed to build taller. This is a devils bargain in my book.

Streetwalls are what make a city exciting. They frame the activity in the community and give it a punch. They are what makes Manhattan crackle, and what gives every medieval warren in a European city it's sense of mystery.

Plazas, mini-parks, and "greenspace" are much overated, and are often copouts from good urban planning. In fact, the greatest plazas and parks are in cities that utilize streetwall planning to the max.

TUP's standard of "ground level retail" is sound. However, I would propose that "built out to the street" is a better marker of good development, retail or no.

spyguy

April 22nd, 2006, 08:31 PM

- edit

Chicagotom

April 22nd, 2006, 10:11 PM

After 20 years! Lets hope that we get some height here. I would like to see something 50 - 60 stories here to extend the Western skyline south of Sears and the Cake Top.

The Urban Politician

April 24th, 2006, 04:15 AM

I am concerned about this as well.

Aside from reducing the height, it seems that the most common concession to NIMBYs made by developers of high-rises is to set the project back from the street. This ruins the cultural concentration that is acheived by using streetwall planning.

Chicago's new "tall and thin" ethos may also contribute to an increasing "Le Corbusier Effect". By setting towers back from the property line, developers are now allowed to build taller. This is a devils bargain in my book.

Streetwalls are what make a city exciting. They frame the activity in the community and give it a punch. They are what makes Manhattan crackle, and what gives every medieval warren in a European city it's sense of mystery.

Plazas, mini-parks, and "greenspace" are much overated, and are often copouts from good urban planning. In fact, the greatest plazas and parks are in cities that utilize streetwall planning to the max.

TUP's standard of "ground level retail" is sound. However, I would propose that "built out to the street" is a better marker of good development, retail or no.

^ Agreed. I am a huge proponent of streetwalls as well. But so far, I have not seen much evidence that these highrises won't be built up to the lot line. Take Vetro and that other new development (Printers Corner?) for example, or the plans for the retail/residential project near Target north of Roosevelt--all of them are built right up to the sidewalk

Loopy

April 24th, 2006, 08:05 PM

^The context of my remarks was the Concord/Lennar project at Polk and Clark.

I missed the community meeting, but it sounds like the developer made some concessions to the unhappy few by setting certain elements of the project back from the street and throwing in some crappo suburban landscaping.

These changes may be appropriate in this case. I don't know. It just sounds like a more and more familiar response to NIMBYs to make the projects less urban in order to quiet the lunatics.

ChicagoTom and PrintersRowBoiler could you elaborate on this?

PrintersRowBoiler

April 24th, 2006, 08:36 PM

They did set it back from the walk. The city had requested that the building be up to the property line, but the developer convinced the city to allow them to recess the building to make the NIMBYs happy. They do propose a strip of landscaping on either side of the sidewalk and are dedicating a third right turn lane from Polk for cars turning onto Clark. For whatever reason, the NIMBYs seem to think that setting buildings back is "smart urban planning." The ringleader of the NIMBYs (mostly residents of 124 W. Polk it seemed) pulled out the Central Area Plan and was basically embarrassed when he tried to claim criteria for buildings were specified in it that were not in fact the truth. It's very irritating as a property owner within a block of this development and the Burnham Pointe and these handful of people are ruining the development of this promising neighborhood.

spyguy

April 24th, 2006, 11:21 PM

^I wonder if there are enough people that live by you that feel the same way that you could create another faction to oppose these NIMBYs.

Belacqua

April 25th, 2006, 12:32 AM

^I think a lot of people are pretty disenchanted with the objections coming out of Folio Square (where I live). Unfortunately, what began as a fairly reasonable attempt to just talk with the developers has morphed into the rabid nimbyism you see today. These guys constantly come up with new and increasingly contradictory reasons to oppose the developments, and I think that at the base of it all is just pure obstructionism. They want to do anything possible to make it not worthwhile for Terrapin to build Burnham Pointe in its current form. The second I started hearing the word "downzone" I knew we were no longer in rational territory, other than a few people's desire to keep their own views and the perceived value attached to them. Unfortunately we've got at least another year of these idiots in control of our condo board.

Polkstreetcanyon seems to be down today, I can only hope that this is a permanent situation and that the window signs will also come down so the wackos can demonstrate without embarrasing the rest of us.

(By the way, hello, this is my first post here but I've been reading for a long time.)

BVictor1

April 25th, 2006, 05:37 PM

1555 South Wabash

Jonathan Splitt Architects Ltd.
https://extranet.emporis.com/files/transfer/6/2006/04/453431.jpg

Loopy

April 25th, 2006, 08:01 PM

^Thanks Victor. Nice rendering, but did the Sears Tower somehow tiptoe 12 blocks east to get into the shot?

^Welcome, Belacqua!

spyguy

April 25th, 2006, 11:19 PM

It's not so bad I guess.

The Urban Politician

April 26th, 2006, 12:20 AM

^I wonder if there are enough people that live by you that feel the same way that you could create another faction to oppose these NIMBYs.

^ We don't need another faction, we have our organization!!

Chicagotom

April 26th, 2006, 02:18 AM

Thanks for the rendering Victor. Anyone else surprised that its not over 20 stories? I count 14. I would have thought that the developer would have wanted to take advantage of a clear sightline to the due East, North and South. I like the fact that it looks like retail on Wabash. There isn't much local retail south of Roosevelt.

Belacqua

April 28th, 2006, 01:01 AM

According the the Zoning Committee agenda for today, Ald. Haithcock was proposing to downzone from DX-16 to DX-12 a rectangle fronting S. Michigan between Congress, 80 ft north of Balbo (500-630 S.), and the alley west of Michigan. Besides lot/unit floor/area ratios, the main difference between the two zoning levels is the fact that DX-16 didn't need a 30-ft rear setback for residential floors, and DX-12 does. Anybody have an idea of what she might be (pre-emptively) doing with this? Or whether it actually passed?

Chicagotom

April 28th, 2006, 03:33 AM

Clark and Polk development is revised, but not reviled
High density, three tower project gets few complaints from SLN

Chicago Journal 4/27/06
By HAYDN BUSH, Managing Editor

Two years ago, Concord Homes proposed building a mix of condo towers and town houses on a piece of property southwest of the intersection of Clark and Polk streets. And while the development received rave reviews from South Loop Neighbors, the Department of Planning and Development nixed the plans, with officials saying at the time that they were looking for a development that would extend the Clark Street street wall south from the Loop.

On April 19, Lennar Communities, which has since purchased Concord Homes, unveiled revised plans to build three high-rises on the site at a confab of South Loop Neighbors. And while the group had supported the original, considerably lower-density project, only a few of those in attendance last week came out publicly against the reworked development.

The developers, led by Moises Cukierman, president of urban land division for Lennar Communities of Chicago, are proposing building the high-rises, which will be 34, 40 and 42 stories respectively, south and west of the intersection of Clark and Polk streets. Architect Drew Ranieri said the plans include a 3.71-acre public park between the three towers, which would be accessible from Clark Street. Ranieri said that while the initial designs for the towers situated them closer to the corner of Clark and Polk, they have since been repositioned; two of the towers are now planned to rise next to the railroad tracks west of Clark Street, hiding their parking decks from view. The drawings shown at the SLN forum were largely conceptual, though the buildings will be constructed with glass and concrete. Ranieri said he expected that the final blueprints for the plan would be completed within a year; construction on the first building is expected to begin in 2007.

The only major objection to the plans, which received the support of the South Loop Neighbors Board earlier this year, came from South Loop resident Peter Ziv, who lives across from the proposed development on Polk Street.

Ziv noted that the project, when it was initially brought to the public in 2004, originally contained only one high-rise situated near Ninth Street, and several three-story buildings, with a total of 290 units. When completed, the current development plan would include more than 1,000 units; no zoning change is required to go forward.

"This is way out of scale for our neighborhood," Ziv said, receiving scattered applause at the meeting. "This will create a canyon."

But Carolyn Nash, an attorney representing Lennar, pointed out that the original plan was rejected by the Department of Planning and Development, whose planners argued in favor of high-rises that would continue the Clark Street street wall heading north into the Loop.

"Two years ago, we had an alternate plan that was rejected resoundingly by the authorities," Nash said.

Noting the preponderance of retail development planned for the area south and west of the development, Ranieri and Cukierman said they decided not to include ground-floor retail in the development.

"Retail didn’t seem viable," Ranieri said.

Deflecting queries about parking in the building—there will be roughly 1.75 spaces per unit—as well as concerns that the development would dramatically increase traffic on Clark and Polk streets, Cukierman said he expects most of the people buying condos in the development to work downtown, so they will use their cars sparingly during the week.

Cukierman estimated that the units would be sold for roughly $350 to $360 per square foot; with an average size of 1,000 square feet, the average condo in the development would sell for roughly $350,000 to $360,000.

Cukierman estimated that the people would move into the first building in 2009. That year, Lennar Homes would begin work on the second building in the project.

_____________________________________________________________

Chicago Journal 4/27/06
Make Clark and Polk a walk in the park
HAYDN BUSH

Buzzword
With the Lennar Communities project at Clark and Polk likely to start construction next year—and a spate of other South Loop development projects nearing construction, the primacy of Clark and Polk as a pedestrian intersection may be on the way.

Right now, though, it’s still touch and go for retail and residential development on Polk once you pass Clark Street heading west, development on LaSalle and Wells notwithstanding. Similarly, Clark Street is barren south of Polk Street all the way to Target, though residential and retail developers have big plans for that as well. But the days of Clark and Polk as a pedestrian desert are nearly over.

If the southwestern end of the South Loop—that is, everything south and west of Clark and Polk—becomes the shopping mecca that Centrum and the Riverside Park developers are hoping for, everyone from college students to Loop commuters will be trekking past Clark and Polk in the coming years.

When it comes to the Lennar plan—which was rolled out to mostly warm reviews at a South Loop Neighbors meeting last week—the city’s emphasis on pedestrian-friendly development is apparent. The developers limited the total number of parking spaces in the project to 1.75 spaces per unit, and were also pressed by the city to deliver generous green setbacks from Polk Street.

But the city has to do more than simply press developers for concessions if the newer portions of the South Loop are going to generate foot traffic. Currently, Clark Street is seen as a convenient alternate route for South Siders driving out of the Loop—especially since the construction of the Roosevelt Road underpass—but it doesn’t make for a compelling stretch to walk. And plans to add traffic lanes on Polk Street, similarly, may increase the intersection’s traffic flow, and make it that less compelling as a walking route. If the Folio Square objectors to the Clark and Polk development and the Terrapin project across the street are right about anything, it’s that the Near South Plan’s emphasis on Polk Street as a walking route is sadly neglected by the Department of Planning and Development. A stop sign near Dearborn Station would be a nice start toward pedestrian-friendliness—and a long-deserved concession for harried Printers’ Row residents sick of dodging cars—but a larger change in attitude is in order, and hopefully one that reduces the traffic flow on both Clark and Polk.

Moises Cukierman, president of the urban land division for Lennar Communities of Chicago, pointed out at the SLN meeting that he expects many of his customers at Clark and Polk will be walking to work in the Loop. The city should step up and make that stretch more appealing for those same commuters to walk south and west to restaurants when they get home at the end of the day.

It may be farfetched today, but if the western part of the South Loop is going to succeed as a pedestrian-friendly community, meeting at Clark and Polk may become the neighborhood’s equivalent of meeting under the clock tower at Marshall Field’s. It will only happen, though, if the positive aspects of the private developments at Clark and Polk are matched with some city-initiated traffic calming.

The Urban Politician

April 29th, 2006, 12:54 AM

^ Interesting article.

It just kills me that these same nitwits who complain about lack of pedestrian-friendly design are also pushing the developers to create an additional turning lane on Polk St, and are the ones pushing to increase the unit-to-parking ratios of the newer buildings.

I can't wait till half of these neanderthals get priced out of the neighborhood, or even decide to leave because it has become too loud and "dense" for their tastes

Loopy

April 29th, 2006, 08:21 PM

^ I can't wait till half of these neanderthals get priced out of the neighborhood, or even decide to leave because it has become too loud and "dense" for their tastes

A lot of noise is made by people who are trying to cash out of their condos and move to the 'burbs. I would venture that most of the Folio Square activists are not concerned about their future quality of life, but their resale potential.

spyguy

April 29th, 2006, 08:36 PM

- edit

The Urban Politician

April 29th, 2006, 08:40 PM

CPD

April 30th, 2006, 05:18 PM

^ This may actually have potential, 'River South' that is.

Why? Because unlike attempts to change an existing name, this area doesn't even have a name.

I can't tell you how many times I refer to this area as "the area north or south of Roosevelt and east of the south branch of the river" etc etc. It's a pain in the ass and I'm sure other people who are referring to this plot of land feel the same way. Lets finally give it a name, and River South sounds perfectly logical to me.

My guess? It'll stick

Plus, the name blends well with other, long-accepted Chicago neighborhood names like River North and River West unlike "SoLo" which is a patent rip-off of NYC and "West Bucktown" which is just absurd and transparently self-serving on the part of developers.

Chicagotom

May 2nd, 2006, 02:29 AM

I noticed that the Case crains are at the Vetro site at Harrison and Wells. Didn't have my camera. Maybe someone can get over there this week.

Chi_Coruscant

May 4th, 2006, 10:07 PM

Interesting blurb:

Equity Residential Focuses on City
By Mark Ruda
http://www.globest.com/news/535_535/chicago/145449-1.html

CHICAGO-Locally based Equity Residential continues to reduce its exposure in the multifamily rental market, but is hardly exiting the area. While selling 1,221 suburban units for $186.7 million in the first quarter, the multifamily REIT says it hopes to begin a 278-unit, $70-million project in the South Loop, with an opening expected in late 2007.

Equity Residential president and chief executive officer David J. Neithercut says the company paid $6 million for a site, and will build the South Loop project with a joint venture partner. The development is expected to yield a return in the “high 6%” range, Neithercut adds during the company’s earnings conference call Wednesday.

Chicagotom

May 8th, 2006, 08:08 PM

Not that there was much on the site for 1555 S. Wabash. There was a single story auto repair garage. I went by this weekend and the site was cleared.

Belacqua

May 15th, 2006, 10:13 PM

I took a long walk through the Riverside Park/Rezmar parcel this weekend--the construction gate at Wells/Roosevelt was wide open. The whole area has been put through a chipper from Clark to the river all the way down to the railroad tracks around 16th, and there are a few flags up marking buried telecom lines, but beyond that there wasn't evidence of even any surveying or other work. South of the two rail bridges (the southern one of which is still an active part of the Amtrak yard) it just reverts to wilderness all the way down to Chinatown, where it's also wide open at Wentworth/18th. I kinda stumbled upon it and didn't have my camera, but I'll try to get down there next weekend and take some photos.

I'd seen it on maps, but it never quite sunk in how walkably close Chinatown is to downtown and Printers Row along the river. I hope they manage to keep the riverwalk part of that plan alive in whatever they finally build, especially now that the Roosevelt Collection will be bringing the world a half mile further south.

Loopy

May 15th, 2006, 11:27 PM

This area has mind-blowing pedestrian potential.

Imagine the synergy in these future possibilities:

St. Charles Airline from Central Station to Riverside Park becomes bike/walk path.

Polk Street bridge is constructed, connecting UIC with the already huge (44,000) small-college Loop student community.

River Walk from Chinatown to River City.

Pedestrian throughways punched through Dearborn Park at 9th and 11th street, connecting Grant Park to the River Walk via The Roosevelt Collection.

These are some things that South Loopers should emphasize as priorities in the upcoming 2nd Ward Aldermanic race.

Belacqua

May 17th, 2006, 03:39 AM

Printers Corner (Polk/Wells) seems to be finally getting underway. The iron fence around the parking lot came down a couple of weeks ago, construction fencing went up today, and there's lots of surveyors' scrawl on nearby sidewalks.

Loopy

May 17th, 2006, 05:12 AM

^Great news!

Here's the Printers Corner website:

http://www.theboulevardcondos.com/#\

They're promoting a youthful, urban concept that is basically everything that Dearborn Park isn't.

More power to 'em.

globill

May 17th, 2006, 04:20 PM

River South is bland,

How about Southfork, a little 80's nostalgia. Or Sloopwater,
or Downstream, would be like an adverbial neighborhood, "I live Downstream."

Belacqua

May 23rd, 2006, 03:56 AM

Just saw this in the 5/19 Reader (http://www.chicagoreader.com/pdf/060519/060519_letters.pdf).

An Alderman’s Late-Breaking Rebuttal

I read your article about the development at Polk and Clark streets in my ward [The Works, May 5] with great interest. Peter Ziv provided your publication with one side of the issue. In the interest of providing your readers with both sides of this issue, I will give you, as Paul Harvey puts it, “the rest of the story.”
Mr. Ziv omitted some facts. They may help to clarify the chain of events.
The developer Terrapin has an as-of-right zoning for this parcel of land. They enjoy the full rights of property ownership and are building within the zoning for this area.
I came out to Mr. Ziv’s apartment about one year ago and met with 40 residents of Folio Square. They expressed their concerns, which I communicated to Terrapin.
Despite resistance from Terrapin, my office was able to set up a community meeting at Grace Place about one month later. The plans for the development were shown with lackluster support from the community. After this response I urged Terrapin to revise their plans and meet with the community, showing changes.
Shortly thereafter I asked Terrapin to meet with Peter Ziv and Steve Fors, the president of Folio Square. They presented two modified plans with a provision for a setback that would have mitigated to some degree the “canyon effect” and would have helped save some views, and the second to narrow the structure to allow more space in the alley between the two buildings and let in more light. Terrapin did not have to modify their initial plans, but at my insistence they did. Unfortunately for the residents of Folio Square and the community, Peter Ziv unilaterally rejected the two modified plans.
I strive to work for the best interests for all of my constituents. In this instance, my ability to intervene on the behalf of the community has been compromised by the zoning of this area and by Mr. Ziv’s unilateral actions at the meeting with Terrapin. This issue has been discussed with the Department of Planning and Development, the Law Department of the city of Chicago, and my office. In a court of law the rights of the property owner would prevail. If there were anything that I could have done it would have happened.
I thank your readers for this opportunity to state the facts in this case.
Alderman Madeleine L. Haithcock

The Urban Politician

May 24th, 2006, 12:03 AM

^ well that's good to hear.

Peter Ziv can bite me

PrintersRowBoiler

May 24th, 2006, 03:05 AM

This was a response from a resident of Folio Square (MilkManDan - I believe he may be the president - can someone confirm) who has been very active in this whole dilemma (from PolkStreetCanyon.com blog):

You raise some damn good questions. There were plenty of us who had gotten many perspectives of what happened at the meeting where Alderman Haithcock was in attendance. Sure there seemed to be some differences in who heard what….but we could at least draw a pretty reasonable line as to where the middle ground was.

As for the meeting referred to in the Alderman’s Reader posting….where Peter & Steve were in attendance …...and were presented with 2 different options:

That was news to me.

At least 3 could have shared what happened at that meeting, and yet there are more than a few residents of Folio who were completely unaware of any options ever having been prepared or presented…...

Here’s your belly-laugh for the day: I’m one of them.

I knew there was a meeting with the developers (Board meeting minutes for the 8/29 meeting), but it only mentions meeting to discuss concerns, and doesn’t specifically mention who was in attendance, or that anything aside from the normal “heres our problem” occurred. I had no idea that actual options had ever been presented.

Equally odd is that there have been so many opportunities for either Terrapin or the Alderman to bring this up, privately or publicly. It’s not like we’ve been keeping a low profile….we’ve been hanging outside their sales trailer for over 2 months now…..heck….multiple potential future 2nd Ward aldermanic candiates have dropped by to chat…...if the Alderman had been better about returning calls or keeping appointments this could have been brought up in Joravsky’s article….or with the Folio residents en masse…...

I’ve been working on collecting first-hand perspectives on exactly what happened in there…..including descriptions of the alternatives…..

As for why it hasn’t been shared with anyone until now…..(assuming of course the Alderman was herself informed from accurate sources)......I’m workin on that as well.

Now Me: I am furious about this. I am losing sunset views and evening/afternoon sunlight to this development in my condo and now I am reading that this "neighborhood representative" rejected a proposal that would have provided a better view and light condition. The whole time this guy has been lying - to his own residents, to his neighbors. He has been trying to incite riots by protesting at neighborhood meetings he crashes and going to the press with his lies (if this is all true, I trust the alderwoman over Ziv). I almost want to go back and look for instances where he may have commited libel... makes me wonder if a class-action lawsuit could emerge. All this time the neighbors and residents have been wasting their weekends picketing, Terrapin has been trying to defend themselves, and people who have threatened legal action against Terrapin now could realize they have been barking up the wrong tree.

spyguy

May 24th, 2006, 03:57 AM

The beginning of the end?

Belacqua

May 24th, 2006, 04:02 AM

^MilkmanDan is not the president, he's just married to someone on the Folio board and he runs the polkstreetcanyon website. As far as I know the board currently has no officers except secretary since the president (Steve Fors, mentioned in the article) and treasurer both moved this past winter, for reasons unrelated to the above. 3 out of the 4 remaining members of the board, Ziv among them, are pro-protest (they're also 3 out of the 6 people you see down there waving signs on any given weekend.)

I don't think there's any basis for class action anything in this matter--as has been often pointed out, the developer is building just what they have the right to and unless there was a contract it doesn't matter what anybody else had to say about it, negotiated, public, private, secret, whatever. Terrapin might be able to take Ziv to court for his endless baseless bad-faith slagging in the press and everywhere else, which I would love to see. But since the guy and his imps have so effectively discredited themselves in the eyes of even the people who might still have sympathy for them, I doubt Terrapin would risk the negative press: "Developer sues local wacko for idle trash talk."

mohammed wong

May 24th, 2006, 04:37 AM

Chi_Coruscant

May 24th, 2006, 04:40 AM

With Ald. Haithcock's support, it is a sure bet that Terrapin would build eventually. I don't think that Ziv guy has any credibility or resourceful enough to get a court order to stop Terrapin from developing.

I hope Ald. Haithcock extends her support to 830 S. Mich project that we all are waiting for.

PrintersRowBoiler

May 24th, 2006, 05:24 AM

printersrowboiler, i think its fine that the building goes to the corner,
why setbacks?
this isnt rogers park,
one of the king hotbeds of nimbyism,
this is the city, and this is good antisprawl planning,
where is the latest render of this project?

you can ultimately only control that which you own,
there is no great old building being destroyed here so I dont see the problem
that is something that I could get behind, not just selfish nimbies complaining about their view going away, chicago is getting denser and denser and higher and higher
and will become more and more like manhattan, especially the downtown areas,
which is awesome,I just hope for good designs,

Now that I have cooled down...

I mentioned a lawsuit not to be directed at Terrapin, but actually at Peter Ziv (libel). I just threw it out there, not that something like that would even happen. I support the development. I am a frequent transient at www.polkstreetcanyon.com (I am Ed). I think this building will trigger a domino effect for the neighborhood and will increase the value of the neighborhood. I believe the building should be at the corner. A small, selfish, greedy side of me would like to see the building moved back only to improve my views. However, I understand that the building built at the property line is good urban planning and will continue to support this development. While many of us believe Peter Ziv has no credibility, he has a small group of supporters who believe there is no room in Printers Row for a building over 10 stories tall. Although the content of his "speeches" is contradicting and irrational, he is an excellent speaker and comes across as an astute gentleman. The alderwoman's letter is a huge blow to his campaign and cleans up her reputation that Ziv is trying to tarnish.

Loopy

May 24th, 2006, 06:28 PM

Has anyone heard anything about how the Lennar and Centrum/Walsh proposals fared at last Friday's Plan Commission meeting?

Loopy

May 25th, 2006, 04:33 AM

^Roosevelt Collection and Lennar Communities proposals were approved unanimously!

From Chicago Journal 5/25/06

http://www.chicagojournal.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&SubSectionID=60&ArticleID=1743&TM=77442.27

City approves Clark Street project

By MAKIKO KITAMURA, Medill News Service

The Chicago Plan Commi-ssion recommended approval of two large-scale developments planned for South Clark Street May 19, which, when completed, will change the landscape of the western end of the South Loop. The projects include the Roosevelt Collection, a mixed-use retail and condominium complex near Clark and Roosevelt, and the Lennar Communities project for three condominium buildings near Clark and Polk.

A unanimous vote Friday cleared the way for Roosevelt Collection, a mixed-use development to be generally located at Roosevelt and Clark streets. The project is led by Chicago-based Centrum Properties Inc. Roosevelt Collection will include approximately 450,000 square feet of retail space including a 16-screen movie theater, 300 residential units in two five-story buildings, 300 residential units in a 43-story building, and a central plaza area.

Part of the submitted proposal entailed a reduction in the size of a park area from the original 2.95 acres to 2.23 acres.

To compensate for the reduction, Department of Planning and Development project manager Lori Bush reported that a river walk and open space component would be added to land west of Wells Street.

Bush also reported that the city plans to use tax-increment financing revenues from the River South district to help pay for infrastructure development.

"We wholeheartedly support this plan," said Bonnie Sanchez-Carlson, president and executive director of the Near South Planning Board. She urged the developers to consider retail development on the west side of Wells Street to complement what is already planned for the east side.

Sanchez-Carlson voiced similar support for a residential development by Lennar Communities of Chicago LLC to be located at Clark and Polk streets.

Construction will encompass 1,000 residential units in three high-rise buildings varying in height from 34 to 42 stories.

Bush noted that 275 parking spaces would be allotted for 254 units.

"We are in support of one-to-one parking," Sanchez-Carlson said. "And we will continue to support this project."

The area is already teeming with condo developments: Winthrop Properties broke ground Monday on its 17-floor Printers Corner site at the northeast corner of Polk and Wells and the Terrapin Group is poised to erect a 28-floor condominium at the northwest corner of Clark and Polk.

CHIsentinel

May 25th, 2006, 08:15 AM

wickedestcity

May 28th, 2006, 10:18 PM

- edit

mohammed wong

May 29th, 2006, 03:02 PM

what if they called it the "silver coast" to corospond the northside gold coast

no way, that is super contrived

ardecila

May 29th, 2006, 09:32 PM

Yeah - not to mention that it makes the place sound inferior

Frumie

May 29th, 2006, 11:36 PM

First the neighborhood(s) evolve and then the name(s) follow. To date they exist in name(s) only.

globill

May 30th, 2006, 08:08 AM

i still like my idea, sloopwater (south loop water)

Azn_chi_boi

May 30th, 2006, 02:49 PM

They could call it River South.

Belacqua

May 30th, 2006, 06:03 PM

River South is already the name of the TIF district that covers most of it east of the river.

Belacqua

May 30th, 2006, 09:36 PM

Crain's Chicago Business, May 30, 2006

South Loop parcel on the block -- again (http://www.chicagobusiness.com/cgi-bin/news.pl?id=20785)
Key slice of star-crossed ex-Rezmar site for sale
By Thomas A. Corfman

Six months after buying the largest parcel of vacant land near the Loop, an Iraqi-born billionaire is putting up for sale a key piece of the property, which has defied development despite the torrid downtown residential real estate market.

The move comes after the collapse of a tentative $150-million deal with a Tampa, Fla.-based real estate firm owned by former San Francisco 49ers owner Edward DeBartolo Jr. The firm would have developed about 17 acres at the north end of the 62-acre site, known as the Riverside District, along the south side of Roosevelt Road, between the Chicago River and Clark Street.

Chicago-based U.S. Equities Realty LLC and Eastdil Secured LLC of New York have been hired to market the 17-acre parcel, says Michael Rumman, CEO of Heritage Development Partners LLC, which manages the project for a London affiliate of General Mediterranean Holding S.A., a conglomerate owned by investor Nadhmi Auchi. The parcel being marketed is slated to have about 670,000 square feet of retail and up to 2,000 residential units.

Iraqi-born billionaire Nadhmi Auchi is selling 17 acres at the north end of the former Rezmar site in the South Loop. Newscom photo
The sales effort, which is expected to reach overseas investors as well as local players, comes after the expiration of a non-binding agreement with Mr. DeBartolo. A DeBartolo executive didn't return a call seeking comment.

It is another setback for the star-crossed proposal, which was announced in early 2001 but has been ensnared by a series of obstacles: the breakdown of a deal with retailer Ikea, financial troubles, and controversy surrounding Democratic fund-raiser Antoin "Tony" Rezko, who retains an interest in the site.

"None of the stuff that sort of haunted us in the past exists today," Mr. Rumman says. The project is now "financially strong and stable," he says.

TIME CAN BE WORST ENEMY

Despite the site's obvious appeal, the pitfalls are a reminder that time can be the worst enemy of any real estate development — particularly one as enormous as the Riverside District, which would include 4,600 homes over the entire site, if it is ever completed.

Carrying costs, including consultants' fees and interest payments, can quickly eat up potential profits, especially on a highly leveraged deal, observers say.

"You always have to be aware of the clock," says Joel Carlins, CEO of Magellan Development Group LLC, co-developer of Lakeshore East, a 26-acre project north of Grant Park that began at about the same time as the Riverside District. "You need to start something."

Chicago-based Heritage, which is co-owned by Messrs. Rumman and Rezko, took over management after General Mediterranean paid $131 million for the site to a partnership led by developer Daniel Mahru and Mr. Rezko, an entrepreneur with ties to Gov. Rod Blagojevich. Heritage still plans to develop the mostly residential southern portion of the 62-acre site, but some also expect the marketing to draw offers for the entire property.

Before the General Mediterranean deal, Messrs. Rezko and Mahru, former co-owners of Chicago real estate firm Rezmar Corp., had piled up more than $100 million in debt on the property. A liquidity crisis in early 2005 resulted in a technical loan default, property documents show, forcing the eventual sale to Mr. Auchi.

Since acquiring the site, Mr. Auchi has reduced the indebtedness to nearly $23 million, including paying off a $22.5-million loan from the original sellers, a venture that included principals in U.S. Equities, Robert Wislow and Camille Julmy. But the hiring of the well-established firm is unrelated to the loan, which was paid off in March, Mr. Rumman says.

STAR-CROSSED SITE
Since the 1980s, the parcel of land just south of Roosevelt Road and between Clark Street and the Chicago River has been mentioned for everything from a casino to a sports stadium.
1998: U.S. Equities Realty Inc. and Joseph Cacciatore & Co. form venture to market site, assembled from their own holdings and property acquired from railroad CSX Corp.

2001: A partnership led by developer Rezmar Corp. agrees to buy site, but financing delays stall deal.

2002: Rezmar buys property for $67 million, proposing mixed-use development.

2003: Retailer Ikea walks away from deal to anchor project after more than six months of negotiations. April 2005: Request for $140-million city subsidy comes to standstill.

November 2005: Rezmar agrees to sell site to Iraqi billionaire Nadhmi Auchi for $131 million.

March 2006: Tampa, Fla.-based DeBartolo Holdings LLC has tentative agreement to buy key portion of site for $150 million, but deal later collapses.

May 2006: Mr. Auchi looks for new buyers.
Photo: Erik Unger

©2006 by Crain Communications Inc.

dvidler

May 30th, 2006, 10:27 PM

The Library Tower will soon be under construction if not already. The parking lot it will replace has been fenced up and a construction vehicle to dig it up is there.

Also, One East 8th should begin soon. They removed the sales center from its spot a few weeks ago.

The Urban Politician

May 31st, 2006, 01:04 AM

^ Good news.

I've been waiting FOREVER for Library Tower. Extending the State St Streetwall south of Congress is a MUST, and LIbrary Tower has been a key ingredient for a long time

Rascacielos

May 31st, 2006, 04:06 AM

^ Good news.

I've been waiting FOREVER for Library Tower. Extending the State St Streetwall south of Congress is a MUST, and LIbrary Tower has been a key ingredient for a long time

There are also signs on the exterior of the Astoria Tower on-site sales center heralding the end of "pre-construction" prices, which leads me to believe they will break ground on that one soon as well.

PrintersRowBoiler

May 31st, 2006, 08:47 PM

SOUTH LOOP MOVES: The developer Smithfield Properties LLC is about to close on the purchase of adjacent buildings at 626 and 642 S. Clark, said David Crawford, partner in D2 Realty Services Inc., which was part of the sale with partners.

Crawford said Smithfield, headed by W. Harris "Bill" Smith, plans student housing on the site, with the two-story building at 642 to be demolished and the 10-story building at 626 to be renovated. Smithfield executives could not be reached.

Meanwhile, Dwinn-Shaffer & Co. said it has negotiated $78 million in construction and second-stage, or mezzanine, financing for a 31-story condo tower being built at 601 S. Wells. The project is the work of Evanston-based architect and developer Thomas Roszak.

Sales are under way for the 233-unit building, which goes by the name Vetro, the Italian word for glass. Prices range from $170,000 to $830,000.

The property is across Wells from the old CSX railroad property, part of which the real estate team of Frankel & Giles has under a long-term option for future residential development. The railroad still has the rest.

The building they want to knock down - Is that Pat's Pizza? The stretch of Clark starts with a parking garage at Harrison followed by a taller building (626), 2-story (642), taller building, and then the car wash/garage. Also, does anyone know if Burnham Pointe will take out that car wash/garage?

Also, I noticed signs at the SEC of Harrison and Clark across from the subject buildings requests for variances. I believe they asked for a larger driveway and the allowance for a bank pull-up window. Does anyone have any information about this?

Loopy

May 31st, 2006, 09:15 PM

Library Tower, One East Eighth and Astoria Tower will all be breaking ground soon. Good news, yes... but there is another very promising development on the block just South of the One Place/Astoria Development:

At 9th and State there is a surface lot and a six story dilapidated structure that was, until last week, the last of the old Vice District rooming houses.

The parking lot, owned by LaSalle Trust, and the rooming house, owned by Filmar Inc were condemned by the City under Emminent Domain for redevelopment. The last I had heard about this, was a lawsuit by the owners challenging the value of the properties assigned by the court in the E.D. procedure. It was expected to drag out for a couple of years.

However, last week, the eighty-one residents of the flophouse were relocated to other, better SRO facilities and the parking lot and the structure were seized by the city. I assume that this means that the litigation was settled and the properties are now scheduled for redevelopment.

Prior to the lawsuit, it was announced that the properties would be developed into a highrise tower and a midrise "loft" building with ground floor retail. The developer was to be the same group that put State Place together: Canyon/Johnson and Northern Realty. Let's hope that they don't hire J-Lowe as the archi this time.

Belacqua

May 31st, 2006, 10:19 PM

PRBoiler:
Yes, I think that is the Pat's building. Their address is 638 S. Clark and the main part of the building is accessed through the door to their south. I don't think Burnham Pointe does anything to the car wash--if it does, then it's a lot more set back from Polk than anyone seems to think, or else the floorplates on their website are totally not to scale.

I can't believe someone might consider a drive through bank branch for SEC Clark/Harrison. Other than dry cleaners, retail bank branches are the one thing the neighborhood has plenty of, and to build something auto based at that corner (right where all northbound traffic is forced to turn as Clark becomes one way south) is retarded. To say nothing of the essential suburbanism of drive through windows at all. Who do they think would use it, I wonder?

On a related note, I heard that the city is considering making Clark two-way for that extra block up way to Congress, which I guess makes a little more sense than the current setup, since most southbound traffic peels off at Congress anyway.

dvidler

May 31st, 2006, 11:36 PM

PrintersRowBoiler

June 1st, 2006, 03:05 AM

Chi_Coruscant

June 1st, 2006, 06:45 AM

I haven't heard anything lately on the YMCA on State St. Any news on that?

Dorothy Tillman refused to support the YMCA HQ be set up on State St. Nobody understand her nor her logic.

Loopy

June 1st, 2006, 09:46 AM

Dorothy Tillman refused to support the YMCA HQ be set up on State St. Nobody understand her nor her logic.

I think that you might be thinking of Alderman Tillman's opposition to a Salvation Army facility in her ward many blocks South of the parcel at State and Harrison that PrintersRowBoiler is referring to.

About a year ago, the YMCA of the USA announced their intent to move their HQ from leased space at 101 North Wacker to a permanent home at State and Harrison. Since then, the YMCA has had a change in their Presidency, and no one knows if this relocation is supported by the new President. I sincerely hope that this development will happen, as it represents a potentially massive facility that will bring much needed programming diversity to the condo-heavy South Loop environment.

As for Aldermanic support, this is Madeline Haithcock's ward, and she can't be troubled to support or oppose much of anything, as it would involve, well... effort.

Chi_Coruscant

June 1st, 2006, 02:24 PM

^thanks for clearing up. I was used to seeing tillman's resistance to any good things trying to happen in her ward like Salvation Army HQ.

BVictor1

June 4th, 2006, 12:36 AM

I guess I'll post this here also.

Here are some renderings for the proposed Roosevelt Collection. This project is proposed for the land between Wells Street on the west and the Metra Tracks on the east Roosevelt on the south and polk Street on the north. From what I can understand from looking at the PD Application, there will be 2 towers, one of 40 stories and one of 44 stories. I took these shot of presentation boards for the project.

http://images1.snapfish.com/346%3C59%3A%3B7%7Ffp343%3Enu%3D3238%3E868%3E492%3EWSNRCG%3D32337%3A5353%3A%3A8nu0mrj

http://images1.snapfish.com/346%3C59%3A%3B7%7Ffp339%3Enu%3D3238%3E868%3E492%3EWSNRCG%3D32337%3A53686%3B7nu0mrj

http://images1.snapfish.com/346%3C59%3A%3B7%7Ffp33%3A%3Enu%3D3238%3E868%3E492%3EWSNRCG%3D32337%3A5368729nu0mrj

This building will be 479'-0"
http://images1.snapfish.com/346%3C59%3A%3B7%7Ffp345%3Enu%3D3238%3E868%3E492%3EWSNRCG%3D32337%3A5368758nu0mrj

http://images1.snapfish.com/346%3C59%3A%3B7%7Ffp33%3B%3Enu%3D3238%3E868%3E492%3EWSNRCG%3D32337%3A5368766nu0mrj

http://images1.snapfish.com/346%3C59%3A%3B7%7Ffp344%3Enu%3D3238%3E868%3E492%3EWSNRCG%3D32337%3A536879%3Cnu0mrj

This building will be 507'-4"
http://images1.snapfish.com/346%3C59%3A%3B7%7Ffp33%3A%3Enu%3D3238%3E868%3E492%3EWSNRCG%3D32337%3A5378426nu0mrj

http://images1.snapfish.com/346%3C59%3A%3B7%7Ffp346%3Enu%3D3238%3E868%3E492%3EWSNRCG%3D32337%3A5378459nu0mrj

http://images1.snapfish.com/346%3C59%3A%3B7%7Ffp344%3Enu%3D3238%3E868%3E492%3EWSNRCG%3D32337%3A5378479nu0mrj

http://images1.snapfish.com/346%3C59%3A%3B7%7Ffp33%3A%3Enu%3D3238%3E868%3E492%3EWSNRCG%3D32337%3A53784%3A7nu0mrj

Belacqua

June 4th, 2006, 03:35 AM

Wow, thanks for the elevations. Where does that second tower fit into the whole thing? Is that on Clark south of the Lennar property?

Loopy

June 5th, 2006, 04:47 AM

Wow, thanks for the elevations. Where does that second tower fit into the whole thing? Is that on Clark south of the Lennar property?

The second tower is likely part of the Northern portion of Centrum's Roosevelt Collection project. It will be at Financial Place and the new 9th Street "extension".

Belacqua

June 5th, 2006, 04:07 PM

The two towers almost look like they may be different versions of the same thing. In the northern elevations of both of them, the bases are very similar and they seem to intersect with the buildings to the east in the same way.

Loopy

June 5th, 2006, 07:39 PM

It's two towers. One is 479' the other 507'. The Roosevelt Collection Southern site has only one tower proposed, so the other one (507') is likely Centrum's Northern tower that has been announced for Financial Place and 9th. This end of the site has not been entirely fleshed out yet due to problematic underground utilities. So they went to the Plan Commission with just the tower component. Victor, can you shed some light on this?

Rascacielos

June 5th, 2006, 07:54 PM

Apart from the towers it looks a lot like the Market Common Clarendon in Arlington, VA.

http://www.mccafferyinterests.com/content/completed/market_common.htm

Loopy

June 7th, 2006, 10:57 PM

I was just reading a few puff pieces about the Southgate Market project at Roosevelt and Canal. Lot's of kudos given to the archi for "embracing the street". Unfortunately no one noticed that they embraced the wrong street.

The first link contains renderings and floor plans links. I noticed that there will be a connection to Roosevelt in the form of a bi-directional curb cut for Whole Foods traffic. The programming required that Whole Foods have an outdoor surface parking lot that allows their customers to "load and go", using the Roosevelt connection. I suppose that any pedestrians who are willing to risk their lives for organic goodies could use this entrance as well. Otherwise one would have to hike over to Canal Street to enter the complex with dignity.

http://www.tartanrealtygroup.com/southgate.htm

http://www.aia.org/aiarchitect/thisweek05/tw0902/tw0902southgate.cfm

Loopy

June 7th, 2006, 11:07 PM

Oops, heres the other puff piece on Southgate Market. This one has a titilating bit of information that, if true, is HUGE.

http://midwest.construction.com/features/archive/0605_feature4.asp

Here is the interesting portion of the article:

The lot, which is at West Roosevelt Road and South Canal Street, borders active rail lines on its east side. An extension of Taylor Street, which currently ends at Canal, is being built across the northern edge of the site to address circulation problems.

The new extension will allow cars to access upper-level parking and the Whole Foods parking area.

A suspension bridge is being hung from I-beams along the east side of the building to carry cars from Taylor to the top floors. Delivery trucks will be able to drive from the extension along the east side of the building at ground level so they won't interfere with car traffic.

With vehicle access concentrated on Taylor, the Canal Street entrance will be for pedestrians.
Glen Gunkel, a project engineer with Pepper Construction, said the Taylor Street work is one of the trickiest aspects of the job.

The Taylor Street extension includes a bridge that will eventually clear the rail lines and cross the Chicago River to the east. Gunkel said that as Southgate's suspension bridge goes up, there is a lot of coordination between the ironworkers on the parking garage and the ironworkers on the Taylor Street bridge, which is being built by Kenny Construction of Wheeling.

"We're building the bridge and a parking garage and using the road to get back in there and access everything, and it's all happening at once," he said.

Holy crap! Does anyone know anything about this? I had to read it three times to make sure that they were really saying that the extension is being built beyond the Southgate project and across the tracks and river. This $30,000,000 project was pretty pie-in-the-sky the last time I heard about it. Did CDOT actually get it funded? Is Kenny really under contract to build it?

Here's a pdf link of the siteplan. Zoom in a little and you can get a taste of the Taylor extension concept at the North (Right) end of the site:

http://www.tartanrealtygroup.com/southgate/southgate_sitescape.pdf

PrintersRowBoiler

June 8th, 2006, 02:08 AM

Wow... a suspension bridge they call it? I wonder where it ends? I am assuming Wells Street. Would it align with the street north of Target? Could Taylor possibly run UNDER the proposed Roosevelt Collection? I am hoping they bridge Polk Street as well (probably not for a while if at all).

spyguy

June 8th, 2006, 02:23 AM

Well the suspension bridge on the east side of the building is this, right?
http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/3051/22pv1.jpg

But I don't know about the Taylor St. bridge over the river...

BTW, here's an old article I dug up about the bridge:

The Southgate Mall will be a focal point of an ambitious plan to build major new traffic arteries in the South Loop. Shoppers will be able to enter the mall from three streets -- Roosevelt, Canal and Taylor.

The Chicago Department of Transportation expects to complete its $22 million relocation of Clark Street underneath Roosevelt in late May or early June.

CDOT intends to extend Taylor Street from Canal to Wells, though it is still seeking funds for the $30 million project.

Taylor Street would become a viaduct, or elevated road, west of Canal, and would include a movable bridge over the Chicago River, said CDOT spokesman Brian Steele.

"This would provide an important east-west connection across the river between Harrison and Roosevelt," Steele said.

The Taylor Street extension could get under way in 2008 or 2009 if CDOT can obtain funding, Steele said.

CDOT also wants to rebuild Wells as a complete street from Polk south to Roosevelt. Longer term, CDOT intends to build a new stretch of Wells extending from Roosevelt south to Cermak.

spyguy

June 8th, 2006, 05:25 PM

http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/chi-0606080026jun08,1,194010.story?coll=chi-news-hed

High-rise plan stirs dispute in South Loop
Some neighbors say a proposal for two condo towers would overshadow the charm of the Prairie Avenue Historic District

By Aamer Madhani
Tribune staff reporter
Published June 8, 2006

A proposal to build two high-rises on a stretch of the South Loop has set off protests from neighborhood residents, who say the development doesn't mesh with a historic district dotted by mansions once belonging to the city's elite.

The development, at 1712 S. Prairie Ave., would include more than 500 residential units and sit across 18th Street from the Glessner House, a national landmark, in the Prairie Avenue Historic District. The project was designed by renowned Chicago architect Lucien LaGrange.

While the South Loop has been at the center of the city's high-rise construction boom, some district residents say they are dismayed that two contemporary high-rises could be built in their neighborhood.

"I think it is a great design--just not right on top of the Prairie Avenue Historic District," said Paul Manzano, a resident who lives near the proposed development.

A century ago, Prairie Avenue was one of the most desirable addresses in the city, where magnates Marshall Field Jr., Philip D. Armour and George Pullman once lived.

In 1887, the Chicago Inter Ocean newspaper reported that the aggregate wealth of the residents who lived along a six-block stretch of Prairie was at least $50 million. Only a few of the original mansions on those blocks remain.

LaGrange said Wednesday that the fortresslike Glessner House also was controversial when Boston-architect Henry Hobson Richardson built it in the late 19th Century. Critics decried its radical departure from traditional residential design.

The new project features a 45-story tower and 33-story tower behind a row of town homes. The towers will be set back about 400 feet from the street, LaGrange said.

"It's not overpowering," LaGrange said. "We have been very respectful of the Glessner House."

The project, which is being developed by the Frankel & Giles firm, must still be approved by the Planning and Development Commission, Zoning Commission and City Council, a planning commission spokesman said.

A squat office building that Hull House and other social service agencies have used would be leveled to make room for the development.

`This balances out the block'

Keith Giles, of Frankel & Giles, said the project would add distinction to the neighborhood.

"This balances out the block and it makes a statement of the new history of Chicago and where we're going," Giles said.

Indeed, many homeowners said they understand that development along Prairie is inevitable--even necessary. But many said they worry the design, which LaGrange said would feature bent towers "dancing in the sky against one another," will ruin the charm of the tree-lined avenue of stone and brick homes.

"I was just appalled," said Mark Kieras, president of the Prairie District Town Home Association. "I came here for the feel of the mansions. I came for the trees."

In addition to new town homes and midrises in the area, developers have built 17 new homes on the 1800 block of South Prairie alongside the five historic mansions still standing, said Jeff Ayersman, who lives on the block and is president of the Commonwealth Homeowners Association.

The new homes sold for as much $3 million, Ayersman said.

Residents met with LaGrange, Giles and Ald. Madeline Haithcock (2nd) on Monday in what turned into a heated meeting about the project, Ayersman and other neighbors said.

Giles said several residents who attended spoke positively of the proposed development. But Ayersman said none of those residents lives in the historic district.

At one point, Ayersman said Haithcock told the residents that it was unrealistic to believe high-rises would not be built in the neighborhood.

Cynthia Young, an aide to the alderman, wrote in an e-mail on Wednesday that Haithcock was unavailable for comment.

Museum would get funds

As part of the proposal, the developer has committed to donating $600,000 to the city's new affordable-housing fund and $700,000 to the Glessner House Museum, said Corina Carusi, director of the museum.

Carusi said the museum supports the project because there is precedent for it and not because the organization would receive a sizable donation--which officials plan to use for roof repairs.

"There are already plenty of midrises present," Carusi said.

But Ayersman said the development doesn't conform with the city's Near South Community Plan, drawn up in 2003, which says taller buildings in the Prairie Avenue District should be about 60 feet high.

"I don't think anyone is doubting the resume of Lucien LaGrange, but I don't think he listened to what the neighborhood wants. ... This is something that needs to be done on a smaller scale."

Giles said he hopes to begin marketing the units this summer.

wrabbit

June 8th, 2006, 07:56 PM

mohammed wong

June 9th, 2006, 06:50 AM

^^^

Argggh - some of these residents can't seem to wrap their heads around the concepts of change & flux. Such a misplaced sense of entitlement. Cultivate your own garden, and afford others the same decency, as they see fit, within the confines of the law.

In other words, don't be so damned bossy, Kieras!

i cant sit by idly and stay silent
though i am still youngy at 32
this new expression which im not sure with whom is popular

WHAT SHALL THY WRAP THY HEAD AROUND?

is only interesting from a historical perspective
its a retarded expression, that i just cant accept,

has anyone wrapped their head around anything?
if we were possessed with telekinetic or psychic powers then i could understand this silly ass expression, but right now i see it as a lazy comic book writers way of making their comics historically authentic to future genrations,

ie its a totally gay (in the highschool expression non homophobic meaning)
expression, totally fucking gay

PrintersRowBoiler

June 9th, 2006, 07:43 AM

I was just downstairs doing laundry when I was reading the newsletter that Ald. Haithcock sends out. She carried a similar message as the Reader.

She said she had the developer meet with neighborhood representatives reluctantly. Due to the fact that there was obstructive underground chambers at the end of the site, the developer was not able to shift the entire building back. The compromise was rejected because it was not set all the way back. Haithcock went on to say she went to the DPD to see how she could address the issue, but since the developer was not taking any money from the city and since the building followed all ordinances, there was nothing she could legally do to force them to move the building back. She said that they were practicing their rights as the land owners. She then applauded Lennary Homes for working with the community.

Loopy

June 9th, 2006, 06:05 PM

^PRB, please elaborate. What development are you talking about?

Chicagotom

June 9th, 2006, 07:11 PM

6/7/2006 10:00:00 PM
Suburbanites seek out the South Loop
Pied-a-terre buyers heat up condo boom

By MAKIKO KITAMURA, Medill News Service

The South Loop may be known as a magnet for single professionals, but the area has been increasingly attracting a more diverse group of buyers, including suburban empty nesters and young families.

Michael and Angelique Parker of west suburban St. Charles are proud parents of seven children, six of whom are grown and out of the house. Their seventh is 13 years old, but they are wasting no time in preparing for their empty-nest years.

About a month ago they scouted out Printers’ Row, and immediately decided to purchase a condominium unit in Printers Corner, a 17-floor, 88-unit building to be constructed at Polk and Wells Streets. They will use it as a secondary residence for weekends until their youngest goes off to college.

"The neighborhood has a lot of appeal for us, with the old Dearborn Station, and we also wanted a building with a limited number of units" for a feeling of intimacy, Michael Parker said.

The changing demographics of the area, along with the tapping out of loft buildings available for residential conversions, is contributing to the South Loop’s new construction boom that’s producing both loft-like and traditional condominium styles.

"Fifty percent of our [South Loop] buyers are suburban buyers," says Jim Colella, general manager of Garrison Partners Inc., a Chicago residential real estate marketing company. "They are probably the largest growth market right now; it’s not just the young kids anymore."

Garrison Partners represents several new-construction condominium developments, including Aristocrat Tower and Chess Lofts, at Cullerton and Prairie streets, and Printers Corner.

In this year’s first quarter the South Loop was the most active downtown neighborhood in new project developments, according to a report by Appraisal Research Counselors, of Chicago.

The report states that about 44 percent of first-quarter downtown sales occurred in the South Loop. Approximately 1,300 condominium units are planned for completion in the South Loop during 2006, according to Gail Lissner, vice president of Appraisal Research.

Lissner also reported that South Loop properties currently on the market range between $270 and $600 per square foot, with 80 percent falling between $300 and $400 per square foot.

Colella said the new South Loop developments are playing off the success of Central Station, a large-scale redevelopment project at the southern end of Grant Park that began in 1990. Central Station has served as the anchor for the revitalization of historic Prairie Street and the greater South Loop.

"With changes being made to the schools in the area and new charter schools coming in, we see more young families with young children," said Bonnie Sanchez-Carlson, president and executive director of the Near South Planning Board. "Older couples who left the city to raise their kids and now want to be back in the city are also coming back to enjoy what downtown has to offer."

"Our patrons range from their early 30s to their late 50s," said Christi Cooke, general manager of Kroll’s South Loop, a popular restaurant at 1736 S. Michigan Ave.

At the same time, developers and real estate agents have no intention of turning their backs on young professionals who continue to flock to the neighborhood for loft living.

"I’m still selling more loft-style units than traditional-style condo units," said Joanie Edelberg, a real estate agent with @properties.

She said many families have been moving to the Museum Park area, which is full of loft-style properties, though it also includes the Central Station development.

And on May 19 the Chicago Plan Commission approved plans for the Roosevelt Collection, a vast mixed-use development to be generally located at Roosevelt and Clark streets. The retail component of the project will cover more than 450,000 square feet. Two of the residential buildings will be designed as five-story loft-style residences, while the third will be a traditional luxury condominium.

"We see the loft buildings attracting younger buyers, while the tower would be more of a luxury building with more amenities," said Howard Hirsch, president of Hirsch Associates, the architecture firm that is designing the residential portion of Roosevelt Collection. "But our intention is that both buildings will be good for any kind of buyer," Hirsch added.

wrabbit

June 9th, 2006, 07:29 PM

i cant sit by idly and stay silent
though i am still youngy at 32
this new expression which im not sure with whom is popular

WHAT SHALL THY WRAP THY HEAD AROUND?

is only interesting from a historical perspective
its a retarded expression, that i just cant accept,

has anyone wrapped their head around anything?
if we were possessed with telekinetic or psychic powers then i could understand this silly ass expression, but right now i see it as a lazy comic book writers way of making their comics historically authentic to future genrations,

ie its a totally gay (in the highschool expression non homophobic meaning)
expression, totally fucking gay
The phrase is an idiom, MW :)

PrintersRowBoiler

June 9th, 2006, 09:04 PM

^PRB, please elaborate. What development are you talking about?

The development is Burnham Pointe.

ardecila

June 11th, 2006, 06:54 AM

ardecila

June 11th, 2006, 06:58 AM

Oh, BTW - I'm currently making a set of Google Earth buildings and overlays to outline all new construction in the South Loop. If it works well, I might extend it to the rest of the downtown area.

However - where is the AMLI project situated? I'm getting it confused with the curvey D2 Realty tower, since the info I have puts them at the same place.

Also - is anything planned for the site north of River City, vacated by Grand Central Station?

Loopy

June 11th, 2006, 07:30 AM

Hmm... If they did build a bridge, it would of course have to be another bascule, for the boat traffic. A little cable-stayed deal (like the 6th St Viaduct in Milwaukee) would be cool, but of course it would have to be very high.

Also, if a bascule is too costly, I'd encourage CDOT to look at a pedestrian-only tilt bridge (tilts can't really be used for cars). It would add some cool modern engineering to that part of the city, and encourage pedestrianism. Plus, it might have funding available from some auto-deterrence program.

My sense is that it will be a bascule, similar to those in place on the river already. I walked over to Taylor Street to look at the completed piece of the extension. It is a four-lane, two-sidewalk concept. I expect the bridge to be the same.

I am dying to find out where CDOT is at with the execution of the bridge.

Loopy

June 11th, 2006, 07:33 AM

Belacqua

June 12th, 2006, 04:24 PM

Also - is anything planned for the site north of River City, vacated by Grand Central Station?

Roughly the northernmost quarter of that parcel just got optioned by Frankel & Giles or D2, I think, and they talked about putting ~500 condos there. That was about all the detail there was. It would have to be a tower on the scale of the other things going in around there to fit that many units.

Don't forget about the multi-use conversion they've proposed for the old Post Office, although that's not SLoop proper.

Loopy

June 12th, 2006, 05:37 PM

Roughly the northernmost quarter of that parcel just got optioned by Frankel & Giles or D2, I think, and they talked about putting ~500 condos there. That was about all the detail there was. It would have to be a tower on the scale of the other things going in around there to fit that many units.

Don't forget about the multi-use conversion they've proposed for the old Post Office, although that's not SLoop proper.

Thanks for the info. I think it was D2.

What's the latest on the Post Office? It would be cool if a use could be found that wouldn't require reducing it's famous mass. I liked the mausoleum idea!

NearNorthGuy

June 12th, 2006, 07:50 PM

Thanks for the info. I think it was D2.

What's the latest on the Post Office? It would be cool if a use could be found that wouldn't require reducing it's famous mass. I liked the mausoleum idea!

Loopy and others:

That mausoleum idea was pretty interesting, I'll agree!

Anyway, the question about the Old Post Office and questions about other very preliminary projects can sometimes be discussed in better detail at CBP meetings than here.

In other words, there is some inside stuff about that and other projects that some of us can mention at the CBP meetings but that can't be put out on the forum. I hope you'll understand.

Anyway, come to the next CBP meeting at the Billy Goat under the Wrigley Building on Thursday, June 22, at 8:30 PM. Hope to see you there!

ardecila

June 12th, 2006, 08:41 PM

As cool/interesting as that sounds, CBP meetings aren't really an option for me as I'm stuck out here in exurbia and I'm 16. It costs ~$40 in gas to drive downtown; Metra's an option, I suppose, but inbounds in the evening are... weird. My location also kinda limits anything I might do for CBP.

BTW, does anybody know about CBP other than the people here?

PrintersRowBoiler

June 12th, 2006, 08:44 PM

Belacqua

June 12th, 2006, 10:10 PM

I found the item I was thinking of, from Crain's, 4/24/06:

Condos set for part of vacant S. Loop site

Chicago developer Frankel & Giles plans to build condos on part of Franklin Point, an ex-rail yard south of the Sears Tower. Frankel & Giles has agreed to buy two acres at Harrison and Wells from D2 Realty of Chicago, which last year dropped plans to develop the entire eight-acre site. Keith Giles says his firm hasn't decided how many condos to build, but zoning allows an estimated 500. [Alby Gallun]

ardecila

June 13th, 2006, 08:00 AM

Franklin Point? Who came up with that name? (it's not all that bad) It's too bad that there aren't developers drooling over this site, though.

The cloverleaf on Congress should definitely be developed-over, though. Some nice condo towers would look amazing above those cloverleaf loops.

Actually, what I'd really like to see in that near-south-Loop area is something similar to the Conde Nast Building in NYC, something with a ton of cool, futuristic-looking transmission stuff on top. It would compliment the Sears nicely - I'd propose a ~800 footer.

Belacqua

June 13th, 2006, 06:34 PM

Franklin Point? Who came up with that name? (it's not all that bad) It's too bad that there aren't developers drooling over this site, though.

I bet they are drooling over the site in theory, but it has big problems that will make it uneconomic to develop until the area is very valuable. Under the site there are tons of buried railbed and concrete and, so I've heard at least, old coal tunnels that will present big environmental remediation issues to whoever finally develops it. I think that's the only reason it has stayed vacant for so long. At least in the meantime it serves a useful community purpose as a dog park. Better than another parking lot.

ardecila

June 13th, 2006, 08:51 PM

Yeah, the dog park is a good idea, except that it's not really a dog park. It's still owned by CSX and Harris Bank, and there is still chainlink up around it, although its falling down in a couple areas. CSX should allow one of our many volunteer organizations to do something semi-permanent with the lot, sorta like what they did with Block 37, until financing is arranged to develop it.

I say build a cofferdam to keep out the river, then excavate to 40 feet down like Ground Zero! Of course, $$$$...

NearNorthGuy

June 14th, 2006, 02:37 AM

[BTW, does anybody know about CBP other than the people here?[/QUOTE]

Let me comment as a member of CBP. We are preparing our bylaws, organizing our committees, designing our website, and doing other things at this very moment.

Once we are set to make a respectable appearance, we will come out into the public eye, take positions on issues and engage in other activities as determined by our now-forming Board.

By the way, your location in the suburbs does not prevent you from becoming a member of CBP. That goes for anyone else reading this thread. You, and any of you reading, can send a Personal Message to "headcase" on this forum. He is the chairman of the Membership Committee and handles a lot of the communications for the group.

Once headcase gets your information, he will get you on the Email list of CBP. Thanks for your interest!

spyguy

June 18th, 2006, 06:07 PM

http://www.dailyherald.com/business/story.asp?id=200579

Suburbanites give new life to South Loop area

By Makiko Kitamura
Medill News Service
Posted Sunday, June 18, 2006

Michael and Angelique Parker of St. Charles are proud parents of seven children, six of whom are grown and out of the house. Their seventh is still 13 years old, but they are wasting no time in preparing for their empty-nest years.

“We’ve been thinking about this for three years,” Michael Parker said.

About two months ago, they scouted out Chicago’s Printers Row neighborhood in the South Loop and immediately decided to purchase a condominium unit in Printers Corner, a 17-floor building to be constructed at Polk and Wells Streets. They will use it as a secondary residence for weekends until their youngest goes off to college.

“The neighborhood has a lot of appeal for us, with the old Dearborn Station, and we also wanted a building with a limited number of units” for a feeling of intimacy, Parker said.

Printers Corner will have only 88 units, and all will have corner views because of its creative design. Affordability and proximity to downtown were also draws for the Parkers. One-bedroom units start at $275,000, two-bedrooms at $350,000.

The South Loop may be known as a magnet for hip young things and single professionals, but the area has been increasingly attracting a more diverse group of buyers, including suburban empty nesters and young families.

The changing demographics of the area, along with the tapping out of loft buildings available for residential conversions, is contributing to the South Loop’s new construction boom that’s producing both loft-like and traditional condominium styles.

“Fifty percent of our [South Loop] buyers are suburban buyers,” said Jim Colella, general manager of Garrison Partners Inc., a Chicago residential real estate marketing company. “They are probably the largest growth market right now; it’s not just the young kids anymore.”

Garrison Partners represents several new-construction condominium developments, including Aristocrat Tower and Chess Lofts, at Cullerton and Prairie Streets, and Printers Corner.

In this year’s first quarter the South Loop was the most active downtown neighborhood in new project developments, according to a report by Appraisal Research Counselors, of Chicago.

The report states that about 44 percent of first-quarter downtown sales occurred in the South Loop. Approximately 1,300 condominium units are planned for completion in the South Loop during 2006, according to Gail Lissner, vice president of Appraisal Research.

Total downtown sales of 1,850 new units were 20 percent higher than during the record-breaking first quarter of 2005.

Meanwhile new-home sales for the entire country were shrinking 5.7 percent in April, to 1.2 million from 1.27 million a year ago.

Lissner also reported that South Loop properties currently on the market range between $270 and $600 per square foot, with 80 percent falling between $300 and $400 per square foot.

Colella said the new South Loop developments are playing off the success of Central Station, a large-scale redevelopment project at the southern end of Grant Park that began in 1990. Central Station has served as the anchor for the revitalization of historic Prairie Street and the greater South Loop.

Unlike Central Station, whose most famous resident is Mayor Richard Daley, Chess Lofts and Aristocrat Tower are considered affordable, with one-bedroom units starting in the high $100,000s.

“With changes being made to the schools in the area and new charter schools coming in, we see more young families with young children,” said Bonnie Sanchez-Carlson, president and executive director of the Near South Planning Board.

“And older couples who left the city to raise their kids and now want to be back in the city are also coming back to enjoy what downtown has to offer,” Sanchez-Carlson said.

“Our patrons range from their early 30s to their late 50s,” said Christi Cooke, general manager of Kroll’s South Loop, a popular restaurant at 1736 S. Michigan Ave.

At the same time, developers and real estate agents have no intention of turning their backs on young professionals who continue to flock to the neighborhood for loft living.

“I’m still selling more loft-style units than traditional-style condo units,” said Joanie Edelberg, a real estate agent with @properties.

She said many families have been moving to the Museum Park area, which is full of loft-style properties, though it also includes the Central Station development. She also cited a new development named Lexington Park at Michigan Avenue and Cermak Road, which will include a seven-story midrise of loft-style units and a 35-story traditional condo highrise.

ardecila

June 18th, 2006, 11:28 PM

Random OT question...

Is Medill News Service the Tribune's version of Reuters/AP? They sell stories and info to other news outlets?

Loopy

June 19th, 2006, 03:45 AM

Random OT question...

Is Medill News Service the Tribune's version of Reuters/AP? They sell stories and info to other news outlets?

Google is your friend.

http://mesh.medill.northwestern.edu/mnschicago/clients.htm

spyguy

June 22nd, 2006, 10:53 PM

http://chicagojournal.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&SubSectionID=60&ArticleID=1848&TM=56914.7

High-rise of illusions
‘Tall and thin’ South Loop building hides the garage and lights up the storefronts
By BILL MAYEROFF, Contributing Writer

David Brininstool, the architect of a new development at 1327-39 S. Wabash, describes the 25-story, 254-unit building as tall and thin.

"We thought it was better for the building itself," Brininstool said of the design during the June 14 South Loop Neighbors meeting.

The development also will feature 12,500 square feet of retail space on the ground level and three levels of parking above. But the multilevel parking structure will be disguised, Brininstool said, behind a rain screen of either flamed granite or natural cleft slate.

"We want the parking but no one wants to see it," he said. " ... All the parking is accessed from the alley in the rear of the building," Brininstool said. "What we’re trying to do is create our own side street."

Brininstool, who wants the residential portion of the building to be a "subtle understatement," said the retail fronts will be made very noticeable, with backlit translucent glass creating a glow around the storefront.

Brininstool designed the residential portion to look like it is made completely of glass[/B], even though a small portion of it will be made of other materials.

"It will read as all glass," he said.

Because most of the other buildings in the area are made of stone and are only around four stories, Brininstool said he tried to design the building so it does not dominate other buildings on the block. The storefront, which will run for 185 feet along Wabash, will match the surrounding buildings while the residential portion will be less noticeable.

"We wanted to keep it real light," Brininstool said. "We really wanted this to be perceived as a retail storefront."

Though some residents at the South Loop Neighbors meeting expressed concern that signs in the storefront could give off too much light, Brininstool and Carolyn Nash, attorney for developers Wabash, LLC, said it will not be a problem. While she did not know specifically how much signage the zoning code allows in the storefront windows, Nash said it would not move or blink.

Residents also voiced concerns that the new development would disrupt traffic patterns in the area. Nash, however, said she anticipates people will walk or take public transit and she thinks traffic flow in the area will not be disrupted by the development.

"It’s one of the beauties of the location," said Nash.

The proposed building’s 254 residential units will be offered as one-, two-, and three- bedrooms, and the 292 parking spaces will be accessed through the alley on the south side. On average, Brininstool said, a one-bedroom unit will have up to 700 square feet of space, a two-bedroom unit will have up to 1,050 square feet, and a three-bedroom will have up to about 1,200 square feet. The developers and architect must still present to the Plan Commission before approval to begin construction is given—Nash said the building may be up for approval next month.

The Urban Politician

June 23rd, 2006, 02:12 AM

http://chicagojournal.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&SubSectionID=60&ArticleID=1848&TM=56914.7

High-rise of illusions
‘Tall and thin’ South Loop building hides the garage and lights up the storefronts
By BILL MAYEROFF, Contributing Writer

QThough some residents at the South Loop Neighbors meeting expressed concern that signs in the storefront could give off too much light, Brininstool and Carolyn Nash, attorney for developers Wabash, LLC, said it will not be a problem. While she did not know specifically how much signage the zoning code allows in the storefront windows, Nash said it would not move or blink.

Residents also voiced concerns that the new development would disrupt traffic patterns in the area. Nash, however, said she anticipates people will walk or take public transit and she thinks traffic flow in the area will not be disrupted by the development.

^ Hah!

I'd love to take a lit neon store sign and wrap it around these assholes' heads.

Oh, and Chicago needs to make people who buy condos downtown sign a contract saying they "won't complain about future developments causing traffic problems in their neighborhood because the argument is just plain stupid and redundant".

Anyways, nice find Spyguy--I really look forward to seeing renderings some day

northsidesoxfan

June 23rd, 2006, 03:10 AM

Loopy

June 23rd, 2006, 04:24 AM

from google maps it looks like they're gonna have to demolish some older buildings. is that correct? i always prefer a surface parking lot, but the developers are at least saying all the right things...

These are the buildings in question; I think a glassy high-rise with ground floor retail will be worth the sacrifice:

http://img142.imageshack.us/img142/320/p10100019rt.jpg

spyguy

June 23rd, 2006, 04:59 AM

Thanks for the pic.

Nothing looks remarkable, or at least worth saving.

ardecila

June 23rd, 2006, 05:02 AM

aww... not another water tank going away!

I can 't really see the entrance to the Filmack/Videomack building, but it could be cool. The taller building next door should really be converted into a parking garage podium. It'd make a hell of a better podium than anything I've seen north of the river, and probably would be better than what Brininstool is proposing - although the "private sidestreet" idea is money. I dunno, I'll wait for some renderings.

PrintersRowBoiler

June 23rd, 2006, 05:55 AM

spyguy

June 23rd, 2006, 05:58 AM

More than just a glass box?

Loopy

June 23rd, 2006, 07:10 AM

I went to the neighborhood meeting last week regarding this building. People are putting up a real stink about saving the arches and facade of the film building since it was where every major motion picture was made in the 20s when they first started making it. The design is VERY preliminary. Very weird too. I was impressed with the architect. The renderings were pretty cool... very trendy. Neighbors were concerned with noise if the foundation is sheet piles and cars/trucks blocking the alley. The development is very retail oriented. It will have a weird garden area on the 4th story deck.

I love it when the NIMBY's pretend to be preservationists. Also, the canard about traffic congestion seems to be another false issue that gets trotted out by these car driving idiots as well. But citing concerns about construction noise really takes the cake! Ah hell, let's not carry on with Civilization, it's too noisy.

PrintersRowBoiler

June 23rd, 2006, 04:26 PM

Frumie

June 23rd, 2006, 04:53 PM

Well, the concern of preserving the arch is genuine... it is more the historical value than the aesthetic. The congestion is a big concern because it is a 20' alley and if a truck stops to make its delivery in the alley, it blocks off all traffic. This would be frequent with all the retail proposed.
But isn't it the aesthetic precisely that has visusal significance, while historical value resides only in the mind? An aesthetic or architectural referencing keeps alive the historical context of a place, otherwise the passerby would have to be an urban archeologist. Can you explain the alley concerns to me; granted 20' is a short stretch, but how does a retail delivery truck block all traffic? Does all traffic mean both the adjacent street as well as the alley; if it's just the alley, and isn't that and fire equipment access their designated purpose?

NearNorthGuy

June 23rd, 2006, 05:42 PM

But isn't it the aesthetic precisely that has visusal significance, while historical value resides only in the mind? An aesthetic or architectural referencing keeps alive the historical context of a place, otherwise the passerby would have to be an urban archeologist. Can you explain the alley concerns to me; granted 20' is a short stretch, but how does a retail delivery truck block all traffic? Does all traffic mean both the adjacent street as well as the alley; if it's just the alley, and isn't that and fire equipment access their designated purpose?

Whatever is done with the ground floor, this arch/entranceway is too important to remove. The photo posted above blocks out the arch, which is solid, engraved limestone. It stasty "Lasky" and "Famous Players" and "Paramount." It is a little gem of Chicago history and it is nice-looking as well. A high-rise can be built while preserving this facade. It is worth it.

Loopy

June 23rd, 2006, 06:52 PM

Whatever is done with the ground floor, this arch/entranceway is too important to remove. The photo posted above blocks out the arch, which is solid, engraved limestone. It stasty "Lasky" and "Famous Players" and "Paramount." It is a little gem of Chicago history and it is nice-looking as well. A high-rise can be built while preserving this facade. It is worth it.

If it's a gem of Chicago history, then the whole building should be saved and redeveloped as a whole. Glomming a terra-cotta arch onto a glassy high-rise is trying to have it both ways. It's not worth it.

Frumie

June 23rd, 2006, 06:56 PM

If it's a gem of Chicago history, then the whole building should be saved and redeveloped as a whole. Glomming a terra-cotta arch onto a modern high-rise is trying to have it both ways. It's not worth it.
Exactly. Stick a historical plaque on the building and be done with it.

spyguy

June 23rd, 2006, 08:10 PM

From A9
http://img517.imageshack.us/img517/2272/untitled1xm.jpg

I didn't know that this the Paramount Pictures building. The entrance could probably be saved and restored, the rest looks kind of bleh. They can call the building Paramount Condos.

PrintersRowBoiler

June 23rd, 2006, 09:22 PM

I think they are calling it Film Exchange Row.

The alley is a concern because that is where you access the parking garage. 20' is too narrow for a truck to park and someone to get around unless the drivers are good (a standard parking lot stall is 9'). A lot of people access their buildings through this alley.

Loopy

June 23rd, 2006, 10:40 PM

This is getting interesting.

Was the developer hoping to tear down this building and then name his development "Film Exchange Row"? That's like clearing a wooded hillside for an apartment complex and then calling it "Woodcrest". I had imagined that they were asking the community to accept their design on it's own merits while factoring in the loss of the present structures. Calling it "Film Exchange Row" after wiping out the Film Exchange is a bit cynical.

I live on this street, and I could go either way on this. The highest and best use of this property is not served by the present occupants of these buildings. Fix them up or tear them down and build something beautiful. Either one would work for me. Unfortunately, it looks like the conclusion will be a mediocre compromise.

As far as the alley issue; I would think that a recessed loading dock that serves the whole complex would not be an impossible feature to realize.

spyguy

June 23rd, 2006, 10:51 PM

Another image I found:
http://img525.imageshack.us/img525/3613/p80600513lu.jpg
http://iconeon.blogspot.com/2005/08/old-brand-central.html

PrintersRowBoiler

June 24th, 2006, 01:41 AM

The arch is a major issue. I believe the review process was tabled when the city told the develepor to come up with a way to incorporate the arch/building in the design. This early in the process, the developers have not addressed this yet. There is actually 3-10' loading docks designed in the overall building in the rear. I have modeled many "auto-turn" models superimposed over siteplans (mostly fire trucks, delivery trucks, and tankers) as part of my job. In my opinion, the docks shown on the siteplan may be barely big enough to accomodate a Fritos truck. Plus you know no UPS or FedEx delivery guys are going to back into the loading dock. The architect has done a good job of trying to get a loading dock area into the design and I'm sure some trucks will use the docks when they stop for extending periods or have large deliveries. But it is still a problem all over Chicago. Last night I had to back my truck onto Congress by the post office because Federal was blocked by a delivery truck!
Also, the building includes demolition of two buildings - the film building and a 4 story storage center. Most of the units will be 1-2 bedrooms with possibilities for 3 bedrooms on the upper floors.

Frumie

June 24th, 2006, 02:34 AM

Here's a perfect design for the plaque is suggested earlier:

http://img525.imageshack.us/img525/3613/p80600513lu.jpg :)

Loopy

June 24th, 2006, 03:32 AM

Oh well, on to other things. I just received this in the mail:

http://img149.imageshack.us/img149/6592/renaissant9zc.png

Very interesting, no?

I believe that I received this because I live within 500 feet of the development. I wonder now if this development is going to be on the agenda for the July 20 Plan Commission meeting.

Edit: Replaced transciption with scan.

spyguy

June 24th, 2006, 03:37 AM

Please, no height reduction. And maybe they'll present some renderings finally.

headcase

June 24th, 2006, 07:29 AM

[CENTER]

Very interesting, no?

I believe that I received this because I live within 500 feet of the development. I wonder now if this development is going to be on the agenda for the July 20 Plan Commission meeting.

Edit: to fix incorrect date.

Interesting, I'll have to see if I can make it...

PrintersRowBoiler

June 24th, 2006, 11:04 PM

I live about 1500 feet from the development and I didn't get an invitation.

Belacqua

June 27th, 2006, 04:42 PM

6/26 Sun Times on the Park Michigan tower. It's still 80 stories, and Haithcock even seems to be on board (although this has been kept pretty quiet until now; we can probably expect her to disappear soon after the meeting and the "existing context" objections come up). Looks like it's really ready to move if they're talking to specific retailers for it.
http://www.suntimes.com/output/business/cst-fin-condos26_fin.html

South Loop skyline looks up

June 26, 2006

BY DAVID ROEDER Business Reporter

Tall and thin is in for downtown building proposals, and the latest one to reflect that would create a visual highlight for the south edge of Chicago’s skyline.

Developers and architects are completing plans for an 80-story building at 830 S. Michigan. It would be built behind a 19th century YWCA to be preserved for the sake of the historic Michigan Avenue streetwall's appearance.

Warren Barr and his Renaissant Development Group are responsible for the estimated $200 million project, which calls for construction of 376 residential condominiums. Also part of the plan is construction of a 10-story building immediately west on Wabash.

James Carroll, chief financial officer for Renaissant, said the project will tap demand for condos that have guaranteed views of Grant Park and Lake Michigan. Another aim, he said, is to attract commercial tenants to a neighborhood where they have been slow to arrive.

The old eight-story YWCA will be gutted for an upscale restaurant and a spa, Carroll said. He also said a specialty grocer is negotiating for space in the Wabash building. The architecture is by Chicago firm Pappageorge/Haymes Ltd.

Carroll said the city's planning department and Ald. Madeline Haithcock, whose 2nd Ward includes the South Loop, have expressed preliminary support for the project. The building's slender profile fits a preference city officials have shown for tall and thin buildings.

City Hall's most vocal proponent of that approach is Samuel Assefa, Mayor Daley's deputy chief of staff for economic development, and it has been echoed in the zoning reviews of the planning department. The best example of that process is the 62-story One Museum Park building under construction at the southwest corner of Roosevelt and Columbus, another Pappageorge design.

It's taller and sleeker than the developers originally proposed because city officials pushed them to provide an architectural landmark for the south end of Grant Park.

The 830 S. Michigan building, to be marketed as Park Michigan, would be Chicago's tallest south of Van Buren. At about 850 feet, it would rank as the ninth tallest among the city's buildings that are current or under construction, between the Two Prudential Plaza and AT&T Corporate Center office buildings.

Renaissant is due to present its plans at a community meeting Thursday at Jones College Prep, 606 S. State. The meeting starts at 6:30 p.m. Unless major objections surface, Renaissant then would submit its zoning application to the City Council.

Carroll said he hopes construction can start in the third quarter of 2007, with unit delivery in late 2009. The pace will depend on pre-sales. Prices should range from about $325,000 to penthouses worth more than $2 million, Carroll said.

One community leader who has seen the plans had unreserved praise. Bob O'Neill, president of the Grant Park Advisory Council, said the tall and thin trend produces attractive buildings that block less sunlight. "Chicago, Hong Kong and New York are the great skylines of the world. We need to keep creating ours so it looks dynamic," O'Neill said.

Renaissant acquired the property in April, paying $13 million, according to Cook County records. The seller was the Johnson family, publisher of Ebony and Jet magazines, whose offices are next door.

Barr's company also plans two other condo towers in that neighborhood, 40 stories at 1000 S. Michigan and 19 stories at 1255 S. State.

droeder@suntimes.com

spyguy

June 28th, 2006, 05:47 AM

Here's a perfect design for the plaque is suggested earlier:

http://img525.imageshack.us/img525/3613/p80600513lu.jpg :)

They should try and get Blockbuster for the retail portion. What a great and fitting entrance.

spyguy

June 30th, 2006, 10:34 PM

http://images1.snapfish.com/346%3C59%3A%3B7%7Ffp343%3Enu%3D3238%3E868%3E492%3EWSNRCG%3D32337%3A5353%3A%3A8nu0mrj

http://images1.snapfish.com/346%3C59%3A%3B7%7Ffp339%3Enu%3D3238%3E868%3E492%3EWSNRCG%3D32337%3A53686%3B7nu0mrj

http://images1.snapfish.com/346%3C59%3A%3B7%7Ffp33%3A%3Enu%3D3238%3E868%3E492%3EWSNRCG%3D32337%3A5368729nu0mrj

This building will be 479'-0"
http://images1.snapfish.com/346%3C59%3A%3B7%7Ffp345%3Enu%3D3238%3E868%3E492%3EWSNRCG%3D32337%3A5368758nu0mrj

http://images1.snapfish.com/346%3C59%3A%3B7%7Ffp33%3B%3Enu%3D3238%3E868%3E492%3EWSNRCG%3D32337%3A5368766nu0mrj

http://images1.snapfish.com/346%3C59%3A%3B7%7Ffp344%3Enu%3D3238%3E868%3E492%3EWSNRCG%3D32337%3A536879%3Cnu0mrj

This building will be 507'-4"
http://images1.snapfish.com/346%3C59%3A%3B7%7Ffp33%3A%3Enu%3D3238%3E868%3E492%3EWSNRCG%3D32337%3A5378426nu0mrj

http://images1.snapfish.com/346%3C59%3A%3B7%7Ffp346%3Enu%3D3238%3E868%3E492%3EWSNRCG%3D32337%3A5378459nu0mrj

http://images1.snapfish.com/346%3C59%3A%3B7%7Ffp344%3Enu%3D3238%3E868%3E492%3EWSNRCG%3D32337%3A5378479nu0mrj

http://images1.snapfish.com/346%3C59%3A%3B7%7Ffp33%3A%3Enu%3D3238%3E868%3E492%3EWSNRCG%3D32337%3A53784%3A7nu0mrj

I hope these are somewhat accurate. If not, they at least provide a different view.
http://img431.imageshack.us/img431/1889/rooseveltcollection01325x0cj.jpghttp://img431.imageshack.us/img431/7040/rooseveltcollection02325x4sn.jpg
http://img431.imageshack.us/img431/7376/rooseveltcollection035rr.jpghttp://img431.imageshack.us/img431/305/rooseveltcollection045aj.jpg

Loopy

June 30th, 2006, 11:45 PM

Wow. Thanks!

Is there any way that you could post some larger versions of the bottom four renderings?

They seem to be the newest and best representations of this development.

Chicagotom

July 1st, 2006, 12:16 AM

I noticed few things that are different in the latest renderings:

1. That god awful sign in gone from Roosevelt Road

2. The building in the middle of the boulevard are more to scale and look less like cheep mall kiosks

3. For the first time you can see that the project will sandwich the tracks with target making them much less of a visual eyesore

4. At first glance I like the concept of the green space (not sure if it's big enough to call a park) at what be the north end of the project

I'm with loopy! Can you post some bigger pics?

The Urban Politician

July 1st, 2006, 12:30 AM

^ I'm in agreement.

But here are my concerns:

1) The ugly cookie-cutter appearance of the shorter buildings. They all look dull and the same! Lets hope these are just some basic schematics

2) The tall building in the background. Loewenberg-style garbage. Again, I hope it's just a basic schematic

3) The fact that the street quickly goes from being a normal paved street to some yucky-brown brick/cobblestone kind of thing, right out of Schaumburg ped-mall suburbia. Let a street be a street, I say--keep the damn thing gray.

Otherwise, I agree that it's an improvement.
Thanks for the find, Spyguy

Loopy

July 1st, 2006, 11:59 PM

I took a walk over to Southgate Market this morning to check out the progress. I was also trying to see if I could get a sense of this new Taylor Street Extension that will ultimately cross the river as a new bridge and land on Wells at LaSalle Park (Roosevelt Collection, D2, AMLI, Lennar, etc.)

This is Southgate Market looking North from Roosevelt bridge. The curved feature is a suspended parking circulator ramp that connects to the Taylor Street extension at the North end to the surface parking lot at the South end.
http://img454.imageshack.us/img454/7461/p10100112sn.jpg

This is the Whole Foods entrance at the South end. It has it's own dedicated surface parking lot that will have a vehicle and pedestrian connection to Roosevelt.
http://img69.imageshack.us/img69/2916/p10100123uk.jpg

This is the Canal Street main pedestrian entrance. This should have been on Roosevelt in my opinion.
http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/4357/p10100139en.jpg

This is a view from the South. You can see the Taylor Street extension ramp. This is the only funded portion of the project to date. It will provide the main vehicle connection to Southgate with it's connection to the curved circulator ramp shown above. I like the fact that non locals can access Southgate Market by taking the Taylor exit from the Downtown Expressway and not clog up the surface streets in the area.
http://img123.imageshack.us/img123/9255/p10100312uf.jpg

This the view of the circulator ramp from the Taylor Extension. Most customers will drive into the facility from this point.
http://img162.imageshack.us/img162/3706/p10100186vd.jpg

Here is a view of the Taylor Street extension ramp from across the river. It is from this point that the viaduct and bridge will be constructed when CDOT gets the funding.

On the left side of the circle I drew you can see the connection between the extension ramp and the parking circulator ramp.
http://img162.imageshack.us/img162/7465/p100031nd.jpg

I cobbled this image together from a Google Earth capture to show how the Taylor Street extension will fit with future developments. Polk Street-North, Roosevelt-South, Canal-West, Clark-East
http://img119.imageshack.us/img119/1341/taylorxtension8nf5im.jpg

spyguy

July 7th, 2006, 06:13 PM

http://www.nearwestgazette.com/Archive/0706/News/newsstory0706g.htm

New retail-condominium building slated for Wabash
By Marie Balice Ward

A new development at 1327 S. Wabash Ave. in the South Loop is in the early approval stages. Representatives of Piedmont
Group Inc., which is developing the retail-condominium complex, presented their plans at a recent meeting of the South Loop Neighbors organization.

This proposed 27-story structure, to be sited two buildings south of Zapatista restaurant on the east side of Wabash Avenue and about a block south of Roosevelt Road, would require demolition of two buildings, explained Carolyn A. Nash, an attorney at Schain, Burney, Ross & Citron Ltd., who represented the developer. The structure would be recessed from the street and be narrower from the fourth floor and above, where residential units would be located. Retail space and a parking garage would occupy the ground level through the fourth floor.

The building’s façade would be glass and might be backlit, explained architect David Brininstool of Brininstool & Lynch Ltd. The type of glass—transparent, translucent, or opaque—has not been chosen.

“There will be a very extensive terrace on the south end of the fourth floor above the parking garage before the condominium tower begins, and a smaller one will be located on the south end,” Brininstool added. Amenities, including a party room, also would be situated on the fourth floor. A terra cotta archway, presently on one of the buildings marked for demolition to accommodate this new development, is being reviewed by the City to determine whether it meets City criteria for required historic preservation.

The archway measures 16 feet wide by 25 feet high, and Brininstool said he believes it can be integrated creatively into the new development. Plans specify ample parking for residents and for the retail portion of the complex, he said, and three loading docks would be located off the alley behind the building. The alley, particularly wide at 20 feet, also would provide access to the garage. The developer also plans a mix of one-, two-, and three-bedroom units, with the top floors for the three-bedroom dwellings. Prices are likely to start at $300,000 for the one-bedroom units.

Additional community presentations will be given, and review and approval stages are scheduled with various City departments, including the Chicago Department of Transportation regarding traffic issues. The developer hopes to meet with the City Planning Commission this summer, after which the Council on Zoning (and eventually the full City Council) will review the plans.

http://img525.imageshack.us/img525/5373/newsst0706g4rg.jpg

spyguy

July 7th, 2006, 06:17 PM

http://www.nearwestgazette.com/Archive/0706/News/newsstory0706l.htm

Prairie Ave. highrises cause South Loop controversy
By Michael Comstock

Two highrises proposed for the 1700 block of south Prairie Avenue have caused controversy within the community.

The project calls for one tower to max out at about 45 stories and the other, while shorter, to exceed 30 stories. They will feature 500 residential units, each averaging 900 to 1,000 square feet and priced from the mid-$200,000s to more than $1 million. The towers would be built behind a row of townhouses.

Area residents recently met with the developers, Frankel & Giles, as well as 2nd Ward Alderman Madeline Haithcock and architect Lucien LaGrange at the Glessner House.

“There was a boisterous neighborhood response to the project,” said Keith Giles of Frankel & Giles. “I know there was definitely a lot of support for the project as well as people who were not so supportive of the project.”

However, Mark Kieras, president of the Prairie District Town Home Association, who also attended the meeting, had a different opinion.

“There were probably 90 to 100 people" at the meeting, said Kieras. “I would say without a doubt that a majority of the people that live in the neighborhood were not happy with the design of the project in relationship to the
Prairie Avenue District.

“There were a few people who spoke out in favor of it, but as it turns out, most of them were not from the direct area or they were currently living in a [Frankel &] Giles property,” Kieras asserted.

Those opposed object that the project abuts the Prairie Avenue Historic District, an area where many historical mansions had been built and in which a few remain. “In some areas, a certain neighborhood would be part of the historic district, like a three block radius,”

said Corina Carusi, director and curator of the Glessner House. “What’s unusual about this is, down here [in the Prairie Avenue Historic District], it’s five buildings.”

Those five are Glessner House, Kimball House, Coleman-Ames (which is owned by the United States Soccer Federation), the Keiph House, and the Marshall Field Jr. House “That’s what makes up the district,” Carusi said. “Everything in between is not part of the historic district.”

Carusi said the towers would be a good addition to the area. “The townhouses, which will be closest to Glessner House, are very complementary,” she said. “The towers, which are definitely modern, a little different than what’s in the neighborhood, they’re beautiful. They’re not in the historic district, so I think it’s fine that they’re modern.”

Giles noted the proposed development meets all legal and zoning requirements. “We are not asking for an upzoning or anything like that,” Gilessaid. “This is a two-and-a-halfacresite that has already been zoned for the amount of units we plan on putting here.” Many residents just do not think the buildings fit in with the area.

“The majority of the people were against the overall design,” said Kieras. “Some people were against the overall size of the project. I’m personally against the design with its relationship being right across the street of the Kimball Mansion and Glessner House.” Kieras said that other newer developments fit well with the landmark mansions in the neighborhood. “They tried to gel with the Prairie District historic mansions, not only in size and scope of the project, but also a little in architectural detail,” said Kieras. “They have turrets that kind of match the Kimball mansion, they have dormers, they have some bay windows.

“The town homes of these contemporary towers, they’re boxed, either white or yellow in color. They don’t mix on that corner, in my opinion,” he said. Kieras also said that the building goes against the Near South Community Plan from two years ago.“

They said in regards to the Prairie Avenue District, the building heights in the area should reflect the low-rise character of Prairie Avenue,” said Kieras. “All the high rises in our area have been 19 to 23 stories high. Obviously, [these plans] are much bigger, almost double.” Also controversial is the donation developers will make to Glessner House as part of the City’s Adopt-a-Landmark program. “We’re contributing to two [Glessner] programs that are in place that are new to the zoning ordinance that the City has recently implemented,” Giles explained.

Carusi added, “If you’re building within 600 feet of a landmark, you can adopt a landmark to fund a project that the City has approved.”Frankel & Giles is contributing about $700,000 for Glessner’s roof and exterior repairs. “We met with people from the City and people from the Landmark Commission,” said Carusi, “and we laid out a few different options, projects we have. They have very strict rules, and that is what we chose.”

Regarding reactions to this deal, she said, “I feel like some of the publications that have come out [about this issue] have been negative towards the Glessner House, sort of insinuating that they [Frankel & Giles] bought our approval of the project by giving us a contribution.” She added that is not the case and pointed to Glessner’s efforts in preserving the community.

“When the [new] mansions across the street were built, [they were] within the boundaries of the historic district,” she said. “We were very active in the design review of those. We don’t feel that things outside of the district are really in our territory.” Frankel & Giles also is contributing about $700,000 to the City’s Affordable Housing Bonus Program to support a fund for affordable housing throughout the city.

Both the Glessner and housing donations are “voluntary contributions in return for certain benefits for the project,” said Giles. As of press time, the project awaits approval from the Department of Planning and Development and the Zoning Commission. It also must pass a vote by the City Council. “We’ve hired the finest architect in our city, Lucien LaGrange,who has come up with a unique design that I think will add to the skyline of the City of Chicago and will endure for many decades— generations, hopefully,” said Giles.

“It’s just going to be a great project, a really outstanding project.”

http://img451.imageshack.us/img451/6013/newsst0706l0km.jpg

Loopy

July 7th, 2006, 06:47 PM

This Prairie Avenue project was before the Plan Commission last month, and I thought it was approved. The article says that it is "awaiting approval".

This begs a question that has been bugging me: How do you track a project through the approval stages. The only online resource I am aware of is the Planning and Development website that lists agenda items for upcoming meetings. There is never any minutes posted, so there is no way to find out how a project fared.

Frumie

July 7th, 2006, 06:47 PM

This appears to be an exciting development with the right people on board. IMO the modern towers make a fine backdrop to the historical district, even making the latter appear all the more precious. BTW Spyguy, you live up to your title; my wife and I have picknicked in the lovely park behind the Clarke House in the historical district, you might want to give it a try. :)

headcase

July 7th, 2006, 06:59 PM

This Prairie Avenue project was before the Plan Commission last month, and I thought it was approved. The article says that it is "awaiting approval".

The project doesn't go infront of the board until August.

Loopy

July 7th, 2006, 07:06 PM

The project doesn't go infront of the board until August.

Thanks, I just looked back at the June agenda and I see now that it was listed as "Matters deferred to the July 20th Plan Commission meeting".

I guess you are saying that it is deferred again.

Belacqua

July 8th, 2006, 12:25 AM

One of the more bizarre South Loop-related items I've come across lately:

Nicky Hilton Launching Her Own Hotel

THURSDAY JULY 06, 2006 07:25PM EST

By Mark Dagostino

Nicky Hilton is getting into the hotel business, she told PEOPLE on Thursday.

"I've always wanted to do it," says the lodging heiress who plans to renovate two existing buildings to open the "Nicky O" on Miami's famed Ocean Boulevard in November. "I've been around hotels my whole life, and I know a good hotel when I see one."

Shortly after, her second Nicky O will open on Chicago's historic Printer’s Row. "Miami will definitely be a party destination, and Chicago will be a little more calm," she says.

The 94-room boutique/condo accommodation will include entertainment news tickers in the elevators, a signature scent and rooms deigned by friends – including $5,000-a-night penthouse by clothing designer Roberto Cavalli.

Although Hilton, 22, comes from a family with an expertise it hotels, she isn't partnering with the clan to fund her new project. "I'll go to my family for advice, but they’re not involved at all," she says of her parents, brothers, and sister Paris.

Still, she is a Hilton: Borrowing a phrase from sister Paris, Nicky says of the Miami hotel's lobby, which will include a giant chandelier at its center and lots of marble: "Its just so beautiful – and hot."

As for her private life, she says everything with her boyfriend, Entourage star Kevin Connolly, is "good" – but she's focusing on her career right now, including shooting ads for her bag line and feverishly working to get the hotels ready to open. "This is my summer," she says of her latest endeavor.

-----------------------

I have no idea where there's even a spot for another hotel in (or should I say "on") Printers Row. Unless the Blake/former Hyatt is going under already? Couldn't be the Blackstone, could it?

Chi_Coruscant

July 8th, 2006, 01:26 AM

Shortly after, her second Nicky O will open on Chicago's historic Printer’s Row. "Miami will definitely be a party destination, and Chicago will be a little more calm," she says.
What does Nicky meant? Is she implying that we are boring people who don't party as much as people down there in Miami?

spyguy

July 8th, 2006, 01:38 AM

I assume she's talking about the properties. The Miami hotel will be more clubbish which is expected if she's going to open on South Beach, while the Printer's Row hotel will be more laid back.

As for the location, PRB posted some places he thinks it might be in the "Other" thread. I doubt that it'll be the Blackstone because first it is supposed to be a Marriott and second, that building is too large to renovate by December.

PrintersRowBoiler

July 8th, 2006, 02:20 AM

I thought of the Blake too - but since that is a condo-hotel, I cannot imagine that they could or would pull it off. The Blackstone seems like too much of a project for starting out. If she is really doing this on her own without help, and based on the picture of the site of the Miami hotel, I am thinking smaller. Plus that is not necessarily Printers Row. I would assume they would boast Michigan Avenue before Printers Row. Dearborn is the main drag of Printers Row, but all buildings that I am aware of are condo. If it is not on Dearborn, I would guess it would be on Clark since that is going to be a hot street in the next few years with Burhnam Pointe, Lennar's projects across the street at Polk and Clark, and the recent purchases of 620-626 (I think) S Clark to be converted to student housing. I suggested new construction might get underway at 601-627 S Clark (I saw a sign for a variance for a larger driveway and bank drive-thru a couple of months ago - maybe part of a larger development?) or at about 735 S. Clark. The existing parking lot was chained off unexpectedly with nice signs that say that the parking lot will be closed July 1. Time to check the Cook County Records Dept!

The Urban Politician

July 8th, 2006, 02:33 AM

What does Nicky meant? Is she implying that we are boring people who don't party as much as people down there in Miami?

^ Take a friggin chill pill Chi. Consider it an unintended compliment. The Chicago location will be more "mature" and for "more discerning" people. There is no doubt that one can have an incredibly unbelievable good time in Chicago--everybody knows that the nightlife is beyond incredible. But Chicago is still not viewed primarily as a "party city" like Miami is. Thank God

Frumie

July 8th, 2006, 02:41 AM

What does Nicky meant? Is she implying that we are boring people who don't party as much as people down there in Miami?
My guess is an awareness of Chicago being more real. Chicago is an urban center created for people with deep roots. Miami is more a tansit center catering to the momentarily rootless.

PrintersRowBoiler

July 8th, 2006, 02:55 AM

Nothing too suspicious in the Cook County Records for Clark and Dearborn Streets. Some recent activity that DID catch my eye is at 650 S. Clark and 749 S. Dearborn (across from Dearborn Station).

Belacqua

July 8th, 2006, 07:37 AM

I thought of perhaps the hotel above the S. Loop Club at State & Balbo--the Carson Hotel or whatever it's called. The building itself is beautiful, although very small by hotel standards. And no parking.

lovestar

July 8th, 2006, 09:15 AM

http://img451.imageshack.us/img451/6013/newsst0706l0km.jpg

How do those structures look good around the historic row homes? They look ridiculous IMO. I am all for expansion in the South Loop. It is inevitable. However, I do not think that exploiting the area with high rises is the answer.
I live in a vintage loft in the South Loop, in a 5 floor building. A hideous 'soft loft' condo building was completed and opened for living just a month ago. It not only looks like crap, but it is totally out of place and an eye sore.
Developers will get their buildings built in the end because they have the money to do it and want to generate more. Unfortunately, most of them clearly only see green and I don't mean grass. :no:

lovestar

July 8th, 2006, 09:20 AM

As for a Ms Hilton wanting to get in on the hotel industry.. Someone tell the gal to buy the Congress Hotel. From the outside, the place looks like complete shit. It is a waste of space and a huge eye sore for Chicago. I am shocked that Mayor Daley doesn't get rid of it, along with the picketers of the past few years!! Surely someone has the vision and the coin to turn that crap into a modern accommodation for all.

spyguy

July 8th, 2006, 07:47 PM

You might have something with the Hotel Blake. That is a Falor Cos property, and they are the ones partnering with her.

Belacqua

July 8th, 2006, 07:55 PM

The Blake is also yet unoccupied, although the restaurant at the bottom is open and gives it the appearance of life from the street. I assume a condotel is like any other condo and you don't actually close with the developer until you can take physical possession?

PrintersRowBoiler

July 8th, 2006, 08:15 PM

It definitely is a working hotel. If you read their reviews, though, it has received horrendous comments. I have not seen any advertising for selling units. Maybe they tabled the condotel plan. And if you go to their website, it fowards you to a website for a hotel in Naples. I am starting to believe that this is the next Nicky O...

PrintersRowBoiler

July 8th, 2006, 08:51 PM

I looked at the recorded documents for the property. I did not see units sold to individual owners. I DID see a whole lot of liens taken out on the hotel. And the kicker is on June 15, the properties were assigned to Mitchell Hotel Grp. I think we are on to something...

spyguy

July 9th, 2006, 06:34 PM

http://www.chicagotribune.com/classified/realestate/realestate/chi-0607090423jul09,0,2010998.story?coll=chi-classifiedrealestate-hed

New projects for Printers Row
John Handley, Special to the Tribune
Published July 9, 2006

Printers Row, the most established neighborhood in the area, also is attracting new construction. Around the corner from Dearborn Station, with its eateries and shops, is the site for the Residences at Burnham Pointe, a 28-story condo with 298 units. Terrapin Properties is scheduled to break ground in November at Clark and Polk Streets.

"Printers Row is like a little boutique section of the South Loop with a European flavor, where people walk on weekends and evenings," said Michael Ezgur, managing member at Terrapin.

But not all of its neighbors approve of the growth. "Some of the residents of Folio Square, located west of the site of Burnham Pointe, objected that the new tower will block their views. They prefer it remain a parking lot," said Bonnie Sanchez-Carlson, executive director of the Near South Planning Board.

South of Burnham Pointe is a 3.7-acre tract planned for 1,000 units by Lennar Communities of Chicago. Another project is Printers Corner, an 88-unit mid-rise at Polk and Wells Streets.

The latest project by Robert Frankel of Bluestone Development is Lakeside Lofts, a 96-unit, five-story building at 2025-2035 S. Indiana Ave.

Keith Giles was a partner with Frankel in Frankel and Giles Real Estate in 1994, when they did their first South Loop project, Filmworks Lofts. "The bank thought we were crazy, but it turned out we had enough buyers."

Giles noted that the average price then was $118 a square foot; today it's $350 a square foot.

South Michigan Avenue continues to be popular.

"In 2000, I saw how Mayor Daley improved the streetscapes in the South Loop and changed the zoning, so we bought a lot at 1250 S. Michigan Ave.," said Jacob Bletnitsky, partner in Russland Capital Group.

After completing Michigan Avenue Tower in 2005, Bletnitsky and his partner, Alex Vaisman, plan to break ground for a second high-rise at 1400 S. Michigan in September.

Giles also is planning two towers of 35 and 45 stories at 1712 S. Prairie Ave.

"Neighbors oppose the project because it will be much taller than other structures in the neighborhood and the modern architecture will not fit in with the historic district," said Tina Feldstein, a South Loop resident and real estate agent.

But, she adds, most residents support construction because more people in the South Loop will mean more services.

Another Prairie Avenue project is Aristocrat Tower, a 24-story condo that will have a four-story base of townhouses designed to blend in with the mansions on the street. The tower is part of the Prairie Station District, which includes Chess Lofts, a conversion of the eight-story building that was the headquarters of Chess Records. Chicago bluesman Muddy Waters signed with Chess Records in the 1940s, and Chuck Berry and Bo Didley also recorded there.

Another pioneer developer in the South Loop is Jerome Karp, who bought the former YMCA at 828 S. Wabash Ave. in 1985. He gutted the building and turned it into 292 apartments. They went condo in 2000."Since the location was near the Loop, I thought it would eventually succeed. It's unbelievable what's happened since then. I wish I would have bought ever y block in the area," Karp said.

Now he plans to break ground soon for One Place Condominiums, a 10-story building with 98 units at 1 E. 8th St.

spyguy

July 9th, 2006, 06:39 PM

http://www.chicagotribune.com/classified/realestate/realestate/chi-0607090439jul09,0,4829053.story?coll=chi-classifiedrealestate-hed

Looking south
Construction in the South Loop is booming, but buyers are taking their time

By John Handley
Special to the Tribune
Published July 9, 2006

To see what's going on in Chicago's South Loop, take a drive or walk around what could be called "Crane City." New condos are sprouting up in all directions. Signs advertise new projects at almost every corner.

The South Loop outperformed other parts of downtown in 2005 new-construction residential sales and has increased its share of the downtown condo market to 44 percent, according to Appraisal Research Counselors, a Chicago firm that tracks residential sales.

"Huge activity is going on in the South Loop. It's the most active part of the city," said Gail Lissner, vice president of Appraisal Research. "The South Loop has had dramatic growth. In 2000, the area had 7,700 housing units. By the end of this year, it will have 13,600, almost double."

From a decaying commercial area, the South Loop has been transformed into a hot spot, from Congress Parkway to Cermak Road (22nd Street) and the lake to the Chicago River.

The rebirth took baby steps in the early 1990s and now is sprinting. The South Loop is cashing in on its convenience to downtown, Lake Michigan, Grant Park and transportation.

And the perception of the South Loop has changed as dramatically, according to Bonnie Sanchez-Carlson, executive director of the Near South Planning Board. "Back then, people would ask, `You're going where?' Now people are rushing here."

"The South Loop is the most integrated part of the city. It's a true mix of blacks, whites and Chinese in an urban environment," said developer Jerome Karp, but it wasn't always this way.

"It was rough in 1986," added Robert Frankel of Bluestone Development. "It was like Berlin after World War II. There were huge potholes and cracked sidewalks. It was a neglected area.

"When Central Station started in 1991, it was big enough to add credibility, and when Mayor [Richard M.] Daley moved there, it created a perception of safety and security," Frankel said.

"Conversion of loft buildings began in the early 1990s. Later, there was construction of new mid-rises and high-rises," he said.

Lissner said of the 6,200 units in the South Loop on the market now, two-thirds have been sold. "In the next couple of years, 6,100 more units are proposed."

James Kinney, president of Rubloff Residential Properties, confirms the growth: "It's going to end up being a whole other city down there."

And that means growing pains, added Sanchez-Carlson added. "Some residents complain about new buildings blocking their views. As street-level parking lots are built on, parking is becoming a problem."

The city requires one parking place for each residential unit built. In addition, some of the new buildings will have extra parking for the public.

"I'm positive about 95 percent of the new developments, but I criticize the city planning department for allowing less than one parking space for each unit in some of the new condos," said Jeff Thomas, owner of Blackie's restaurant and a longtime South Loop resident. "Even if people walk to work, all have cars. Retail is hurting because of lack of parking."

Terri Haymaker, deputy commissioner for the central district in the city's Department of Planning and Development, said of new construction that "the city's goal is to help it along."

She added that some parts of the South Loop, including Central Station, Dearborn Park and Printers Row, have a true neighborhood feel.

Dearborn Park dates from the early 1980s, while the conversions in Printers Row started in the mid-`80s, said Keith Giles, a veteran developer in the South Loop.

South Prairie Avenue is returning to its "Millionaires Row" roots. In the late 19th Century, it was where Chicago's movers and shakers lived, including Marshall Field, George Pullman and Philip Armour.

While most of those mansions are gone, a few survive and new ones have been built to blend in south of 18th Street.

Today, though, the big story in the South Loop is the high-rises."Greater density is appropriate for the South Loop mainly because of its proximity to downtown. From a regional planning perspective, it makes sense to have housing close to the central business district. People can take public transportation. It gets them out of their cars," said Peter Skosey, vice president of external relations for the Metropolitan Planning Council.

Haymaker said the proposed high-rises even extend to on Prairie Avenue, where they will be set back with townhouses along the street. "Modern design there is acceptable," she added.

The volume leader in high-rises is the Enterprise Companies, the Chicago builder of the Museum Park section of Central Station, the 80-acre master-planned development that anchors the east side of the South Loop.

Ronald Shipka Sr., principal of Enterprise, said his firm plans to build 3,400 to 3,600 more units in high-rises on 10 acres at Museum Park Place, near the south end of Central Station.

Construction has begun on the first of four high-rise condos Enterprise is building on Roosevelt Road between Michigan Avenue and Lake Shore Drive.

"Sales are down 20 to 25 percent, but we're maintaining an acceptable pace. People are more cautious now," Shipka admits. "They're taking 12 to 16 weeks to decide. It used to be three to four weeks."

But "there's no sense of a bubble in the South Loop," said James Colella, general manager of Garrison Partners, which is marketing Chess Lofts and Aristocrat Tower. He also points out that there has been a leveling off in the market.

This year, the best-selling building in the South Loop is CMK Development's 33-story glass-and-steel tower at 1720 S. Michigan Ave., where 325 of the 498 units have been sold.

"People either like a glass box or they hate it," said Colin Kihnke, president of CMK.

Kihnke noted that the city has broadened its architectural guidelines. "Since Millennium Park, everything has changed. Everything is no longer just red brick."

CMK's tower will be built on the former site of the Cotton Club, a jazz venue modeled after the famed club in New York's Harlem.

Another condo slated for a historic site is the Lexington Club, planned for 336 units at Michigan and Cermak. That site held the Lexington Hotel, Al Capone's headquarters from 1928 to 1931.

Lower prices than on the North Side are luring buyers from throughout the area. "In 2005, the average sale in the South Loop was $341,000, $497,000 in Streeterville and the Gold Coast," Kinney said.

Brian Hilsen and his wife, Chantana, are among them. They live in Brookfield but have purchased a two-bedroom, two-bath condo at 30-story Astoria Tower at 9th and State Streets.

"In 10 years, you'll be hard-pressed to find a better place in the city than the South Loop," said Brian. "We looked in the West Loop and on the North Side, which is overpriced. You get more for your money in the South Loop. We both work downtown and we like the central location of Astoria." They expect to move there in 2008 when the building is completed.

simulcra

July 10th, 2006, 02:03 AM

"I'm positive about 95 percent of the new developments, but I criticize the city planning department for allowing less than one parking space for each unit in some of the new condos," said Jeff Thomas, owner of Blackie's restaurant and a longtime South Loop resident. "Even if people walk to work, all have cars. Retail is hurting because of lack of parking."

First of all, Blackie's is amazing and everyone should go there. If you've never heard of it or something crazy like that, it's near AMC River East and their Blackie's Burgers are absolutely amazing (I like it rare!).

Second of all, I'm surprised by the ignorance implicit in such a comment. The lack of cars will *benefit* retail, because it will be an impetus for retail to develop in the south loop, preventing it from being a skyscraper suburb. What he should have said is "near north retail is hurting for lack of potential customer base" because such city limitations will ultimately be better for the south loop community.

Belacqua

July 10th, 2006, 03:44 AM

Simulcra, I think you're talking about Boston Blackies, on Grand & St. Claire (http://www.bostonblackies.com/), which has different ownership from Blackies at Polk & Clark (http://www.blackieschicago.com/) which has been open since 1939, even through the S.Loop's wasteland years. The one on Grand I think opened in the 70s.

The confusion is understandable. They use the exact same typewriter font on their signs and have similarly limited but tasty menus, and I'm sure they must have been related at some time. But bartenders and waitresses at both places suddenly seem to no speaka the English so good when you ask about the connection. I assume there must be some kind of family feud or lawsuit involved.

simulcra

July 10th, 2006, 07:55 AM

uh oops. boy is my face red.

still, my point still stands that *boston* blackies has damn good burgers

LA1

July 11th, 2006, 02:32 AM

First, not everyone in Chicago has a car. Thats just bs. Many by choice, especially in downtown.

2nd, what retail in the South Loop? You dont have any freaking retail yet, so what the fuck is struggling? The college students are there, the density is coming. The problem in the SLoop isnt struggling stores. Its no stores. Sure there are restaurants, bars, small markets,clubs, coffee joints, but actual retail? Where?

I can think of Walgreens and Target, both of which seem to be doing well. But thats it.

Belacqua

July 11th, 2006, 03:33 AM

Well, not that the problem is lack of parking, but there are a few retail spots and about the only thing that seems to do okay aside from what you mention is the wine shops. In Printer's Row proper there are a bunch of storefronts that can't keep anything going for any length of time other than salons, dry cleaners and retail bank locations, and Dearborn Station is a huge waste of beautiful space. God knows how the few bookstores stay open because there's never a single person in any of them and they're all closed by the time you get off work (but maybe it just takes one person a week willing to pony up $5750 for a nice 1st edition Dreiser).

But these mostly aren't places that people would drive out of their way to, anyway. At least on Dearborn they're suffering from high rents and small footprints that don't allow much small business to survive other than pricey boutiquey stuff, and to support that kind of retail you need either serious money or serious density in the immediate area, neither of which is there yet. Lack of parking is decidedly not the problem, unless this guy is talking about neighborhood people too lazy to walk more than four blocks to his restaurant.

lovestar

July 11th, 2006, 03:34 AM

In the past 4yrs of living in the South Loop things are definitely picking up. Eventually the owners of the area businesses will be doing better. Lots of new things popping up! Patience.

richardsonhomebuyers

July 11th, 2006, 04:00 AM

uh oops. boy is my face red.

still, my point still stands that *boston* blackies has damn good burgers

I second that. One reason why I never want to move from my building is they are right down stairs :) The blackies burger kicks all ass.

LA1

July 12th, 2006, 04:41 AM

Boston Blackies is good, but I like Poag Mahones on Wells, south of Jackson. Best burger in the city. Also a great bar scene, makes you feel like you are back in the 1920s or a real Irish Pub.

richardsonhomebuyers

July 12th, 2006, 06:32 AM

^^ I will have to try them. I'm always up for a good burger.

Loopy

July 12th, 2006, 05:21 PM

Some pretty good news here. Columbia has been tightening up their campus, bringing their various departments closer together. This move will bring the Dance and Theater students in the same complex as the Film and Video department and other visual arts.

Additionally the article mentions a new restaurant going in next to the Eleven City Diner. It's going to be lively on this block with all of the boho art students and the deli owner out on the sidewalk arguing with his new neighbor!

http://www.globest.com/news/624_624/chicago/147207-1.html

Last updated: July 11, 2006 08:11am

Dance School Relocates to South Wabash
By Bonnie Grota

CHICAGO-Columbia College Dance and Theater School has signed a long-term lease that will keep its facilities in the South Loop. The school will occupy the entire second floor of the five-story 1122 S. Wabash Ave. building. Occupancy of the 12,600-sf space will take place this fall.

Yvonne Jones, a vice president with Zifkin Realty Group, represented building ownership, MBA Enterprises-3 Inc., in the transaction. Geoff Euston, a senior vice president at US Equities Realty, represented the college. "Building ownership is in the process of making several improvements," Jones tells GlobeSt.com. "A new lobby is being constructed in addition to a new elevator, and the building will have two restaurants.” Eleven City Diner, a deli, has already opened on the ground floor, and another well-known Chicago-area restaurant will be announced soon for the retail space next door to the deli, Jones says.

Columbia College is now in the process of converting the former office space on the second floor of the five-story building for its rehearsal and performance studio. "They are totally gutting and rebuilding the existing space,” says Jones. “The school received an allowance for the build-out."

The dance school is relocating from 1306 S. Michigan Ave. Constructed in 1920, 1112 S. Wabash has been maintained as an office property. "There isn't much office space left in the South Loop," Jones tells GlobeSt.com. "Most of it has been either torn down or re-used for either retail or residential space."

Jones says that Columbia will continue to increase its presence in the South Loop by leasing or by acquisition. "The growth of Columbia's Dance and Theater School prompted the search for a larger venue," says Jones. "This new location accommodates the program's continued expansion while remaining close to the college's other properties. The College already occupies space right next door to this one."
The school has two five-year renewal options for this space, according to Jones. There are other tenants in the building. If the school needed to eventually expand its space in the building, the opportunity may present itself if those tenants would choose not to renew their space.

Loopy

July 14th, 2006, 08:42 PM

Well, it looks like Spyguy and PrintersRowBoiler nailed it. Nicky O just announced that her Chicago hotel will be in the "historic Morton Salt Building", that's the current Blake hotel. I wonder how many of Nicky O's guests will cross the street to browse rare books.

http://home.businesswire.com/portal/site/google/index.jsp?ndmViewId=news_view&newsId=20060714005109&newsLang=en

July 14, 2006 12:56 PM US Eastern Timezone
CORRECTING and REPLACING Nicky Hilton Launches Nicky O Hotels; Hilton Heiress Expands Design Empire to Include Boutique Hotel Properties in South Beach and Chicago; Designer Roberto Cavalli Designs Luxury Penthouse Suite
CORRECTION...by Nicky O
NEW YORK--(BUSINESS WIRE)--July 14, 2006--Please replace the release with the following corrected version.

The corrected release reads:

NICKY HILTON LAUNCHES NICKY O HOTELS; HILTON HEIRESS EXPANDS DESIGN EMPIRE TO INCLUDE BOUTIQUE HOTEL PROPERTIES IN SOUTH BEACH AND CHICAGO; DESIGNER ROBERTO CAVALLI DESIGNS LUXURY PENTHOUSE SUITE

Drawing upon both her family history and the design passion expressed through her highly successful clothing and handbag lines, Nicky Hilton today announced her newest venture, Nicky O, a premier luxury hotel brand that will launch later this year in Miami, followed shortly after by Chicago. In tandem with world renowned designer Roberto Cavalli, who will design a luxurious 5,000 square foot penthouse suite at Nicky O South Beach, Nicky O will marry the look and feel of a classic French Regency destination with the glamour of modern Hollywood.

Deeply involved in every aspect of the redesign, from all common areas to the guestrooms, including several "grand" suites at each hotel, Hilton is looking to make a clear impression at every turn. She explains, "Having grown up in the family business I certainly have an understanding of the day-to-day operations at a successful property. With the Nicky O brand I'm looking to combine that knowledge with my entrepreneurial passion in the design world and create an environment that hasn't been seen before."

With suites ranging from $300/night to $5,000/night for "rooftop" penthouse suites, Hilton is also bringing her sensibilities to the more personal levels of accommodation including designing of the staff attire and selecting specific scents and amenities for each property.

Hilton adds, "It has been such a pleasure putting this project together. I truly believe that Nicky O hotels will provide an unparalleled experience by combining the worlds of hospitality, design and entertainment in a way that hasn't been done before. We look forward to appealing to the most discerning of travelers."

Located in the heart of South Beach on the legendary Ocean Drive in the Breakwater building, the first of the Nicky O hotels -- an all-suite hotel/condo property -- will debut this November in Miami. Nicky O Chicago, a 162-room stylish boutique hotel located on Printer's Row in the historic Morton Salt Building, will follow shortly after.
Miami's Zilbert Realty Group is handling sales and marketing of the Nicky O South Beach which is offering 94 condo suites, selling from just under $500,000 to over $7M. Buyers will get privileged access to the Nicky O lounge, expected to be one of South Beach's most popular hot spots.

spyguy

July 15th, 2006, 02:18 AM

- edit

spyguy

July 20th, 2006, 04:48 AM

They had these figures:

Michigan Avenue Tower II - 70% sold
Aristocrat Tower - 50% sold
Lexington Park - 300 pre-registered buyers

And this:
The Roosevelt Collection.

Centrum Properties is planning
this major mixed-use residential
development and “life-style retail
center” on 12 acres bounded by
Roosevelt Road, 9th Street,
between Wells Street and the
Metra tracks, west of the new
Target store. Initial sales are projected
to begin in autumn of 2006.
The $1-billion Roosevelt
Collection plan calls for 1,000
housing units including loft-style
condos, two high-rises and more
than 420,000 square feet of commercial
space including a 20-
screen theater, retail shops, entertainment,
restaurants, and a
major health club.
The Phase I loft condominiums
and retail space would be
elevated on the same level as
Roosevelt Road and built on top
of an 1,800-car parking garage. A
30-story high-rise with 300 condominiums
overlooking the park
also is part of Phase I.

And perhaps more importantly:

Riverside District.
This $2.5-billion venture will utilize the
62-acre tract of undeveloped land
along the south branch of the
Chicago River south of Roosevelt
Road to 16th Street and east to
Clark Street, according to Heritage
Development Partners, LLC.
Plans for the Riverside District
call for a mix of new retail space,
restaurants and other commercial
uses as well as 4,600 residential
units--from studio apartments,
mid-rise and high-rise condominiums
and lofts to luxury townhomes
and mansion rowhomes.
The initial phase of the Riverside
District is expected to be
launched in early-2007.

Also this rather sad ad for what I think is 18-Prairie
http://img92.imageshack.us/img92/3159/pre18prrq2.jpg