Centrum, is the finalizing of the vacation of Financial south of Polk simply to make more room for yourselves now that you'll be getting out of the ground further south, or are you preparing to start work on something on that land?

Sunset for construction crane lovers:

http://img231.imageshack.us/img231/4327/rooscoll20071104hf9.jpg

Centrum, is the finalizing of the vacation of Financial south of Polk simply to make more room for yourselves now that you'll be getting out of the ground further south, or are you preparing to start work on something on that land?

We are not starting anything soon on that land. We moved Financial, Taylor and 9th to allow for the park and for CDOT to install the street and utilities. Specifically, I moved Financial to the west b/ CDOT requested it due to certain underground utility issues. They are bringing an 8' main down new financial.

Sunset for construction crane lovers:

http://img231.imageshack.us/img231/4327/rooscoll20071104hf9.jpg


We have one more coming soon. We are pouring the first elevated slab this week, if all goes well.

Centrum - This is off-topic but I don't know where else to ask - is there something big planned at Belmont and Kimball? I see your signs and it would be great to see a transit-oriented develoment there.

This morning (as requested):

http://img262.imageshack.us/img262/9808/rooscoll20071108nn7.jpg

Centrum, would I be right in saying that you hope to have retail stores open next November?

This morning (as requested):

Centrum, would I be right in saying that you hope to have retail stores open next November?

We plan to open the retail portion of the project Oct 2009.

We plan to open the retail portion of the project Oct 2009.

What about the theater? I thought I read recently that it could open in 2008.

What about the theater? I thought I read recently that it could open in 2008.

Same thing. We plan to open all the retail at once.

Centrum - This is off-topic but I don't know where else to ask - is there something big planned at Belmont and Kimball? I see your signs and it would be great to see a transit-oriented develoment there.

I don't know what we are doing at that location, exactly. That project is being run from a different group.

Can someone post the Roosevelt Collection's webcam. I seem to have lost it. Again.

Can someone post the Roosevelt Collection's webcam. I seem to have lost it. Again.

http://www.rclofts.com/constructionCam.html

Thanks ITV.

I swung the RC cam all the way to the west and it looks like there are crews begining to do work on the East side of the River at Taylor Street. Centrum is this a staging area or are you guys getting ready to do site prep work on Taylor Street?

I swung the RC cam all the way to the west and it looks like there are crews begining to do work on the East side of the River at Taylor Street. Centrum is this a staging area or are you guys getting ready to do site prep work on Taylor Street?

we are staging between wells and the river. we are renting that land for a few months.

Taylor Street is fully vacated and we won't be doing any work on it. Taylor was replaced w/ 9th street. We did that at CDOT's request.

What's going on with this, any updates and photos?

What's going on with this, any updates and photos?

Well, there is a webcam (link at the top of the page) that gives a really nice overview of what's going on.

The Roosevelt Collection site is outside the normal "beat" for the regular photographers, and the Roosevelt overpass is BRUTALLY cold and windy at this time of year, since it's so barren.

Well, there is a webcam (link at the top of the page) that gives a really nice overview of what's going on.

The Roosevelt Collection site is outside the normal "beat" for the regular photographers, and the Roosevelt overpass is BRUTALLY cold and windy at this time of year, since it's so barren.

Speaking of the overpass, are there any renderings or information about where RC will be connected to the street grid? Will you be able to access it from Roosevelt Rd.? I dont remember ever reading anything about it.

Roosevelt Collection will have an intersection with Roosevelt at 150W, or approximately LaSalle Street. This will be from the Roosevelt Road level, and will be the main retailing level.

The parking garage will also have entries from Wells Street, down on ground level.

Construction is up to the second retail level, but it's snowing too much to get a good picture right now:

http://img220.imageshack.us/img220/9382/rooscoll9feb08ep5.jpg

I visited the sales center last week and was very impressed. I was told the high rise section is currently being considered rental given the mortgage environment. The scale model is really well done. I did not have my camera with me unfortunately.

When are they going to build that 9th street connection to Clark?

..

When are they going to build that 9th street connection to Clark?

CDOT has on their website a page for Wells Street reconstruction. It rebuilds 9th Street up to the Metra viaduct on both the east and west sides. This is planned to be finished by late summer. Once it's done, then CDOT will probably begin to plan for underpass construction.

Well, the new 9th Street cul-de-sac coming west off Clark (next to Amli 900) is open. CDOT is working on Wells south of Polk and the relocation of Financial Place right now. I was surprised that the plans include only a little stub of 9th east from Wells, with no mention of a Metra underpass:

http://egov.cityofchicago.org/city/webportal/portalContentItemAction.do?contenTypeName=COC_EDITORIAL&topChannelName=HomePage&contentOID=536969535

The cross-sections of 9th Street, visible in that press release, show 9th Street sloping down before the Metra tracks. There's no reason to do that unless an underpass is planned.

when is the project supposed to be completed?

The retail portion of Roosevelt Collection is to open Oct. 2009.

I visited the sales center last week and was very impressed. I was told the high rise section is currently being considered rental given the mortgage environment. The scale model is really well done. I did not have my camera with me unfortunately.
So, to the best of your knowledge, the highrise portion is moving forward and will be a part of this phase?

A few clarifications if anyone knows the answers...

1. CDOT says they are adding a left turn lane for southbound traffic onto Taylor from Wells... where does this go to? The parking garage at the RC? It almost looks like it will line up with the south end of the park, but I expect it to go right into the parking garage.

2. CDOT shows some work along Clark including widening the street and the sidewalk for a small section near AMLI's project. Does anyone know the details of the AMLI project? Do they plan to extend this from PL to PL or do they plan to keep the 6' walk at their property lines.

3. Does anyone know any plans for CTA lines along Clark now that 1,000s of units (triple towers at Clark/Polk, Amli, Burnham Pointe, dorms, D3's project) will be added there plus the added population along Wells (RC)?

4. When discussing high rises for RC, are we discussing the high rise at the NW corner of the RC (SW corner of the park) or the stand-alone tower at Financial and Polk? I really like that tower and how it does a great job hiding the parking podium, maintaining views/sunlight for the neighbors, and a lot of open space.

5. Anyone know what the story is with the property south of the Paper building? It looks like with the relocation of Financial, the lot has only about 100' from public way to public way. That is not enough to get two bays of parking (very ineifficent for parking garage/podium) and likely will result in lack of interest for the property (it has been for sale for a long time). It seems inevitable that it will now be a surface lot for a very long time.

when is the project supposed to be completed?I was told occupancy is 12-18 months away.

So, to the best of your knowledge, the highrise portion is moving forward and will be a part of this phase?Yes, it will be built, just not sure if it is condo or rental.

5. Anyone know what the story is with the property south of the Paper building? It looks like with the relocation of Financial, the lot has only about 100' from public way to public way. That is not enough to get two bays of parking (very ineifficent for parking garage/podium) and likely will result in lack of interest for the property (it has been for sale for a long time). It seems inevitable that it will now be a surface lot for a very long time.

^ Well, a building without a podium could be built, with either below grade parking or (gasp!) no parking. I'm sure the latter is not fathomable given the prevailing assumption that cars absolutely must be accommodated everywhere, but it's indeed very possible, desirable, and should be encouraged (although it obviously won't be).

5. Anyone know what the story is with the property south of the Paper building? It looks like with the relocation of Financial, the lot has only about 100' from public way to public way. That is not enough to get two bays of parking (very ineifficent for parking garage/podium) and likely will result in lack of interest for the property (it has been for sale for a long time). It seems inevitable that it will now be a surface lot for a very long time.

The site is currently zoned DX-5. The site could easily accommodate a 4-5 story apartment building or a row of townhouses. That may be the only hope for development - either that, or some sort of use that requires little to no parking. I could see a retail-only building there - maybe restaurant space and some small shops?

I know of no CTA plans to run rail lines along or near Clark, but they may increase frequency on the #24 to account for all the new residents.

The site is currently zoned DX-5. The site could easily accommodate a 4-5 story apartment building or a row of townhouses. That may be the only hope for development - either that, or some sort of use that requires little to no parking. I could see a retail-only building there - maybe restaurant space and some small shops?


I suppose the proposed parking podium for the apartment across the street will be lined with townhouses so it can't be that oud of the question. A 4-5 story apartment building would probably only need one level of parking so that might work. I just get the feeling that if the owner could not get the money he wanted from Centrum (presumably they inquired because they bought everything around it) that this guy wants more money than what a retail or 4-5 story apartment building can bring in. They have the same issue at the big parking lot at the SEC of Congress and Dearborn. Someone at one point mentioned this property... just seeing if someone like Mr. Downtown knows something we all don't.

Roosevelt Collection from the Target Parking lot

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2091/2256438107_ef244443b7.jpg?v=0

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2334/2257237790_971c5b51bb.jpg?v=0

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2141/2256439951_1679e69c32.jpg?v=0

Amli 900
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2341/2257239710_4eba590e7f.jpg?v=0

I just get the feeling that if the owner could not get the money he wanted from Centrum (presumably they inquired because they bought everything around it) that this guy wants more money than what a retail or 4-5 story apartment building can bring in.

I'm not sure who the owner is anymore. The city must have bought part of the parcel in order to shift Financial Place to the west. Perhaps they own all of it. If that's the case, then the city may be withholding the land for an RFP at a later date, or they may refuse to sell to Centrum in order to bring a different developer in and break the monotony.

1. CDOT says they are adding a left turn lane for southbound traffic onto Taylor from Wells... where does this go to?
Excellent question. I was under the impression that the park begins at the south line of Taylor.

any plans for CTA lines along Clark
Already served by the 24 and 129, and the terminal of the 22 and 36 is at less than a block away, at Polk.

Anyone know what the story is with the property south of the Paper building?
Just that it's been advertised for sale in Crain's in recent months. You raise a good point about the inefficiency for parking, which I've been told is also the problem with the surface lot at Dearborn/Harrison. I think with condo spaces, you could do one row of parallel spaces to get around this:
http://img170.imageshack.us/img170/6539/picture11eh0.png

Centrum bought property solely from the big Walsh-Higgins parcel, so they may not have tried to buy this parcel.

When are they going to build that 9th street connection to Clark?

CDOT is not building the connection with this phase of the project. I do not know when that connection will go in.

So, to the best of your knowledge, the highrise portion is moving forward and will be a part of this phase?

It's the second phase of the Roosevelt Collection project and it will move forward.

We've been taking some panoramic pictures of the project. Can I PM them to someone to post?

Sure, you can PM them to me if you'd like.

I suppose the proposed parking podium for the apartment across the street will be lined with townhouses so it can't be that oud of the question. A 4-5 story apartment building would probably only need one level of parking so that might work. I just get the feeling that if the owner could not get the money he wanted from Centrum (presumably they inquired because they bought everything around it) that this guy wants more money than what a retail or 4-5 story apartment building can bring in. They have the same issue at the big parking lot at the SEC of Congress and Dearborn. Someone at one point mentioned this property... just seeing if someone like Mr. Downtown knows something we all don't.

I heard directly from someone-who-knows at Centrum that the owner of the parcel wanted 2-3x market value for that piece, and/or wanted to participate in the development. Total non-starter, and hence, it is still available.

I'm not sure who the owner is anymore. The city must have bought part of the parcel in order to shift Financial Place to the west. Perhaps they own all of it. If that's the case, then the city may be withholding the land for an RFP at a later date, or they may refuse to sell to Centrum in order to bring a different developer in and break the monotony.

No, from what I understand this is a private owner. He thinks he is holding a gold mine.

How does the shift of Fin Place impact the lot south of 801 Wells? Are we talking about the same parcel?

I heard directly from someone-who-knows at Centrum that the owner of the parcel wanted 2-3x market value for that piece, and/or wanted to participate in the development. Total non-starter, and hence, it is still available.

is this is the site north of 9th and west of financial? If so, he plans to hold that site for a while, based on my last conversations with him.

is this is the site north of 9th and west of financial? If so, he plans to hold that site for a while, based on my last conversations with him.

yes, that is the site we are discussing. that's a shame. i suppose it means slightly less competition for your product, but it also means that the neighborhood will be marred by an unsightly, unimproved gravel lot where cars are jammed in like sardines.

Hey Centrum,
Was contribution to the Wells Street Improvement as a contingency for approval and entitlement of the project? Any dollar amount and/or percentage of the total cost of WSI you wouldn't mind sharing?

Construction update. I hadn't realized the "loft" buildings would go this tall.

http://img228.imageshack.us/img228/9550/rooscoll20apr08uk2.jpg

It's almost topped-out, if the renderings on their website are to be believed. Only roof structures remain.

Apparently they haven't started the west buildings yet.

After visiting Atlantic Station, I'm more re-assured about this development. The stairs at the north end, if they come out well, seem like they will tie the development into the city fairly well. If there is street-level retail along Wells, then I don't see this as being any worse than North Bridge at Rush/Illinois.

The stairs at the north end, if they come out well, seem like they will tie the development into the city fairly well.
There's no retail along Wells, just parking garage entrances.

And the stairs have been value-engineered so they're now little more than exit stairs. They will certainly not invite anyone to approach on foot from the north and climb up three flights to sneak in the back entrance by the cinema. They'll shout "go back home, you loser, until you're wealthy enough to drive here like a real Amurkin."

The width of the stair had to be reduced b/ CDOT is installing an 8' sewer on the western edge of the stair. We cannot build over it. You might have seen an older design. I think our new design is very attractive and more grand.

I asked about the value-engineering last fall, and this was the response I received. The remark about the "older design" makes me think that perhaps you and I both saw the same unexecuted, older design. Of course, it could also be the Centrum guy tooting his own horn, which is pretty likely.

The lack of retail along Wells is extremely disappointing, and a huge missed opportunity. I saw a nice rendering a while back that depicted the area with a ground-level street grid, and shops under the Roosevelt viaduct. I'm starting to pine for that now, even though it was low-scaled.

April 6, 2008
http://WilBSnodgrassiii.smugmug.com/photos/277541882_8dn9Y-XL.jpg

Is anything planned for those hideous parking lots directly south of River City along the river?

Not yet.

..

As far as I know, the owner of the riverfront site is Jos. Cacciatore & Sons. I don't know of any specific plans for the site since the later phases of River City were cancelled, unlike the Riverside District to the south and Franklin Point to the north, both of which have had relatively recent development plans released to the public.

April 6, 2008
http://WilBSnodgrassiii.smugmug.com/photos/277541882_8dn9Y-XL.jpg

^ Ugh...

I'm so turned off with how this entire part of town is developing.

No grid, lots of stand alone garages, and the fugly Dearborn Park...

..

^ Ugh...

I'm so turned off with how this entire part of town is developing.

No grid, lots of stand alone garages, and the fugly Dearborn Park...

It has come a long way from five years ago... when there was literally nothing. Once they punch 9th Street through the tracks, build Taylor Street, finish Wells and extend Southerly, the grid will be slightly better. The garages once everything will be built out should not be too bad stashed by the tracks - better than up agaisnt the street (although without retail it isnt great). You gotta figure at some point they are going to open up Dearborn Park (try to open up the streets / redevelop portions of it) - dont hold your breath!

i know this might be considered a stupid question for most of the forum but is Dearborn Park a gated community? from the picture above, it looks like a gc... a very very sad way to live in the city. sorry for my ignorance, i have never been in that area for the six years i've lived in Chicago.

i know this might be considered a stupid question for most of the forum but is Dearborn Park a gated community? from the picture above, it looks like a gc... a very very sad way to live in the city. sorry for my ignorance, i have never been in that area for the six years i've lived in Chicago.

Sort of - more like a walled community. Anyone can really walk through there... but there are only a few access points for both pedestrians and cars.

You can walk into it, but not through it. You can only enter on the north and east sides, and the west/south sides are basically an unbroken wall. Many of the residents like this, because people cannot drive or walk through their neighborhood to reach places on the other side, and so their neighborhood becomes very quiet and isolated.

^ F' em'

You can walk into it, but not through it. You can only enter on the north and east sides, and the west/south sides are basically an unbroken wall. Many of the residents like this, because people cannot drive or walk through their neighborhood to reach places on the other side, and so their neighborhood becomes very quiet and isolated.

seems a little short sighted to me. when properties are connected and part of the same exciting street scape, everybody's property is more valuabe.

seems a little short sighted to me. when properties are connected and part of the same exciting street scape, everybody's property is more valuabe.

What's that? The big picture, you say? Never heard of it.

when properties are connected and part of the same exciting street scape, everybody's property is more valuabe.

As evidenced by the premium homebuyers pay for a property on a cul-de-sac.

At any rate, the city came and installed speed bumps on the cul-de-sacs in Dearborn Park I last week. No one seems to know who wanted them or why. Apparently the wheels were set in motion when Haithcock was alderman.

seems a little short sighted to me. when properties are connected and part of the same exciting street scape, everybody's property is more valuabe.

Opening up to the neighborhood doesn't add value when the surrounding neighborhood consists of vacant lots and empty railyards, which was the case when Dearborn Park was built. Times change, you know, and one of the fascinating things about cities is reading the layers of history (social, economic, environmental) that are encoded in the built environment around us. We can regret decisions made in the past that, in retrospect, were not the best ones -- but which might have made sense to someone in the past. And meanwhile, we can hope that future generations will look as kindly upon the decisions that we make today.

(If you really want to get ticked off about poor connectivity, try walking the riverwalk up either side of the north branch in River North/River West sometime.)

The original plan for River City would've cost billions of dollars. Very few of those grand Modernist megastructure schemes ever got built for good reason: they ran out of money in their quest to have cities grow mechanically, not organically. The few that did get built look preposterously overplanned and hopelessly inflexible in retrospect: Illinois Center, Renaissance Center, Peachtree Center, Front de Seine.

As evidenced by the premium homebuyers pay for a property on a cul-de-sac.

^ Yet some of Chicago's most expensive property is not located on cul-de-sacs.

If it's a great neighborhood, I don't think it matters. The south loop was a shithole when DP was built, but as it improves as a neighborhood I"m wondering how important having a blind-ending street will really be weighed against the pressure of a growing community that faces congestion

^ Yet some of Chicago's most expensive property is not located on cul-de-sacs.

If it's a great neighborhood, I don't think it matters. The south loop was a shithole when DP was built, but as it improves as a neighborhood I"m wondering how important having a blind-ending street will really be weighed against the pressure of a growing community that faces congestion

it really isn't very forward thinking, is it? you don't build a community of this size without thinking more about its future environment than the present one.

I'm in total agreement with you, Urban; we're dealing with a serious lack of logic. And in real answer to your point: there will come a time when they will need to poke an expensive hole(s) in the interior of RC and connect it with more of the "outside world".

Perhaps the developers should have studied the history of the fortress Circle before it morphed into the open and green UIC.

^^related:

Big mistake or not: orienting RC to the riverfront rather than on a north/south axis in the middle of the project?

I'm not sure why this keeps getting asked. Roosevelt Collection is not within 300 feet of the river.

May 10, 2008

http://img106.imageshack.us/img106/5758/rc1uk1.jpg

http://img166.imageshack.us/img166/9236/rc2cj9.jpg

^ Nice shots. I have a thing for canyonized rail ROW's, and this one looks like it's turning out that way.

I'm assuming that the DOT will remove the railings from the Roosevelt Bridge where it interfaces with Roosevelt Collection, right?

..

There's no retail along Wells, just parking garage entrances.

And the stairs have been value-engineered so they're now little more than exit stairs. They will certainly not invite anyone to approach on foot from the north and climb up three flights to sneak in the back entrance by the cinema. They'll shout "go back home, you loser, until you're wealthy enough to drive here like a real Amurkin."

We have about 6000sf of retail along Wells Street.

Hey Centrum,
Was contribution to the Wells Street Improvement as a contingency for approval and entitlement of the project? Any dollar amount and/or percentage of the total cost of WSI you wouldn't mind sharing?

Many years ago a TIF was approved to do the Wells Street work. I do not know how much the work costs - MQ is doing the work for CDOT.

^ Nice shots. I have a thing for canyonized rail ROW's, and this one looks like it's turning out that way.

I'm assuming that the DOT will remove the railings from the Roosevelt Bridge where it interfaces with Roosevelt Collection, right?

The Roosevelt Road intersection should be done this year.

we are starting the steel in the theater this week, if anyone is interested.

..

Thanks for the updates Centrum!

Besides Kerasotes, could you list some of the major tenants that have been locked in?

I am especially interested in the book store tenant.

I cannot release that information yet. I can tell you that we are getting great traction and will have a number of leases to announce soon.

We've also written 6 new resi contracts over the last three weeks.

it really isn't very forward thinking, is it? you don't build a community of this size without thinking more about its future environment than the present one.

And when Dearborn Park was planned in the 1970s, how could anyone have predicted what the South Loop would look like in the late 2000s?

Take some time to read plans and predictions from that era; very little of it had any prescience whatsoever. (And no, even though I work in the planning biz, I'm afraid to say that we probably haven't gotten much better at crystal-ball-gazing since then.) And even if City Hall actually did write binding, official City Plans, and the Central Area is the only part of town where it even pretends to do so, what were the chances that its ideas would come to fruition? Distributor subway, anyone?

In the 1970s, some people genuinely planned for River City to become an inwardly focused monster complex three times as big as Presidential Towers -- or half again as large as Robert Taylor Homes. (Note how wonderfully River City, as built, meets the street. And yes, the original plan would have used a Section 8 mortgage, which could have filled it with public housing tenants.) The demographic trends were perilous: the city's population dropped over 10% in the 1970s, with a net loss of 300,000 people (the population of Pittsburgh or Tampa!), all while the city's poverty rate increased 24%.

Hindsight is 20/20.

we are starting the steel in the theater this week, if anyone is interested.

Hurry up... finish the freakin movie theaters :) I'm tired of going up north to watch a movie. Has the completion date changed?

no, we are on schedule and plan to open October 2009. Steel for the theater is going up as we speak.

no, we are on schedule and plan to open October 2009. Steel for the theater is going up as we speak.

I always thought that the theater was going to be on the very southern edge of the entire building structure, with the residential units on the west and east edges (which are on top of two floors of retail). I can't tell for sure, but looking at the steel for the theater today, it looks like the theater is going up on the west edge of the entire building structure???

I always thought that the theater was going to be on the very southern edge of the entire building structure, with the residential units on the west and east edges (which are on top of two floors of retail). I can't tell for sure, but looking at the steel for the theater today, it looks like the theater is going up on the west edge of the entire building structure???

Theater is on the north side of the building on both the east and west sides. It sits on top of the first retail level.

Theater is on the north side of the building on both the east and west sides. It sits on top of the first retail level.

Oops....I meant to say northern edge! Thanks for the clarification.

Taken today:
http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/5373/rcoll614qr7.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

Centrum, I'm curious why the theater is being framed in steel rather than concrete like the rest of the center. It seems like concrete would have fewer problems with sound transmission.

Sorry if this question has been asked before, but has there been any thought about building over the Metra tracks? It just seems like a great opportunity to make use of what could end up being unused air rights

Sorry if this question has been asked before, but has there been any thought about building over the Metra tracks? It just seems like a great opportunity to make use of what could end up being unused air rights

didn't they do this on some of the Museum Park buildings?

I notice that Roosevelt Collection's retail floors are cantilevered out toward the tracks about three feet further than the parking levels. I suppose it's possible that Metra agreed to accept a narrow maintenance easement extending beyond the tracks up to +25 feet only, but that's very unlike Metra.

Originally, Metra's interest was a "relocatable easement," which raised hopes that the tracks could be moved to allow easier development both here and on the Riverside Park tract. But the Riverside Park PD and the 2003 LaSalle Park amendments changed that, giving Metra ownership of the current track ROW.

Anyway, these three tracks are small potatoes for development. I'd love to see something over the Amtrak/Metra yards between the river and Canal. An Olympic stadium, for example.

Sorry if this question has been asked before, but has there been any thought about building over the Metra tracks? It just seems like a great opportunity to make use of what could end up being unused air rights

No thought was given. If Centrum had owned all the land between clark and the metra we might have though about this, but w/out that land there was no reason to bridge over.

Centrum, I'm curious why the theater is being framed in steel rather than concrete like the rest of the center. It seems like concrete would have fewer problems with sound transmission.

I'm actually no longer at Centrum, so I don't speak for the company or project anymore. I'm at a private equity shop now. So, my comments going forward are NOT on behalf of Centrum.

The theater is steel b/ of the long spans - 60' in some cases. Concrete can not economically make those types of spans. Sound transmission is not an issue from the theater out, the issue is from the retailers up. Our tenant design criteria addressed that, so it really is a non-issue.

I notice that Roosevelt Collection's retail floors are cantilevered out toward the tracks about three feet further than the parking levels. I suppose it's possible that Metra agreed to accept a narrow maintenance easement extending beyond the tracks up to +25 feet only, but that's very unlike Metra.

Originally, Metra's interest was a "relocatable easement," which raised hopes that the tracks could be moved to allow easier development both here and on the Riverside Park tract. But the Riverside Park PD and the 2003 LaSalle Park amendments changed that, giving Metra ownership of the current track ROW.

Anyway, these three tracks are small potatoes for development. I'd love to see something over the Amtrak/Metra yards between the river and Canal. An Olympic stadium, for example.

Metra has a 10' easement west of the retaining wall the entire length of the property - can't build in that area. for firetruck assess we needed to provide 16' clear from the retaining wall. So, we had 16' clear (horizontal) and 14' clear (vertical). After the 14' vertical dimension we cantilevered the building back 6' to the edge of the 10' easement.

flickr.com - patrickherek

July 6
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3072/2650341922_9f12cd47c8_b.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3128/2650339006_e208f67940_b.jpg

I notice that Roosevelt Collection's retail floors are cantilevered out toward the tracks about three feet further than the parking levels. I suppose it's possible that Metra agreed to accept a narrow maintenance easement extending beyond the tracks up to +25 feet only, but that's very unlike Metra.

I agree.

Any concession is very "unlike Metra."

http://img4.imageshack.us/img4/7813/3407124889f165ef0a8bb.jpg
drdave88/ flickr
http://img4.imageshack.us/img4/9601/34071172836f962b87a7b.jpg
drdave88/ flickr
http://img4.imageshack.us/img4/4669/3407116769e25dc5d556b.jpg
drdave88/ flickr

Looking good! THanks spyguy!

Excellent update by harry:

A Rainy end to the 1st of May.
http://lh5.ggpht.com/_8TC_VUmf9Fw/Sgi7UNm8mjI/AAAAAAABLpc/Dk2D4Gdd67k/s800/2009_05_01R.JPG
Full Drabness (http://picasaweb.google.com/harry.r.carmichael/RooseveltStation#5334719714545146418)

Love these details (4 varieties ?) on the bridge.
http://lh6.ggpht.com/_8TC_VUmf9Fw/Sgi7VHMNG4I/AAAAAAABLpk/1Pye6uLG2YM/s800/P1350780.JPG

Shooting into the rain
http://lh5.ggpht.com/_8TC_VUmf9Fw/Sgi7WYxThtI/AAAAAAABLps/PZeJUqlBhS8/s800/P1350784.JPG

Impressive entryway.
http://lh6.ggpht.com/_8TC_VUmf9Fw/Sgi7XpQLfeI/AAAAAAABLp0/ed7WRDqFVbk/s800/P1350800.JPG

I love the red facade around the movie theatre. I even think it would look great on the facade of a high rise used as an accent. I'm excited to see all of those planters filled up with plantings too. Basically excited to have the whole project open and having people and stores moved in.

http://chicagoismynewblog.wordpress.com/

June 3, 2009

Roosevelt Collection as seen from the Chicago River & 18th Street.

http://img72.imageshack.us/img72/1053/rimg1181.jpg

From Crain's Chicago Business Chicago Real Estate Daily (http://www.chicagorealestatedaily.com/cgi-bin/news.pl?id=34599)

Chicago restaurateur Jerry Kleiner will run an upscale bar at the 16-screen Kerasotes movie theater that’s set to open later this year in the South Loop.
****
The roughly 4,700-square-foot mezzanine level bar will have room for about 160 patrons. The mezzanine level also will provide access to premium seating areas in two theaters, where there will be 150 reserved seats in an upper level of the two theaters featuring plush seating and table service.
****
Kerasotes will be the first tenant to open at Roosevelt Collection, where more than 300,000 square feet of additional retail space has had its opening pushed back a year to fall 2010 due to the recession and struggling retail industry.

ITS OFFICIAL! Roosevelt Collection Changes from Condos to Rentals

http://thecondoist.wordpress.com/2009/08/07/breakingnew/

What does everyone think?

^^ It will be good to get these rented and I'm going to be optimistic and say they will rent out fairly well. Better than only being half occupied I suppose. Plus...many rental buildings that are currently under construction will convert into condos in the future so I would bet the same would happen here.

http://chicagoismynewblog.wordpress.com

http://www.chicagorealestatedaily.com/cgi-bin/news.pl?id=35067

South Loop condo project switches to apartments
By Alby Gallun, Aug. 07, 2009

...The residential units are part of a larger project that will include a 300,000-square-foot shopping center. Anchored by a 16-screen Kerasotes Showplace movie theater and a David Barton gym, the retail space is about 50% leased, Mr. Barket says. The developer is in “serious negotiations” with tenants for another 40% of the space, he says, declining to identify the retailers.

A design apparently assembled from spare parts left over from other developments:

http://i47.tinypic.com/zus87d.jpg

The neoclassical precast on the corner is especially baffling:

http://i48.tinypic.com/f36zhl.jpg

^ Thanks for the pics, Mr. D.

You act as if you're surprised. Haven't you been looking at renderings of this thing for the past 2 years? How else was it supposed to turn out?

http://www.chicagorealestatedaily.com/article/20101222/CRED03/101229967/big-loss-likely-as-roosevelt-collection-goes-on-the-block#axzz18rJDd9Rt

Big loss likely as Roosevelt Collection goes on the block
By: Alby Gallun December 22, 2010

Centrum Properties has put a $350-million mixed-use project in the South Loop up for sale, a move that will likely wipe out the developer’s entire investment and potentially result in tens of millions of dollars in losses for its lenders.

...The offering also includes a 1,482-space parking garage and the development rights for two residential towers on the site totaling 658 units, according to an HFF marketing brochure. A buyer may buy the whole project or individual parts.

I came across these nice aerials and thought I'd share them:

http://img534.imageshack.us/img534/9282/69440101502764752653724.jpg
http://img51.imageshack.us/img51/6227/69869101502764753003724.jpg
http://img717.imageshack.us/img717/1998/39522101502764749553724.jpg
Hirsch Associates/ Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/album.php?fbid=10150276474915372&id=472644855371&aid=556177)

So what are the chances they actually build the 40 story tower and move to phase II?

So what are the chances they actually build the 40 story tower and move to phase II?

Somewhere between zero and nil.

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20110319/ISSUE01/303199975/chicagos-mccaffery-scores-a-bargain-on-troubled-roosevelt-road-project

Chicago's McCaffery scores a bargain on troubled Roosevelt Road project
By: Alby Gallun March 21, 2011

A joint venture including developer Dan McCaffery is buying one of Chicago's biggest boom-era real estate projects to go bust: Roosevelt Collection, a South Loop retail-and-apartment complex that is expected to sell for about half the $350 million it cost to build.

People familiar with the transaction say Mr. McCaffery and Los Angeles-based investment firm Canyon Capital Realty Advisors LLC have agreed to buy the project at Wells Street and Roosevelt Road from Centrum Properties Inc., a Chicago-based developer that broke ground in 2007, just as the real estate market was peaking.

I wonder if the sale includes the Phase II property? I would actually expect that to start before the high-rise in Roosevelt Collection, due to its better location and short walk to Printers' Row.

http://www.chicagorealestatedaily.com/article/20110613/CRED03/110619964/roosevelt-road-developer-must-fill-300-000-square-foot-void

Roosevelt Road developer must fill 300,000-square-foot void
By: Alby Gallun June 13, 2011

...To improve the project, the developers plan to raze retail buildings in a median at the center of the project, converting the space into a public plaza with landscaping, water features and children's play areas.

“In its present condition, it's not very inviting,” Mr. McCaffery says. “It's not very pedestrian-oriented and it doesn't strike you as a place to quote-unquote gather. If we can do things that make it more of a place to gather, there is a market for that down there.”

^ I actually like the plan to raze the median retail buildings and replace with public space.

It will make it look more like a true neighborhood and less like a shopping mall.

It'll transform it into the biggest courtyard building in all of chicago... I like it.

^ In a sense, I have always thought of this development as just that--a massive courtyard building

As always, I'm a little worried. The idea that a retail center needs an empty unprogrammed "gathering spot" in the middle just doesn't ring true. I fear that it's simply a ploy to create short-term parking up there to lure convenience-type retail. I would have thought the center restaurant pavilions would have been the easiest to lease if it were going to remain a lifestyle center.

^ It's more than just a retail center--it's an actual neighborhood. Besides, where did they talk about parking? They said they are looking to create public plazas and water features.

Besides, a little bit of diagonal parking may not be a bad thing.

^They could start by actually building the park they are obligated to build at the north end, and the stairway down from the cineplex. The part that doesn't make sense to me is tearing out the center's only black-iron spaces. I think it's a scheme to get TIF money.

http://img43.imageshack.us/img43/3548/chirooseveltcollectionn.jpg

??????

If these are the latest plans, I don't understand them.
http://img534.imageshack.us/img534/8625/2rco.jpg
http://img33.imageshack.us/img33/7647/4rc2.jpg
Now there will be three towers north of the theater, where the park was originally planned? And are those pedestrian bridges over Wells?
http://img32.imageshack.us/img32/3104/3rc1.gif
Are they just shifting the park even further north where phase 2 (tower+townhomes) was supposed to be?
http://img811.imageshack.us/img811/6963/5rc2.jpg
It's starting to look like a Vegas resort.

IMO this is still the stupidest development I've seen so far. Why couldn't they or someone force them to just put it on a standard grid? That would of been far more practical than this BS. And that last shot does look like a vegas development...

^You'll find no bigger fan than me of the Chicago grid, but the problem here is that Roosevelt Road is 30 feet above Wells Street. How would you have "put it on a standard grid?"

I can't wait to see these plans in a readable size, but there's actually a certain logic to putting the towers between the cineplex and Ninth St., allowing the towers to face the streets, with the parking podium in between being an extension of the existing parking garage. (Might be a problem with the exiting requirement for the cinemas, though).

^It works for LSE.....

I really hope the towers have a significant enough height to help out the SL skyline. and judging from the 2nd pic it looks like only 1 tower would be actually fronting a street while the other one will be set substantially and the other facing the train tracks...

What works for LSE? The absurd U-turns required to get from Middle South Water to Lower Stetson? Three levels of Wacker Drive with high-speed ramps up or down?

Back in the 90s I tried to convince the city to put the Metra tracks on viaduct all the way (instead of having them drop down at 14th and then come back up at Polk), so that the new Roosevelt Road could be down on the ground with intersections, like a real civilized city street. My neighbors complained that this would throw Dearborn Park into permanent shadow and—even worse—allow Roosevelt Road bus riders to stand next to their condo buildings!

if we had the money and the right people with a good imagination and power to get things done, then having roosevelt elavated could be a good thing considering how flat the rest of the city is. They could elevate the rest of the streets to connect to roosevelt and build highrises with those dreadful parking podiums. That way underground parking would be much easier to accomplish and buildings will always be taller/more attractive than what they would regularly be. the only people with access to the lower level will of course be residents and employees. Also metra would be a subway then...

if we had the money and the right people with a good imagination and power to get things done, then having roosevelt elavated could be a good thing considering how flat the rest of the city is. They could elevate the rest of the streets to connect to roosevelt and build highrises with those dreadful parking podiums. That way underground parking would be much easier to accomplish and buildings will always be taller/more attractive than what they would regularly be. the only people with access to the lower level will of course be residents and employees. Also metra would be a subway then...

That's a lot of infrastructure... look at how expensive reconstructing Wacker is.

See this PDF doc (http://www.rooseveltcollection.com/pdf/Roosevelt_Retail_May08.pdf), from May of 2008.

The 3 towers appear to be separate from Roosevelt Collection, part of a larger LaSalle Park planned development referenced at McCaffery's site and previously noted at the Roosevelt Collection site.

See this PDF doc (http://www.rooseveltcollection.com/pdf/Roosevelt_Retail_May08.pdf), from May of 2008.

The 3 towers appear to be separate from Roosevelt Collection, part of a larger LaSalle Park planned development referenced at McCaffery's site and previously noted at the Roosevelt Collection site.

Perhaps I'm looking at the wrong thing in the pdf, but the plans don't look the same.

Here's basically what I'm trying to say:
http://img39.imageshack.us/img39/4295/rckey.jpg

RC phase 1 is what is standing today. The original plans stated that they'd eventually build a ~40 story tower in the corner (#1 above). There was also supposed to be a one acre park (mysteriously never finished) which now seems to have been replaced by the new towers (#2 and 3).

RC phase 2 was supposed to be a tower plus attached townhomes where #4 is. Now that land looks like it will become the park or "Future _" (I can't read the tiny font).

The land at #5 with three towers was last controlled by AvalonBay. Maybe you're thinking of that?
#6 is the AMLI tower (completed).
#7 is The Curve (proposed).

Here's a larger version
http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/3945/rczoom.jpg

You're right, spyguy, I was thinking of Area 5. Your enlarged version makes things much clearer.

Demolition/construction cam:

http://oxblue.com/pro/open/mccafferyinterests/rooseveltcollectionplan