daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > World Development News Forums > General Urban Developments > DN Archives



 

 
Thread Tools
Old January 20th, 2005, 04:37 AM   #1
BVictor1
Chicago's #1 Fan
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,975
Likes (Received): 5

Downtown Development News

Falor Tackling Second Hotel Condo Project
By Mark Ruda
Last updated: January 18, 2005 08:49am

CHICAGO-The Falor Cos. is taking the hotel condominium one step further. Set to deliver the first units in the market when the 161-unit Hotel Blake opens this spring at 500 S. Dearborn St., the company is beginning to sell units at 202 S. State St.

The first phase of the Hotel Blake, which will beat higher-priced hotel condominiums in Trump International Hotel and Tower and the Elysian to the market, was a quick sell-out. “Some of the most interested buyers have been business travelers who frequently take trips to the same destinations like Chicago,” says president and chief executive officer Robert Falor. “Executives who know they’ll be making seven to 10 trips a year, would rather own their own room than pay upwards of $200 a night every time they come in for business.”

The 16-story, 91-year-old building at State and Adams streets was acquired a year ago for nearly $1.3 million, according to property records. Units are priced at an average of $275,000, which would make the ultimate value of the property nearly $27 million. Falor Cos. renovated the property to add high-speed Internet access in all rooms, marble-tiled baths, a workout room, a business center, restaurant and bar.

Los Angeles-based Kor Hotel Group will manage the hotel. Sudler Real Estate will market the units.

“The greatest amenity at 202 S. State is the surrounding area,” says residential brokerage president Bill Fields. “Lake Michigan, Grant Park, Millennium Park and the Theater District are all within walking distance, as is the Art Institute of Chicago as well as a number of nearby shops and restaurants.”
BVictor1 no está en línea  

Sponsored Links
 
Old January 20th, 2005, 05:21 AM   #2
oshkeoto
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 565
Likes (Received): 0

"Units are priced at an average of $275,000,"

State and Adams for $275,000? JESUS what I would give to be 35 and decently employed right now...

Live there for five years, sell the place for $5 million, retire to an Albany Park six-flat.
oshkeoto no está en línea  
Old January 21st, 2005, 01:38 AM   #3
BVictor1
Chicago's #1 Fan
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,975
Likes (Received): 5

City easing building fee rise
New ordinance allowed up to 1% of construction cost

By Thomas A. Corfman and Gary Washburn
Tribune staff reporters
Published January 20, 2005

The Daley administration is backpedaling from the eye-popping increases in building permit fees included in the City of Chicago's 2005 budget.

A new fee ordinance, set to take effect Feb. 1 and applying only to new construction, calls for permit fees of up to 1 percent of costs, replacing a formula based on building size.

As a result, the new ordinance could increase the cost of a building permit for a 2,000-square-foot home to at least $1,800, compared with $264 under the old schedule. Donald Trump's permits for his 90-story skyscraper could cost at least $2.6 million, compared with about $350,000 under the old system.

But the city is preparing a specific schedule of fees, based on building type, that could soften those increases. However, the Department of Construction and Permits still does not know who will be charged how much.

Department spokeswoman Sabrina Miller noted Wednesday that the ordinance calls for a maximum fee of 1 percent of construction costs but a minimum charge of $85.

The higher permit fees were part of the $5.1 billion budget plan approved by the City Council last month after spirited bargaining between the administration and aldermen over a wide assortment of tax and fee increases needed to close a $220 million deficit.

The permit controversy is an embarrassment for the administration, which was criticized by some community advocates and a few aldermen for not providing adequate information about the budget.

"There's no process," said Peter Skosey, vice president with the Metropolitan Planning Council. "It's Mayor Daley's budget people getting together in a room, trying to figure out where there's an upward trend and how the city can make money on it."

The permit fee hikes come on top of a new residential-development tax, called an impact fee, that ranges from $250 to $625 per unit, depending on its size.

"I think they'll live to regret some of these decisions, if indeed it gets to the point where it starts to reverse that upward trend," Skosey said.

Before the budget was passed, the permit fee increases gained little attention, even from developers and construction contractors.

"We knew it was in the budget, and it was one of the many things--we didn't get specific on that one--when I testified about what we felt was death by a thousand taxes," said Gerald Roper, president of the Chicagoland Chamber of Commerce.

Roper said developer Steven Fifield brought the new fees to the attention of business leaders, using Trump's 2.5 million-square-foot project as an example.

Fifield, president of Chicago-based Fifield Cos., could not be reached for comment.

Before the Chamber of Commerce and the Chicago Development Council, a local real estate group, could lobby City Hall for changes, Planning Commissioner Denise Casalino had stepped into the controversy, Roper said.

Casalino "said it was a mistake in their calculations, and they were fixing that," Roper said.

Casalino, a former first deputy director in the permit department, said the change was intended to increase the annual total of permit fees by $1 million, Roper added.

Through mid-November, 2004 building permit fees brought in more than $30 million.

Casalino "wants to make sure these fees don't inhibit new construction," said her spokesman.

Miller, the permit department spokeswoman, denied the fee increase was a mistake, but added, "I don't think anybody could even come up with a clear, definitive number of how much additional money the change would generate."

The increases are part of a change in the way permit fees are calculated that was intended to bring the city in line with modern building codes. Under the old ordinance, fees were calculated based on a rate of $12 per 1,000 cubic feet of building space.

Under the new ordinance, the maximum 1 percent would be determined by either a project's actual budget or a table of typical costs for various types of projects set by the International Code Council, a construction industry group that proposes model building codes.

San Francisco, Detroit, Boston and Houston charge more than 1 percent, the permit department says. Chicago charges 1 percent for renovation projects.

In Chicago, construction costs typically are higher than the council's cost table, especially for high-rise buildings. For example, the table estimates the cost of residential development at $106.23 a square foot. In Chicago, a building such as the proposed Trump International Hotel & Tower Chicago easily could cost twice that much, industry experts say.

The Tribune estimated permit fees under the new ordinance using the council's cost table.

While developers of high-priced condominiums and townhouses are scrambling to pass the fee increase on to home buyers, the new fees and taxes could halt other developments, said Chicago zoning attorney H. James Fox, a partner in law firm Quarles & Brady LLP.

"New, affordable and moderately priced housing? You're not going to have any more of that," he said.
BVictor1 no está en línea  
Old January 24th, 2005, 11:01 PM   #4
geoff_diamond
Live from the Loop
 
geoff_diamond's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,578
Likes (Received): 0

Not trying to hijack this thread for something other than its intended purpose... but, I couldn't really find a better spot for these. As you all know, already, Hyatt Center and 111 S. Wacker are both wrapping up construction. Rather than make two new threads for buildings that only have a few weeks left until they're finished, I thought I'd just post some updated shots in here. Enjoy.

111 S. Wacker as seen from Franklin and Monroe.


Looking straight up the glassy facade of 111 S. Wacker.


Perhaps the nicest garage entrance I've ever been witness to (111 again).


Putting the finishing touches on the 111 lobby.


The northwest corner of 111.


Another shot of the 111 lobby.


That's it for 111 S. Wacker updates. Hyatt Center shots can be found in the following post.
geoff_diamond no está en línea  
Old January 24th, 2005, 11:04 PM   #5
geoff_diamond
Live from the Loop
 
geoff_diamond's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,578
Likes (Received): 0

Hyatt Center... as promised.

New signage on Franklin.


What can I say about this shot? I love this building.


Quickie shot of the south facade of the building.


Lastly, a shot of the base. It's hard to make much out because it's still quite dark inside.
geoff_diamond no está en línea  
Old January 25th, 2005, 05:41 AM   #6
BVictor1
Chicago's #1 Fan
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,975
Likes (Received): 5

Great shots dude..

I think that the lobby of 111 South Wacker is going to be stunning. That curved, sloped ceiling is amazing.
BVictor1 no está en línea  
Old January 25th, 2005, 06:23 AM   #7
STR
What'u smokin' Willis?
 
STR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Chicago, Illinois
Posts: 2,082
Likes (Received): 55

I can see that edge-on shot of Hyatt ending up on many-a-postcards.
__________________
There are six phases to every project 1) enthusiasm, 2) disillusionment, 3) panic, 4) search for the guilty, 5) punishment of the innocent, 6) praise for the non-participants. - Guy Tozzoli
Build your own Model Skyscrapers** New World Trade Center (2006-) 3D Model ** World Trade Center (1971-2001) 3D Model
STR no está en línea  
Old January 25th, 2005, 06:49 AM   #8
geoff_diamond
Live from the Loop
 
geoff_diamond's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,578
Likes (Received): 0

Yeah... it's just such a photogenic building!
geoff_diamond no está en línea  
Old January 30th, 2005, 04:32 PM   #9
BVictor1
Chicago's #1 Fan
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,975
Likes (Received): 5

THE MARKET
Condo market thrived in a record '04

Wayne Faulkner, Real Estate editor

Published January 30, 2005

It's official: 2004 was a record year for sales of existing homes in Illinois.

The statewide total of 126,946 sales was up 4.3 percent from the 2003, according to the Illinois Association of Realtors. Both single-family homes and condominiums set records last year, the Realtors reported last week.

In the Chicago area, sales of single-family homes rose 3.8 percent in 2004, to 80,921.

But condos sold at "double the rate of existing single-family homes," according to a statement by John Veneris, the Illinois Realtors' president. Statewide, condo sales rose 9 percent in 2004, to 54,690, and the median price was up 6.7 percent, to $189,900.

In metro Chicago, condo sales rose 9.4 percent in 2004, to 51,662 from 47,212, and the median price rose 6.8 percent, to $193,900 from $181,600 in 2003, according to the Illinois Realtors' Mary Schaefer.

The sales records were set even as the time it took to sell homes rose -- substantially in some towns, as we reported last week.

One reader, a builder, wondered whether the market times went up because real estate agents no longer can take a home off the market and then put it right back on and make it appear on the multiple listing service that it's new to the market.

But that apparently didn't figure in, because the Multiple Listing Service of Northern Illinois changed the rules about five years ago to more accurately reflect market times, according to Mary Rzepecki, director of operations at the region's largest MLS.

Until last February, a home would have to be off the market for 180 days before it could be relisted and start its market time over again, said Sarah Burke, rules and regulations supervisor at the MLS. Now a house must be off the market for 90 days before it can be relisted with its sales odometer at zero days, she said.

Say a house is listed for 200 days and hasn't sold. It is taken off the market -- perhaps the listing expired or the seller switched agencies -- and 60 days later goes back on the market and into the multiple listing service. The listing will then show 201 days on the market, not just one, Rzepecki and Burke explained.

What's new is old

When we get ready to buy a home, we often debate whether we want old or new. We may like the feel of an older house, with its mature landscaping and fine old woodwork. But, we like the up-to-date floor plans of new construction, plus new houses often have all the modern conveniences we've come to expect: advanced wiring, efficient heating and cooling systems, a fancy, big kitchen with nice appliances.

Is it possible to have it both ways: a new house that seems like it's been around for decades?

If you have several million dollars to spend, you can buy such a house in Lake Forest.

Listed at $7.25 million by Houda Chedid of Baird & Warner, the English Tudor-style mansion looks from its photographs to have stood on its 1.5-acre lot off Green Bay Road for decades.

That's because builder and designer Demari Homes LLC wants it that way. That's their specialty, said Richard Vanselow, partner in the North Shore firm.

"I would say that most people that I run into want homes that look like something that's not trendy, therefore they go back in time," Vaselow said.

The stone, brick and stucco house, which has seven bedrooms and nine full baths, according to listing information, has a slate roof. Its exterior doors are hand-built hickory with hand-carved spandrels. The interior doors are maple. Interior walls are stucco or plaster throughout.

And though all the cabinetry was made on-site, Vanselow said, the home's flooring is antique white oak and reclaimed stone from France and England.

There are seven fireplaces, including one in the living room with an antique marble surround reclaimed from a house in England. The foyer's stone floor is English graybar limestone.

In addition to the ancient and organic, the house has the modern and the electronic, including a home theater in the lower level, AMX integrated home audio and video system and a wine cellar, according to specs from the builder. It also has five furnaces, a separate boiler system to provide hot water and radiant heat in the master suite and two 175-gallon tanks providing 350 gallons of 120-degree water every hour.

How long does such a house take to build? From concept to finish, about four years, Vanselow said, with three years of that in construction.

----------

Wayne Faulkner is editor of Real Estate. You can contact him at wfaulkner@tribune.com, or by mail at Chicago Tribune, 435 N. Michigan Ave., Chicago, IL 60611.
BVictor1 no está en línea  
Old May 20th, 2005, 01:02 AM   #10
geoff_diamond
Live from the Loop
 
geoff_diamond's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,578
Likes (Received): 0

Couple of additions for this long-dead thread.

I noticed, a few nights ago, a new sign adorning what used to be the Noble Fool. Looks like it will be called the Argo Tea Cafe now - no information on what it is or when it's going to open.



Secondly, I peeped this juicy little tidbit on a walk through River North a few mins ago - looks like some soil-bore testing going on at the parking lot located on the southwest corner of Dearborn and Hubbard. Please o' please let this be the death-knell for yet another surface-lot!!!

geoff_diamond no está en línea  
Old May 20th, 2005, 04:07 AM   #11
24gotham
Formerly InTheLoop
 
24gotham's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Upper West Side, NYC
Posts: 485
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by geoff_diamond
Couple of additions for this long-dead thread.

I noticed, a few nights ago, a new sign adorning what used to be the Noble Fool. Looks like it will be called the Argo Tea Cafe now - no information on what it is or when it's going to open.

I was noticing this the other day as well. It would be nice to see something fill the gap left by the Noble Fool. I find it a bit odd that they would use theater space for a cafe... hmmmmm
__________________
24gotham - "Architecture should reflect the time in which it is built, not a previous time that may or may not have existed."

Formerly "InTheLoop" of Chicago.
24gotham no está en línea  
Old May 21st, 2005, 08:42 PM   #12
wrabbit
Registered User
 
wrabbit's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,162
Likes (Received): 4

There is an Argo Tea at Armitage and Sheffield - the first (test) store, I believe. Think Starbucks, but with an emphasis on tea rather than on coffee.
wrabbit no está en línea  
Old May 22nd, 2005, 12:03 AM   #13
geoff_diamond
Live from the Loop
 
geoff_diamond's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,578
Likes (Received): 0

Well, not my first choice, but, it beats the hell out of vacancy.
geoff_diamond no está en línea  
Old May 26th, 2005, 07:01 AM   #14
Chi_Coruscant
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 881
Likes (Received): 0

Wha????

There was a little chatter at SSP about 4th Presbyterian proposal was shot down by the city. Can anyone confirm it?
Chi_Coruscant no está en línea  
Old May 26th, 2005, 02:11 PM   #15
Chi_Coruscant
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 881
Likes (Received): 0

Proposed 4th Presbyterian Tower in Jeaopardy?????

Alderman opposes tower by landmark church

May 26, 2005

BY DAVID ROEDER AND FRAN SPIELMAN Staff Reporters Advertisement
(www.suntimes.com)
Downtown's alderman Wednesday issued a thumbs-down review of the most controversial development on the city's agenda, the plans for a 64-story tower immediately west of the landmark Fourth Presbyterian Church at Michigan and Delaware.

Far from just another commentary on the project, the letter from Ald. Burton Natarus (42nd) diminishes chances it will win city approval, at least in its current form. The developers need a zoning change for the tower, and the City Council usually follows the wishes of the local alderman on such matters.

In a two-page letter, Natarus said the project's design has merit. But he assigned great weight to the opposition letters he received from those who live near the project. The letters supporting it, he said, tended to come from residents outside the Streeterville area.

Local residents, under the umbrella of such groups as the Streeterville Organization of Active Residents and the Connors Park Neighborhood Coalition, complained the tower would block views. They also said it would overwhelm the serenity of the church, whose sanctuary and garden offer a refuge amid the rush of Magnificent Mile shopping.

"What is proposed is a beautiful architectural piece, which should be built elsewhere -- on a site with open space," Natarus wrote. "The overwhelming opposition to this development by nearby neighbors clearly indicates that the public health and welfare of the community will be impaired; and thus, I am obligated to report that I cannot support this application for development as outlined above."

The condominium tower would have gone up on land the church owned. Last year, it struck a deal with developers Edward James Partners LLC and Opus North Corp. to be paid $25 million for a long-term lease on the property.

The Rev. John Buchanan, pastor of Fourth Presbyterian, said Natarus' decision disappointed him because the project fit the guidelines published in the city's own central area plan. Buchanan and Jack Guthman, the zoning lawyer for the project, said they'll ask for a city hearing despite Natarus' opposition.

That would mean bringing the project before the Chicago Plan Commission, of which Natarus is a member. If it's approved there, it would go to the City Council.

"We understand there's a history of following the alderman's advice, but we'll have to deal with that issue because we believe in our cause here," Guthman said. He also said resorting to the courts is possible if the zoning isn't granted.

The developers said the high-rise would have been shorter than most of the other signature buildings along Michigan Avenue, such as Park Tower, Water Tower Place, the 900 N. Michigan tower and the strapping John Hancock Center. Many saw irony in Hancock residents complaining about the height of an adjoining structure.

Jim Houston, president of the Streeterville residents group, said Natarus respected local concerns about density and traffic. The building would have overwhelmed the block and "created a density that is unprecedented anywhere else in the city," he said.

Natarus could not be reached. The language in his letter indicated he'd be open to a compromise involving a smaller building.

Development is a constant issue in his ward and during the most recent aldermanic election in 2003, Natarus had a tough race. He won a relatively low 56 percent of the vote against a challenger who accused him of being too accommodating to builders.

Asked about drafting a compromise, Buchanan replied, "We haven't even begun that conversation yet."

The church's contract with the developers foresaw the possibility of city rejection. It provided for a lower payment, down to $13 million, if the city insisted on a smaller building.

As proposed, the 64-story tower would have included 240 condos plus about 74,000 square feet for the church's use.
Chi_Coruscant no está en línea  
Old May 26th, 2005, 06:29 PM   #16
paytonc
Pragmatist
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: DC
Posts: 433
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by oshkeoto
"State and Adams for $275,000?
Um, it's a condo _hotel_. You're buying a hotel room, not an apartment, and it's aimed at people who might live there a few days a month, if ever. Price is only one part of what it costs to own; many of these buildings have high maintenance fees (assessments) since, after all, it's a hotel.

I highly doubt price escalation on that scale, as well.
.pc
__________________
http://westnorth.com
paytonc no está en línea  
Old May 27th, 2005, 01:50 PM   #17
Chi_Coruscant
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 881
Likes (Received): 0

http://www.artic.edu/aic/visitor_info/groundbreak.html

Groundbreaking Ceremony for the Art Institute’s New Building
May 31, 2005
Celebration begins at 8:30 a.m. in the North Garden

PROGRAM of EVENTS

8:30 a.m. Performance by Redmoon Theatre
9:00 Chicago Children's Choir
9:15 Welcome by President and Director Jim Cuno and a reading by Chicago actor Roderick Peeples
Remarks by Mayor Richard M. Daley and John H. Bryan, chairman of the Art Institute’s board of trustees, and architect Renzo Piano
Performance by the Brass Ensemble of the Chicago Symphony Orchestra
10:30 Museum opens. See Renzo Piano’s designs for the new building in the exhibition Zero Gravity at the top of the Grand Staircase.
10:30–3:30 Gallery talks throughout the museum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Zero Gravity: The Art Institute, Renzo Piano, and Building for a New Century

Opens May 31
Gallery 200
Overview: In 1999, internationally recognized Italian architect Renzo Piano was commissioned to design the Art Institute’s new north wing. Piano’s plan, which makes imaginative use of natural light and blends of new architectural forms into an established urban fabric, has inspired this exhibition that not only provides a foretaste of the new addition but also evokes the stimulating environment of the Renzo Piano Building Workshop, where the architect’s singular visions take shape.

Located at the top of the Grand Staircase, Zero Gravity portrays Piano’s studio as a creative place where ideas develop, plans are drawn, and models crafted. On a large table, reminiscent of the one in his Paris office, working documents are displayed. Nearby walls bear plans and drawings that document the project’s development. The models on exhibit are crucial to understanding how the architect’s process. Two-dimensional plans are developed in three dimensions to fully analyze concepts of scale and space. Removed from the confines of a gallery, the work is incorporated into the museum’s own architecture, underscoring Piano’s commitment to designing a building integral to the historic whole.

Opening in spring 2009, the glass, limestone, and steel structure will add a 21st-century architectural identity to a museum best known for its grand 19th-century building on Michigan Avenue. The new wing’s distinctive feature will be a luminous sunscreen, described by the architect as a “flying carpet,” that will “float” above the actual roof and shelter the building and its immediate surroundings. The wing will provide new galleries for modern and contemporary art, while more than doubling classroom space for educational programs and adding a third, public garden court.

Many of the materials on view in the exhibition are reproduced in a 56-page catalogue illustrated with more than 40 color models, plans, renderings, and sketches. An essay by president and director James Cuno explores Piano’s approach to the design of the building, while curator Martha Thorne surveys his recent museum architecture. The book is available in the Museum Shop and online.
Chi_Coruscant no está en línea  
Old May 27th, 2005, 06:44 PM   #18
The Urban Politician
The City
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 5,955
Likes (Received): 6

Woohoo!

Let the tradition of greatness roll onward..
The Urban Politician no está en línea  
Old May 27th, 2005, 07:23 PM   #19
geoff_diamond
Live from the Loop
 
geoff_diamond's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,578
Likes (Received): 0

This is a big surprise. I can't remember the last time I saw Natarus shoot down such a prominent project. At the same time, I imagine he's looking toward the future and election-time, at which point an angered SOAR and Connor's Park group might be all that's needed to oust him.

Personally, this sort of opposition still makes me gag - if you're concerned about losing your view, buy a condo on Lakeshore. Otherwise, shut up. If you're concerned about too much traffic and density, buy a house in Naperville. If you're concerned about your property values faling to appreciate at a high enough level for you, at least have the balls to admit it.

SOAR makes me fucking sick... this project isn't even IN Streeterville, yet they find a way to stick their noses in it and probably get it shelved. And, for those people in the Hancock complaining about losing a view... what, exactly, are you losing a view of? Chicago's beautiful west side? Give me a fucking break.
geoff_diamond no está en línea  
Old May 28th, 2005, 01:14 AM   #20
Latoso
C.B.P.
 
Latoso's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,225
Likes (Received): 1

NIMBYs must die!
__________________
LATOSO
C.B.P. - Citizens for Better Planning

Make no little plans; they have no magic to stir men's blood and probably will themselves not be realized. Make big plans; aim high in hope and work, remembering that a noble, logical diagram once recorded will not die. - Daniel Burnham
Latoso no está en línea  


 

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT +2. The time now is 04:40 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like v3.2.5 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

Hosted by Blacksun, dedicated to this site too!
Forum server management by DaiTengu