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

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



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old December 9th, 2006, 10:40 PM   #41
spyguy
Expert
 
spyguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 6,916
Likes (Received): 97

- edit
spyguy no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old December 11th, 2006, 03:47 AM   #42
ardecila
Jack-Of-All-Trades
 
ardecila's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: New Orleans/Chicago
Posts: 1,391
Likes (Received): 2

I hope they do a good job matching the Beaux-Arts, materials-wise. That is, if they don't use limestone, I'm gonna be pissed.

Why is the AMA deserting their awesome Kenzo Tange, River North building?
ardecila no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 12th, 2006, 06:26 PM   #43
Mr Downtown
Urbane observer
 
Mr Downtown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,547
Likes (Received): 10

Here's the 1986 two-tower proposal. This was done by Lucien Lagrange for US Equities Realty.


Last edited by Mr Downtown; December 12th, 2006 at 06:33 PM.
Mr Downtown no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 13th, 2006, 02:04 AM   #44
ardecila
Jack-Of-All-Trades
 
ardecila's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: New Orleans/Chicago
Posts: 1,391
Likes (Received): 2

That's nice (if it uses actual stone or terracotta) but what's with the purple corners? Is that just a scanner error or something?
ardecila no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 13th, 2006, 06:40 AM   #45
Mr Downtown
Urbane observer
 
Mr Downtown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,547
Likes (Received): 10

The purple is some kind of weird scanner artifact. Sorry.
Mr Downtown no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 13th, 2006, 07:51 AM   #46
ardecila
Jack-Of-All-Trades
 
ardecila's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: New Orleans/Chicago
Posts: 1,391
Likes (Received): 2

Oh, thank god. But I thought Lucien was no longer on this project? The most recent renderings show a large neoclassical cubic tower, with a modern, glassy atrium inside. This is from Jones Lang, I think. It's a shame - I like the 2-tower proposal much better.
ardecila no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 13th, 2006, 01:15 PM   #47
edsg25
BANNED
 
edsg25's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 9,195
Likes (Received): 105

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Downtown View Post
Here's the 1986 two-tower proposal. This was done by Lucien Lagrange for US Equities Realty.

comparing the photographs, I'd have to say 2>1
edsg25 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 14th, 2006, 06:16 AM   #48
ardecila
Jack-Of-All-Trades
 
ardecila's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: New Orleans/Chicago
Posts: 1,391
Likes (Received): 2

Well, the above version couldn't exist exactly as shown - Union Station already has 4 or 5 floors of office space built in the "huge mass" configuration of 1 tower. Hopefully these can be topped with the 2 instead of 1.
ardecila no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 10th, 2007, 03:28 AM   #49
spyguy
Expert
 
spyguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 6,916
Likes (Received): 97

- edit
spyguy no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 10th, 2007, 03:50 AM   #50
The Urban Politician
The City
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 5,935
Likes (Received): 21

I love developments like this (the other one being the Harold Washington Library and perhaps 65 E Goethe) because, in a sense, it's like adding back to Chicago's dwindling pre-war building stock.

Does that make sense to anybody?
The Urban Politician no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 10th, 2007, 05:41 AM   #51
bnk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Chicagoland
Posts: 1,157
Likes (Received): 727



No, but this is a massive and important build up where a build up is needed.

Burnham had visions for this.

This is an important one. I say forget about how much tax, tifs, are given to this project, for this one is important IMO, right after Park Michigan.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BVictor1 View Post


INSIDE COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE
Union Station proposal may be back on track

.
bnk no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 12th, 2007, 07:03 AM   #52
UrbanSophist
Registered User
 
UrbanSophist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 2,850
Likes (Received): 44

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Urban Politician View Post
I love developments like this (the other one being the Harold Washington Library and perhaps 65 E Goethe) because, in a sense, it's like adding back to Chicago's dwindling pre-war building stock.

Does that make sense to anybody?
Yeah. I like both those buildings. While I love new designs, I don't think we should be blindly progressive. If pre-war architecture was good, we should try and build in that style in some places. At least it doesn't hurt.
UrbanSophist no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 12th, 2007, 04:14 PM   #53
Mr Downtown
Urbane observer
 
Mr Downtown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,547
Likes (Received): 10

Quote:
Originally Posted by bnk View Post
Burnham had visions for this.
He did? Burnham died in 1912. Union Station planning didn't begin until 1915, and they didn't make the final decision about the office block on top until probably 1921. In the Plan of Chicago, Guerin's rendering of the West Loop railroad station scheme shows a two-story headhouse on Union Station, surrounded by six-story buildings.

At any rate, the idea that massive TIF subsidies are needed to encourage development around Union or Ogilvie just doesn't pass the sniff test.
Mr Downtown no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 12th, 2007, 07:34 PM   #54
ardecila
Jack-Of-All-Trades
 
ardecila's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: New Orleans/Chicago
Posts: 1,391
Likes (Received): 2

No, but by adding TIF, the city gets a greater degree of control over what happens with this project... right? If left to their own devices, most developers would slap a pre-cast concrete, steel-framed lightweight tower on top of this thing. But since they are basically helping to pay for it, the city can mandate a more sophisticated design with real stone and proper columns, pilasters, and cornice.

I do disagree with the use of TIF to subsidize office towers in the surrounding area, though, when they could be used to fix the horrendous traffic situation on Canal in front of Union Station, or to provide some seed funding on the West Loop Transportation Center.
ardecila no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 12th, 2007, 08:04 PM   #55
Mr Downtown
Urbane observer
 
Mr Downtown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,547
Likes (Received): 10

Quote:
Originally Posted by ardecila View Post
by adding TIF, the city gets a greater degree of control over what happens with this project... right?
Union Station is a Chicago Landmark, so the city already has tremendous control over the materials and finishes. The size and materials for the office tower expansion were negotiatiated with Amtrak when the landmarking was done in 2002.
Mr Downtown no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 12th, 2007, 08:46 PM   #56
PrintersRowBoiler
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 650
Likes (Received): 1

This one is worse than the Post Office! I cannot believe the city will just give away TIF money like that. Where does it end? Now the city just subsidizes developments when they see a project that they like. How will this development benefit the neighborhood? And do we really need more foot/car traffic for the hotel/office/condos around this building?
PrintersRowBoiler no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 13th, 2007, 02:15 AM   #57
spyguy
Expert
 
spyguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 6,916
Likes (Received): 97

- edit
spyguy no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 13th, 2007, 02:28 AM   #58
paytonc
Pragmatist
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: DC
Posts: 433
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by spyguy View Post
Panel OKs $59-mil. subsidy for Union Station
Okay, for that kind of money I expect gold-plated faucets in the public restrooms. That kind of tax subsidy could build one heck of a nice train station; are we assuming that the tower pays for itself, since it's mostly leased? (And is it just me, or does condos not sound like the best use for a tower here?)
__________________
http://westnorth.com
paytonc no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 13th, 2007, 02:47 AM   #59
nomarandlee
My Mind Has Left My Body
 
nomarandlee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: 1060 W. Addison, City by the Lake
Posts: 7,209
Likes (Received): 2761

Its only six floors of condos. I bet there are a contigent of commuters who reverse commute to the burbs enough that it would be an attractive idea.
__________________
Stephane Charbonnier, “I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.”
nomarandlee no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 13th, 2007, 04:30 AM   #60
Frumie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 717
Likes (Received): 0

It would be the third train station project for Mr. Youssefi, a former Jones Lang LaSalle executive who has worked on the redevelopment of Grand Central Terminal in New York and Union Station in Washington, D.C.

Though some have questioned using TIF money to subsidize large private developments, a city official told commissioners that the cost of rehabilitating the existing eight-story structure — estimated at $100 million — was so large that a developer would not undertake the project without city assistance.

Yay for TIF
__________________
You truly want peace? Be righteous.
Frumie no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

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

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 05:28 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 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