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 October 27th, 2005, 12:37 AM   #41
Azn_chi_boi
BANNED
 
Azn_chi_boi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Bridgeport + Chinatown, Chicago
Posts: 4,218
Likes (Received): 12

If building this building why not the 7 South Dearborn. Anyways, someone should make a new thread and put it in the News/ Deveolpment forum so everybody thats not in the Chicago forum might see this and cast their opinion too.
Azn_chi_boi no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old October 27th, 2005, 12:59 AM   #42
Dale
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 9,179
Likes (Received): 5505

Quote:
Originally Posted by elliot
That is butt ugly and will scar Chicago forever. Looks like another 3 pronger wanker posted (Malaysian???).

2 words: SAT - ELITE
Jakarta
Dale no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 27th, 2005, 12:59 AM   #43
spyguy
Expert
 
spyguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 6,916
Likes (Received): 97

Because the 112 floors that 7 S. Dearborn had would probably be hard to fill, or come at the cost of other buildings being built.
spyguy no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 27th, 2005, 03:28 AM   #44
Chicago Shawn
Registered User
 
Chicago Shawn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Chicago IL
Posts: 361
Likes (Received): 0

This deal has a fishy smell to it especially now that LR is effectively scraping a nearly fully designed condo tower for that site, that the company had full plans in persuing back in July-August; so this deal must be pretty recent. I can check with my contacts at Perkins and Will and see if the 500 N. LSD project has been scraped all together. On a positive note though, this means LR will begin moving foreword on the sexy all-glass 65 E. Huron project, if 500 N. LSD is really dead.

What I think may be happening is that Beitler who has been trying to build this thing for quite some time is just riding the wave that FS created. If zoning is changed for a 2000' tall tower on a dead end street, then it obvously would be easy to persuide the city to do the same on a lot a two blocks away on a busy street.

Or, I think Carley, Beitler and LR could be secretly combing forces to build one project at the Fordham Spire site, which would benifit all three parties and appease the NIMBYs at the same time. It would be a victory on all fronts, the NIMBYs only get one super tall tower in the neighborhood instead of two, Carley gets Neighborhood approval for the full height of his project, and Beitler gets a 1500 foot off the ground mounting for his broadcast antenneas. While LR still gets to proffit from the land sale, and in the meantime can persue the current ~650 foot condo project on the 500 N. LSD lot wich SOAR would praise as being "more in scale with the nieghborhood". Then Alderman Natarus is who talks to the developers about the hybrid project, is then praised by the NIMBY's for listening to 'neighborhood concerns over too much traffic, density, shadows', and by helping to combine the projects wins over his NIMBY consituants who re-elect him in 2007.

or Beitler is pushing this to be built on this proposed location, knowing he would endorsed for the positives about the project, while sucking up all the demand for HDTV broacasting space; but is pushed to build it somewhere else in the city, like in the South Loop "frontier" where the proposed Riverside Park development is heading for a dead end. This tower could be a catylist for developing the underutilized land, while getting its endorsement from the city to place it in a area that would surley have NIMBYs to bulk at the height being way out-of-scale with the area, but the city will claim the South Loop (or wherever) is the best position for the needed broadcast space. In the meantime, the publicly known project gathers up all the demand from local TV stations from contract signing which then places the finnancing puzzel together, allowing construction to start right away on a newly chosen site.

The fact that the same design is being reused for this location is making me belive something might be up about this project that is not being publicly talked about, or Betlier could be just sparing himself more architect's fees in re-using the old design for a serrous proposal. But then, I have to ask, why would LR scrap a condo project that they have been investing in and fully designing for the past year now. Could they be posed to make that much money on this tower deal that would off set the lost revenue of the scraped condo project?
Chicago Shawn no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 27th, 2005, 03:39 AM   #45
Dale
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 9,179
Likes (Received): 5505

Oh, the intrigue.
Dale no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 27th, 2005, 04:52 AM   #46
Suburbanite
Registered User
 
Suburbanite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 872
Likes (Received): 5

^I can never tell when you are being sarcastic.

Anyway, I think that the tower itself is very slick and modern which I like. It may work well flanking navy pier with the FS, kinda like a gateway of sorts. In general, I have always had a strong dislike for huge tv towers in city centers. I don't know why but they just don't seem to belong there. I don't see why this can't be built away from downtown. Actually it may look better not surrounded by other tall buildings and just sort of rising out of a flat part of the city.
Suburbanite no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 27th, 2005, 05:58 AM   #47
wickedestcity
BANNED
 
wickedestcity's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,566
Likes (Received): 26

i havebt been online in a few days and i just got on ................................HOLY MUTHER ******* SHIT!!!!!!! 2000FT ANTENA!?!? i cant beleive i missed this ! this is the second time! i missed the fordham when that hit the fan too. that structure looks HOT AS SHIT!!!
wickedestcity no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 27th, 2005, 06:07 AM   #48
Dale
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 9,179
Likes (Received): 5505

Quote:
Originally Posted by wickedestcity
i havebt been online in a few days and i just got on ................................HOLY MUTHER ******* SHIT!!!!!!! 2000FT ANTENA!?!? i cant beleive i missed this ! this is the second time! i missed the fordham when that hit the fan too. that structure looks HOT AS SHIT!!!
Sounds like you ought to go away more often !
Dale no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 27th, 2005, 06:42 AM   #49
Chi_Coruscant
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 879
Likes (Received): 0

Originally Posted by wickedestcity
i havebt been online in a few days and i just got on ................................HOLY MUTHER ******* SHIT!!!!!!! 2000FT ANTENA!?!? i cant beleive i missed this ! this is the second time! i missed the fordham when that hit the fan too. that structure looks HOT AS SHIT!!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dale
Sounds like you ought to go away more often !
Please do!
Chi_Coruscant no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 27th, 2005, 07:54 AM   #50
ChicagoSkyline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Chicago[Naperville-SW Suburb] + Miami[Miami Beach & South Beach]
Posts: 2,101
Likes (Received): 29

Quote:
Originally Posted by spyguy999
This was on archidose:


Wow, very interesting HDTV tower for Chicago!
If Chicago decided not to place the HDTV antenna on top of Fordham Spires then Yes, it is great that Chicago has looking for an unique extreme tall TV tower that will serve great purposes for Chicago particularly Navy pier area!
First, I think that the height should be a lot higher then 2000ft! If Fordham Spires also being construct in the future and both of them being quite close together, it looks kind of awkward having two same height supertalls stand next to each other! So height for TV tower should be way taller with condiering to the height of Fordham Spires, change it to something like 2100ft to 2500ft!
I also like the design and purpose of it cause the TV tower will dedicate the bottom for car parking(hopefully alot more spaces then currently 400 car lots planned) which is really good for the thriving navy pier area as travlers and buses can find easy and closer places to park or even for the residents near Navier Pier. Oh, I also like the restaurant and observatory deck on the top of it! How about a casino on the top section of it? since it is away from the population on the Navy Pier and if construct, will be the world's tallest casino in the world,lol!
I think the location of it should be closer to navy pier, that way, it stands away from the skyscraper area of lake shore drive and it also serves navy pier as another lesiure location for the city! Top of it being the tallest observatory in the world and also if it building next of navy pier, the view can be really awsome looking from southwest to northwest with pano like chicago skyline!
I am all for this TV tower designed by Cesar Pelli only if it is way higher then 2000 ft and next to Navy Pier!

Last edited by ChicagoSkyline; October 27th, 2005 at 08:15 AM.
ChicagoSkyline no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 27th, 2005, 08:05 AM   #51
ChicagoSkyline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Chicago[Naperville-SW Suburb] + Miami[Miami Beach & South Beach]
Posts: 2,101
Likes (Received): 29

Quote:
Originally Posted by ThirdCoast312
So i guess we'll never get to see what this project at 500 N was going to be. I would rather a have 60 story apartment tower designed by Ralph Johnson than this huge piece of trash. Oh well.


Don't worry bud! I doubt that this supertall TV Tower will like to plan for that location, at least I hope! I am looking it to build a lot closer or even next to Navy Pier, because it can serve wonderfully as a lesuire TV Tower that will fullfill all kinds of Nay Pier needs and of course the midwest HDTV signal,lol!
I think that they should keep that 500 N apartment tower on the lake shore dr., since that area is more preferable for residential and skyscrapers then an extreme tall freestanding multi-purpose TV Tower!
ChicagoSkyline no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 27th, 2005, 08:28 AM   #52
ChicagoSkyline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Chicago[Naperville-SW Suburb] + Miami[Miami Beach & South Beach]
Posts: 2,101
Likes (Received): 29

Quote:
Originally Posted by spyguy999
http://www.chicagotribune.com/busine...i-business-hed

Tall TV tower may increase traffic, and tourist money, in Streeterville

THOMAS A. CORFMAN
Published October 26, 2005

For the venture proposing a 2,000-foot-tall broadcast tower for a site near Navy Pier, arranging financing could be the easiest part of the project.

"Traffic is the No. 1 concern," said Jim Houston, president of the Streeterville Organization of Active Residents, a vocal neighborhood group expected to closely scrutinize the development.

Developer J. Paul Beitler and LR Development Co. on Tuesday confirmed plans for the tower on a site along Lake Shore Drive between Illinois Street and Grand Avenue. The proposed tower, with its observation deck and restaurants, raises different concerns than the condominium towers already under construction in the area, Houston said.

"It's an Eiffel Tower type situation," he said.

The Metropolitan Pier and Exposition Authority, which runs Navy Pier, will also take a close look at congestion problems, said Theodore R. Tetzlaff, chairman of the authority. But the proposed tower could fill in a sightseeing gap between Michigan Avenue and the pier.

"Anything we can do to properly expand the attractions as people move down to the pier would be good for the people that visit us," he said.

The tower may not increase the number of tourists to Navy Pier as much as increase what they spend in the area, said Beitler, president and chief executive of the Chicago-based real estate firm that bears his name.

While agreements must still be signed with broadcasters, Chicago-based LaSalle Bank and pension fund National Electrical Benefit Fund have expressed interest in financing the project, he said.
I like it!
I think that this TV Tower should defienitely build in the Navy Pier serving as attraction(Observatory), lesiure on the top(Restaurant,Casino, Navy Pier Mall, Game Arcades) and tons of parking lots on its bottom!
By doing so, it will resolve the tension of streetville residents for yet another supertall in front of their lake view,lol! Also it will redirect the traffic of lake shore dr towards Navy pier area and not crowded it along with another supertall Fordham Spires tower near the Lake shore dr.!
I think by having it in the Navy pier, this approach is more friendly for chicago skyline, residents and urban layout and of course the traffic!
ChicagoSkyline no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 27th, 2005, 10:26 AM   #53
wickedestcity
BANNED
 
wickedestcity's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,566
Likes (Received): 26

i like the whole futuristic look its got going on but i agree with you all it needs a dif. location.the south loop is good or wolf point is also a good idea.even somewere smack in the middle of river north .

Last edited by wickedestcity; October 27th, 2005 at 10:50 AM.
wickedestcity no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 27th, 2005, 07:23 PM   #54
Jai
ॐ शान्तिः शान्तिः शान्तिः
 
Jai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Haleiwa, Oahu, HI :. Waianae, Oahu, HI :. DETROIT, MI
Posts: 3,703
Likes (Received): 79

It looks way to Dubaish.. and therefore architecturally conventional and cliche.

The architecture is completely out of place in Chicago. And not out of place in terms of its being more visionary, but out of place while being conventional

Something more organic looking or architecturally more forward looking would complement the fordham spire more. This should be build in somplace like Chongquing not Chicago, some place people care more for size than beauty


I was ambivilant to the spire, but eventually came around. But this is just bad

Last edited by Jai; October 27th, 2005 at 07:48 PM.
Jai no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 28th, 2005, 12:07 AM   #55
The Urban Politician
The City
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 5,935
Likes (Received): 21

Is is just me, or does it seem as if the city is just slapping SOAR in the face with this one?
The Urban Politician no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 28th, 2005, 02:58 AM   #56
geoff_diamond
Live from the Loop
 
geoff_diamond's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,578
Likes (Received): 2

I don't share everyone's disdain for this proposal... although, I think it would be better suited all the way at the end of Navy Pier (eminating from the roof the Grand Hall).
geoff_diamond no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 28th, 2005, 03:33 AM   #57
Azn_chi_boi
BANNED
 
Azn_chi_boi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Bridgeport + Chinatown, Chicago
Posts: 4,218
Likes (Received): 12

I thought of that too at first, but they wont destroy Grand Ballroom... the only way would be landfilling more of Navy Pier. BTW, if built east of the Ferris WHeel, then the Lake Michigan views would be somewhat blocked
Azn_chi_boi no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 28th, 2005, 09:58 AM   #58
ChicagoSkyline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Chicago[Naperville-SW Suburb] + Miami[Miami Beach & South Beach]
Posts: 2,101
Likes (Received): 29

Quote:
Originally Posted by Azn_chi_boi
I thought of that too at first, but they wont destroy Grand Ballroom... the only way would be landfilling more of Navy Pier. BTW, if built east of the Ferris WHeel, then the Lake Michigan views would be somewhat blocked
Great idea!
I thought that our new TV tower is way to closer to the fordham spires and too close to the busy lake shore drive! If they can change the location by Navy pier with means of building over the current grand ballroom or landfill extension over navy pier of the end, that way, this tower is AWAY from the skyscraper areas, populated residential area and it also won't take away the beauty of Fordham Spire and supertalls around the area! Since this is a special purpose tower, it should stands on its own away from the crowd

BTW, how about on the very top, put some sort of lighthouse flashlight, so that the sail boats/ships miles and miles out can still see where chicago is!
ChicagoSkyline no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 28th, 2005, 02:10 PM   #59
Chi_Coruscant
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 879
Likes (Received): 0

Antenna plan just a ploy, some think
October 28, 2005

BY DAVID ROEDER Business Reporter Advertisement
Chicago Sun-Times

How real is the plan to build a 2,000-foot tower for digital broadcast antennas on the lakefront? Real estate executives said Thursday the proposal is unlikely to be realized and that it is just a tactic for squeezing rent concessions from Sears Tower.

But a developer involved in the enterprise, J. Paul Beitler, insisted the project has secure financing. Because it is essentially an antenna mast holding little besides some sky-high restaurants to draw tourists, there's no pre-leasing requirement for construction to begin.

"This is not a fairy tale,'' Beitler said. "We didn't show this to the mayor to have fun or to tease the city.''

Beitler has partnered with LR Development Co. to propose the tower for land LR controls at Peshtigo and Illinois near Navy Pier. Beitler recruited well-known architect Cesar Pelli to provide the design.

Its primary purpose would be to serve the broadcast needs of stations making a move to digital from analog programming. But executives familiar with the economics of antennas doubted the new building could financially compete with Sears or the backup site for most stations, the John Hancock Center.

One broadcast executive acknowledged the idea could be useful in negotiations with Sears Tower. Larry Wert, president and general manager of WMAQ-Channel 5, said, "An alternative broadcast site is a good thing, given the leverage opportunity and the backup opportunity.''

Wert declined to comment on the Beitler plan or Channel 5's involvement in it. Several other TV station bosses didn't return calls.

In the late 1990s, the stations floated various ideas for a freestanding site for digital antennas, including spots on Chicago's West Side and in northwest Indiana. The antennas must be higher than Sears Tower to provide clear digital signals to Chicago homes.

At the time, broadcasters said there were technical reasons why Sears Tower and the Hancock couldn't squeeze digital equipment next to the analog gear. Those technical issues disappeared or were resolved once negotiations got serious.

Sears Tower, the city's tallest building and transmission site for most Chicago TV stations, has ample space to serve broadcasters now and well into a digital future, said Barbara Carley, who manages the building as director of CB Richard Ellis Inc.

Her opinion is no surprise, but it was echoed by another executive with experience in negotiating antenna deals. "One hundred percent of the digital requirement in Chicago has been satisfied,'' he said.

The executive said Beitler might be trying to revive an old dream of adding something tall to the skyline. In the 1980s, Beitler pushed a "world's tallest building'' for the southwest corner of Madison and Wells, but falling demand for office space killed the idea.

"It's very expensive to construct the systems needed to serve the broadcasters,'' the executive said. Asked if there was substance to Beitler's plan, he replied, "I think he's puffy, frankly.''

A critical point is whether Beitler carries commitments to negotiate antenna space on behalf of Chicago's TV stations. Beitler declined to discuss his arrangement with the stations, saying he is bound by confidentiality clauses.

Insiders estimate that the antennas produce more than $10 million in annual income for Sears Tower. The slightly shorter Hancock building is believed to earn less than $2 million a year from its antennas.

Beitler said the $300 million tower has secured a construction loan from LaSalle Bank that's contingent only on the city granting zoning approval. If that comes, "we are going ahead with this tower,'' he said. "I expect to start in July.''

One TV station leader downplayed the Beitler idea, taking an "I'll believe it when I see it'' approach.

Carley said the antenna leases at Sears Tower have an average of about five years to run.

While the Hancock is the backup TV site for most TV stations, the owner of its commercial space, Shorenstein Realty Services LP, has spent heavily to offer all stations improved emergency power in the event of blackouts, said Chuck Fendrich, senior vice president at Shorenstein.

The stations shared costs with the landlord. "I would have a hard time seeing them walk away from that capital commitment,'' Fendrich said. He said the leases extend beyond 2010.
Chi_Coruscant no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 28th, 2005, 10:56 PM   #60
Adam186
Work harder, work faster
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Omaha
Posts: 150
Likes (Received): 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by Azn_chi_boi
I thought of that too at first, but they wont destroy Grand Ballroom... the only way would be landfilling more of Navy Pier. BTW, if built east of the Ferris WHeel, then the Lake Michigan views would be somewhat blocked
I mentioned the observation deck and restaurant idea awhile back (before this proposal) in the Navy Pier Redevelopment thread. If I remember right, you said Navy Pier didn't need an observation deck. Glad to see that you changed your mind.
Adam186 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 02:17 AM.


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