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 April 11th, 2007, 03:07 AM   #101
ErmDiego
BANNED
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 154
Likes (Received): 2

Agree, but does each project need to be cost sensitive? I think this is what hurt's the South Loop. I say that because it has been shown people will pay $1.5MM - $2.7M for quality construction in the District. Those are people intending to live and stay. Sometimes a project like this raises the bar regardless if it is North side or South loop, and actually leads to better housing diversity, where the bar is raised. Quality will bring in buyers who want to live, not just flip.

Flipping and investment are good, in moderation. It just seems to me that the South Loop market is to driven by investors, agents buying multiple units for flipping, etc. and a) they drive up price for average developments, b) developers keep putting some of this on the market, c) it creates a false frenzy, and d) the problems with the development quality never fully surface because everyone is a short timer, wanting to get out. Ultimately some of the cost sensative buyers are overpaying speculated 2nd hand flipped units, and then having to contend with the quality problems.

Maybe I am just crazy I think Aqua would sell like gang busters in the South Loop.
ErmDiego no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old April 11th, 2007, 03:14 AM   #102
ErmDiego
BANNED
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 154
Likes (Received): 2

Columbian

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Hightower View Post
CMK has done some magnificent projects, aesthetic-wise. I think the Columbian is pretty uninspiring. But, that is another topic.

To expect every project to be on caliber with Aqua is not realistic. The construction cost prices out cost-sensitive buyers.
I will give you uninspiring, because it is classical, but would you agree it is quality construction? At the same time, CMK's glass design has looked relatively the same on all their projects and in my opinion it wears on lack of diversity. Take the two buildings next door to each other (1720 S. Michigan & 1680?). The effect of the length of the two buildings together just seems to create a steril street wall effect, yet maybe by itself, it could work. I am not expert, just what I observe. I just hope in 10 years it does not look like the stuff on King drive.
ErmDiego no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 11th, 2007, 03:35 AM   #103
Mr. Hightower
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Brooklyn, NY / Chicago, IL
Posts: 20
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by ErmDiego View Post
Maybe I am just crazy I think Aqua would sell like gang busters in the South Loop.
Of course. But, it wouldn't be profitable. You couldn't get as much $/sf in the south loop as you would in Lakeshore East.
Mr. Hightower no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 11th, 2007, 03:43 AM   #104
Mr. Hightower
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Brooklyn, NY / Chicago, IL
Posts: 20
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by ErmDiego View Post
I will give you uninspiring, because it is classical, but would you agree it is quality construction? At the same time, CMK's glass design has looked relatively the same on all their projects and in my opinion it wears on lack of diversity. Take the two buildings next door to each other (1720 S. Michigan & 1680?). The effect of the length of the two buildings together just seems to create a steril street wall effect, yet maybe by itself, it could work. I am not expert, just what I observe. I just hope in 10 years it does not look like the stuff on King drive.
I cannot comment on the Columbian's construction without reviewing the drawings and construction team. It all comes down to the brick curtain wall. If they screw that up, you will have a never-ending nightmare. Isn't that a Walsh project? If so, I would not buy there unless they are using one particular team.

CMK used Brininstool/Lynch on their south loop projects. They have improved their style, and I like it now. The stuff they did with Perkins & Will in the Near North is fantanstic and won many awards.
Mr. Hightower no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 11th, 2007, 11:51 AM   #105
BVictor1
Chicago's #1 Fan
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,186
Likes (Received): 882

Quote:
Originally Posted by ErmDiego View Post

B) The Building - A cheap design, with no respect. I invite you sometime
to take a walk to the Clark House/Woman's park and gander at
Museum Park Place Tower I with it's hideous red stripes. From
LSD it may look fine, but up close from within, it dominates when
it should not need to. X/O is going to be twice as tall,
in the middle of the District, and stick out like a sore thumb. The best
part of the District is nothing sticks out yet, and there is a decent
blend. Lucien could have taken a number of his conservative projects
like 840 LSD or Alyisian(sp) and most folks would have been
supportive; this project is a cheap knock off. It's like IKEA...
If the building was on Cermak, Michigan, etc. no one would care.
Blah-blah-blah...


Cheap design my ass. All those bullshit-fake ass historical rip off town houses there are the joke. This opinion shows that without a doubt you have no taste in what real architecture and what living in a true urban environment is all about. Museum Park Place I is a really interesting design. Finally something with a little color and boldness,a dn I can't wait for the 2nd EVEN TALLER TOWER to begin construction. And I'm sorry, but we're all glad that Lucien didn't go with his annoying PO-MO designs over there. We have moe than enough of that in the central area as it is. That's the problem with you people, always going and thinking conservative. That's why this country is so ****ed now, too many goddamn simpletons that lack vision and forward thinking. Take that shit to DuPage County.
BVictor1 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 11th, 2007, 12:02 PM   #106
BVictor1
Chicago's #1 Fan
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,186
Likes (Received): 882

Quote:
Originally Posted by ErmDiego View Post
Maybe I am just crazy I think Aqua would sell like gang busters in the South Loop.
Where in the South Loop are you talking about are you refering? Because I'm sure that if Aqua was proposed in the same location as where X/O WILL BE BUILT, at the same scale as it will be built in LSE we'd be having this same argument.
BVictor1 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 11th, 2007, 12:07 PM   #107
BVictor1
Chicago's #1 Fan
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,186
Likes (Received): 882

Quote:
Originally Posted by ErmDiego View Post
I will give you uninspiring, because it is classical, but would you agree it is quality construction? At the same time, CMK's glass design has looked relatively the same on all their projects and in my opinion it wears on lack of diversity. Take the two buildings next door to each other (1720 S. Michigan & 1680?). The effect of the length of the two buildings together just seems to create a steril street wall effect, yet maybe by itself, it could work. I am not expert, just what I observe. I just hope in 10 years it does not look like the stuff on King drive.
But you seem to like the same seeing as you're arguing that the developments surrounding the Prairie Avenue Historic District should reflect it's character.

I'd take the suff on King Drive (if you're refering to Prairie Shores) any day over the Prairie District development.

And it's 1620 and 1720 South Michigan for future references.
BVictor1 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 11th, 2007, 03:57 PM   #108
ErmDiego
BANNED
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 154
Likes (Received): 2

Quote:
Originally Posted by BVictor1 View Post
Blah-blah-blah...


Cheap design my ass. All those bullshit-fake ass historical rip off town houses there are the joke. This opinion shows that without a doubt you have no taste in what real architecture and what living in a true urban environment is all about. Museum Park Place I is a really interesting design. Finally something with a little color and boldness,a dn I can't wait for the 2nd EVEN TALLER TOWER to begin construction. And I'm sorry, but we're all glad that Lucien didn't go with his annoying PO-MO designs over there. We have moe than enough of that in the central area as it is. That's the problem with you people, always going and thinking conservative. That's why this country is so ****ed now, too many goddamn simpletons that lack vision and forward thinking. Take that shit to DuPage County.
Dude, you need to take a pill...So know you are expert in Architecture because you think bold red painted concrete tic-tac toe design is an architectural accomplishment? Boy, that is some incredible vision you have. If it can be designed by a 1st grade class with lego blocks is it really employing vision?

Good architecture is good architecture regardless or modern or classic, but most of this stuff is a lazy limp-wristed attempt at modern architecture by people who lack skills that true craftsman used to employ, followed by poor execution and cheap construction. You seem to think that only the architecture matters...and no one lives there. Enjoy your rental building after the foundations are vibrated down.
ErmDiego no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 11th, 2007, 04:03 PM   #109
ErmDiego
BANNED
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 154
Likes (Received): 2

Lakeshore East

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Hightower View Post
Of course. But, it wouldn't be profitable. You couldn't get as much $/sf in the south loop as you would in Lakeshore East.
Early on, the Lakeshore East was running equal or less then some of the stuff in Museum Park, of course Museum Tower. The later projects have kicked it up a notch. Those holding early are going to do well in that nitch area. The new Townhome prices there are a bit high for the square footage...wow!
ErmDiego no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 11th, 2007, 05:36 PM   #110
robituss
Registered User
 
robituss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: chi
Posts: 272
Likes (Received): 1

I think both Museum Park Place and especially X/O are bold and interesting designs. But whatever, its all subjective. Like I've been saying, holding developers accountable to producing good products is fine and I agree, but putting a cap on development (particularly height and density) because of the central or near south plan seems very backwards. One would think they should encourage additional residents to move to the area, take advantage of the boom at its height! As far as the developer being shady, well, that may be; only ermdiego seems to know. But it sounded like there were some ample oppurtunities to attend the plan commision meetings etc., and contact those members, because on this board it seems like many people knew about them.

Personally, I was attracted to the area because of these types of projects, and Im sure many others are. We want to live in an exciting urban environment and appreciate interesting architecture. X/O could be a signature building for the south loop. Yes, it will stick out, but so what - in my mind its in a good way. (I didn't even like it at first). Before, that whole place stuck out as a wasteland in close proximity to the museums, at least this is a positive. And being a blank slate for many years, how can people argue about 'character'? Maybe in small spots only. The fake old-style townhomes try to create this character, but poorly mimics the existing homes.

Truly, I just think many in PDNA sound like they simply dont like the design, and thats why they are up in arms. While some of you guys may be responsible in holding developers accountable, I would guess that the majority are simply fighting additional developments for the traditional 'nimby' reasons. Otherwise, the real concerns should have been stated at the forefront and they would appear more willing to work with these developers to force them to improve their standards, add infrastructure, and adjust their designs. Instead of trying to just get rid of the project altogether -which would seem like a total wasted oppurtunity to me.
robituss no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 11th, 2007, 07:01 PM   #111
BVictor1
Chicago's #1 Fan
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,186
Likes (Received): 882

AHHHH!!!! Progress

The architectural lines are rivaled only by the lines forming for Tower II's Grand Opening!

X/O's design is impressive. But even more impressive is the VIP list forming for
X/O's unveiling of Tower II.

Interest is extraordinary - even at this early stage. If you want to get in on the ground-floor, now is the time to let us know by touching base any way you can.

X/O hopefuls are calling, emailing registering, visiting in person - they know it's the best way to ensure true VIP treatment when the big day arrives. Join them today!

Being first in line is an immeasurable advantage. The South Loop is one of the country's hottest markets, and X/O is the South Loop's hottest address - selling nearly 150 residences in a few short months. Being first increases
your earning potential!

So please be prepared, and get in touch with us.
Tower II Grand Opens May 5th and 6th - your one and only chance to be first in line!


BVictor1 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 11th, 2007, 07:06 PM   #112
ErmDiego
BANNED
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 154
Likes (Received): 2

Now you have something I can agree with: "Otherwise, the real concerns should have been stated at the forefront and they would appear more willing to work with these developers to force them to improve their standards, add infrastructure, and adjust their designs. Instead of trying to just get rid of the project altogether -which would seem like a total wasted oppurtunity to me."

You hit one of the key points. The Alderman was all reactionary after the point - she gave zero support, information, disclosure (due to the campaign money), and hamstrung the residents with zero power. When the residents did express their input, she shut them down with her "Car Salesman taking an offer to her boss act" with Giles. On one hand, she lied about "I have never been for this project" and then turns around and writes a letter of endorsement and votes in council for the project. At least recuse yourself lady.

The GSLA - MR. Key was a joke in his pandering & dictorial support of the project. Coincidence that he stepped down right after the project approval? Their job is to work to the Near South Community Plan, not create something noone wanted. Also, When you hold a community meeting, get to know who is from the community and kick everyone else out of the room for a few minutes

DPD - Lori Healy has set city Planning and Restoration efforts back twenty years (on a variety of projects). I am not sure if she or Linda Searl has ever spent anytime in the neighborhoods. Follow the plan, and enforce the ordinance on the books. They are too worried about seeing if their new zoning FAR bonus calculation works. Also, why does the Plan Commission have Alderman serving on it who take money from developers with no development in their ward? Do they think we are that dumb?

And listen, if the new style of tall & thin is what is desired (X/O is not tall and thin by the way), fine, then revise the plan with the community validation that was used to revised the plan in 2006.

This is the acknowledgement I like by Linda Searl, Chairman of the Planning Commission :"the commission does not always consider whether individual projects fit in the general plans that are issued and sometimes forgotten".
ErmDiego no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 11th, 2007, 07:29 PM   #113
ErmDiego
BANNED
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 154
Likes (Received): 2

Quote:
Originally Posted by BVictor1 View Post
AHHHH!!!! Progress

The architectural lines are rivaled only by the lines forming for Tower II's Grand Opening!

X/O's design is impressive. But even more impressive is the VIP list forming for
X/O's unveiling of Tower II.

Interest is extraordinary - even at this early stage. If you want to get in on the ground-floor, now is the time to let us know by touching base any way you can.

X/O hopefuls are calling, emailing registering, visiting in person - they know it's the best way to ensure true VIP treatment when the big day arrives. Join them today!

Being first in line is an immeasurable advantage. The South Loop is one of the country's hottest markets, and X/O is the South Loop's hottest address - selling nearly 150 residences in a few short months. Being first increases
your earning potential!

So please be prepared, and get in touch with us.
Tower II Grand Opens May 5th and 6th - your one and only chance to be first in line!


It will probably turn out like Filmworks Lofts (nice facade work), Dearborn Tower (nice settlement$$), Roosevelt Hotel (nice flooding), etc.; the true buyers better be ready for the big special assessment that will hit them.

Of course, it is quite likely that the contracts to date are just reservations for the 212 E. Cullerton Investment crew, whose names will quietly dissappear.

But then F&G will have had a hand in getting your biggest Cronnie out of office by Next Tuesday...she will be singing like a bird, but it is possible that one of her 'friends' will take care of her out of office 'wink'.
ErmDiego no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 21st, 2007, 06:07 AM   #114
Chi649
Registered User
 
Chi649's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Chicagoland
Posts: 1,156
Likes (Received): 12

I saw a couple of tv commerical advertisements for X/O tonight so it seems like this project is moving forward.
Chi649 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 21st, 2007, 08:16 PM   #115
amf312
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 2
Likes (Received): 0

Is X/O moving forward?

What can the new Alderman do to alter or stop it? Isn't there already a PD ordinance in place?

They are having an open house today, fyi.
amf312 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 21st, 2007, 08:21 PM   #116
The Urban Politician
The City
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 5,935
Likes (Received): 21

^ Considering that this is being cast off as Haithcock's "blunder" I doubt he will, but then who the hell am I?

Anyway, I was watching the Yo and they broadcasted an interview of the developers. According to them, groundbreaking will occur around this time next year.
The Urban Politician no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 22nd, 2007, 03:57 AM   #117
robituss
Registered User
 
robituss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: chi
Posts: 272
Likes (Received): 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Urban Politician View Post
According to them, groundbreaking will occur around this time next year.
What? They need to get moving on this thing. I thought they have been selling pretty fast, there's no need to go so slowly. I would have thought they'd start demoing that building by the fall.
robituss no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 22nd, 2007, 04:54 AM   #118
Cullertonian
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 12
Likes (Received): 0

The PDNA seems to have two concerns with the X/O and a few other proposals for the district: 1) A legitimate concern about the quality of the developers' work and 2) good 'ole NIMBY complaining about design. It's great that the first issue is coming to light, and will hopefully lead to improvements if not at least increased awareness of some very shady business and construction practices. On the second point, they're not going to get anywhere by trying to make everything look like it was built in 1883.
I personally love standing in the Clark House park and enjoying the view of the red grid of Museum Park Place rising above the faux-old townhouses on Prairie. And I look forward to seeing the X/O twins over the Glessner House. Hopefully the PDNA's concerns will make it so F&G's investors at X/O don't have to invest in ShopVacs along with their condos.
Cullertonian no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 22nd, 2007, 06:17 AM   #119
Mr Downtown
Urbane observer
 
Mr Downtown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,547
Likes (Received): 10

Well, there's also the fact that it was approved illegally, in violation of the city's adopted plan for the area.
Mr Downtown no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 22nd, 2007, 04:31 PM   #120
The Urban Politician
The City
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 5,935
Likes (Received): 21

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Downtown View Post
Well, there's also the fact that it was approved illegally, in violation of the city's adopted plan for the area.
^ Are these plans legally binding?
The Urban Politician 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 07:01 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