Printers Corner blends materials in nod to South Loop neighbors
Posted 10/11/2007 by Kate Hawley
Now that Printers Corner is nearing completion, it's becoming easier to see how the design by FitzGerald Associates Architects relates to the surrounding structures. The building, at 170 W Polk St in the South Loop, is most notable for a design that allows only corner units.
“Obviously that has to be the first thing you mention when someone asks you about the building,” Mike DeRouin, an architect with FitzGerald, told New Homes Magazine writer Dan Schuyler recently. “But the building brings a unique presence to the neighborhood in another important way. The lower portion blends in with the brick façades of the neighborhood, yet you know something is happening above it because we brought the tower design down through the base to ground level.”
The top 11 floors of the glass-and-concrete tower step back to create eight corner units per floor, while the six-story brick and concrete base pays homage to the historic brick manufacturing buildings characteristic of the Printers Row area, he says.
Prices for the one-bedrooms range from the $280s to the $350s. The two-bedroom units are priced from the $360s to $480s. Deeded parking is $36,000.
Floors seven through 12 are expected to be ready for delivery in November, and the remaining floors the following month. About 75 percent of the 88 units have sold, according to Sales Manager Timon Bernstein.
Comments
10/11/07
Jeff said:
What a horrible base. I understand the need, but at least get creative on integrating into the building. Why not fool people into thinking the first few floors look like the rest of the building, or next door and make it look like condos with windows? Make the lower section look like a loft building.
tomi said:
I agree. This building has nothing to do with contextualism and destroys the pleasant pedestrian scale of the surrounding buildings.
Alan said:
That base looks like garbage. Blend in, my @*s
Stokes said:
This doesn't relate whatsoever to the context. The base should've been wrapped in residential units (at least on the street side) to bring the base's scale down a bit. The tower looks like a pile of precast and that relates to the surrounding like monkeys relate to computers.
paulj said:
Kate, what are you on?
H-O-R-R-E-N-D-O-U-S! Has our fair City of Chicago approved this?
Mr. DeRouin, thanks for De Ruining the neighborhood.
Stokes said:
If it's within the current zoning, no such design review from the City's Planning Dept. It's really a shame.
coco said:
what's going on with the two-tone color scheme on the concrete? are they trying out different kinds of primer or is that the final "design"?
The way it addresses the street is actually not terrible if you're right up next to it (which is the only way you'd really see it unless you're across Wells in the vacant lot), but it fer sher looks like crap when taken as a whole.
Gordy said:
This is a great example of a building design based soley off the plan with little to no regard of elevation…
Stokes said:
This building looks like it was designed 5 years ago for another site, never built and then shoe-horned onto this lot.
SLooper said:
Anyone know where the parking garage entrance is? Just wonderin'. It does look like primer. Looks like they couldn't decide which color primer.
urban politician said:
looks like the back of the buiding is facing the front for some reason. what's up with that?!
Joe Zekas said:
This doesn't appear to be "the urban politician" of old, but rather a brand new one known as "urban politician."
10/12/07
UptownR said:
Yeah, that one's a dog. But this is what parking requirements get you, since no-one is willing to pay for underground parking in this city. It's time to stop building this city around the car–particularly so close to downtown and transit! We can't live in a city of blank-wall parking podiums!
Jeff said:
UptownR, I disagree - that is a lazy excuse the developers are using. There are plenty of ways to integrate parking into a building or set of buildings with out being so damn unimaginative or boring. In addition to underground as you indicate, options on older buildings in Streeterville for example, use car elevators, etc. How about the urban planners shut their yapper an do their job…if they were really planning, they might suggest, instead of putting garages in each building, why not integrate several developments into one shared parking facility that could also anchor destination and retail parking and commercial facilities, in addition to resident needs.
For those Jr. Hillary Clinton's that lecture us on the rules of how we should live our lifein the big city, tellling us to live like we are in NYC, etc. they fail to comprehend, that in a period when public transportation has all the competing factors to grow and shine (energy costs, record driving transit times, etc, )Chicago's CTA is taking major steps backwards. This (like rediculous tax increases), just feeds into increasing the urban sprawl this is creating more competition for already scarce funds. Those that keep telling others, "if you don't like congestion & crime, move to the burbs" will soon have their wish if things do not change. The CTA/RTA is broke from the bottom up, and it will take more than $$ billions to fix.
Road projects will get priority $$$ for many reason, one being it is easy to model tangible benefits, especially at current fuel prices, and b) in the last 10 years, big trucking/shipper business's have put an unbelievable foothold of transit facilities in the Chicago burbs that serve the Midwest and National needs (drive out I-55, 2-94, I-90 from Chicago some day), that their lobbyists are winning the battle to drive these road upgrades; public transportation transit issues for commuters are getting lost in the shuffle.