Comments ( 15 )

• Design looks interesting, unlike the location for residential. Better spot for an office tower.

• Not so sure bout that paulj. With the conversion happening to the Old Post Office and some other large scale residential towers coming to the area (600 S. Clinton or so), the location may actually become a transitional site linking the loop to both South Loop developments and planned UIC dorms.

• Paulj – couldn’t possibly disagree with you more. This is just the beginning of what I predict will be a huge trend of residential infill in the Loop at sites that in decades past would have only be considered suitable for office development. Basically, locations such as this have been far undervalued as potential residential project sites. Just look at how successful 235 is already – reportedly well over two-thirds sold, and they haven’t even opened up a sales center! There is tremendous untapped demand for walk-to-work residences that is about to explode, and this will only grow as time goes on (with likely permanently high gas prices, ridiculous and ever-increasing congestion, chronic underfunding of transportation infrastructure, etc.). People want simpler lifestyles, and there is nothing simpler than a short walk to and from work (whether from your rental or owner-occupied residence). The conventional wisdom is completely obsolete, folks – there is no part of the Loop that will ever again be strictly for offices – it’s all one big mixed-use district now, and rightly so. Besides the obvious transportation issue, here are some other supporting factors that will make the Loop proper of the next decade what the South Loop was during the current decade: a huge relative value – much better bargain all-considered than Gold Coast, River North, Lincoln Park, etc etc etc. And much less rampant NIMBYism than any other neighborhood in the city. When everything is mixed-use (and especially when the majority use is commercial space), and when the residential is a good mix of rental and condo, you won’t find the ugly face of NIMBYism proliferating where it sadly does almost everywhere else – most recently it has unfortunately become prevalent in the South Loop…

• Sam,

  2/3 Sold? Mmmm Hmmm. That sounds like realtor spin to me….

  I am by no means against the project, but walk out of that lobby after 6pm on a weekday or any time on a weekend and looks like the area is under a curfew. I live in the Heritage (Michigan and Randolph) and find my neighborhood so lacking in day-to-day retail that I cannot imagine living at 235 Van Buren. Macy’s is dying a slow death (watch for some news about a closing in the next few years), there are no walk-able grocery stores, few local non-national restaurants. There are many more opportunities to buy a home near the lake either under construction or yet to happen. I question why anyone would want to live in isolation and wait 10-15 years (if ever) for the neighborhood to evolve. But if you do, more power to you!

• 2/3 sold does not seem too far off.

• Paulj,

  Do you really have difficulty believing a development offering condos priced from 200-400k located just steps away from tens of millions of sf of class a office space is 2/3 sold after a few months of pre-pre-marketing?? (no, I’m not a real estate agent and have no interest in any residential developments) I don’t think you should. You sound very miserable in your place over at the Heritage….are you by chance a transplanted suburbanite who is having difficulty adjusting to the downtown life? I certainly agree that while the downtown retail scene is by no means perfect, you are far too pessimistic…things are definitely moving in the right direction…..expect a grocery to open within the next couple years, I would not hold your breath wating for Macy’s to close, and predominance of national chains is of course a national phenomenon – nothing particular to the Loop….you say 10-15 years – I say there is no end to the ongoing transformation of the Loop – but look for vast improvement in day-to-day retail options in less than 5 years….

• Sam, Not an agent? Riiigggghhhtttt! Of course you claim otherwise on other internet boards.

  http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=446357&page=15

  InTheLoopSam “…(my own background is in urban planning, my passion architecture and my profession real estate)…”

  Of course the extensive uses of “-” give you away.

• OutOfTheLoop,

  I don’t know who Sam is, but I do know that there are a lot of professions in real estate besides that of agent. Architect, for example, or appraiser or analyst or property manager or …

• I think OutoftheLoop is another incarnation of that Jeff Ayersman moron

• Sam, are you busted??

  No, not an ex-suburbanite. Perhaps after living in Paris for six years I got used to the silly notion of neighborhoods, proper density, architectural review boards, people having input over the built environment… Call it civility in the built environment. 235 Van Buren is yet another box on a box . Wouldn’t it be wonderful if the city required underground parking on all downtown buildings (think 311 S. Wacker, Sears Tower). The proliferation of “decorated” parking garages really takes away from the urban pedestrian experience. Other so-called world class require underground car parks…. And believe it or not, I develop commercial real estate development, Sam. Sacre Bleu!

• Based on Chicago’s soil, I don’t think it is possible to mandate underground parking, as nice as it would be.

• Aren’t they going to put a grocery store into the old Carson’s store on State? I thought that was the plan.

  The loop has much more weekend traffic than only five years ago. I live not far from this new building. I wouldn’t exactly say that it is a “neighborhood” but with the CTA problems, believe me, being able to walk to work and getting home in 10 or 15 minutes is a dream come true.

  Gas prices? What gas prices?

  It’s getting better. They need to re-design Union Station and get some better shops in there. That would help the area. There is plenty of room to do it. Maybe it will happen if that condo addition on the roof goes through.

• Work in real estate – yes. Not even close to being an agent however. Architectural review is generally a bad idea – what we need is more freedom of expression in the architectural community. When you say people having input over the built environment – to me that’s just an invitation for more NIMBYism. And believe me – I’m no fan of parking, cars (don’t own one – my means of transportation are 1 walking, 2 CTA and 3 cabs), big parking podium blobs, etc but there should not be a requirement that all parking be underground – rather the city should push for innovative design solutions (in some cases in which developers come in with a low cost basis, underground parking in Chicago is quite feasible – while in other cases it is less so). One of downtown Chicago’s great advantages as far as continuing strong growth prospects is its relative affordability when compared to other 24/7 cities – we should not be harming our affordability with these types of expensive regulations…

• Remember, this is Chicago so be careful what you wish for. New regulations are never crafted in a professional or scholarly way. Take the parking regulations in our new “progressive” zoning code. Whereas the old code didn’t regulate vehicle maneuverability space, now it does, and the spatial demands now exceed what is really necessary by about 15%. That’s huge. What a waiste. Among other things, it vastly increases the difficulty of hiding it behind other uses.

• Parking could be mandated underground–it’s just more expensive, and tilts the economics to be less favorable for developers. The great parking podium menace is ruining the more newly developed areas of downtown, however. Walking around River North is turning into a stroll through a canyon of pre-cast parking podiums. Yes, many have retail or restaurants on the ground level, but the next five to seven levels are some form of decorated blank wall.

  I do think that a residential tower is feasible in just about any area within two miles of the Loop these days. Would I personally want to live in the location mentioned above? Probalby not, but there are many that do. And retail options are only going to increase over time. Housing always happens first, and retail usually lags several years behind.