@ChicagoGeographer IMO and am just a mechanic. But that hole/property looks too small. Also building towers ain't cool anymore or useful. A las Vegas sphere would be cooler and probably bring more tourist thus revenue IMO.
I had no idea that Chicago alderpersons have that much independent authority over building projects rather than, say, the city planning department. Given that this is Chicago, though, I can easily imagine that the 'tough negotiations' with the alderperson were largely about the size of the kickback -er- "campaign donation".
My guess is the reason that law was created in the first place was to facilitate kickbacks for the aldermen and prevent developers from being able to go over their heads. Mike McDonald himself probably wrote that law it would make a lot of sense.
I really wish the Gateway Tower proposal was built instead of the current plans. There’s nothing wrong with the new design but it could be built anywhere in Chicago
The building that's going there has been specifically designed for that exact spot, with intensive wind studies made to try and make the building 'invisible' to wind given its exact situation relative to the lake and surrounding buildings. It's just about as far from 'could be built anywhere' as it gets as far as I know.
Very cool. I knew about the history of the original Spire, but not about all the fails since then. I make the drive to Chicago quite a bit and will actually kind of miss seeing the Chicag-Hole as I like to call it. Oh, well. We still have the Bean! Thanks for the video, Gavin!
For some reason, the stock footage around 2:15 amuses me. Mostly, it's the gavel being poised at the ready on a small desk paired with the scales of justice on top of a couple of law-looking books. The haphazard finger pointing at the text adds to the silliness. Well done, sir.
I'm up in McHenry and own an escape room here. There is a 4D Cityscape Puzzle of Chicago that we almost used in one of our rooms but shelved the idea and it ended up inside a display case in our lobby where it's been ever since. The puzzle has a few layers and miniature buildings. Many customers check it out and scratch their heads at the mini model of the proposed spire and I usually tell them the TLDR of its failure to launch. This video helped me learn a little more about it!
Forcing ground floor retail on the development I think was a good thing and axing the hotel section of the towers I don't really agree with, but I can at least understand it. But, axing condo units to make the entire development rental only is asinine, imo, I can't even think of a rational justification for it.
Timing as noted is everything. The condo craze ended and apartments seen as more desirable. Many converted buildings to condos did revert back. Some who tried.. were not able to carry it out. Another tower recently complete on S Michigan Ave... was also originally planned as very high-end condos and on hold for months to years as Coviid added delays and it finally did get completed as a same look, but totally altered tower to apartments for a building as it is moderately priced and deemed vs most ultra-luxury as originally designed. Should condos make a big comeback as more desired and perhaps when interest rates drop much more? New towers might plan and get built again mostly as condo towers.... I am not urban planner, but I do have access to what others say the market we are in has changed to.... and that is during a higher interest period also... a market for apartments more. In coming years it may change and planners will change with that again.
@@davidw7 I think a common concern here is that individuals at most levels of the market are being frozen out of ownership due to lack of supply. Instead,. the housing stock is handed over to vc firms. It's a little hard to know if people don't want condos or can't afford them, but either way there are fewer people building equity, both financially and socially. On the other hand, some people would say that increasing the number of rental units is the best way to help with the housing crisis and that condos are simply locked up as investments. Of course this building probably won't be particularly affordable anyway.
@@drake1636 Still it is market based. Higher interest rates have more eair to by into any home first. Not like one tower is unique. The condo craze did end. It was a frenzie of condos for many years. I am sure if someone wants a condo.... plenty to find. In this market of some promoting doom. Chicago to fall and many not sure if to stay longterm at a job there.... when a lease up one is free to pick up and go. A condo still is not short-term. It is a commitment at the mercy of a volatile market of not .ery supply, but is it the curre t hippest choice social media, pop-culture promoted happenung tbing today? No... so demand slows though rentals rose in demand as condos just migh ne too much ... that was a millenniun generation thing to do.
@@ChrisCiber or starving them of cash with tax policy. Or robust rent-control regimes to change the flavor for them. Maybe the current mortgage loan interest write-off for owner occupancy is an insufficient subsidy. Who builds stuff there is no market for?
The problem being is that people don’t want to live in this community unlike in previous generations. There simply isn’t enough demand as WFH and the decline of the retail and hospitality sectors in the area are pushing people into the neighborhoods. Chicago is flattening out with far less demand to be near the Loop.
Very cool to see some Chicago content! Subscribed for your Geoguessr content but nice to learn more about Chicago as well. Please keep us informed about your city!
Oooooof course the alderman got in the way. Hotel rooms could've brought more revenue to the area as a whole but nooooooo. I'm thrilled to see the project actually starting though
I would not call those concerns “classic NIMBY”. I live close by. It is a very compact and densely populated area. A lot of investment over decades has transformed that area from a scary collection of dilapidated warehouses to a thriving residential neighborhood. No, the City should not just rubber stamp whatever is best for the developers. Impact on the surrounding are is a very important and prudent consideration. Besides, it got approved so concerns were clearly not just about blocking the project.
I remember walking by this when ground was being broken.... yup about 15 years ago...... I wana say I remember seeing big twilight billboards and snakes on a plane...... I think the word at the time was reitalizig the river front and then the 2008 market thing.....
Perfect time to build a new tower. The American Economy is kicking ass and ready for more business. So many new companies are taking over as the older companies falter to change.
You left out my favorite stupid idea for the site.. A swimming pool anchored to an enormous hot air balloon that would rise and lower in and out of the hole.
Kinda glad the site has a new tower that will finally go up!! However, my "4D Cityscape Time Puzzle" of Chicago is about to become outdated since it has a small replica of the Chicago Spire....
it's great that something is finally going there, but it's so so depressing that the more grand proposals for such a unique site got cut down by some assholes and our asshole alderman. I'm very close to this site and Reilly is my alderman. The idea that a skyscraper wouldn't fit in here when 99% of residents live in one of the 20+ towers that make up this ward is *insane*. We got 3 new towers is just the last few years! And one of them is condo+rentals+hotel! It's so stupid and I hope those townhomes get upzoned and built over oh and BJ said he'd reign in aldermanic power when it comes to housing but shocker that hasn't happened
nice vid and cool looking towers! i wonder why they made them shorter, would replacing the hotel portion with more rental units or something else more publicly accessible not have worked too? (i might be thinking too simply about this, this is totally not my area of expertise :D)
Ooooh, does this win most controversial Chicago development project over The 78 or Lincoln Yards? (or the O'Hare expansion or the Lathrop Homes or the Red Line South extension or...) No small plans indeed :)
@@addisonbaker8211 in a few ways: one, that it's taking so long to do at all; two, what the eventual routing will be; three, that any decent routing will probably invoke eminent domain/etc. in a community that has good reason to be sensitive to that.
@@addisonbaker8211 Other than that it’s a massively expensive public project to connect a lightly populated area that is already connected to mass transit? No, not controversial, just stupid.
Why all rentals? Feels like there is some more to be uncovered there... I maybe can see why no hotel - traffic.. but all rentals seems very confusing. Just convert the hotel to rentals and light office. Confusing - let's learn more about that alderman's ties 😛
Unrelated to the topic, your voice doesn't match your face and I'm not trying to be rude...but you have a set of pipes there. You would be a perfect news anchor or something. On a related note, great video!
My city approved plans were to build the biggest slaughter house the great lakes has ever seen, but my financing fell through 😔 Best place really. Your local government does nothing when rich people dump pollution directly into the river.
It was a lot of hate that lead to Chicago Spire demise. 1. Non American architects design 2, Santiago was getting to much fame (he even signed the transit hub at the World Trade Center 3. Foreign bank finance 4. Even Donald trump publicly criticized the tower 5. A lot of people taught the tower was too tall and it shouldn’t surpass the freedom tower in height 6. The kick back on super talks skyscrapers after 9/11
I would think Donald T did not want such a taller taller than his new supertall in Chicago on the river around the same time Donald's was under construction and it was completed in 2009. It was already about half-way up when the Crash hit.... all his DUESCHBANK money to finance it secured and that was not American.... American banks would not since he had those bankruptcies. Donald wanted the tallest as it was planned before 9 11. Scaled down after that and of course cost skyrocket past 40-stories.... and taller even faster. Freedom Tower got the nod as tallest in America by its spire .... as the twin antenna of Sears (Willis) Tower did not count. So Sears had highest floor over Freedom Tower, but the spire added needed height counted. Being Freedom Tower of course had it not fought and besides.... Skinnies would pass it anyway.
Boring end design. Short towers will just blend with its surrounding buildings. The original Spire would have been an instant icon. Skyline has too many blocky structures.
I'm getting really tired of 850 foot buildings, no matter how pretty they are. We built a world record 1,400+ foot building *50 years ago.* It's way past time to build a 2,000+ foot building and reclaim our title. We've got to stop standing around and letting other cities pass us by.
