641 replies to this topic

[Nparker]

Doesn't look "mean" anymore...this kills the whole vibe it was trying for.

Exactly. It now looks like your standard condo box. More appropriate for Fairfield (but not the 1100 block of Burdett)  than the city's old industrial heartland. Who exactly was demanding the suburbanization of the design?

[nagel]

The same people who beat left handers and told artistic people to get real jobs. “Make it look like the others.”

[aastra]

 

Doesn't look "mean" anymore...

 

Nicely worded. Many times I've questioned the validity of encouraging an "industrial esthetic" around there, and I wasn't really sure that Ironworks was even delivering on it, anyway. But now that we see this wimpy revised version, it seems pretty clear that the original concept was actually delivering that heavier industrial vibe. I'm also more on board with the premise now, because I can see the old version working well with stuff like Capital Iron, whereas I'm not sure the new version fits at all. Thus proving that you don't know what you're trying to get until it's gone.

 

So... that whole longstanding thing re: discouraging balconies in the old town... I guess we're doing a hasty 180 on that now?

 

edit: I don't know, "wimpy" might be too harsh. But I'd say it's wimpier than the previous version by a fair bit.

 

pic from http://ironworksliving.com

Edited by aastra, 02 March 2018 - 03:53 PM.

[aastra]

 

The same people who beat left handers and told artistic people to get real jobs.

 

I know an artist who makes a good living beating left-handed people.

[Mike K.]

No Balconies in Old Town died a long time ago. The Sovereign, Janion, Union, Cityzen, 595 Pandora and The Pearl all feature prominent balconies in their designs. The only project that seems to have gotten caught up in that schtick is 601 Herald.

[aastra]

Do the old town design guidelines no longer encourage recessed balconies and small metal balconies?

[Mike K.]

You do see a lot of recessed balconies in design, but you also see balconies that aren't recessed and are quite large (595 Pandora in particular).

[tiger11]

I much prefer the new design personally! 

[MarkoJ]

Both versions look good to me with a slight preference for the original design. How about instead of beating around the bush this gets approved and some much-needed entry-level inventory comes to market.

[aastra]

I don't disagree with that. Unto itself there's nothing wrong with it.

[JanionGuy]

any word on underground parking?  That lot, as well as the one between Janion and Mermaid Wharf, are going to be missed.

[Nparker]

Both versions look good to me with a slight preference for the original design...

I don't disagree with that. Unto itself there's nothing wrong with it.

I know this is going to sound like something I usually rally against, but for once I have to say, it's not that this is bad design, it's just not the right design for this location. 

[Kapten Kapsell]

any word on underground parking? That lot, as well as the one between Janion and Mermaid Wharf, are going to be missed.

Interestingly enough, Robbins has applied for permission to place a temporary surface lot with 38 parking stalls for a 3 year period nearby at 629 Chatham. It will be considered at CotW this Thursday March 8; city staff recommend denying the temporary use permit.

Edited by Kapten Kapsell, 02 March 2018 - 07:47 PM.

[G-Man]

I wasn't a big fan of the first design and this is much worse. That said I think it could be made about 75% better by giving it about another six feet at ground level. Some really tall commercial would save it.

[jonny]

I prefer the previous design, but there's nothing wrong with this design. There's certainly no reason to delay this project any further.

[Linear Thinker]

92 vehicle spaces, 122 bike.

Driveway off of Store St.

1 full level below grade and a half level at street level behind the commercial spaces.

 

any word on underground parking?  That lot, as well as the one between Janion and Mermaid Wharf, are going to be missed.

[Jackerbie]

Dramatic change to the site plan, too. Those smaller buildings at the rear have been nixed, and the new plans show only half of the development (the first two submissions included two development phases, boxed in red below)

 

Old (Second submission Sept 2017)

 

New (Third submission Jan 2018)

[Kapten Kapsell]

Perhaps the surface lot would be temporary until further development takes place?

[Nparker]

Perhaps the surface lot would be temporary until further development takes place?

Ugh. Surface parking. Kill this project if it means that a parking lot remains when it's done. 

[Mike K.]

It'll be developed at a future time.