Blurring the line between city and suburb, a proposal has been sent to Evanston officials for what would be the largest building in the suburbs. The building, a 49-story condo building, would be situated at Church Street, Orrington Avenue and Sherman Avenue. The triangular shaped lot currently has a two story retail building which would be torn down for the project.
The project will no doubt have its opponents, when asked by the Tribune if she thought there would be a backlash, Ald. Cheryl Wollin responded: 
"Nothing in Evanston is non-controversial. I expect it to be thoroughly debated." Zoning officials should have a recommendation in about two weeks, which will be followed by public meetings, hearings, and a vote by the city council.
The current title holder for the largest suburban building surrounding Chicago is the Oakbrook Terrace Tower, which stands has 31 floors and stands at 418 feet. The proposed building in Evanston would house 49 stories at 523 feet.
We sympathize with the residents and business owners in the area at their impending reaction to the proposal. At the same time, economically and geographically a taller building in Evanston makes sense. It will definitely increase congestion, but it will also add to the walkability of the area. As the Tribune points out, the glass and metal structure will add to the natural light that reaches downtown Evanston as well.
The development company hopes to complete construction of the building by 2010.
add to digg
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
email this
add to facebook
add to del.icio.us
It will definitely increase congestion, but it will also add to the walkability of the area.
How in the world would this "add to the walkability of the area"? It's quite "walkable" now--adding a 50 story condo building will certainly make it more congested and less "walkable."
To really increase the walkability, they should restore the land back to its original use as a park.
Yeah, what the hell? What is walkability supposed to mean? Have you ever been to Evanston? This building will do nothing but add congestion and chain stores which no one will really be interested in walking to anyways. The Evanston city council is out of control with respect to the condo builders. All of the discussion so far with this building has and is scheduled to be in closed door sessions. Of course it will be controversial if the council makes a decision on this one without any form of input from the residents of Evanston.
Yeah, what used to be a quaint "little" town is turning into a bunch of ugly, oversized, boxes, with lego like colors, and add that there is no "decent" parking for neighbors (oh, yeah sure, they provide indoor parking for the upper crust, but street parking for the rest of us is usually timed and strictly adhered to by the rolling jeeps, sheesh...\also, rental fees for apartments have started to skyrocket. I mean damn, we only have one McDonalds now (used to have two, one was by the university), every other restaurant is catered to the condo owners who can afford to eat at these establishments. Can I just get a char polish and fries!
Evanston is a city as well as a suburb. It need a dense, vibrant urban core to remain cosmopolitan and desirable.
Increasing "walkability" means many things. For one, the building will house 500 or so people who will not need to get into their cars to get around downtown Evanston. It is exactly the kind of project the city should be trying to attract.
Hey Chuffy, do you live in Evanston?
No, I live in Downtown Chicago where people use the same arguments about "congestion", parking and traffic to try to scotch good developments there.
Face it. The era of selfish, sprawled out suburban living is over. It's time to densify our community cores and encourage a more concentrated walkable culture.
Having Fountain Square renovated is a very nice bonus, it could turn into a very pleasant public space.
Donna, in terms of street parking, street parking of course has a cost (minor stuff like the maintenance costs, but also major stuff in a downtown area like the opportunity cost of using that land to house one measely auto). So it's reasonable that in downtown, parking will be expensive and regulated.
If you want ample choice of char and polish, there are plenty of neighborhoods in the city for you, and if you want to drive everywhere, there are plenty of other suburbs for you too.
One of the big things people like about downtown density is that people don't have to drive everywhere; they are walking on the sidewalks and as a result, stopping into more stores and helping the local economy. 500 new residents in the heart of this district would only further said street life and economic activity.
"rental fees for apartments have started to skyrocket. I mean damn, we only have one McDonalds now"
And artifically restricting development resulting in a shortage of housing will decrease rents how?
Well, seeing as Evanston is so walkable, why do you need more parking? The development adds to the walkability of the area, because you actually have a destination to walk to. Sure, traffic mught be an issue for a while during construction, but it's not like cars will be zooming in and out continuously. The only reason why you have those clunky boxes now is because people such as yourselves complained so much about height in the past, the city forcd the developers to reduce the height and cause the development to spread out across the site. What happens when you sit on a bag of sand?
Last time I checked Evanston was a suburb, but it's still the City of Evanston. I don't think The Evanston city council is out of control with respect to the condo builders, I think they are out of control with respect of never being bold and always listening to the complaints of NIMBY'S, who never think of the city as a whole, but only what affects them.
Evanston ois not the quaint little town of 1900 or even 1950 anymore. It's 2007, and it's time for this town to break free of it's restraints.
If we keep Evanston disguised and unrecognized, quietly tucked away and hidden within the out-stretched reach of Chicago's broad-shouldered shadows, (like our friends to the North), will we, too, be the beneficiaries of a celebrated state-of-the-art Santiago Calatrava-designed Centre for the Arts?
If the answer is yes, then I say "Down with Central Evanston's Sky-defining Residential Gem!"
They better not fuck with The Orrington.
Victor, the reason the buildings are boxy is because they were designed that way not because the residents complained and made them shorter. Having seen some of the plans before modification, they were the same just taller. They didn't spread out at all, they always took up the whole lot. Many were even modified to have larger setbacks.
I'm all for Evanston moving into the future but endless condos and chain stores isn't the way to do it. If the city council were being bold they would use the apparent lust for living in Evanston as a bargaining chip and extract something useful from these builders rather than just letting them build whatever they want wherever they want to. Maybe a fund for independent businesses?
The Orrington already "f^cked" with itself by plopping that god-awful dryvit additional on top several years ago. way to ruin a once classy and elegant piece of historic hotel architecture.
as for this proposal, i think it looks pretty good all around. i love the fact that they're saving the hahn building in its entireity and not just gutting it into a parking garage (as the now-dead Roszak proposal called for). and the refurbishing of fountain square plaza is LONG overdue. the fountains don't work half of the time, the limestone fountain bases have huge chunks that have fallen out of them, and the brick paving is crumbling and been patched in the most unattractive, half-assed manner. it is truly embarrassing that what is supposed to be the central focal point for downtown evanston is in such shoddy disrepair. something needs to be done regardless of the fate of this tower proposal.
as for the height of the tower, some might be inclined to go with their gut reaction against anything tall and "city-like" in evanston, but with the growth of the city's young skyline over the past decade, it's become apparent that evanston needs a cap stone building to complete the skyline, and there's no better spot for such a building than on this block. perhaps 49 floors is a bit too tall, but something significantly taller than the bank building and sherman plaza is needed to round out the skyline and give it a deserved peak (and anything that helps take attention away from the offensively banal sherman plaza can only be a good thing). i hope the city, developer, and citizens can come to an agreeable compromise that allows this project to move forward and create a new modern symbol for downtown evanston that won't be an architectural embarassment like sherman plaza.