New development at South Side Works (Bloomfield: real estate, 2014, rent)

[SlurmsMcKenzie]

New SSW development

Not sure if this has been mentioned yet, but Highwoods has come out with the rendering of their first office building in the SSW. I like it, I think it fits well with what is over there. I do wish it were a little more creative and taller than six floors, but it is a nice addition to the "skyline" of the south side. I wish the North Side (aside from the most recent Alco proposal) would have taken a page from SSW. Nothing at SSW really has the "wow" factor but it is certainly more varied/creative and looks much better than the sloppy quick-brick looking North Side Continental developments.

[airwave09]

Originally Posted by SlurmsMcKenzie

New SSW development

Not sure if this has been mentioned yet, but Highwoods has come out with the rendering of their first office building in the SSW. I like it, I think it fits well with what is over there. I do wish it were a little more creative and taller than six floors, but it is a nice addition to the "skyline" of the south side. I wish the North Side (aside from the most recent Alco proposal) would have taken a page from SSW. Nothing at SSW really has the "wow" factor but it is certainly more varied/creative and looks much better than the sloppy quick-brick looking North Side Continental developments.

I like it as well, I'm sure the design will get tweaked a few times before construction starts. I hope they change the cornice though it looks bland and out of place.

What Continental is doing on the North Shore is a travesty. They get parcels of valuable land for pennies on the dollar due to legacy crony agreements with officials and sports teams, then they go and put up the most half-assed structures you could possibly put up in any location, let alone one right next to downtown.

The new North Shore place office building doesn't even have matching brick and mortar between the 2nd and 3rd floors and was made with the cheapest materials that could be found at Home Depot. Someone needs to ban them from the city, they are a joke.

[SteelCityRising]

Like it or not people don't really care about architecture anymore. Southpointe, for example, looks bland and hideous, yet it is extremely popular with landing new tenants. All people care about anymore is the bottom line, for better or for worse. If you can maximize your profit by building as horribly as possible while still meeting code requirements and then charging maximum rent given the physical location of the property, then KA-CHING!

[airwave09]

Originally Posted by SteelCityRising

Like it or not people don't really care about architecture anymore. Southpointe, for example, looks bland and hideous, yet it is extremely popular with landing new tenants. All people care about anymore is the bottom line, for better or for worse. If you can maximize your profit by building as horribly as possible while still meeting code requirements and then charging maximum rent given the physical location of the property, then KA-CHING!

That's correct, except Southpointe and the North Shore are polar opposite locations from a development perspective. The buildings out there are appropriate since its nothing more than a suburban office park. The really sad thing is even those suburban buildings are designed with much more quality than some of the garbage continental has put up.

[I_Like_Spam]

Originally Posted by airwave09

That's correct, except Southpointe and the North Shore are polar opposite locations from a development perspective. The buildings out there are appropriate since its nothing more than a suburban office park. The really sad thing is even those suburban buildings are designed with much more quality than some of the garbage continental has put up.

There are architecturally acclaimed suburban offices, like the Apple HQ in Cupertino and CIGNA's over in Bloomfield CT.

Some people like a more pastoral settings for their businesses.


Just because something is "just" a suburban office park doesn't mean that it can't be beautiful as well as functional for its use.

[FreightTrainRunning]

Originally Posted by I_Like_Spam

There are architecturally acclaimed suburban offices, like the Apple HQ in Cupertino and CIGNA's over in Bloomfield CT.

Some people like a more pastoral settings for their businesses.


Just because something is "just" a suburban office park doesn't mean that it can't be beautiful as well as functional for its use.

Sure, but such things have no business being in the middle of a city.

[airwave09]

Originally Posted by I_Like_Spam

There are architecturally acclaimed suburban offices, like the Apple HQ in Cupertino and CIGNA's over in Bloomfield CT.

Some people like a more pastoral settings for their businesses.


Just because something is "just" a suburban office park doesn't mean that it can't be beautiful as well as functional for its use.

I could care less what they build out in a suburban office park, but it should anger people when a building in the middle of cow fields has better architecture and quality of materials than major developments in the central core of the city.

[SteelCityRising]

Originally Posted by airwave09

I could care less what they build out in a suburban office park, but it should anger people when a building in the middle of cow fields has better architecture and quality of materials than major developments in the central core of the city.

It doesn't anger people. If it doesn't somehow involve American Idol, Big Brother, dancing cats, or a football game, then most Americans drooling on themselves couldn't care less.

[ElijahAstin]

Originally Posted by SteelCityRising

Like it or not people don't really care about architecture anymore.

Or perhaps you find today's prevailing architectural styles distasteful. I certainly do.

Originally Posted by SteelCityRising

Southpointe, for example, looks bland and hideous, yet it is extremely popular with landing new tenants.

"Bland" and "hideous" are diametrically opposed adjectives, though I'd give you "hideously bland."

Originally Posted by SteelCityRising

All people care about anymore is the bottom line, for better or for worse.

That's the way it's been since the advent of capitalism.

Originally Posted by SteelCityRising

If you can maximize your profit by building as horribly as possible while still meeting code requirements and then charging maximum rent given the physical location of the property, then KA-CHING!

That's how the free market works with all real estate, including the stuff of urbanist wet dreams.

[UKyank]

Originally Posted by ElijahAstin

That's how the free market works with all real estate, including the stuff of urbanist wet dreams.

As a general rule I agree with this, but when you're dealing with public land being given to developers (usually at a severe discount) then there should be more demands placed on the aesthetic characteristics of what is being built.

Of course a developers wet dream is to throw up the cheapest possible structure that you can fill with rent paying tenants (see anything Buncher has ever proposed). The city however can (though it usually doesn't) & should hold plans to a higher standard when they are the owners of the land.

[yes, I'm aware that the land is question is owned by Soffer Organization, but it was originally conveyed to them by the city via the corrupt URA & should have agreements that cover what can be built).