The Chicago Plan Commission on Thursday approved Sterling Bay’s proposed residential tower at 350 North Morgan in the Fulton Market District. The development required a zoning change from Business Planned Development 1456 to Residential Business Planned Development 1456.
This marks the second Sterling Bay approval on adjacent blocks, joining 345 North Aberdeen, which has just been torn down to clear the site for future development.
Rendering of 350 N Morgan Street by Gensler
350 North Morgan renderings via Gensler
Rendering of 350 N Morgan Street by Gensler
350 North Morgan will be a 39-story, 573-unit residential tower rising 436 feet in height. A four-story podium will hold 240 parking spaces and ground-floor retail uses. There will also be dedicated bicycle storage for one two-wheeler per residence. Design architect Gensler has included a 17,000-square-foot outdoor terrace on the fifth floor, atop the podium, that stretches the entire length of the building along Carroll Avenue. Public feedback led to changes in the tower’s orientation, including the relocation of the loading area over to Carpenter Street, enhancing the landscaping along Carroll Avenue, and moving the building’s entry from Carroll Avenue to Morgan Street.
All 115 affordable units, required under Chicago’s ARO guidelines, will be located on site. Thirty-nine of those will be available to those earning at or below 50% AMI, and 20 units for those at or below 40% AMI. a Neighborhood Opportunity Bonus Fund payment of $4.75 million will be paid.
Ground floor plan of 350 North Morgan Street via Gensler
350 North Morgan parking plan via Gensler
Amenity floor plan of 350 North Morgan Street via Gensler
Typical plan floors 6-31 via Gensler
Typical plan floors 32-38 via Gensler
Elevations of 350 N Morgan Street by Gensler
350 North Morgan roof plan via Gensler
The tower will rise on the former site of the Pioneer Wholesale Meat facility. Like much of the Fulton Market meat-packing industry, they sold their building and moved out of the neighborhood, and the structure was permitted for demolition on August 22, 2022. Atlas Industries followed through with demo work in September 2022.
It is not yet known who the general contractor will be for the new build, but Sterling Bay has partnered with Skender for their project at 345 North Aberdeen. During the Plan Commission presentation Thursday, Sterling Bay’s Fred Krohl stated their best-case scenario would be to break ground on the $294 million project before the year ends, but that will be contingent on securing financing for the tower.
Site context of Sterling Bay’s two recent Fulton Market approvals
Demolition prep, 08/28/2022. Photo by Daniel Schell
Demolition in progress, 09/07/2022. Photo by Daniel Schell
The photographer stood in the bed of that pickup truck (with permission) to see over the fence. Photo by Daniel Schell
Chicago YIMBY congratulates Sterling Bay and Gensler on the approval, and we look forward to updates on 350 North Morgan’s development status.
Subscribe to YIMBY’s daily e-mail
Follow YIMBYgram for real-time photo updates
Like YIMBY on Facebook
Follow YIMBY’s Twitter for the latest in YIMBYnews
I believe 370 N. Morgan St. is Vista Development, not Sterling Bay.
Ugh. You’re right. Thank you for correcting me on that.
It looks like Gensler finally found an architect. Attractive design. Thanks to Sterling Bay, it’s not an icon but is a quality addition to the Fulton Market District.
Another cell block to agitate and demean the visual senses of population of West Town. No character. Another glass box.
This design is what “West Town” forced on developers.
In order to preserve that warehouse-industrial “aesthetic,” architects were given a limited pallet of materials. Due to simple economics, many designs have watered down or altered to a version that pencils out. Fulton is wanting to build Brooklyn-level design while bordering Rust Belt-adjacent abandonment.
Based on your Twitter, though, research, fact and reason were never quite the things you dove deep into. It’s always the “yelling at the wall” kinda debates for you instead. Demanding citizen oversight for non-taxpayer money that feeds the housing opportunity fund? It’s fine to be confused but do some damn research before posting nonsense.
I live there, Own property and this is mind numbing to the senses. A stricter city-wide governance would make sense to create a more timeless and ornamentally softer appeal. This is harsh and is visually unkind. It looks like everything else over there. The Fulton Market area is destroyed. The small streets can’t handle the traffic, SO many, many homeowners are upset. The charm and visual grace is gone, while others line their pockets.
You live in a city, get out of your car. Use it for weekend trips if you have one. The only reason Fulton Market had no traffic before the towers was from losing its entire purpose of a food market.
Look up those historic photos of sidewalks cramped, horse carriages edge-to-edge, and a maze of streetcars plowing through. Fulton Market was the center of food trade before the railroads lost their importance in this chunk of Chicago. This area is only livable/popular because we decided to not let a good opportunity waste away. Some of your neighbors have attempted to improve traffic stress, but when they pedestrianized Fulton St., y’all lost your minds.
Starting with the argument “I’m a property owner” 99% of the time is followed by a selfish demand in exchange. You cashed in when the market was low and now you want the success all to yourself. This is just as pathetic as Glenco residents upset about mixed-income residents coming into town.
If you want a city frozen in place, Hinsdale might be more your speed. You say line your pockets, how much has your land value appreciated since before peak West Loop?
Your arguments might have some value of you reasoned them properly.
I mean I don’t think:
1. that any good architect being forced to work with a limited pallet of materials is automatically forced to create cliche rectilinear forms. It’s just the facade.
2. I highly doubt these developers would be any more creative if given more leeway, none of them have build that kind of reputation in the last 30 years of operation in Chicago, we all know that. That’s how we got River North Beige.
Even tho I generally agree that limiting architects is not idea, I do think your counterargument is suppositional and not really based on the extreme nosedive Chicago architecture has taken since the 1960s.
^ @Zaptron well if there were any neighborhood to get creative and experimental with architecture in 21st century Chicago it would’ve been West Loop. Who knows what could’ve been if we hadn’t enforced strict design guidelines–though they seemingly have grown more lax.
I also wish we were still more adventurous and innovative with our city’s architecture, but I’ll take bland boxes over underutilized land, especially considering our finances. We unfortunately don’t have the luxury of waiting around for better proposals.
Lana, we acknowledge that you own property in West Town, but that is not our concern.
The growth in the West Loop has significantly benefited the city, creating construction jobs and fostering the development of retail, residential areas, and an emerging life sciences industry. This represents over a billion dollars in investment and growth for the City of Chicago. The architecture and walkable streets are enhancing Chicago’s legacy.
This YIMBY board focuses on community development and encourages constructive discussion.
While your opinion is valued, please keep in mind that content like this may be upsetting for those who identify as NIMBYs. Ultimately, the city will likely prioritize where the money resides.
So you saw the skyline growth the city has had since the early 2000s, bought property right next to the Loop, and didn’t expect it to ever push West? That’s on you sweetie <3
I’m convinced the reason that Chicago hasn’t had interesting buildings in decades leads back to the construction of the Thompson center 40 years ago. It created a ridiculous negative overreaction by the public. Architects simply said since ‘screw it. They want bland architecture.’
@Jordan
That’s true. I do feel like we have enough warehouse chic now and could really let them go hod wild with something futuristic. It’s just some reason I just never see us getting big projects with Zaha Hadid, Kohn Pederson Fox, Fosters + Partners etc. our developers seem to lack vision (and maybe budget?) and are more parochial than the international investors you see in nyc.
There is a wealth of diversity in the architecture of West Loop. I don’t understand the arguments against this. Chicago is one of the few cities that can effectively embrace a particular theme and execute it well, while also being able to pivot to another style, thereby enhancing the city’s legacy. This diversity is evident throughout the city. It’s clear that we are currently in a phase where buildings are reflecting the historical industrial character of the city with a modern twist. This architectural style is very appealing; consumers love it and take pride in living in a vibrant city like Chicago.
I don’t think it’s super diverse tbh but I spent most of my adult life in London, Shanghai, Beijing, and Sydney where contemporary architecture is taken very very seriously and public space is seen with bold vision. So I have really high expectations not just for forms and facades, but for the use of public space (courtyards, sunken gardens, landscaped mews, etc). The West Loop is fine if you’re comparing it to Baltimore, Houston, etc.
Think budget. NYC is THE magnet in the US for international investment, especially in real estate. It’s the center of finance in the US, which has been the biggest beneficiary of worldwide wealth creation for the last generation.
Chicago has one of the most diversified markets in the US, but due to demographics, people have been leaving to retire in the sunbelt. Money attracts innovative design. That’s why you see more of it in NYC than Chicago. Chicago firms have done their innovative work in other countries because that’s where the money is.
The downside to having innovative architecture is that places like NYC, London, Dubai and even Toronto have become unaffordable for everyday people. There are tradeoffs for having a city filled with new, sparkling “high design” buildings.
Every impressive tower in Miami has one crazy thing in common: it is sponsored by some of the most affluent consumer brands in the world. Miami and NYC have other projects, but the ones getting the design critiques to gawk come at rents starting around $4k or making $1 million condos seem shamingly low. These are not features of sustainable cities.
That new condo tower, hopefully coming to 1325 W. Fulton St., will have units starting at $1 million and going up to 7. What average Chicagoan is purchasing those kinds of units? I wish the development all the best, but that design refinement comes at a price, and Chicago is not that kind of city. Add a million more people to get us past our previous peak; maybe we’ll have our international renaissance.
I wish the skyline added more stars frequently, but the average ones add solid density while letting the true beauts shine. I love seeing the best of our towers reflect off the glassy ones. Get too many showstoppers in one place, and you lose the significance of those landmarks. London and Dubai come to mind in that regard. Besides the CN Tower, Toronto has very little that piques my memory of ‘wow.’ I could just be ignorant, but design talks.
That’s very true. It’s not like SOM is incapable of doing really bold things, they just aren’t capable of doing it in Chicago.
This tower is attractive in the Fulton Market context. The area was never pretty and floral. I do wish some where a developer would put up an icon to help anchor and have a sense of “place or identity” for reference in the district. It’s all background buildings.