CHICAGO | General Developments

[lawfin]

Ald Joe Moore supports Loyola L redevelopment:

http://www.ward49.com/site/epage/133955_322.htm

Plaza:

http://www.ward49.com/site/files/322/133955/446262/612353/Loyola_Station_Plaza.pdf

4 story mixed use:
http://www.ward49.com/site/files/322/133955/446262/612354/Loyola_Four-Story_Development.pdf

I think this really has a chance to transform that part of RP; given this and the recent rehab of the 4+1 about a block north and that area is going to be quite a bit more spiffy this time next year or so.

[LA21st]

Ald Joe Moore supports Loyola L redevelopment:

http://www.ward49.com/site/epage/133955_322.htm

Plaza:

http://www.ward49.com/site/files/322/133955/446262/612353/Loyola_Station_Plaza.pdf

4 story mixed use:
http://www.ward49.com/site/files/322/133955/446262/612354/Loyola_Four-Story_Development.pdf

I think this really has a chance to transform that part of RP; given this and the recent rehab of the 4+1 about a block north and that area is going to be quite a bit more spiffy this time next year or so.

Yea, I live in the area. There's been a nice change on Sheridan north to Lunt. Morse is looking much better these days.

[Rizzo]

Burberry

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7245/7265788338_ffdc7b2e75_b.jpg



Esquire

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8165/7265812956_b00f7804ea_b.jpg

[ardecila]

^^ May it rest in peace...

Here's hoping we realize our mistake in another 30-40 years and restore the Esquire. Presumably the mutilation also includes a new roof/tuckpointing/etc that will help protect the fragments of the original design.

[BWChicago]

^^ May it rest in peace...

Here's hoping we realize our mistake in another 30-40 years and restore the Esquire. Presumably the mutilation also includes a new roof/tuckpointing/etc that will help protect the fragments of the original design.

well, the roof was replaced in the 80s when they did the last renovation, as they added a floor at that time. What you see is all that's left of the original building, save the foundation and other three walls.

[Rizzo]

well, the roof was replaced in the 80s when they did the last renovation, as they added a floor at that time. What you see is all that's left of the original building, save the foundation and other three walls.

Yeah, out the back door of my hallway you can look down onto the Esquire and easily see they added a modern roof. This building has been through so much in its lifetime.

[spyguy]

http://www.chicagorealestatedaily.com/article/20120525/CRED03/120529822/specialty-grocer-chooses-old-town-for-first-chicago-store

Specialty grocer chooses Old Town for first Chicago store
By: Micah Maidenberg By: Ryan Ori May 25, 2012

Suburban Detroit-based upscale grocer Plum Market Corp. has plans to open a store in Old Town, ratcheting up the battle for shoppers on the Near North Side.

In its first deal outside its native Michigan, Plum will lease about 28,000 square feet of ground-floor space in 1233 N. Wells St., a 250-unit apartment building being developed by Houston-based Hines Interests L.P. and Chicago-based JDL Development Corp.

[markh9]

Color Jam (ArtLoop 2012)

http://i.imgur.com/RonyA.png

Installation started on this Wednesday night at State and Adams.

Shots from today:
http://i.imgur.com/xdasb.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/Edq1w.jpg

Facebook album of installation photos here (https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.421252757895681.93791.110409682313325&type=1).

The Loop Alliance also has a live webcam here (http://artloop.chicagoloopalliance.com/).

http://i.imgur.com/uPEEh.png

Those sidewalks seem incredibly dirty for only being 2 days old. Will they keep replacing it on a monthly/weekly basis? It's going to look quite rough by the end of the summer if there is no ongoing maintenance.

Goodman Center
http://i.imgur.com/SZyON.png

http://i.imgur.com/3xlqW.jpg

Jones College Prep (or, rather, the trees in front of it)
http://i.imgur.com/VjXc1.png

Columbia College Facade
The fritted glass is going in. When I biked to the building Wednesday night, there were about 4 panes of the new glass in on the lower floors. The effect was so subtle, I didn't even notice they were fritted for a minute or so. Hopefully it will be more apparent when the full design is up there.

[ChiPhi]

^^^
The color jam is looking really cool. I'm planning on having some visitors this summer and I think that will be my number one spot to visit. Also, can't wait to see the new Columbia Facade go up. Columbia really does the best architecture in the city imo. As much attention as Roosevelt gets for their vertical campus, Columbia constantly churns out far lower key but equally excellent stuff from the Studio Gang media building (http://www.archdaily.com/67247/columbia-college-chicago-media-production-center-studio-gang-architects/) to the Lawrence Booth dorms (http://www.boothhansen.com/projects/columbia-college-housing/). The current architecture scene in Chicago would be much worse off without them.

[ChiPhi]

I'm wondering if it might possibly be the school that will abut it?

I really don't think that school will be in LSE. Spy Guys post only said on LSD if I recall correctly. Here is another article (http://www.chicagoparent.com/open-house-directory/little-gems-international) I found:


2301 N. Clark Street
Chicago, Ill. 60614
312-361-3519

. . .

Our state-of-the-art facility is 2 blocks from Lincoln Park.

On the Gems website (http://gemseducation.com/lgi/lincolnpark/home.php) and the article are some pics of the already built location. And the facebook page (http://www.facebook.com/pages/Little-GEMS-International-Chicago/266616570047449?sk=info) corroborates this location.

And so lets cut that out of discussion of this building all together. I will copy and paste this to Gen Dev if people want to discuss the school further.

[Andrew|W]

well, the roof was replaced in the 80s when they did the last renovation, as they added a floor at that time. What you see is all that's left of the original building, save the foundation and other three walls.

Looking at historic photos a few years ago, I could tell that most of the original theater lobby's form, if not the actual materials and features, was still evident before the current renovation, particularly the stair wrapping around the one prominent column. I don't think there was anything else left though, which makes losing most of the facade more painful. The developer could do pretty much anything they wanted inside; I understand that retail needs display windows, but did they really have to destroy the buildings massing, squaring off the curve, only to achieve a few more feet of leasable space?

[bnk]

I do not know anywhere else to put this article.





www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-met-landfill-hearing-0526-20120526,0,5555504.story


Chicago losing 86 acres
Waste company wants to expand landfill

By Dawn Rhodes, Chicago Tribune reporter
9:01 PM CDT, May 25, 2012


A Cook County judge ruled Friday that 86 acres on the Southeast Side will no longer be part of Chicago, opening the door for the waste disposal company that owns the property to expand a landfill into that area.

Cook County Associate Judge Susan Fox Gillis ruled in favor of Land and Lakes Co., which was suing the city for the right to disconnect the land in the Riverdale community. The land sits on the southern edge of the city limits at 138th Street and Cottage Grove Avenue, just north of Cook County's only operating landfill, Land and Lakes' River Bend Prairie Landfill in south suburban Dolton.

Environmental advocates ...


A Chicago Law Department spokesman said the city was weighing its options, "including an appeal."

...

[denizen467]

I really don't think that school will be in LSE. Spy Guys post only said on LSD if I recall correctly. Here is another article (http://www.chicagoparent.com/open-house-directory/little-gems-international) I found:

On the Gems website (http://gemseducation.com/lgi/lincolnpark/home.php) and the article are some pics of the already built location. And the facebook page (http://www.facebook.com/pages/Little-GEMS-International-Chicago/266616570047449?sk=info) corroborates this location.

And so lets cut that out of discussion of this building all together. I will copy and paste this to Gen Dev if people want to discuss the school further.
"Little GEMS" is for pre-K, and the main GEMS is for older kids. The ex Tower Records building you found will be for the tots, so LSE is still a possibility for the kids up through highschool age.

[Saber925]

^ At a condo meeting I attended 2 weeks ago, a member of Magellan was asked about the lot next to the spiral stairway. He said they were in negotiations, but could not comment except to say it was not a residential use. So I'd say the school is still a possibility.

[spyguy]

^Thanks for the info.

"Little GEMS" is for pre-K, and the main GEMS is for older kids. The ex Tower Records building you found will be for the tots, so LSE is still a possibility for the kids up through highschool age.

That is correct. Even on that website they say, "In 2013, the GEMS World Academy at Lakeshore East (Chicago) will open and serve students in grades PreK-12."

----

Walgreens replacement - Broadway and Glenlake
http://img99.imageshack.us/img99/3761/imagejmn.jpg

[ChiPhi]

^^ Thanks so much for the corrections SpyGuy, Denizen and Saber. I do hope we see more mixed use in LSE; right now it still feels far more like a highrise cul-de-sac than a real, living neighborhood. A school should bring some life to the "neighborhood."

[the urban politician]

^ Really, it's not mixed use enough?

It has walkable retail in 2 different sites, dense residential, a hotel, and a park. Technically, Aqua has office space, and some of the commercial space is bank branches, which can be seen as 'office space' as well.

If you ask me, the addition of a school is just icing on the cake. It's a mixed neighborhood already

[the urban politician]

Walgreens replacement - Broadway and Glenlake
http://img99.imageshack.us/img99/3761/imagejmn.jpg

^ What crap.

What they need to do is redevelop the southeast corner of that intersection Broadway/Glenlake.

[Nowhereman1280]

Walgreens replacement - Broadway and Glenlake
http://img99.imageshack.us/img99/3761/imagejmn.jpg

Wow... That's almost... err... Good? Not revolutionary, but actually semi-handsome, what is this world coming to when Walgreens starts building stuff that is not ass ugly? It also looks like an adaptive reuse of the existing structure which would put it squarely in the "good" category in my mind as I hate to see anything torn down when it could be retrofitted, even if it's a shitty 70's retail building.

Now if we could just get them to do something about the parking lots...

[ChiPhi]

^ Really, it's not mixed use enough?

It has walkable retail in 2 different sites, dense residential, a hotel, and a park. Technically, Aqua has office space, and some of the commercial space is bank branches, which can be seen as 'office space' as well.

If you ask me, the addition of a school is just icing on the cake. It's a mixed neighborhood already


I suppose they do have all those little retail areas and the market will be nice, but the whole area still feels sterile every time I'm in there. The foot traffic feels so much less than it should be given the number of residents. It is a vertical suburb imo. Hopefully kids walking to and from school will bring some life to the neighborhood. The big problem is the way it is chopped off from the offices nearby (BCBS, Aon et al.) by the sunken park. And all the retail faces inward if I remember correctly instead of meeting the surrounding high traffic streets. I think until that changes LSE will continue to feel like a poorly planned sprawl suburb built upwards instead of outwards. If the park and cul-de-sac become as high traffic as Randolph, Wacker (obviously foot traffic on these streets drops precipitously as one moves east), Lake, Columbus because of a school that'd be great.

[the urban politician]

I suppose they do have all those little retail areas and the market will be nice, but the whole area still feels sterile every time I'm in there. The foot traffic feels so much less than it should be given the number of residents. It is a vertical suburb imo. Hopefully kids walking to and from school will bring some life to the neighborhood. The big problem is the way it is chopped off from the offices nearby (BCBS, Aon et al.) by the sunken park. And all the retail faces inward if I remember correctly instead of meeting the surrounding high traffic streets. I think until that changes LSE will continue to feel like a poorly planned sprawl suburb built upwards instead of outwards. If the park and cul-de-sac become as high traffic as Randolph, Wacker (obviously foot traffic on these streets drops precipitously as one moves east), Lake, Columbus because of a school that'd be great.

^ The Mariano's has a pedestrian connection to Randolph st, and in fact you will see a lot of pedestrians coming into the store from outside the neighborhood. Also, I actually don't think LSE has really achieved its goal density yet. You still have a half dozen or so highrises that have yet to be built. Given the decent amount of pedestrian activity we have already, I think it will be a pretty vibrant neighborhood when all is said and done.

I also think that LSE is a great example of a successful urban neighborhood that does not fall into the Jane Jacobs/street grid-esque Greenwich Village, Manhattan model that give so many urbanists in our generation such a hard on. Everybody worships New York so much in part because it is the New York brand of urbanism that is automatically considered kosher to everyone. More power to cities that are trying to create their own mold.

[ChiPhi]

^^^
Ballsy to question Jane Jacobs, especially on SSP. I guess I understand what you are saying, though. I need to consider this for a bit more, but I have to say that LSE feels more like a tall Dearborn park than some indigenous urban planning genius. It should get better as the buildings continue to fill in though...

[Mr Downtown]

I hear that the Steger Building, 28 East Jackson, will be rehabbed for student housing. They're serious enough that they're moving the office tenants out. I think they might be seeking Class L landmarking/tax breaks. The terra cotta has started falling into the street.

[lakeviewer]

^Thanks for the info.


Walgreens replacement - Broadway and Glenlake
http://img99.imageshack.us/img99/3761/imagejmn.jpg

Hey Spyguy, I've heard that Walgreens is looking to gut and renovate the store at Bway & Waveland, have you heard anything?

[Ch.G, Ch.G]

Now if we could just get them to do something about the parking lots...

I've said it before, but I wish they would just put it on the roof.

[the urban politician]

SOHO House work expected to start this year (http://www.chicagorealestatedaily.com/article/20120530/CRED03/120539997/soho-house-work-expected-to-start-this-year)

[spyguy]

Hey Spyguy, I've heard that Walgreens is looking to gut and renovate the store at Bway & Waveland, have you heard anything?

Don't know really. Walgreens seems to be renovating many of their stores, so I'm sure it's a possibility.

Something that seems to have been overlooked due to the Wolf Point discussion: Roeder's article confirms that Old Navy is moving to the Borders space on State Street but that Gap is going to continue to use the building for "other concepts" (so no new highrise yet). Seems a little bit strange considering that Gap is closing stores in the US and hasn't had a store in the Loop in years.

The old Nokia store on Michigan Avenue has apparently been leased. Hopefully they don't mutilate that building.

Neiman Marcus is starting a major renovation of the entire store that will last until 2014. Now that is a building I hope they make exterior changes to.

[Rizzo]

Construction work on the 4th floor of the old Barney's New York store at Oak and Rush. Not sure what it's for but that building has been a buzz of activity.

[Chicago_Forever]

:previous: Suitsupply

Suitsupply Sets A Tentative Opening Day; Rooftop Gonna Be Pimp

From Racked Chicago

http://chicago.racked.com/archives/2012/05/15/suit-supply-sets-a-tentative-opening-day-rooftop-gonna-be-like-wow.php


Way back in Early December, we let you know that Suitsupply was planning a burst onto Oak Street (at Rush). Since then, there've been few developments in construction or in promotion, yet, we still hear the buzz at the intersection for this Dutch seductress interested in keeping our pants pressed. Via the Racked tipline we were alerted that Chicago Magazine has said the store will open later this month. Don't get your hopes up just yet, boys. In fact, the construction on the space, like many other Chicago buildouts, is hard to gauge progress.


From Racked Chicago.

Looks Like Suit Supply is Building a Massive Terrace

http://chicago.racked.com/archives/2012/04/20/looks-like-suit-supply-is-building-a-massive-terrace.php

Via the Racked tipline we were informed Chicago's newest affordable yet trendy menswear store (yet to open) just released drawings and might just become more of a destination shop due to a pimped out rooftop. According to Suitsupply HQ, the store, dependent on construction will open on June 26.
Suitsupply [Official Site]

[Rizzo]

:previous: Suitsupply

Suitsupply Sets A Tentative Opening Day; Rooftop Gonna Be Pimp

From Racked Chicago

http://chicago.racked.com/archives/2012/05/15/suit-supply-sets-a-tentative-opening-day-rooftop-gonna-be-like-wow.php


Way back in Early December, we let you know that Suitsupply was planning a burst onto Oak Street (at Rush). Since then, there've been few developments in construction or in promotion, yet, we still hear the buzz at the intersection for this Dutch seductress interested in keeping our pants pressed. Via the Racked tipline we were alerted that Chicago Magazine has said the store will open later this month. Don't get your hopes up just yet, boys. In fact, the construction on the space, like many other Chicago buildouts, is hard to gauge progress.


From Racked Chicago.

Looks Like Suit Supply is Building a Massive Terrace

http://chicago.racked.com/archives/2012/04/20/looks-like-suit-supply-is-building-a-massive-terrace.php

Via the Racked tipline we were informed Chicago's newest affordable yet trendy menswear store (yet to open) just released drawings and might just become more of a destination shop due to a pimped out rooftop. According to Suitsupply HQ, the store, dependent on construction will open on June 26.
Suitsupply [Official Site]

Sounds cool! Yeah, when you look at the roof it looks like it was always intended to be a restaurant or something with large glass windows and doors. Currently they've removed a few of the glass windows on the top floor, and the interior looks totally gutted. I believe in the time Barney's occupied the building it was just offices with the store on the lower 3 levels.

Here it be:
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8148/7305655938_30b31053fa_b.jpg
Hayward

[markh9]

http://i.imgur.com/3Ltml.png

http://i.imgur.com/LtKRk.gif
http://i.imgur.com/rcFTn.png
http://i.imgur.com/aTsEY.png
http://i.imgur.com/lc5tC.png
http://i.imgur.com/XiRHc.png
http://i.imgur.com/DRcau.png
http://i.imgur.com/5qW1D.png

Surprised this one has evaded our collective lens...

DePaul Theatre School (http://theatreschool.depaul.edu/about_new_facility.php)

Construction Cam (http://constructioncams.depaul.edu/)

[ChiPhi]

^^^
Its pretty okay, but case and point for anyone over at the Wolf Point who says that PCP isn't Starchitect.

[ardecila]

Yes, that's the other major Cesar Pelli project in town. :haha:

Personally, I love the DePaul theatre project. A much better design relative to its context than Wolf Point is. A handsome, dynamic composition with lots of interesting ideas for how the acting and instruction inside the building can interact through the facade with the public outside. I'll reserve judgment until it's completed, but it seems just as clever as Jeanne Gang's Film Production School at Columbia.

[Rizzo]

Just by looking at the steel, the interiors should be pretty cool with the placement of all the rooms....especially that framed box near the corner.

[denizen467]

Neiman Marcus is starting a major renovation of the entire store that will last until 2014. Now that is a building I hope they make exterior changes to.
I wonder if they want to reduce the fortresslike presence along the sidewalks and have more windows?

[the urban politician]

^ I hope.

I hope that an entire generation of fortresses along the Mag Mile get renovated. Neiman Marcus is up there among some of the worst, but I'm also thinking of Water Tower Place (unlikely to happen) and perhaps even North Bridge, although the Mag Mile side of the latter one isn't too bad. I would love to see more upgrades along the likes of TopShop, which really interacts with the street will and adds dynamism. The All Saints store is nice as well.

Neiman Marcus just looks so....1989. My wife loves shopping but we hardly ever go in there and a part of me thinks that this is because the exterior is so uninviting.

[Nowhereman1280]

^^^
Its pretty okay, but case and point for anyone over at the Wolf Point who says that PCP isn't Starchitect.

One good building out of dozens doesn't make someone a "Starchitect". One doesn't not even have to be good to be a Starchitect, they just need to be famous as the word implies. I've actually been somewhat excited about the theater school since it was announced (posts even before you joined the forum), but I still think Pelli is a hack. This is a smaller project and a completely different game than highrise architecture so I don't see how you think this has any bearing on his credentials when it comes to highrise design. In fact, this is so different than most of his work that I wouldn't be surprised if it were a design handed off to younger, less shitty, architects in his firm.

[nomarandlee]

^ I hope.

I hope that an entire generation of fortresses along the Mag Mile get renovated. Neiman Marcus is up there among some of the worst, but I'm also thinking of Water Tower Place (unlikely to happen) and perhaps even North Bridge, although the Mag Mile side of the latter one isn't too bad. I would love to see more upgrades along the likes of TopShop, which really interacts with the street will and adds dynamism. The All Saints store is nice as well.

Neiman Marcus just looks so....1989. My wife loves shopping but we hardly ever go in there and a part of me thinks that this is because the exterior is so uninviting.
Agreed with all that other North Bridge. I actually think as far as indoor malls go it is one of the better ones going both inside and out and perhaps the nicest in the whole region. Now the Nordstroms annex I would love to take a wrecking ball and let it have at the monstrosity. So much could be done on that spot with a respectable or signature building and plaza.

The worst offenders to me on The Mile by far is the Lagrange Plaza Escada building. Its a complete embarrassment to the street and wins as worst offender on Michigan by a good margin. The Walgreens I think could do a lot a better with even some relatively minor tweaking and a new retailer. Also Grand east of Michigan needs to be decked over a half a block and the stores spruced up because right now that section looks like it leads to a slum alley.

[Rizzo]

^ I hope.

I hope that an entire generation of fortresses along the Mag Mile get renovated. Neiman Marcus is up there among some of the worst, but I'm also thinking of Water Tower Place (unlikely to happen) and perhaps even North Bridge, although the Mag Mile side of the latter one isn't too bad. I would love to see more upgrades along the likes of TopShop, which really interacts with the street will and adds dynamism. The All Saints store is nice as well.

Neiman Marcus just looks so....1989. My wife loves shopping but we hardly ever go in there and a part of me thinks that this is because the exterior is so uninviting.

Northbridge is the king of all precast in that area...6 blocks worth. Excellent retail presence at street level, but I wish they could have used blind windows at least to break up all that solid walls and a bit more marble, brick, metals...something not so heavy. Doubt there will ever be a reclad, but we can expect to see some work on the mall with the purchase of the neighboring building for expansion.

Also Grand east of Michigan needs to be decked over a half a block and the stores spruced up because right now that section looks like it leads to a slum alley.
It absolutely needs to be decked all the way to St. Clair. As is, the street and stair configuration is bad for business. No one wants to go down Grand that way because it looks unfriendly. I'm sure businesses would improve drastically if a plaza was built with a nicely done staircase leading down. The only business covered up would be Grami, but the underground vibe of it would probably make it all the more interesting. The new restaurant proposed by Blackies could have also taken advantage of a multi-level configuration.

[tawfiqmp]

What's the next big thing in Chicago that has a realistic chance of getting built? If there isn't one, are we likely to see something in the near future? I've heard a few ideas about the old post office development having some sort of large mall.

[untitledreality]

What's the next big thing in Chicago that has a realistic chance of getting built? If there isn't one, are we likely to see something in the near future? I've heard a few ideas about the old post office development having some sort of large mall.

Search: Chicago (http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/tags.php?tag=chicago)

And NOTHING is happening at the Old Post Office. Its all just posturing for resale.

[ardecila]

It absolutely needs to be decked all the way to St. Clair. As is, the street and stair configuration is bad for business. No one wants to go down Grand that way because it looks unfriendly.

I agree, the balconies suck. A plaza would be a challenge though, since Grand slopes upward towards St. Clair while the balconies are level. You'd have to either depress Grand or rebuild the upper-level tenant spaces a few feet higher.

Essentially, you'd need the full cooperation of the adjoining land owners. I'd also love it if, at the end, the city extended the sidewalk into the parking lanes and built comfortably wide staircases on each side. No reason this needs to be ugly (https://maps.google.com/maps?oe=utf-8&client=firefox-a&q=rome,+it&ie=UTF-8&hq=&hnear=0x132f61afa8f0165f:0x400c8c51bf371cd5,Rome,+Italy&gl=us&ei=rjzIT6XmIaPu2gXf-sniDQ&oi=local_group&ved=0CJoBELYD).

[tawfiqmp]

Search: Chicago (http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/tags.php?tag=chicago)

And NOTHING is happening at the Old Post Office. Its all just posturing for resale.

Was just an idea I saw a user threw out there, not that it was true or going to happen.

But I'm wondering if this city has any plans for creating another attraction for tourism. A big mall would be nice but then again, that would take away from what Michigan ave is.

[markh9]

But I'm wondering if this city has any plans for creating another attraction for tourism. A big mall would be nice but then again, that would take away from what Michigan ave is.

The impending Navy Pier redevelopment (http://chicago.curbed.com/tags/navy-pier) will be the shiny "new" tourism attraction. Thread here (http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=156131&page=3).

Malls are inherently anti-urban and should not be subsidized by the city - especially under the guise of becoming a 'new tourist attraction'. Read: B37.

That, and Boul Mich already has 2 (or more?) major malls as it is...

[tawfiqmp]

The impending Navy Pier redevelopment (http://chicago.curbed.com/tags/navy-pier) will be the shiny "new" tourism attraction. Thread here (http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=156131&page=3).

Malls are inherently anti-urban and should not be subsidized by the city - especially under the guise of becoming a 'new tourist attraction'. Read: B37.

That, and Boul Mich already has 2 (or more?) major malls as it is...

Ah that makes sense. I'm just feel as some parts of downtown needs to revamped with people, especially at night. I know some of the places in the loop close early also which has partly to do with that. I just want to know if Chicago will be heading in the direction of making this an energetic at night, especially in some parts of the downtown area.

[emathias]

Ah that makes sense. I'm just feel as some parts of downtown needs to revamped with people, especially at night. I know some of the places in the loop close early also which has partly to do with that. I just want to know if Chicago will be heading in the direction of making this an energetic at night, especially in some parts of the downtown area.

What separates a big city from a small city is that a big city has nightlife districts that don't necessarily correlate with being downtown. In a small city, the only place you can put nightlife without irritating residents is in a dedicated business district. In Chicago, there's nightlife just north of the Loop, just west of a the Loop, a little just south of the Loop, plus in 4-5 other districts away from the Loop. Even parts of the Loop are pretty energetic until 10pm or so when the theatres let out.

If you've been spending time at LaSalle and Jackson in the middle of the night thinking Chicago's a dull town for nightlife then, well, you've been missing out on quite a lot.

...
That, and Boul Mich already has 2 (or more?) major malls as it is...

Depending on what you consider major, there's North Bridge at Grand/Michigan anchored with Nordstrom's, there's Watertower at Pearson/Michigan anchored with Macy's, there's 900 North, at Delaware/Michigan anchored with Bloomingdale's, and there used to be Chicago Place, at Superior/Michigan anchored with Saks but that one no longer functions as a mall but it still has some big stores on the lower floors, including Saks still being there. Malls don't have to be anti-urban, it's just that most try to force focus into them, which is an inherently anti-urban strategy. I wouldn't say North Bridge is anti-urban, though, since at the street level they have retailers with doors on the sidewalk along every heavily pedestrian street they front. In fact most of the malls on Michigan do. Watertower is probably the least urban of the malls, but it's also the most successful financially, so you can see why developers wouldn't necessarily volunteer to build them as urban as possible.

[Rizzo]

What's the next big thing in Chicago that has a realistic chance of getting built? If there isn't one, are we likely to see something in the near future? I've heard a few ideas about the old post office development having some sort of large mall.

Realistically, I don't think you'll be seeing any more large malls downtown... especially in that area. Michigan Ave and State Street are the city's primary shopping destinations and I can't imagine there being a 3rd one downtown.

The building would best be a casino + hotel with parking.



Burberry 6/1
http://www.umich.edu/~ifmuth/burberry133.jpg

[tawfiqmp]

What separates a big city from a small city is that a big city has nightlife districts that don't necessarily correlate with being downtown. In a small city, the only place you can put nightlife without irritating residents is in a dedicated business district. In Chicago, there's nightlife just north of the Loop, just west of a the Loop, a little just south of the Loop, plus in 4-5 other districts away from the Loop. Even parts of the Loop are pretty energetic until 10pm or so when the theatres let out.

If you've been spending time at LaSalle and Jackson in the middle of the night thinking Chicago's a dull town for nightlife then, well, you've been missing out on quite a lot.



Depending on what you consider major, there's North Bridge at Grand/Michigan anchored with Nordstrom's, there's Watertower at Pearson/Michigan anchored with Macy's, there's 900 North, at Delaware/Michigan anchored with Bloomingdale's, and there used to be Chicago Place, at Superior/Michigan anchored with Saks but that one no longer functions as a mall but it still has some big stores on the lower floors, including Saks still being there. Malls don't have to be anti-urban, it's just that most try to force focus into them, which is an inherently anti-urban strategy. I wouldn't say North Bridge is anti-urban, though, since at the street level they have retailers with doors on the sidewalk along every heavily pedestrian street they front. In fact most of the malls on Michigan do. Watertower is probably the least urban of the malls, but it's also the most successful financially, so you can see why developers wouldn't necessarily volunteer to build them as urban as possible.

Great points you make. Thank you for responding. That makes sense about surrounding areas being vibrant.

Realistically, I don't think you'll be seeing any more large malls downtown... especially in that area. Michigan Ave and State Street are the city's primary shopping destinations and I can't imagine there being a 3rd one downtown.

The building would best be a casino + hotel with parking.

Yeah, that's exactly the kind of stuff I'm talking about. I'm not saying Chicago has to go all out and be Vegas or anything, but something like New Orleans where they have some nice Casinos in spots.

[george]

Goodman Center as of 5-18

http://img152.imageshack.us/img152/2480/rooscent.jpg

[denizen467]

There is construction fencing and I think jersey barriers on the south side of Illinois a bit west of State (at the surface lot). I can't remember what was announced there - which makes me think the announcement was just about more parking?

[ardecila]

This is for a 2-story bar/restaurant out of Scottsdale called American Junkie.

Opening was scheduled for September but if you didn't see anything resembling a building, they're probably behind schedule.

[the urban politician]

^ Yes, Spyguy provided renderings of that many months ago.

It's impressive how much this area has filled in over the past few years. From parking lots & plazas to a veritable mini restaurant row

[jpIllInoIs]

Chicago Trib (http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-met-loyola-to-loyola-20120602,0,419770.story)

Former McDonald's CEO gives $40 million to university's business school

Quinlan's $40 million donation — the largest gift to Loyola from an individual — will enable the school to begin construction soon on a nine-story building at the northeast corner of State Street and Pearson Avenue.

The building is the latest development in the university's downtown location, known as the Water Tower campus. Since 2005, the university has added a dorm and student center, expanded the law school and built a new School of Communication.

[the urban politician]

^ Seriously?

Parking lots everywhere and a historic building has to get knocked down for this?

Total bullshit

[Rizzo]

^ Seriously?

Parking lots everywhere and a historic building has to get knocked down for this?

Total bullshit

Yeah, I like the 4 story building on the corner. The small scale contributes to the neighborhood's character. I'd hate State Street to become institutional looking. It's just not appropriate. The best thing would be this building flipped to Chestnut and State. That nasty 1-story lowrise would be torn down, and maybe they could get cafe or restaurant space on the ground level. The former Mike's Bar would be left in place along with its neighbors

This is a case where Loyola is rounding off its campus corners. Connecting bits of urban fabric where it can mostly easily control campus connectivity. That's understandable, so it's not surprising you'll see buildings with less intensive uses get sacrificed.

Rendering we've only seen to date
http://www.scb.com/images/project/616/School%20of%20Business.jpg
SCB.com

[Nowhereman1280]

^^^ Looks like you beat me to it with the rendings, but I'd like to add that the Chestnut and State site is reserved for a future highrise. They were originally talking about doing dorms in the bottom that would have an entrance on one side of the building and Condos on top that would have an entrance on the other side. I would not be surprised to see it revised to dorms + apartments as Loyola continues to have housing shortages. Anyhow, that site could see up to a 50 floor building depending on what they end up doing with it.

^ Seriously?

Parking lots everywhere and a historic building has to get knocked down for this?

Total bullshit

Only one of the buildings that is coming down is worth saving and even it is barely usable as is. The corner building is pretty much falling down right now and was horribly mutilated in a series of renovations in the 60's and 70's.

In addition to that it's not like Loyola can just put this building two blocks away on a parking lot. It's a college campus, they can't just have random buildings all over the place, they need to be close together in order to form any semblance of a campus.

I lobbied hard when they were planning that building (and I was helping with the new campus plans) to be saved, but in the end they made a pretty convincing argument that it really wasn't worth it.

Finally, the building they are replacing it with is actually going to be pretty sweet and probably a more interesting design. It's one of the few SCB designs lately that don't fit the "glass box deluxe" mold:

http://www.scb.com/images/project/616/School%20of%20Business.jpg
scb.com

http://www.scb.com/images/project/616/Day03-Base.jpg
scb.com

http://www.scb.com/images/project/616/2008_0811-Loyola%20SBA%204.jpg
scb.com

Overall it's an improvement for the area IMO and probably the best location for this new building. Also, it's good for the city because Loyola's goal is to make its business competitive with the likes of U of C and Northwestern. It has already made huge strides in the quality of its students and the size of its schools and the business school has never had a real home of it's own (being bounced around between McGuire Hall, Corboy Center, and The Claire, some courses used to even be held in Lewis Towers). Hopefully this will help them push into the top tier of business schools globally from the upper second tier where they are now. They'll probably never be ranked higher than U of C or NW, but if they can get anywhere close it will be a huge gain for the city.

[the urban politician]

^ I can understand your arguments, but this really institutionalizes this stretch of State St, as Hayward lamented.

It is nice to have some stores/restaurants on the ground level to make the area more appealing to passersby on foot.

[VivaLFuego]

In addition to that it's not like Loyola can just put this building two blocks away on a parking lot. It's a college campus, they can't just have random buildings all over the place, they need to be close together in order to form any semblance of a campus.

While I can get this argument for a land-grant style cornfield State U campus, I just don't follow why this goal is considered necessary, or even desirable, for an urban campus. It's detrimental to the public as it (a) results in monotous land-use, the "institutionalization" others have lamented and (b) maximizes the concentration of valuable land being removed from the tax rolls. The market distortion in (b) is of course self-inflicted, and between Loyola and the Arch-Diocese, the area near Chicago-State will basically be completely off the tax rolls.

A truly urban campus gradually weaving itself into an existing neighborhood absolutely and precisely should consist of random parcels and buildings scattered amongst all the other land uses and property owners.
</jane jacobs>


I lobbied hard when they were planning that building (and I was helping with the new campus plans) to be saved, but in the end they made a pretty convincing argument that it really wasn't worth it.

This is a good example of the sorts of arguments historic preservationists will almost always lose in Chicago --- for this exact reason. Saving the mixed character of a district is never about a single building nor is saving a single building ever economically justifiable --- it's the drip-drip-drip demolition over time that suddenly results in an area being institutionalized or otherwise sanitized.

[Rizzo]

At this point, I only hope Loyola can be a partner in its town-gown relationship. They shouldn't be creating a "campus," nor do they deserve to consider it as one since the term is an insult to the neighborhood. Rather consider their downtown cluster a presence.

Their buildings can still contribute to the street presence by leasing out lower levels to other businesses and minimizing lobbies to academic structures. Ideally, you'd have a nice glass entrance shifted East down Pearson with a reception desk, a stair, an elevator.....and that's all. It would draw you up into a massive second floor lobby. The SCB renderings absolutely suggest this, but I still think the commercial component needs to break away from the rest of the design as to suggest a totally different use and scale in relationship with State Street.

Again, I'm cautiously optimistic. The drip-demolition example is an excellent way to describe neighborhood transformation. If you look at past photos, that area was far more lively in commercial activity, and more fine grain architecturally than it is today. For the sake of improvement new condo towers are built, but you also can't tip the scales too far where it's a monotonous sea of large buildings. There needs to be a balance, and I'm concerned our supply of smaller buildings may be far too diminished where the neighborhood loses some of its interestingness.

But you can't avoid the inevitable. This is the same as inviting a hospital downtown. Once these institutions need to expand, negotiating a good urban solution is almost impossible.

[Dan in Chicago]

If the rendering is accurate, it means they will also demolish the little 3-story house right next to Baumhart Hall. Originally the Frank Schofield House, it was built in 1934 and has a very quirky, almost modern design with a lot of interesting brickwork - similar to the Carl Street Studios in Old Town. I'll try to get photos soon so everyone can see what's being lost.

[nomarandlee]

What this issue really addresses in my mind is the need to revisit that landmark ordinance to protect these low rise buildings in River North that failed to pass a few years ago. Does anyone have info on how that vote went down or what explenations were given for rejecting it?

I don't think this building would have been included under that ordinance but in general terms the idea of making many of River North's early century low rises off limits should be considered. There are plenty of parking lots and mediocre low rise buildings in which to push up and build high density neighborhood that River North (or just beyond in this case) deserves.

The low rises give the neighborhood a great character and contrast next to the towers that have and will rise eventually. It would be a great shame to one day make it a Loop Deux only with far more mediocre towers to replace the streetscape.

[denizen467]

I have a vague recollection that, at one point, Nowhereman talked about the demolition for the Pearson corner building stopping at least 1 building short of Baumhart. That was probably at a tentative, early stage. But the new render does leave a gap between the buildings, a little mysteriously.

[spyguy]

What this issue really addresses in my mind is the need to revisit that landmark ordinance to protect these low rise buildings in River North that failed to pass a few years ago. Does anyone have info on how that vote went down or what explenations were given for rejecting it?

I don't think this building would have been included under that ordinance but in general terms the idea of making many of River North's early century low rises off limits should be considered. There are plenty of parking lots and mediocre low rise buildings in which to push up and build high density neighborhood that River North (or just beyond in this case) deserves. The low rises given the neighborhood a great character and contrast though to the towers that have and will go up and it would be a great shame to one day make it a Loop Deux only with far more mediocre towers.

I strongly agree. There are dozens of these smaller buildings left that need to be protected on both sides of Michigan Avenue really. We've already lost quite a few of these to Northwestern, the condo tower boom, and Gold Coast retail expansion.

For example, on Erie you have this to the west (http://maps.google.com/maps?q=chicago&hl=en&ll=41.894082,-87.628965&spn=0.001416,0.003076&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=48.956293,100.810547&t=h&hnear=Chicago,+Cook,+Illinois&z=19&layer=c&cbll=41.894084,-87.628847&panoid=Oayum15IBPrD_20jTKbRlw&cbp=12,342.33,,0,-19.93) of Michigan and this to the east. (http://maps.google.com/maps?q=chicago&hl=en&ll=41.894145,-87.623002&spn=0.001424,0.003076&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=48.956293,100.810547&t=h&hnear=Chicago,+Cook,+Illinois&z=19&layer=c&cbll=41.894146,-87.623118&panoid=MKAAUZDfX51pwalq_xf_bQ&cbp=12,179.72,,0,-16.26) You can play this game with pretty much any street (http://maps.google.com/maps?q=chicago&hl=en&ll=41.893261,-87.628891&spn=0.001424,0.003076&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=48.956293,100.810547&t=h&hnear=Chicago,+Cook,+Illinois&layer=c&cbll=41.893261,-87.628891&panoid=NGmhWXRJ9pKhe1Isvs-heg&cbp=12,2.11,,0,-17.28&z=19) that intersects the Mag Mile.

[george]

I biked through the fenced in, empty, Cabrini Green Rowhouses this afternoon. It's an eerie place as they await their fate.

http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/8908/cabrinie.jpg

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2012-02-16/news/ct-met-cabrini-green-rowhouses-20120216_1_row-houses-cabrini-green-residents-public-housing

[Rizzo]

^ Wow it's going to be weird seeing a big empty lot over there get even bigger.

La Casa in Pilsen

http://www.umich.edu/~ifmuth/lacasa7.jpg

http://www.umich.edu/~ifmuth/wltarget.jpg

[ardecila]

La Casa looks fantastic, but a little bit instagram-ish. ;)

The renderings showed structural glass for the corner, but it looks like that was value-engineered down to a traditional aluminum-framed system. Still, the variegated metal panels on the sides look great.

As a side note - this is exactly the type of building we need to be encouraging next to L stops...

[george]

La Casa is coming along nicely.^

6-3 Burberry

http://img819.imageshack.us/img819/4826/burb1z.jpg

[Rizzo]

If the rendering is accurate, it means they will also demolish the little 3-story house right next to Baumhart Hall. Originally the Frank Schofield House, it was built in 1934 and has a very quirky, almost modern design with a lot of interesting brickwork - similar to the Carl Street Studios in Old Town. I'll try to get photos soon so everyone can see what's being lost.

It would be nice if they could somehow relocate it.

[Rizzo]

La Casa looks fantastic, but a little bit instagram-ish. ;)

The renderings showed structural glass for the corner, but it looks like that was value-engineered down to a traditional aluminum-framed system. Still, the variegated metal panels on the sides look great.

As a side note - this is exactly the type of building we need to be encouraging next to L stops...

LOL! Yes, it was my attempt at making a phone photo a bit less shitty....add an instagrammy filter. I always seem to pass by Pilsen at night when of course it's dark. I hope the next iphone camera will have manual settings.

[george]

Starbucks on Rush plods along

http://img138.imageshack.us/img138/8670/starbucksonrush.jpg

[emathias]

What this issue really addresses in my mind is the need to revisit that landmark ordinance to protect these low rise buildings in River North that failed to pass a few years ago. Does anyone have info on how that vote went down or what explenations were given for rejecting it?
...

If I remember some scuttlebutt from the time, I think what happened was that someone fairly junior cooked it up without getting support from Friedman. Considering how many buildings he owns that would be impacted, not getting his support from the outset was a huge political blunder.

Disclosure: I own a condo in River North, in an association made up of four vintage buildings (average age: 120 years) on the same block as a Friedman building and one other vintage building, and no buildings on my block were marked for protection under the ordinance. Which is weird and dumb, because I bet at least 80% of my neighbors would have voted to accept landmarking of our association - especially if it brought any tax benefit.

If they make another go at it, it should be comprehensive, and it must have Friedman's support, and it must include all of River North, and not just a few buildings in the middle.

[ardecila]

The Italianate buildings in the "middle" of River North are small, relatively low-intensity structures that are vulnerable to demolition because of their size.

The industrial loft buildings along Franklin are in a different class and deserve a different type of protection. They're not even really under threat, although future-proofing can't hurt.

Generally the narrower the scope of a landmark district the better. There's no doubt that numerous blocks along Hubbard and Illinois are high quality, contiguous urban fabric from the 1870s and 80s, first wave after the Fire buildings. But only the blocks that survive more than 50% are worth landmarking. Otherwise the economics will give us a situation where all the non-landmarked parcels of any size will fill with massive skyscrapers and prevent the midrises that would help resolve the scale differences. Protecting isolated buildings also leads to a lot of weird, ugly through-block and L-shaped buildings (I couldn't get too upset at the loss of that bank for the Tri-Hotel, since several small vacant lots will be filled)

[the urban politician]

Damn, La Casa in Pilsen looks nice, and it's dense!

I really hope this tips the scale for that neighborhood.

[Nowhereman1280]

If the rendering is accurate, it means they will also demolish the little 3-story house right next to Baumhart Hall. Originally the Frank Schofield House, it was built in 1934 and has a very quirky, almost modern design with a lot of interesting brickwork - similar to the Carl Street Studios in Old Town. I'll try to get photos soon so everyone can see what's being lost.

No, that house is safe from what I understand. I actually had a series of discussions with Honte about this before he died/disappeared. That building is extremely historically and architecturally important and I believe was one of the earliest "Modernist" buildings in Chicago. Honte also disclosed to me that he knew who the owner was and I correctly deduced from his hints exactly who it is. It is none other than one of the principals of one of the most avant-garde architecture firms in the city. I won't say who it is (though I'm sure some could find out if they snooped around), but there is no way in hell they will ever sell it to Loyola. This is also royally pissing Loyola off because they want to grab the alley in the middle of the block so they can connect all the buildings on the block together at ground level to use it for a huge block of classroom space, but this one little house is categorically preventing them from ever doing that. They are the only building on the block that requires access (for trash collection, not even for the garage, lol.

Anyhow, that building is "not for sale at any price" and will never be torn down thank god. From what I learned from Honte it is extremely important. Below is an excerpt from one of Honte's PM's to me (I know its not quite Kosher to copy and past from PM's, but this is information that should be more widely known):



Of course, no one wants to stop Loyola from building a great new building, but with so much land (and so many buildings already torn down for this purpose), I think it's perfectly reasonable that at least one could be saved. Personally, I think it would be cooler to have a much taller building on their existing vacant sites (plus the hardware store), and all of the vintage buildings on Pearson saved. They could be turned into some kind of student retail experience (in conjunction with the street mall you mention), something like Maxwell Street for UIC, which would lend a pedestrian scale and quaint quality to their concept. But the only thing I am truly worried about for now is the Speyer house.

As I mentioned in the thread, the house was done in 1928 by Sol Kogan. If you don't know his work, please go check out the artist enclave in Old Town on Burton Street. It's one of my favorite places in the city, where artists and a few architects "took over" the block and transformed it by hand into something extraordinary. Kogan worked with the noted artist Edgar Miller over there, and he very well might have done the same on Pearson Street.

Most of the information I have on the building is coming from John Vinci's excellent monograph on Speyer, which was self-published and done basically because Vinci is a great person. I did, however, verify though my independent research that Kogan was the architect. I also learned that the building was a studio on the top floor, and stables on the bottom.

The area surrounding this building, as I am sure you know, was once called "Tower Town" (after the Water Tower) and was the city's principal arts enclave. While I don't know the history of this building completely, I would guess, given Kogan's participation and the progressive look of the building, that it has a direct link back to this part of the city's history. As such, it is probably the only reminder left in Chicago that Tower Town ever even existed.

A. James Speyer was Mies van der Rohe's first grad student. He literally followed Mies into Chicago and asked to work with him. He went on to become a great architect, of major importance to the 2nd Chicago School of architecture, as is very wonderfully explained in Vinci's book. His career as an architect was short-lived, however, because he was offered a job at the Art Institute, becoming their chief curator of Contemporary Art in 1961. He is responsible for obtaining a lot of the amazing pieces that will be housed in the new Piano wing. While he was an architect, he produced some of the earliest and most beautiful Miesian homes in Chicago, which to be precise only number 3. It's worth noting that all of these homes are, remarkably, still standing (considering that Highland Park has no landmarking ordinance, and nearly everything under 5000 sq ft seems destined for the dumpsite in that suburb). I have photographs and addresses if you ever want to learn more, or if you need them to show to anyone at Loyola.

Speyer bought the house on Pearson in 1965. His work is mostly found on the inside, but now that Loyola has demoed the buildings one block north, you can see some of the cool parts he added to the back of the building, as well as the partial 3rd floor he added. These small additions, ironically, are the only exterior architecture within Chicago city limits by one of its most important early Modernists.

The house is now owned by an important Chicago architect, whose name you surely know. For the sake of his privacy, I don't think it would be right to mention the name here. But there is a third-generation connection to the house's architectural legacy that only adds to its importance.


As far as a response to a lot of the bellyaching about "sterilizing" and "institutionalizing" the street goes, I simply disagree. I don't think Loyola has sterilized that area at all. In fact, they've amped the vibrancy of that area way up with the amount of foot traffic their concentrated mass of uses has generated and the active WLUW station on the corner. It would be completely stupid for them to try to locate this use several blocks away simply to take up a parking lot. Additionally, there is no way Holy Name would hand over that huge vacant lot at Chicago and State to Loyola. Many here may not be familiar with Catholic politics, but most of the church doesn't exactly love to cooperate with the Jesuits. That's why Loyola wasn't able to snag the seminary across from Lewis Tower; the arch diocese would rather waste money and let a perfectly good building go underutilized than let the Jesuits get it. That building should have gone to Loyola and would have made and excellent home for their business school, but the arch diocese are assholes and wouldn't let Loyola have it despite the fact that it was already set up to be used as classrooms. They instead converted it to offices.

Anyhow, Loyola now controls most of that block to the East of State and the YMCA and intends to continue to push West into those empty lots (hopefully preserving the low rises along State) with dorms and additional classroom facilities. However, the details of those plans are still very blurry as they haven't quite fleshed them out yet.


PS: the street mall Honte mentioned is something that I don't know if I've mentioned before of if it's public knowledge. There are long term plans to turn Pearson from Water Tower through Loyola Campus into a pedestrian mall. I think the Speyer House is fouling up these plans as well. Normally I would never support such a thing (obviously super blocks are horrible), but Pearson gets almost no real traffic and is mainly used by cars circling and looking for parking. It could work out pretty well if it's executed correctly, but I'm apprehensive about that idea as well.

PPS: If you look at the rendering you can see there is in fact a gap left in it for Speyer House. There is a brown blob placed where Speyer House is probably to distract from the fact that Loyola has again failed to drive out mid block owners. This is a touchy issue for the administration as it happened to them once previously when they were building Corboy Center and that little Italianate 3 flat between McGuire and Corboy refused to sell out them. They figured they'd eventually break him after they started construction and be able to buy it when they decide to re-build McGuire, but the owners have since fortified their position and I believe might have gone as far as to place the building in trust so that the school can never acquire it. That is a sour issue for the administration because it smacks of their utter incompetence in the late 1990's when 25 E Pearson was being planned and constructed.

[spyguy]

Ald. Moore rejected (http://www.ward49.com/site/epage/134095_322.htm) a plan to build two 6 unit buildings at 7220 N. Oakley.

Meanwhile, Ald. Moreno seems to support a new project at 1711 N. Winnebago even against community objections. The developer want to build three 5-story buildings containing a total of 54 apartments and 78 parking spaces. Renderings/burry photos here (http://chicago-pipeline.com/2012/05/31/residents-vote-to-disapprove-proposed-winnebago-avenue-lot-development/).

[k1052]

Ald. Moore rejected (http://www.ward49.com/site/epage/134095_322.htm) a plan to build two 6 unit buildings at 7220 N. Oakley.

Meanwhile, Ald. Moreno seems to support a new project at 1711 N. Winnebago even against community objections. The developer want to build three 5-story buildings containing a total of 54 apartments and 78 parking spaces. Renderings/burry photos here (http://chicago-pipeline.com/2012/05/31/residents-vote-to-disapprove-proposed-winnebago-avenue-lot-development/).

Most of the objections about the Winnebago project are laughable. The strongest criticisms would be parking ratio and the treatment of the ground floor facing Winnebago, both of which are pretty negotiable.

[ChiTownCity]

Why was NoWhereMan banned?

[emathias]

The Italianate buildings in the "middle" of River North are small, relatively low-intensity structures that are vulnerable to demolition because of their size.

The industrial loft buildings along Franklin are in a different class and deserve a different type of protection. They're not even really under threat, although future-proofing can't hurt.
...

Okay to be specific, the north side of Huron between LaSalle and Wells, the west side of Wells between Huron and Superior and a half block north of Superior, that cluster of buildings are all small-scale buildings that most people find charming but aren't always economic to maintain without protection.

[ardecila]

I guess I never really looked closely at that area. Interesting stuff, a lot of unique buildings that are halfway in between the italianate lowrises and Chicago School midrise warehouses. I guess I drew a strong dividing line too hastily.

The building at Wells and Superior has been altered... from Streetview it seems pretty cool, a great example of the creative stuff that can happen when building owners aren't constrained by strong landmark protection. So far, it seems like the gallery owners and restaurants in the area prefer the character of the older buildings instead of erecting new ones, although there are some newer residential buildings. Unfortunately, often alterations become mutilation.

[Dan in Chicago]

That's great news about the Speyer/Schofield House, and I can understand now why the university commissioned a rendering that obscures it in the small gap. It will be out of context between two large university buildings, but that's better than being demolished.

[george]

6-3
Goodman Center

http://img641.imageshack.us/img641/6449/goodmancent.jpg

[Swicago Swi Sox]

Why was NoWhereMan banned?

I had the same question. I am kinda new here...is banning normal?

[jpIllInoIs]

i had the same question. I am kinda new here...is banning normal?

no soup for you!!

[ardecila]

Some members post very frequently and inevitably they will run their mouth at some point. I've come close a few times, and had a moderator noticed I might have been banned. Fortunately I've edited all of that nonsense out.

[emathias]

With the ongoing reconstruction of the N-S portion of Wacker Drive, I thought you might like this image from when it was first constructed:

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-eWD9lFbiXjU/T6kbZrHGe7I/AAAAAAAAx8Y/h0PGaGfBVXg/s1600/PHOTO+-+CHICAGO+-+WACKER+DRIVE+CONSTRUCTION+-+LOOKING+NORTH+FROM+OPERA+BUILDING+-+1950.jpg
From Chuckman's collection (http://chuckmancollection.blogspot.com/2011/09/photo-chicago-wacker-drive-construction.html)

[Ch.G, Ch.G]

I've come close a few times, and had a moderator noticed I might have been banned.

What, did you almost use an exclamation point once? :haha:

[Mr Downtown]

Thanks for the Wacker Drive image, Emathias. Not one of those buildings remains, unless you can make out the Great Lakes Building or Merchandise Mart way in the back. The picture is looking north from the Civic Opera Building (at Washington), with the ramp down at Randolph.

[J_M_Tungsten]

What was wacker drive before wacker drive? I imagine the existing buildings, built prior to the multi-level wacker drive, had to raise their main entrances up to the new main street level. If any one has any info or pictures of the area prior to wacker drive, can you PM me? Thanks!

[Mr Downtown]

The north-south part was Market Street, which had a stub terminal of the Lake Street L:

http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m42g01v9Qy1rodbnso1_1280.jpg
CTA flickr

The top level of Wacker is roughly the same level as the old Market Street. I can't remember exactly, but I think that may have been raised in the teens when the new higher-level bridges were built. I think the current entrance to the 1912 Great Lakes Building (SWC Lake & Wacker) was originally the second level, but the Civic Opera Building was always the way it is now.

[denizen467]

Does anybody know who determines whether (and upon what basis) a newspaper machine/box may be installed on a given corner? (Other than the architecturally-designed cabinets the city installed in certain places a couple years ago, which I assume it owns.) To observe the obvious, they are almost always in large clusters, suggesting each publisher isn't just haphazardly applying for licenses for random busy corners here and there to compete with other publishers. So either there's only one or two distributors for all of the city's corners, or the aldermen designate certain corners and let the distributors just have at it, or something.

Does the city charge rent, like it does for restaurants' summer sidewalk cafes?

[ardecila]

What, did you almost use an exclamation point once? :haha:

Current Events.

[emathias]

Current Events.

Sounds like the name of a scientific hydrology paper.

[Mr Downtown]

Does anybody know who determines whether (and upon what basis) a newspaper machine/box may be installed on a given corner?

No time this morning to look it up, but I think newspaper boxes are placed wherever the distributor wants them, no license required. I seem to recall that the city has some generalized placement restrictions downtown, but there were some cases in the 1980s holding that newspaper boxes enjoyed First Amendment protection. Obviously, those don't trump public safety concerns, but they're given a lot of latitude. Back in the 80s, there was a group affililated with Ed Vrdolyak who started a one-page "newspaper" solely so they could put the boxes on downtown sidewalks and sell ads on the sides. The city eventually won that fight.

[Standpoor]

What was wacker drive before wacker drive? I imagine the existing buildings, built prior to the multi-level wacker drive, had to raise their main entrances up to the new main street level. If any one has any info or pictures of the area prior to wacker drive, can you PM me? Thanks!

Sorry to continue the historical photo posts but the only camera I have is my phone and I am not very good at using it. The east-west Wacker replaced River Street I believe, which was mostly docks. Graham and Morton, Goodrich, and the lesser passenger steamers had their docks along the south side of the main branch. This also meant that River St. was a big market street too since the steamships would come in with passengers and cargo, like fruit, and it would be sold along the street. My grandfather would travel to Chicago with his dad and sell fruit that they did not sell at the Benton Harbor Fruit Market along the street when he was a kid.

http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6164/6265396368_5272de99c9_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/retrosnapshots/6265396368/) Early 1900s Chicago Graham &amp; Morton Line Docks Photo (http://www.flickr.com/photos/retrosnapshots/6265396368/) by RetroSnapshots (http://www.flickr.com/people/retrosnapshots/), on Flickr

And just in case you thought I was kidding about my poor photo skills, this is a photo I took trying to document a barge going under the lift bridge at Ping Tom Park for our discussion back about river traffic. The sun was so bright I could not see the screen and only got my knee. But it is new and mine.
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7088/7345630602_4d7edd486d_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/76566007@N02/7345630602/)
20120313_142615 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/76566007@N02/7345630602/)

[Mr Downtown]

The east-west part of Wacker replaced South Water Street. River Street was the short NE-SW diagonal approach to the Rush Street Bridge, where Heald Square is now.

http://chicagocarto.com/burnham/images/803836wacker_southwater.jpg

South Water Market was relocated to W. 14th Street, but the produce merchants wanted to keep their old addresses, so those blocks ignored Chicago's addressing system from 1925 until 2004, when the produce market relocated yet again to 29th & Ashland, and the buildings were converted into University Commons.

Incidentally, we have a thread for Historic Chicago photos. (http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=147930)

[Rizzo]

South Water Street looked awesome

[denizen467]

The South Loop Costco (or is it CostCo?) opens on the 28th this month.
Does anyone know how much longer before the West Loop Target opens?

[Mr Downtown]

I had to laugh when I heard them calling it the "South Loop" location. It's at 15th & Ashland, 1.5 miles west of the river.

It's particularly amusing to those of us who fiercely fought back in the 1980s to keep the name "South Loop" (instead of "Burnham Park" as the developers proposed) for the area around Printers Row. Now the South Loop apparently extends to 15th & Ashland and to 28th & Michigan (Rogers Pontiac ads). Annuit coeptis.

[Buckman821]

Gateway/Marianos in the West Loop yesterday evening:

https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-w0l4y47uv90/T9Cxg91wUfI/AAAAAAAAAKo/ehnAGU8h_hM/s800/gateway.jpg

[Rizzo]

Gateway/Marianos in the West Loop yesterday evening:

https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-w0l4y47uv90/T9Cxg91wUfI/AAAAAAAAAKo/ehnAGU8h_hM/s800/gateway.jpg

This is turning out nice.