[honte]

^ I think they did this as a way to please the high-rises next-door and to win approval of the whole project. They are probably written into the PD so that they must remain. Plus, I am sure many of the buyers who are taking these units wouldn't otherwise have looked into the development, so a little diversity is a nice touch (even if the architecture should have rocked).

____________

@Spyguy, thanks for this info. I've got to go up there to check this out ... I believe it's the first double-facade in Chicago (please correct me if I am wrong). Why did they mess up the design with those "contextual" side features, though? It looks silly to see a limestone arch on such a clean and modern building.

[Ch.G, Ch.G]

^ I think they did this as a way to please the high-rises next-door and to win approval of the whole project. They are probably written into the PD so that they must remain. Plus, I am sure many of the buyers who are taking these units wouldn't otherwise have looked into the development, so a little diversity is a nice touch (even if the architecture should have rocked).

Don't get me wrong: this is certainly better than nothing, and the architecture isn't terrible at all. There's just something about that rendering I find disconcerting, and something disconcerting in general about townhomes in locations like these. Maybe it's the abrupt change in scale; I mean, you go from towering behemoth to ground-hugger in a matter of a few dozen yards.

[VivaLFuego]

Damn, nice retort, shut down...

I hate to say it, but suburban schools really are better, I don't see how schools that get funded with wayyyy more tax dollars are worse or equal on average than schools with way less funding.
So why are my test scores and overall knowledge far greater than the average suburbanite if I went to such an awful underfunded inner city high school, while they had such awesome facilities and teachers?

[jstush04]

So why are my test scores and overall knowledge far greater than the average suburbanite if I went to such an awful underfunded inner city high school, while they had such awesome facilities and teachers?

I'd hate to get back into this in this thread, but...

^ we're talking about averages, and 30% of chicago students can't do basic math once they reach highschool. OK, I pulled the "30%" from my ass because I can't remember the exact percentage, but you and I both know its an abysmal number. They teach you in CPschools these days that culture and believing in yourself are more important than truly understanding how to read and write.

Payton and Northside are outstanding schools. Plenty of brilliant kids go to Lane. I'm sure there are plenty of other examples. But there is a reason that people move out to the suburbs (if they can) when they want their kids to get the best education they can get. Yeah, a neighbor from another country is great, but try writing that on your resume (if you even can write)

lets just agree that the averages in the suburbs (aka not a particular suburb) is better than the averages in the city. I'm too lazy to do research for you, but I've seen the numbers that come out every year, and I'm sure you've seen them, too. This thread isn't the place to discuss why that is, or why I'm wrong.

[Mr Downtown]

Townhouses like this are a good way to cover up a parking podium, offer a human-scale frontage to the park, and appeal to a completely different purchaser market. Hat Trick!

These are at the base of highrises, not in places where you could have built another highrise.

[Busy Bee]

I would have preferred to see 10-15 story midrises in the place of these "parkhomes", not only that they look a bit Cuesta Verde in appearance, with those arches and all. Could've been a lot better.

[ardecila]

They remind me a lot of the apartment buildings in Rome, with a few modern influences.

I REALLY hope Loewenberg and Magellan build the Market (a Treasure Island) and the elementary school.

[Chicago2020]

http://img530.imageshack.us/img530/6676/parkhomets4.jpg

yeah I wouldn't mind living there

[Nowhereman1280]

So why are my test scores and overall knowledge far greater than the average suburbanite if I went to such an awful underfunded inner city high school, while they had such awesome facilities and teachers?

Because those are average test scores, the average does not imply that everyone has that score, it implies that it is the AVERAGE, as the name would suggest. In fact, it is quite possible that there are no children in the school system that have the average score because it is an average.

For example, if there are 10 kids in the CPS, and 5 of them get a 10 on the standardized test and the other 5 get a 0, then the average score is 5, yet no one got that score, how could this be?!?!?! Anyone who has taken basic math should know this, too bad Chicago Public Schools are so bad at teaching basic math.


By the way, I fucking hate the informations commons, it pisses me off so much that they put it where they did. It completely ruins the LAKESHORE effect of the LAKESHORE Campus. The entire student body opposed putting it where they did, they could have put it where the Jesuit Residence currently is, set back from the lake by 300 feet, but the bureaucracy of this school wouldn't listen to the students because they wanted those stupid walkways to connect to the library and Chapel. Those dumb walkways don't do anything for us students and only mar the outsides of those two gorgeous buildings while completely blocking our views and access to the lake. The administration at Loyola is out of control and does whatever it likes regardless of the effect it has on students and student opposition.

[honte]

^ Agreed 100% about messing with the Rebori. Shame on them and the city for not coming up with a better solution. Anyone ever heard of underground walkways?

[EarlyBuyer]

I REALLY hope Loewenberg and Magellan build the Market (a Treasure Island) and the elementary school.

The Treasure Island website says the store will open in Spring 2009.

http://www.tifoods.com/

[VivaLFuego]

Townhouses like this are a good way to cover up a parking podium, offer a human-scale frontage to the park, and appeal to a completely different purchaser market. Hat Trick!

These are at the base of highrises, not in places where you could have built another highrise.

Agreed. Efficient use of space, and much more aesthetically pleasing than blank-wall or screened parking.

[SamInTheLoop]

Townhouses like this are a good way to cover up a parking podium, offer a human-scale frontage to the park, and appeal to a completely different purchaser market. Hat Trick!

These are at the base of highrises, not in places where you could have built another highrise.


All true, yet the design could have and should have been so much better...they would have had solid sales velocity and easy $700+ psf pricing with something more modern and innovative.......many people still stubbornly, foolishly cling to the misnomer that modern townhouse design doesn't sell (this is apt to change quickly, however, as remember just 6 or 7 years ago a majority of developers probably thought modern mid and high-rise design wouldn't sell - and we all thankfully now realize just how monumentally wrong they all were)...

[EarlyBuyer]

Edit: Deleted duplicate post

[EarlyBuyer]

All true, yet the design could have and should have been so much better...they would have had solid sales velocity and easy $700+ psf pricing with something more modern and innovative.......many people still stubbornly, foolishly cling to the misnomer that modern townhouse design doesn't sell (this is apt to change quickly, however, as remember just 6 or 7 years ago a majority of developers probably thought modern mid and high-rise design wouldn't sell - and we all thankfully now realize just how monumentally wrong they all were)...

The Parkhomes at Aqua will have a contemporary facade. It will be interesting to see how quickly these move once marketing begins.

This rendering was posted by archytype 5/07 on the Aqua thread

http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/5646/bdpsery6.jpg

[SkokieSwift]

RE: the Parkhomes

Please tell me the reddish brown part will be brick. If so, this will be a nice change of pace from all the glass and concrete in the vicinity.

[honte]

^Yes.

All true, yet the design could have and should have been so much better...they would have had solid sales velocity and easy $700+ psf pricing with something more modern and innovative.......many people still stubbornly, foolishly cling to the misnomer that modern townhouse design doesn't sell (this is apt to change quickly, however, as remember just 6 or 7 years ago a majority of developers probably thought modern mid and high-rise design wouldn't sell - and we all thankfully now realize just how monumentally wrong they all were)...

Sam, do you have any stats showing the sales velocity of well-designed, modern buildings vs. run-of-the-mill junk? It would be very interesting to compare these numbers in an analytical fashion.

[cubbbyblue]

^Yes.



Sam, do you have any stats showing the sales velocity of well-designed, modern buildings vs. run-of-the-mill junk? It would be very interesting to compare these numbers in an analytical fashion.

I dont thnk you can compare this analytically unless you have a defined way of determining, without question, "well-designed" vs. "run-of-the-mill junk". There might exist run of the mill junk that fills up faster then well-designed modern buildings due to demand, the economy, and a multitude of different factors. I don't think that you can necessarially correlate the design of a building with the rate of occupancy. Im not trying to be an ass, but answering this question seemed much more appealing then working on my marekting research project. Just happened to be a coincidence that this question dealt with statistics and i was working on my project dealing with a similar field.

[Mr Downtown]

many people still stubbornly, foolishly cling to the misnomer that modern townhouse design doesn't sell

What counter-example can you offer?

Phil Kupritz's Millennium townhouses sold very slowly, while across the street Dearborn Village sold out from plans. I think many developers saw that as a cautionary tale.

[dboggie]

Does anyone have a floor plan for the townhouses?

I am fairly unfamiliar with townhouses in general, but my initial impression is that is a lot of money to be asking for a home that has windows on only 1 side. Are there bedrooms in the back that are completely windowless?

[EarlyBuyer]

Does anyone have a floor plan for the townhouses?

I am fairly unfamiliar with townhouses in general, but my initial impression is that is a lot of money to be asking for a home that has windows on only 1 side. Are there bedrooms in the back that are completely windowless?


dboggie: click here for floor plans: http://www.lakeshoreeast.com/parkhomes.html

[dboggie]

dboggie: click here for floor plans: http://www.lakeshoreeast.com/parkhomes.html

Thanks EarlyBuyer! It appears they do a pretty good job considering the circumstances, especially with the 2-floor living room allowing light to get deeper into the unit. Although you better like climbing stairs if you want one of those!

[EarlyBuyer]

You're welcome. Yeah, townhome dwellers probably need to spend less time in the gym.

[spyguy]

Saw this design for 2800 N Lincoln Avenue by Product Architecture.
http://img256.imageshack.us/img256/6687/07100301lf4.gifhttp://img256.imageshack.us/img256/1521/07100302ef4.gif
I'm not sure how far along the project is (or if it's even still alive) but it's certainly better than what's there now.

EarlyBuyer mentioned that new signs went up in LSE.
Redesigned Village Market
http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/1255/twelvedq2.jpg
http://img210.imageshack.us/img210/8810/thirteenzb4.jpg

[the urban politician]

Considering the relative shortage of vintage commercial streetscapes on the south side, this is great news:

Landmark district proposed for Cottage Grove

Designation would encompass more than 20 Chatham and Greater Grand Crossing buildings

One of Chicago's finest surviving groups of neighborhood commercial buildings today received preliminary approval as a landmark district by the Commission on Chicago Landmarks.

Located along Cottage Grove Avenue, primarily between 75th and 79th streets, the proposed district features 21 Classical, Renaissance, Gothic Revival and Prairie style structures dating to the early 1900s. All but three of the buildings are noted for their terra cotta cladding and ornamentation, which reached an apex of creativity and lavishness during the 1920s, according to the commission.
http://egov.cityofchicago.org/city/webportal/portalContentItemAction.do?BV_SessionID=@@@@1001450191.1195619433@@@@&BV_EngineID=cccfaddmiiefmflcefecelldffhdffn.0&contentOID=536964536&contenTypeName=COC_EDITORIAL&topChannelName=Dept&blockName=Planning+And+Development%2FI+Want+To&context=dept&channelId=0&programId=0&entityName=Planning+And+Development&deptMainCategoryOID=

[honte]

^ It's always been a lovely district, but I can't believe they took notice! I am happy to know it's going to be around longer than all of us.

Concerning the Village Market, big disappointment. It seems like the major access points have been reduced, if not eliminated (remember the grand escalator?), and the design isn't much more sophisticated. As always, it could have been worse....

[jjk1103]

someone should do a census analysis on this & see what the population would be if this was indeed the case

.......about 10,000,000

[EarlyBuyer]

:previous:

Thanks spyguy for the photo's of the now more linear LSE Market Center. This is (at least) the third design the consumer has seen for this building.

[trvlr70]

Saw this design for 2800 N Lincoln Avenue by Product Architecture.
http://img256.imageshack.us/img256/6687/07100301lf4.gifhttp://img256.imageshack.us/img256/1521/07100302ef4.gif
I'm not sure how far along the project is (or if it's even still alive) but it's certainly better than what's there now.

EarlyBuyer mentioned that new signs went up in LSE.
Redesigned Village Market
http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/1255/twelvedq2.jpg
http://img210.imageshack.us/img210/8810/thirteenzb4.jpg

The outside terrace about Treasure Island is a nice touch. It may have one of the coolest views around for the general public.

[aaron38]

So will you be able to walk from the BCBS/340OTP plaza to that rooftop terrace? Or will they be completely separate?

[dropdeaded209]

quick little review from the sun times on the spertus institute (http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/660306,CST-NWS-spertus21.article)

[the urban politician]

Quick question--for anybody who may have made it to the Nov 16th Plan Commission meeting, did they discuss the 11-story 1260 W Madison project proposed by the Pinkus Group?

I'm curious, because I posted a Chicago Journal article about this recently in which NIMBY's were trying to get this project deferred from the agenda, even though the Alderman supports it

[ardecila]

So will you be able to walk from the BCBS/340OTP plaza to that rooftop terrace? Or will they be completely separate?

As I mentioned on SSC, I'll bet anything that the lot between Aqua and BCBS will become a loading dock for the Market on the lower level and a plaza on the top level.

I think there will be several access points to the building on the top, from the south, east, and west.

[SamInTheLoop]

Quick question--for anybody who may have made it to the Nov 16th Plan Commission meeting, did they discuss the 11-story 1260 W Madison project proposed by the Pinkus Group?

I'm curious, because I posted a Chicago Journal article about this recently in which NIMBY's were trying to get this project deferred from the agenda, even though the Alderman supports it


Great question - I was wondering the same as I don't think it's clear in the monthly Plan Commission report on NewCitySkyline...

[SamInTheLoop]

direct Fioretti quote from the Tribune - "We need for development to cool down to keep the neighborhood hot." I posted this for anyone who doubts my contention that our new downtown aldermen intend to slowdown the development approval process (this is already evident in the very sparse Plan Commission agendas (for downtown high-rises) since late spring/early summer. Rather than being a sympton of the condo market slowdown or credit crunch (these impacts would show up more in groundbreakings for projects that are already entitled), the slow down in the entitlement process itself is more of a reflection of the new aldermen's desires to slow down development overall (what I sometimes call 'chasing the community consensus phantom') - I just didn't think I would get so lucky with a quote so explicitly expressing his intentions...

Also, what is Fioretti suggesting - that he thinks it's his role to interfere with the free market in order to prop up prices or something? Folks - I'm telling you - this is a very misguided individual trying to make some sort of mark...

[SamInTheLoop]

Looks similar to a model I saw in the sales center some months back. While it's not stunning, I like it overall and think it's so much better than some previous versions I had seen. This version looks like Loewenberg received a much-needed dose of design assistance, just like they need on practically anything of theirs that doesn't suck...

[VivaLFuego]

direct Fioretti quote from the Tribune - "We need for development to cool down to keep the neighborhood hot." I posted this for anyone who doubts my contention that our new downtown aldermen intend to slowdown the development approval process (this is already evident in the very sparse Plan Commission agendas (for downtown high-rises) since late spring/early summer. Rather than being a sympton of the condo market slowdown or credit crunch (these impacts would show up more in groundbreakings for projects that are already entitled), the slow down in the entitlement process itself is more of a reflection of the new aldermen's desires to slow down development overall (what I sometimes call 'chasing the community consensus phantom') - I just didn't think I would get so lucky with a quote so explicitly expressing his intentions...

Also, what is Fioretti suggesting - that he thinks it's his role to interfere with the free market in order to prop up prices or something? Folks - I'm telling you - this is a very misguided individual trying to make some sort of mark...
No need to convince me... his detrimentality is surpassed only by union-hack Reilly.

[LaSalle.St.Station]

No need to convince me... his detriment is surpassed only by union-hack Reilly.



and a bif f u to al those those that blasted hatchcock and nataurus throught the years.... get used to more of these puke ups.

[BVictor1]

I didn't know where else to post this exactly. It's quite disgusting actually. Ignorance is bliss. If the moderators feel that it should be moved elsewhere, so-be-it...

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-adv.bdog.acmain1nov25,0,5631708.story?coll=chi_tab01_layout

PIONEER FAMILIES   PUSHING THE EDGE OF SUBURBIA

Leaps of faith drive ever-expanding 'burbs

http://www.chicagotribune.com/media/alternatethumbnails/story/2007-11/33937633-24051343.jpg

In this two-part series, we examine the Chicago area's population expansion through the lives of two families. Today: Meet the Schramkas, among the first to move into a subdivision on the Western edge of Aurora.

By Charles Leroux and Patrick T. Reardon | Tribune staff reporters
November 25, 2007

Standing in front of their new home, Alysia and Ryan Schramka and their 2-year-old daughter, Madison, look out across 600 acres of what recently were corn and soybean fields. At the moment, their view is of a barren landscape. The streets have been put into the naked ground but curve along lots where only weeds reside.

[ardecila]

It's worth mentioning, BVic, that the subdivision article is only half of a two-part series. The Tribune has some fairly good journalists who know that presenting only one side of an issue is unfair.

The tagline for part two is "What the newest subdivisions can learn from the oldest". I'm hoping that it includes some discussion of New Urbanism and sustainable growth patterns.

The first article, though, presented a skewed picture of edge developments. It rattles on about how bike paths and natural streams are "creating a sense of community". Bike paths are often used as excuses not to pave sidewalks, and they are rarely used except for exercise purposes, since they don't lead to employment and they don't lead to shopping.

Often, the "natural stream" or "wetlands" they are preserving is a sad-looking little retention pond with some cattails in it that somehow avoided the scourge of the bulldozer.

I'm all for metropolitan growth, but I'm seriously hoping that we look to compact development along transit and highways, or infill in existing suburbs. The featured couple in the article hopes that the pastoral setting will remain forever - that can't happen if farmland keeps getting chewed up at astronomical speeds in all compass directions.

[jstush04]

PIONEER FAMILIES   PUSHING THE EDGE OF SUBURBIA

oops, could you post the link for the article? the link you posted was for the image

[Jaroslaw]

direct Fioretti quote from the Tribune - "We need for development to cool down to keep the neighborhood hot." ...


Also, what is Fioretti suggesting - that he thinks it's his role to interfere with the free market in order to prop up prices or something? Folks - I'm telling you - this is a very misguided individual trying to make some sort of mark...

Very revealing quote... do you have a link to the article itself?

Maybe I am saying this only because I am a masochist and I want everyone else here to beat up on me. But Fioretti is right.* When you have unlimited supply and limited demand, you will not have higher prices. And a rising price for one's home has become something of an entitlement for today's middle class. They get that rising price in a lot of suburbs because the zoning is so strict. Half-acre lots and so on. Control the supply. It is in the direct interest of anyone who bought in the south loop to prevent more projects for coming online, and the same with LSE. This is basic.
There is no free market in the suburbs.

*Fioretti is also a fool who doesn't understand cities. Density creates a virtuous cycle, more people is more amenities, is more services, we've been over that a hundred times here. What Fioretti can do is get the city competitive with the suburbs on schools etc. He should do the optimistic proactive thing and work on increasing demand, not decreasing supply. What is this, Europe?

It boggles my mind that high density costs the city more than low density costs the suburbs, when high volume is always more efficient than low volume. It boggles my mind that with city property values and population going up, Daley needs a property tax increase. It boggles my mind that for decades people with kids have had to leave Chicago to get their kids into good schools, and no one addresses their concerns... where is the school at LSE? Let's not get started on transit. Where is Fioretti on this?

OK, over with the post-Thanksgiving rant. Let's just hope gas prices keep going up and the hydrogen car is a bust, that's the only hope for Chicago. :)

[Rocket1]

oops, could you post the link for the article? the link you posted was for the image

Here's a link to the article

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-adv.bdog.acmain1nov25,0,5631708.story?coll=chi_tab01_layout

[BVictor1]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/entertainment/chi-1125_spertusnov25,1,6882709.story?ctrack=1&cset=true

ARCHITECTURE

Blades of glass
New Spertus Institute's gemlike wall of glass a welcome counterpoint on South Michigan

By Blair Kamin | Tribune architecture critic
November 25, 2007

http://www.chicagotribune.com/media/photo/2007-11/33881085.jpg

Chicago's rough-hewn cityscape, already studded with architectural jewels, has a sparkling new gem. It resembles an exquisitely cut diamond dropped into the great wall of stone that rises like a cliff across from Grant Park.

[wrabbit]

^^ Thanks for posting this. Kamin is pretty much spot on here - he stresses the importance of depth and three-dimensionality in the facade, and the ways in which constraints can fuel creative solutions - and IMHO K&S deserves all the accolades we can toss out.

Now, somebody, anybody, please give these chaps a tower project - Hines? Magellan? Buck? Anyone out there? Anybody care?

[BVictor1]

Jackson Street Bridge Reconstruction Project

The Chicago Department of Transportation is rebuilding the Jackson Blvd. bridge over the Metra / IC railroad tracks in Grant Park. The bridge was built in 1925, and has reached the end of its useful life. The $11 million project will rebuild all the bridge's structural elements, while maintaining its historic Beaux Arts design. The work will restore the bridge's historic architectural elements, and add ornamental lighting and balustrades. Crews will also rebuild the stairs to the Metra Van Buren Station platform. Construction is scheduled to begin the week of November 19, with estimated completion in summer 2008. During construction, Jackson between Michigan and Columbus will close to traffic. Monroe Street or Congress Parkway are the recommended detours for east and westbound traffic. Metra passengers: Stairs to / from the Metra Van Buren Station platform to Jackson will be closed. Passengers should use the Van Buren entrance / exit. For more information, visit www.cityofchicago.org/transportation


St. Charles Air Line Bridge to be Landmarked
Monday, December 3 at 10 AM

Notice is hereby given that the City Council's Committee on Historical Landmark Preservation will hold a meeting at City Hall, located at 121 North LaSalle Street, in Room 201-A to consider recommendations that the following be designated as Chicago Landmarks:

2nd Ward - The St. Charles Air Line Bridge at 16th & Lumber Streets.

42nd Ward - The Continental and Commercial National Bank Building at 208 South LaSalle Street
The Old Chicago Coast Guard Station by Lake Michigan near the mouth of the Chicago River
The Roanoke Building and Tower at 11 South LaSalle Street
The Veseman Building at 444 North LaSalle Street
The (Former) Engine Company 42 Firehouse at 228 West Illinois Street
The Chicago & Northwestern RR Bridge at Kinzie & Canal Streets

For more information, visit www.chicityclerk.com/citycouncil/agendas/histlandmarks120307.pdf

[ginsan2]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/entertainment/chi-1125_spertusnov25,1,6882709.story?ctrack=1&cset=true

ARCHITECTURE

Blades of glass
New Spertus Institute's gemlike wall of glass a welcome counterpoint on South Michigan

By Blair Kamin | Tribune architecture critic
November 25, 2007

http://www.chicagotribune.com/media/photo/2007-11/33881085.jpg

Chicago's rough-hewn cityscape, already studded with architectural jewels, has a sparkling new gem. It resembles an exquisitely cut diamond dropped into the great wall of stone that rises like a cliff across from Grant Park.
I like it, but I don't know how I feel about it right there.

[Loopy]

December Plan Commission and Landmarks Committee agenda items on Google map:

http://www.communitywalk.com/chicago/il/aldertrack__december_2007/map/191423

[jstush04]

spertus opens to the public on friday, and there is an open house on sunday, the 2nd

I think there's a public viewing area on the top floor. You can see a nice, unique view of millenium park and the lake from there.

Correct me if I'm wrong

[headcase]

spertus opens to the public on friday, and there is an open house on sunday, the 2nd

I think there's a public viewing area on the top floor. You can see a nice, unique view of millenium park and the lake from there.

Correct me if I'm wrong

You are right, there is actually an open terrace up there. And yes the views are very cool.

SSDD

[Alliance]

I like it, but I don't know how I feel about it right there.

Its awesome. K&S rocks. :cool:

[ardecila]

St. Charles Air Line Bridge to be Landmarked
Monday, December 3 at 10 AM

Notice is hereby given that the City Council's Committee on Historical Landmark Preservation will hold a meeting at City Hall, located at 121 North LaSalle Street, in Room 201-A to consider recommendations that the following be designated as Chicago Landmarks:

2nd Ward - The St. Charles Air Line Bridge at 16th & Lumber Streets.

42nd Ward - The Continental and Commercial National Bank Building at 208 South LaSalle Street
The Old Chicago Coast Guard Station by Lake Michigan near the mouth of the Chicago River
The Roanoke Building and Tower at 11 South LaSalle Street
The Veseman Building at 444 North LaSalle Street
The (Former) Engine Company 42 Firehouse at 228 West Illinois Street
The Chicago & Northwestern RR Bridge at Kinzie & Canal Streets

For more information, visit www.chicityclerk.com/citycouncil/agendas/histlandmarks120307.pdf

Is anybody going to this meeting? It's at 10am on a Monday, so I can't attend. Landmarking all of these is peachy, except for the C&NW bridge. This bridge stands right where the Carroll Street Transitway is supposed to cross the river. The railroad bridge can't carry the transitway's buses (I don't think), so it would have to be replaced or modified if the project is to proceed. Landmark designation for the bridge might therefore add huge amounts of expense to the Transitway project (to get around the bridge somehow), and maybe even jeopardize the project totally.

[honte]

^ Nothing gets Landmarked in Chicago without prior agreement by the rest of the DPD (sadly).... I am certain they have already discussed these plans in relation to the circulator proposal, and everything is going to be fine.

Besides, this is just the rubber stamp part of the process. The Bridges passes the Commission a long while back, and the city could have easily contested at that point if there was something negative about to happen.

[ardecila]

I am certain they have already discussed these plans in relation to the circulator proposal, and everything is going to be fine.

I was thinking about contacting someone in CDOT about the issue... is that totally out of line?

I'm worried that the city is letting this opportunity escape as the corridor is densely-developed. By waiting, they are only increasing the final cost and decreasing the feasibility of the project.

[aaron38]

So I heard today about the sad loss of a preservation battle in Palatine.
A little old lady lived in a 19th century historic home in downtown Palatine, on a decaying block that was slated for redevelopment. When she died last year, her family sold the land to the city, and the city set about finding someone to move the house. The house was being offered free to anyone who would move it.
But last week the city and a perspective mover/owner walked through the home and found a sad state.

The home had been stripped of everything of value. The doors, pocket doors, trim, hardware, cabinets, radiators, banister and staircase had all been ripped out. Large holes were left in the walls, and the house was deemed no longer structurally sound for moving, nor worth the effort.

So it's going to be torn down now, it's historical value is gone. A shame, it was a good house.

[jjk1103]

So I heard today about the sad loss of a preservation battle in Palatine.
A little old lady lived in a 19th century historic home in downtown Palatine, on a decaying block that was slated for redevelopment. When she died last year, her family sold the land to the city, and the city set about finding someone to move the house. The house was being offered free to anyone who would move it.
But last week the city and a perspective mover/owner walked through the home and found a sad state.

The home had been stripped of everything of value. The doors, pocket doors, trim, hardware, cabinets, radiators, banister and staircase had all been ripped out. Large holes were left in the walls, and the house was deemed no longer structurally sound for moving, nor worth the effort.

So it's going to be torn down now, it's historical value is gone. A shame, it was a good house.

......who stripped the house ?

[aaron38]

^^^ Pretty sure it was the lady's kids, before they sold the land, but I don't know for sure. The city must not have done a final inspection. Lesson learned I guess...

[honte]

I was thinking about contacting someone in CDOT about the issue... is that totally out of line?

Oh, I don't know, it's your call. But nothing about these bridges is going to be a surprise to anyone in the city... you might find out some good stuff to report back to us though.

Often times, the agenda of the planning department overall comes out subtly in the way buildings are landmarked. For instance, the St. Charles Air Line Bridge ... could this suggest that they are planning a Highline-style development there instead of simply ripping it out (that would be fantastic, of course)? I've heard numerous things about this, but nothing substantial. On the other hand, the second bridge next to the St. Charles Air Line (I always forget the name of it), was conspicuously absent from the designation - seems to be in keeping with the fact that much of that line (or spur, or whatever you transit buffs call it) has been ripped out without much consideration.

[Mr Downtown]

the second bridge next to the St. Charles Air Line (I always forget the name of it

Baltimore & Ohio Chicago Terminal Railroad.

Mayor Daley is a big bridge fan, and the push to landmark these bridges came from him. You can be sure that landmarking the C&NW bridge near Kinzie has been thoroughly discussed with CDOT.

A year ago, at a party, I talked with one of the engineers who was working on adapting it (and elevating it, I think, as was done with the Kinzie Street Bridge) for busway use.

[ardecila]

the second bridge next to the St. Charles Air Line was conspicuously absent from the designation

I thought the two bridges there were inextricably connected? As I understood, both decks share a common counterweight. I kinda like the fact that one half is permanently locked upward. You can understand the dynamism of the bridge design, since both states (up and down) are visible at once.

A year ago, at a party, I talked with one of the engineers who was working on adapting it (and elevating it, I think, as was done with the Kinzie Street Bridge) for busway use.

So it is possible? Excellent, I was worried there for a bit. I shot off an email to CDOT... I doubt it will be answered, since I used the general-comments address. I don't have any personal contacts there, and I don't know who specifically to ask within CDOT, so I had no other choice.

What do you mean by elevating it? Are they trying to raise the river clearance so that it will be opened less frequently? I didn't think such modifications were possible under a landmark designation. Adding a drivable deck seems like a minor modification that could be done with a dense steel grid like the one on the Columbus Dr. bridge, but I don't know if the bridge is wide enough to accommodate two lanes or the signalling system that would be required for one-lane operation.

[Mr Downtown]

I thought the two bridges there were inextricably connected? As I understood, both decks share a common counterweight.

No, two separate bridges (http://maps.live.com/default.aspx?v=2&cp=qz93g67pxcwb&style=o&lvl=1&tilt=-90&dir=0&alt=-1000&scene=11386313&encType=1) a few feet apart.

http://img143.imageshack.us/img143/3520/stcharlesbridgeuplraj6.jpg

[BVictor1]

Baltimore & Ohio Chicago Terminal Railroad.

Mayor Daley is a big bridge fan, and the push to landmark these bridges came from him. You can be sure that landmarking the C&NW bridge near Kinzie has been thoroughly discussed with CDOT.

A year ago, at a party, I talked with one of the engineers who was working on adapting it (and elevating it, I think, as was done with the Kinzie Street Bridge) for busway use.

I'd personally rather see rail than bus.



What do you mean by elevating it? Are they trying to raise the river clearance so that it will be opened less frequently? I didn't think such modifications were possible under a landmark designation. Adding a drivable deck seems like a minor modification that could be done with a dense steel grid like the one on the Columbus Dr. bridge, but I don't know if the bridge is wide enough to accommodate two lanes or the signalling system that would be required for one-lane operation.

I think that you're confusing this with Kinzie Street the roadway which crossed the north branch of the river. He's refering to the "viagra" bridge, the railroad bridge next to the Sun-Times (Aparrel Mart). The structure itself would be elevated so that the bridge itself could be lowered and have enough vertical clearance for boats.

I believe that there was an article in yesterdays Tribune about this bridge.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/classified/automotive/chi-gettingaround_26nov26,0,489104.column

Q: "What, if anything, is the city of Chicago's plan for the Kinzie Street bridge over the Chicago River in the downtown? This eyesore is permanently stuck in the up position and it appears to be of no purpose anymore. Will it stay up forever?"

Dennis O'Malley, Chicago

A: Train traffic across the bridge ceased years ago when trains stopped delivering newsprint to the former Chicago Sun-Times building on Wabash Avenue, now the site of Trump Tower.
But the Union Pacific Railroad, which owns the Kinzie bridge, still maintains the structure, according to the Chicago Department of Transportation.

There are no plans to demolish the historically significant drawbridge, which was the world's heaviest and longest bascule leaf span when completed in 1908, CDOT said.

[ardecila]

I think that you're confusing this with Kinzie Street the roadway which crossed the north branch of the river. He's refering to the "viagra" bridge, the railroad bridge next to the Sun-Times (Aparrel Mart). The structure itself would be elevated so that the bridge itself could be lowered and have enough vertical clearance for boats.

I'm not confusing it with anything. The name of the bridge IS the Chicago & NorthWestern Kinzie Street Bridge. It originally led to the C&NW's Wells Street Station and Yards, which were where the Merchandise Mart and Apparel Center are now (built on air rights).

BTW, I got a response back from CDOT. No new information there ("the alignment is not yet determined").

[honte]

What do you mean by elevating it? Are they trying to raise the river clearance so that it will be opened less frequently? I didn't think such modifications were possible under a landmark designation.

Landmark policy in Chicago is very loosey-goosey when it comes to matters like this. It all depends on what they have designated as historic aspects of the structure, and each designation has its own laws based largely on politics, commissioner whim, "educated opinions," inner-city wheelings and dealings, etc. Since this is one subdepartment stroking another (in my opinion), they'll have make it possible to do what they need to accomplish. But the landmark designation will be in place to help justify a particular expenditure on restoration and to counter particular arguments that a cheaper alternative (like demolition) should be explored. Also, it will provide an added layer of review and sophistication when reviewing any modifications that happen to the structure, which can't be a bad thing.

But in Chicago, is anything related to landmarks written in stone? Definitely not. That's particularly why I am such an advocate of the landmark policy - in many ways, it's just another layer of community protection that should be in place in many instances beyond what we have now. Buildings in Chicago have been de-landmarked, and frequently alterations happen that I personally think are far too liberal. Cf. Farwell building and McGraw hill as chief examples, but smaller ones abound (such as ruinous window replacement on the Vesseman building, etc). To be fair, there are also many, many great examples of very careful adaptations of existing structures, which do not damage the integrity of the building.

[Jaroslaw]

The co-op supermarket board (55th and HP) has voted, and although a shareholder vote is still on, it looks like there will be a debt workout and either Treasure Island or Dominick's will get into the space. The only other alternative is Chapter 11.

The interesting part, from a university email (the U of C owns the strip mall) is this: "The University and a new grocer will invest over $5M into the physical facilities in order to create a vastly improved shopping experience." It's not enough for expanding the store itself, becaus their only way would be up. But they could do a multi-level parking structure, that lot is jammed all day.

[VivaLFuego]

The co-op supermarket board (55th and HP) has voted, and although a shareholder vote is still on, it looks like there will be a debt workout and either Treasure Island or Dominick's will get into the space. The only other alternative is Chapter 11.

The interesting part, from a university email (the U of C owns the strip mall) is this: "The University and a new grocer will invest over $5M into the physical facilities in order to create a vastly improved shopping experience." It's not enough for expanding the store itself, becaus their only way would be up. But they could do a multi-level parking structure, that lot is jammed all day.

I remember some years ago there was talk of developing that huge lot into a structure. But $5 million sounds like too small a number for anything substantial; that sounds more like build-out, rehab, etc and maybe some additional landscaping and pedestrian improvements. Ideally, I'd love to see that parking field developed into a multi-story garage with some first floor retail spaces and turn the "Hyde Park Shopping Center" into something that integrates the community from the pedestrian experience (between 53rd and 55th) rather than divides it.

[migueltorres]

I remember some years ago there was talk of developing that huge lot into a structure. But $5 million sounds like too small a number for anything substantial; that sounds more like build-out, rehab, etc and maybe some additional landscaping and pedestrian improvements. Ideally, I'd love to see that parking field developed into a multi-story garage with some first floor retail spaces and turn the "Hyde Park Shopping Center" into something that integrates the community from the pedestrian experience (between 53rd and 55th) rather than divides it.

I agree with you. I live near that area and the co-op is my grocery store. I think Treasure Island would be a good fit because what I like about the Co-op is their ample selection of organic and natural products and that's what kept me coming back even if that store is more expensive that Jewel or Dominicks. They do need more parking but what I would like it to be is more pedestrian friendly. I try to support businesses in that "mall" as much as possible, including that awesome bakery and the new pizza place, but it seems like to get there I have to fight it over with cars entering and leaving the parking lot.

[honte]

I remember some years ago there was talk of developing that huge lot into a structure. But $5 million sounds like too small a number for anything substantial; that sounds more like build-out, rehab, etc and maybe some additional landscaping and pedestrian improvements. Ideally, I'd love to see that parking field developed into a multi-story garage with some first floor retail spaces and turn the "Hyde Park Shopping Center" into something that integrates the community from the pedestrian experience (between 53rd and 55th) rather than divides it.

They should restore the Harry Weese design of the strip mall, and add pedestrian-friendly enhancements where the parking is now. The Co-Op itself was a Keck + Keck design - wouldn't mind a good restoration of that, although from what I gather, it wasn't as good as the Weese stuff.

[honte]

Very good news today in the Roeder article. This is the amazing SOM project on the South Side.

http://www.suntimes.com/business/roeder/669790,CST-FIN-roeder28.article

PRIMO LAND: Quintin Primo III, chairman of Capri Capital Partners LLC, is said to be making headway in plans to start a $155 million residential and retail center southwest of 39th and State. An insider reports that he's close to landing a grocery store anchor. Letters of intent have been drafted for Roundy's, Dominick's and Ultra Foods, the source said, adding that a movie theater chain and the standard CVS or Walgreens are also close to signing.

[VivaLFuego]

They should restore the Harry Weese design of the strip mall, and add pedestrian-friendly enhancements where the parking is now. The Co-Op itself was a Keck + Keck design - wouldn't mind a good restoration of that, although from what I gather, it wasn't as good as the Weese stuff.

I fully agree, having grown up in the Weese/Pei townhomes :) They really butchered the aesthetic of the mall in the late 90s, they totally reclad it when a thorough cleaning, painting, and patching would have sufficed (as they did for Pei's Monoxide Island apartments, er, University Park or whatever it's called). But culturally there is still a backlash against mid-century modernism and brutalism, as further evidenced by how the downtown subway renovations are really 'softening' up the design. Sigh.

[BVictor1]

They should restore the Harry Weese design of the strip mall, and add pedestrian-friendly enhancements where the parking is now. The Co-Op itself was a Keck + Keck design - wouldn't mind a good restoration of that, although from what I gather, it wasn't as good as the Weese stuff.

Personally, I'd like to see the whole shopping center along with the plaza at 51st and Lake Park demoed and rebuilt.

Harper's Court is something different though. I actually like that space even though I don't shop there often. That shitty parking lot can go though...

[the urban politician]

^ I second that.

I always hated that shopping plaza. I used to live 4 blocks away from it but I was compelled to drive there anyway because its design screams "DON'T WALK!! DRIVE!!"

That's why I loathe strip malls in urban areas with a passion. They bend over, pull down their pants, and blast foul gas in the faces of pedestrians. Tear um all down.

On another note, this last week in Chicago has been damn horrible, concluding with the news of the (somewhat expected) transit bill failure. I think I'm just going to sit out the forums and news for another week (If that's at all possible) :doh:

[spyguy]

There was some good news too. CHIsentinel on SSC mentioned that Parkview East might be taller and Roeder's column shows the Metropolis project moving forward.

[StormFire]

Interesting article on the city using eminent domain to take out not only some struggling businesses, but also what appears to be two very successful stores - a Walgreens and a Chicago Soccer.

http://www.insideonline.com/site/epage/56078_162.htm

I am a bit torn - the Walgreens has been there forever and serves a community need (plus lots of folks WALK there), and the Chicago Soccer does well, but some of the places in between are in need of help. And I have thought for YEARS that the Walgreens outside is in serious need of a facelift - it is horrible in appearance. But having the city take out businesses using eminent domain purely for economic improvement and not to build a library or airport or something, even though this has been recently supported by the Supreme Court, kind of bugs me. I would rather see private investment working on its own - think about how Block 37, regardless if you like it or not, sat vacant for what, decades, while they tried to develop it.

[aaron38]

I came across two new proposals in the NW burbs from the Hummel Group, in Barrington and Crystal Lake. Both are mixed use TOD: First floor retail and close to the Metra stations.
Yeah they're PoMo I guess, but Hummel does quality work. They'll be traditional masonry, below grade parking, good infill and density for the neighborhoods. Everything the suburbs need more of.

Barrington
http://i142.photobucket.com/albums/r86/aaron38/misc/Barrington.jpg

Crystal Lake
http://i142.photobucket.com/albums/r86/aaron38/misc/CrystalLake.jpg

[Patel]

:previous:

Do you have addresses on those said projects.

Thanks.

bnk

[Mr Downtown]

Wow. I didn't know Hummel figurines were now making little villages, too.

[Nowhereman1280]

You know, those won't look too bad if they really do use traditional masonry since they are actually the proper scale for classical/pomo style. Its when they try and stretch a style into proportions it was never meant to be built in and use shitty building materials that it gets ridiculous.

[Busy Bee]

^Agreed 100%. I'm not AGAINST neo-traditional design just because I prefer modern. As has been stated many times and is crucial in understanding urban design—it is the mix of both that makes for a fantastic built environment. There is room in the modern world for structures that take their cues from historic styles and reference them appropriately, tastefully and with a high degree of mastery.

[aaron38]

Do you have addresses on those said projects.

The Barrington proposal is on the SW corner of Main and Hough.
The Crystal Lake one is on Main Street near the Metra station, but I'm not sure exactly where.

[ardecila]

The Barrington proposal is on the SW corner of Main and Hough.

100 South Hough Street, roughly. I assume each retailer will get its own address, since the building fills the block.

I've been talking with some guys from Hummel Group about the retailers lined up. They're looking for a major bookstore as an anchor tenant.

Borders doesn't have any nearby locations, so they've been approached (I believe) but the square footage is a little small for them without sprawling onto 3 floors like the one at Randolph/State. This adds major costs of elevators and escalators that might only be worth it in a high-traffic location like downtown. Then again, Deerfield, Naperville, and even Lincolnshire have built 2-story Barnes & Nobles, so it's possible.

I think Barbara's has also been approached.

[pip]

.

[Eventually...Chicago]

I had this theory kicking around in my head for a little while and i figured i would run it through the gauntlet of fire and see what everyone thought.

I was trying to figure out a way to justify places like the BP and Wabash and Roosevelt or like the office depot on orleans and grand(?) and why they might not be too terrible. I was thinking that perhaps these national chains building crap buildings actually serve a purpose of "reserving" sites for future development. For instance, because there is are so many other sites that have potential for development its fine if a few are gobbled up with one story walgreens or branch banks. Take these two scenarios:

#1
a - neighborhood is seeing incredible redevelopment, retailers and residents are flocking to the area
b - while other high profile projects are being built, national chains compete for the best locations
c - boom cools down, national chain stores ebb and flow, some leave some stay
d - as parcels become available, already in good locations, with a singular title holder, new high quality development replaces lower quality chain development

#2
a - neighborhood is seeing incredible redevelopment, retailers and residents are flocking to the area
b - national chains do not build in the area, instead smaller 2,3,4... story buildings get built. Let's say they're condos or perhaps retail and office.
c - when the next boom comes, this site is passed over due to the fragmentary nature of ownership of the site. High quality development looks to other sites.

So i guess that is all i have right now (it was more day dreaming on the EL rather than good hardcore theorizing). My best example of this happening is the BP at halstead, north and clybourn. If this parcel were made up of strip retail, condos or apartments, even, who knows if they would be getting the high quality retail and (presumably) higher quality building.

Rolling it all into one sentence...
If you can't get a quality building which would be the highest, densest and best use for the site, then you are best off with a singular, national, retail use to simplify ownership transfer and ease of building for future projects.

Have away guys!

[VivaLFuego]

Those suburban developments look decent....Barrington and Crystal Lake are pretty far out there and conservative, I hope for the success of these with many more to follow around every Metra station up that way.

[Chicago Shawn]

Wow on the Crystal Lake proposal. When I lived up there in the mid 90's a developer was laughed out of city hall when he proposed a six story building on the Hines Lumberyard, about 2 blocks from the Metra Station. Glad and suprised to see the change of hart regarding the much needed density. This will be the tallest resdiential building in town.

http://i142.photobucket.com/albums/r86/aaron38/misc/CrystalLake.jpg

Good form overall, with the right materials it could come out really nice, but with cheap stuff it wil be another Pomo trainwreck.

[Marcu]

^ Not really sure about the Crystal Lake project being in good form. The roof and the balconies are a little over the top. If the same project was proposed anywhere in Chicago, we'd blast it as pomo garbage. Why the double standard?

[Nowhereman1280]

^^^ I wouldn't blast that if it were proposed here assuming they use real masonry and all. There is tons of that stuff in the Lincoln Park area, you can even see some of it from the Red Line. But it is acceptable because it uses real brick and stone accents and fits right in with all the 3 flats and apartment buildings.

I actually think Pomo infill on the north side is generally very well done and really helps fill out a lot of popular neighborhoods that would otherwise be left with random open lots and parking lots breaking up the rows of three flats.

Also, has anyone else here noticed the sweet new three story building on Belmont just east of the Red Line? With the curvy stainless steel facade? It looks really sweet, I think more infill should have designs like that.

[VivaLFuego]

^ Not really sure about the Crystal Lake project being in good form. The roof and the balconies are a little over the top. If the same project was proposed anywhere in Chicago, we'd blast it as pomo garbage. Why the double standard?

Touche, from the aesthetic perspective, but I'd still applaud the density if that were going up near the Metra stations in, say, Edison Park, Edgebrook, etc.

[jpIllInoIs]

Those suburban developments look decent....Barrington and Crystal Lake are pretty far out there and conservative, I hope for the success of these with many more to follow around every Metra station up that way.

Interesting to note Viva is that the only Chicagoland outlet for Air America is WCPT 820AM in Crystal Lake. Also Crystal Lake hosted the Gay Games rowing events. All of Chicago media showed up for the city council meeting anticipating outraged residents, etc. The vote to host the event sailed through the Council unopposed and without dissent from the public. Lets give the suburbs some credit for progressive thinking if not architecture.:yes:

[VivaLFuego]

Interesting to note Viva is that the only Chicagoland outlet for Air America is WCPT 820AM in Crystal Lake. Also Crystal Lake hosted the Gay Games rowing events. All of Chicago media showed up for the city council meeting anticipating outraged residents, etc. The vote to host the event sailed through the Council unopposed and without dissent from the public. Lets give the suburbs some credit for progressive thinking if not architecture.:yes:

From Wikipedia:
Controversy erupted in the community in February 2006, when it was announced that the Gay Games, which were scheduled to begin July 15, 2006 in Chicago were seeking to hold the rowing events on Crystal Lake. The lake is uniquely suitable to hold such events because of its considerable length and width, and shape. However, Crystal Lake, situated in strongly conservative McHenry County, is home to many conservative Christians, who were opposed to the events on moral grounds. On March 2, 2006, the Crystal Lake Park District voted to reject the Gay Games' application to use the lake for their rowing events, after a tense meeting where over one hundred residents spoke before the board, the majority in opposition. The vote was 2-2, as Crystal Lake Park District President Jerry Sullivan was absent. The deadlocked issue was considered dead. The Gay Games indicated they may seek legal action against the city and the Park District, citing a recently passed Illinois law which prevents discrimination based on sexual orientation.

The controversy continued and of course the event was eventually allowed, but it seems more like a few right-headed leaders are responsible, not the average Crystal Lake-ian. And a municipality doesn't really have any say over the political angle of radio signals broadcast from within their boundaries, unless I'm misinterpreting the first amendment (obviously the FCC has had some issues with this before, but....at least that's legally within their general purview).

[Mr Downtown]

Um, you're forgetting that the previous month 300 people showed up at the Crystal Lake park board to protest having "those people" come to town.

And the "unopposed" city council vote was 6-1. (http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2006-04-05-gay-games_x.htm)

[wrabbit]

Some shots from inside at today's open house at the new Spertus annex:

9-10F
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y150/wjcordier/2spertuspano2.jpg

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y150/wjcordier/L1030197-1.jpg

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y150/wjcordier/L1030175.jpg

View from the 2F cafe(teria)
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y150/wjcordier/L1030181-1.jpg

[ardecila]

Those suburban developments look decent....Barrington and Crystal Lake are pretty far out there and conservative, I hope for the success of these with many more to follow around every Metra station up that way.

The community seems cautiously optimistic so far here in Barrington. The corner used to be occupied by a locally-owned 76 station, but it closed about 2 years ago. Now it is temporary parking for village employees. Except for the Chase branch, all other businesses on the site have closed (a framing shop, a linens shop, a portrait studio, and a menswear store).

Hummel's proposal is huge (for this town at least), much larger than that rendering would indicate. Three buildings of three stories are proposed, and two of them have retail. All three buildings have below-grade parking, and a small lot between the buildings serves for retail customers.

http://img526.imageshack.us/img526/1376/msd1zu7.jpg

[the urban politician]

http://img526.imageshack.us/img526/1376/msd1zu7.jpg

^ You know, there has been a hell of a lot of TOD around Metra stations in Chicago's suburbs. Why hasn't the same taken place in the city itself?

I can only think of the Metra station in Beverly, which has recently gotten a mixed condo/townhome with retail development across the street; Solstice on the Park could be another example (if all goes well). Perhaps there has been a small scattering of others, but nothing really significant that I can think of. Can anybody else?

[VivaLFuego]

^ You know, there has been a hell of a lot of TOD around Metra stations in Chicago's suburbs. Why hasn't the same taken place in the city itself?

Aldermen.

[the urban politician]

^ Perhaps, but there's a lot of NIMBYism in the suburbs as well, with their own town puppet councils. Yet still they are getting these projects.

[BorisMolotov]

Yea, but even some really conservative places like Bartlett (whose residents are opposing a 100 ft cell phone tower in the middle of the woods allowed several 4 story buildings right next to our metra station

[VivaLFuego]

I disagree. If those suburbs had an aldermanic system with wards, thereby diffusing responsibility among many and creating a disconnect between those responsible for revenue/budget-making and those responsible for development, then they would be just as NIMBY as Chicago. The development decisions in the suburbs are made by the same people responsible for the budget, and they know not to frivolously throw away development investment and its resultant tax revenue (property and/or sales). If anything, popular opinion in the burbs is even more anti-development than Chicago (at least in the established burbs), but their power structure is such that one right-headed individual can overcome mob mentality (Crystal Lake, for example). Such accountability and responsibility is so far removed from the individual aldermen in Chicago that they can get away with not giving two shits about the city as a whole and just focus on their vocal NIMBY constituents.

Of course, reforming the aldermanic system would require approval from exactly the people who would have their power reduced by such reform, so it'll never happen. That's why, grudgingly, we pro-development folk need to support the corruption-prone programs such as TIFs, the Planned Development process, and asset privatization, because they at least provide a little power (money, jobs) to City Hall to wield against the Aldermanic tyrants; while the Aldercreatures still have a hand in those programs, of course, City Hall does too, which on the margin could be at least a modest improvement over the status quo.

[Nowhereman1280]

One of my friends is planning on running to be the alderman of the 49th ward in the next few years. He is going to run on a position of fighting back against LUC buying up all the the productive, tax generating, properties and then no longer paying taxes on them (because they are Non-profit) while kicking existing residents out. I have a feeling that idea will become very popular in Rogers Park where people are tired of getting kicked around by the university.

Also, he is pro gentrification while also being pro-mix income housing and development. He says the problem with Rogers Park is that it is something like 65% subsidized housing and that creates huge problems of segregation and ghettoization, especially north of Howard. I'm voting for him when he does run...

[the urban politician]

I disagree. If those suburbs had an aldermanic system with wards, thereby diffusing responsibility among many and creating a disconnect between those responsible for revenue/budget-making and those responsible for development, then they would be just as NIMBY as Chicago. The development decisions in the suburbs are made by the same people responsible for the budget, and they know not to frivolously throw away development investment and its resultant tax revenue (property and/or sales). If anything, popular opinion in the burbs is even more anti-development than Chicago (at least in the established burbs), but their power structure is such that one right-headed individual can overcome mob mentality (Crystal Lake, for example). Such accountability and responsibility is so far removed from the individual aldermen in Chicago that they can get away with not giving two shits about the city as a whole and just focus on their vocal NIMBY constituents.

Of course, reforming the aldermanic system would require approval from exactly the people who would have their power reduced by such reform, so it'll never happen. That's why, grudgingly, we pro-development folk need to support the corruption-prone programs such as TIFs, the Planned Development process, and asset privatization, because they at least provide a little power (money, jobs) to City Hall to wield against the Aldermanic tyrants; while the Aldercreatures still have a hand in those programs, of course, City Hall does too, which on the margin could be at least a modest improvement over the status quo.

^ Great explanation. I guess perhaps this largely explains why there is such a divide between the immense density of downtown verses the relative low density of Chicago's neighborhoods? City Hall probably has a LOT more influence on downtown development then, say Portage Park. Would that be an accurate assessment?