CHICAGO | General Developments

[wrab]

^ Yeah - pretty amazing. And that view is one of the good things about the new Pritzker Park - it really opens up vistas to the Old Colony, the Fisher & the Weese Correctional Center

[BWChicago]

The Edison (now Board of Education) Building at Clark/Adams. I think there's resistance to doing anything that might be thought of as a "waste" of money needed for education, though a few years ago there was a rumor that TIFF money had been allocated for the project.

Yes, that really casts a pall over Federal Plaza. And it's a Burnham building too - but man, that terra cotta needs a lot of work. The Clark/Adams building at the southwest corner needs cleaning badly too.

[Nowhereman1280]

How long do you guys think these cleanings will last? Supposedly the air now is much cleaner (particulate wise) than it was even 30 years ago, not to mention the coal burning days of the first half of the century. How long will it take for these buildings to get dirty like this again? Will they ever even be able to get this blackened again?

[nomarandlee]

A more sanitized corporate version of food vendors coming......

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chicago/chi-food-kiosks-city-zone-03-jul03,0,4093395.story

Firm behind bus shelters will install 5 food kiosks in city parks
Pritzker Park first in line for food stand from JCDecaux
By Mike Helfgot | Special to the Tribune
July 3, 2009

The French company behind the city's advertising-driven bus shelters wants to improve the dining options in the city's parks.

As part of its 2002 contract to provide the city with 2,400 "street furniture" items in return for the right to sell advertising space on them, JCDecaux can install up to five "cafe kiosks" in parks throughout the city.

The first one, in the Loop's Pritzker Park, could be opened by fall, and there are tentative plans for additional structures to be placed in Grant Park's Solti Garden and at Roosevelt Road and Michigan Avenue by next spring, according to Grant Park Conservancy President Bob O'Neill.

"The prototype is really nice, a considerable improvement," O'Neill said. "It is the same idea as the bus shelters. They were run down and graffiti-ridden, and now they are really nice structures. They will be some of the nicest kiosks selling food of any parks in the country."

The kiosks, like the bus shelters cost the city nothing, but can have advertising panels. Advertising must be subject to Chicago Park District sponsorship agreements. The company also provides newsstands and pole-mounted panels.

JCDecaux will pay the city $307 million over the life of the deal.

The kiosks are expected to cost $50,000 to install, significantly more than the $12,500 the bus shelters cost.

They are to be 14.5 feet wide, 14.5 feet deep and 9.5 feet high, painted black with silver accents and have metal curved roofs supported by tubular columns and structural walls. Each is supposed to have multiple walk-up windows.

Vendors are being recruited with the idea of creating a variety of options.

"We don't just want hamburgers and hot dogs," O'Neill said. "We'd like to have different ethnic foods from different city venues to reflect Chicago's culinary heritage. One of the complaints we get a lot is that there are surprisingly few places to eat along the waterfront."

[J_M_Tungsten]

http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f21/cbotnyse/my%20photos/Image9.jpg

Taken from cbotnyse thread http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=171176. Awesome thread, check it out if you havent yet.

Does anyone know if there are any plans for the undeveloped lot just south of the river? It seems like a very large vacant lot in a prime lakfront view to just be sitting there empty. :shrug:

[BVictor1]

That's Lake Shore East. The entire plot of land was vacant in 2000.

[J_M_Tungsten]

Thats where the golf course was right? They built alot of it up, I was wondering if there were any plans for the remainder of the vacant lot?

[ChiMack]

Westahaven Development is having troubles does anyone know if other mixed income buildings are having the same problems?

westhaven problems (http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-cha-class-clash-30-jun30,0,5368357.story?page=1)
Low-income apartment dwellers and middle-class condo owners have shared Westhaven Park Tower since the building opened in 2006 -- an innovative setup that the city hoped would unite residents and exemplify Chicago's $1.6 billion overhaul of public housing.

Proximity, however, has not led to harmony."
"

[trvlr70]

Thats where the golf course was right? They built alot of it up, I was wondering if there were any plans for the remainder of the vacant lot?

There are plans to develop the remainder of the available land. But those structures are yet years away. It time it will happen.

[Busy Bee]

A couple good sized towers are planned there, but obviously won't happen until the next condo cycle—then some probably.

[ardecila]

Magellan has shown they are in it for the long haul at Lakeshore East. I doubt any new towers will begin for a few years, but at least some of the vacant land will be filled when they begin construction on the Village Market complex.

At that point, the park will be (almost) surrounded, leaving only two small lots at the NE and NW corners. These will be occupied by an elementary school and more parkhomes, respectively.

To be honest, the whole parkhome concept irritates me. It's better than a parking podium fronting the street, but in the core of the central area, land should not be occupied by townhomes. Developers have parcels too small to build towers on, but with land values too high for more modest structures. The only idea that's been broached are these awkwardly-proportioned, gigantic townhomes that only a few can afford. The Parkhomes start at $1.7 million, for chrissake. They tried it for the two lots at the NE and NW corners of Dearborn/Polk in Printers Row, but those do not match the scale of the street and don't belong there.

[Busy Bee]

I think most of us on this forum agree that those parkhomes suck and a true midrise structure, 8-15 floors would have been a significantly better urban design solution than these ridiculous (and ugly) townhouses.

[ChicagoChicago]

^^^^

I don't know why I thought Arquitectonica was going in that spot...

[a chicago bearcat]

great article in ChicagoArchitect about both Lakeshore East and Southworks

[lawfin]

great article in ChicagoArchitect about both Lakeshore East and Southworks

is there a link? or print only?

[BVictor1]

The Chicago Department of Zoning and Planning Invites You to a Presentation of the Chicago Central Area Action Plan

Thursday, July 9 from 6:30 to 8 PM

A community presentation will be held at Roosevelt University at 400 S. Michigan Ave. in the Congress Lounge. For more information, please call 312-744-2850.



The Chicago Plan Commission to Vote on the Chicago Central Area Action Plan



Wednesday, July 15 at 1 PM



A public hearing and vote will be held at City Hall, in Council Chambers (2nd Floor), at 121 N. LaSalle St. Those wishing to testify either for or against this item should arrive early and sign in. The text of the agenda item is below (blue text). For more information, please call (312) 744-5777.



“A proposed plan (Chicago Central Area Action Plan) for Chicago’s central business district and adjacent neighborhoods an area bounded by North Avenue on the north, the Stevenson Expressway on the south, Lake Michigan on the east and Halsted Street on the west, but also including the west loop area bounded by Halsted Street on the east, Ashland on the west, Lake Street on the north and the Eisenhower Expressway on the south. The Plan identifies and prioritizes Transportation, Urban Design and Open Space projects to allow the area to continue to grow while balancing the needs of residents, workers, tourists, shoppers and others who visit the Central Area. (2nd 3rd 27th 42nd and 43 Wards).”

[cbotnyse]

Taken from cbotnyse thread http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=171176. Awesome thread, check it out if you havent yet.

Does anyone know if there are any plans for the undeveloped lot just south of the river? It seems like a very large vacant lot in a prime lakfront view to just be sitting there empty. :shrug:thanks! that pic is not the best, it is blurry and I couldnt save it in PS. :yuck:

yeah that plot is primo. I remember I heard the idea of another 2000 footer there. Could you imagine that and the Spire at the mouth of the river? ah its nice to dream.

That entire plot was a golf course and I remember I played it once. (had to be late 90s). what an awesome experience that was.

[emathias]

[SIZE="3"]...
[B]The Chicago Plan Commission to Vote on the Chicago Central Area Action Plan
...

So, what is the significance of their vote on this? If they vote yes does anything actually happen?

[Mr Downtown]

^Well, it gets put on the shelf with the other adopted plans.

[spyguy]

http://soarchicago.org/News_Views/details.cfm?NID=56

New Parking Facility Planned for Ontario St. & Ohio St.

When plans were approved to begin the construction of the new Children's Memorial Hospital on Chicago Avenue, the medical campus institutions committed to constructing a parking facility to support the institutional patient and staff growth projections through 2012.

The new parking facility will be built and owned by Northwestern Memorial Hospital and will be located at 441-459 E. Ontario / 440-458 E. Ohio St.

The proposed above grade facility will provide a new state of the art day care facility for 375 children along with approximately 1,300 parking spaces. At present the structure is envisioned to have day care services on the first two floors of the building topped off with 12 stories of parking.

On or about June 30, 2009, an application to change the zoning of the site will be filed along with an application to approve the concept under the Lake Michigan and Chicago Lakefront Protection Ordinance. Buildings and residents within 250 feet of the proposed structure will be receiving a notice to this effect.

On July 29 the project will be introduced to the City Council. This is NOT an approval for the project, but an announcement of it. Northwestern Memorial Hospital will seek community input to the proposal before it goes to the City's Plan Commission for approval.

It is anticipated that construction of the facility will begin in October 2010 and open in January 2012.

[harryc]

thanks! that pic is not the best, it is blurry and I couldnt save it in PS. :yuck:

That entire plot was a golf course and I remember I played it once. (had to be late 90s). what an awesome experience that was.

I remember drinking down there, and then climbing the billboard - must have been the late 70s

[ardecila]

^^ 2 stories of active use at ground level isn't bad for a parking garage. Let's hope Northwestern does something decent with the design. Greenway Self Park isn't far enough along to judge its architectural merits, but it looks to be light-years beyond every other standalone garage downtown.

[emathias]

http://soarchicago.org/News_Views/details.cfm?NID=56

New Parking Facility Planned for Ontario St. & Ohio St.

...
The new parking facility will be built and owned by Northwestern Memorial Hospital and will be located at 441-459 E. Ontario / 440-458 E. Ohio St.
...

It's really unfortunate that SOAR and Reilly don't negotiate a street or at least a pedestrian throughfare through that block in that location. That's one of those overly-long industrial blocks that could really benefit pedestrians by being split.

[ardecila]

^^ Contact SOAR about it. They're still working with Northwestern on the garage design.

[ChicagoChicago]

Village Green seeks TIF district for Loop apartment project

(Crain’s) — A Michigan developer is resurrecting a plan to convert a 45-story vintage Loop office building into apartments after the credit crisis doomed financing for the project late last year.

Village Green Cos. aims to rely on a mix of public funding sources to pay for the $141-million development at 188 W. Randolph St., the kind of risky project that private lenders won’t touch anymore. An earlier financing package fell apart last year after commercial banks refused to back municipal bonds that would have helped pay for the conversion.


Village Green wants to convert 188 W. Randolph into a 313-unit apartment building. Photo from CoStar Group Inc.
The new plan doesn’t include private lenders, but it does envision a role for the city, which might form forming a new tax-increment financing (TIF) district to help pay for the project...


http://www.chicagobusiness.com/cgi-bin/news.pl?id=34671

[ChicagoChicago]

^^^

I suppose this is an excellent example of what we as taxpayers should save and what we should let go. The cost per unit will be around $455k to renovate. Personally, I'd rather see tax money go to saving this building that throwing tens of millions at a project like Block 37 for a CTA station that may or may not ever be built.

[denizen467]

It's really unfortunate that SOAR and Reilly don't negotiate a street or at least a pedestrian throughfare through that block in that location. That's one of those overly-long industrial blocks that could really benefit pedestrians by being split.
-Well maybe it will include it. The Erie/Ontario garage has an easy (if not immediately obvious and not official) way for peds to pass through mid block.
-Which trips would this aid anyway? Looking at the potential destinations on Ontario or Ohio, a very, very limited number of people would need a pass-through.
-Security & maintenance: Ohio gets lots of summertime beach ped traffic because of the LSD underpass; I don't think SOAR would want to encourage more alleyways where people could loiter, litter, etc. Who will pay to clean and surveill?

[Taft]

My landlord attended the meeting and then passed out copies of this story to the entire building.

http://www.yournews.com/copyroom/postmynews.asp?empid=0&zipcode=70634&STORY_id=89804&sections_id=381&sections_CHILD_id=0&FULLNAME=


A new Trader Joe’s market is slated to open in Lake View as early as July 2010, filling a void in grocery shopping options.

By CRYSTAL FENCKE

CHICAGO (YN) - The store will be located at 667 W. Diversey Parkway., just blocks from the Dominick’s the neighborhood lost to fire five years ago.

...

It will be at the site of a current parking lot that has long served the area, and a vacant but extant three-flat residence. Just to the east are open retail spaces which formerly housed a Barnes & Noble book store and a Pier 1 Imports. Those spots are currently being considered for new tenants, said Chris Oakley, an architect representing M Development.

...

Residents are generally in favor of the chain expanding to Lake View, but peppered Oakley and the others with questions about two changes some feel would affect the character of the community: plans to convert Orchard from a one-way to a two-way street up to the alley; and a new traffic signal at Orchard and Diversey.

Luay Aboona is a traffic and parking planning consultant, with a firm that conducted a study rating the flow on Diversey. He said that without instituting those changes to minimize the blocking of vehicles, “right now it’s on the edge of being a failure.”

Regarding the new two-way designation, concerned neighbors believed that drivers won’t realize the change is only on one block of Orchard. They fear that when drivers notice they’ve overshot the short two-way stretch, they’ll be prompted to turn around and possibly endanger children.

53-foot semi trucks will travel down North Halsted Street and east down Schubert to reach the Trader Joe’s loading dock to be located on Orchard. Resident Deanna Accurso worried that the trucks, which will make three daily deliveries, will impede auto traffic. “You can hardly get down Schubert now,” she said. However, the dock at the building should facilitate unloading and help to avoid the trucks’ need to back up, maintaining a clear narrow artery.

...


I like the details that I'm hearing for the most part (though I still would've rather had a Roundy's...).

But I, too, question the wisdom of using Orchard and/or Schubert for deliveries. The orchard plan makes a degree of sense as I'm guessing they will eliminate a few parking spots to widen Orchard (sort of like the treatment given to the Whole Foods at Halsted/Waveland). And I think a simple "Dead End" sign would prevent the problem some residents brought up. But I think Schubert could be a legitimate problem. From that article, it was difficult to tell whether Schubert was a planned delivery route or whether residents were just concerned that it might be. But if that's the plan, it would turn out terribly. Schubert is about the width of Orchard, but is a two-way street. As it stands, two cars often have difficulties passing each other or making turns around each other on Schubert. Frequent delivery trucks on that street would make it a nightmare.

Anyway, lots of interesting info there for people living in the hood.

[jc5680]

:previous: That can only be good for the area. I used to live only a few blocks from there on wrightwood, when I decided to move in april the lack of resonable grocery options was definitly an influence on my choice.

The Market Place, and Lincoln Park Market are good enough to get you buy, but the prices and selection were ridiculous compared to a Dominick's/Jewel. Forget about picking up some beer or wine with your food at either of those places as well. 8.99 for a six-pack of miller light, come on now… for a dollar less I can get a twelve-pack at jewel.

Also, its good to see that surface lot go, but why not take over one of the vacant barnes and noble or pier one buildings?

[Marcu]

^ Hopefully this additional Trader Joe's will alleviate some of the traffic from the one on Lincoln in Lakeview, which is insanely crowded almost any day of the week. Realistically, the N and NW Sides and nearby burbs (Skokie, Evanston, Niles) can probably support 2-3 additional Trader Joe's.

[Chicagoguy]

I was wondering if anyone had heard anything about upcoming changes to the area surrounding the Kimball Brown Line stop. I know they just finished a luxury midrise of 6 floors there as well as I saw some new construction of what looked like retail stores...I was just curious if anyone new of anything else planned for that area?

[lawfin]

^ Hopefully this additional Trader Joe's will alleviate some of the traffic from the one on Lincoln in Lakeview, which is insanely crowded almost any day of the week. Realistically, the N and NW Sides and nearby burbs (Skokie, Evanston, Niles) can probably support 2-3 additional Trader Joe's.

No Shit I would love to get a Trader Joe's...even though I do not shop there often...on Morse in Rogers Park....where the old Wamu....and before thaat Osco was.....Morse has some nascent retail....but could use a shot in the arm....a Trader Joes could what the doctor ordered

[lawfin]

I was wondering if anyone had heard anything about upcoming changes to the area surrounding the Kimball Brown Line stop. I know they just finished a luxury midrise of 6 floors there as well as I saw some new construction of what looked like retail stores...I was just curious if anyone new of anything else planned for that area?

Really do you have pics.....I think development in that scale....say between 5-8 stories within a block or two of transit station is a great...great idea.

[woodrow]

I'm pleased about the Trader Joe's, but it isn't a good replacement for a Dominick's or Jewel or Treasure Island or . . . I want a full scale Dominick's back on Broadway - DAMMIT! I sometimes tire of my mile roundtrip schlep to T.I., esp. in winter.

[Chicagoguy]

Really do you have pics.....I think development in that scale....say between 5-8 stories within a block or two of transit station is a great...great idea.

I dont know how to add pics on here but the new Luxury midrise is called Kimball Station and you can look at the pics on their website. It was just finished and they are renting the units out. I actually move in the end of this month. It is nice because you have a view of the entire northside of the city...from Evanston to Downtown. Just curious if they have more development planned for the area...more retail is definitely needed!

[Taft]

I'm pleased about the Trader Joe's, but it isn't a good replacement for a Dominick's or Jewel or Treasure Island or . . . I want a full scale Dominick's back on Broadway - DAMMIT! I sometimes tire of my mile roundtrip schlep to T.I., esp. in winter.

No kidding. Every time I walk past that empty lot on Broadway I get a little bummed.

And this is exactly why I wish this Trader Joe's was a Roundy's instead. Nothing against Trader Joe's, but it isn't really a full supermarket replacement and our little corner of LP/LV really needs one now. Heck, even a Whole Foods would've filled that need a bit better (of course at a cost).

Not that I should complain...being able to walk a couple blocks to pick up some food will be great.

[pottebaum]

Good to hear about the Trader Joe's--with both Barnes and Noble and Pier 1 closing, that section of Diversey could really use a boost. Also, I wonder who's looking at the old Barnes and Noble location. It's a pretty big space.

[spyguy]

Apparently the Shell gas station at Chicago & Orleans will become a drive-through National City bank.

[emathias]

Apparently the Shell gas station at Chicago & Orleans will become a drive-through National City bank.

That's a shame. That corner is ripe for a nice building to fill out the corner.

[ardecila]

I'm pleased about the Trader Joe's, but it isn't a good replacement for a Dominick's or Jewel or Treasure Island or . . . I want a full scale Dominick's back on Broadway - DAMMIT! I sometimes tire of my mile roundtrip schlep to T.I., esp. in winter.

You would have your Dominick's, if it weren't for Robert Vanecko.

[VivaLFuego]

I dont know how to add pics on here but the new Luxury midrise is called Kimball Station and you can look at the pics on their website. It was just finished and they are renting the units out. I actually move in the end of this month. It is nice because you have a view of the entire northside of the city...from Evanston to Downtown. Just curious if they have more development planned for the area...more retail is definitely needed!

Lawrence Ave is a pretty impressive continuous stretch of retail, and there's a decent amount along Kedzie as well... what's missing from that area?

[VivaLFuego]

Apparently the Shell gas station at Chicago & Orleans will become a drive-through National City bank.

Drive-thrus aren't allowed by right in the underlying C1-5 zoning, are they? Don't they require a special use permit? What's so frickin' hard about just saying no to pedestrian-hostile development in Chicago's Central Area (a mere 1 block from a rapid transit station, no less)?

[lawfin]

Apparently the Shell gas station at Chicago & Orleans will become a drive-through National City bank.
FAN phukin Tastic

[Chicagoguy]

Lawrence Ave is a pretty impressive continuous stretch of retail, and there's a decent amount along Kedzie as well... what's missing from that area?

Well from what I could tell there wasnt a large grocery store anywhere in the area. Alot of little markets but no Dominicks, Jewel, or something like that? Would also be nice if there were more restaurants...but I think that might be a couple of the things being built in the new retail building going up?

[spyguy]

Alderman Reilly Seeks Your Support for His New Ordinance Assisting Historic Structures

Alderman Reilly seeks your support for an ordinance which he introduced at the last City Council meeting on June 3rd. Click here (http://i733.photobucket.com/albums/ww338/Reilly2011/AmendmenttoCZOSection17-8-0600.jpg) to view a copy of the ordinance. The purpose of the ordinance is to broaden the possibilities for redevelopment and reuse of structures 50 years or older, with historic status or actual landmark status. Alderman Reilly has growing concerns over older building stock in the ward facing high vacancy rates due to their obsolescence. The city cannot afford for these important buildings to ultimately be abandoned and left to deteriorate because their zoning does not allow for the flexibility necessary for redevelopment. In this environment, we need creative approaches to retain and whenever possible, expand our economic base.

Specifically, this proposed ordinance expands the Elective Planned Development Thresholds - Section 17-8-0600 adding an additional category for older buildings, allowing those owners to take advantage of the Planned Development process. Currently, if a building does not meet the elective thresholds, redevelopment is restricted to its zoning classification. With this amendment, owners seeking to redevelop their property can seek relief from zoning restrictions related to Floor Area Ratio (FAR), Minimum Lot Area (MLA), parking requirements and building height.

Alderman Reilly's proposed ordinance will be heard at Committee on Zoning next Thursday, July 16th at 10:00am in City Council Chambers. He respectfully request your support and testimony at Committee to reflect the need for flexibility at this difficult economic time as well as the importance of incentivizing preservation of our most significant structures. If you have any questions or would like further discussion, please reach out to Madeleine, Alderman Reilly's Chief-of-Staff for assistance. Thank you for your consideration for this important issue.

[Dr. Taco]

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y6/jstush04/newlutherangeneralchildrenshopsital.jpg

"newly constructed" lutheran general children's hospital. looked really nice

[VivaLFuego]

^ In general I like Reilly's proposal - it's not ideal to solve every deficiency in the zoning code via the Planned Development process (which basically exists to end run around zoning), but hey, it's still progress if it makes the rehabilitation of historic structures more viable by not making them automatically non-conforming for lacking open space and off-street parking.

General kudos to Reilly on this. I suppose time will tell which particular interest is driving this proposal and who wrote the language in the amendment - my first guess of course would be Friedman, who owns many non-conforming, historic-but-not-landmarked properties in Reilly's ward, and probably has some ideas he'd like to enact for them.

[Nowhereman1280]

No Shit I would love to get a Trader Joe's...even though I do not shop there often...on Morse in Rogers Park....where the old Wamu....and before thaat Osco was.....Morse has some nascent retail....but could use a shot in the arm....a Trader Joes could what the doctor ordered

Really? I don't think Morse, which has its own unique artsy and community feel, should have a box store of any kind anywhere near it. Nor would it ever happen, the community is Rogers Park is very strong and very against box stores anywhere near them for whatever reason. There is a reason why the only grocery store actually in the physical boundaries of the park is the Dominicks at Howard (that only got through because the city needed an anchor to the craptastic gateway development). The same goes for pharmacies like CVS and Walgreen's, the only one that is really in the central Rogers Park area is the brand new one at Loyola el station, which only got through because Loyola is the only other force (other than the city) that can force or trick the community into doing something they don't want to do.

I think the community is generally wrong in driving these stores away from the neighborhood, but I would never want one anywhere near the Morse district. They almost put a Trader Joes in the Granville (corner of Granville and Broadway) and I think the only appropriate place for box stores in the neighborhood is in the already existing parking lots along Broadway and Clark. Not to mention Morse is far too small of a street to handle the traffic generated by a grocery store, its covered in stop signs.

That's a shame. That corner is ripe for a nice building to fill out the corner.

Guys, I don't think this is any worse than the existing gas station. Both can easily be torn down when the time is right and the plot becomes ripe for highrise construction. I'd be pissed if they built a 6 story pomo condo building, but having a gas station turn into a bank isn't very bad. They are about equally destructive to the streetscape and equally tear downable.

[lawfin]

Really? I don't think Morse, which has its own unique artsy and community feel, should have a box store of any kind anywhere near it. Nor would it ever happen, the community is Rogers Park is very strong and very against box stores anywhere near them for whatever reason. There is a reason why the only grocery store actually in the physical boundaries of the park is the Dominicks at Howard (that only got through because the city needed an anchor to the craptastic gateway development). The same goes for pharmacies like CVS and Walgreen's, the only one that is really in the central Rogers Park area is the brand new one at Loyola el station, which only got through because Loyola is the only other force (other than the city) that can force or trick the community into doing something they don't want to do.

I think the community is generally wrong in driving these stores away from the neighborhood, but I would never want one anywhere near the Morse district. They almost put a Trader Joes in the Granville (corner of Granville and Broadway) and I think the only appropriate place for box stores in the neighborhood is in the already existing parking lots along Broadway and Clark. Not to mention Morse is far too small of a street to handle the traffic generated by a grocery store, its covered in stop signs.



Guys, I don't think this is any worse than the existing gas station. Both can easily be torn down when the time is right and the plot becomes ripe for highrise construction. I'd be pissed if they built a 6 story pomo condo building, but having a gas station turn into a bank isn't very bad. They are about equally destructive to the streetscape and equally tear downable.
Well I know for a fact the Gordon...the man who ran against Joe Moore ij the last election had talks with Trader Joes about the spot on Morse I am speaking about. It has in the past housed several box stores as you term it. It was for years an Osco....I can;t recall now if it was also a Jewel Osco combo......it has been a Wamu.....so it has been a "box" type store before. Tthe building of which I speak is a single story schlock....building that has parking already on its side.....It really is only useful as currently constituted for a "box" store....though I wouldn't mind it being torn down for something like the CVS as Lawrence and Damen.

I agree with your sentiment that I would not want to tear down most of buildings along Morse ...most of which are decent quality though some are dilapidated and could use some work. However, while it is nice a romantic to speak of the Morse Arts district, as a Rogers Park native and property owner who lives about a 5 minute walk form the Morse L I can attest to the need for an anchor tenant on Morse, it would help draw more traffic and more businesses...and maybe allow a few TOD's to be developed as well. Much of the businesses on Morse are holding on....but could potentially flourish.....Morse used to be a sort of Main Street for Rogers PArk..years ago....it has unfortunately gone through a tough 3 decades...and quite frankly was down right nasty during most of the 1990's and earlier this decade.There has been an uptick recently but I am afraid that the recession may stymie this nascent strip.

[ardecila]

^ In general I like Reilly's proposal - it's not ideal to solve every deficiency in the zoning code via the Planned Development process (which basically exists to end run around zoning), but hey, it's still progress if it makes the rehabilitation of historic structures more viable by not making them automatically non-conforming for lacking open space and off-street parking.

General kudos to Reilly on this. I suppose time will tell which particular interest is driving this proposal and who wrote the language in the amendment - my first guess of course would be Friedman, who owns many non-conforming, historic-but-not-landmarked properties in Reilly's ward, and probably has some ideas he'd like to enact for them.

The same Friedman who balked at extending landmark protection to his buildings in the form of the River North Historic District?

Granted, the point may be moot with the impending castration of Chicago's landmark ordinance.

[J_M_Tungsten]

removed by user

[Mojava]

Drive-thrus aren't allowed by right in the underlying C1-5 zoning, are they?

There's a freestanding drive-up Chase bank at Dearborn and Ohio.

[VivaLFuego]

The same Friedman who balked at extending landmark protection to his buildings in the form of the River North Historic District?

Granted, the point may be moot with the impending castration of Chicago's landmark ordinance.

Correct. My hypothesis is basically that he has something cooking that would involve heavily modifying/rehabbing his historic structures, that he could do if zoning were relaxed but he couldn't do if they were landmarked. Thus, my thinking is that the River North Landmark District proposal has more or less built the dust due to intense lobbying by specific property owners who would be affected, and this is the 'compromise' that would generally 'save' the structures but still allow whatever would have been disallowed or at least made difficult by landmarking - most likely gut interior rehabs and miscellaneous facade modifications. On the surface, it sounds like a reasonable compromise, though obviously (1) outright landmarking is preferable for the best structures and (2) there's still something unsettling about deficiencies in the zoning code being rectified by making the zoning code ever more meaningless and applied to fewer and fewer developments. At some point the city should either throw in the towel on zoning and approve every development on a case-by-case basis (which we're getting close to already with the entire Planned Development machine) or fix the zoning code to actually represent what people want to get built and what people want to build. I'm curious to see what's cooking, since I refuse to believe this proposed amendment came purely out of Rational Planner Reilly (though my snark is not to detract from the possibility that this could be a successful and positive compromise achievement of his).

[Marcu]

Really? I don't think Morse, which has its own unique artsy and community feel, should have a box store of any kind anywhere near it. Nor would it ever happen, the community is Rogers Park is very strong and very against box stores anywhere near them for whatever reason. There is a reason why the only grocery store actually in the physical boundaries of the park is the Dominicks at Howard (that only got through because the city needed an anchor to the craptastic gateway development). The same goes for pharmacies like CVS and Walgreen's, the only one that is really in the central Rogers Park area is the brand new one at Loyola el station, which only got through because Loyola is the only other force (other than the city) that can force or trick the community into doing something they don't want to do.


I agree. A Trader Joe's will never happen on Morse. It is simply not the type of street where Trader Joe's typically has a presence. If Trader Joe's does decide to locate in Rogers Park, it is almost guaranteed to be on Clark Street, where chains are already abundant. However, Trader Joe's is much more likely to locate either in nearby Downtown Evanston, somewhere close to Lincolnwood Town Center, or along the Touhy Avenue stripmall corridor in Skokie/Niles. RP is simply too income diverse for TJ judging by their previous location decisions, which range from high income yuppie areas to affluent suburbs.

As for RP's supposed disdain for chains, I have to disagree. As someone who has tracked RP's political developments for some time, I have a hard time believing the RP establishment's stance is anything more than a desire to land businesses they like, and keep out business they don't like. Walmart and Jewel=bad, Target and Whole Foods=good. It really has very little to do with design. They'll take a stripmall Whole Foods over a Jewel built to the grid any day. That being said, I don't believe a Trader Joe's would face any opposition.

[J_M_Tungsten]

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y6/jstush04/newlutherangeneralchildrenshopsital.jpg

"newly constructed" lutheran general children's hospital. looked really nice

Awesome, I havent seen this completed yet, do you have anymore pictures?

[emathias]

...
Guys, I don't think this is any worse than the existing gas station. Both can easily be torn down when the time is right and the plot becomes ripe for highrise construction. I'd be pissed if they built a 6 story pomo condo building, but having a gas station turn into a bank isn't very bad. They are about equally destructive to the streetscape and equally tear downable.

I agree that in theory they coudl be, but are there actually any examples of drive-through banks being torn down for something else?

[Dr. Taco]

Awesome, I havent seen this completed yet, do you have anymore pictures?

naw, i'm not quite a photo journalist yet, haha. i just snapped a photo really quick while exiting portillos

[Mr Downtown]

^Well, you have the cleanup costs. The sites are contaminated with greed and creeping suburbanism and all that has to be removed or remediated. :)

However, the Metcalfe Federal Building at Clark/Jackson was formerly the Continental Illinois drive-through.

[Nowhereman1280]

@ lawfin: I am not familiar with that building, are you talking about that small thing a few blocks west of the el? I can see that holding a pharmacy, but not a full blown grocery store. I still don't think Morse, the physical road, can support that kind of car traffic. I am just mad that the TJ at Granville fell through, that would have been great for the redevelopment of the area, especially along Broadway where more buildings like the Morgan are needed to fill in all the drive throughs and parking lots (though thats outside the realm of RP, its close enough to have an impact).


As for RP's supposed disdain for chains, I have to disagree. As someone who has tracked RP's political developments for some time, I have a hard time believing the RP establishment's stance is anything more than a desire to land businesses they like, and keep out business they don't like. Walmart and Jewel=bad, Target and Whole Foods=good. It really has very little to do with design. They'll take a stripmall Whole Foods over a Jewel built to the grid any day. That being said, I don't believe a Trader Joe's would face any opposition.

I'm not talking about the "establishment" (I would argue there really is no establishment or "head to the beast" in RP, its very grassroots, but that's a different discussion) I am talking about community opinion. The community in RP is very much terrified of the g-word (gentrification) and rabidly opposes anything they think will lead to it (I've spent a lot of time around Loyola Community relations and Capital Improvements to see this first hand). There is a good reason why Rogers Park has only one chain grocery store that is relegated to a crappy stripmall on the far edge of the community.

[Jibba]

Apparently the Shell gas station at Chicago & Orleans will become a drive-through National City bank.

Seriously? When will these bullshit developments cease? I don't care about the (possibly legitimate) rationalizations for these crappy builds; they are leaving little chance for a nice, walkable neighborhood to fill out those bombed-out areas near Cabrini.

[lawfin]

@ lawfin: I am not familiar with that building, are you talking about that small thing a few blocks west of the el? I can see that holding a pharmacy, but not a full blown grocery store. I still don't think Morse, the physical road, can support that kind of car traffic. I am just mad that the TJ at Granville fell through, that would have been great for the redevelopment of the area, especially along Broadway where more buildings like the Morgan are needed to fill in all the drive throughs and parking lots (though thats outside the realm of RP, its close enough to have an impact).



I'm not talking about the "establishment" (I would argue there really is no establishment or "head to the beast" in RP, its very grassroots, but that's a different discussion) I am talking about community opinion. The community in RP is very much terrified of the g-word (gentrification) and rabidly opposes anything they think will lead to it (I've spent a lot of time around Loyola Community relations and Capital Improvements to see this first hand). There is a good reason why Rogers Park has only one chain grocery store that is relegated to a crappy stripmall on the far edge of the community.

Soon to be a second...with the resurrection of DOminick's on ridge....I'd say by mid-august or so.

I don't know the exact address on Morse.....but it is a single story building....it has housed an Osco, actually for quite a while, then a Wamu, it has a parking lot on the side.....I can't remember what it is right now....I try to block it out of my head everytime I walk by. It is about a block or so west of the L on the south of Morse; actually it might be a combo dollar store laundry.

here is a link to building...pic is old http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=1400+W.+Morse,+Chicago,+il&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=33.764224,56.513672&ie=UTF8&ll=42.010259,-87.666156&spn=0.007733,0.013797&t=h&z=16&layer=c&cbll=42.007767,-87.667143&panoid=bFj3k0uIurJUf9PI3ku_eg&cbp=12,180.14,,0,5



What is planned at the Granville??

[lawfin]

I agree. A Trader Joe's will never happen on Morse. It is simply not the type of street where Trader Joe's typically has a presence. If Trader Joe's does decide to locate in Rogers Park, it is almost guaranteed to be on Clark Street, where chains are already abundant. However, Trader Joe's is much more likely to locate either in nearby Downtown Evanston, somewhere close to Lincolnwood Town Center, or along the Touhy Avenue stripmall corridor in Skokie/Niles. RP is simply too income diverse for TJ judging by their previous location decisions, which range from high income yuppie areas to affluent suburbs.

As for RP's supposed disdain for chains, I have to disagree. As someone who has tracked RP's political developments for some time, I have a hard time believing the RP establishment's stance is anything more than a desire to land businesses they like, and keep out business they don't like. Walmart and Jewel=bad, Target and Whole Foods=good. It really has very little to do with design. They'll take a stripmall Whole Foods over a Jewel built to the grid any day. That being said, I don't believe a Trader Joe's would face any opposition.

Other than the absolutley horrible Mcd's at Pratt and Clark and the even more dreadful Walgreens (they should be banned from developing any more in the city until they adopt more responsible design) of what chains do you speak?


RP does have its share of lower income working and non-working section 8 types. But it also has a growing population of relatively well off people buying SFH's that may be the best bang for your buck in the city....I think the area could support it.

The questionable part is the desire of a corporation to enter what may appear to be a challenging and unconventional market

[lawfin]

@ lawfin: I am not familiar with that building, are you talking about that small thing a few blocks west of the el? I can see that holding a pharmacy, but not a full blown grocery store. I still don't think Morse, the physical road, can support that kind of car traffic. I am just mad that the TJ at Granville fell through, that would have been great for the redevelopment of the area, especially along Broadway where more buildings like the Morgan are needed to fill in all the drive throughs and parking lots (though thats outside the realm of RP, its close enough to have an impact).



I'm not talking about the "establishment" (I would argue there really is no establishment or "head to the beast" in RP, its very grassroots, but that's a different discussion) I am talking about community opinion. The community in RP is very much terrified of the g-word (gentrification) and rabidly opposes anything they think will lead to it (I've spent a lot of time around Loyola Community relations and Capital Improvements to see this first hand). There is a good reason why Rogers Park has only one chain grocery store that is relegated to a crappy stripmall on the far edge of the community.

I am all for gentrification....bring it on....I'd like to see a cut of section 8 a in RP as wel......I think we represent that demographic just fine....time to spread the wealth

[Nowhereman1280]

^^^ I generally am too, but I feel like Rogers Park will develop much better if the gentrification is controlled and more oriented towards preserving the historically diverse and interesting vibe of the neighborhood. Rogers Park already is and has the potential to be one of the most interesting and pleasant neighborhoods in the city, but its going to take special care to get it to actually "gentrify".

As far as Section 8 goes, RP could probably support more of it. The problem is that Rogers Park also has a ton of city housing projects almost entirely in the form of nursing homes. I don't know who in the planning department thought that putting dozens of them along Sheridan Road in a two or three mile stretch was a good idea, but it wasn't. Also, the decrepit public nursing home at the corner of Sheridan, Devon, and Broadway MUST DIE. Not only is it one of the ugliest towers in the city, it is dangerous. People have repeatedly been killed because the building is constantly not up to code (its even had several elevator accidents if I recall correctly). On top of all that, there is some public restriction on liquor licenses on that block which actually played a role in the destruction of the Granada Theater as well as the placement of Gentile Center (Loyola's big nasty high school gym/basketball stadium), but that is another story. That may be the one building that I despise most out of all buildings in the city, it puts even Grand Plaza to shame.


here is a link to building...pic is old http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=1400+W.+Morse,+Chicago,+il&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=33.764224,56.513672&ie=UTF8&ll=42.010259,-87.666156&spn=0.007733,0.013797&t=h&z=16&layer=c&cbll=42.007767,-87.667143&panoid=bFj3k0uIurJUf9PI3ku_eg&cbp=12,180.14,,0,5



What is planned at the Granville??

Yeah that's what building I thought you were referring to. I don't see how that could support a TJ's, it seems far too small.

The building is finished now (The Granville: http://www.emporis.com/application/?nav=building&lng=3&id=215079) and an Aldi is now the anchor tenant. Before Aldi it was going to be Office Depot, then it changed to Trader Joe's and now it is Aldi. They should be building out the retail space soon (if not as we speak) because I believe Aldi is supposed to take occupancy this winter.

Aldi is not the tone that should be set for the Rogers Park and North Edgewater area which has a lot of potential to redevelop as the baby boomers/old people who originally bought in all the 60's developments die or move to nursing homes and are replaced by younger, more vibrant occupants due to the affordable nature of the units. A Trader Joe's there would have really propelled the area to a position as one of the next trendy neighborhoods in Chicago (you'd be surprised the effect Whole Foods and Trader Joes have on the location decisions of college students in my generation).

[lawfin]

^^^ I generally am too, but I feel like Rogers Park will develop much better if the gentrification is controlled and more oriented towards preserving the historically diverse and interesting vibe of the neighborhood. Rogers Park already is and has the potential to be one of the most interesting and pleasant neighborhoods in the city, but its going to take special care to get it to actually "gentrify".

As far as Section 8 goes, RP could probably support more of it. The problem is that Rogers Park also has a ton of city housing projects almost entirely in the form of nursing homes. I don't know who in the planning department thought that putting dozens of them along Sheridan Road in a two or three mile stretch was a good idea, but it wasn't. Also, the decrepit public nursing home at the corner of Sheridan, Devon, and Broadway MUST DIE. Not only is it one of the ugliest towers in the city, it is dangerous. People have repeatedly been killed because the building is constantly not up to code (its even had several elevator accidents if I recall correctly). On top of all that, there is some public restriction on liquor licenses on that block which actually played a role in the destruction of the Granada Theater as well as the placement of Gentile Center (Loyola's big nasty high school gym/basketball stadium), but that is another story. That may be the one building that I despise most out of all buildings in the city, it puts even Grand Plaza to shame.



Yeah that's what building I thought you were referring to. I don't see how that could support a TJ's, it seems far too small.

The building is finished now (The Granville: http://www.emporis.com/application/?nav=building&lng=3&id=215079) and an Aldi is now the anchor tenant. Before Aldi it was going to be Office Depot, then it changed to Trader Joe's and now it is Aldi. They should be building out the retail space soon (if not as we speak) because I believe Aldi is supposed to take occupancy this winter.

Aldi is not the tone that should be set for the Rogers Park and North Edgewater area which has a lot of potential to redevelop as the baby boomers/old people who originally bought in all the 60's developments die or move to nursing homes and are replaced by younger, more vibrant occupants due to the affordable nature of the units. A Trader Joe's there would have really propelled the area to a position as one of the next trendy neighborhoods in Chicago (you'd be surprised the effect Whole Foods and Trader Joes have on the location decisions of college students in my generation).

Ok I heard ther was an aldi going in somewhere on broadway....I didn't know where.

The only thing I can say is that I heard that they are upscaling aldi' lately.....

I have not shopped at an aldi since I helped with canned food drives when I was in HS...so it has been a while.

I do know though that some of my neighbors shop there.


It may sound snooty or whatever...but my wife and I shop at generally more high end places.than my neighbors....though I love them to death....very fortunate to have great neighbors...makes all the difference in the world

I doubt I'll be shopping at aldi. My wife like TJ; ....now come to think of it arn;t aldi and TJ owned by the same people or brothers or soemthing...

I can take or leave it...I used to like WIld Oats...in Evanston

I disagree with the sec 8.....I don't have numbers in front of me but anecdotally i'd day RP has more than its share.

COncentrations of poverty do not work.....that idea captures also the scattered housing......

I was walking home from dinner with my parents the night that 9yr old girl was shot by the scattered site at Bosworth / Ashland /Pratt

______________________________________________________________________________________

God from the above rambling you'd think I was stone drunk when I wrote it....Nope just couldn't sleep despite being dead tired

[chicagoguy1]

I also live in east rogers park, I wish we had more retail, especially along sheridan road. I am actually excited about the CVS and Five Guys opening near the Loyola redline stop, I wish trader joes would open there.

[VivaLFuego]

Did the state capital plan include money for the Museum of Broadcast Communications? Seems like every other obscure museum got money...

Museums also would prosper.

The DuPage Children’s Museum is slated to get nearly $2 million, and the Orpheum Children’s Science Museum in Champaign would get $500,000.

Smaller amounts would go to museums commemorating the southern Illinois oil industry, recording the history of the Illinois State Fair and even celebrating southwest Rockford’s ethnic diversity (African-American, Hispanic, Irish, Italian, Lithuanian and Polish).

[Marcu]

Other than the absolutley horrible Mcd's at Pratt and Clark and the even more dreadful Walgreens (they should be banned from developing any more in the city until they adopt more responsible design) of what chains do you speak?


RP does have its share of lower income working and non-working section 8 types. But it also has a growing population of relatively well off people buying SFH's that may be the best bang for your buck in the city....I think the area could support it.

The questionable part is the desire of a corporation to enter what may appear to be a challenging and unconventional market

The following RP chains come to mind: Little Cesar's, multiple Subways, Papa Romeo, multiple 7-Elevens, several chain Laundromats, Giordanos (local but nevertheless a chain), Leona's, Chipotle, Starbucks, Citgo, Mobil, Super 8 Motel, etc. I'd say the breakdown of chains to non-chains is no worse than other North Side neighborhoods in Chicago. Plus Gateway Commons is entierly chains and there's the ugly strip mall districts along Western and Howard, which I guess are not entierly in RP but is certainly close by.

I certainly don't think RP can't support a Trader Joe's. But looking at existing Trader Joe's locations, they seem to be extremely conservative in their selection, and as you said, the move to RP would be unconventional. It would be quite a stretch for a company used to Lincoln Park, Glenview, and Highland Park.



As far as Section 8 goes, RP could probably support more of it. The problem is that Rogers Park also has a ton of city housing projects almost entirely in the form of nursing homes. I don't know who in the planning department thought that putting dozens of them along Sheridan Road in a two or three mile stretch was a good idea, but it wasn't. Also, the decrepit public nursing home at the corner of Sheridan, Devon, and Broadway MUST DIE.


Most of those buildings and specifically the one on Devon/Sheridan are not nursing homes, but senior citizen subsidized housing, which is quite different. That building is definetly ugly as hell, but I fail to see how buildings housing senior citizens, nursing homes or otherwise, keep an area from gentrifying? Other than horrible building design, they add residents and consumers to an area, don't increase crime like Section 8 residents are purported to do, and fulfill a societal need (help the elderly and less fortunate, etc.).

[lawfin]

I agree. A Trader Joe's will never happen on Morse. It is simply not the type of street where Trader Joe's typically has a presence. If Trader Joe's does decide to locate in Rogers Park, it is almost guaranteed to be on Clark Street, where chains are already abundant.

I never meant to indicate that there were not chains in RP....of course there are. I merely questioned your contention that chains are "abundant" on clark street in RP. Local business are far more common along CLark that chains.


That is all my post indicated and it was based on reaction to your own words

[lawfin]

Most of those buildings and specifically the one on Devon/Sheridan are not nursing homes, but senior citizen subsidized housing, which is quite different. That building is definetly ugly as hell, but I fail to see how buildings housing senior citizens, nursing homes or otherwise, keep an area from gentrifying? Other than horrible building design, they add residents and consumers to an area, don't increase crime like Section 8 residents are purported to do, and fulfill a societal need (help the elderly and less fortunate, etc.).
I completely agree with you here. That building is ugly as hell though and its impact on that corner is nasty.

Also I wish they never tore down the 3-4 story terra cotta on the southwest corner of broadway and Devon.....that parcel has iterated through a number of pestilential chains over the last 16 or so years


My issue is not section 8 per se; but concentrations of it in certain areas.....I simply think it should be distributed more uniformly as opposed to its pocket distribution currently.



Does anyone have a map or list that shows concentrations of sec 8 city or even region wide?

That would be interesting

[VivaLFuego]

Does anyone have a map or list that shows concentrations of sec 8 city or even region wide?

That would be interesting

Department of Housing and Urban Development and the agencies it funds (including CHA) are incredibly protective of that sort of data. The data that have been pieced together by various means would make the continuation of government-subsidized blighting of neighborhoods quite difficult to justify, so there are a number of entrenched interests who would not like the data showing that Section 8 is strongly associated with crime and blight to be so publicly available and crunchable.

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200807/memphis-crime

[lawfin]

Department of Housing and Urban Development and the agencies it funds (including CHA) are incredibly protective of that sort of data. The data that have been pieced together by various means would make the continuation of government-subsidized blighting of neighborhoods quite difficult to justify, so there are a number of entrenched interests who would not like the data showing that Section 8 is strongly associated with crime and blight to be so publicly available and crunchable.

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200807/memphis-crime

I remember that articel.....in fact I meant to post it in my post a few posts back.....you read my mind because I was going to post that article later today.

a related brookings study:
http://www.brookings.edu/es/urban/publications/jargowskypoverty.pdf

the related Police Executive Research article
http://www.policeforum.org/upload/Gathering-Storm-PRINT-Final_110473745_1027200610304.pdf

[Nowhereman1280]

Most of those buildings and specifically the one on Devon/Sheridan are not nursing homes, but senior citizen subsidized housing, which is quite different. That building is definetly ugly as hell, but I fail to see how buildings housing senior citizens, nursing homes or otherwise, keep an area from gentrifying? Other than horrible building design, they add residents and consumers to an area, don't increase crime like Section 8 residents are purported to do, and fulfill a societal need (help the elderly and less fortunate, etc.).

No, if I recall correctly, many of the facilities I am thinking of (especially up by Loyola Park) are nursing homes or halfway houses. Neither of these will singlehandedly blight a neighborhood, but a large concentration of them certainly isn't healthy. The thing at Devon and Sheridan is awful because of the awful effect it has had on urban planning in the area. For example, there is some legal device forever preventing the issuance of a liquor license on that block. Loyola at one point had a deal with Brunos (the major hold out north of the el) to relocate to a new building where the Morgan was just built, but then the liquor license provision was discovered and Gentile Center, instead of being built next to the El where a stadium should be, was build smack dab in the middle of the Loyola Campus.

My other major complaint against the building is that it is perpetually out of code. There have been several incidents in the past 5 to 10 years where residents have been injured or died because of code violations. These range from fires caused by electrical issues to elevator failures. The building is not only completely ugly, but dangerous to its citizens and to the health of the neighborhood around it.

[spyguy]

The Metropolis
http://img27.imageshack.us/img27/1333/metropolis8.jpg
http://img200.imageshack.us/img200/7687/metropolis9.jpg
http://img200.imageshack.us/img200/9977/metropolis10.jpg

[Busy Bee]

WTF is that? Please tell me thats not what replaced that awesome SOM Bronzeville proposal./

[wrab]

^ I was about to write the same thing - WTF?

[the urban politician]

I HATE IT!

....that is a criminal development.

Absolutely no ambience, nothing that lets you know that you're in a city. Much of the south side of Chicago just continues to remain a shithole not worth visiting. With this development I basically give up on that part of town--I'm more interested in downtown, the near west, and the north sides. Clearly city leadership does not give a flying fuck about that part of town, even though it is pretty close to downtown and mass transit lines.

I cannot begin to describe how utterly horrified and disappointed with the city of Chicago I am after looking at those renderings. I apologize for ever giving a shit about anything south of Cermak and east of the Kennedy.

[wrab]

WTF is that? Please tell me thats not what replaced that awesome SOM Bronzeville proposal./

They're both at 39th/E Pershing & State, and they're both Capri Capital projects. So, again, WTF gives here?

That SOM proposal was really great.

[the urban politician]

^ I just don't fathom why a stand-alone retail development can't be built here that still accommodates parking while not taking a shit on any hopes of building a decent urban community. There have been so many hopes for Bronzeville and developments like this just completely undermine any efforts under way, imo.

You have my word that the actual development will be worse still than the rendering. It will be indistinguishable from those dime a dozen strip centers in suburbia. Doesn't the city's 'strip center ordinance' have some kind of pull here? Where's the city & the Aldermen on this one?

What ever happened to "the Olympics" and revitalizing the south side, and all that jargon? Man, Cleveland builds shit like this. What's the point of Chicago being Chicago if its cityscape just fills up with utterly worthless crap like this? Why even bother--what's there for these Bronzeville residents to even be proud of?

[VivaLFuego]

At the risk of making a gross generalization, Chicago's African-American community isn't predominantly interested in the sorts of urbanity we extol on this board. Most of the middle-class/professional blacks I know generally view (1) having a car and (2) being able to drive everywhere with (3) easy parking as a good thing, and a move to the suburbs and away from the thugs and BS crime of the city is viewed as an attractive option if not for the long drives to get out and do social stuff on the weekends, which still generally involves the city. As a further generalization, middle class and professional blacks who live in the city use autos for commute trips at a higher rate than others - South Shore has a very high auto commute mode share which contrasts pretty sharply with the bus-dominated north lakefront (again, these are percentages, not absolute totals - north side still tops in the absolute total because it has 3 times as many people).

Put another way, the development market in predominantly African-American areas in this city just really isn't into the sort of stuff that we are, and it would be contentious indeed to 'force' certain things into certain neighborhoods - and if this is done via an unfunded mandate then it means nothing gets built.

Long story short, I'm in the same boat as tup, and some time ago wrote off most of the South and West Sides as never being attractively urban in my lifetime (and I'll just cover my eyes and ears when suburban craptacular stuff gets juiced with large TIF subsidies) - but even writing off those swaths of the city still leaves a huge area of greatness where urbanists can fight the good fight, so to speak.

[wrab]

Seems like this would be a matter of the same developer taking stock of the current investment climate by a) changing the primary tenant, and b) dropping the housing component. Shame though to lose the SOM design.

[lawfin]

for context the old renders
general link: http://www.som.com/content.cfm/metropolis

http://www.som.com/local/common/modules/gallery/dsp_image_gallery.cfm/metropolis?galleryCategoryID=504624&ImageIndex=2

http://www.som.com/local/common/modules/gallery/dsp_image_gallery.cfm/metropolis?galleryCategoryID=504624&ImageIndex=3

http://www.som.com/local/common/modules/gallery/dsp_image_gallery.cfm/metropolis?galleryCategoryID=504624&ImageIndex=4

[george]

7-15

Loyola U Chicago Ave at Wabash

http://img190.imageshack.us/img190/1162/chiwabash1.jpg

http://img190.imageshack.us/img190/7515/chiwabash2.jpg

[VivaLFuego]

^Groovy - now give the same treatment to the McDonald's next door

[VivaLFuego]

Seems like this would be a matter of the same developer taking stock of the current investment climate by a) changing the primary tenant, and b) dropping the housing component. Shame though to lose the SOM design.

But moreso than dropping the housing component and switching to low-rise retail only, this is switching to a strip mall format. A strip mall with landscaping, yes, but a strip mall with outlots nonetheless. I don't think you'd see so visceral a reaction if the revised form of the development still resembled something vaguely urban, housing component or no.

[emathias]

At the risk of making a gross generalization, Chicago's African-American community isn't predominantly interested in the sorts of urbanity we extol on this board. Most of the middle-class/professional blacks I know generally view (1) having a car and (2) being able to drive everywhere with (3) easy parking as a good thing, and a move to the suburbs and away from the thugs and BS crime of the city is viewed as an attractive option if not for the long drives to get out and do social stuff on the weekends, which still generally involves the city. As a further generalization, middle class and professional blacks who live in the city use autos for commute trips at a higher rate than others - South Shore has a very high auto commute mode share which contrasts pretty sharply with the bus-dominated north lakefront (again, these are percentages, not absolute totals - north side still tops in the absolute total because it has 3 times as many people).
...

I think, as far as gross generalizations go, this is reflective of my experience, too.

I would say, however, that I think there are two primary drivers for this:

1) Cars being valued as evidence of having "made it" more in the urban black community than in the urban white community.

And probably more importantly:

2) Crime. Almost every black South Side person I've talked to about the issue identifies crime as their primary reason for not wanting to use public transit. Even Mike Payne, the "Gray Line" advocate, advocates the Gray Line partly because he feels Metra controls crime better than the CTA on the south branches fo the Red and Green Lines. High crime will destroy urbanity, because even the most ardent urbanists have their limits when it comes to crime. As much as the expressway and automobile enabled the death of urban centers, it was at least as much caused by rampant crime and rioting in the inner cities. One personal anecdote: My father was born in Brooklyn in 1945. My grandfather and grandmother moved out of New York only after my grandmother was mugged twice in six months on the subway. Guliani may be criticized for "Disneyfication" and for infringing on certain civil rights, but I honestly don't think New York's population would be growing now if they still had the crime they had in the 1980s.

While the North Side likes to exaggerate the crime on the South Side, it's not an exaggeration to say that some parts of the South Side that have the best structural setup for dense urbanity are held back by crime that is higher than most parts of the North Side. I don't know where the crime tipping point is, but at some point crime will function to depopulation an area. On the West Side, the Garfield Park and Lawndale areas won't gentrify with any real gusto until the crime rate at least starts to show some improvement. Viewed as a limiting factor for development and population growth, crime costs the City a LOT in lost property taxes and sales taxes.

[VivaLFuego]

^ Well put... and the crime issue gets stickier still because of deeply ingrained mutual mistrust between law enforcement and civilians n many of these communities, i.e. not being able to count on the police for protection - of course there is street crime in Wicker Park, Lincoln Park, but residents still have a general sense that the police are there to protect the populace. So the privacy, independence, and control of a car has some symbolic and practical value in areas where that's not the case, where there's a more general perception that government force is not there for your benefit.

The crime issue also speaks to why the 'urban pioneer' developments, such as Dearborn Park Phase I, or some of the mid-1990s stuff in West Loop and Fulton Market area, tend to be very insular and hostile to the street.

And frankly, it's not like either the (1) land value or (2) net retail demand in this part of town is high enough that it's practical to mandate highly urban forms, e.g. underground or rooftop parking. Such mandates would kill the project without an attached subsidy. Of course, the suburban schlock will also receive a subsidy, which is probably the only part of the entire deal I would object strongly to (whatever, allow the strip mall, but don't subsidize it).

[spyguy]

Looks like the long-delayed Advanced Chemical Technologies Building at UIC will now move forward.

http://www.chicagojournal.com/News/07-15-2009/Local_impact_of_the_capital_bill

Local impact of the capital bill
07/15/2009 10:00 PM

...Among the big Near West Side winners in the bill is the University of Illinois-Chicago, which will get $57.6 million to plan, construct and equip a new chemical sciences building.
---

I think this was the rendering from years ago.
http://img10.imageshack.us/img10/1278/531820uic20day20shot.jpg

[the urban politician]

^ It begs the question--what occupies this space now?

Viva and emathius, I agree completely with you. You both more eloquently stated what I should have said yesterday--unfortunately, I was and still am enormously disappointed.

I have long had a desire to see at least the area between downtown and Hyde Park develop into something more urban. I am fine with strip malls elsewhere, but this particular patch of land, if developed properly, can give Chicago a continuously urban streetscape from the northern edge of the city down through Hyde Park. Developments like this strip mall being labeled ridiculously as "Metropolis" are just one step towards the erosion of such a thing ever happening in our lifetimes.

[Dr. Taco]

^ practice baseball field. the main one is a little south of there now. i always thought they'd get rid of the giant parking lot and put a parking lot, but this makes more sense right now. UIC has so much land for future development

[lawfin]

I think, as far as gross generalizations go, this is reflective of my experience, too.

I would say, however, that I think there are two primary drivers for this:

1) Cars being valued as evidence of having "made it" more in the urban black community than in the urban white community.

And probably more importantly:

2) Crime. Almost every black South Side person I've talked to about the issue identifies crime as their primary reason for not wanting to use public transit. Even Mike Payne, the "Gray Line" advocate, advocates the Gray Line partly because he feels Metra controls crime better than the CTA on the south branches fo the Red and Green Lines. High crime will destroy urbanity, because even the most ardent urbanists have their limits when it comes to crime. As much as the expressway and automobile enabled the death of urban centers, it was at least as much caused by rampant crime and rioting in the inner cities. One personal anecdote: My father was born in Brooklyn in 1945. My grandfather and grandmother moved out of New York only after my grandmother was mugged twice in six months on the subway. Guliani may be criticized for "Disneyfication" and for infringing on certain civil rights, but I honestly don't think New York's population would be growing now if they still had the crime they had in the 1980s.

While the North Side likes to exaggerate the crime on the South Side, it's not an exaggeration to say that some parts of the South Side that have the best structural setup for dense urbanity are held back by crime that is higher than most parts of the North Side. I don't know where the crime tipping point is, but at some point crime will function to depopulation an area. On the West Side, the Garfield Park and Lawndale areas won't gentrify with any real gusto until the crime rate at least starts to show some improvement. Viewed as a limiting factor for development and population growth, crime costs the City a LOT in lost property taxes and sales taxes.

^^^Tangentially related due to correlation between crime and poverty....

High poverty area are considered where 40% or more of households are below the poverty line. This was seen as a critical tipping point and was one of the reasons behind razing high density housing projects.

Recent evidence however indicated that the tipping point may be much lower that expected...probably around 20% of household below poverty line....beyond this crime seems to increase non-linearly and suddenly.

This is why I have an issue with concentrations of section 8 housing and concentration of scattered sites....they seem to be less scattered (uniformly) and more like clustered (non-uniformly)

But I agree with your sentiment.....the biggest thing holding back revitlization is the crime issue.....much of it is perception only; some of it is all too real

[lawfin]

Also somewhat related to this topic....I have put together density charts for the north and west sides...
see:
http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=170972&page=14

[wrab]

Also somewhat related to this topic....I have put together density charts for the north and west sides...
see:
http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=170972&page=14

Interesting - thanks for that. The prize for highest density on the N Side goes to Near North Side at 48,541 people per square mile.

[lawfin]

Interesting - thanks for that. The prize for highest density on the N Side goes to Near North Side at 48,541 people per square mile.

Note that these north side numbers are all 2000 based....I would not be surprised if many if not most have increased in population since then

Near North will probably crack 50-52,000 / sq mile inn 2010

A recent number I saw from a local business development group here in RP claims the RP is now north of 68,000 as of 2006 which would yield 37,000/ sq mile

[VivaLFuego]

^These measurements also depend very highly on the miscellaneous assumptions:

(1) weighted v. unweighted
(2) include or exclude 'dead space' like rivers, industrial areas, parks

etc.

As long as the assumptions are consistent than at least you get a good relative measure, e.g. greater than, less than, comparable to.

[emathias]

^These measurements also depend very highly on the miscellaneous assumptions:

(1) weighted v. unweighted
(2) include or exclude 'dead space' like rivers, industrial areas, parks

etc.

As long as the assumptions are consistent than at least you get a good relative measure, e.g. greater than, less than, comparable to.

I've always wondered how much, if any, of the park Lincoln Park was included in the area measurements for the neighborhood Lincoln Park and those others that border the park along the north Lakefront.

[lawfin]

^These measurements also depend very highly on the miscellaneous assumptions:

(1) weighted v. unweighted
(2) include or exclude 'dead space' like rivers, industrial areas, parks

etc.

As long as the assumptions are consistent than at least you get a good relative measure, e.g. greater than, less than, comparable to.
^^These number are all from 2000 census. The total area sums to 227 sq miles...which is I believe the are of the city. I do not know if numbers are produced that extract out rivers, parks, unused brownfields etc.

This is one reason why I did not include the O'Hare community area in the northside measure....because it is dominated by the Airport where next to no one lives. If you have numbers for the "effective" livable area of neighborhoods send them my way and I'll recalculate.

I too have often wondered what the "effective" density is. I would imagine in most areas probably about 10-at most 15% higher.

[ChiMack]

http://www.chitowndailynews.org/Chicago_news/For_an_answer_on_housing_Bronzeville_residents_visit_the_mayors_house,30099

Bronzeville residents want 500 vacant lots to be turned into affordable housing

[lawfin]

http://www.chitowndailynews.org/Chicago_news/For_an_answer_on_housing_Bronzeville_residents_visit_the_mayors_house,30099

Bronzeville residents want 500 vacant lots to be turned into affordable housing
Tell them to get jobs so they can afford affordable housing!

[VivaLFuego]

http://www.chitowndailynews.org/Chicago_news/For_an_answer_on_housing_Bronzeville_residents_visit_the_mayors_house,30099

Bronzeville residents want 500 vacant lots to be turned into affordable housing

New construction housing is dramatically uneconomical if being built for low-income residents, and all the more so in the city where the land value per square foot is higher than way out in the sprawly urban fringe - it has been ever since the advent of basic building codes that made super cheap and flimsy wood frame shacks illegal. It's just sort of a basic law of life now that lower income people don't live in brand new housing unless that housing is drastically subsidized, and one has to wonder if all levels of government don't have more important things to spend money on than subsidized housing when unsubsidized housing units still exist.

Saying that low income folk deserve subsidized brand new housing is akin to saying low income folk deserve a subsidized fresh-off-the-factory-line Land Rover, rather than simply having to live within their means and get a cheaper used car.

I wish people wouldnt be so offended by the fact that new construction housing generally targets the middle, upper-middle, and upper income brackets because those are the only price points at which it's economical to develop. It is what it is. Poor people live in 'used' housing, just like they drive used cars. By all means their housing should not be 'sub-standard' and should be livable, safe, and sanitary, but that's a big difference from demanding new construction.