HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > General Development


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #3481  
Old Posted Apr 17, 2008, 7:16 PM
VivaLFuego's Avatar
VivaLFuego VivaLFuego is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Blue Island
Posts: 6,480
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ch.G, Ch.G;3491650
If that's what you are for, then just say so: "Grant Park should remain forever open, clear and free of any buildings [I
except[/I] in this case and this case, etc."
Like the Art Institute, Harris Dance Theatre, Lollapalooza, some concerts at Pritzker Pavilion...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3482  
Old Posted Apr 17, 2008, 7:22 PM
cbotnyse cbotnyse is offline
Chicago Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: River North, Chicago
Posts: 1,620
Quote:
Originally Posted by VivaLFuego View Post
Like the Art Institute, Harris Dance Theatre, Lollapalooza, some concerts at Pritzker Pavilion...
and the only problem you have with all of these is they are not 100% free? I understand your argument, but firmly believe that cultural attractions like this can co-exist in Grant Park.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3483  
Old Posted Apr 17, 2008, 7:22 PM
Via Chicago Via Chicago is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 5,611
Quote:
Originally Posted by cbotnyse View Post
Its the same as all other activites in Grant Park. Some times they're free (Taste of Chicago) sometmes they're not (Lollapalooza).
Those are festivals, not buildings. And no, I'm not a huge fan of allowing corporations to take over parks for a day either (as has happened at Millennium Park a number of times). But theres a difference between being inconvenienced for a weeked and entirely losing a portion of the park to a private enterprise..forever.

Last edited by Via Chicago; Apr 17, 2008 at 7:44 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3484  
Old Posted Apr 17, 2008, 8:23 PM
Abner Abner is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 577
Quote:
Originally Posted by cbotnyse View Post
I was talking about in Chicago. Should museums everywhere be free and government funded? thats another issue.
For the record, several museums in Chicago are free, such as the National Museum of Mexican Art, which is located in Harrison Park. But that shouldn't be the issue.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3485  
Old Posted Apr 17, 2008, 8:37 PM
cbotnyse cbotnyse is offline
Chicago Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: River North, Chicago
Posts: 1,620
Quote:
Originally Posted by Abner View Post
For the record, several museums in Chicago are free, such as the National Museum of Mexican Art, which is located in Harrison Park. But that shouldn't be the issue.
I just looked up some free museums and you're right. I was even surprised to learn the CCM currently charges children the same fee as an adult! ($9). anyway, not the issue, you're right.

Has anyone read this book? Forever Open, Clear, and Free: The Struggle for Chicago's Lakefront

I just rememebred I bought it awhile back but havent started it yet. I will be sure to do that soon.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3486  
Old Posted Apr 17, 2008, 11:49 PM
VivaLFuego's Avatar
VivaLFuego VivaLFuego is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Blue Island
Posts: 6,480
Quote:
Originally Posted by cbotnyse View Post
and the only problem you have with all of these is they are not 100% free? I understand your argument, but firmly believe that cultural attractions like this can co-exist in Grant Park.
I'm on your side, dude... I'm just pointing out the silliness of the "Forever free open and clear" argument, because it's obviously already applied selectively (i.e. meaninglessly). If the Children's Museum is to be criticized in this location, it should be along the lines of:
1. It is not of cultural significance to justify this location, as opposed to AIC, Pritzker Pavilion, etc.
2. An underground Children's Museum?
3. It's ugly
4. No public subsidy to a private organization (but it sure wouldn't be the first time...see above "meaninglessness of selectively applied rules")

Traffic/accessibility concerns are NIMBY fodder. The "Forever free" people are begging the question of why the AIC shouldn't be demolished, Lollapalooza disbanded, Harris Dance Theatre demo'd, etc for consistencies sake, since those are obviously an impediment to Grant Park being forever free open and clear. The proposal needs to be attacked on different grounds than these.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3487  
Old Posted Apr 18, 2008, 12:36 AM
schwerve schwerve is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 343
Quote:
Originally Posted by VivaLFuego View Post
4. No public subsidy to a private organization (but it sure wouldn't be the first time...see above "meaninglessness of selectively applied rules")
is there a public subsidy for this? my understanding is that its being financed by the CM and they're spending $15 mil for use of the land and a new field house.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3488  
Old Posted Apr 18, 2008, 1:15 AM
Loopy's Avatar
Loopy Loopy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 665
Quote:
Originally Posted by schwerve View Post
is there a public subsidy for this? my understanding is that its being financed by the CM and they're spending $15 mil for use of the land and a new field house.
They are not currently subsidized by the taxpayers, but the primary reason for their move is to hook up to the gravy train.

By moving to the Grant Park location the Chicago Children's Museum will be eligible for funding under the "Museums in the Park" program. This a fund that is generated by a special annual tax on Chicagoans. It currently supports: The Art Institute of Chicago, the Field Museum of Natural History, the Adler Planetarium, the John G. Shedd Aquarium, the Chicago Historical Society, the Chicago Academy of Sciences, the Museum of Science and Industry, the DuSable Museum of African American History, and the Mexican Fine Arts Center Museum.

The fund is pretty much a zero sum game. Adding a new museum to the list just diminishes funding to the other institutions.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3489  
Old Posted Apr 18, 2008, 1:45 AM
Mr Downtown's Avatar
Mr Downtown Mr Downtown is offline
Urbane observer
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,385
When CCM first discussed the idea of moving to Grant Park in 2003, they said it was not with the intent of tapping the Museums in the Park fund (I specifically asked). Of course, this could be done at Navy Pier, by just extending the definition of Lincoln Park to include their space at Navy Pier.

I was delighted to see Kamin mention Pritzker Park this morning, as I've come to think that's the best location of all, offering easy access to parking, unparalleled transit access, and a highly visible location for a new work of architecture.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3490  
Old Posted Apr 18, 2008, 2:09 AM
honte honte is offline
Registered
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Chicago - every nook and cranny
Posts: 4,628
^ Plus, it is the most miserable "park" in the central area - really hardly qualifies as such, and it is not helping State Street in any fashion in its present state.
__________________
"Every building is a landmark until proven otherwise." - Harry Mohr Weese

"I often say, 'Look, see, enjoy, and love.' It's a long way from looking to loving, but it's worth the effort." - Walter Andrew Netsch Jr.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3491  
Old Posted Apr 18, 2008, 2:35 AM
the urban politician the urban politician is offline
The City
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Chicago region
Posts: 21,375
Museum plans to put the oohs and aahs back in science
After makeover, visitors can walk through a tornado or make their own rainbows


A Museum of Science and Industry model illustrates how the planned "You! The Experience" health exhibit would look. The new exhibit would benefit from the museum's fundraising campaign. (Tribune photo by Scott Strazzante / April 16, 2008)

By William Mullen | Tribune reporter
10:56 PM CDT, April 16, 2008
Article tools
The Museum of Science and Industry announced plans Wednesday to revamp some of its largest, most familiar exhibit spaces as a part of a major effort to spur children's interest in science and improve science education in schools.

By 2011, 90 percent of the museum will be new or substantially changed from what it was in 2000, officials said in announcing a hefty $205 million fundraising drive.
__________________
Supercar Adventures is my YouTube channel:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC4W...lUKB1w8ED5bV2Q
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3492  
Old Posted Apr 18, 2008, 3:10 AM
BVictor1's Avatar
BVictor1 BVictor1 is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 10,401
Quote:
Originally Posted by Via Chicago View Post
If you say so...



And why would you want a childrens museum underground in the first place? I dont understand why people are acting like this is the only available plot of land left on the planet to relocate a museum and totally unwilling to explore alternatives which make way more sense (and will meet zero opposition to boot)
I didn't realize that people went to museums to look out the window
__________________
titanic1
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3493  
Old Posted Apr 18, 2008, 3:11 AM
jjk1103 jjk1103 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 878
Quote:
Originally Posted by Abner View Post
For the record, several museums in Chicago are free, such as the National Museum of Mexican Art, which is located in Harrison Park. But that shouldn't be the issue.
......ole' !!!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3494  
Old Posted Apr 18, 2008, 3:12 AM
Abner Abner is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 577
I don't mean to take it off topic, but there is scaffolding up around the building on the north side of 18th at Canalport, just west of the Schoenhofen Brewery. (It was used as the location of the orphanage in The Blues Brothers.) Please somebody tell me it's not coming down!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3495  
Old Posted Apr 18, 2008, 3:14 AM
jjk1103 jjk1103 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 878
Quote:
Originally Posted by honte View Post
^ Plus, it is the most miserable "park" in the central area - really hardly qualifies as such, and it is not helping State Street in any fashion in its present state.
yes, it's just a have for the homeless......but they should re-develope it as a park ...not a museum !
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3496  
Old Posted Apr 18, 2008, 3:15 AM
jjk1103 jjk1103 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 878
Quote:
Originally Posted by Segun View Post
All the Smithsonian Museums are free in DC.
....they have unlimited money (pork) !!!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3497  
Old Posted Apr 18, 2008, 3:19 AM
Abner Abner is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 577
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjk1103 View Post
yes, it's just a have for the homeless......but they should re-develope it as a park ...not a museum !
It's barely big enough to toss a frisbee, it's in shadows all the time, and it's under an el station. Combined with the parking garage, though, it would be a great place to put any number of things, including a children's museum--which would then be across the street from the Harold Washington Library.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3498  
Old Posted Apr 18, 2008, 3:27 AM
honte honte is offline
Registered
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Chicago - every nook and cranny
Posts: 4,628
Quote:
Originally Posted by Abner View Post
I don't mean to take it off topic, but there is scaffolding up around the building on the north side of 18th at Canalport, just west of the Schoenhofen Brewery. (It was used as the location of the orphanage in The Blues Brothers.) Please somebody tell me it's not coming down!
To be honest, I think this is more the topic of what this thread used to be.

The building you are talking about is a three-story, red-brick commercial building with a Star of David on it, right? This is also a part of the Schoenhofen complex. It was the administration building, 1886, and is also a landmark. Thanks for your concern.
__________________
"Every building is a landmark until proven otherwise." - Harry Mohr Weese

"I often say, 'Look, see, enjoy, and love.' It's a long way from looking to loving, but it's worth the effort." - Walter Andrew Netsch Jr.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3499  
Old Posted Apr 18, 2008, 3:56 AM
Abner Abner is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 577
Quote:
Originally Posted by honte View Post
To be honest, I think this is more the topic of what this thread used to be.

The building you are talking about is a three-story, red-brick commercial building with a Star of David on it, right? This is also a part of the Schoenhofen complex. It was the administration building, 1886, and is also a landmark. Thanks for your concern.
Holy crap, the owner can let a landmark get to that condition? The Schoenhofen powerhouse looks great, but that poor administration building looks like it's ready to collapse. Probably nothing some maintenance (like maybe putting glass in the windows and heating the thing) couldn't fix, but the building is just a shell now. I certainly hope the scaffolding is up in preparation for some restorative work. Thanks for the info, I'm relieved and surprised that it's landmarked.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3500  
Old Posted Apr 18, 2008, 4:30 AM
VivaLFuego's Avatar
VivaLFuego VivaLFuego is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Blue Island
Posts: 6,480
1. "Pritzker Park" (I use scare quotes because it's not a park, more of a bum hotel) would be a great place for the Children's Museum, especially since the blight that is "Pritzker Park" is only as such because of the whims of the Pritzkers to begin with (as part of the Library deal, right? Mr. D maybe could chime in with some more details on that?).

2. The Schoenhofen brewery complex is amazing, it will one day make a great loft district if the surrounding "manufacturing" land is allowed to redevelop to some decent residential use... but that will take city government getting over it's wasteful fetish of subsidizing low-density "manufacturing" jobs as if there is some net benefit to the city.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > General Development
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:48 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.