CHICAGO | General Developments - Page 310

sammyg · #**6181** Posted: **Feb 20, 2009, 7:01 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by munda

Lets see The UC resemblance Chicago Stadium. The Cell resemblance Old Comiskey Park.

Are you kidding me? Have you even been to Chicago, let alone to a game here? Here's Chicago Stadium:

Here's United Center:

Both Pictures courtesy Wikipedia

Not to mention the United Center's modern amenities, lounges, etc.

aic4ever · #**6182** Posted: **Feb 20, 2009, 7:43 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by harryc

Nice slideshows - just need to be more extensive.

thanks for the link.

More updates coming shortly. Some of the stuff in "News" is active and moving, and we've got the W Hotel renovation to be added in as well over the next week or two of updates. Had to launch with some fixed content, though.

munda · #**6183** Posted: **Feb 20, 2009, 8:23 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by sammyg

Are you kidding me? Have you even been to Chicago, let alone to a game here? Here's Chicago Stadium:

Here's United Center:

Both Pictures courtesy Wikipedia

Not to mention the United Center's modern amenities, lounges, etc.

Of course the interior is different from each stadium and offer different amenities. when people see the stadium they see the exterior first. the exterior of UC resemblance Chicago Stadium.
Chicago stadium was in a square/rectangle shape.
the UC is just turned on its axis and just rounded out the edges.

Its exterior bears a striking resemblance to that of Chicago Stadium.
-Wikipedia

emathias · #**6184** Posted: **Feb 20, 2009, 8:32 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by munda

ok...
chicago has build United Center, U.S. Cellular Field and renovated Soldier Field all in the past 20 years. Lets see The UC resemblance Chicago Stadium. The Cell resemblance Old Comiskey Park. Putting a spaceship on top of Soldier Field dont make it new. Chicago built "new" stadiums, but used the blueprint of old stadium.
all i am saying is that chicago needs new stadium design as eye popping as the architecture of the city.

There are only so many ways to design a basketball arena. The United Center doesn't really look much like Chicago Stadium - it's oval vs. rectangle, to begin with.

There are also only so many ways to design a baseball stadium, and "The Cell" is almost nothing like old Comiskey. Two gently sloping levels of seats, covered by a roof over the stands along the sides. Old Comiskey looked somewhat like Wrigley. "The Cell" is one gently sloping level below a very steep level, with skyboxes in between the two and not much of a roof.

And Soldier Field wasn't a "renovation," it was a completely new stadium constructed within the confines of the original stone walls of the war memorial. Nothing remained of the structure or interior of the original Soldier Field, not to mention the layout and capacity is entirely different. The original was an old-school symetrical "bowl," with all the seats rising uniformly from the playing field, no overhangs or roofs. The new field is not symetrical, and has overhangs and skyboxes and seats 61,500 people. The original could be configured for seating from 57,000 to 100,000.

Basically, you don't know what you're talking about, so quit trolling.

emathias · #**6185** Posted: **Feb 20, 2009, 8:34 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by munda

...
Its exterior bears a striking resemblance to that of Chicago Stadium.
-Wikipedia

Wikipedia is the exact opposite of authoritative.

the urban politician · #**6186** Posted: **Feb 21, 2009, 2:42 AM**

Does anybody have renderings of the new Metropolis development at 39th and State? I wonder if the developer will consider adding residential at a future date?

spyguy · #**6187** Posted: **Feb 21, 2009, 6:22 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by spyguy

http://www.chicagorealestatedaily.co...ws.pl?id=33039

Foreclosure suit hits Armitage Ave. shopping center
By Eddie Baeb, Feb. 18, 2009

...Mr. Hunt’s firm also owns a site at North and Clybourn avenues, where sources say Apple Inc. is in talks for a second Chicago store.
----

They could just be repeating old information, but at least it's something...

----
^To go along with that, I saw this on a blog a month ago. Take it with a grain of salt, of course, but it still sounds pretty interesting.

Quote:

Rumor: new Apple store at North/Clybourn
January 23, 2009

I received a rumor from a reliable source today: firm plans exist to build an Apple store above the Red Line station at North Avenue and Clybourn. Cool!

...Sounds good. But what I heard was a little different... my source told me Apple is partnering with the CTA/Chicago to rebuild the adjacent red line station and mash it together with the newly constructed store. Apple would in essence "donate" the station for the right to have it connect/integrate with the retail space.

ardecila · #**6188** Posted: **Feb 21, 2009, 8:45 PM**

An Apple-designed subway station would be cool beyond belief. It's too bad they picked this station, though... it's the only subway station from the 1930s era with an above-ground headhouse.

honte · #**6189** Posted: **Feb 21, 2009, 9:28 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ch.G, Ch.G

Maybe Helmut paved the way with 600 N Fairbanks? You've talked about it before but I think it's a point worth repeating: There's not much of a middle ground in this city. Buildings are either razed or preserved totally in tact, no contemporary addition or progressive rereading.

To be fair, other American cities haven't done a great job, either. I mean, you have an architect as high profile and acclaimed as Norman Foster make a total mess of the old Hearst building. Cesar Pelli's proposed addition to South Station is similarly awkward.

Has anyone seen this one by Garofalo Architects?

http://www.garofaloarchitects.com/work/noble/noble.html

I wish projects like that happened more often. Maybe one day we'd even get something like this:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/javier1949/2634431378/

...although, given the treatment of the interior, I guess that's the definition of facadectomy?

This is an amusing post for me... I see where you're going, but as far as your examples, I feel exactly the opposite. I think the Hearst Tower leaves something to be desired, particularly on the inside, but I think the exterior is an absolute success.

Meanwhile, I sorely dislike the two positive examples you bring up. The Garafolo thing, which I see almost daily, is in my opinion a disrespectful wreck, a kind of architectural graffiti that has no understanding for its underlying canvas.

H+dM lost a lot of credibility for me with that project (in Spain, right?). The people clearly asked for preservation of that structure, but the architects were too high-and-mighty to defer to the old. I have a lot more respect for someone like Weese or Vinci or Crombie Taylor, who can (could) execute great buildings whenever they wanted, but were confident enough to do real restorations when they were warranted.

I'm not opposed to creative reinterpretations, but they'd better be well done, respectful, and highly informed. Which is to say, there is a right time and a right place for this, but that's not too common. Otherwise, forget it. But the main thing that interests me far more is the addition of the real parameters associated with respecting the existing urban fabric and the implications this can have upon the new product - not what impact the new can have upon the old. I don't see many people operating in that fashion...

spyguy · #**6190** Posted: **Feb 21, 2009, 9:29 PM**

^I agree. It's a beautiful and unique station, it just needs to be repaired.

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/cgi-b...rticleId=31354

Next stop: no gas
By: H. Lee Murphy February 23, 2009

Drivers will have an even harder time finding a North Side gas station if Houston-based Shell Oil Co. succeeds in selling five prime locations.

Shell has signed contracts to sell stations in River North, Old Town, Lincoln Park and Lakeview, brokers and developers say. The buyers are believed to be interested in converting the gas stations into retail developments, these people say. The deals are subject to financing and other contingencies.

Jibba · #**6191** Posted: **Feb 21, 2009, 9:39 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila

An Apple-designed subway station would be cool beyond belief. It's too bad they picked this station, though... it's the only subway station from the 1930s era with an above-ground headhouse.

That's my main problem with this proposal (no telling how serious it is, of course).

The first image that popped into my head when I read about it was that of exiting a ride at Great America and having no choice but to be corralled through a labyrinth of shops:

"Thank you for riding the CTA Red Line. Please remember to buy an iPod."

lawfin · #**6192** Posted: **Feb 21, 2009, 9:56 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jibba

That's my main problem with this proposal (no telling how serious it is, of course).

The first image that popped into my head when I read about it was that of exiting a ride at Great America and having no choice but to be corralled through a labyrinth of shops:

"Thank you for riding the CTA Red Line. Please remember to buy an iPod."

Yeah no shit!

Further insidious erosion between public and private sector

lawfin · #**6193** Posted: **Feb 21, 2009, 10:11 PM**

dp

schwerve · #**6194** Posted: **Feb 21, 2009, 10:51 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by lawfin

Yeah no shit!

Further insidious erosion between public and private sector

who cares,

they can call it the "apple present the new ipod store at division station, on the mcdonalds red line, brought to you by the chase cta... buy a whopper" if it helps fix/improve the system, bring it on.

BWChicago · #**6195** Posted: **Feb 21, 2009, 11:19 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by schwerve

who cares,

they can call it the "apple present the new ipod store at division station, on the mcdonalds red line, brought to you by the chase cta... buy a whopper" if it helps fix/improve the system, bring it on.

Doesn't CDOT own the subway stations?

Mr Downtown · #**6196** Posted: **Feb 22, 2009, 12:59 AM**

Correct. The subway lines are owned by the City of Chicago, an Illinois municipal corporation. The Chicago Transit Authority, another Illinois municipal corporation, assumed the franchise of Chicago Rapid Transit to occupy and operate through said facilities. As I understand it.

SkokieSwift · #**6197** Posted: **Feb 22, 2009, 4:44 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by spyguy

^I agree. It's a beautiful and unique station, it just needs to be repaired.

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/cgi-b...rticleId=31354

[B]Next stop: no gas

It would be awesome if that North Avenue parcel became a (gulp) highrise to help "bookend" the southern border of Lincoln Park. Anyone know the zoning?

BWChicago · #**6198** Posted: **Feb 22, 2009, 4:24 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SkokieSwift

It would be awesome if that North Avenue parcel became a (gulp) highrise to help "bookend" the southern border of Lincoln Park. Anyone know the zoning?

Hope this isn't why North Federal Savings and Loan/Diamond Bank wasn't landmarked.

cbotnyse · #**6199** Posted: **Feb 22, 2009, 5:05 PM**

Here are some renders of the current renovations of U.S. Cellular Field. I am a bit confused though. It doesnt look like anything is new, just a redesign of the existing ramp.

http://www.isfauthority.com/managex/...iclesource=250

VivaLFuego · #**6200** Posted: **Feb 22, 2009, 6:07 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by BWChicago

Hope this isn't why North Federal Savings and Loan/Diamond Bank wasn't landmarked.

That would actually be the one context under which I'd be fine with the foregone landmarking. It's criminal how underutilized the land along North Ave. is between Clark and Wells (with the exception of the building on the SE corner of North/Wells which should be landmarked).

Zoning here is only for an FAR 3.0, and it falls under the lakefront protection ordinance, and it's 43rd Ward. I doubt we'd see anything other than 1 story retail. And if that's the case, then I too hope that it doesn't include the Modernist bank.