HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     
Welcome to the SkyscraperPage Forum

Since 1999, the SkyscraperPage Forum has been one of the most active skyscraper enthusiast communities on the web. The global membership discusses development news and construction activity on projects from around the world, alongside discussions on urban design, architecture, transportation and many other topics. Welcome!

You are currently browsing as a guest. Register with the SkyscraperPage Forum and join this growing community of skyscraper enthusiasts. Registering has benefits such as fewer ads, the ability to post messages, private messaging and more.

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > City Compilations

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #7301  
Old Posted Mar 29, 2012, 10:40 PM
BorisMolotov's Avatar
BorisMolotov BorisMolotov is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 511
Quote:
If we could get Mcd's to redevelop; in one of my fantasy version of the universe Mcd's would take pride in their "hometown" and build an HQ worthy of the massive corp that it is. Something on the order of the first several floors showcasing different Mcd's menus from across the world; maybe have each floor represent a continent or something with rotating country menus. It would / could be s showcase / tourist attraction....way cooler than the campy thing there now.
I know someone high up at McDonalds from church and I've asked him about relocation since places like Sara Lee were doing it (another person at my church works there) and he says they're quite happy in Oak Brook. Among other things, it's more centralized to the entire Chicagoland area than downtown Chicago.

Sidenote: The McDonalds on campus in Oak Brook there is much bigger and nicer than the Rock n' Roll McDonalds as well. I do like the idea of showcasing the international menu though.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7302  
Old Posted Mar 30, 2012, 1:24 AM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is online now
vertical
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: unconventionally bicoastal
Posts: 10,500
Oak Brook also offers very quick travel times to O'Hare and, yes, is dead-center to all of Chicagoland. I really wish they would consider some sort of Tysons Corner-esque transformation. Maybe if they ever extend the Blue Line from Forest Park...

I don't think there's anything wrong with having multiple centers around Chicagoland if those centers are walkable, easily accessible from the city and connected to each other via good roads and transit.
__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...

Last edited by ardecila; Mar 30, 2012 at 1:52 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7303  
Old Posted Mar 30, 2012, 1:44 AM
Hayward's Avatar
Hayward Hayward is offline
High above the Gold Coast
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 6,301
Quote:
Originally Posted by ardecila View Post
Oak Brook also offers very quick travel times to O'Hare and, yes, is dead-center to all of Chicagoland. I really wish they would consider some sort of Tysons Corner-esque transformation.
I hate how both Schaumburg and Oak Brook have very large mall and I can't get to them easily by rail transit.

Heck at least I could take Amtrak to Somerset of Troy back when I lived in Ann Arbor!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7304  
Old Posted Mar 30, 2012, 1:55 AM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is online now
vertical
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: unconventionally bicoastal
Posts: 10,500
If you're willing to do that, surely the Blue Line + Pace bus is not that bad. The bus connecting Rosemont to the Northwest Transit Center near Woodfield is one of the few Pace lines with decent service.
__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7305  
Old Posted Mar 30, 2012, 2:03 AM
Hayward's Avatar
Hayward Hayward is offline
High above the Gold Coast
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 6,301
Quote:
Originally Posted by ardecila View Post
If you're willing to do that, surely the Blue Line + Pace bus is not that bad. The bus connecting Rosemont to the Northwest Transit Center near Woodfield is one of the few Pace lines with decent service.
Taking the blue to O'hare is torture enough for me. Don't get me wrong, I'm happy we have it. It's just all the stops...then a transfer.

Metra would be more effective with speed, but it gets me nowhere near.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7306  
Old Posted Mar 30, 2012, 1:34 PM
Nowhereman1280 Nowhereman1280 is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Pungent Onion, Illinois
Posts: 8,538
^^^ Oh come now, the Blue Line to O'Hare isn't that bad. It takes like 35 to 40 minutes to get from downtown to O'Hare depending on where you are starting. That's generally much less than driving with traffic.

However, there is no reason to ever go to Woodfield when you live in an area with the best shopping in the city. Also I'm sure Shaumburg would be mortified at any proposed extension of the CTA or other mass transit to their mall because it would "draw the minorities" out there.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7307  
Old Posted Mar 30, 2012, 2:37 PM
Mr Downtown's Avatar
Mr Downtown Mr Downtown is offline
Urbane observer
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,497
Average weekday driving time from Circle to O'Hare is 23 minutes. Minimum average (at midnight) is 17 minutes; maximum average (morning rush) is 40 minutes. Jackson to O'Hare by Blue Line is 44 minutes.

And gentlemen, the transit thread is here.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7308  
Old Posted Mar 30, 2012, 7:37 PM
rgolch's Avatar
rgolch rgolch is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 774
Anyone have a map (i.e. google maps overlay) showing were current construction projects are occurring?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7309  
Old Posted Mar 30, 2012, 8:33 PM
ChiPhi's Avatar
ChiPhi ChiPhi is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Chicago, Philadelphia
Posts: 500
I've got two. One from Skyscraper Page and one from Yo Chicago.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7310  
Old Posted Mar 31, 2012, 12:28 AM
BorisMolotov's Avatar
BorisMolotov BorisMolotov is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 511
Quote:
Also I'm sure Shaumburg would be mortified at any proposed extension of the CTA or other mass transit to their mall because it would "draw the minorities" out there.
Schaumburg already has a relatively high minority population. It's only about 72% white, less when you take out Hispanics.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7311  
Old Posted Mar 31, 2012, 1:23 AM
rgolch's Avatar
rgolch rgolch is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 774
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiPhi View Post
I've got two. One from Skyscraper Page and one from Yo Chicago.
The first one is great. You guys should think about linking it to the first page, filtering out the built ones...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7312  
Old Posted Mar 31, 2012, 1:44 AM
ChiPhi's Avatar
ChiPhi ChiPhi is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Chicago, Philadelphia
Posts: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BorisMolotov View Post
Schaumburg already has a relatively high minority population. It's only about 72% white, less when you take out Hispanics.
Now if only they weren't a disgusting sprawl town, I might consider living there.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7313  
Old Posted Mar 31, 2012, 1:59 AM
i_am_hydrogen i_am_hydrogen is offline
shy city
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 4,170
It looks like Ald. Cappleman is doing the right thing and putting his support behind 3750 N. Halsted despite foolhardy and myopic community opposition.
__________________
flickr
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7314  
Old Posted Mar 31, 2012, 2:11 AM
the urban politician the urban politician is online now
The City
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Libertyville, IL
Posts: 10,482
Quote:
Originally Posted by i_am_hydrogen View Post
It looks like Ald. Cappleman is doing the right thing and putting his support behind 3750 N. Halsted despite foolhardy and myopic community opposition.


Had to bust out the smiley on this news.

Do you have a link?
__________________
If God is your imaginary friend, so be it. But don't try to make him mine.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7315  
Old Posted Mar 31, 2012, 2:18 AM
i_am_hydrogen i_am_hydrogen is offline
shy city
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 4,170
Nope. The article is from Inside-Booster, which doesn't have a website.
__________________
flickr
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7316  
Old Posted Mar 31, 2012, 3:38 AM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is online now
vertical
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: unconventionally bicoastal
Posts: 10,500
Quote:
Originally Posted by i_am_hydrogen View Post
Nope. The article is from Inside-Booster, which doesn't have a website.
Never fear, the NIMBYs have obtained a copy.

(PDF) http://www.halstedneighbors.org/wp-c...er_Proof_3.pdf

Looking at the elevations just makes it clear how absurd this opposition really is. This site is surrounded by buildings taller than the proposed one.
__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7317  
Old Posted Mar 31, 2012, 3:58 AM
Hayward's Avatar
Hayward Hayward is offline
High above the Gold Coast
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 6,301
It's absolutely absurd and unreasonable. It should just be assumed that any future development at Halsted on toward the lake will have considerable height.

It's not like anyone can argue view obstruction.
And it's not like anyone can argue the demolition of a historic building when there is none.

A parking lot that is there is destroying neighborhood character
A sizable building would redeem it.

I'll be real upset if these NIMBYs have any impact on this project. Back when I lived in Ann Arbor at least some justice was served when small midrise projects that were derailed by NIMBYS were ....seeemingly accidentally.....converted to dump sites and graffiti playgrounds. Take that property values!!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7318  
Old Posted Mar 31, 2012, 12:34 PM
the urban politician the urban politician is online now
The City
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Libertyville, IL
Posts: 10,482
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hayward View Post
It's absolutely absurd and unreasonable. It should just be assumed that any future development at Halsted on toward the lake will have considerable height.

It's not like anyone can argue view obstruction.
And it's not like anyone can argue the demolition of a historic building when there is none.

A parking lot that is there is destroying neighborhood character
A sizable building would redeem it.

I'll be real upset if these NIMBYs have any impact on this project. Back when I lived in Ann Arbor at least some justice was served when small midrise projects that were derailed by NIMBYS were ....seeemingly accidentally.....converted to dump sites and graffiti playgrounds. Take that property values!!
^ To some degree, NIMBYism is exactly why Chicago needs to be somewhat corrupt. Backroom deals are necessary for this very reason--the public is too fickle and selfish to allow things that benefit the greater good of the city to go forward.

Glad to see that the Alderman recognized the stupidity around him and is moving this thing forward. I especially applaud Cappleman because he recognized that this development would be much better for the community than a god-awful big box shopping center. I imagine there won't be any trouble landing financing for this project. Rental demand in this location has got to be quite high.
__________________
If God is your imaginary friend, so be it. But don't try to make him mine.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7319  
Old Posted Mar 31, 2012, 2:55 PM
Buckman821's Avatar
Buckman821 Buckman821 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 378
Quote:
Originally Posted by ardecila View Post
Looking at the elevations just makes it clear how absurd this opposition really is. This site is surrounded by buildings taller than the proposed one.
Seriously. At this point is the density even considerably different from the vintage courtyard across the street to the south or the vintage flatiron-esque building to the east?

I might have to rejoin their facebook page and gloat. I have no respect or sympathy for these people. Sometimes people just need something to be angry about to occupy their dreary lives, which is why this opposition always seems so much worse in the gold/coast/lincoln park/east lakeview. Simply too many people with nothing better to worry about and who have false impressions of self-importance.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7320  
Old Posted Apr 1, 2012, 1:53 PM
Kippis's Avatar
Kippis Kippis is offline
Chicagoland Runaway
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Chicago
Posts: 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by i_am_hydrogen View Post
It looks like Ald. Cappleman is doing the right thing and putting his support behind 3750 N. Halsted despite foolhardy and myopic community opposition.
I am still a member of their Facebook page, and the overwhelming consensus actually seems to support a big box retail component over what is currently proposed. All these folks care about are their damn air rights over the greater future health of the neighborhood. I haven't really taken time to gloat on their page, but Ald. Cappelman seems to be doing a fairly good job of that as it is.

Interestingly enough, they have read -- and taken offense to -- our replies concerning their dilemma on this forum, but I'm going to say it anyway: Morons.
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 > City Compilations
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 1:31 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.