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 > Discussion Forums > City Discussions

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #41  
Old Posted Apr 19, 2012, 4:09 AM
JDRCRASH's Avatar
JDRCRASH JDRCRASH is offline
Skyscraper Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: San Gabriel Valley
Posts: 7,724
These changes are truly sad.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #42  
Old Posted Apr 19, 2012, 7:04 AM
Chicago103's Avatar
Chicago103 Chicago103 is offline
Future Mayor of Chicago
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Chicago
Posts: 6,037
Quote:
Originally Posted by untitledreality View Post
If you are a fan of vintage buildings, late 19th century urbanism or Chicago in general, get ready for some serious pain.

All before photographs are courtesy of Charles A. Childs and are all located in the near South side and Douglas neighborhoods.

20th and Prairie



29th and Michigan



29th and Prairie



31st and Calumet



31st and Cottage Grove



33rd and Cottage Grove



33rd and Michigan



35th and Indiana


Those old pictures show that those parts of the south side looked a lot like Brooklyn or the Bronx as far as density is concerned. It is one of the reasons that the population density of modern Chicago is relatively low compared to NYC even though it is still one of the densest in the US overall. The towers in the park surrounded by open and vacant land and parking lots might make for taller buildings but you don't pile up mega density that way. Most of those buildings were torn down post-1950 and hence the mega population loss since that time. I sometimes wonder if the fact that Chicago tore down many more old residential buildings (per capita) than New York City makes it more difficult for us to return to our population peak whereas in NYC most of the pre-war buildings remained and thus it was easy for it to surpass it's previous population peak by immigrants and newcomers living in apartments just as cramped as in the pre-WWII era. Here in Chicago we are going to have to build, build, build to get back and modern building standards, floor plan sizes, zoning codes and NIMBY's make it difficult to get back to that level of density. Imagine how desirable those near south side lakefront neighborhoods would have been if those old buildings remained, there wouldn't have been such a huge desirability gap between the north and south lakefront neighborhoods. At least Kenwood-Hyde Park-South Shore is intact but what is between there and downtown needs a lot of work.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #43  
Old Posted Apr 19, 2012, 12:51 PM
MolsonExport's Avatar
MolsonExport MolsonExport is offline
The Vomit Bag.
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Liver & Onions
Posts: 22,333
^sad cases of empty-lotmanship.
__________________
There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know we don't know. -Donald Rumsfeld
Didn't you notice on the plane when you started talking, eventually I started reading the vomit bag?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #44  
Old Posted Apr 19, 2012, 12:52 PM
Lakelander's Avatar
Lakelander Lakelander is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 3,751
Main & Ashley Streets - Jacksonville, FL

1949


2010
__________________
Metro Jacksonville
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #45  
Old Posted Apr 19, 2012, 2:09 PM
unusualfire unusualfire is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Cincinnati,OH San Diego,CA Alamosa, CO
Posts: 2,024
^Wow everyone was skinny back then.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #46  
Old Posted Apr 19, 2012, 3:39 PM
ChiMIchael ChiMIchael is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 204
I wonder if New York is the only city in the US where urban renewal ultimately prevailed.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #47  
Old Posted Apr 19, 2012, 5:31 PM
zilfondel zilfondel is offline
Submarine de Nucléar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Portland
Posts: 4,056
Portland

11th & Hoyt, Pearl District

Then:

pic courtesy of vintageportland.wordpress.com

Now:
__________________
Portland Bike Bridge traffic:

2009 - 15,749 | 2010 - 17,576 | 2011 - 18,257 | 2012 - 18,794
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #48  
Old Posted Apr 19, 2012, 5:53 PM
JManc's Avatar
JManc JManc is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 18,167
Utica, NY

Top, Kanatenah Apartments on Genessee St. facing north. (1910)
Bottom, same location circa 2010. The apartments burned down in 1994.

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #49  
Old Posted Apr 19, 2012, 6:02 PM
summersm343's Avatar
summersm343 summersm343 is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 5,046
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiMIchael View Post
I wonder if New York is the only city in the US where urban renewal ultimately prevailed.
Philly has done very well with urban renewal in most parts of the city. A lot of historic architecture has been saved in Philly... thank god.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #50  
Old Posted Apr 20, 2012, 6:08 AM
NY Jew NY Jew is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chicago103 View Post
Those old pictures show that those parts of the south side looked a lot like Brooklyn or the Bronx as far as density is concerned. It is one of the reasons that the population density of modern Chicago is relatively low compared to NYC even though it is still one of the densest in the US overall. The towers in the park surrounded by open and vacant land and parking lots might make for taller buildings but you don't pile up mega density that way. Most of those buildings were torn down post-1950 and hence the mega population loss since that time. I sometimes wonder if the fact that Chicago tore down many more old residential buildings (per capita) than New York City makes it more difficult for us to return to our population peak whereas in NYC most of the pre-war buildings remained and thus it was easy for it to surpass it's previous population peak by immigrants and newcomers living in apartments just as cramped as in the pre-WWII era. Here in Chicago we are going to have to build, build, build to get back and modern building standards, floor plan sizes, zoning codes and NIMBY's make it difficult to get back to that level of density. Imagine how desirable those near south side lakefront neighborhoods would have been if those old buildings remained, there wouldn't have been such a huge desirability gap between the north and south lakefront neighborhoods. At least Kenwood-Hyde Park-South Shore is intact but what is between there and downtown needs a lot of work.
your wrong about NY the reason NY has more people today is solely because Queens and SI transformed from Farm land to city land. In addition they destroyed the housing stock in great swaths of NY. putting of projects in place. you can't appreciate how ugly those parts of NY look unless you get a panoramic view of the city and see big blobs of red

If I would take Manhattan, Brooklyn, and the Bronx's individual peak populations added it up and subtracted it by todays populations there would be over a million less people in the city then it's "peak"
peak population current difference
Manhattan 2,331,542 (1910) - 1,585,873 - 745,669
Brooklyn 2,738,175 (1950) - 2,504,700 - 233,475
Bronx 1,471,701 (1970) - 1,385,108 - 86,593
total population loss 1,065,737
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #51  
Old Posted Apr 20, 2012, 6:14 AM
NY Jew NY Jew is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiMIchael View Post
I wonder if New York is the only city in the US where urban renewal ultimately prevailed.
no it failed drastically look at Brownsville and South Bronx for the worst of the results. The only urban renewal success story came on the Upper West Side, and parts of the east side.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #52  
Old Posted Apr 20, 2012, 7:45 AM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is offline
vertical
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: unconventionally bicoastal
Posts: 10,709
For a sense of what some of those South Side buildings would have looked like, there's still one building left at 43rd and King. It looks like it was restored, since it has a cornice and the street level is in nearly perfect shape, but I can't find any real-estate data on it, which you would expect if it was apartments or condos.


flickr/reallyboring
__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #53  
Old Posted Apr 20, 2012, 2:29 PM
MolsonExport's Avatar
MolsonExport MolsonExport is offline
The Vomit Bag.
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Liver & Onions
Posts: 22,333
Quote:
Originally Posted by JManc View Post
Utica, NY

Top, Kanatenah Apartments on Genessee St. facing north. (1910)
Bottom, same location circa 2010. The apartments burned down in 1994.

no way.

AAGGGHHH!!
__________________
There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know we don't know. -Donald Rumsfeld
Didn't you notice on the plane when you started talking, eventually I started reading the vomit bag?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #54  
Old Posted Apr 20, 2012, 4:35 PM
CityKid CityKid is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: BK,NY/SF,CA/LB,CA
Posts: 479
What an incredible thread! Those Chicago before and afters are particularly depressing.

Here's a blog from a photographer in Long Beach, CA who works with some local newspapers such as the Press Telegram. He's documented some before and afters in Long Beach and surrounding cities in Southern LA County.
__________________
Everytime you drive to the grocery store, you are killing a polar bear.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #55  
Old Posted Apr 20, 2012, 7:27 PM
hammersklavier's Avatar
hammersklavier hammersklavier is offline
The Hammer
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Polis Philou Adelfou
Posts: 4,046
Quote:
Originally Posted by NY Jew View Post
your wrong about NY the reason NY has more people today is solely because Queens and SI transformed from Farm land to city land. In addition they destroyed the housing stock in great swaths of NY. putting of projects in place. you can't appreciate how ugly those parts of NY look unless you get a panoramic view of the city and see big blobs of red
Most of the biggest cities still had room to grow in 1950--NY had Staten Island and far Queens, Philadelphia had the Northeast and Roxborough, Detroit had its far western area, Chicago still had undeveloped land all the way around its fringes, and so on. Only Frisco and Boston were stringently boxed in when it came to growth.

To say otherwise is rather provincial.
__________________
CCME | CtL | Hidden City

Who knows but that, on the lower levels, I speak for you?’ (Ralph Ellison, Invisible Man)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #56  
Old Posted Apr 20, 2012, 7:49 PM
Boisebro's Avatar
Boisebro Boisebro is offline
All man. Half nuts.
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Boise, Idaho
Posts: 2,063
this is a much more recent transformation.

on the left is downtown boise in 1986. boise destroyed many of its downtown buildings to make way for new development in the 1970's, most of which never materialized, which resulted in vast tracts of empty dirt lots.

on the right is boise today. note that the empty lot in the lower right of the image is where boise's new tallest building is currently under construction.

__________________
I've been inducted by aliens.
I'm in their Hall of Fame because of all of the great ideas they found up my ass.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #57  
Old Posted Apr 20, 2012, 8:34 PM
mhays mhays is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 13,168
I lived in Boise 1979-1985. That was a pretty hellish four blocks. I think the circular plaza hadn't happened yet in 1985.

I only wish some of the new stuff was better. The lower left isn't any better than it was. The hotel on the upper left is beyond horrific, with inutterably bad connection to the street or plaza. I like some of the other stuff though.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #58  
Old Posted Apr 20, 2012, 8:40 PM
Bronxwood Bronxwood is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by MolsonExport View Post
no way.

AAGGGHHH!!
Yes that's really messed up. But at least the other beauty down the block is still standing.

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #59  
Old Posted Apr 20, 2012, 8:42 PM
Cottonwood Cottonwood is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Boise
Posts: 3,426
Boise has done a great job with the Grove Plaza and the area that extends between the Centre on The Grove and Wells Fargo's tower. It is one of the centers of activity downtown with the fountain, trees and grass areas and is a great place to people watch, moreso when the Saturday Market is taking place.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #60  
Old Posted Apr 22, 2012, 4:57 AM
bbeliko's Avatar
bbeliko bbeliko is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Over the rainbow
Posts: 2,168
Mexico City:
1957:


2012:



source


1922-1990's







source
__________________
"A couple of years ago, a couple of geniuses put on something called Woodstock Festival. It was a tragedy. Groups recognised that they could go into larger cattle markets, play less time and make more dollars. What they've done is to destroy the rock industry."- Bill Graham

Last edited by bbeliko; Apr 22, 2012 at 5:55 AM.
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 > Discussion Forums > City Discussions
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:10 PM.

     

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