CHICAGO | General Developments

[JK47]

focusing on the Olympics skirting Chicago is even sillier in light of FIFA. does anyone really believe the IOC is any less corrupt? can you say Solti?

I think you mean Sochi, which was the Winter Olympic that somehow managed to be more expensive than a Summer Olympic at $51 Billion. Solti was, as far as I can tell, a conductor at the CSO.

lets ignore the fact that most cities lose enormous amounts of money on this silly endeavor anyway and the model is fundamentally flawed. they should simply build a permanent home for the summer games and be done with it. beyond that, its generally accepted the U.S. had no chance of winning a bid regardless of city choice, due to *drum roll* internal politics.
With international events there is an element of vanity. Hence the (ultimately ruinous) displays put on by Athens, Beijing, and Rio de Janeiro were well received by the respective international sporting body in each case because it stroked the egos of the members of that sporting body. Chicago promised a modest and reasonable display while others promised grandeur. That, in combination with the (as regards the IOC) the dispute over revenue sharing with the USOC derailed the Chicago bid.

but see, the same people who love to espouse chicago's neighborhoods and "blue collar toughness" and "grittiness" are often the same who love to sneer down their noses the people who live there or who arent part of the global elite. they are the people who are appalled that someone living in a community is more invested in the social fabric of their block, or a building thats a lynchpin in the neighborhood, than catering to mega developers who dont have their best interests in mind.

This sounds like an oblique reference to gentrification. The stance I see from those opposing development, in reality the entrance of higher income (relative to the neighborhood) homeowners and business-owners that cater to said homeowners, seems odd because it runs counter to the stance those same groups take on affordable housing. Essentially, they want to keep or expand affordable housing where (for the purposes of this paragraph) higher income households reside but they want to discourage them from moving into lower income neighborhoods. Which is ultimately unworkable when values rise in traditionally higher income neighborhoods forcing (or encouraging) different strata of such households, with lower relative incomes, to spread out into traditionally lower income neighborhoods.

Which is to say that development in higher income areas will drive the "gentry" into neighborhoods that are cheaper and yet attractive (the stable working and middle class neighborhoods with good transportation connections and commercial prospects). Rather than trying to fight the wave one should take the long view that neighborhoods change in character over time. Pilsen, for instance, started out as a neighborhood of, among other things, Czechs. Lakeview was once fairly seedy and industrial and the Gold Coast, in the area of the Viagra Triangle, used to be a Bohemian area.

ive said it before, but the mono-culture of this board is not helpful or conductive to generating nuanced discussions on these issues. you sound just as closed minded and frankly far more detached from the issues that most people care about day to day.

This is a board for people who are interested in real estate development and building construction. It's unreasonable for you to expect to find a strong current of support for policies that would throttle or limit development in order to preserve a neighborhood in proverbial amber.

[JK47]

If anything, for the high-crime neighborhoods the reality is worse than the perception, because the perception is that their averages are closer to the city when, in reality they're 10-20 times more violent than the gentler parts of Chicago. Lee's films aren't prescriptive, but if they provoke thought among his intended audience perhaps they'll spur the kind of both grassroots and top-down actions that will lead to positive change. I dislike the word "Chiraq," but it's hard to dispute that arguing over names when people *are* actually dying at a shocking rate is more than a little distastful.


The only merit I can see to opposing the use of terms like "Chiraq" is it undermines efforts to repair a community's appearance. I'm thinking of the broken windows philosophy where the community works to improve physical appeal and attractiveness to outsiders in order to encourage commerce and investment. A catchy name that portrays the area as a proverbial warzone replete with murder doesn't help when one is trying to reduce crime by eliminating decaying property and bringing in jobs and economic activity.

More should be done besides argue over the name. However, the name itself can create negative perceptions that will linger and hinder other efforts that could be attempted (aside from flooding the area with police which never seems to have the impact one would hope for).

I wonder if this film will do more than tell us what we already know, that certain portions of the South Side suffer from an extreme amount of violent crime and crushing poverty.

[Ch.G, Ch.G]

If anything, for the high-crime neighborhoods the reality is worse than the perception, because the perception is that their averages are closer to the city when, in reality they're 10-20 times more violent than the gentler parts of Chicago.

I disagree. I think people already have a general understanding that in Chicago, like most if not every city, the majority of crime occurs in certain areas.

Lee's films aren't prescriptive, but if they provoke thought among his intended audience perhaps they'll spur the kind of both grassroots and top-down actions that will lead to positive change. I dislike the word "Chiraq," but it's hard to dispute that arguing over names when people *are* actually dying at a shocking rate is more than a little distastful.

That attempt to shame is more than a little unfair when I'm arguing that the sensationalism of "Chiraq" does more harm than good to the people whom it's ostensibly meant to help.

[wierdaaron]

I think Chicago is pretty cool.

[rlw777]

I disagree. I think people already have a general understanding that in Chicago, like most if not every city, the majority of crime occurs in certain areas.

That attempt to shame is more than a little unfair when I'm arguing that the sensationalism of "Chiraq" does more harm than good to the people whom it's ostensibly meant to help.

Absolutely agree. On several occasions I have had friends who don't live here who referred to Chicago as the most dangerous city in the US. Infact just last week in one of the Philly threads someone posted something about Chicago being the most dangerous city in the US. Though Chicago doesn't even break the top 100. "Chiraq" may be helping out some Chicago actors which is great but the title only reinforces an already exaggerated perception of the city.

[wierdaaron]

Back to Roosevelt Collection... the Crains article on the sale (http://www.chicagobusiness.com/realestate/20150617/CRED03/150619832/back-from-the-dead-roosevelt-collection-changing-hands) almost reads like a hagiography on McCaffery himself. It's true that he was able to squeeze some money out of the place by flipping it, but other than patience McCaffery didn't bring much else to the table worth that much lauding.

Simply flipping something for a nice profit might be worthy of praise in business circles, but I would be much more impressed if he'd demonstrated any care or pride in ownership or improvement to the location or community. Sterling Bay flips properties for huge profits left and right, but they do it by salvaging and restoring notable buildings and breathing new life into them and their environments by stuffing them full of young tech workers who will inject the area with new economic life. People don't commend SB for their timing like they do McCaffery in that article, they commend SB for their vision, and their stewardship over their properties, and how that translates into an uncanny ability to fill up practically-abandoned commercial space at top dollar.

McCaffery was able to lease up RC with stores that are already going out of business due to low traffic, and turned the obligation to build a public park into a land-sale rooftop-garden switcheroo without any care for design or benefit for the community. Shrewd businessmanship, sure, but not thoughtful stewardship.

Also, it's not totally clear exactly what the article is referring to when they say the land to the north was sold to Woods. It could be referring to the corner pocket along Wells that was slated for a highrise, but I think it means the stretch of land along Financial, south of Polk, which has been a sandbox lo these many years but was part of the RC package and was earmarked for future phases of residential. Having new hands on that strip of land could be interesting, as it's been a missing link in the effort to unify RC with the rest of the neighborhood to the north.

[Domer2019]

Absolutely agree. On several occasions I have had friends who don't live here who referred to Chicago as the most dangerous city in the US. Infact just last week in one of the Philly threads someone posted something about Chicago being the most dangerous city in the US. Though Chicago doesn't even break the top 100. "Chiraq" may be helping out some Chicago actors which is great but the title only reinforces an already exaggerated perception of the city.

This is a misconception (in certain respects) that will not leave without a fight. First and foremost, the logical fallacy that total murder counts are proof of a higher level of danger in the statistical average city block. Murder rates are more indicative, when comparing it to area and population, but the sensationalist and ever present headlines trump deeper research, which most out-of-towners don't care enough to go into.

Secondarily, the implicit ties to corruption, and the era of Al Capone. Ask an international about Chicago, and their answers will be Michael Jordan and Al Capone. Other cities like London with Jack the Ripper escape this misfortune of summation due to having a wealth of other identity facets (which Chicago also has, but to lesser extent, and to lesser knowledge).

Chiraq too has the headline/Al Capone effect in that it inserts itself (however temporarily) into the list that mentally sums up Chicago. And most people won't even see the movie, they'll just hear the title. Judging a book by its cover.

[wierdaaron]

Maybe they should have that mobster tour bus go through the hood instead of downtown.

edit: Noob question, but I noticed yesterday that the river looked a lot more brown than green yesterday at the main branch around the lock. I'm guessing that's because of all the rain the day prior, but is the brown specifically from Lake Michigan overflowing into the lake at Navy Pier, or would it be from upriver?

[emathias]

Maybe they should have that mobster tour bus go through the hood instead of downtown.

edit: Noob question, but I noticed yesterday that the river looked a lot more brown than green yesterday at the main branch around the lock. I'm guessing that's because of all the rain the day prior, but is the brown specifically from Lake Michigan overflowing into the lake at Navy Pier, or would it be from upriver?

My understanding is that the mud is mainly from rain washing dirt and mud directly into the river. The river normally has a gentle southward flow due to the reversal, but during heavy downpours it tends toward it's natural current which is into the lake, which is blocked by the locks. In really heavy downpours, the city has to open the locks and let the river flow into the lake to avoid flooding in downtown. Some of the mud is likely also stirred up from the bottom by the changes in current caused by rapid influx of rainwater, too.

[msu2001la]

My understanding is that the mud is mainly from rain washing dirt and mud directly into the river. The river normally has a gentle southward flow due to the reversal, but during heavy downpours it tends toward it's natural current which is into the lake, which is blocked by the locks. In really heavy downpours, the city has to open the locks and let the river flow into the lake to avoid flooding in downtown. Some of the mud is likely also stirred up from the bottom by the changes in current caused by rapid influx of rainwater, too.

Just to add to this:

Chicago has combined sewers, so stormwater and sewage go into the same pipes and normally it all gets treated as sewage, and the treated (clean) water is released into waterways or the lake. (Newer cities have separate systems for sewage and stormwater.)

As such, when we get heavy rains the water treatment plants cannot keep up with the volume due to all the stormwater, so the system starts to fill up. Eventually, they have to discharge combined sewers directly into waterways without treating it first or the system will back up into people's homes and businesses. This discharge is called a "Combined Sewer Overflow" or CSO.

Usually, CSO's involve dumping untreated sewage (combined with stormwater) into the Chicago River where it flows downstream, away from Lake Michigan. At this point, the Chicago River itself is basically part of the combined sewer system. So, when that starts to back up and river levels rise, the only choice to avoid flooding downtown is to open the locks and discharge into Lake Michigan.

The Chicago Metropolitan Water Reclamation District (MWRD) opened the locks at Wilmette and Navy Pier on Monday night. So, at that point the river is temporarily reversed, and untreated sewage is flowing directly into Lake Michigan via Chicago River (and North Shore Channel).

MWRD tries to avoid CSO's, but we've had around 40 per year for the last few years. Opening the locks is a last resort, and this has only been done handful of times in the last few years.

[msu2001la]

So, when people talk about the Riverwalk being "designed to withstand flooding", they are really just talking about the hardscape elements. I'm sure the concrete, rails, steps, etc can all handle some inundation, and after a healthy power washing (hopefully with some disinfectant) should be good to go.

Plant material too can withstand a certain amount of inundation, but nothing is going to survive if routinely inundated with contaminated with sewer water. With the increasing frequency of severe storms, these major storm events that used to happen once every 5 or 10 years are suddenly becoming an annual occurrence.

Chicago is working on increasing sewer capacity with the ongoing deep tunnel project, and things like green alleys, green roofs, rain gardens etc all work to slow down the inflow of stormwater into the system, but they have a long ways to go and mother nature seems to be going in the opposite direction.

[MayorOfChicago]

So, when people talk about the Riverwalk being "designed to withstand flooding", they are really just talking about the hardscape elements. I'm sure the concrete, rails, steps, etc can all handle some inundation, and after a healthy power washing (hopefully with some disinfectant) should be good to go.

Plant material too can withstand a certain amount of inundation, but nothing is going to survive if routinely inundated with contaminated with sewer water. With the increasing frequency of severe storms, these major storm events that used to happen once every 5 or 10 years are suddenly becoming an annual occurrence.

Chicago is working on increasing sewer capacity with the ongoing deep tunnel project, and things like green alleys, green roofs, rain gardens etc all work to slow down the inflow of stormwater into the system, but they have a long ways to go and mother nature seems to be going in the opposite direction.

* Deep tunnel has a 2.3 billion gallon capacity in the tunnels themselves that came online in 2006
* The O'hare reservoir can hold 350 million gallons of sewage awaiting treatment during floods and is currently online.
* The temp Thornton reservoir can hold 3.5 billion gallons of sewage and is currently online
* The final Thornton reservoir is due to come online in August with a 7.9 billion gallon capacity
* The McCook reservoirs are due to come online with 3.5 billion gallon capacity in 2017 and 10 billion gallons by 2029.

So the good news is the current 6.15 billion gallon storage should increase to 10.55 billion gallons within 2 months and then to 14.05 billion gallons in 2017.

That should help greatly with floods and discharging into the rivers. I would hope those initial reservoirs will stop discharges into the lake at a minimum.

[Mr Downtown]

As for disinfectant, first, the concentration of pathogens in CSO water is really, really small. Secondly, all those surfaces are out in open sunlight.

[Via Chicago]

The fact that this project was engineered in the 60s/70s and isnt coming fully online until 2030 is just absurd.

[Steely Dan]

The fact that this project was engineered in the 60s/70s and isnt coming fully online until 2030 is just absurd.
chicago's unrelenting flatness: a dream for cyclists and a nightmare for civil engineers for over 200 years.

[sentinel]

^^So true. But then I look at what's happening Dallas and Houston these past few weeks and realize how much of an engineering marvel Chicago(land) is. Granted, we're 500+ feet above sea level, but the overall flatness of Chicago has necessitated some ingenious engineering feats..

[wierdaaron]

Oh, I wasn't insinuating that brown water = poop water. I'm just interested in how the different water sources mingle together to create different shades, and it was unusual seeing the river such a different color.

Whenever I cross the Mackinaw bridge I can't help but notice that where Lake Michigan and Lake Huron meet you can see a distinct border in the water where the two bodies of water are somehow distinct even though they flow right into each other. That always gets me thinking about fluid dynamics and what gives bodies of water their appearance, instead of something like "hey look at this huge bridge I'm on."

Thanks for the input everyone!

[Steely Dan]

Whenever I cross the Mackinaw bridge I can't help but notice that where Lake Michigan and Lake Huron meet you can see a distinct border in the water where the two bodies of water are somehow distinct even though they flow right into each other.
as someone who has vacationed on mackinac island every summer of my life for the past 4 decades, and crossed the mackinac bridge countless times, i've never once witnessed that phenomenon of separate water in the two lakes. lakes michigan and huron are, hydrologically speaking, just two lobes of one big giant lake. it is only historical convention that we think of them as two separate bodies of water. in reality, they are not separate in any hydrological way. water flows back and forth in both directions through the straits of mackinac (which are still 5 miles wide at their narrowest pinch point where the bridge is), and the straits are quite deep, bottoming out at around 120 feet deep.

it's all the same gorgeous deep blue water of lake huron-michigan, the largest great lake of them all.

http://cdn.c.photoshelter.com/img-get/I00002p.ygniRENc/s/880/880/df025950-mackinac-bridge-aerial-photo.jpg
source: http://homeandgardenphotos.photoshelter.com/image/I00002p.ygniRENc

[Via Chicago]

chicago's unrelenting flatness: a dream for cyclists and a nightmare for civil engineers for over 200 years.

i mean, i also understand that the quarries didnt empty out as quickly as projected but still....by the time you get it built and online you've missed the moving target (which is not to say flooding is going away, but even with the additional capacity id be shocked if this can accomodate some of the storms we've had in recent years). also the whole "bioswale"/permeable alley initative seems to have completely petered out...that should have just as big of a commitment but its mostly lip service.

[sage]

To jump onto the CSO conversation, the website istheresewageinthechicagoriver.com (http://istheresewageinthechicagoriver.com/) shows a map of what segments currently have CSO, along with a couple links to MWRD reports.

[msu2001la]

also the whole "bioswale"/permeable alley initative seems to have completely petered out...that should have just as big of a commitment but its mostly lip service.

I don't know about the green alley program, but CDOT is definitely pushing sustainable/green infrastructure in all of their current streetscape projects where existing soils allow.

Here's six current/recent street projects that involve infiltration planters, permeable pavement and/or bioswales:
Lawrence Ave between Clark and Western
Argyle between Broadway and Sheridan Road
Cottage Grove between 77th and 83rd
Leland between Clark street and the Lakefront
State street between 35th and 55th
Oak Park Avenue between Irving Park Road and Forest Preserve Drive

[ardecila]

i mean, i also understand that the quarries didnt empty out as quickly as projected but still....by the time you get it built and online you've missed the moving target (which is not to say flooding is going away, but even with the additional capacity id be shocked if this can accomodate some of the storms we've had in recent years). also the whole "bioswale"/permeable alley initative seems to have completely petered out...that should have just as big of a commitment but its mostly lip service.

Well, the equally big change is in the requirements for on-site detention.

Setting aside feel-good initiatives for bioswales and green alleys, all new developments in Chicago on sites of 15,000SF or larger, or with 7500SF of impervious surface, must comply with the Stormwater Ordinance that puts limits on how quickly water can flow out of a site. This does little to mitigate the impacts of existing buildings and surfaces, but definitely puts a big brake on the increase of stormwater. (On the negative side, it may lead to more open retention ponds for large developments outside of the densest neighborhoods. Hello, goose poop.)

That's only the city, though - Chicago is the most fragmented metro area in the US, and getting all those tiny little suburbs to enact similar standards is a serious challenge.

[wierdaaron]

as someone who has vacationed on mackinac island every summer of my life for the past 4 decades, and crossed the mackinac bridge countless times, i've never once witnessed that phenomenon of separate water in the two lakes.

It's a bit to the west of the bridge itself, I think I usually see it either before getting on the bridge or soon after. It could just be a depth change making it look darker.

[Chi-Sky21]

I know Loyola University Lakeshore campus has done a lot of work recently in regards to stormwater. Kind of interesting.

http://www.luc.edu/sustainability/initiatives/iesstormwater/

[Steely Dan]

It's a bit to the west of the bridge itself, I think I usually see it either before getting on the bridge or soon after. It could just be a depth change making it look darker.

you're undoubtedly seeing an abrupt depth change causing the water to look different, as in the picture below.

http://brech.com/np/edifice/images/Mackinac%20Bridge-94.jpg
source: http://brech.com/np/edifice/index.html

the actual waters in the two halves of lake huron-michigan are identical and show no differentiation from each other as one often see when rivers of two different water types flow into each other and remain separate for miles downstream.

[wierdaaron]

...k but my point about water being neat still stands

[BVictor1]

Strand Hotel renovation/facade restoration
6300 Block of S. Cottage Grove
06/18/15

https://im1.shutterfly.com/media/47a5d839b3127ccee931efd4c52100000030O00AcNmjhy5atmwPbz4C/cC/f%3D0/ls%3D00606599846820150619034609795.JPG/ps%3D50/r%3D0/rx%3D720/ry%3D480/

https://im1.shutterfly.com/media/47a5d839b3127ccee9306971e58b00000030O00AcNmjhy5atmwPbz4C/cC/f%3D0/ls%3D00606599846820150619034628597.JPG/ps%3D50/r%3D0/rx%3D720/ry%3D480/

[Jim in Chicago]

chicago's unrelenting flatness: a dream for cyclists and a nightmare for civil engineers for over 200 years.

This could just as well describe the Netherlands, and yet they've figured it out.

[Steely Dan]

This could just as well describe the Netherlands, and yet they've figured it out.

as are we.

and much like the netherland's delta works (1958-1997), massive and exorbitantly expensive infrastructure projects like TARP are built on the time scale of generations. this kinda stuff doesn't happen overnight.

[brian_b]

Did anyone make it down to the Ickes Homes redevelopment meeting and have any more information than what dnainfo is reporting?

http://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/20150619/south-loop/ickes-developer-chosen-by-cha-eight-years-after-demolition

It would be nice to have more photos of the posters they used.

[Ch.G, Ch.G]

as are we.

and much like the netherland's delta works (1958-1997), massive and exorbitantly expensive infrastructure projects like TARP are built on the time scale of generations. this kinda stuff doesn't happen overnight.

Yup. Big Dig: 25 years (almost a decade behind schedule), $14+ billion dollars (nearly 200% cost overrun), and, based on my understanding, for a project not as large in scope.

Calls for action on the Alaskan Way Viaduct replacement tunnel (only two miles?) in Seattle began in the early aughts. The site-specific boring machine, Bertha, which began its work in July 2013 and was supposed to finish by September 2014, has been stalled since December 2013. Work isn't supposed to be completed until 2017, though I'm not sure if that time frame includes recent problems. Again, my understanding is that the scope of this project is neither as large as the Big Dig nor Deep Tunnel.

[VKChaz]

as are we.

and much like the netherland's delta works (1958-1997), massive and exorbitantly expensive infrastructure projects like TARP are built on the time scale of generations. this kinda stuff doesn't happen overnight.

Yes, some feel the 'grass is always greener...'
London needs to spend billions doing something similar to Chicago
good summary video of the issue
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WfT1TSycNu4

[lu9]

I found this pair of new homes interesting. I particularly like what was used along the sides.

(excuse the poor quality iphone shot)

http://i57.tinypic.com/2m4oj21.jpg

[BVictor1]

Did anyone make it down to the Ickes Homes redevelopment meeting and have any more information than what dnainfo is reporting?

http://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/20150619/south-loop/ickes-developer-chosen-by-cha-eight-years-after-demolition

It would be nice to have more photos of the posters they used.

I wish I had. I knew that Dowell was planning on having a town hall, but my energy was just gone. It seems foolish to build less units than were originally there, especially now that there's a green line stop at Cermak.

[urbanpln]

It seems foolish to build less units than were originally there, especially now that there's a green line stop at Cermak.

The new proposed plan will be fairly dense. Six to seven acres were taken out of the site to build Jones College Prep an athletic field, and there is more vacant land on the east side of State Street that is prime for more mixed use development.

[untitledreality]

It seems foolish to build less units than were originally there, especially now that there's a green line stop at Cermak.
Agreed. Scrap the townhouses and walk ups, just go full mid rise. With the amount of land available I see no reason they couldn't comfortably fit 1,500 units by only constructing midrise structures.

Atrium Village is planning 1,500 units on 7.4 acres
River South is planning 2,700 units, and park space, on 5.8 acres

and yet, CHA thinks 867 units on 12 acres is acceptable.

[wierdaaron]

Christ on a bike, McCaffery and Antunovich? So much potential for that spot to be a gateway to a new McMotor Row district, but I can't think of a combination of names that would give me less hope. Sounds like a good amount of retail though.

[BVictor1]

The new proposed plan will be fairly dense. Six to seven acres were taken out of the site to build Jones College Prep an athletic field, and there is more vacant land on the east side of State Street that is prime for more mixed use development.

So... what stops them from going vertical? I'm guessing the athletic field is on the ground and not in the sky :D

[Mr Downtown]

You're asking what makes CHA unenthusiastic about highrises?

[BVictor1]

You're asking what makes CHA unenthusiastic about highrises?

No one said wrap them in chain link fencing.

[spyguy]

Ace Hotel - 311 N Morgan
http://i57.tinypic.com/2wqttg7.jpg

[the urban politician]

^ I approve.

[Notyrview]

It's nice, if not a little boring. A hotel building should be at least 10 stories. C'mon.

[the urban politician]

I don't know, I'm not totally opposed to having a height limited district in some places.

It's charming, and in areas with rapidly rising property values height limitations gobble up vacant land.

The NIMBYism in the Gold Coast and east River North and the pander hack nature of Ald Reilly, for example has had one positive effect as I predicted years ago: developers are piling on the proposals further west. Our nascent midtown Manhattab is slowly forming, we just need to develop that little McDonald's/Rainforest Cafe district.

Actually, the owners of those sites and the Holy Name parking lot are being unwise by waiting so long. As time passes their properties are more valuable yet as land around them gets settled with residents they run the risk of severe NIMBYism squashing any large proposals.

[BVictor1]

I don't know, I'm not totally opposed to having a height limited district in some places.


That's called the rest of the City of Chicago. This is the central area and I'm opposed to having height limited districts there. On that note, I have no problem with the Ace Hotel.

[the urban politician]

^ I agree, but the West Loop still has too many parking lots. Throw in 2 or 3 forty story towers and you gobble up all the demand.

Why not 10-15 six to eight story buildings instead?

[Notyrview]

I don't know, I'm not totally opposed to having a height limited district in some places.

It's charming, and in areas with rapidly rising property values height limitations gobble up vacant land.

The NIMBYism in the Gold Coast and east River North and the pander hack nature of Ald Reilly, for example has had one positive effect as I predicted years ago: developers are piling on the proposals further west. Our nascent midtown Manhattab is slowly forming, we just need to develop that little McDonald's/Rainforest Cafe district.

Actually, the owners of those sites and the Holy Name parking lot are being unwise by waiting so long. As time passes their properties are more valuable yet as land around them gets settled with residents they run the risk of severe NIMBYism squashing any large proposals.

I'm not totally opposed to height restrictions in this area either, but it seems like the West Loop NIMBYs want to limit buildings to like three stories which is insane. As for River North, I don't care what happens there, it's so ugly.

[BVictor1]

^ I agree, but the West Loop still has too many parking lots. Throw in 2 or 3 forty story towers and you gobble up all the demand.

Why not 10-15 six to eight story buildings instead?

They have too many six to eight story buildings in that area as it is. I'm sick of mediocrity.

[the urban politician]

^ The mediocrity has nothing to do with the height, it has to do with the design. The West Loop is full of dull, wannabe historic brick buildings.

But River North has plenty of mediocre buildings as well, they are just taller.

Shorter buildings if designed well could be really nice. One thing that's needed is to get rid of the hare-brained parking minimums

[BVictor1]

^True, which is why I want both height and design :)

That's why I always interject my two-cents and go to these meetings. Of course it's not just about height.

[UrbanLibertine]

^ I agree, but the West Loop still has too many parking lots. Throw in 2 or 3 forty story towers and you gobble up all the demand.

Why not 10-15 six to eight story buildings instead?

I completely agree.

[streetline]

^ I agree, but the West Loop still has too many parking lots. Throw in 2 or 3 forty story towers and you gobble up all the demand.

Why not 10-15 six to eight story buildings instead?

I might prefer to swap that around to six to eight 10-15 story buildings. I want to fill in those parking lots as much as anyone, but I also want to make the resulting neighborhood dense and urban.

And, to me, the big thing is design. Not so much in the modern vs traditional sense, but the sense of making good use of the site's frontages and helping to make the west loop denser not only in unit counts but in terms of fine grained retail and urban walk-ability.

Honestly, I wonder if the west loop would be less against towers if more of the ones they got weren't such terrible examples. Big exposed podiums should be right out; even if you put retail on the first floor, the multi-story blank walls above them are street deadening and decorating those blank walls can only help so much. Much better to add a couple of stories to those podiums to make room to wrap them in apartments, or townhouses, or offices, or any active use.

[hawainpanda]

I don't know, I'm not totally opposed to having a height limited district in some places.

It's charming, and in areas with rapidly rising property values height limitations gobble up vacant land.

The NIMBYism in the Gold Coast and east River North and the pander hack nature of Ald Reilly, for example has had one positive effect as I predicted years ago: developers are piling on the proposals further west. Our nascent midtown Manhattab is slowly forming, we just need to develop that little McDonald's/Rainforest Cafe district.

Actually, the owners of those sites and the Holy Name parking lot are being unwise by waiting so long. As time passes their properties are more valuable yet as land around them gets settled with residents they run the risk of severe NIMBYism squashing any large proposals.

river north is basically a low rise version of midtown, it has a nice mix of office and residential...everything just needs to be 10x taller (and all the parking lots filled in)

[Mr Downtown]

to me, the big thing is design. . . .[in] the sense of making good use of the site's frontages and helping to make the west loop denser not only in unit counts but in terms of fine grained retail and urban walk-ability.

That's why I don't understand the relentless call by some folks here for more towers, which we know from many decades of sad experience deaden the streetscapes wherever they appear. They're sold at price points that attract nonresident investors (meaning units that are dark 40 weeks of the year), they have parking podiums that deaden the bottom fifth of the building, and their owners are dead-set against any ground-floor uses that might attract the wrong kind of folks or need truck deliveries.

It seems to me that the West Loop is off to a much better start, in terms of an attractive and walkable streetscape, than any district composed primarily of towers, whether in Streeterville, Central Station, River North, Belmont Harbor, East Hyde Park, No Man's Land Wilmette, or Edgewater's Sheridan Road.

[streetline]

That's why I don't understand the relentless call by some folks here for more towers, which we know from many decades of sad experience deaden the streetscapes wherever they appear. They're sold at price points that attract nonresident investors (meaning units that are dark 40 weeks of the year), they have parking podiums that deaden the bottom fifth of the building, and their owners are dead-set against any ground-floor uses that might attract the wrong kind of folks or need truck deliveries.

It seems to me that the West Loop is off to a much better start, in terms of an attractive and walkable streetscape, than any district composed primarily of towers, whether in Streeterville, Central Station, River North, Belmont Harbor, East Hyde Park, No Man's Land Wilmette, or Edgewater's Sheridan Road.

I'd agree "that the West Loop is off to a much better start", but I'd disagree with the idea that we should eschew towers. While avoiding towers can avoid their ills, it also avoids their advantages, and that is not a trade-off we should just uncritically accept.

While there have been a series of horribly damaging design trends in towers (especially when they're put on the kind of larger lots still available in parts of the West Loop), from towers in parks to towers in parking lots to towers on big visible podiums; the problem isn't the height of the tower itself, it's how it [fails to] meet the street.

It is possible to design proper towers that contribute to the feel of a neighborhood by meeting the street with human activity and scale on the first few floors, and there are even local examples like JeffJack in the West Loop.

What we should be doing is demanding that when towers come, they come with retail on multiple scales (mostly fine grained, but the occasional supermarket or other large retailer is also necessary), and active human uses along all of their street frontages on the first few floors, and minimal curb-cuts.

And while we push for those restrictions, we should make sure that parking minimums don't apply where they don't make sense, so that developers can build only what the market demands.

Unfortunately, the current legal and procedural tools available to Chicago neighborhoods and residents trying to influence developers are mostly oriented around limiting height and density, rather than avoiding the harms that can come with poorly designed height and density. Hopefully that will change over time.

[Mr Downtown]

^What do you see as the advantages of towers?

[streetline]

^What do you see as the advantages of towers?
Density (without sacrificing unit size), views (incoming and outgoing), shared amenities (gym, pool, doorman, guest parking, on-site dry cleaner, recycling, bulk cable and internet, etc... basically anything that it makes sense to pool expenses on that doesn't scale down well to accommodate non-tower developments on urban lots). Those are the first things to come to mind.

[LouisVanDerWright]

^^^ More intense/efficient use of existing infrastructure, more tax revenue, generally more energy efficient PSF, etc, etc, etc... Oh and people just like to live in them so why shouldn't we build them?

[Ryanrule]

^ I agree, but the West Loop still has too many parking lots. Throw in 2 or 3 forty story towers and you gobble up all the demand.

Why not 10-15 six to eight story buildings instead?

ill have 10-15 80 story buildings.

[Mr Downtown]

My argument is that tower districts—in the US at least—just don't achieve particularly high density. To preserve their views, they're not put all that close together. A neighborhood full of courtyard buildings, like those found in South Shore just southeast of 71st & Stony, hits 27,000 persons/sq mi, while East Hyde Park/Indian Village is at 24,000. The West Loop is already at 20,000. Corbusian projects are half that: Lake Meadows is 12,000; Prairie Shores is 9,000. On the North Side, Belmont Harbor is only 36,000, while East Lakeview (just northeast of Broadway & Diversey) is 67,000.

It's easy to poke around on CensusReporter (http://censusreporter.org/profiles/14000US17031081201-census-tract-81201-cook-il/) and see the densities for individual census tracts. Here are a dozen I just looked up:

301.01 82,000 Edgewater
633.01 67,000 East Lakeview (NE of Bdwy & Diversey)
813 64,000 North Streeterville
801 63,000 Gold Coast
814.03 44,000 South Streeterville
619.02 36,000 Belmont Harbor
4305 27,000 South Shore (SE of 71st & Stony)
818 25,000 River North
3907 24,000 East Hyde Park
8331 20,000 West Loop
8411 17,000 Chinatown
3510 12,000 Lake Meadows
3501 9,000 Prairie Shores

[Randomguy34]

Look at this census tract I found in Edgewater

Census Tract: 307.02
Area: 0.003 square miles
Population: 1,538
Density: 479,985.7 people per square mile
Hehe, imagine if all of Chicago had this high of a density. Our population would be 112,316,653.8 people, easily the most powerful city in the world. :cheers:

[stevevance]

Look at this census tract I found in Edgewater

Census Tract: 307.02
Area: 0.003 square miles
Population: 1,538
Density: 479,985.7 people per square mile

Hehe, imagine if all of Chicago had this high of a density. Our population would be 112,316,653.8 people, easily the most powerful city in the world. :cheers:

In how many buildings are those 1,538 people housed?

[stevevance]

I'd agree "that the West Loop is off to a much better start", but I'd disagree with the idea that we should eschew towers. While avoiding towers can avoid their ills, it also avoids their advantages, and that is not a trade-off we should just uncritically accept.

[snipped]

It is possible to design proper towers that contribute to the feel of a neighborhood by meeting the street with human activity and scale on the first few floors, and there are even local examples like JeffJack in the West Loop.

[snipped]

Unfortunately, the current legal and procedural tools available to Chicago neighborhoods and residents trying to influence developers are mostly oriented around limiting height and density, rather than avoiding the harms that can come with poorly designed height and density. Hopefully that will change over time.

Not saying they don't exist, but can you point out some towers that meet this criteria, in addition to JeffJack?

Have you seen how Arkadia attempted to "meet the street"?

[streetline]

My argument is that tower districts—in the US at least—just don't achieve particularly high density. To preserve their views, they're not put all that close together. A neighborhood full of courtyard buildings, like those found in South Shore just southeast of 71st & Stony, hits 27,000 persons/sq mi, while East Hyde Park/Indian Village is at 24,000. The West Loop is already at 20,000. Corbusian projects are half that: Lake Meadows is 12,000; Prairie Shores is 9,000. On the North Side, Belmont Harbor is only 36,000, while East Lakeview (just northeast of Broadway & Diversey) is 67,000.

It's easy to poke around on CensusReporter (http://censusreporter.org/profiles/14000US17031081201-census-tract-81201-cook-il/) and see the densities for individual census tracts. Here are a dozen I just looked up:...

You can also map population density on socialexplorer.com (http://www.socialexplorer.com/29efc1d5a6/view) for a more complete picture. If you view by census block group, you'll see that dense areas are pretty much where the fully built out neighborhoods that contain significant numbers of towers are. You can't really compare densities in census tracts because a lot of Chicago's lakefront tracts contain large areas of park land that throw the numbers off.

And, in any case, you're ignoring my mention of not compromising on unit size, and your argument depends on presuming the heavy use of the design patterns I'm arguing against. No one is arguing in favor of building another Prairie Shores.

[Randomguy34]

In how many buildings are those 1,538 people housed?

3 towers it would appear. The census tract only includes only the area bounded by those 3 towers and nothing else, so of course the density would be skewed. But it certainly is fun to imagine Chicago having that high of a density.

[streetline]

Not saying they don't exist, but can you point out some towers that meet this criteria, in addition to JeffJack?

Have you seen how Arkadia attempted to "meet the street"?

For recent stuff: the tri-hotel project in River North is nice. As is 1611 W Division.
And then, of course, there are many buildings put up before the era of the ubiquitous automobile that address the street well.

And, yes, I'm aware of Arkadia.

[Mr Downtown]

Thanks for the pointer to socialexplorer.com. Indeed, block group is the better way to look at residential density, but I didn't want to take the time to map the census data myself last night.

Although the censusreporter maps look like they include big areas of lake in the tracts, I believe the calculation is done based on the land area alone. Of course, that sometimes includes park areas.

[LouisVanDerWright]

My argument is that tower districts—in the US at least—just don't achieve particularly high density. To preserve their views, they're not put all that close together. A neighborhood full of courtyard buildings, like those found in South Shore just southeast of 71st & Stony, hits 27,000 persons/sq mi, while East Hyde Park/Indian Village is at 24,000. The West Loop is already at 20,000. Corbusian projects are half that: Lake Meadows is 12,000; Prairie Shores is 9,000. On the North Side, Belmont Harbor is only 36,000, while East Lakeview (just northeast of Broadway & Diversey) is 67,000.

It's easy to poke around on CensusReporter (http://censusreporter.org/profiles/14000US17031081201-census-tract-81201-cook-il/) and see the densities for individual census tracts. Here are a dozen I just looked up:

301.01 82,000 Edgewater
633.01 67,000 East Lakeview (NE of Bdwy & Diversey)
813 64,000 North Streeterville
801 63,000 Gold Coast
814.03 44,000 South Streeterville
619.02 36,000 Belmont Harbor
4305 27,000 South Shore (SE of 71st & Stony)
818 25,000 River North
3907 24,000 East Hyde Park
8331 20,000 West Loop
8411 17,000 Chinatown
3510 12,000 Lake Meadows
3501 9,000 Prairie Shores

Correlation is not causation. The fact is that most of the districts you mention were built in an era where highrises were almost strictly reserved for commercial (hotel and office) uses in Chicago. That era also happened to be one in which ultra high density, small unit size, construction was totally acceptable. Of course those areas, South Shore being an excellent example, will still have comparatively high density. We simply have not allowed the construction of such intense uses in the post war, highrise residential, era.

Meanwhile the densest census tract you list, Edgewater, was largely intensified during the postwar era and, for whatever reason, was one of the few areas where ultra dense, post war, construction was ever allowed en masse. As a result, some parts of Edgewater attained absurd densities and the huge numbers of post war skyscrapers add significantly to that. In any case, Streeterville is well on it's way to match the densities of Edgewater once all of the surface lots are finally eliminated, you are talking about the addition of thousands more units which should hopefully bump density into Edgewater-like numbers.

I think the reason a lot of highrise districts in Chicago tend to underperform density wise is that they also happen to have a lot of underutilization as a result of A. high parking demand B. history of industrial use C. history of urban renewal clear cutting. It's not a result of highrises, it's a result of a glut of vacant lots between those highrises which is largely caused by an entirely different set of urban challenges.

[rlw777]

My argument is that tower districts—in the US at least—just don't achieve particularly high density. To preserve their views, they're not put all that close together. A neighborhood full of courtyard buildings, like those found in South Shore just southeast of 71st & Stony, hits 27,000 persons/sq mi, while East Hyde Park/Indian Village is at 24,000. The West Loop is already at 20,000. Corbusian projects are half that: Lake Meadows is 12,000; Prairie Shores is 9,000. On the North Side, Belmont Harbor is only 36,000, while East Lakeview (just northeast of Broadway & Diversey) is 67,000.

It's easy to poke around on CensusReporter (http://censusreporter.org/profiles/14000US17031081201-census-tract-81201-cook-il/) and see the densities for individual census tracts. Here are a dozen I just looked up:

301.01 82,000 Edgewater
633.01 67,000 East Lakeview (NE of Bdwy & Diversey)
813 64,000 North Streeterville
801 63,000 Gold Coast
814.03 44,000 South Streeterville
619.02 36,000 Belmont Harbor
4305 27,000 South Shore (SE of 71st & Stony)
818 25,000 River North
3907 24,000 East Hyde Park
8331 20,000 West Loop
8411 17,000 Chinatown
3510 12,000 Lake Meadows
3501 9,000 Prairie Shores

I think more information is needed to come to this sort of conclusion. building occupancy rates, how much land is taken up by offices, vacant land, parks etc. For example from your numbers here River North is only slightly more dense than Chinatown but Chinatown doesn't have nearly the same mount of land consumed by office space & kitschy restaurants.

[emathias]

Look at this census tract I found in Edgewater

Hehe, imagine if all of Chicago had this high of a density. Our population would be 112,316,653.8 people, easily the most powerful city in the world. :cheers:

Maybe then we could build some more subways.

[marothisu]

3 towers it would appear. The census tract only includes only the area bounded by those 3 towers and nothing else, so of course the density would be skewed. But it certainly is fun to imagine Chicago having that high of a density.

I'm all for density but that would simply be unliveable.

The highest density non-fluke tract in the city is where I live - between Dearborn, State, Chicago and Division. There's also 22 Census Block Groups with density above 100K per sq mile which is good. 49 total of at least 75K per sq mile.

[ardecila]

Also changes in household size are independent of urban design factors. Larger families in the courtyard buildings of South Shore and multi-roommate setups in Lakeview may elevate the densities of those neighborhoods compared to the courtyard buildings of, say, Ravenswood.

[Randomguy34]

I'm all for density but that would simply be unliveable.

The highest density non-fluke tract in the city is where I live - between Dearborn, State, Chicago and Division. There's also 22 Census Block Groups with density above 100K per sq mile which is good. 49 total of at least 75K per sq mile.

Haha, it certainly would be. My comments were more so intended as a joke world. I'm sure no one would want to live and walk shoulder to shoulder with people on the streets. I just simply meant that it would fun to imagine how the city would function with the given infrastructure present :)Maybe then we could build some more subways.

Wouldn't be too surprised if the city still didn't want to build them and instead told everyone to just use their cars. Dear God, imagine the traffic throughout the city.

[nomarandlee]

Riverwalk......

Got my first taste over the past weekend as well.
The owner of my local coffee shop told me he was asked by the powers that be if they could vend in Pritzker Park, so they're getting a bike-mounted keg to serve cold brew iced coffee out of. Maybe the city could offer something similar for the riverwalk: roll out a coffee cart of some kind.

Yes, a morning brunch/coffee cafe is surely needed there. I assume that is in the cards.

I also think that some food trucks/carts on Wacker or right off Wacker would also be a real good idea, at least during lunch hours. There is a surprising lack of fast food/quick eats to be had along right off of Wacker for tourist or office workers. There are some but not nearly as much as many options as one will find in a few blocks north or south. Why make people who want to enjoy their lunch by the river to have to walk blocks with their food bag in hand or who don't want to eat at the few vendors down at the riverwalk.......

Also, and it is a minor quibble. But I hope they upgrade the Chicago Riverwalk sign/gates on Wacker. They look rather cheap and pedestrian. The signage doesn't have to be loud or big but it also should look better then as if a high school metals shop did it.......

Also the retail spaces look rather stark and utilitarian right now. Especially the Belgian Beer/Fries vendor. I am guessing over the coming months each vendor will customize their nooks with some furnishings and fittings that give each some unique character. Right now it each vendor looks like they set up their space with the consideration of a street festival kiosk. I suspect that will change over the months.......

I would also like the city to thinking of changing rules to be similar to the new Navy Pier rules that would allow customers to walk along with drinks in hand (presumably in plastic) along the confines of the Pier. I think we could trust people in Chicago to do the same at the riverwalk. Or at least to experiment with it......

I was also mildly shocked with just how many kayakers there were out and about along the river. I was skeptical if the kayak vendor would really be worthwhile to have there but I saw enough people out in them that I think it may have been a very wise choice.

[VKChaz]

Wouldn't be too surprised if the city still didn't want to build them and instead told everyone to just use their cars. Dear God, imagine the traffic throughout the city.

Pretty sure the City wants more subway. But they do cost ~$1B per mile.

[VKChaz]

Riverwalk......

Also, and it is a minor quibble. But I hope they upgrade the Chicago Riverwalk sign/gates on Wacker. They look rather cheap and pedestrian. The signage doesn't have to be loud or big but it also should look better then as if a high school metals shop did it.......


Agreed.
Also, pet peeve but not sure signage needs the name Chicago - I think people know where they are. (unless they want to get really silly and call it the Chicago River Riverwalk)

[munchymunch]

So Dream hotels announced they are managing a Chicago hotel in 2014. That same day crains ran an article about a hotel development at 201 n Clark. That hotel would be ran by Hampshire..... Which owns dream.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/BL-DVB-22536

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/realestate/20141126/CRED03/141129933/developers-plan-loop-hotel-then-squabble-over-200-000

[Domer2019]

Not sure if this has been mentioned before here. It seems like something that's been expected/brewing for a while, as far as I know.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-navy-pier-ferris-wheel-met-20150622-story.html

Navy Pier's Ferris wheel, an icon of the Chicago lakefront, will be dismantled this fall and replaced by a taller ride featuring temperature-controlled gondolas that will be ready in time for the pier's 2016 centennial.

Pier officials and Mayor Rahm Emanuel were set to announce Tuesday that the new wheel will rise to a height of 196 feet, almost 50 feet taller than the current wheel. Still, the new wheel will be 68 feet shorter than the original Ferris wheel, which was built for the 1893 World's Columbian Exposition in Chicago.

[streetline]

Not sure if this has been mentioned before here. It seems like something that's been expected/brewing for a while, as far as I know.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-navy-pier-ferris-wheel-met-20150622-story.html

It seems strange to me that they don't make the Navy pier wheel closer to a reproduction of the original Ferris wheel. If we can't match other cities for size, due to the pier's space constraints, at least we can have the greatest authenticity.

[Tom Servo]

Tuesday that the new wheel will rise to a height of 196 feet, almost 50 feet taller than the current wheel. Still, the new wheel will be 68 feet shorter than the original Ferris wheel

LOL. Of course. :rolleyes:

[Notyrview]

This is a joke, why even bother dismantling it.

[the urban politician]

Yeah, it should be taller

[LouisVanDerWright]

So Dream hotels announced they are managing a Chicago hotel in 2014. That same day crains ran an article about a hotel development at 201 n Clark. That hotel would be ran by Hampshire..... Which owns dream.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/BL-DVB-22536

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/realestate/20141126/CRED03/141129933/developers-plan-loop-hotel-then-squabble-over-200-000

Interesting, has anyone else heard anything about this? I heard some interesting rumbles about Dream myself lately.

[LouisVanDerWright]

The fact that we ever removed the original wheel in the first place was a great travesty. That should have been a permanent part of Chicago just like the Eiffel Tower is for Paris. Worse yet we disassembled it and sent it to St. Louis, the place we reversed an entire river in order to send our sewage to. If they are going to replace that wheel, they should recreate the original, rivet for rivet.

[MayorOfChicago]

I walk the Riverwalk from Michigan to LaSalle on my way to work now, love it. I have noticed though an increase in the number of homeless who are taking over benches and setting up camp sprawled/passed out as I walk to work.

Is there a rule or program to stop it from being taken over? There are a lot of prime "sleeping" benches along those new areas of riverwalk. I wouldn't want it to become normal for people to be sleeping on them all the time. It's not just the sleeping, it's just how sprawled out people can get, and then with dirty bags, random pieces of clothing, etc.

Not trying to hate on the homeless, obviously they're going through a lot of pain and hardship, but this clearly wasn't what the riverwalk was developed for.

[Near North Resident]

The fact that we ever removed the original wheel in the first place was a great travesty. That should have been a permanent part of Chicago just like the Eiffel Tower is for Paris. Worse yet we disassembled it and sent it to St. Louis, the place we reversed an entire river in order to send our sewage to. If they are going to replace that wheel, they should recreate the original, rivet for rivet.

pretty sure that wouldn't meet today's 'safety standards'

[woodrow]

Very cool post about recent doings at the Deep Tunnel, tour of the Thornton Quarry. The scale is seriously mind boggling.

http://gapersblock.com/mechanics/2015/06/21/touring-the-deep-tunnel-and-thornton-quarry/

[Ryanrule]

I walk the Riverwalk from Michigan to LaSalle on my way to work now, love it. I have noticed though an increase in the number of homeless who are taking over benches and setting up camp sprawled/passed out as I walk to work.

Is there a rule or program to stop it from being taken over? There are a lot of prime "sleeping" benches along those new areas of riverwalk. I wouldn't want it to become normal for people to be sleeping on them all the time. It's not just the sleeping, it's just how sprawled out people can get, and then with dirty bags, random pieces of clothing, etc.

Not trying to hate on the homeless, obviously they're going through a lot of pain and hardship, but this clearly wasn't what the riverwalk was developed for.

push em into the water. helps the smell too.

[Kenmore]

Very cool post about recent doings at the Deep Tunnel, tour of the Thornton Quarry. The scale is seriously mind boggling.

http://gapersblock.com/mechanics/2015/06/21/touring-the-deep-tunnel-and-thornton-quarry/

this rules

[chrisvfr800i]

push em into the water. helps the smell too.

Jeez...tough crowd.

[SamInTheLoop]

push em into the water. helps the smell too.


Just don't forget to spit in the faces first of these miserable filth piles and tell them it's all because they didn't work hard enough, and were too stupid, and how you're ashamed to even be a member of the same species as them...........lest you let them off too easy.......

[LouisVanDerWright]

Honestly though, they don't need to be invading the river walk, there are million other places downtown for them to camp out. Camp on Lower Wacker (better cover anyhow) and then panhandle on the river walk. Don't clutter it up with all your stuff.

pretty sure that wouldn't meet today's 'safety standards'

I'm willing to bet it would, though the cabs would probably not meet today's ADA and building standards. The funny thing about late 1800's engineering is the materials they are using were so new that they really didn't know exactly how strong it is like we do today. As a result the engineering math basically went "make a conservative guess of how much steel or rivets you need and then double or triple it anyhow". Consequently almost all the stuff we built back then was massively over-engineered which is how the "L", for example, is still in service after 120+ years of exposure to the elements. Seriously, go look at the really old sections of the Green Line sometime, almost every surface is covered in rivets because, well, they were making damn sure it wasn't going to fall apart.

I'm willing to bet Ferris was dead set on making sure the spokes, hub, and rim of his wheel wasn't going to fail. I remember reading the axel was the largest single piece of steel ever cast in history up until that point. The "L" has also survived through multiple periods of severe neglect not to mention salt spray carried onto it from freeway segments of the system and roads running beneath it. I am willing to bet that the Ferris Wheel would still be standing today if it hadn't been dismantled and moved to STL.

[Mr Downtown]

Remember that St. Louis wasn't the next stop for the Ferris Wheel. After plans to move it to New York or London fell through, it first went to Clark & Wrightwood, where Charles Yerkes hoped it would enhance weekend ridership on his North Side streetcars. But the neighborhood NIMBYs voted his proposed beer garden dry, and after a few money-losing years he and his partners entertained an offer from the St. Louis entrepreneurs.

http://41.media.tumblr.com/cb84509c9ab00aeb3cde3c25858530b1/tumblr_nf7cc2rsFj1rk4fqyo1_1280.jpg

[ChickeNES]

Jury awards Rezko creditor $23 million over South Loop deal
Alby Gallun - Crain's Chicago Business - June 23, 2015

A federal jury awarded nearly $23 million to a creditor of Antoin “Tony” Rezko, ruling that the imprisoned power broker conspired with the European owner of a prime South Loop property to avoid a big debt payment.

The jury yesterday sided with Semir Sirazi, who took a secured interest in the parcel nine years ago as part of a debt restructuring deal with Rezko, who owned a stake in the 62-acre riverside site. But Sirazi didn't receive a penny a couple years later, when Rezko sold his stake to his partner in the property, Luxembourg-based General Mediterranean Holding.

In a 2010 lawsuit, Sirazi alleged that GMH helped structure the sale so Rezko could stiff him. After deliberating for about 2½ hours yesterday, the jurors agreed.

...

Rezko at one time planned 4,600 homes and a shopping center on the property on the east side of the Chicago River just south of Roosevelt Road. GMH has been in talks with Chicago-based developer Related Midwest to form a joint venture that would develop the property. The question now is what, if any, impact the verdict will have on any development deal.



http://www.chicagobusiness.com/realestate/20150623/CRED03/150629949/jury-awards-rezko-creditor-23-million-over-south-loop-deal

[LouisVanDerWright]

^^^ I'm sure any agreement they signed had a full section devoted to contingencies over this lawsuit. Any settlement will probably just come out of General Mediterranean's share of the partnership. It's not like Related has a cash shortage, $23 million isn't going to kill a deal this big.

[msu2001la]

Clark & Wrightwood...neighborhood NIMBYs

Yup, that sounds about right.

[bnk]

Very cool post about recent doings at the Deep Tunnel, tour of the Thornton Quarry. The scale is seriously mind boggling.

http://gapersblock.com/mechanics/2015/06/21/touring-the-deep-tunnel-and-thornton-quarry/

Nice find. Photos are awesome

I just cant wait for the Thornton Composite Reservoir to come on line soon

the largest such reservoir in the world 8 Billon Gallons is a lot.

"I like it a lot" Not I like you a lot but I like it a lot said in a Jim Carey voice from the first dumber and dumber movie. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NH9t44iOiA4

Hell if that massive thing can hold 8 billion gallons imagine how much of a safe you would need for 8 Billion or more dollars owned by the 0.001%. The size of just this one quarry is incredible and there are even more in the pipline.


Anyhoo

Def worth clicking the link

[MultiModal]

I heard that this morning the Humboldt Park factory that is right off the end of the 606 went on the market for 3 million

[The Pimp]

push em into the water. Helps the smell too.

lmao!!!

[spyguy]

Interesting, has anyone else heard anything about this? I heard some interesting rumbles about Dream myself lately.

Yes, at around the time that Crain's article came out there was this proposal which would include Dream, another hotel, and residential. Not sure what the latest is however....
http://i62.tinypic.com/wvem8g.jpg
http://i61.tinypic.com/tapyjr.jpg