CHICAGO | General Discussions

[SIGSEGV]

Originally Posted by ardecila

I think Mr. D weighed in on this a few years ago. Historically there was wholesale grocery in the Haymarket/Randolph area and the South Water Market on what is now Wacker Drive, but not really public markets like you see in Europe (or Cleveland, lol). Probably in the early days these markets sold directly to consumers on a small scale, but the rapid commercial growth of downtown soon pushed most of the residents to outlying neighborhoods. Downtown became strictly a business district and the downtown markets focused in on wholesale only by ~the 1890s.

Out in the neighborhoods, Chicagoans did their shopping at countless small grocers, often with a particular ethnic specialty. I assume all those small grocers had political power, so the city never stepped in to build neighborhood-level public markets that might compete with them. Eventually the small grocers gave way to larger supermarket chains (A&P, Jewel, etc) that combined greengrocer, butcher, fish, dry goods, bakery, floral, and eventually pharmacy/liquor under one roof and importantly provided parking for shoppers.

Later even the wholesale markets moved out of downtown, ironically to make way for new waves of residential. The South Water Market moved to 15th/Blue Island in the 20s and then to Damen/Blue Island in the 2000s. Obviously the meatpackers moved out of Fulton Market in the 2010s...

I guess we could fix the "mistake" and build a market today, but what would be the purpose? Downtown residents are already fairly well-served by supermarkets, although there's room for improvement. If the point is tourism, what exactly would the market offer? There are some good producers out there, but the Midwest doesn't have the rich bounty of California, Spain or Italy. We have a short growing season and most farmers are growing corn or soybeans. The existing farmer's market system is excellent, but if you shop there you quickly figure out that the good stuff is only available for 4 months out of the year. Not really enough to support a permanent structure.

Milwaukee of course has a great public market, but I think part of the rationale for building it was to provide a grocery option to the Third Ward so the residential population could keep growing. I assume private grocery chains were not interested in building there, or at least weren't interested in an urban format. We don't really have that issue in downtown Chicago.

I was thinking of both Milwaukee and Cleveland as localish examples, and places like Jean Talon in Montreal as a reach example (in perhaps a worse climate for growing...). I think it would probably be a mixture of tourists, downtown residents/commuters and a general city-wide hangout spot.

Sure we don't NEED one, but it seems like a bit of a missed opportunity. Not that I know where to put it, should one exist. The Robert Morris Center (which I think is basically empty now?)? That area of downtown isn't very close to any grocer...

[Chisouthside]

In terms of produce Maxwell Street market used to fulfill that need albeit it was only open on sundays. It still exists but its sadly a shell of it's former self.

[SIGSEGV]

Streetsblog Chicago editor John Greenfield is in the hospital after being injured by debris from a truck in downstate Marion. https://chicago.suntimes.com/2023/4/...thern-illinois

[jpIllInoIs]

Originally Posted by SIGSEGV

Streetsblog Chicago editor John Greenfield is in the hospital after being injured by debris from a truck in downstate Marion. https://chicago.suntimes.com/2023/4/...thern-illinois

Very sad, critical situation. prayers indeed.

[BrickellBased]

Record hotel and visitor revenue for Chicago surpasses 2019

https://gov.illinois.gov/news/press-release.26700.html

With Commercial in the doldrums Residential and Hospitality seems up to the task of picking up the slack.

This is green light for Tribune East baby!

Note: Fiscal years in IL end June 30 so '23 is done.

[twister244]

Originally Posted by BrickellBased

Record hotel and visitor revenue for Chicago surpasses 2019

https://gov.illinois.gov/news/press-release.26700.html

With Commercial in the doldrums Residential and Hospitality seems up to the task of picking up the slack.

This is green light for Tribune East baby!

Note: Fiscal years in IL end June 30 so '23 is done.

Yeah, it's a weird time. If you walk around downtown, you would never think office vacancy rates are in the crapper. It's good for residential/hotel mixed use proposals. I find this news especially good considering how bad some other CBDs across the country are doing.

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by twister244

Yeah, it's a weird time. If you walk around downtown, you would never think office vacancy rates are in the crapper. It's good for residential/hotel mixed use proposals. I find this news especially good considering how bad some other CBDs across the country are doing.

I went to the office on Monday - first time anywhere since right before COVID in 2020. I thought it would be a ghost town and my train to and from work would be empty. Nope - it was actually still pretty active outside and the trains were pretty full LOL

[Busy Bee]

Originally Posted by bnk

“[NASCAR] was the kind of crowd that was willing to pay a lot to attend the race, but also goes out to stay in the suburbs,” he said.

Who would imagine?

[urbanpln]

Originally Posted by busy bee

who would imagine?

lol!

[west-town-brad]

Originally Posted by marothisu

I went to the office on Monday - first time anywhere since right before COVID in 2020. I thought it would be a ghost town and my train to and from work would be empty. Nope - it was actually still pretty active outside and the trains were pretty full LOL

I agree the trains do seem full at rush hours, but I think the CTA is just running fewer trains.

[twister244]

Originally Posted by west-town-brad

I agree the trains do seem full at rush hours, but I think the CTA is just running fewer trains.

The other thing that could be happening is companies reducing their footprint while more people come in. I doubt anyone is coming in 4/5 days a week, so you have folks coming in probably using smaller areas than they did before.

Then again, maybe the stats on RTO are lagging. Time will tell.

[XxxX]

Originally Posted by sentinel

Which still aligns with my belief that 788' figure is the top of highest structural slab, seen in Nick's picture:



...and is where the previously shown 791' height that was in the section diagram from ChicagoYimby is located.

a 12' or taller mechanical and elevator penthouse is certainly possible, so I feel confident that the architectural top of this building is still 800'+

- this tower looks not bad... but it doesn´t fit well in this historical neighborhood... you have this beautiful 1920er old michigan avenue buildings... and then a big round glass building... just awful

- doesnt fit in chicago... not boxy enough

- it would fit well in miami or los angeles

- if i was a city council... i would vote against this building design in this historical neighborhood... chicago must preserve its old michigan avenue skyline at all costs...

[sentinel]

1.) Well, the tower is nearly complete so not sure what you think can be done at this point.

2.) While I understand your concerns about protecting the historic nature along south Michigan Ave, I think there are always opportunities to blend historic architecture with new projects, which is very common in older European cities. Many cities such as Vienna, Munich, London, Paris, Milan, etc, have similar mixing of old and new styles.

3.) Chicago architecture is not just defined by 'boxy' structures as you describe them. There are many buildings from the early 20th century in Chicago and even in the mid-20th century during the height of the International style that defied that trend and became iconic for their lack of 'boxiness' (Marina City, River City condos, the old Prentiss hospital...or maybe it was just projects Bertrand Goldberg?).
Any global city like Chicago, that has a rich and varied architectural city can and should have a variety of design forms.

[XxxX]

Originally Posted by sentinel

1.) Well, the tower is nearly complete so not sure what you think can be done at this point.

2.) While I understand your concerns about protecting the historic nature along south Michigan Ave, I think there are always opportunities to blend historic architecture with new projects, which is very common in older European cities. Many cities such as Vienna, Munich, London, Paris, Milan, etc, have similar mixing of old and new styles.

3.) Chicago architecture is not just defined by 'boxy' structures as you describe them. There are many buildings from the early 20th century in Chicago and even in the mid-20th century during the height of the International style that defied that trend and became iconic for their lack of 'boxiness' (Marina City, River City condos, the old Prentiss hospital...or maybe it was just projects Bertrand Goldberg?).
Any global city like Chicago, that has a rich and varied architectural city can and should have a variety of design forms.

- you doesnt understand quite my point

- my point is... this old michigan avenue skyline is chicago... if you see a picture of this street... you know instantly it is chicago... if you erase the michigan avenue buildings, the sears tower and the john hancock building... chicago would be not chicago anymore... you must protect this buildings forever... like empire state building, chrysler building or woolworth building in new york... you must protect them at any cost

- look this two new big glass buildings in the front destroying the old skyline... they standing in the front row... if they would stand behind the old buildings or two blocks behind... it would look 10 thousand times better... it would be a nice contrast...

- you had old 1920 buildings in front row... then younger bigger buildings behind... and the sears tower featuring a lot of 200 meter buildings in the back... one of the most beautiful skyline in the world... a very nice contrast...

- now if destroy all old buildings in the front row and just build tall glass buildings instead... you will destroy this unique skyline forever... it will be just a another city with a big skyline

[XxxX]

i mean this...

[XxxX]

old historical buildings in the front... and newer taller buildings in the back... nice contrast

[r18tdi]

Originally Posted by XxxX

- you doesnt understand quite my point

- my point is... this old michigan avenue skyline is chicago... if you see a picture of this street... you know instantly it is chicago... if you erase the michigan avenue buildings, the sears tower and the john hancock building... chicago would be not chicago anymore... you must protect this buildings forever... like empire state building, chrysler building or woolworth building in new york... you must protect them at any cost

- look this two new big glass buildings in the front destroying the old skyline... they standing in the front row... if they would stand behind the old buildings or two blocks behind... it would look 10 thousand times better... it would be a nice contrast...

- you had old 1920 buildings in front row... then younger bigger buildings behind... and the sears tower featuring a lot of 200 meter buildings in the back... one of the most beautiful skyline in the world... a very nice contrast...

- now if destroy all old buildings in the front row and just build tall glass buildings instead... you will destroy this unique skyline forever... it will be just a another city with a big skyline

You don't seem to understand the fact that no on "erasing" anything.

The old buildings you are referring to are Historic Michigan Boulevard District and are protected. The new glassy towers at 1000 and 808 S. Michigan replaced a vacant parking lot and a POS garage, respectively.

You can't blame developers for developing vacant or severely underdeveloped parcels that are available to them, especially when the new buildings fully comply with the guidelines of the Historic Michigan Boulevard District.

[XxxX]

Originally Posted by r18tdi

You don't seem to understand the fact that no on "erasing" anything.

The old buildings you are referring to are Historic Michigan Boulevard District and are protected. The new glassy towers at 1000 and 808 S. Michigan replaced a vacant parking lot and a POS garage, respectively.

You can't blame developers for developing vacant or severely underdeveloped parcels that are available to them, especially when the new buildings fully comply with the guidelines of the Historic Michigan Boulevard District.

- i know that the old buildings are protectet... i know this

- but there is a big difference ... between building a big glass building in the the front row of historical buildings or behind it...

- if i was a city council, i would prohibit big glass skyscrapers in the front row... and allow them only behind the old buildings... and in the front row i would only approve buildings with 1920, 30 architecture... like one bennet park

- you know what i mean ?

[dewbs]

Originally Posted by XxxX

- i know that the old buildings are protectet... i know this

- but there is a big difference ... between building a big glass building in the the front row of historical buildings or behind it...

- if i was a city council, i would prohibit big glass skyscrapers in the front row... and allow them only behind the old buildings... and in the front row i would only approve buildings with 1920, 30 architecture... like one bennet park

- you know what i mean ?

The 1920's were 100 years ago, friend.

[F1 Tommy]

Originally Posted by XxxX

- i know that the old buildings are protectet... i know this

- but there is a big difference ... between building a big glass building in the the front row of historical buildings or behind it...

- if i was a city council, i would prohibit big glass skyscrapers in the front row... and allow them only behind the old buildings... and in the front row i would only approve buildings with 1920, 30 architecture... like one bennet park

- you know what i mean ?

That could have been interesting, but it is more common to see that in Europe. They had already torn down many of the old building in the south loop back in the Daley SR. era leaving vacant lots so we can't bring them back now. Rebuilding and saving old destroyed or damaged buildings started after the war in Europe, so they have been doing it for years. But in the USA they mostly tore down the old and rebuilt with new and mostly modern unless they got landmarked after the war. More private investment, less government control in the USA.