CHICAGO | Boom rundown - everything over 12 floors. v5

[honte]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

so what do you think? thumbs up, thumbs down? would this be a useful tool, or just make discussion more scattered and confusing? the more input i get, the better.

Steely man, this is just another attempt to Shut Chicago Down!! Joking...

Seriously, I don't have a problem with things as they are. If Chicago's news gets buried in some "dumping ground," I think it's bad. On the other hand, I do frequently see rather (ahem) minor projects from other cities with their own threads. My understanding is that the forum leaders do not wish to see threads of this nature from Chicago, for obvious reasons. Yet if Chicago could support more discussion, and it's desired by the public but for some reason not good for the forum in its present state, we might be forced to reconsider.

My routine here is simple: I subscribe to the threads I like, and I never browse anything (if I did, I'd never get any work done). The downside to this, however, is that sometimes there is a thread out there that would interest me, but I have no idea it exists. A Chicago repository would probably fix this problem.

[honte]

All,

I received this message in my e-mail from Preservation Chicago. I urge everyone to take some action if this issue is of importance to you. The clock is ticking.
_______________________

STOP THE DEMOLITION OF THE LAKE SHORE ATHLETIC CLUB!

4/23/07
Dear honte,

The irony is glaring. In the face of just having won the U.S. Olympic bid, the city is now standing by, allowing the demolition of a building that is itself an Olympic legacy. The Lake Shore Athletic Club is a site where many Olympic swimmers have trained and where the U.S Olympic trials for swimming were held in 1928.

Grandly presiding at the gateway of Chicago's shoreline since 1924, the LAC's days are now numbered: A demolition permit has been applied for. There is a vacuum of power in the 42nd Ward and Fifield Companies is doing an end run around the new alderman. Because the building is Orange rated, a 90-day demo delay has been triggered. We must take immediate action to stop the senseless destruction of what is not only a stunning architectural example, but one with an amazing history behind it.

Please contact Alderman-elect Brendan Reilly today about the importance of a new owner preserving and re-using this building, and that it should be protected from demolition by designating it a Chicago landmark.

Lake Shore Athletic Club, 850 N. Lake Shore Drive (1924) Jarvis Hunt, Architect
[See www.preservationchicago.org for photographs]

Brendan Reilly's contact info is:

http://www.reillyforchicago.com/contact.php
312-519-2277 before May 1
312-642-4242 after May 1
312-277-1009 fax
P.O. Box 10939, Chicago, IL 60610

_____________________________________________________________

For more information about the background and history of the Lake Shore Athletic Club, please visit http://www.preservationchicago.org/risk/uncert ain.html

Please forward this message to other concerned parties.


Jonathan Fine,
Preservation Chicago

-----------------------------------------------------

email: [email protected]
web: http://www.preservationchicago.org

[Visiteur]

It's a darn shame this building was demolished.

What was the "new highrise" that replaced it?

[Latoso]

I don't think we should entertain such a drastic and unneeded change on SSP. The last thing we need is a place for an edsg25 wannabe to go on Andy Rooney-esque rants. I love him, but sometimes I feel there are too many needless threads on SSC that clutter my user experience.

If anything, perhaps we should lower the threshold of Chicago projects in the global forums to 500+ feet. That way we can still discuss significant projects of some still large projects without having to discuss a new Ramada by O'Hare.

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by Visiteur

It's a darn shame this building was demolished.

What was the "new highrise" that replaced it?

That would be 30 West Oak.

Taken by Retrograde

[SlatsGrobnik]

Originally Posted by aaron38

Personally I don't think the shorter towers have the discussion trafic to justify their own threads. Even the Mandarin and Legacy threads have had to be bumped just to keep them from purging. Weeks could go by for an individual building with nothing to report.

The main pro would be to have sub 700' threads to consolidate their info for easier archive searching. But the con is that instead of reading one boom rundown thread, we're reading a dozen threads, and that just gets tedious.

My vote is to keep as much information in the boom rundown as possible, keep the sub 700'ers here. When one of us goes on a big photoshoot walk, this is the place to put the 50 pic post. So I say keep the status quo.


Edit: I agree with Alliance on one point. If ALL Chicago threads were in one bucket it would be a plus. But that's not the proposal up for a vote, and things are scattered enough as is.
I still would say no though on sub-700' threads.

Well stated. You are wise beyond your years.

[M II A II R II K]

Originally Posted by Chicago Shawn

Awful idea. I hate the scattered nature of SSC. Most buildings in the boom do not see enough talk to even keep the threads alive, causing lost time searching for them in the back pages. Keep it the way it is. Remind the other moderators that the Boom Rundown you created Steely has set the standard here, we should do nothing of the sort to scatter it into the midwest forum, as with the huge number of projects it would be just a waste of bandwith.

To make a long story short I guess it would depend on how much of a need there was to talk about the lesser projects in more depth and detail, whether they be to do with skyscrapers or otherwise. In addition to of course the already existing rundown threads and the highrise section threads.

[LoyolaBeachView]

600 N Fairbanks




Avenue East (I'm pleasantly surprised by the skin on this)

[spyguy]

^It's nice, but once you see the model of the building you have to wonder about the completed building on all sides.

Anyway, 600 continues to look beautiful.

[SamInTheLoop]

My vote is to keep the Chicago threads set up the way they currently are...

[LoyolaBeachView]

Originally Posted by SamInTheLoop

My vote is to keep the Chicago threads set up the way they currently are...

Me too.

[Mr Roboto]

Originally Posted by spyguy

Anyway, 600 continues to look beautiful.

I agree. IMO this may be one of those that actually turns out better than the renderings, which I thought looked good but nothing special.

As far as the setup of the forum, I completely agree with aaron38. I think its easier to navigate here also. Plus, wouldn't it be a little harder for the moderators anyway?

[Chi_Coruscant]

I like all discussions about high-rise projects with any height numbers compiled right here. I vote to keep all Chicago-related threads stay as original.

[ComandanteCero]

I'll throw in a thumbs up. The boom rundown shows the depth and breadth of development going on in Chicago (more than the rest of the Midwest combined). All of that sub-700 ft development's discussion potential is being funnelled into either this thread or the general development thread (creating bloated, diffuse and scatterbrained threads). I'm sure plenty of people like that aspect, but for other people who might want to just keep tabs on specific projects, or get some more depth of discussion on particular projects it's a mess trying to wade through dozens and dozens of pages worth of posts to see the most recent picture of say 600 N. Fairbanks, or respond to a particular point about a project. With a whole sub-forum alot of these significant projects might get their own thread, and make navigation more efficient and informative for everyone.

[Kngkyle]

As many others have said, I like only having a few threads to check on when I visit the forums. Going through tons of different threads takes up too much time and is more confusing. Keep it the way it is. You could still create a Chicago sub-forum. But don't have a different topic for every project. There are some interesting topics in the Chicago sub-forum on SSC. I like to keep up on the "Windy City: Photos that will blow you away" topic and check for others that might spark my interest.

[lalucedm]

Originally Posted by Marcu

Great pictures.

Which buildings going up now are just as ugly as stateway gardens? I can't think of any off the top of my head. The mere size of those windows makes me cringe.

I was thinking Vision on State.

[VivaLFuego]

Originally Posted by honte

All,

I received this message in my e-mail from Preservation Chicago. I urge everyone to take some action if this issue is of importance to you. The clock is ticking.
_______________________

STOP THE DEMOLITION OF THE LAKE SHORE ATHLETIC CLUB!

4/23/07
Dear honte,

The irony is glaring. In the face of just having won the U.S. Olympic bid, the city is now standing by, allowing the demolition of a building that is itself an Olympic legacy. The Lake Shore Athletic Club is a site where many Olympic swimmers have trained and where the U.S Olympic trials for swimming were held in 1928.

Grandly presiding at the gateway of Chicago's shoreline since 1924, the LAC's days are now numbered: A demolition permit has been applied for. There is a vacuum of power in the 42nd Ward and Fifield Companies is doing an end run around the new alderman. Because the building is Orange rated, a 90-day demo delay has been triggered. We must take immediate action to stop the senseless destruction of what is not only a stunning architectural example, but one with an amazing history behind it.

Please contact Alderman-elect Brendan Reilly today about the importance of a new owner preserving and re-using this building, and that it should be protected from demolition by designating it a Chicago landmark.

Lake Shore Athletic Club, 850 N. Lake Shore Drive (1924) Jarvis Hunt, Architect
[See www.preservationchicago.org for photographs]

Brendan Reilly's contact info is:

http://www.reillyforchicago.com/contact.php
312-519-2277 before May 1
312-642-4242 after May 1
312-277-1009 fax
P.O. Box 10939, Chicago, IL 60610

_____________________________________________________________

For more information about the background and history of the Lake Shore Athletic Club, please visit http://www.preservationchicago.org/risk/uncert ain.html

Please forward this message to other concerned parties.


Jonathan Fine,
Preservation Chicago

-----------------------------------------------------

email: [email protected]
web: http://www.preservationchicago.org

Thanks. I'm a 42nd warder and will surely contact Reilly about this. It's funny, because my concern about him was that he would be anti-development, and my first letter to him will be urging him to stop development....I suppose I'll include in the letter about how I am pro-development, but that tearing this building down to be replaced by a squat shitbox is atrocious.

[the urban politician]

Steely, I vote against the change.

One of my favorite things about SSP is the consolidation of all the discussions I care about into this collossal mega-thread. If I had to scurry around looking for info on this slow POS computer of mine it would be a nightmare. Thumbs down

[Nowhereman1280]

Originally Posted by LoyolaBeachView

The base of what?

The retail base, what they are currently framing around the base of the new crane...

[bnk]

Originally Posted by sentinel

^^ Agreed, if it ain't broke don't fix it - I'm not really too keen on doing it the way Steely proposes, akin to what is on SSC, which I never really liked anyway. Best to just leave it the way it is.

Keep it the same.

Change hurts.