CHICAGO | General Developments

[XIII]

Originally Posted by HowardL

Sorry but fuck FOTPL. They have lost every last shred of credibility.

They approached "the last 4 miles" in the same absolutist, extremist way, too. At least Rogers Park was smart enough to tell them to go die in a fire.

But the FoP seem to think in all-or-nothing terms. I attended one of the meetings Friends of the Park held a couple of years ago to discuss this plan. The crowd, when asked “How would you like to see these last two miles of parkland created” overwhelming said “We wouldn’t.” When asked, “Ok, if something were to be built, how would you want it built,” we replied “We don’t want it built.” The Friends of the Park clearly had its agenda and the “engagement” with the neighborhood was a dog and pony show of the first order.

http://featuresblogs.chicagotribune.com/...he-last-two-on-the-north-side-.html#more

[msu2001la]

Originally Posted by XIII

They approached "the last 4 miles" in the same absolutist, extremist way, too. At least Rogers Park was smart enough to tell them to go die in a fire.

http://featuresblogs.chicagotribune.com/...he-last-two-on-the-north-side-.html#more

NIMBYs vs FOTP.

[Busy Bee]

Originally Posted by r18tdi

^ All that work and they wouldn't think to bury LSD underground?

Agreed. Even without these landfill plans LSD should ideally be tunneled starting at the eastward bend at LSE and coming out at about Grand or Ohio. This would eliminate the LSD Chicago River and Ogden Slip bridges and overheads altogether and open up DuSable Park as well as LSE to the lake and park. Anybody want to conjure a guess as to what something like that might cost?

[the urban politician]

^ $4.325 billion

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by msu2001la

The stretch between Oak Street and Ohio Street is particularly brutal. This area was supposed to be addressed as part of the NLSD relocation project, but that seems to have fallen off of the radar for now.

http://i.imgur.com/CCwxLPU.jpg

I see nothing wrong with the lakefront in the picture. There's nothing wrong with having the city come right up to the water, at least in this one section.

I don't necessarily disagree with a better waterfront, but I'd prefer something narrow and programmed like the West Harlem Piers that doesn't ruin the awesome juxtaposition of highrises and open water.

West Harlem Piers (NY)

hot in harlem


w-architecture

[UPChicago]

The reconfiguration of Lake Shore Drive is more about the functionality and efficiency of traffic flow on the Drive rather than landscaping/ open space.

[msu2001la]

Originally Posted by UPChicago

The reconfiguration of Lake Shore Drive is more about the functionality and efficiency of traffic flow on the Drive rather than landscaping/ open space.

Of course it is. Transportation funds are being used for the study. If the road worked, there would be no redesign needed.

The only way to reconfigure NLSD to eliminate the current problems is to push into the lake, remove buildings or dramatically change the roadway from a mini-highway back to a street-level boulevard with lower speeds. We all know which way this will go, so there will be new parkland/open space. The Oak Street curve will be flattened out, Belmont Harbor will be significantly changed due to the major pinch point there. The coast guard has issues with Diversey Harbor opening, so that will get reconfigured too. Etc.

The lakefront trail is also part of the transportation network. Re-configuring the lakefront trail was one of the top priorities that came out of the focus study groups and IDOT understands (I think) that this is a critical transportation component.

NLSD sits almost entirely within property owned by the Chicago Park District. So, landscaping and open space are going to be key issues.

[J_M_Tungsten]

Didn't they have major flooding in NYC from that hurricane a few years back? I think I remember seeing the carrousel in Brooklyn Bridge Park almost under water. Water can cause serious damage anywhere when the circumstances are right.

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by J_M_Tungsten

Didn't they have major flooding in NYC from that hurricane a few years back? I think I remember seeing the carrousel in Brooklyn Bridge Park almost under water. Water can cause serious damage anywhere when the circumstances are right.

Yes. They're still making some repairs to some subway lines/stations because of it too.

[moorhosj]

Originally Posted by SamInTheLoop

I thought East Loop was odd choice because it was too far East, however that was a better site selection for a new HQ than Harpo

Based on what? The primary reason you have given is distance from Ogilvey/Union. The original option is even further away than Harpo. You can also add the ability to build-to-suite as an advantage to the Harpo site.

The arrogance is your belief that you know 1. The process used to choose and 2. The criteria used to choose.

You simply don't know those things. Declaring a decision bad when you have no idea of the intent is blatant arrogance. Sure, businesses make bad decisions, nobody ever argued that point.

Originally Posted by SamInTheLoop

not some sort of algo that told them to locate in Fulton Market.

Given their access to data on traffic, transit, fiber-optic cables, etc. I would be very surprised if an algorithm wasn't used in their site selection process. Algorithms are how one determines the time it would take people to travel to a given location. Are you suggesting they didn't do that analysis?

[UPChicago]

Originally Posted by msu2001la

Of course it is. Transportation funds are being used for the study. If the road worked, there would be no redesign needed.

I'm more responding the comment above mine, in the sense that if ever Lake Shore Drive at that stretch were to ever be reconfigured it would not be due to a desires for open space and will not likely abut the lake.

[Chi-Sky21]

I guess those poor guys in the pic with the canoe don't know how close the boat house is. 8)

[Market Urbanism]

Hello,

I haven't been active in this forum, but someone recommended I post here. Please, let me know if there's a better venue to post.

I'm a Chicagoan, and founder of marketurbanism.com. I will be attending the first nationwide YIMBY conference this month in Boulder. (yimbytown.com) (anyone else going?) Among other things, YIMBY activist, journalists, and professionals from cities around the country will gather to discuss pro-development activism, what works/what doesn't, and collaborate to form a nationwide network for activism.

At the conference, I want to be able to accurately report on the status of the YIMBY movement in Chicago. So, I'm proposing a meet-up to discuss what activism is happening in Chicago, and gauge the desire to formally engage in activism. Ideally, we'd meet once over the next week to discuss the current status here in Chicago, and again after I return so I could share what I learned from other YIMBY activists and we can discuss next steps.

Are folks interested in getting together to discuss activism? Is there a better forum for this topic? Feel free to reach me at [email protected]

[Skyguy_7]

Welcome! I think you came to the right place

[r18tdi]

http://chicago.curbed.com/2016/6/7/11877482/chicago-development-news-offices-cortland-corridor-

Don't we've seen this conversion before. The building has some pretty great bones.

[ChiHi]

Originally Posted by Mr Downtown

Friends of the Parks' Last Four Miles initiative specifically excluded any extension of Lake Shore Drive.

"Construction of the parks is projected to cost between $350 million and $450 million, depending on which of the alternate plans is selected. The plan would not require a tax increase, and costs would be incurred incrementally, over time, as the city can afford to pay for them."

Pretty sure we can skip those last 4 miles......

[SamInTheLoop]

Originally Posted by Market Urbanism

Hello,

I haven't been active in this forum, but someone recommended I post here. Please, let me know if there's a better venue to post.

I'm a Chicagoan, and founder of marketurbanism.com. I will be attending the first nationwide YIMBY conference this month in Boulder. (yimbytown.com) (anyone else going?) Among other things, YIMBY activist, journalists, and professionals from cities around the country will gather to discuss pro-development activism, what works/what doesn't, and collaborate to form a nationwide network for activism.

At the conference, I want to be able to accurately report on the status of the YIMBY movement in Chicago. So, I'm proposing a meet-up to discuss what activism is happening in Chicago, and gauge the desire to formally engage in activism. Ideally, we'd meet once over the next week to discuss the current status here in Chicago, and again after I return so I could share what I learned from other YIMBY activists and we can discuss next steps.

Are folks interested in getting together to discuss activism? Is there a better forum for this topic? Feel free to reach me at [email protected]

Checked out this site. All it is is NewGeography for libertarians that actually like to live in cities. Joel Kotkin and Co. have that schtick down for the suburban and auto-sewer set, and someone realized there's an opening in terms of a role to be filled by a similar shill on the same general ideological side but without all the very thinly-veiled urban-loathing.

Very 'fake intellectual' stuff, ie the type of content and 'research' and so forth that typically appeals to libertarians and freemarketeer/free-market fundamentalist types......

There's no 'there' there.....moving right along......

[SamInTheLoop]

Originally Posted by moorhosj

Based on what? The primary reason you have given is distance from Ogilvey/Union. The original option is even further away than Harpo. You can also add the ability to build-to-suite as an advantage to the Harpo site.

The arrogance is your belief that you know 1. The process used to choose and 2. The criteria used to choose.

You simply don't know those things. Declaring a decision bad when you have no idea of the intent is blatant arrogance. Sure, businesses make bad decisions, nobody ever argued that point.



Given their access to data on traffic, transit, fiber-optic cables, etc. I would be very surprised if an algorithm wasn't used in their site selection process. Algorithms are how one determines the time it would take people to travel to a given location. Are you suggesting they didn't do that analysis?

You just don't get it. These real estate decisions are still (I don't care if it's Google itself) human decisions that are very often driven by individual key decision-maker preference, bias, based on 'feelings' and 'gut', and sometimes the result of faulty or incomplete analyses, or based on the wrong or incomplete criteria, and are in many cases highly influenced by outside advise and consultation (which in turn are driven by certain incentives and also those individuals' biases and preferences - and sometimes faulty analyses (or having 'bad' or incomplete criteria for the decision in the first place).


A big part of McDonald's clear mistake with this decision is that what it is doing is really 'trend-chasing'. I've received some inside industry information from multiple sources about this tentative deal, and it happens to reinforce everything I've thought about it: McDonald's was by all accounts very heavily influenced apparently by bad and silly advice about what is 'hip', 'cool', 'where the action is', 'where you gotta be', 'where the hot young talent loves to work and hang out', 'where innovation happens', etc etc - perhaps only a handful of people only truly know the full range of specific incentives that were motivating that lousy advice.

Instead of doing their due diligence and the work necessary to select the right space/location for their new downtown HQ, McD's apparently got suckered into chasing a trend that (for those of you that don't believe me - you'll see in the years to come - whether it's clear 3 years from now - or 6) will prove to be an awful decision.......

Sometimes it's just damn good to be right.

[chrisvfr800i]

Originally Posted by Market Urbanism

Hello,

I haven't been active in this forum, but someone recommended I post here. Please, let me know if there's a better venue to post.

I'm a Chicagoan, and founder of marketurbanism.com. I will be attending the first nationwide YIMBY conference this month in Boulder. (yimbytown.com) (anyone else going?) Among other things, YIMBY activist, journalists, and professionals from cities around the country will gather to discuss pro-development activism, what works/what doesn't, and collaborate to form a nationwide network for activism.

At the conference, I want to be able to accurately report on the status of the YIMBY movement in Chicago. So, I'm proposing a meet-up to discuss what activism is happening in Chicago, and gauge the desire to formally engage in activism. Ideally, we'd meet once over the next week to discuss the current status here in Chicago, and again after I return so I could share what I learned from other YIMBY activists and we can discuss next steps.

Are folks interested in getting together to discuss activism? Is there a better forum for this topic? Feel free to reach me at [email protected]

You'll find this forum is NOT a place where different points of view are shared and discussed. For me, at least, the best use of SSP is to view pictures of my (and other) projects during construction. There are some really talented photographers on this forum!!

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by SamInTheLoop

You just don't get it. These real estate decisions are still (I don't care if it's Google itself) human decisions that are very often driven by individual key decision-maker preference, bias, based on 'feelings' and 'gut', and sometimes the result of faulty or incomplete analyses, or based on the wrong or incomplete criteria, and are in many cases highly influenced by outside advise and consultation (which in turn are driven by certain incentives and also those individuals' biases and preferences - and sometimes faulty analyses (or having 'bad' or incomplete criteria for the decision in the first place).


A big part of McDonald's clear mistake with this decision is that what it is doing is really 'trend-chasing'. I've received some inside industry information from multiple sources about this tentative deal, and it happens to reinforce everything I've thought about it: McDonald's was by all accounts very heavily influenced apparently by bad and silly advice about what is 'hip', 'cool', 'where the action is', 'where you gotta be', 'where the hot young talent loves to work and hang out', 'where innovation happens', etc etc - perhaps only a handful of people only truly know the full range of specific incentives that were motivating that lousy advice.

Instead of doing their due diligence and the work necessary to select the right space/location for their new downtown HQ, McD's apparently got suckered into chasing a trend that (for those of you that don't believe me - you'll see in the years to come - whether it's clear 3 years from now - or 6) will prove to be an awful decision.......

Sometimes it's just damn good to be right.

Give me a damn break with this. So the hell what if they are chasing a trend? This is America. Let them build their damn headquarters wherever they want, at least it's in the city. Stop trying to act like you have all the answers. We get that it's a slight hike from the Metra depots. We all understand this. We are not nitwits. Neither is McD's. They will figure it out