CHICAGO | General Discussions

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by pip

edit:

Twister I totally agree with all you said. It has all the ingredients and the right balance. There is some serious issues though.

marothisu. This is all anecdotal. Boston is the same thing from what I see. Plates from all over and lots from Florida and other winter destinations. Not trying to downplay Chicago. I hope the best for it.

Right. What I say is anecdotal. I agree, but what you are also saying is anecdotal as well. Also sounds like you aren't in Chicago anymore so perhaps you aren't really experiencing what many of us are actually seeing.

When I lived in Chicago for 8 years prior, this never happened to this scale a single year I can remember. Also I was seeing this in February, March, April, etc. In no way did it just start in the summer. Also jibes with what multiple realtors at multiple companies in town were telling us as we started looking to buy places starting in the fall - they were seeing a sudden influx of people from CA and NYC moving here looking for places to buy or scoping out places to buy before they moved. Usually they told us after they found out we had moved back to Chicago from NYC ("oh yeah...we're seeing a sudden influx. People from there contacting us left and right. Do you have any idea why??")

[Vlajos]

Apologies if this was posted before, but this census analysis from Crains is very encouraging for Chicago's future.

https://www.chicagobusiness.com/opin...ulation-growth

Some good notes from the article:

The number of college graduates in Chicago increased by 203,000 between 2010 and 2020, more than any other U.S. city except New York and Los Angeles, and higher than both on a percentage basis.

Chicago's college grads aren't usually thought of as immigrants, but, like traditional immigrants, they're primarily newcomers. According to the census, 55% weren't born in Illinois, and based on reasonable assumptions, the share of city-living graduates who are Chicago natives may be just 10%.

Some analyses have purported to show Chicago's middle class has almost vanished, but census data indicates these claims are exaggerated. Pew Research Center, a nonpartisan research group, defines middle class as having household income between two-thirds and 200% of the regional median—in metro Chicago's case, $50,000 to $149,000 for 2020. By this standard, 62% of city households were middle income; 34% were lower; and 4% upper. Ten years earlier, the numbers were 62% middle; 37% lower; and 1% upper.

The citywide poverty rate—20% in 2000—rose to 24% in 2012, and has since fallen to 16%. The city's median household income still lags that of the region, but the gap is narrowing. In 2010, the city's median income was 77% of the region's; in 2020, it was 83%.

[rivernorthlurker]

Says O'Hare expansion completion delayed 2 years

https://www.chicagobusiness.com/airl...erhaul-delayed

Anyone have the full article? Thought the first satellite terminal though I think is supposed to open next summer IIRC.

Is there a separate O'Hare thread for the expansion?

[left of center]

Originally Posted by F1 Tommy

I really don't expect anything from a NY based newspaper to have positive articles on Chicago.

Case in point, the NYT released an article about how Chicago will be under water due to global warming and rising lake levels. Ignoring the fact that the 5 boroughs are at extreme danger of rising sea levels, and the fact that the massive system of man made locks are in place to keep lake levels where they are and can be opened to help alleviate future flooding. But you knooooow....

If more funds are needed for the OPL, the Obamas have a massive nationwide fundraising network they can tap into. I am not too worried, and I'm sure the Obamas aren't either.

[galleyfox]

Originally Posted by left of center

Case in point, the NYT released an article about how Chicago will be under water due to global warming and rising lake levels. Ignoring the fact that the 5 boroughs are at extreme danger of rising sea levels, and the fact that the massive system of man made locks are in place to keep lake levels where they are and can be opened to help alleviate future flooding. But you knooooow....

If more funds are needed for the OPL, the Obamas have a massive nationwide fundraising network they can tap into. I am not too worried, and I'm sure the Obamas aren't either.

That was an epic reporting fail.

NYC publications spent a full month saying that Chicago was going to be swamped by Lake Michigan and floods.

Couldn’t be bothered to warn their own city a few weeks later that excessive hurricane rains can drown people in their basements because of NYC’s poor drainage infrastructure.


But seeing as the main source of this article is Friends of the Parking Lots, there is probably lots of the grasping of straws regarding the “so-called evidence”

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by galleyfox

That was an epic reporting fail.

NYC publications spent a full month saying that Chicago was going to be swamped by Lake Michigan and floods.

Couldn’t be bothered to warn their own city a few weeks later that excessive hurricane rains can drown people in their basements because of NYC’s poor drainage infrastructure.

The WSJ piece about the Obama Center is biased ideological garbage, but I didn't have a problem with the NYT piece about Lake Michigan.

It's the kind of journalism we should have in Chicago, but our papers don't have the resources to pay someone to fact-check politicians and the MWRD/Army Corps.

Because the impacts of climate change on Chicago are more distant and abstract, there's a lot of complacency here which is dangerous. We may get off better than the coasts, but we won't be unscathed. We need to do our own climate proofing just like other parts of the country. Instead all we get is Deep Tunnel and the Army Corps' lakefront rebuild, which are still solving 1970s problems, not 2020s or 2030s problems.

[Chi-Sky21]

it's all good, i hear we are shipping all our water out west to help them. 8)

[OhioGuy]

Originally Posted by rivernorthlurker

Is there a separate O'Hare thread for the expansion?

There is an O'Hare & Midway thread in the Transportation forum.

https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=87889

[F1 Tommy]

Originally Posted by ardecila

The WSJ piece about the Obama Center is biased ideological garbage, but I didn't have a problem with the NYT piece about Lake Michigan.

It's the kind of journalism we should have in Chicago, but our papers don't have the resources to pay someone to fact-check politicians and the MWRD/Army Corps.

Because the impacts of climate change on Chicago are more distant and abstract, there's a lot of complacency here which is dangerous. We may get off better than the coasts, but we won't be unscathed. We need to do our own climate proofing just like other parts of the country. Instead all we get is Deep Tunnel and the Army Corps' lakefront rebuild, which are still solving 1970s problems, not 2020s or 2030s problems.

Chicago is 666 feet above sea level. They are more worried about Lake Michigan levels dropping than going up to flood stage.

[Busy Bee]

Pretty sure there talking more about future increases in storm surges than actual sea level rise.

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by F1 Tommy

Chicago is 666 feet above sea level. They are more worried about Lake Michigan levels dropping than going up to flood stage.

I never said Lake Michigan was going to continue rising. But we will see some effects of climate change, so we'd better start studying/modeling the local effects at our universities, and designing projects to prepare for those imapcts. Instead we are still spending billions on Deep Tunnel so some homeowners in the Bungalow Belt don't get flooded basements.

[galleyfox]

Originally Posted by ardecila

I never said Lake Michigan was going to continue rising. But we will see some effects of climate change, so we'd better start studying/modeling the local effects at our universities, and designing projects to prepare for those imapcts. Instead we are still spending billions on Deep Tunnel so some homeowners in the Bungalow Belt don't get flooded basements.

I can’t imagine why the city spent money on a major current problem affecting thousands of Chicago homeowners every year and causing general water quality issues. /s

Instead of spending money on speculative problems that may or may not happen two centuries from now.

So far excessive rainfall and localized flooding has indeed been the principle issue of climate change here so far, and Deep Tunnel is a decent attempt to address it.

It’s silly to be handwringing over Lake Michigan when it’s still cycling the same as it has ever done, well within the limits Chicago’s infrastructure was built for (aside from a handful of poorly located buildings)




https://www.epa.gov/climate-indicators/great-lakes

[Briguy]

Originally Posted by galleyfox

I can’t imagine why the city spent money on a major current problem affecting thousands of Chicago homeowners every year and causing general water quality issues. /s

Instead of spending money on speculative problems that may or may not happen two centuries from now.

So far excessive rainfall and localized flooding has indeed been the principle issue of climate change here so far, and Deep Tunnel is a decent attempt to address it.

It’s silly to be handwringing over Lake Michigan when it’s still cycling the same as it has ever done, well within the limits Chicago’s infrastructure was built for (aside from a handful of poorly located buildings)




https://www.epa.gov/climate-indicators/great-lakes

We actually need more rain AND the lake to freeze over for a significant part of the winter for the level to rise. Polar vortex freezes and record precip caused 2020 levels. Lakes already down like 2 ft from there and we've had normal rain, but less icy winters.

More likely than not the lake begins to dry up. Almost certainly if winters become totally ice free every year.

[Steely Dan]

^^ it's always intrigued me why lake superior only has a 4' variance band, while the other great lakes all have more of a 7 - 8' variance band.

[glowrock]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

^^ it's always intrigued me why lake superior only has a 4' variance band, while the other great lakes all have more of a 7 - 8' variance band.

I'd say it's simply a manner of its massive surface area and depth, Steely. It takes MUCH more variance in water flow to affect Superior vs every other Great Lake.

Aaron (Glowrock)

[BrinChi]

Lake Superior is also about 25 feet higher in elevation than the Michigan-Huron basin. There are the Soo Locks for boats to move between them, and they also use this channel to regulate the flow of water from Superior into Michigan-Huron. I think there was some controversy a couple years ago when they were releasing water and Michigan-Huron approached its record level.

[rivernorthlurker]

Yeah I recall years back (talking like 2012) when Lake Michigan was near 50 year lows (see above) that the lake was so low. This had to do with climate change! Now it's really high, because of climate change!? Or the increased variance now has to do with climate change... etc.

If it gets too high can't we just increase the flow through the locks and send it over the falls into the St Lawrence? Also it's freshwater, worst case we build another canal and send it into Iowa for some farmland.

Too high doesn't doesn't seem like a problem at all, it's the too low (see out west) is a real problem.

[Chi-Sky21]

To high erodes the lakefront and beaches. Also if it is to high and we get a ton of rain we can't open the locks to relieve pressure on the river from rising to high in the downtown.

[twister244]

Originally Posted by rivernorthlurker

Yeah I recall years back (talking like 2012) when Lake Michigan was near 50 year lows (see above) that the lake was so low. This had to do with climate change! Now it's really high, because of climate change!? Or the increased variance now has to do with climate change... etc.

If it gets too high can't we just increase the flow through the locks and send it over the falls into the St Lawrence? Also it's freshwater, worst case we build another canal and send it into Iowa for some farmland.

Too high doesn't doesn't seem like a problem at all, it's the too low (see out west) is a real problem.

I suspect it's climate change creating more variance. Feast or famine (like what we saw all over the world this Summer). When it's hot and dry, it's really hot and dry. When it's wet, it's really wet. So you are going to see these dramatic swings.....

If you look at CA, yes they are in a massive drought, but all it takes is a series of Pineapple Express events in a single winter to fill all of the reservoirs back up and then some. Remember a few years back (2017?) when Oriville overfilled with flood damage? There was insane record snowfall in the Sierra Nevada mountains.

Higher temperatures mean more evaporation off the lake and less ice. But it also means the air holds much more water than can come down as precipitation.

[Steely Dan]

USNWR is out with their 2022-2023 university rankings.

below are the 37 "national universities" in the midwest that made the top 200 nationally.

(private schools are bolded, and catholic schools are also italicized)


#6. University of Chicago - chicago
#10. Northwestern University - evanston
#15. Washington University - st. louis
#18. University of Notre Dame - south bend
#23. University of Michigan - ann arbor

#38. University of Wisconsin - madison
#41. University of Illinois - champaign
#44. Case Western Reserve University - cleveland
#49. Ohio State University - columbus
#51. Purdue University - west lafayette

#62. University of Minnesota - minneapolis
#72. Indiana University - bloomington
#83. Marquette University - milwaukee
#83. Michigan State University - east lansing
#83. University of Iowa - iowa city

#97. University of Illinois Chicago - chicago
#105. Miami University - oxford
#105. St. Louis University - st. louis
#115. Creighton University - omaha
#115. Loyola University Chicago - chicago

#121. University of Kansas - lawrence
#121. University of Missouri - columbia
#127. Illinois Institute of Technology - chicago
#127. Iowa State University - ames
#127. University of Dayton - dayton

#137. Depaul University - chicago
#137. Drake University - des moines
#137. University of St. Thomas - st. paul
#151. Michigan Technological University - houhgton
#151. University of Cincinnati - cincinnati

#151. University of Nebraska - lincoln
#166. Bradley University - peoria
#166. Kansas State University - manhattan
#166. Xavier University - cincinnati
#176. Valparaiso Univeristy - valparaiso

#182. Missouri University of Science and Technology - rolla
#182. Ohio University - athens


with 6 schools on this list, chicago once again does very well relative to the rest of the midwest.

and i believe this is the first year ever that UIC has cracked the top 100 nationally on USNWR's annual ranking, making it the highest ranked public university in the midwest outside of the Big 10 on this list.

not too shabby at all for a modern-era "from-scratch" splinter university once named after an expressway interchange.