Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Illinois > Chicago
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 12-13-2015, 06:46 AM
 
Location: Chicago
6,359 posts, read 8,760,614 times
Reputation: 5869

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by FAReastcoast View Post
NYC has also torn down some Gems as well, but far less so than Chicago. Much of NYC looks exactly as it did 100+ years ago. Virtually all Manhattan neighborhoods are landmark districts, where teardowns don't exist the way they do in Chicago.
I'd find it difficult to find anything comparable to the tearing down of the old Penn Station.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-13-2015, 07:11 AM
 
Location: Chicago
6,359 posts, read 8,760,614 times
Reputation: 5869
Quote:
Originally Posted by edsg25 View Post
I hesitate to introduce this topic as I am becoming more and more convinced that the Chicago sub forum has become an incredibly toxic place where negativity is the rule (perhaps more so than any other sub forum on City-Data) and Chicago bashing is the blood sport of choice, but I'll still give it a stab…

These are hardly the best of times in Chicago, the city we love. The litany of ills….corrupt and inefficient government, poor schools, astounding murder rate, gangs, guns, rogue cops, a world class and third world city mixed into one, etc…….are real and debilitating.

But Chicago has been down before, many times, and it seems always to bounce back. Like the timex watch of yore that takes a licking, but keeps on ticking or the Energizer Bunny who keeps going and going and going, you can't keep Chicago down.

Truthfully, all cities have their ups and downs. I can remember times when NYC and SF were in serious trouble, but look at them today.

Question is: do you believe that Chicago has another "golden age" in front of it, that we can get past our present problems and build on the incredible strength that is hard wired into this very much world class and alpha city.

Our advantages far out way our negatives: we have so much going for us.

Obviously I've made my opinion clear here; no mystery on how I feel.

But how about the rest of you? Yes, times are tough and we've been on the wrong track and have taken a hit. But……...Do you see Chicago bouncing back? And, if so, what do you think would be the factors that would generate this comeback city?
Quoting myself here. Why? In four pages worth of this thread, we haven't once discussed the topic I described above.

If we're not going to talk about the topic suggested…..Can you see Chicago coming back once again….then why is this thread (more of a re-thread of other endless threads) still open?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-13-2015, 11:19 AM
 
10,275 posts, read 10,247,648 times
Reputation: 10644
Quote:
Originally Posted by FAReastcoast View Post
My understanding is when people say NYC is losing it's character, it is because longtime business (Bodegas, Music Venues, etc) are closing and trendy boutiques, restaurants, and national chains are opening in their place; it is not because NYC is literally tearing down it's history. For the most part, virtually all of Manhattan and Brownstone Brooklyn (the two areas most guilty of losing character) look almost exactly as they did 100+ years ago. Whereas in Chicago, many areas are literally being bulldozed for modern buildings and parking structures.
Admittedly, a large percentage of the general public prefer new glassy buildings with plenty of parking to 100+ year old structures not always up to modern standards, but I would take character and the architecture over convenience.
Exactly. The issue in Chicago somewhat different than in NYC.

The "NYC is losing its character" meme is tied to the gentrification and everything becoming much more affluent. It's a legitimate criticism, and worthy of concern, though a different one than FAReastcoast is mentioning re. Chicago.

In Chicago it isn't so much the gentrification, but the parade of filing-cabinet towers that are turning core Chicago into a super-generic looking city that could be anywhere. You walk down the street in River North and Streeterville and the character is gone. It's basically a parade of gigantic parking podiums, with Applebees at the base. If you're going to, say Eataly, or Northwestern Medical, you look around the neighborhood and think "what the hell happened". Compare the neighborhood around Eataly in Chicago with the original Eataly on 23rd street in Manhattan and see the stark neighborhood difference. Like night and day.

In NYC, a majority of Manhattan is either landmarked or special-districted, parking is strictly limited, and parking podiums basically don't exist as a housing typology, so the issue is less centered on built form than on the changing character of the city's inhabitants. In Chicago, the city is very pro-development and there are few landmarked or downzoned areas, and parking podiums are the norm, so the issue is centered on the increasingly depressing built form. Yes, there is tons of development in NYC, in fact far more than in Chicago, but it tends to be sliver towers, landmarks-approved contextual buildings, or developments in formerly industrial zones, and there are practically no "fat" residential towers taking up entire blocks, with the street-deadening garage bases.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-13-2015, 12:07 PM
 
1,089 posts, read 1,848,454 times
Reputation: 1151
Well, the "San Francisco" part of Chicago is growing and doing well. There has been a large amount of gentrification all over the north side during the last twenty years. The "Detroit" part, not so much.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-13-2015, 12:26 PM
 
Location: Oak Park, IL
5,523 posts, read 13,888,388 times
Reputation: 3906
Quote:
Originally Posted by NOLA101 View Post
In NYC, a majority of Manhattan is either landmarked or special-districted, parking is strictly limited, and parking podiums basically don't exist as a housing typology, so the issue is less centered on built form than on the changing character of the city's inhabitants. In Chicago, the city is very pro-development and there are few landmarked or downzoned areas, and parking podiums are the norm, so the issue is centered on the increasingly depressing built form. Yes, there is tons of development in NYC, in fact far more than in Chicago, but it tends to be sliver towers, landmarks-approved contextual buildings, or developments in formerly industrial zones, and there are practically no "fat" residential towers taking up entire blocks, with the street-deadening garage bases.
What would be the result if Chicago adopted NYC's more restrictive development pattern? I'm genuinely curious.

My guess is that NYC can get away with high level of restriction because demand of development is so high. Since land values in Chicago are so much lower, wouldn't more restrictions drive up the costs of construction resulting in less development? The number of people willing to pay $1000/sq foot is significantly lower in Chicago than NYC. Perhaps development would be pushed away from the current hotspots into more neglected neighborhoods as a result, or alternatively into the suburbs?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-13-2015, 01:03 PM
 
14,802 posts, read 17,562,567 times
Reputation: 9244
Where are all these old buildings being bulldozed? Almost all the new high rises are on former surface lots or a crappy single story Gino' East or Ed Debevics. What do people think should be built in this land in River North and Streeterville?

In neighborhoods like Lincoln Square, Edgewater, Albany Park, Avondale, Uptown, old brick two flats are being converted left and right to sfh but are not being destroyed from the outside. The only teardowns I see are craptastic frame sided homes that are beyond repair and are ugly.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-13-2015, 01:19 PM
 
Location: Oak Park, IL
5,523 posts, read 13,888,388 times
Reputation: 3906
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vlajos View Post
Where are all these old buildings being bulldozed? Almost all the new high rises are on former surface lots or a crappy single story Gino' East or Ed Debevics. What do people think should be built in this land in River North and Streeterville?

In neighborhoods like Lincoln Square, Edgewater, Albany Park, Avondale, Uptown, old brick two flats are being converted left and right to sfh but are not being destroyed from the outside. The only teardowns I see are craptastic frame sided homes that are beyond repair and are ugly.
In the Loop I can only think of 209 Lake St. I think there's a Gilded age mansion or two in River North which is being torn down as well. As far as I can remember, the vast majority of new construction in the central area is taking place on vacant lots. Granted, most of those lots had historic buildings at one point, but that ship has already sailed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-13-2015, 02:04 PM
 
Location: River North, Chicago, Illinois
4,620 posts, read 8,116,350 times
Reputation: 6321
Quote:
Originally Posted by NOLA101 View Post
...
In Chicago it isn't so much the gentrification, but the parade of filing-cabinet towers that are turning core Chicago into a super-generic looking city that could be anywhere. You walk down the street in River North and Streeterville and the character is gone. It's basically a parade of gigantic parking podiums, with Applebees at the base. If you're going to, say Eataly, or Northwestern Medical, you look around the neighborhood and think "what the hell happened". Compare the neighborhood around Eataly in Chicago with the original Eataly on 23rd street in Manhattan and see the stark neighborhood difference. Like night and day..
...
Funny you mention Eataly. Just a block away are the Tree Studios, fully preserved, and the Shriner's Temple. Many of the other things nearby there that were torn down were warehouses, but not interesting ones like in New York's SoHo, very plain industrial ones. Two blocks north of Eataly is the Driehaus Museum, dedicated to Guilded Age mansions, and on a well-preserved block of old mansions.

New York is older than Chicago, so it had more old buildings to start with. Whether it's really been better at preserving things or not, I don't know. Certainly the Bronx did not do a good job of preservation, not by any measure, and Queens, which probably has the most in common with Chicago of any of the New York boroughs, doesn't appear to anyone like a bastion of preservation. Much of Manhattan was built even before Chicago was incorporated, and nearly all of it before Chicago hit its growth spurt, so comparing them is really a false comparison. It'd be like comparing Manhattan with Istanbul or Rome.

As far as River North goes, as others have said a lot of what's been built on lately has been surface lots, and most of the surface lots came about by the demolition of economically nonviable and not architecturally significant warehouses - not a big loss since being old by itself would be a silly reason to preserve a building if it was in no other way significant. But River North does have some nice collections of older buildings - the Cathedral District has some nice blocks and buildings, including the cathedrals themselves, and Erie just west of Wabash to Rush, the YMCA building, the older stone buildings on Dearborn just south (and north) of the YMCA, the Bush Temple of Music is being renovated at Chicago and Clark, and further south on Clark and along good chunks of Wells are older, well-preserved buildings, as well as near the intersection of Superior and Franklin, Ontario west of Orleans, Kinzie Street has the old Court House building and older brick buildings between Lasalle west to the River. You can't expect a place to stay completely static, especially when River North has converted from an industrial / SRO-dominated area into a vibrant mixed-use community.

There also really aren't that many "Applebee's" type places in River North. Sure, there's a Chili's at Ontario and State, and a few national chains on Ohio between State and Michigan, but not that many other parts of River North are blatantly filled with chains. Weber Grill is a chain, but a chain that's headquartered in Chicagoland. Hard Rock Cafe and Rainforest Cafe are not in the base of highrises, and are likely to be replaced with highrises within the next 20 years.

Restaurants like Maggianos at Clark and Grand and Bar Louie were FOUNDED in River North - that they are national chains now is irrelevant to your argument because they started here. The former Rock and Roll McDonalds is another locally-based outfit and a flagship store at that. With the exception of the ubiquitous Starbucks locations, very few of the highrises have national chains in them - regional chains, some, but many of them are either local chains or even unique shops. That Michigan Avenue has a lot of international brands on the street is also more or less irrelevant because that's always been part of the draw for shoppers - that they could get international brands there. That more places in America now have access to some of those brands doesn't mean Chicago has gotten more bland, but that transportation and globalization has brought more brands to more places.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-13-2015, 06:30 PM
 
Location: Chicago, IL
8,851 posts, read 5,776,538 times
Reputation: 11467
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChicagoMeO View Post
As long as you keep on voting for leaders who do the same ol same ol, you will get the same ol same ol.

As long as people want to be forever indebited to the Democratic "vote for me and i will give you goodies" and they believe it, and then these promises turn out empty.. you will continue to get the same ol same ol.

Cant we have any good leaders to nominate?
I agree with this. The "politics" of Chicago have to be changed. After years of being the "murder capital" in the 90s, DC finally got rid of Marion Barry (mostly from his own infamous doing) and brought in Anthony Williams (Harvard-trained attorney and successful financial career) who completely changed the decade-long culture of the city. Although his gentrification strategy is what lead to improving the ills of the city, it got the job done, much like Gulianni's strong-arm policing. He changed DC from the murder capital to a white-collar city, and turned many of the depressed areas into thriving neighborhoods. he did things completely differently than how the old guard ran things for decades even if it wasn't popular. I think Chicago needs a change in the mindset of leadership. All the political corruption has likely held back a lot of potential progress over the years.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-13-2015, 06:40 PM
 
Location: Below 59th St
672 posts, read 750,967 times
Reputation: 1407
I do wish people would stop holding up NY as some kind of urban trump card. There are a great number of truly hideous buildings all over the Manhattan. Sterile, boxy, refrigerated monstrosities. It's a miracle that the buildings skirting Central Park weren't torn down. And the new towers being built, IMO, are ****e. That neo-brutalist thing at 437 Park Ave. is a good example and there's a dire tower-in-the-park being dug into the Lower East Side. We need to be thankful for the bounties of the Jazz Age.

The drab fridge-towers springing up in downtown Chicago are unpleasant but from what I can see, they're being built on parking lots or on the rubble of even less attractive buildings. I tried searching for fine old buildings being torn down to make newer ones, but aside from that example on Lake, and a deco-era factory in the West Loop, I couldn't find any. There are even examples of facades being painstakingly preserved... so fridge-blocks can rise out of their interiors like a horror-movie alien wearing the flaps of its victim's skin.

Is it tragic that many wonderful buildings were torn down during 'urban renewal'? You bet. I cry every time I see what Congress Pkwy did to the streetscape of Printer's Row. But filling in those empty lots is a good thing, even with the damned podiums. And there are some buildings that make a good show of tucking the parking away to give at least a nod to urbanity.

Back on topic, I think that if Chicago can get its fiscal house in order, fix its schools and modernize its government then it will thrive. It has a diverse and robust economy, a fine built environment and a forward-thinking attitude to construction and density.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Illinois > Chicago
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top