North Shore boundaries

Where do you place the almost elusive like boundaries of the North Shore? Sure we can all agree it north of Chicago on Lake Michigan. But where specifically? Some real estate folks call their sites "North Shore" even though they are well inland...to cash in on the panache of the name. North Shore magazine meanwhile covers not only the North Shore, but the whole North and NW suburban area. Traditonalists will tell you the North Shore suburbs must be along the lake from Evanston to Lake Bluff. These folks often see Evanston as a transition between North Shore and city. Highwood is viewed as being on the North Shore but not of the North Shore. Others are comfortable including suburbs one town in from the lake: Glenview, Northfield, Northbook, Deerfield. Except for the lack of lakefront, these towns are very much like lakefront communities and are integregally tied to it. Skokie, though one town in from the lake, doesn't seem to get North Shore status, although Old Orchard has long been viewed as the North Shore's shopping center. As North Shore applies to life style and income more than geography, it would be rare to see anyone give North Chicago or Waukegan the status of a North Shore location, terribly snobby though that may be. SO, WHERE DO YOU PLACE THE BOUNDARIES OF THE NORTH SHORE?>

Updates on the following?

No news on any of these for ages. Just curious if they're just on permanent hold until there is more funding, or what? 1) Metra Market 2) The recently designed pedestrian bridges over LSD (winners already selected by a world-wide competition), as well as the pedestrian bridge flanking LSD across the Chicago River 3) West side movie production studios 4) Stand-up comedy channel (in 2004 there was a Tribune article about 2 people who wanted to start a stand-up comedy channel based in Chicago--no news ever since) Does anybody know anything new about any of these, or are we to assume they're all in limbo at this point>

Devon Street

I am amazed by the number of non-Asian Chicagoans I have met, who live in or around Chicago, and have NEVER been to (or have just stopped by briefly) the Devon St. district. No offense, but I honestly don't think you guys realize how rich, successful, and vibrant an ethnic district it is. 26th street may have the record for sales, but Devon St has become a national icon among Indo-Pak ethnic districts. People on the coasts and down in Florida know about it. It is a highly competitive environment, thus a person can get VERY cheap Indian food, jewelry (24K gold masterpieces), clothing, imported goods, etc and it draws people from everywhere. Devon Street is probably at its peak (or approaching its peak) as an ethnic district. Although I hate to think of such things, it perhaps (but maybe not!!!) may eventually go into decline as many ethnic districts before it have. But for those of you who are too young (like me) to have ever seen a vibrant urban ethnic district (ie Italian, Greek, Jewish, German, etc etc), this is one hell of an opportunity. I know most of you are not Indian/Pakistani--but that's not the point. It is an opportunity to experience a truly rich ethnic district that is thriving right here, right now. Anyway, I hope more of you guys check it out. Lincoln Park/Lakeview/Uptown/Bucktown/Wicker Park, etc etc are truly awesome urban hoods, but Devon St. is a whole different experience.>

Chicago as an adjective

How many different ways is Chicago used as an adjective and not a noun? I'm talking about terms recongnized nationally that honor Chicago's unique style. I'm talking about, for example... Chicago style hot dogs Chicago deep dish pizza Chicago row houses Chicago school of architecture Chicago blues are there others?>

Chicago, unconfined

I just started a thread on the US subforum where are asked what NYC would have been like without its Manhattan island location. I'd like to ask a similiar, albeit less dramatic, question about Chicago. WHAT WOULD HAVE BEEN THE IMPLICATIONS FOR CHICAGO IF THE CHICAGO RIVER HAD NOT WORKED WITH LAKE MICHIGAN TO CREATE A PHYSICALLY DEFINED CITY CORE? In other words, what would Chicago been like without the peninsula-like Loop? No, I'm not suggesting the Chicago River would have gone away; I'm only saying it would not have set off the downtown area the way it does. Without a "set apart" Loop, would Chicago have needed to reach for the sky the way it did, developing the first skyscraper...and many more afterwards? Would our Loop streets be the canyons they are today? Would streets from Wacker to Congress and from Michigan to Wacker have the importance they do today if the downtown region was allowed to spread out? How much did georgraphy and topography contribute to Chicago's incredible centralization?>

It's 18 degrees hotter here.....

....than in L.A.! >

Transit Trip Planning

I came across a really neat site: http://tripsweb.rtachicago.com/ Anyone know how accurate the travel times are?>

Field's death greatly exagerated?

Crains next week (according to abc7) is serioiusly weighing keeping the Marshall Field's name in some capacity in Chicago. WIth 3% gain in sales over the holidays (compared to 2% at other Field's stores), the State Street store has become a magnet for those into Field's nostalga. Meanwhile, federated has listened to and been influenced by Chicago's attachment to the Field's name. One possibility, Channel 7 reports, would be the Feild's name remaining on the State Street. There are other ways (through products) that Federated may utilize to keep the name Marshall Field's alive. GREAT NEWS IF THIS HAPPENED>

Unhappy news in Chicago

We have a finanacial areana looking strong thread that showcases some of the positive economic developments in our fair city. This thread is meant as the mirror image....you know turned 180 degrees.....focusing on not so good news in our city. Most of us here love Chicago, but all is not perfect and I just thought we should present the good w/ the bad.>

Printers' Row Book Fair!

So - did anyone go this year? Books about Chicago history and architecture are apparently in vogue now, so there was a wide selection. Last year, I got a 310-page guide to the Columbian Exposition, printed 1892, for $20. (Its binding was damaged - easily fixed for another 25$) This year, I picked up a large volume from Rizzoli (who makes expensive coffeetable books) called "The Sky's The Limit". It was printed c. 1990 and has 2-3 pages each on 115 Loop buildings with full color photographs and lengthy descriptions. They aren't the common photos available on the Net, either. This was $48, in good condition. All in all, a fun trip for me. Revolution Bookstore was selling some Chinese Revolution posters, so I was tempted to buy a 5-foot-wide Chairman Mao, but it was packed up before I got back to the booth. On a side note: I took a few minutes to climb the tower of Dearborn Station. You can only get to the third floor, where there is a landing. Beyond that is either a "locked at all times" gated 3rd floor, or a ladder/trapdoor to ascend higher in the tower. The whole thing gave me a cool/creepy vibe. Anyone know any more about this?>

Out-migration cools talk of inner-city resurgences

Out-migration cools talk of inner-city resurgences A few years ago, Chicago was widely touted as the brightest star in the turnaround of many of the USA's big cities. The 2000 Census found that Chicago had gained population during the 1990s, the first decade that had happened in 50 years. Population estimates released Thursday by the Census Bureau show three Illinois cities among the top 50 in percentage growth since 2000, but Chicago is not among them. The city's population declined 1.2% between 2000 and 2004 while the suburbs of Joliet, Aurora and Naperville grew by 21.4%, 16.4% and 8.9%, respectively. (Related story: Big cities not booming) The Chicago story exemplifies trends playing out across the nation. The growth that fueled hopes for a long-term urban resurgence has cooled somewhat. (Full lists: Slowest-to-fastest growing | Alphabetical) "The '90s was the best decade for older big cities since the 1940s," says Robert Lang, director of the Metropolitan Institute at Virginia Tech. "Now, during this decade, it's not going so well. The fastest-growing cities in the country are essentially obscure suburbs. To the rest of the country, these are not national cities." Among them is Port St. Lucie, Fla., whose 12% population increase from July 2003-July 2004 was the highest of the 251 U.S. cities that have more than 100,000 residents. "They are basically kind of suburban places that never have big-city status," says demographer William Frey of the Brookings Institution. "But they're the kind of places that people are moving to because they're more affordable." High housing costs in many big cities are driving some people away. Other factors: • "Safety moves" after 9/11. "There was some tendency for people to stay away from the big, dense cities, especially the ones that got named as potential (targets), and even some like those," Frey says. • The economy. The dot-com decline blasted cities such as San Francisco and Boston. Other cities have experienced job losses, and municipal red tape often hinders start-up entrepreneurs, says Joel Kotkin, senior fellow at the New American Foundation, a Washington, D.C., think tank. "The notion of the resurgence of the inner city was being overstated," he says. "In Philadelphia, for example, Center City is better than it's ever been. But the rest of the city is losing jobs and population." Among other highlights in the new Census estimates: • The Sun Belt continues to be the USA's growth engine. The 10 fastest-growing cities from July 2003 to July 2004 that have more than 100,000 people are in California (4), Florida (3), Arizona (2) and Nevada (1). Nineteen of the top 25 such cities are in those four states, 10 of them in California. • There was only one change among the USA's 10 most populous cities, with San Jose replacing Detroit at No. 10. Chicago remains the third most populous U.S. city, with 2.86 million residents, but its net out-migration rate has accelerated since the 2000 Census, says Kenneth Johnson, a demographer and professor of sociology at Loyola University Chicago. During the 1990s, 171,000 more people moved out of Chicago than moved in, Johnson says. The overall population increased because there were more births than deaths. From 2000 to 2004, he estimates that 140,000 more people moved out of the city than moved in, and the birthrate has not compensated for it. While black and white residents left the Windy City in the 1990s, that was partly offset by Hispanics moving in, Johnson says. "Whites and blacks are still leaving," he says. "But Hispanics are now leaving more than during the 1990s." It's not just the city, either. Cook County, which includes Chicago, had a net loss of almost 49,000 people between 2000-2004, a pattern being repeated in places such as Detroit and Cleveland, he says. "That's new," Johnson says. "It used to be common for the central city to lose people but the surrounding county would be gaining. Now, for some of these places, it's not just the central city that's losing population but the county that contains the central city." Chicago's population had declined every decade since the 1950s, from a peak of about 3.6 million. It now appears that the gains of the 1990s were a short-term deviation from the long-term trend, Johnson says. Still, he says, "This city still is a viable, lively place. It's just not as dominant as it once was in this metropolitan region.">

Out-migration cools talk of inner-city resurgences

Out-migration cools talk of inner-city resurgences A few years ago, Chicago was widely touted as the brightest star in the turnaround of many of the USA's big cities. The 2000 Census found that Chicago had gained population during the 1990s, the first decade that had happened in 50 years. Population estimates released Thursday by the Census Bureau show three Illinois cities among the top 50 in percentage growth since 2000, but Chicago is not among them. The city's population declined 1.2% between 2000 and 2004 while the suburbs of Joliet, Aurora and Naperville grew by 21.4%, 16.4% and 8.9%, respectively. (Related story: Big cities not booming) The Chicago story exemplifies trends playing out across the nation. The growth that fueled hopes for a long-term urban resurgence has cooled somewhat. (Full lists: Slowest-to-fastest growing | Alphabetical) "The '90s was the best decade for older big cities since the 1940s," says Robert Lang, director of the Metropolitan Institute at Virginia Tech. "Now, during this decade, it's not going so well. The fastest-growing cities in the country are essentially obscure suburbs. To the rest of the country, these are not national cities." Among them is Port St. Lucie, Fla., whose 12% population increase from July 2003-July 2004 was the highest of the 251 U.S. cities that have more than 100,000 residents. "They are basically kind of suburban places that never have big-city status," says demographer William Frey of the Brookings Institution. "But they're the kind of places that people are moving to because they're more affordable." High housing costs in many big cities are driving some people away. Other factors: • "Safety moves" after 9/11. "There was some tendency for people to stay away from the big, dense cities, especially the ones that got named as potential (targets), and even some like those," Frey says. • The economy. The dot-com decline blasted cities such as San Francisco and Boston. Other cities have experienced job losses, and municipal red tape often hinders start-up entrepreneurs, says Joel Kotkin, senior fellow at the New American Foundation, a Washington, D.C., think tank. "The notion of the resurgence of the inner city was being overstated," he says. "In Philadelphia, for example, Center City is better than it's ever been. But the rest of the city is losing jobs and population." Among other highlights in the new Census estimates: • The Sun Belt continues to be the USA's growth engine. The 10 fastest-growing cities from July 2003 to July 2004 that have more than 100,000 people are in California (4), Florida (3), Arizona (2) and Nevada (1). Nineteen of the top 25 such cities are in those four states, 10 of them in California. • There was only one change among the USA's 10 most populous cities, with San Jose replacing Detroit at No. 10. Chicago remains the third most populous U.S. city, with 2.86 million residents, but its net out-migration rate has accelerated since the 2000 Census, says Kenneth Johnson, a demographer and professor of sociology at Loyola University Chicago. During the 1990s, 171,000 more people moved out of Chicago than moved in, Johnson says. The overall population increased because there were more births than deaths. From 2000 to 2004, he estimates that 140,000 more people moved out of the city than moved in, and the birthrate has not compensated for it. While black and white residents left the Windy City in the 1990s, that was partly offset by Hispanics moving in, Johnson says. "Whites and blacks are still leaving," he says. "But Hispanics are now leaving more than during the 1990s." It's not just the city, either. Cook County, which includes Chicago, had a net loss of almost 49,000 people between 2000-2004, a pattern being repeated in places such as Detroit and Cleveland, he says. "That's new," Johnson says. "It used to be common for the central city to lose people but the surrounding county would be gaining. Now, for some of these places, it's not just the central city that's losing population but the county that contains the central city." Chicago's population had declined every decade since the 1950s, from a peak of about 3.6 million. It now appears that the gains of the 1990s were a short-term deviation from the long-term trend, Johnson says. Still, he says, "This city still is a viable, lively place. It's just not as dominant as it once was in this metropolitan region.">

Out-migration cools talk of inner-city resurgences

Out-migration cools talk of inner-city resurgences A few years ago, Chicago was widely touted as the brightest star in the turnaround of many of the USA's big cities. The 2000 Census found that Chicago had gained population during the 1990s, the first decade that had happened in 50 years. Population estimates released Thursday by the Census Bureau show three Illinois cities among the top 50 in percentage growth since 2000, but Chicago is not among them. The city's population declined 1.2% between 2000 and 2004 while the suburbs of Joliet, Aurora and Naperville grew by 21.4%, 16.4% and 8.9%, respectively. (Related story: Big cities not booming) The Chicago story exemplifies trends playing out across the nation. The growth that fueled hopes for a long-term urban resurgence has cooled somewhat. (Full lists: Slowest-to-fastest growing | Alphabetical) "The '90s was the best decade for older big cities since the 1940s," says Robert Lang, director of the Metropolitan Institute at Virginia Tech. "Now, during this decade, it's not going so well. The fastest-growing cities in the country are essentially obscure suburbs. To the rest of the country, these are not national cities." Among them is Port St. Lucie, Fla., whose 12% population increase from July 2003-July 2004 was the highest of the 251 U.S. cities that have more than 100,000 residents. "They are basically kind of suburban places that never have big-city status," says demographer William Frey of the Brookings Institution. "But they're the kind of places that people are moving to because they're more affordable." High housing costs in many big cities are driving some people away. Other factors: • "Safety moves" after 9/11. "There was some tendency for people to stay away from the big, dense cities, especially the ones that got named as potential (targets), and even some like those," Frey says. • The economy. The dot-com decline blasted cities such as San Francisco and Boston. Other cities have experienced job losses, and municipal red tape often hinders start-up entrepreneurs, says Joel Kotkin, senior fellow at the New American Foundation, a Washington, D.C., think tank. "The notion of the resurgence of the inner city was being overstated," he says. "In Philadelphia, for example, Center City is better than it's ever been. But the rest of the city is losing jobs and population." Among other highlights in the new Census estimates: • The Sun Belt continues to be the USA's growth engine. The 10 fastest-growing cities from July 2003 to July 2004 that have more than 100,000 people are in California (4), Florida (3), Arizona (2) and Nevada (1). Nineteen of the top 25 such cities are in those four states, 10 of them in California. • There was only one change among the USA's 10 most populous cities, with San Jose replacing Detroit at No. 10. Chicago remains the third most populous U.S. city, with 2.86 million residents, but its net out-migration rate has accelerated since the 2000 Census, says Kenneth Johnson, a demographer and professor of sociology at Loyola University Chicago. During the 1990s, 171,000 more people moved out of Chicago than moved in, Johnson says. The overall population increased because there were more births than deaths. From 2000 to 2004, he estimates that 140,000 more people moved out of the city than moved in, and the birthrate has not compensated for it. While black and white residents left the Windy City in the 1990s, that was partly offset by Hispanics moving in, Johnson says. "Whites and blacks are still leaving," he says. "But Hispanics are now leaving more than during the 1990s." It's not just the city, either. Cook County, which includes Chicago, had a net loss of almost 49,000 people between 2000-2004, a pattern being repeated in places such as Detroit and Cleveland, he says. "That's new," Johnson says. "It used to be common for the central city to lose people but the surrounding county would be gaining. Now, for some of these places, it's not just the central city that's losing population but the county that contains the central city." Chicago's population had declined every decade since the 1950s, from a peak of about 3.6 million. It now appears that the gains of the 1990s were a short-term deviation from the long-term trend, Johnson says. Still, he says, "This city still is a viable, lively place. It's just not as dominant as it once was in this metropolitan region.">

Happy Birthday to Michigan Avenue

Happy Birthday >

Jetski rentals?

Milwaukee has Jetski rentals along the lakefront, and it appears very popular. I have been asked this by a random tourist and I've been wondering this myself... where are the jetski rental outfits in Chicago?>

Future skyline comparison: Chgo & NYC

a weird question here: New York and Chicago are the skyscraper capitals of the US and have the nation's two favorite skylines. Tall buildings in Chicago are more defined on the skyline in Chicago than in New York, which tends to be dominated by the sheer mass of buildings that has no Chicago counterpart. Both cities are undergoing a high rise construction boom. In Manhattan, that boom appears to contribute more to the skyline's sense of bulk than it does to height (other than Freedom Tower which will completely realter lower Manhattan). In Chicago, we are used to three buildings (Hancock, Aon, Sears) punctuating our skyline. We are entering an era where they will be getting company: Trump, Waterview, the 2 or 3 super tall's planned for Wabash, the building with the Mardaran Hotel near MilPk, etc. These buildings will give a new sense of height to the Chicago skyline, without seriously altering the mass of much of the skyline. Sight unseen (since you haven't seen it....right?) which city's new skyline will be more aestethically appealing to you: Chicago's super talls, constrasted against a lower scaled skyline -or- Manhattan's increased mass and the height offered at Freedom Tower ????????????? I'm not only asking which will be more attractive, but which will be more improved due to the new construction.>

Chicago subway Picture

I'm wondering that some subway station in Chicago has been renovation. Please post picture of Subway in Chicago, or can post CTA metro bus. Thanks. >

where's our bank of america?

The last thing I heard was Bank of America's Chicago operation was in the Sears Tower. This is the first time I'm going to favor a high vacancy rate for the Sears, but nearly every major American city has an iconic BoA tower, for most cities it's their tallest, and now New York gets Bryant Park. We need our next 1000 foot office tower to be a BoA, preferably somewhere south of CNA plaza so we can get the skyline going south with another supertall. Whatsup with BoA defining the skylines of American cities and being OK with having nothing in Chicago?>

Any thoughts on Jesse Jackson, Jr. vs. Mayor Daley?

The heat is building up, and Jesse Jackson, Jr. is really dishing it out. Does anybody have any predictions for the future, or thoughts about Jackson? I don't know what to make of this guy. All he does is criticise Daley, but I would like to get an idea how he would like to run the city. All I know, so far, is that he is against Daley's recent slew of scandals and he supports 15% affordable housing throughout the city. But really, there are only about 3 things I can say about this guy, from what I know: 1) He wants to advance his career 2) He wants to help African Americans 3) He wants to build Peotone. #1: whatever #2: certainly an important and noble cause, but I think that is just one of MANY, MANY aspects of a Mayor's job. A Mayor must run a whole city--including attracting both national and international business, campaigning with Federal officials for funding, improving city services, schools, fighting crime, etc. Not to mention the key things that matter to the modern city (which Daley has a good handling of), ie making the city fun, attractive, entertaining, and a cultural hub. Where does Jesse Jackson, Jr. stand on these issues? Luckily Jackson's family, like Daley's, has a lot of clout. But how would Jackson use it? #3: ptooey! YUCK! Okay, I'm not against Peotone, but I'll be damned if the Mayor of Chicago puts the interests of his buddies in the south suburbs over the interests of his own city. Does this mean he would put the brakes on he O'Hare expansion? Definitely concerning.... The other question is, if the guy runs, is he likely to beat Daley? With what I know now (this is not to say my opinion wouldn't change if I learned more about where Jackson stands), I overwhelmingly would support Daley--I like his style, and I think he cares about the city very deeply. I also think that a certain amount of politican "favoritism" is inevitable, but the guy gets things done, and that's more than you can say about 99% of politicians on this earth.>

Skyscraper Sway

I was wondering whether anyone had data regarding skyscraper sway in Chicago. As in, how much does the Sears Tower, the Hancock, or my humble Marina City abode dance around in a stiff wind? Having only lived at MC a month, you can definitely tell the building moves, if not feel it. Little pinging noises just every now and then come from the window casing or balcony door jamb, just regularly and loudly enough to know it isn't the wind. If you put your back to the interior of the central core at the top floor (61/the roofdeck), you can feel a definite, though slight, jerky movement. A fellow I ran into on the roof tonight remarked on it, which got me wondering about how far it's supposed to move. I'm guessing at most only 4 inches or so. Anyone know? I WILL say that if only four inches, a little goes a long way. The day last week when the weather finally broke it was a very windy morning. Waiting for my laundry I killed some time on the roofdeck and felt almost seasick.>

Which new building will afford the best views, all things considered

The building could be quite ugly itself... which might be a plus in terms of views, since you wouldn't actually have to look at it..>

not so flat?

Forgive what may be a silly question and one that is strictly opinion and perception: but, if you live and Chicago and spend a lot of time downtown, does our continuously rising skyline and all that height spread out in the central part of the city actually make you feel, at times, that you are not in a flat city? Admittedly you can't drive up it, nor can you walk outside on it and see flowers and trees, but on some level does that skyline give you that sense of height that may just take the place of for the lack of hills? As in....driving inbound on the Kennedy from O'Hare, does that view in front of you suggest a flat city or one with its own man made hills (dare I say mountains)??????????????>

New to the forum.....

I just wanted to say a quick hello. I spent a few years living in Chicago before family commitments brought me to Florida. I have spent the last five years missing that fantastic city, and may finally be in a position to move back!! The great pictures on this site are a big motivation to make this move happen, so thank you all for the insperation. -Mike>

Favorite Chicago restaurant?

This is pretty straightforward: what is your favorite Chicago restaurant? I'm looking for places to eat when I head back >

Holiday Light displays around Chicago

So guys, where can one go to see some killer christmas light displays? Every year I love driving through Sauganash. And then theres this guy in Albany park , or mabye it was Hollywod park (i cant remember) where this one guy goes all out and puts up a pretty crazy amount of lights. I used to love when my father drove us past it when I was a kid. Then theres the mag miles light display of course. So wheres your favorite display in or around the city both public or private? Also i want to encourage you to post pics if at all pos.>

Break the mold: how to get Chicagoans to wake up and get out of their cars

On a massive level, what can be done? The transit system is pretty decent, but it seems like more of a 'get to work' kind of thing. For everything else it's like "where's the parking? No parking? Oh my GOD!!!" How do we tackle this STUBBORN, STUBBORN problem in the city? I point you all to Exhibit A ('Concerns for Parking Scoffed At'): http://www.hpherald.com/pg4.html How do we reeducate people with this seriously flawed attitude?>

Merry Christmas Chi Town

MERRY CHRISTMAS HAPPY HANNUKAH To all of you in chi from all of us in NY Have a healthy, happy, safe one guys... Lots of Love- Gia>

Daley mayoral bid challenged

Daley mayoral bid challenged On last day to file disputes, opponent questions petitions By Mickey Ciokajlo Tribune staff reporter Published December 27, 2006 Supporters of mayoral challenger William "Dock" Walls filed objections Tuesday to the nominating petitions of Mayor Richard Daley, the first time since Daley became mayor that his petitions have been called into question. Daley's campaign said it is confident in the validity of its petitions. But Walls said his supporters found a number of problems with the mayor's petitions, including the names of people not registered to vote and evidence of forgery. "In most instances, you find that most of these people who are purported to be signers on these petitions were not even registered voters in the city of Chicago," Walls said. In a statement, Daley's campaign manager, Terry Peterson, said, "We are confident that our signatures will withstand any challenge." Tuesday was the deadline for filing challenges against the petitions for candidates running in the Feb. 27 election for mayor, city clerk, city treasurer and alderman. A team of 18 hearing officers--private attorneys retained by the elections board--will review the challenges and make recommendations to the Chicago Board of Election Commissioners. Where the validity of signatures is called into question, voter rolls may be reviewed and handwriting experts asked to testify. The board's decisions can be appealed to Cook County Circuit Court. Mayoral candidates must file a minimum of 12,500 signatures of registered voters. Daley's campaign said it filed more than 24,000, which was far fewer than in past elections. Walls said his supporters also filed challenges against candidates Syron Smith and Ziff Anthony Sistrunk for not providing enough signatures. But Walls said he did not challenge Dorothy Brown, the other major candidate in the race against Daley, because he and Brown agreed to leave each other's petitions alone. Walls' petitions were not challenged. Paul Davis, Brown's campaign manager, said they decided not to file objections although their reviewers found problems with each candidate's petitions. "We thought that it was in the better interest of our campaign that we focus on the issues ahead," Davis said. "We felt that in the long run that the distraction of a long, protracted fight ... could take away from the focus of our campaign." Daley's petitions were challenged when he ran for mayor in 1989, but he survived and won the election. No one has challenged his petitions since. In the other two citywide races, challenges were filed against four of the seven candidates for city clerk and a challenge was filed against Elida Cruz, the sole opponent running against newly installed City Treasurer Stephanie Neely. In some instances, two or more challenges were filed against a candidate. In the aldermanic races, 192 objections were filed against 141 candidates. Two hundred and forty-five candidates have filed for the 50 seats on the City Council, a job that will pay $100,971 when the new term begins in May. Some incumbent aldermen also had their petitions challenged, including Richard Mell (33rd), Carrie Austin (34th) and Daniel Solis (25th). this is BS right? Please? Right? I would be so furious if Daley got axed from the ballot because of some measure like this. Yes I know it's the rule, and rules are rules - but please. Obviously he has enough support. The only other decent canidates left the race, and now you're left with a few people running who honestly don't excite me much at all. This guy is really pissing me off by pulling crap like this, as if he was going to win anyway.>

Extreme Segregation Is Preventing Chicago From Reaching It's Full Potential

Let me first start by saying, I am a transplant from the southern United States. I am also an African American male who has earned a masters degree in urban planning. I currently work in my profession for the City of Chicago which has given me an opportunity to contribute to the rebirth of this great city. After traveling to many great urban centers of the U.S., Canada and Europe (Barcelona, Paris, London, Amsterdam, etc.) my experiences have helped me to realize that Chicago is one of the great cities of the world. Still, Chicago needs to try harder to break the massive segregation that exist on the south and west sides. It is preventing the city from reaching its full potential. Although the city is busy, diverse and racially cosmopolitan, it does not feel as cosmopolitan as some cities of lesser importance. Part of the problem is, certain politians do not really understand what it takes for a city to continue to stay vibrant and healthy. Some elected officials have denied the sale of land to certain groups. They create negative vibes by not meeting or welcoming newcomers or people who do not look like them. Their rationale for doing this is that they want the indigenous population or people with historical roots in the community to have the land. They also say they're holding the land for the next wave of individuals who will move back into the city from the suburbs. This is an expensive gamble. Cities need new blood to survive and prosper (immigrants). I am not saying this is the only reason why the south and west sides of the city are segregated but if immigrants are not made to feel welcome they will go where they are comfortable. Chicago's racial segregation problem was created by many factors which includes history, economics, labor and politics. It has had a devastating impact on the African American community. We have an opportunity break up some of the segregation. Hispanics and Asians are the fastest growing groups in the city they could help breathe new life into those areas of the city that need it. A more diverse south and west side would greatly improve the quality of life for the city and entire region.>

What are your favorite websites dedicated to historic architects?

I'm looking to assemble a collection of websites dedicated to the most prolific architects in Chicago history. Anybody have any favorites?>

Dear America: Surprised you came

Dear America, I'm surprised you showed up here on the Chicago forum. I suspected you think the forum, like the city, goes into a deep freeze in mid-November and, with luck, starts to emerge from the cold and snow in April. And yet our temperatures throughout December had vast periods in the high 50's.....and none of the natives were the least bit surprised. My family did some last minute holiday shopping at an outdoor mall....and some folks were out there without coats. That might have been a bit much for me, but the weather was delightful...as it has been plenty of time. We've gotten out a lot and enjoyed the outdoors this December (as with many Decembers in the past). Next week is Christmas. Will it snow? Probably not. I haven't checked the forecast, but I virtually can't even remember the last time it snowed on Christmas....perhaps it was back when we went over the river and through the woods to grandmother's house. January is coming up. Do I suspect cold weather? Sure. Sometimes we get a two week chill in mid-January where bundling up is a necessity. But the norm tells me that by Feruary, the extended cold is unlikely. Major snow, bitter cold...they happen, sure, but with a regularlity that a lot of you outsiders would be surprised how short. Hibernation in the winter is unnecesary when there are usually lots of nice days out there. I'm not sure why I'm writing this. Outsiders won't believe me. And even some Chicagoans will complin plenty about winter. But for most of us, the inconvenience is not huge, the good weather exceeds the bad, we go about our lives most days like we do in other seasons....and we put up with that heavy snow and bitter cold when it happens, knowing it is not the norm. So, believe what you want. As for me (no lover of heavy snow or extreme cold), I plan to enjoy this winter in Chicago like I have most...with not that much concern for weather. I hope that does not disappoint the Arctic landscape people lying in the sun thinks is the definitive Chicago in the winter months. Seasons greetings!>

Olympics 2016: Chgo & LA power structures

I must plead ignorance about a great deal regarding ChicagoÂ's Olympic bid and how it compares to that of Los Angeles. Perhaps those of you who know can share some answers here. First I would like to say that both Chicago and Los Angeles are great cities. Either one could well represent the United States if chosen by the USOC as the bid city. I have no desire to compare the merits of each of these great cities. However, I am curious as to which of these two cities is better positioned to get an Olympics based on its power structure (both governmental and private sector) to first organize an Olympic plan and then to be able to pitch it effectively. Based strictly on the powers that be (city hall, support from state, support from the business community, ability to coordinate all groups, the quality and professionalism of those involved with the process, regional cooperation, financing, logistical concerns, etc.), which city has the human resource advantage (whether or not it is a successful bid or not).>

Chicago's HOT! Bias Opinion? I Think Not!

Is it just me or is Chicago hot hot hot?! It just seems like the past year or two Chicago’s gotten an enormous amount of good press. Our downtown office market is hotter than ever, the Residential bust has not influenced Chicago nearly as much as the coasts, Chicago’s been the number 1 travel destination for a few years now, it seems like many movies are showcased or shot in Chicago lately not to mention TV shows, There’s been an enormous influx of residents back into the cities center, businesses are flocking to the city in droves the Southside is now on the map again, not to mention Millennium Park, Block 37, and the proposed major project circle line, we’re in the running for the 2016 Olympics bid, we have 2 super talls going up and dozens of other major major developments including central station ,lake shore east and other major skyscrapers (a phenomena unseen since the late 60s and early 70s, potentially getting the magnificent 2000 foot Chicago Spire, and the list goes on and on and on !!!!>

Chicago Mixed Bag of Photos 2005: Part 2 Old Irving Park (NW Side)

On to Part 2, for those of you that missed part one, you can find it HERE. This part of the serries will focus on the area known as Old Irving Park. The northern section is also known as Mayfair, which is also part of the Albany Park Neighborhood. The dark purple triangle in the south is a historic district called Irving Park Villa, which the second half will focus on. This building used to be a city school, it's now the Irish American Herritage Center Another urban school Infill The magnificant Carl Schurtz High School :worship: Hands down, architecturally, one of the best designed schools in the city. And just down the street from Carl Schurtz, we have Irving Park Villa a historic treasure trove of prairie and craftsman style homes set on streets with landscaped medians. The Kennedy Expressway slices the neighborhood in two... And that wraps up part two, stay tunned more to come>