Should Chicago be the Capital of Illinois?

I recently visited Springfield and can't say I was really impressed with it at all. I find to be a very disappointing city for being a state capital. To be honest, Chicago is so dominant in Illinois that I was always felt that Chicago would be a much more sucessful capital than Springfield. Does anyonw else agree. If you had the choice would you make Chicago the capital?>

2007 Richard J. Daley Urban Forum

i went to this even last year and had an amazing time. i was in the middle of doing a research paper about urban events such as the olympics, and i was actually able to interview the mayor of toronto and the current mayor daley for my paper. i suggest you guys look into this and attend it. http://www.uic.edu/orgs/daleyforum/index.html>

John Hancock Center Q's

Just wondering if anyone may be able to help me. I have a university assignment at present on the structural system of high rise buildings. I've chosen the JHC as my case study, and have had no trouble finding info about the primary structure ie. diagonalised braced tube. I am, however, finding it increasingly difficuly to find any info on the secondary structure of the building - structural floors, internal columns, walls, windows, cladding attachment details etc etc. If anyone has some information that may help Jason>

Lewis University

got accepted their and since i am not from IL i would like to know how is the parties, you know night life and the chicks. i don't wanna be stuck in a boring college. so tel me anything you know about romeville and the university. is it boring or not?? anything i might want to know. thank you very much.>

Affordable Housing Thread

Just thought it might be a good idea to have a thread on this subject. A place to put news about affordable housing or post new projects, SRO replacements and the like going up. Below I found an article a couple weeks old and I dont remember seeing it anywhere here so I am posting it.>

Irony?:Who's more attached to Chicago: midwesterners of downstate Illinoisians?

Having to share a state with the beomith that is Chicago has soured a significant number of downstaters on our city for an eternity. Yet in the Middle West on the whole, Chicago's reputation is often excellent, trips to Chicago are enjoyed and the norm for plenty, and interest in Chicago can be great. Is it possible that an ironic relationship exists: Midwesterners on the whole like and are attached to Chicago more than the very downstate Illinoisians who share the state with us? (and, if anyone is interested, no...I certainly don't think that anyone outside of our region is obsessed with Chicago or that Chicago is the focal point of anyone's life; I'm not interested in elevating Chicago's status here or take an unreasonable view of our own self-importance. I am merely curious as to how positive feelings and connections to Chicago compare in our own backyard (downstate IL) and throughout the Midwest as a whole.)>

I Love Chicago, but...

@#$% do I hate the weather here. It goes from sub-zero to days like today. There's only 4 months of decent weather a year.>

What a day for a parade......

Let there be light, as if God himself is dirrecting the path of the parade. I knew I picked a good spot outside city hall, I figured there was plenty of paper to be shredded there. I expected some red tape to come flying out the windows too. Why yes, our mayor does know how to through a party! Being in the action of this old-school ticker tape parade within the LaSalle Street skyscraper canyon featuring our very own 'world champion' baseball team was one of the coolest things I have ever experienced. We need to do stuff like this more often. The streets were so alive and filled with sooooooo many pedestrians, it was awesome.>

that other team in town

Now that the World Series has ended, is it time to ask... Remember the Cubs, that other baseball team in Chicago? Predictions: What effect (if any) will the Sox' WS championship have on Cub management, fans, success on and off the field, #1 status in Chicago baseball, belief in curses, the idea that losing is cute......and any thing else that might have been affected by what happened on the South Side this season?>

The White Sox Need a New Ballpark

Lets face it, after millions of dollars of renovations and a re-naming, Comiskey Park/U.S. Cellular Field is still only a mediocre (at best) place to see a ball game. It's not going to get better with age. It's not going to gain character. Its soul-less aura isn't going away no matter how many seats are eliminated or how many new "attractions" are added. It's really only a matter of time before it gets torn down. What with all the truly great architectural gifts this city has been given of late (Millennium Park, Fordham Spire...), and now the impetus of the first White Sox World Series win in 88 years behind them—now, more than ever would be the perfect opportunity to strike, and to give Sox fans and residents of Chicago everywhere a structure they can proud of. Something they can grow old with and be proud to bring their grandchildren to decades from now. My only specific suggestion: build it so that home plate is over the location of old Comiskey Park's. It would be a great touch. >

whats the most diverse neighborhood

whats he most diverse neighborhood in chicago.... in terms of the highest african american, caucasian and east asian and immgrants...populations.>

Renaming buildings,

Im sure this has been covered before but Ive been following this forum for awhile, (maybe six months) and havent seen it covered. I just cringe when people mention the Aon center, I guess as a kid I always knew it as the standard oil building and it doesnt seem right that people call it by a different name just because its changed tenants or owners. I suppose its a more unique name, as there are other standard oil buildings but it just seems so fake, sure its not like renaming the sears tower, which would never happen, Im just think that the aon center is pretty close to the brink of WTF, as far as renaming buildings go, personally I think its a gay name for a company. Its something that was brainstormed at some branding meeting or something, its a fake made up name and I will never point out the structure and tell someone oh yeah thats the aon center. Its like renaming the prudential builiding. Just wondering what everyone else thought.>

Where to stay

Allo Chicago-ians Ill be in your fine city over new years, but just have a quick question. In what part of the city is it best i stay in, to be central, close to it all etc. Im looking at hotels, claiming the "loop" and "miracle mile" but am not really sure what that means entirely for your city and its attractions. Anyway, thanks>

focal points in downtown over the ages

It seems like Chicago has some very distinct street/corridors downtown that each had there respective distinct Â"erasÂ" in which these street/sections of Chicago downtown was the focal point in town. South State Street (State and Madison in particular) had its glory days around the turn of the century. The LaSalle canyon was a predominant streetscape with the Chicago Board of trade as its centerpiece during and in the years surrounding the depression era. North Michigan Ave. began its glorious days in the 60Â's and 70Â' and continued till recent years. I dare say that the current focal point of the city is our magnificent river. With all the amazing construction and eye popping developments surrounding and lining its shores this phenomenal crossbreed between nature and man made elements is being groomed to become ChicagoÂ's greatest artery and linking point for the whole city. Building a strong bond between the north and south sides of the greater downtown area. Do you all share my views on this matter or do you feel it is off base completely? Were do you see the city turning its attention in years to come? I predict that Block37 will become the main focal point of the future (2015 -????) Do you agree with that assessment?>

I hopefully that Fordham Spire will get approve

That's look great with 2,000 ft. I'm very serious that get approve so I hate to see fail again.>

Chicago's strongest midwest relationship is with...

Which city in the middle west do you think Chicago has the strongest relationship? To which are we most connected? I'm thinking in terms of... Milwaukee: backyard neighbor, our only one, with a similiar layout of lake, parks & beaches, and river St. Louis: 18th century rivalry for dominance in Mid-America that still lasts to today. Huge Cub-Cardinal rivalry. Besides, we live in a state that is attached to only two metro's: Chgo and StL Detroit: closest parallel to Chicago in late 19th-mid 20th c. industrialization and ethnic mix. Even by the 1950's, these two were frighteningly enough similiar to each other Cleveland: mainly because it comes across as a "Mini-Chicago" more so than any other midwestern city Minneapolis: many view Chicagoland and the Twin Cities as the most thrieving metro areas in the Middle West today Cincinnati: historical link related to Chgo/StL relationship. Cincy was the first city west of the Appalachians to be the great city of the west (prior to the LA Purchase). Chicago, obviously, holds that role today. Indianapolis: aggressive Indy has no qualms about going up against the Chicago big boys....as in fighting over the Big Ten tourney site. So which one of these major cities is most closely related to Chicago, has the most dominant relationship with our Windy City (and why did you choose it). If you want to throw in Kansas City and Columbus into the mix, that's fine (but, let's face it: I left them off here because their inclusion would be dubious, as best)>

Which building would you live in?

Chicago has so many great resdential scrapers, but if you had the choice which one would you live in? I would choose Marina City. I wouldn't care which tower, I think Marina is great.>

The University of Chicago?

I'm currently a senior in Charlottesville, VA. After a lot of deliberation, I've finally decided to spend the next four years at the University of Chicago. I chose Chicago mainly over Penn, Brown, Duke and Northwestern because its economics program just too good to ignore. I'm also a very sociable guy and since Charlottesville is a huge college town (home of "The University") I've been to quite a few frat parties and the like. I've heard that Chicago's social life wasn't too great and I was wondering if this was really the case? Is Hyde Park a typical college town? Does it have a lot of good bars, coffeeshops, stores, etc? How is the crime rate in and around the University of Chicago area? How accessible is downtown Chicago from the University of Chicago? Do a lot of students go downtown on the weekends? Could you recommend any nice, upscale coffeeshops (preferably with wireless internet) in or near downtown that a college student could frequent in the afternoons? And one last question: how do native Chicagoans view the University of Chicago? Most of my friends, when they found out I chose Chicago over Brown and Duke, thought I was crazy. Only my teachers and counselors knew how great the school really is. Is this the case in Chicago as well? Or is the University of Chicago well-respected there? How do you guys view it compared to Northwestern? (My counselor, who's from the Northeast-- Boston and NYC, I think-- told me that UChicago was "on par" with Harvard/Yale/MIT/Stanford while Northwestern was "on par" with Duke/Johns Hopkins. Is this accurate?) Thanks for your help. Can't wait to see Chicago this September.>

Chicago Boat Tours

I've been hearing a lot about all the boat tours in Chicago. Could you guys help me pick one out, there seems to be a few operators. I found the following websites: http://www.chicagoline.com/ http://www.chicagotours.us/tours/tou...l.cfm/tid/1355 http://www.cruisechicago.com/ I also notice that there are River vs Lake tours, Historical vs. Architectural tours, etc. Any tips would be appreciated, thanks!>

Do "these groups" still matter?

I'm not sure if this great nation and great city of ours are "melting pots" or "stews"...or neither. I am curious as to what happens to any group that stays in nation (and a city) so diverse and with the ability to mix over a period of time. Can the qualities of such a group be retainedd...or are they inevitably lost? I'd like to examine some of the main stream groups that were the bedrock of Chicago's massive European migration that extended throughout the last part of the 19th century and into the 20th. To me, some fo the leading groups of European immigrants that so affected Chicago that I would like to examine here are: • Irish • Italians • Poles (excluding the present wave of Polish immigration) • Jews (culturally, not religously; excluding the present wave of Russian Jewish immigration) • Germans With the passage of time, when we look at these groups: Do they retain any significatn part(s) of their heritage or, for all intents and purposes, have they faded into that general category of being Americans far removed from their ethnic roots, something akin to the British roots that preceeded the revolution. Are these European ethnics totally mixed into a society that is now in the process of making accomodations and a comfortable fit with an immigration wave that is largely Hispanic and Asian, not European? So where do these five significant groups of Chicagoans (Irish, Italians, Jews, Poles, Germans) fit in in modern Chicago and modern Chicagoland? Is what they brought with them from Europe still significant or has it been virtaully all "main streamed"? In an attempt to clarify what distinctions I made above, let include the following: Jews are viewed in an ethnic sense here due to their inability to feel a part of so many European nations in which their ancesters lived. Both Poles and Jews were affected greatly by nearly a century of communism in eastern Europe. Thus today's groups of Russian Jews and Polish immigrants are vastly different from those who came to our shores a hundred years ago. Communism changed culture. Jews among the five groups listed have the added component of religion and ethnicity being the same group. While this may have slowed Jewish assimilation and intermarriage down compared to other groups, Jews have totally "caught up" in this discriptor....thus while Italian, Irish and Polish Catholics were intermarrying earlier in their immigrant experience, Jews were not....but that trend has been vastly altered since WWII. So what does it mean to be Irish, Italian, Jewish, Polish, or German in Chicagoland today? Does it extend beyond ethnic restaurants, a river dyed green, festive Italian weddings, Jewish country clubs, German delis and bakeries in Lincoln Square, cheering for European soccer teams, loving a Polish pope, supporting Israel? So the basics here...how long does it take for ethnic minorities (as the five used as examples here in Chicagoland) before they totally "blend in" and intermarry to a point where their roots become a minor part of their American persona? (And whatever the answer, it would probably give us insight into what will happen with today's Hispanic and Asian immigration waves in the next few generations)>

What do you want to see most in Chicago's skyline evolution?

As Chicago's skyline continues to change, what would you like to see the most? What should be the main focus? Beautiful, diverse architecture? Expansion? Building height? In my mind, I want Chicago to be a Midwestern Hong Kong, except replace the boring bland buildings with good ones, but I know that will never happen. Countless lowrises and midrises would have to be torn down, and the whole structure of the city would change, and not necassarily for the better. Also, to have and ridiculously big skyline, we would have to sacrifice good archricture and be left with countles bland, awful buildings. For Chicago's skyline some more supertallls wouldn't hurt. What else would you like to see?>

Cubs vs. Sox on t.v.: bipartisan coverage

I realize that it is far easier and "neater" for WGN (or FSN or anyone else who broadcasts) to contractually make Cubs vs. Sox broadcasts the property right of one team or the other, but wouldn't we all be better served if these ball games were broadcast in a bipartisan way, a joint Cub/Sox airing with broadcasters from both teams? Instead of giving three games to the Cubs and three to the Sox, why not make these three joint games as far as the broadcasters go? For advertsising purposes, the games still could be divided between the two as would the camera crew. But in the booth, it would be a joint broadcast. The current broadcasts are a turn off for half the fans and the fun of a joint broadcast would truly make these games special.>

Chicago Hotels

Hey guys, I'm planning on going to Chicago for a couple days and was hoping for hotel suggestions. Looking for either one downtown that is reasonably priced at least one that is easily accessible to downtown by subway/train. Since we're only there for 3 days, we're going to have to squeeze as much as possible without a car. Any recommendations of places to go, both the touristy stuff & also off the trail places. Also, any good bar/club districts. Thanks for the help. Partybits from Toronto>

Crosstown Classic

Crosstown Classic, Windy City Series, Red Line Rivalry... whatever you call it, it's been one hell of a series, hasn't it? Filled with flare and controversey, just the way I like it. This is a rivalry at its best, even if it was a cheap shot (and some might say a dirty play).>

Chicago skyline through the years

Okay, I am asking a lot, but does anyone have photos of Chicago from say 1965- the present. It does not have to be every year, but every 5 years. It would be so cool to see how the skyline has progressed. What I am looking for is pics of the entire skyline as followed: 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1992 1994 1996 2000 2003 2006 In the 90s there was a huge boom, that is why there is more. So lets see if all the Chicago forumers or any forumers have pics from those or around those years. Thanks>

What if Comiskey II....

a little revisionist history, if you please. Try chewing on the following questions: 1. What if Comiskey Park II hadn't been built in 1990? What if a less anxious Jerry Reinsdorf hadn't minded waiting a little and Camden Yards in Baltimore had openned before Comiskey. What effect would the Baltimore park had on Chicago? Would we have followed the route of retro-park (ball park as attraction) in the downtown area? Would a retro park been built on the current site of Comiskey II (a few cities, very few, like Philly and Milw, chose outskirt ball parks rather than downtown). Where would the park been built and what would it have been like? Would it have been closely related to Balt, Clev, SF, Pgh, Hou, etc? 2. Did things actually work out better than we thought on the South Side? A good percentage of the retro parks are a bit over the top with their assymetrical fields, their quirks for the sake of quirks, their too cute ways of trying to emulate old fashioned ball parks. Is it just possible that conventional wisdom is wrong and the Cell's straight forward lines (plus correcting errors, particularly the super steep upper deck) is almost refreshingly clean cut and down to earth? Is it also possible that a neighborhood ball park in Bridgeport is better than a downtown ball park...especially in light of what is arguably baseball's best environment is tucked away on Chicago's North Side at Clark and Addison? Could we actually have gotten this one right...or is that too much to hope for? 3. And a third totally off-the-wall question (just for fun): what if one of those older leagues (like the Federal) had survived and Chicago had a franchise in it What would baseball have been like in Chicago with three major league teams, not two...with the Cubs on the North Side, the Sox on the South, and the immaginary team in the new league on the west? Any thought what such a (admittedly unlikely) set up might have meant in our city.>

Historic Chicago Articles

A thread for old, but still interesting articles. For those interested and having large amounts of free time. Quote:> Copyright Dow Jones & Company Inc Jul 7, 1989 CHICAGO -- Inside many a developer who dons a hard hat and looks skyward lurks the urge to blot out the sun. Their universal dream: to build the world's tallest structure. Even Sears, Roebuck & Co., already owner of the highest skyscraper, is inspired anew. In May, two Chicago developers, J. Paul Beitler and Lee Miglin, unveiled a design for a competing world's tallest -- a 125-floor office complex that would be built just a stone's throw from the Sears edifice. Not to be outdone, Sears quietly began drawing up contingency plans to add at least 16 floors to its tower -- topping the proposed upstart by at least one floor. "Having the second-tallest building is like climbing the No. 2 peak in the Himalayas," says Cesar Pelli, architect of Sears's new rival. "Mount Everest is the only one that counts." Some psychologists call this architectural overreaching the Tower of Babel complex, after Noah's offspring who tried to glorify themselves by building a tower to the heavens. There are already more than half a dozen towers on the drawing board -- from Atlanta to Long Beach, from Newark to Phoenix -- that would top the Sears building. While limited available land sometimes makes tall buildings a necessity, the German historian Oswald Spengler warned in 1926 that this "irresistible tendency toward the infinite" would ultimately enslave builders. Today, plenty of tenants would say he was right. The Sears Tower, for example, is plagued by periodic spells of high winds that rip windows out of their frames, overcrowded elevators that can cause nausea, and top floors sometimes so stuffy that workers leave in the middle of the day. Tenants recall all-too-well how, last year, windstorms shattered nearly 200 windows. Donald G. Mulack, a lawyer on the 82nd floor, barely escaped the gales that claimed his goldspike paperweight, digital clock and coffee mug. (Sears says that it has reinforced its windows, and that the other problems occur rarely.) And, hey, how about that view? Well, not always. "On a cloudy day, you could see nothing," says Joan Bianco, who used to have an office on the 100th floor. "It scared the hell out of me." Looking for cash, Sears put the dark glass-and-steel corporate monument on the block last fall and, though it expected to get $1.2 billion for it, the company is likely to have to settle for less, real-estate sources familiar with current bids say. It dismisses any suggestion it has an edifice complex, insisting its draft plan to add 16 floors is merely meant to placate buyers who fear coming up short on prestige. Sears says the buyer would have to do any new construction. Meanwhile, Sears's property manager, Philip Chinn, calls those who would build a taller building "egomaniacs." Sometimes it seems that a primal urge drives modern architects to try to dominate the skyline, and look down on the merely huge below. "If one enters the sky, one penetrates a sacred domain," muses Mr. Pelli. In New York, Donald Trump (who dismisses Mr. Pelli's design as a mere "matchstick") has hired Helmut Jahn to devise a structure that would soar 150 floors over the city. In Newark, N.J., developer Harry Grant has proposed a 122-floor building, and emblazons blueprints with his photograph -- in a hard hat. "It shows the uniqueness of Harry Grant the Developer," he says. "We're doing something a normal developer wouldn't do." "There's something essentially male about wanting to reach the heavens, to surpass all others," concludes Marvin Zuckerman, a University of Delaware psychologist. It's unshackled machoism, others say. Thus, it figures that some developers recall with a touch of wistfulness the image of Hollywood's King Kong beating his chest atop the Empire State Building to impress Fay Wray. She hated it. Susan Maxman, a director of the American Institute of Architects, claims erecting the world's tallest building "is just something I can't imagine a woman wanting to do. Men make zowie power statements. Women are more environmentally sensitive." Being the biggest isn't just a matter of ego. For many tenants, there's a certain cachet to being in a well-known building, and they're willing to pay for it. Sears Tower commands up to $38 a square foot in rent a year, compared with the $25 most downtown Chicago office buildings get. The tower is also almost completely leased, unlike some of those nearby. Still, there are few big cities in the U.S. that aren't facing a glut of office space, and the race to build ever-taller buildings is aggravating the problem. In Chicago, for example, some building owners already offer free rent for two years to lure tenants. Sears is also planning to vacate 44 floors and move 6,000 employees to the suburbs, which will add to the glut. Never mind, say the new aspirants. "The world's tallest building is our dream, nothing more," Mr. Beitler explains. "It will be the highest medal of honor in our business. Whether we make money or not is something else." Something else indeed, for the taller the building the more dizzying the costs. For example, footings often have to be placed deeper in the earth. Spending soars for extra steel and concrete to withstand high-altitude winds. Thicker pipes for the plumbing maze are a must. And obviously it takes longer to build a very tall building, increasing the burden of interest-heavy construction loans. In some respects, "it's an economic disaster," admits Mr. Trump. Though many tall buildings such as the Sears Tower are profitable, Mr. Trump says his proposed tower makes sense only because it would draw attention to other buildings he plans nearby. "It will bring prestige and positive forces," he insists. Not from Harry Weese, founder of a Chicago architectural firm. "These plans are only for madmen," he contends. Mr. Weese once mocked Frank Lloyd Wright's 30-year-old design for a 528-floor building by drawing a cable car running from the skyscraper's top to distant suburbs. But later, the bug bit Mr. Weese too. In 1981 a Chicago developer persuaded him to design a 210-floor building. "He got me salivating by saying over and over, 'I have financing.'" The capital didn't materialize and the developer dropped out of sight. Today, says Mr. Weese, "I do penance by restoring old buildings." The appeal of tallest-buildings is considerable for cities needing an economic and ego boost. Business leaders in Long Beach, Calif., were agog at prospects for their skyline in 1978, when a now-deceased French developer blew in with plans for a 150-floor, rocket-shaped tower of stainless steel. Designed to top a harbor landfill, the futuristic building was to be a tourist attraction to complement the nearby Spruce Goose-Howard Hughes's plywood jumbo seaplane that flew only once. But those big plans fell through, and so have many others. Consider the 500-floor building proposed for Houston in 1983. "It was a time in Houston's history when anything seemed possible," says Robert Sobel, the architect for the project. His dream collapsed with the oil industry. In a sign of shifting world economic fortunes, Mr. Sobel says a company in South Korea has phoned about designing a building for Seoul that would top the Sears Tower by three floors. Theoretically, buildings can rise to virtually any height if, among other things, footings can be planted deep enough. Mr. Sobel says his research showed his 500-floor building was "totally feasible. I remember wondering at the start why the World Trade Center {110 floors} isn't 200 floors? If you want to make a statement, make it!" Bragging rights are at stake in all this, as they have been for centuries. Tall structures have been built by doomed civilizations celebrating their fleeting grandeur, by conquerors proclaiming their dominance, by religions reaching toward the heavens. Then, at the turn of the century, came steel-reinforced concrete, and things really got off the ground -- to previously unthinkable heights. Now, Toronto tourism officials boast that their 1,815-foot Canadian National Tower is really the king of the hill. The fact that the structure is mostly just a broadcast tower doesn't stop them from occasionally sending Sears travel brochures, declaring who's actually No. 1. It's just a matter of time, though, before some developer builds a new No. 1. "It gains them notoriety. A developer wants to be the tallest," says Lee Beedle, director of the Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat, an association of the tall-obsessed. Mr. Beedle adds: "What's more exciting than walking down the street and seeing tall structures that men have built?" Credit: Staff Reporter of The Wall Street Journal >Here's a bit of interesting fact: The Sears Tower did not need a zoning variance when proposed. F###ing copyrights. A funktastic review of the skyline from the bicentenial. The creators of the Sears Tower and JHC talk of New Urbanism long before the phrase was invented. Anyone else miss the Cold War? >