Hi, I'm a lover of Chicago and NYC and a total urbanist living in Washington, DC (also a VERY well planned city) who ultimately wishes to settle in Chicago thus I have been reading up a lot on recent developments. I have been reading this forum for months but only now did I create a membership.

Here's my problem with Chicago:
I am about 2 hrs from starting an Amtrak journey to NYC, where I'll be kickin' it in a hotel in Times Square. I realize that NYC is 100% committed to transit-oriented development, whereas Chicago is like 70% or so. Why is Chicago holding back?
I know that in recent years a lot of DISGUSTING suburban-looking strip centers have popped up in the city, although the City Govt has done a good job of curtailing this form of development with its new zoning laws, but how do we know these zoning laws will be enforced? Sure, a lot of new developments look nice (North Avenue collection, the designs of new shopping centers in the south loop, the redevelopment of Stateway Gardens, etc) but I still think Chicago thinks it's more car dependent than it really is (all those off-street parking requirements).
For example, I was driving on the ever-so neglected south side a few months ago and noticed brand new strip malls (still under construction) on 79th st, with front-sided parking and all, right next to the 79th street red line station. What is up with that?
Also, Smithfield properties, the same company that created that retarded front-parking strip mall on Milwaukee Ave (right in the middle of a perfect urban boulevard!!!), is creating a shopping center on Armitage and California (see the City of Chicago website for more info) being designed by Booth Hansen. I have not been able to find designs, but I know that it will consist of 3 buildings and 50 parking spaces. This, in the middle of historic Logan Square! I am worried about how that shopping center will look.

I guess the point of all of this is that Chicago, one of the leading centers of architecture in the world, the new headquarters of the Congress for the New Urbanism, is still giving in to suburban standards (sometimes). Last time I rode through Brooklyn or Queens, NY I almost NEVER saw anything suburban looking. Why can't Chicago do the same and 100% commit itself to Transit-oriented development like it did before 1950? Already I'm reading about Walmarts, more Best Buys, and more Targets on the way--I think I'm going to puke!

BTW, did you read the recent Tribune article where the CTA claimed if it does not get more funding it will downsize itself to a rush-hour ONLY service? What the f*** is happening here? I need more input from people who are currently living in Chicago and seeing this crap with their own two eyes!

I couldn't agree more. I want to vomit every time I see a surface-lot in the City. I got rid of my car the day I moved here and haven't looked back since. Alot of my friends, however, are too lazy/stubborn to make an honest effort at riding public transit exclusively. I think much of the problem lies in that certain areas of the City are, in all honesty, underserved by the CTA... and when some people have cars, it seems like everyone thinks they have to have one.

So, until the CTA gets their act together and really makes service top-notch, this dependancy on the automobile won't subside.

As far as the CTA threatening to reduce to rush-hour only... it's nothing more than a scare tactic. The city could never, and would never, allow that to happen. The whole thing would come crashing in and a century-and-a-half's worth of planning would go down the drain.

BTW, did you read the recent Tribune article where the CTA claimed if it does not get more funding it will downsize itself to a rush-hour ONLY service? What the f*** is happening here? I need more input from people who are currently living in Chicago and seeing this crap with their own two eyes!
It is called pandering for more funds. It happens all the time. The CTA threatens this and that if it isn't given more money. The CTA will not downsize to rush hour only service.

It's actually sort of amusing to think that they're making threats like this while in the midst of a $1+ billion renovation of the brown line. Yeah, they're real cash-strapped.

And the planned Circle Line (phase one u/c now, reactivating and retrofitting the Paulina connector).

Not from Chicago, but I can totally relate to what you're saying, same problem here in Toronto.

The thing with cities like New York and Hong Kong is that space has always been at a premium, urban sprawl has really never been an alternative. Yes the city has spilled out into the boroughs but the true urbanism has continued.

Chicago and Toronto have heaps of surrounding room and urban sprawl is so difficult to be curbed. (Although Frank Llyod Wright was a strong advocate of suburban living) Mass transit works properly in dense urban areas but really comes up short to the car in others. But a lot of people like living in suburban areas, they have their single family dwelling with more space and access to large super stores. Corporate America is taking over with the mega complexes and for some reason people are not opposed to living in a mundane suburb that looks like every other one in North America.

I can't speak for Chicago but in Toronto our subway system is underfunded and severely neglected. Nobody wants to build subways anymore, in New York you have no choice, but even here traffic is horrible. They've been discussing possible new subway lines for decades now. Although we have a huge building boom going on right now, a lot of in-fill happening so now that the density is rising and new subway lines seem to be starting up, so hopefully it'll bring people out of the cars.

I was away for 2 months and on my way back into the city 2 nights ago I noticed a huge strip plaza right near the western waterfront, I couldn't believe it.

I really think New York is a superb example of true urbanism, the street pattern was layed out from the beginning and everything was just infill. Their subway system works because subway and taxi is how you move in New York, what other option do you have really? No matter how many subway lines you build, if the density is not there, it doesn't become practical. When you exit the station if you have to walk far, people will just drive the whole way.

I think the only hope we've got in sight (as aweful as this may sound to some people) is the possibility of oil inflating to like $200/barrel. Although, I wonder if paying five or ten dollars for a gallon of gas would even be enough to pry some people out of their Hondas.

BTW - I didn't realize that the circle line had actually been started!! Where can I go see it!?

Keep in mind that its only phase one, and its the cheapest of the 3 phases. The Paulina Connector is an unused elevated connection that serves as the only connection between the Blue Line and the rest of the CTA system. It was only used for non service train movements. It connects the Douglas Branch of the blue line by the Medical Center to the green line. Currently, they are working on it so that eventually, they will begin running Douglas branch trains to the Loop, instead of routing them to the Congress branch of the blue and the Dearborn Street subway. A new station is planned for Madison Street, to serve the United Center.

You can see the construction of the connector by the Medical Center, along I-290 and Ashland, and along Paulina north of Van Buren, as it runs east of the United Center.

Phase one, once completed, will look like this:
http://chicago-l.org/plans/images/CircleLine/CircleLine-Ph1-Opt1-detail.jpg
Interesting to note that they might merge the Orange and Brown Lines, in order to keep the Loop from being even more congested by adding another line that terminates there.


For those who dont know, the Circle Line will eventually look like this, in some 10 years (hopefully)
http://chicago-l.org/plans/images/CircleLine/CircleLine-Phase3-detail.jpg

Hrmm... even the new layout seems somewhat flawed. The "loop the loop" line, as I've heard it referred to, is still too far east. It is the area further west (between the O'Hare branch of the blue line and the Harlem branch of the green line) that most desperately needs service improvements. The areas served by the new line are already well-handled by existing L routes and bus service. Also, they desperately need to add bus service to the Clybourn and Elston corridors... I find these places to be some of the trickiest in the City to get to (despite their popularity).

I agree, further west would be a better option.

Ofcourse, but you need to realize, the CTA planned this because it wa the cheapest way to do it. Of the roughly 13 miles needed for the entirety of the circle line, 5 miles already exist as other lines, 1 mile only needs reactivation, and only 6 miles of new elevated and subway tracks need to be laid. Further west, we are talking of laying much more virgin track. 1 mile = $100 to $500 million. Not too cheap. Hell, look at the Mid-City transitway, to be built on already existing track that parrallels Cicero Ave. It will connect Midway to Jefferson Park, and retrofitting the rail and adding the 3rd rail alone will exceed $1 billion. The government isnt just going to fork over that cash. You gotta take what you can get :)

I had no idea that work had started on the new 'el' line. Good news.

Oh believe me... I'm not complaining :)

Just expressing my best-case pipe dreams :)

I had no idea that work had started on the new 'el' line. Good news.

Pictures of the Paulina Connector being rebuilt. Sadly, most of the origional steel structure, which dates back over 100 years, will be removed and replaced with concrete.

http://www.chicago-l.org/operations/lines/images/Paulina/ROW%40Madison04.jpg

http://www.chicago-l.org/operations/lines/images/Paulina/ROW%40Monroe04.jpg

http://www.chicago-l.org/operations/lines/images/Paulina/ROW%40Madison06.jpg

http://www.chicago-l.org/operations/lines/images/Paulina/ROW%40Madison05.jpg

http://www.chicago-l.org/operations/lines/images/Paulina/ROW%40Monroe03.jpg


Honestly, you Northsiders gotta venture out to the West Side every now and then ;)

To add to the above, much of the work on the Paulina is completed. The final tracks and signals are to be added by January 05, and then Douglas Branch trains will run directly to the Loop. Once a station is built on Madison @ United Center (one is not planned yet), phase one of the Circle Line will be complete.

Sadly, I go to school on the west side :)

There is no United Center station because there are 10 lots with 6000 parking space around the UC. At 16 bucks a car that is $96,000 per event.

A Streeterville/Navy Pier/Musuem Campus/McCormick Place line would be #1 on my list. Followed by a Clinton St. subway and then the O'Hare-Midway line. Of course those would cost serious money.

Too bad the United Center dosent have a say. A station will eventually be built. It would be stupid not to, and is outlined in the Circle Line Plan.

As for a Streeterville Line, there is the Ogden Avenue Light Rail Line that is also planned, and attached to the same highway fund bill as the Circle Line. It will run from Navy Pier, along Grand Avenue, then underground along Carroll Avenue underneath the Merchandise Mart, the link up to Ogden Avenue, and eventually 22nd. Atleast itll give Streeterville more transit options, which it desperatly needs.

I think it's actually reasonable to build the circle line close in like that, not only for ridership but for convenience once all these areas experience a mass flooding of redevelopment (which is already beginning to be the case). Building it that close fulfills its purpose to relieve congestion on lines in the Loop because you have that many more convenient transfer points closer in, and getting people over from say, the Forest Park branch over to the Orange Line to Midway, is still that much easier.

If they should build a loop outside of even this one, they should do it with a mid-city line along or near Cicero from the blue line to O'hare, then extend the current brown-line terminus west to meet up with it. Then on the south side, have that new line head east to meet up with the green line terminus in Englewood.

This has already been slightly mentioned, but New York City doesn't have the premium of space that Chicago has, so using up land for a surface lot = mega bad idea. Boston had most of it built up long before viable transit, so surface lots weren't even an idea.

Although suburban style development may be happening, the city is trying to discourage car uses in at least the loop and near loop areas. Imposing anti-parking requirements universally would undoubtadly result in huge backlash... while NYC has amazing rail connections and bus, there are still areas in chicago that are greatly underserved and almost requires a reliance on cars to get places.

As for the circle line, form what I know, it hasn't started. The city (or CTA) is simply renovating the Paulina connector in anticipation of the FFA for the circle line (which I believe still needs preliminary engineering work before it qualifies?).

And funds for CTA operating budget is different than the money used to fund the brown-line renovation. 1 Billion dollars (which I believe is actually still undetermined since they're doing bidding... should be about 400-500 million?) is provided mostly by the federal government and has little to do with the CTA's ability to have money... sure they have to put some funds down, but a huge chunk of it just comes from convincing the government it's important. To operate, however, while the CTA does get subsidized, its revenue has to match at least a certain percentage of its total budget to be subsidized (I forget the number). While this could just be the CTA trying to get more money for breathing room, if they are having a budget shortfall, if it gets too serious, they could lose alot of subsidies, which would be even worse, hence the fare increases and the plea for more money.

DISCLAIMER: I'm not an expert in this stuff, so I may get things wrong.

EDIT: Despite some of the bad news (aka mistakes) that seems to be happening in Chicago, there's alot of good stuff happening, too (like the relative success of Daley's bid to make chicago the greenest city in America, or the "hydrogen highway" along I-90). Any suburban development within the city limits might just be urbanites taking their environment for granted. If they truly knew what suburbs were like (my "home" is Plano, the ultimate suburb of North Dallas), they would be oppossing such developments.

Urban Politician: I hope you relocate to Chicago, cause despite being "second city" it ranks tops in my book. Cheers.

You guys are all making good points!

However, keep in mind that by NYC I don't mean Manhattan, which obviously is deprived of space. If you add up Brooklyn, Queens, Bronx, and Staten Island that's much bigger than Chicago. My issue has NEVER been with downtown Chicago. Other than some bloopers like too many parking garages, it's awesome. I'm talking about the non-downtown neighborhoods. I am concerned about maintaining transit-oriented development to encourage transit use, not just rebuilding or creating new CTA lines.

With all the redevelopment of the el and new stations being built, there better be pedestrian-oriented shops and living spaces right next to the new stations (best example--Belmont and brown line). Because if I see a sea of parking next to a new CTA station I will be SEVERELY dissappointed in this beautiful city.

Example--the orange line, built in 1993. I rode that once--all I ever saw was vacant former industrial land, empty big-boxes with huge parking lots, and saw-tooth like abandoned streetwalls next to the stations. I was like "seeya later, south side!" after that. Yet the south side is the last frontier of development in the city. I can only hope the south side is developed smartly and has that beautiful urban aesthetic so inherent to the north side of town. Just my thoughts, guys...

BTW, I had a great time in NYC!!!

I got a BJ by a HOT hooker

Urban Politician: The Orange Line follows roughly the I&M Canal Industrial corridor. You arent gonna see any urbanity there really, just industrial parks and warehouses. Orange Line vistas south of Chinatown are not a good representation of south side urbanity. Sadly, you cant really see much south side urbanity on the cta trains, as the red line runs in the Dan Ryan median, and the green line only goes as far south as 63rd, although you do see good vistas along the main branch of the green.

Hrmm... "good vistas along the main branch of the green."

I certainly hope you mean the West branch and not the South, because I certainly don't consider projects and burnt-out houses good vistas :)

I know the elevated platforms need updating, but it's a real shame they are replacing the old iron with concrete supports....something about that old riveted iron that really added a certain texture to the landscape that plain old concrete can never do.






KGB

I, for one, welcome the changes to concrete. The iron is long overdue for an upgrade. It's time to move on to a more modern design. A design that will match Chicago's two new 1,000 footers. Waterview (970 feet) and Trump (1125-1300 feet). These changes are what keeps Chicago a unique center of architecture.

While I do like the "flavor" of the iron elevated materials, I suppose concrete does provide for slightly quieter and smoother rides.

Parking next to a CTA stop is occasionally inevitable. For example, the Garfield stop on the Green line has a park-n-ride under construction. It takes care of a hideous and frequently littered empty lot, provides some temporary construction jobs, and ultimately provides greater access to a side of chicago that has limited rail connections (stops on the red line and green line are sparse and their coverage is somewhat limited, as oppossed to the brown/red with added service south of belmont with the purple line).

Also keep in mind the south side is sparser than the north side. The north side is really built up, but you can go around alot of the south side and see vacant lots everywhere (although less so around hyde park-kenwood and the north west parts of woodlawn).

Hrmm... "good vistas along the main branch of the green."

I certainly hope you mean the West branch and not the South, because I certainly don't consider projects and burnt-out houses good vistas :)

Yes i do mean the South :) We are talking about South Side lines arent we? And when it comes to viewing enjoyment, the main south branch of the Green is the best. Granted, its not the best overall, but yeah. Keep looking east :)



Dont call the South Side sparse. Granted, it has massive industrial swaths of land and a lot of burned out buildings, but remember, it was origionally much much denser than the northside, and was built as such. Go to Hyde Park and tell me its not dense! Granted, much of the South Side's urbanity has been burned down or bulldozed for parking lots. Hell, the South Loop, south of 13th Street, is basically 5 to 10 story buildings with parkings lots everywhere (although that is RAPIDLY changing). The South Side has much potential, IMO, and will eventually be built densly once again. We just need some of that North Side infill to come over to this side of town!

This is a novice question - how well does METRA connect with CTA? I'm assuming they are seperate agencies & therefore seperate fare systems. Any possibility in combining? After my trip to Chicago (which I enjoyed very much) was METRA, though technically a commuter rail, was similar to Atlanta's MARTA, a heavy rail. Both have stations spread out a fairly wide distance (more than 1 or 2 miles) & are geared towards automobile commuting. Though MARTA does resemble more of a subway (not just the fact that it's underground) in downtown & Midtown with stations every 5 blocks, otherwise it resembles commuter rail.

My point is, besides comparing the two systems, is with CTA & METRA combined - Chicago has an incredible transit system.

The Circle Line's going to be awesome. Is that the same as the STAR line?

I have huge hopes for the south side, I mean more than just those massive condo buildups in the south loop. Woodlawn has lots of new buildings that are nice, large, and affordable, and the neighborhoods are getting better.

the CTA and Metra, outside the loop, don't connect as well as you'd hope. I suppose the Circle line will go far in making the two systems click together. But even then, Metra serves mainly for commuting purposes; outside of rush hour, service is limited.

There are dozens of new buildings on the South Side, take 63rd down to Stony Island and you'll see signs in every empty lot. On the green line to 55th, North Side quality infill is also popping up. Along Western Avenue on the west side, 3 flats are also appearing.

Why not create a direct trainconnection between Damen and Chinatown via Blue Island and Halsted to serve better the south core of the city ?

http://chicago-l.org/plans/images/CircleLine/CircleLine-Phase3-detail.jpg

Why ignore Ashland?

Is it new track from 18th to Ashland or are they reusing something?

18th to Ashland will be elevated.

Okay, I've finally had a few minutes to sit and stare at this map and there's a few things that I hadn't noticed before.

1. So, the Brown Line will now have a south branch that replaces the 54th/Cermack branch of the Blue Line?

2. The orange line is just going to skirt the south and west sides of the Loop before following the Brown Line north??? This is the last thing we need... one less line that circles the whole loop and more congestion on northside tracks!

3. The Purple Line no longer circles the Loop either... which means... yes, the only option for completely circling the loop anymore will be the Brown Line... can you say OVERCROWDED!?!?!?

I dunno, maybe these are just inaccuracies in the map, but, if they're not, they seem like some glaring mistakes to an untrained eye.

These are just initial proposals and haven't been subject to preliminary engineering or final conceptual design reports, I believe.

2. The orange line is just going to skirt the south and west sides of the Loop before following the Brown Line north??? This is the last thing we need... one less line that circles the whole loop and more congestion on northside tracks!

I'm confused by this also. So Midway isn't going to be the one and only destination now?

So I'm reading in the news, they are redeveloping the USX sight into a mixed-use neighborhood called "southworks". All of the public housing developments are being redeveloped--Robert Taylor will be redeveloped to "Legends South", and and numerous other redevelopments will occur. Many of these are supposed to have retail component.

They look like they will be well developed, considering how Roosevelt Square's site plan looks. But ever since the redevelopment of Cabrini with that OUTRAGEOUSLY SICKENING strip center with Whole Foods and Blockbuster on Division Street, I have cause to be concerned. Does anybody know how to find detailed site plans of these developments or where I can find more info? I went to the website of Park Boulevard (stateway gardens) but it barely shows anything.

I know that these are not the nice north side areas that we all love, but I actually see a lot of potential in these neighborhoods as extending Chicago's urban greatness rather than taking away from it, and becoming another one of Chicago's Mistakes! :nono:

Okay, I've finally had a few minutes to sit and stare at this map and there's a few things that I hadn't noticed before.

1. So, the Brown Line will now have a south branch that replaces the 54th/Cermack branch of the Blue Line?

2. The orange line is just going to skirt the south and west sides of the Loop before following the Brown Line north??? This is the last thing we need... one less line that circles the whole loop and more congestion on northside tracks!

3. The Purple Line no longer circles the Loop either... which means... yes, the only option for completely circling the loop anymore will be the Brown Line... can you say OVERCROWDED!?!?!?

I dunno, maybe these are just inaccuracies in the map, but, if they're not, they seem like some glaring mistakes to an untrained eye.

Balancing out the coverage of lines on all of the loop's sides will help in the congestion department (notice once the circle line is complete, all sides of the loop have two lines running through), plus commuters going from an outer branch to another outer branch will be able to bypass the loop altogether if they so choose.

I agree. I would like to see bigger residential towers go up next to the el stations, for example Brown line stops Paulina, or Irving Park. I know Chicago has a height limit for most of the city, but can't the areas near transit be rezoned for better uses? Not 40 story towers, but in the 10-20 story range, at least. The northside has enough of those 4 and 3 flats, it would be nice to see a change. Most stations are Chicago's main streets, so its not like they would be towers would be proposed on small residential streets. Maybe change is coming, who knows. But I for one, would love to see a mass TOD approach througout the city. How many el stations are in the city? 100? Start taking advantage of every single one.

There are around 150 stations on CTA last time I checked.

And I think buidligns in the 10-20 story range could work if they are carefully planned. But I think height limits with zoning are in the hands of the aldermen of their respective neighborhoods. Random 10-20 story 60's office towers are slightly more common on the west and south sides, as well as in the more suburban northwest side.

In general I think that zoning is kinda hurting the city of chicago. Development in hot spots is highly restricted and hence prices are artifically inflated. Converse seems to also be true (although I want to see some actual numbers before I start getting up on my soap box).

In the case of Chicago, I don't really see the point of ToDs, since the city is in and of itself a huge ToD. Metra could use some ToDs, but ToDs around L stations seems to be just highly unnecessary icing on an already great cake. Not that I wouldn't mind, but I don't think it should be a high priority to promote it as oppossed to like a city like Portland or Dallas. The market tends to favor ToDs in Chicago anyways.

Kohl's opening first store in Chicago

August 3, 2004

BY SANDRA GUY Business Reporter Advertisement







Kohl's Department Stores will open its first store inside Chicago's city limits as early as October on a long-vacant site in the 2100 block of North Elston that was once a DuPont Chemical Co. paint factory.

The store will be Kohl's first two-level structure in the Midwest and, at 132,000 square feet, one-and-a-half times the size of a typical Kohl's store, said Kohl's spokeswoman Lori Sansoucie.

The 10-acre parcel, previously mentioned as a possible Ikea furniture store site, will include a new Best Buy store just to the south of Kohl's.

The Best Buy is expected to open early in 2005, a company spokesman said Monday.

Kohl's, a mid-price apparel retailer, and Best Buy proved to be better choices for the site than did Ikea because they draw from a smaller geographic area, and will cause fewer traffic problems, the site's developer and the ward alderman said in separate interviews Monday.

Best Buy and Kohl's will each employ 150 full- and part-time workers, company spokesmen said.

A new traffic light is planned on Elston between Webster and Ashland so shoppers can enter Kohl's from Elston, said 32nd Ward Ald. Ted Matlak.

The free-standing Kohl's store will have a 350-car parking garage, which it will share with the 45,000-square-foot Best Buy, which will be close to the old intersection of Hobson and Elston, said site developer Warren Baker.

Another 500 parking spaces will be available on the ground.

The 10-acre site, vacant for 20 years, will be parceled among Kohl's, which will sit on 2.5 acres; Best Buy on 3 acres, and 4.5 acres of parking between the stores, Baker said.

Baker's company, Chicago-based Baker Development Corp., has spent $2 million to clean up the site, and is getting no city subsidies for the project, Baker said.

The project will result in an $8 million tax-increment financing (TIF) district, which Matlak will use for infrastructure improvements in the community.

Matlak said he wants to "clean up" the industrial area that includes Ashland, Armitage, Cortland and Elston.

Baker said the exterior finishes of the stores, including pre-cast stone, and the work that has gone into their elevations will give the retailers a more stylish look than the typical "big box."

Kohl's, a Menomonee Falls, Wis.-based rival of Sears, Roebuck and Co. in mid-priced apparel sales, already operates 31 stores in Chicago's suburbs and northwest Indiana.

A Chicago retail analyst said the success of other "big box" retailers in the city bodes well for Kohl's.

Retailers in the Elston-Clybourn corridor, such as Target Corp., Home Depot and Best Buy, rack up some of the biggest sales in the country for those retail chains, said Neil Stern, senior partner at Chicago-based retail consultancy McMillan Doolittle.

"If Kohl's has a good location, [the store] should be able to produce extraordinary volumes," Stern said.





Tell me, guys--a good thing or another one of Chicago's mistakes? I'm not too fond of that surface parking lot but given that it's in a vacant former industrial site, it's hardly likely to disrupt any neighborhood character. I wouldn't know, where is 2100 N Elston? How would it look in that location?

Armitage and California commercial project announced

22,000-square-foot retail center to replace vacant lot

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The City Council today approved a plan to redevelop vacant property at Armitage and California Avenues in the Logan Square community with new neighborhood retail.

"This project is another example of how the City’s programs can create new neighborhood amenities and job opportunities for our residents," said Mayor Richard M. Daley. "Projects like these help improve the quality of life in communities throughout Chicago."

The City-owned parcels consist of approximately 49,000 square feet of vacant land which was formally used as a car lot. It is located on the northwest corner of Armitage and California in the Fullerton/Milwaukee Tax Increment Financing (TIF) area.

The proposed developer, Smithfield Properties, plans to construct a $6.1 million, 22,000-square-foot retail center consisting of three buildings and a 59-space parking lot. The buildings, designed by Booth and Hansen Architects, will be constructed of quality masonry materials and be of a unique architectural style.

A steel beam will run the length of each structure just below the parapet wall and tie all three buildings together. Additionally, the building will have a green roof on 50% of the non-mechanical space.

Smithfield was a respondent to a Request for Proposals (RFP) issued on April 2, 2003. Under the plan, Smithfield would be sold the property for $2.45 million, the appraised value of the site. No City financial assistance will be part of the project.

Smithfield has extensive experience in Chicago real estate development. Some of their most recent projects include: Block 36- State and Randolph-Borders Books and Art Institute Student Housing; Republic Windows and Doors; Woolworth's Building at State and Washington; and the current 5 N. Wabash mixed-use redevelopment.




Well, guys, anybody know about this? Will Smithfield f*ck it up or will it be beautiful? Anybody know where to get a site plan?
I think I've posted too much today. Too much free time (which is funny, since I work like 10 hrs a day, plus I HAVE a girlfriend and I'm an alcoholic--so I guess I must really love Chicago or something)

If Smithfield doesn't f*ck it up in the design, they will screw with whoever has to rent or buy from them. (sorry, I have been burned by then, and I can't let it go.)

As for a Kohls moving in, well, it's better than a Walmart on the northside. It's sad enough that we will have one on the southside, and possibly on the westside.

OMG... I couldn't think of a more useless location for another Best Buy. So, now we have two Best Buy's, two Circuit City's and two Home Depot's within ten blocks of each other. What the hell is it about the North and Elston corridors???

I just think that's rediculous.

^At least the crap on North Ave is easily accessible by transit. Elston Ave is strictly for those with cars.
That being said, Whoever paid the alderman under the table to get the go ahead for develpment in the North and Clyborn corridor without a single thought about appropriate urban planning, needs to be shot. Crossing North Ave to go from one store to the next is a nightmare, and it isn't going to get better. Almost none of the stores are pedestrian friendly, traffic is horrendous, This was not a well thought out plan. It was a get the retailers in quick, generate as much tax $$ for the city as possible, we will deal with the consequences later plan. Well, it is later, and getting around the area sucks. They need a pedestrian bridge, or better traffic control including more crosswalks, and wider sidewalks. The businesses need to get together and do a better job of cleaning the sidewalks, and gutters, like they do with the parking lots.

I've never found crossing the street to be much of a problem since the traffic there is always a standstill. But, I am disgusted by all the surface-lots and a general lack of transportation options. As you said, Elston is even worse.

If the City is ever going to break people of their nasty little driving habits, they need to make it incredibly easy to use public transportation and incredibly difficult to find parking. Right now, they're doing the exact opposite; as long as this continues, the lazies will continue to clog our streets and pack our parking lots.

I disagree, Geoff. I wouldn't say the city is doing the "EXACT OPPOSITE". Sure, they try to accommodate cars to some degree with their off street parking requirements, but for the most part 85-90% of developments I see in the city still place the pedestrian #1 by buildings and entrances being built to the street with streetfront entrances. Some big boxes aren't like that, as well as some commercial developments in some areas, but then Chicago is one of the nation's great urban laboratories--development in the city reflects urban planning principles in practice at the time. With a new focus on urbanism, we already see better developments being made. Notice that a lot of the strip malls, etc were built around or before 2000, about when people began to take notice and pushed for a change in the zoning ordinance (which has now happened!).

For those of you interested in new urbanism, check out www.cnu.org or www.newurbannews.com

From the July/August 2004 issue of New Urban News
The city that works, today

PHILIP LANGDON

On the very day the Congress for the New Urbanism’s annual conference opened in Chicago — June 24 — the Census Bureau reported that the city’s population had declined between 2000 and 2003 after rising in the 1990s for the first time in 50 years. No Chicagoans I spoke with took the news very seriously. “I doubt the Census Bureau estimates’ veracity, since the Census also severely underestimated the population growth at the end of the 1990s,” said Payton Chung, CNU membership coordinator. As it happened, Chung spent much of June 24 giving new urbanists a bus tour of Chicago’s boulevards and commercial streets — corridors that look better all the time.
What Chicago has accomplished in recent years is remarkable. Though the Census Bureau estimates that the city’s population declined by about 27,000 to 2,869,121, after expanding in the 1990s by 112,000, there’s been a continuing torrent of new housing. The 1990s brought construction of more than 52,000 housing units. From 2000 through 2003, the city issued permits for nearly 30,000 more, according to Chung. People want to live in the Windy City.

Richard M. Daley, mayor since 1989, is associated with an impressive number of civic improvements. Here are a few:

• The Chicago Housing Authority has passed the halfway point in a “Ten-Year Plan for Transformation,” which calls for building or rehabilitating 25,000 units of public housing. Most high-rise public housing is being replaced by mixed-income housing closer to the ground. At the notorious Stateway Gardens on the South Side, the original street grid has been restored, according to Daley, “so it looks and feels like other Chicago neighborhoods.”

• The city has built or fully renovated 44 neighborhood public libraries since 1989. Another eight will be completed before or during 2005. “This is one of the few [urban] library systems in the country that’s opening new libraries,” boasts Chicago Public Library spokeswoman Margaret Kallackey. The new or renovated libraries incorporate features that reduce energy use. Of importance to urbanists, the libraries are conceived as gathering places for their neighborhoods. Parking spaces are minimized to encourage people to visit on foot or via public transportation.
• On May 27, Chicago adopted the first major rewrite of its zoning since 1957. In March 2003, New Urban News reported on some of the problems the real estate boom of the past decade or so has brought — buildings too bulky to fit with their neighbors; front yards replaced by sunken patios; rear yards covered over by parking and garages; and other manifestations of insensitive development. Many of those problems will be eliminated or alleviated by the new code, which takes effect November 1. Rear-yard setbacks will be increased in residential neighborhoods, to prevent developers from covering too much of the lot and causing the neighborhoods to feel cramped. Below-grade front-yard patios, called “patio pits,” will be prohibited. Buildings on the busiest retail streets will be required to have entrances and large display windows facing the front sidewalks. Parking requirements will be reduced for landmark buildings, elderly housing, and sites within 600 feet of rail stations.
The new code “follows a fairly conventional zoning ordinance structure,” says Kirk Bishop, project director for Duncan Associates, the Commission’s prime consultant on zoning reform. “It doesn’t look like some of the codes that are held up as new urbanist models.” But, Bishop says, “buried in it are many elements that meet new urbanist goals, such as pedestrian-oriented streetscapes.” Farr Associates, a Chicago-based firm with new urban principles, helped craft the code’s standards for pedestrian-oriented retail districts. The ordinance seeks to preserve classic six-corner intersections where radial thoroughfares cross the city’s grid. For details on the new Chicago zoning code, click here.

Whether the population has really slipped since 2000 is unclear. Given the smaller households today, the city could continue to become a better place even as its population diminishes. What is clear is that the center is getting stronger, that many of the neighborhoods are improving, and that Chicago is making good choices.




I don't know about you guys, but that sounds quite encouraging to me!

Anyone wanna comment on the article I posted below? It's really quite uplifting, if you ask me...

It's a nice verification of what I have thought about the census estimates for 2003. Chicago is in way too much of a swing to be losing people to that degree.

(yes, it's Payton Chung from the article--chanced upon this from doing a vanity google)

a few quick responses:
- I don't see a problem with cutting back on round-the-Loop routings; very few people actually use the trains to get from point A to point B on the Loop, since it's faster to just walk. and maybe they're factoring in the Monroe and Carroll busways, which would greatly ease (currently neglected) east-west travel.

- nowhere does Chicago's neo-feudal political system have a greater impact than in its planning and development, or rather lack thereof. unlike the studied discipline of staff-led planning in, say, Portland or Vancouver, and unlike the frenzied cacophony of NIMBYs that paralyzes planning in New York or San Francisco, Chicago gives each of its aldermen absolute power over their own little fief. under City Council tradition, aldermen _never_ vote for something that the "home" alderman is opposed to; indeed, it's rare that a bill will even make it to the city council floor if the alderman of the ward in question hasn't already signed off on it.

as a result, community groups (i.e. NIMBYs) are very powerful in some wards; in other wards, developers have free reign; in still other wards, absolutely nothing happens because the alderman is a complete nincompoop. and in almost no cases are actual planning directives followed, since none of the aldermen have anything more than a passing familiarity with the principles of good planning. so even though the city has a Department of Planning & Development, it ends up being more about Development (chasing deals) than Planning--no use planning, after all, if the alderman's just going to overrule you. the city hasn't updated its comprehensive plan since 1967, for instance. for the past few decades, Chicago has been shrinking, not growing, and planning for growth just hasn't been on the political agenda--besides, doing so would step on a lot of politicians' toes. now might be a good time to bring it back, and politically astute allies are always welcome.

- 2100 N Elston was an industrial wasteland; quite literally, as it is a brownfield with extensive contamination from a prior use. so was North/Clybourn once upon a time--it was part of the halo of abandoned factories that surrounded Cabrini-Green, once providing plenty of jobs but in later years just cutting it off from the rest of town. the retail development along Clybourn wasn't planned, per se; no one realized what was going on until too late. the Clybourn corridor straddles two wards and is outside the purview of any one community group except the LEED Council, a group of industrial employers along the river. their main mandate was to prevent residential encroachment within the riverside industrial corridor; the compromise with the first few developers was that big-box retail was okay. no one, least of all the retailers (many of whom entered only hesitantly), expected that the retail would be anywhere near that successful in drawing traffic--hence the expansion of the corridor to Elston.
- pc

Things I dont like about the circle line.

Orange doesnt need to go all the way to Kimball.

North + Clybourn being the superstation.

Why does the purple line go to China town, ending at the loop would of been nice, becuase now beside the brown is the only line that around the loop, thats what transfer stattion is for.

If the purple is extended to Chinatown, why not just extend that all the way to Midway- and have an express purple line to Midway?

Why does the circle line follor the orange lline after ashland, just make a station at halsted/35th(like that cta 2055), and make a mini superstation at 35th/ sox/ IIT


Why isnt the purple line follwing brown but red at river north.

The blue line cant transfer to the orange or purple without getting on another trains!

These are the things that are very inconvience right now, that I see

Orange doesnt need to go all the way to Kimball.



As far as the Orange Line extension: there is no reasonable way for it to end at Belmont. The extension to Kimball merely means that there will be fewer brown line trains operating on the line.

I'm sure part of CTA's thinking is giving two of the busiest North Side stops (Belmont and Fullerton) lots of service and options (subway or el) to get downtown by offering red, brown, orange, and purple service.

Things I dont like about the circle line.

Orange doesnt need to go all the way to Kimball.

North + Clybourn being the superstation.

Why does the purple line go to China town, ending at the loop would of been nice, becuase now beside the brown is the only line that around the loop, thats what transfer stattion is for.

If the purple is extended to Chinatown, why not just extend that all the way to Midway- and have an express purple line to Midway?

Why does the circle line follor the orange lline after ashland, just make a station at halsted/35th(like that cta 2055), and make a mini superstation at 35th/ sox/ IIT


Why isnt the purple line follwing brown but red at river north.

The blue line cant transfer to the orange or purple without getting on another trains!

These are the things that are very inconvience right now, that I see

1. What's the difference if it heads all the way up to Kimball? Like edsg25 pointed out, it will simply result in fewer Brown Line trains north of Belmont. The actual number of trains will probably remain the same.

2. What's wrong with a superstation at North/Clybourn? Where would a better place be? North/Clybourn is good because the Circle Line will need to be underground on the north side. Bringing it above ground to a station would cost unnecessary dollars and there wouldn't be room for an above ground superstation anyway.

3. What is the disadvantage to running Purple to Chinatown? If you are riding the Purple to the Loop from the north side, just get off in the Loop. If someone had to go to Chinatown, they now could do so with a one-seat ride. The only advantge to having it circle the loop is that you could ride back north without getting off. Doesn't seem like too many people would need to do that...

4. I sort of agree with this one. It wouldn't be a very large problem to run the Purple to Midway. Perhaps not enough demand right now?

5. It is cheaper this way. Trains could be routed along existing track. 2055 plan would involve building almost 2 miles of new track. Too expensive and has few advantages.

6. Purple would follow existing route from Evanston to persumably Belmont and then switch to Red Line tracks. Subway is faster to the Loop than elevated. Besides, there will be additional Orange Line trains on the elevated north of the river.

7. I don't understand this one at all. Switching between any color line will result in having to switch trains. Blue Line to Orange would be accomplished at Clark/Lake (just like it is now). Blue to Purple could be accomplished at Jackson or Washington (since Purple would be in subway).

I am wondering if anyone has information about

*The Mid-City line along Cicero. Is this a pipe dream or more? What are the chances?

*Is the Paulina Connector done and is it being used?

1. Pipe Dream. Circle Line, express service to O'Hare, and Clinton Street subway are all higher priorities, and none of them has any funding yet. We'll be lucky even one of these 3 gets built in the next 20 years.

2. The Paulina Connector may be done, but even if it is, it can't be used for passenger trains until they build stations on it, which there is currently no money to do.

1. Pipe Dream. Circle Line, express service to O'Hare, and Clinton Street subway are all higher priorities, and none of them has any funding yet. We'll be lucky even one of these 3 gets built in the next 20 years.

2. The Paulina Connector may be done, but even if it is, it can't be used for passenger trains until they build stations on it, which there is currently no money to do.

1. True. Money is an issue but IIRC, the Mid-City is also a political hot potato. Residents living along the route have been fighting tooth and nail to keep that corridor clear. This includes rail as well as possible truck route or expressway uses.

2. The Connector has always remained "in service" in the sense that the CTA has been shuttling cars back and forth along it for years. It has been rebulit and is now ready for revenue service but like you said, it needs some stations to make any money! Trains with passangers could be rerouted along there right now if need be (before, only CTA employees were allowed on there for insurance reasons).

Is the track work at Tower 18 complete yet? Wasn't this put in place (with the Paulina Connector) to allow for the proposed Silver Line?

7. I don't understand this one at all. Switching between any color line will result in having to switch trains. Blue Line to Orange would be accomplished at Clark/Lake (just like it is now). Blue to Purple could be accomplished at Jackson or Washington (since Purple would be in subway



actually according to the circle line plan, the orange line wont stop at Clark/Lake

Check out the transit map for Tokyo, probably the least auto-dependent city in the industrialized world.

http://osamuabe.ld.infoseek.co.jp/subway/maincity/tokyo/tokyoj.gif

If we're really serious about making cars uneccessary in our cities for most residents, this should be the model. No American city outside of NYC is even close.

Wow, I can't believe somebody brought this thread back!

Actually, this is the very first thread I started on SSC, and it contains my very first post..

Tokyo was so chaotic, when my parents went there before. You could get lost on the trains if you are a tourist in Tokyo.

So, is that bestbuy and Kohls going around the Cabrini Green area?
Seems pretty dang close to a lot of cool urban areas..

BTW: Do any of you know where I could find pics of that area? I'm a little surprised to hear that an area like this (with big box retail) is so close to neighborhoods like Lincoln Park or Old Town.

actually according to the circle line plan, the orange line wont stop at Clark/Lake

Whoops, my bad! But how is this still a problem? If you were coming in on the Forest Park branch and had to go to Midway, you would transfer to the Circle at Medical Center and take it south to Ashland/Archer. From there grab the Orange to Midway. This is a two seat ride but will still be quicker than taking the Blue all the way into the loop and transferring to the Orange at Clark/Lake.

If you were taking the Blue in from O'Hare and had to get to Midway you would transfer to Circle at Division and take it to the Orange. Again, a two seat ride but still quicker than going all the way downtown.

The fact that Blue doesn't directly connect with Orange doesn't mean that this is some type of deficiency. All it means is that riding habits will need to change.

I'm impressed by the Tokyo subway map. Apparently they have unlocked all the secrets of DNA.

The situation with cars is that if you make it easy to own and keep one, then people will. If a city wants to reduce car dependancy, they have to make it public transportation truly the best option for ones day to day life AND make it difficult to maintain a car in the city. If the city only does one without the other, people are probably going to maintain cars. So far chicago does both only half-assed. It is marginally difficult to maintain a car, and public transportation is isn't all that great (but great for the US). As such, a lot of people own and use cars, understandably so.

My Opinion,

We need two lines in the loop circling completly...in opposite directions. There are many people who do transfer and there are many people who use different lines....in the loop to get out of the loop faster. Case in point...I take the brown line into the loop and get off at Washington & Wells. When I go home I take the Purple line at Washington & Wells. That saves me 15 minutes. Many people do this...just watch what happens at the Merchandise Stop in the morning commute...people get off one train..take a few steps turn around and wait for the following train.

Idealistically I would love to see O'Hare and Midway Connected through a Cicero line, but am totally opposed to this and any other western additions unless they can show huge ridership possibilities. This is possible by the city creating urban villages and getting behind more density at each stop. And before they go out west they need to create the line along south lakeshore drive....through streeterville and up the lake front to the redline at Hollywood. The densit parts of the city.

I wished the orange line only go onthe wells/van buren line.
Green/ go on the lake/state line
Red/Purple/Circle go in the state subway
Blue in the dearborn subway.
and then the brown line only in downtown, one going clockwise, one going counterclockkwise

or put the orange as a loop line, and make brown go all the way to midway.
Now that would be less crowded and the people can go loop and loop and loop for the whole day without getting off.

I wished the orange line only go onthe wells/van buren line.
Green/ go on the lake/state line
Red/Purple/Circle go in the state subway
Blue in the dearborn subway.
and then the brown line only in downtown, one going clockwise, one going counterclockkwise

or put the orange as a loop line, and make brown go all the way to midway.
Now that would be less crowded and the people can go loop and loop and loop for the whole day without getting off.

Gah, this is confusing!

1. Circle Line plan calls for Orange to run along Wells/Van Buren legs of Loop. Wish granted.

2. What do you mean by "lake/state"? Green already runs on Lake. Are you saying it should go in the subway? It is impossible to run along Lake and them magically jump into the subway downtown.

3. Circle line calls for this. Wish granted.

4. This already happens and won't be changing. What's the wish?

5. Okay, this is just stupid. Why on earth would the CTA run some type of glorified model train only around the Loop?

I knew 1-4 already happens, I dont know why I put wish. Green stay the same. Brown should follow green.

5... should just happen.. lol... and 24 hours. lol, a bum could stay up there forever.

So, is that bestbuy and Kohls going around the Cabrini Green area?
Seems pretty dang close to a lot of cool urban areas..

I wouldn't consider that neighborhood to be near Cabrini Green..Although it is actually at the border of where 4 major neighborhoods intersect:

Lincoln Park/Lakeview/Logan Square/Bucktown

Elston has typically been industrial with little residential traffic. The other important characteristic about this location is that it is within blocks of the Fullerton ramps for 90/94. Anyone who has driven down Fullerton knows that the traffic situation is already pretty bad, although this new retail addition could clearly bring us to traffic levels resembling North avenue which would be nothing short of a nightmare.

Target have a coming soon sign at 33rd/Damen/Archer, (the exit at Damen on the Stevenson). Probably building there becuase of the Orange Lines stops.