Chicagoist: Another One Bites the Dust

MPS

Tue, 08 May 2007 09:34:00 -0600

I grew up in Skokie so it is somewhat sad to see this happen to the purple hotel. As a hotel I think its days are finished - there is no way it can compete with the Holiday Inn (down Touhy on the other side of the Edens) with its upscale new conference center. The only saving grace might be a conversion to condos or something, but that market isn't great now, and refurbishing the interior is probably too expensive. Plus it's not terribly hard to justify demolishing a nearly half-century old building that's long been paid for and can't be easily re-used. Even if many of us fondly remember the whimsical exterior. At least the location is still great - at the intersection of two major arterial streets near a major highway interchange. I hope because of that at least something good and interesting develops there. I imagine there has a to be a viable business plan for that site, even if the building is demolished.

MPS

Tue, 08 May 2007 09:26:43 -0600

Bill V

Fri, 04 May 2007 09:52:07 -0600

Over the last several years it's really turned into a dive, you don't stay there unless you have to!

JP Paulus

Thu, 03 May 2007 22:34:02 -0600

The latest owner of the Purple Hotel is the owner of Foster Bank and the Korean Broadcast channel 41. If the Purple Hotel was run like what I have heard of channel 41, a lot of things were done on the cheap & good people may have been burned in the process. It's sad, because it seemed like a neat place....just wish it could have been used as it should have.

Olive

Thu, 03 May 2007 18:24:17 -0600

I do remember it back when it was the Radisson. I vaguely remember it being the Hyatt as well. My family and I used to go to the hotel restaurat - TJ Peppercorn's which was a pretty good place, sort of upscale, little sorbet cones between each course. Baby showers, wedding showers, large family dinners for special occasions were held there. Their weekend or Sunday brunches were good too. I had some out of town friends stay there for a conference six months ago and they said it was worse than a Motel 6. I don't know if a new owner took over, or if it just changed names cuz Radisson dropped them, but it def. went rapidly downhill since it was renamed The Purple Hotel. Does anyone know the history of the place? The succession of hotel names and owners that passed through?

hugslife

Thu, 03 May 2007 17:21:44 -0600

i had my bar mitzvah here in 1986. so long, ugly-modern purple hotel.

Unindicted Co-conspirator

Thu, 03 May 2007 17:17:03 -0600

I love that it's purple! And the reason it's purple is that Hyatt ordered blue bricks, but was sent the purple ones & construction would have had to stop to wait for the blue ones. So they used the purple bricks. It's always been known as the purple Hyatt to everyone I know. It was fine until Hyatt sold it off & a variety of owners paid a chain to be part of their franchise, but since the chains didn't own it, when standards got too low, the chains [Raddison, Ramada] just canceled the franchise.

woodlawnchuck@aol.com

Thu, 03 May 2007 15:26:34 -0600

It is a neat building. There are some very funky hotels like this down by Midway, on Archer, and also, if you ride up Mannheim, near O'Hare. Very seedy looking places, but a throwback to a time when Chicago's airport area investors wanted to infuse the area with Las Vegas-like hotels, circa 50s-70s, stucco and all. Yeah, the purple sucks. Then again, it's purple, which makes it pretty f-cking cool!

Ferdy

Thu, 03 May 2007 14:46:40 -0600

But it's PURPLE! How often do you see a purple building. It doesn't look rundown from the outside.

ross

Thu, 03 May 2007 14:37:18 -0600

The Purple Hotel is no landmark. It simply looks like a purple Super 8. Good ridence!

Ferdy

Thu, 03 May 2007 14:35:54 -0600

I'm going to miss the Purple Hotel (finally got the name right after so many chain names). I remember when it opened, and I pass by it almost every day.

Jeff

Thu, 03 May 2007 14:22:20 -0600

I went to a friend's bar mitzvah in that purple hotel. It was some kind of chain hotel back then, though. (1984) Marina Towers is a condo building. It's entirely up to individual owners as to whether or not the units get remodeled. I have a friend who lives there. Some of the residents who are old folks now were original owners. Some units are sparkling modern, others old and dingy. One unit, before another frind of mine moved in, had the kitchen done in a French country style. Very out of place and goofy looking in a building like that.

geekgrrl

Thu, 03 May 2007 14:07:16 -0600

i've heard that about marina city.. that it's basically like stepping back into the '60s.

Linda

Thu, 03 May 2007 13:44:32 -0600

Or just say "The Diplomat Hotel". We all know where it is. Speaking of landmarks in disrepair, I saw some recent photos of some condos in Marina City. They look like they haven't been upgraded since they were built. Are they planning to remodel the buildings or their units at all?

edddddd

Thu, 03 May 2007 13:42:25 -0600

I took a picture of the hotel a few years go when I discovered it on an unrelated errand. A few days after I took the picture, I realized that I captured something peculiar in one of the rooms. here guess the activity.

Jeff

Thu, 03 May 2007 13:29:41 -0600

Um, what's confusing about Chicagoist saying they wouldn't stay at the hotel that used to be above the Indian place (restaurant?) on Sheffield and Belmont? Would it make more sense if it said "AT Sheffield and Belmont"?

Alicia Dorr

Thu, 03 May 2007 13:27:51 -0600

Ahh .. "wouldn't have stayed" - sorry! Thanks Al

Al Conif

Thu, 03 May 2007 13:12:18 -0600

Please explain: "we wouldn't stay at that one hotel that used to be above the Indian place on Sheffield and Belmont." That is one akward sentence.

Fancypants

Thu, 03 May 2007 13:05:48 -0600

Probably one of the reasons hotels kept failing at this locations was because of "good" hotels close by in skokie and near old orchard.