Chicagoist: New Development Threatens "Integrity" of Wrigleyville

mikely1

Fri, 26 Dec 2008 16:11:33 -0600

The neighborhood was ruined a long time ago. It was soooo much cooler back in the day ... when Clark Street was an Indian trail.

Kfunk

Wed, 24 Dec 2008 15:17:19 -0600

I actually like sportsworld. @aaronsinger The Yum Yum (donuts mmmmm) lot development was what I referring too. @guint I think the problem with the yum yum lot is there is some ownership dispute since it is part of an old railroad easement or something like that. The City or county or someone should step in an declare who owns what so they can go ahead and build there. I think a hotel in the neighborhood is a good idea- has anyone tried to get a hotel room on the Northside? As someone else said, more parking is sort of a wash but if you put a hotel there people will need to park. A Best Buy tho?- this "plan" seems most likely a feint in order to push someones hand regarding the other proposed hotel development. I honestly haven't been following the development plans very closely. @Steve Rhodes- thanks for bringing this plan to light. Stay Classy Chicago- I'm Ron Burgandy?

Steve Rhodes

Wed, 24 Dec 2008 14:52:31 -0600

We'll see about SportsWorld, but to make clear, I'm commenting on Karl's angle in this post, not reacting to any commenters per se.

BWChicago

Wed, 24 Dec 2008 11:21:41 -0600

As I said, the hideous SportsWorld isn't going anywhere either way.

Steve Rhodes

Wed, 24 Dec 2008 08:22:51 -0600

Because I wrote the NBC5 post as well as the headline, I feel compelled to weigh in. What you left out was that the headline included a question mark, as in "Wrecking Wrigleyvlle?" As evidenced by the comments here, I think this accurately reflects some of the concern about this development - that a big-box retailer with a Hyatt as part of a development at least as tall as - and directly across from - Wrigley Field would alter the neighborhood's mix of sports apparel shops and sports bars, whether you like that mix or not. I mean, would you really like a Best Buy and Hyatt and 500 parking spaces across the street from Wrigley Field instead of the hideous SportsWorld? That's the question at hand.

BWChicago

Wed, 24 Dec 2008 02:19:27 -0600

Guint, You are wrong. This is a completely different development unaffiliated with the Cubs on a different property. That development would be on the triangular land to the West of Wrigley. As for architecture, this is just a massing diagram and shouldn't be read as what the building will look like. The trees are probably just there to give it some scale - I would not read that as it necessarily being planned. The architects are Solomon Cordwell Buenz, a well-respected firm. It should look fine. EXCEPT this does not actually include the Sportsworld hideosity at the corner. They won't sell. For anyone trying to say Wrigley is crumbling, remember that the falling concrete was not a part of the stadium itself, but part of covering for some pipes. It was tacked on. I like this development now, except for the parking and the big boxes, for the reasons already stated. I am apprehensive about displacing businesses. I also wish this were on more of the parking and other underutilized lots along Clark north of Addison instead of working buildings, but oh well.

matty

Tue, 23 Dec 2008 22:25:14 -0600

this will be complete in...never.

JoeM500

Tue, 23 Dec 2008 20:37:59 -0600

Bad investment because the new owner of the Cubs will move them to a nice, new, modern stadium in the burbs within 7 years!

Thunderbelly

Tue, 23 Dec 2008 17:39:54 -0600

I am not sure how you can tell the materials being used from this rendering. I think you are inferring a little too much into the rendering. I will agree it does have a bit of a "beltway office park" vibe to it. However the street level retail will ensure it doesnt have that vibe in reality. Big box stores are certainly not the way to go. I do believe that IO and Goose Island etc... have expressed interest and have had discussions about being in the new building. The area has traffic. This building will adversely affect it sure, but people should know when to drive around there and when not to, especially with the public transit options available. The area can certainly use a hotel. The height should be kept shorter than Wrigley, but doesnt need to be much shorter. This is a prime location for density, near the lake, the el. It will take some give and take but this project should be built in some shape or form.

raoulism

Tue, 23 Dec 2008 17:36:50 -0600

Who is this project for? People who already live in the neighborhood? Cause I doubt that. Making Lakeview more "exclusive" is ruining its character. Bah.

DaleyGrind

Tue, 23 Dec 2008 17:12:30 -0600

Via Chicago: If you don't think this hulking mass of concrete brick and cheap composite materials doesn't look like something straight outta' Schaumburg you're on crack.

via chicago

Tue, 23 Dec 2008 17:06:55 -0600

Boy, where to begin...a couple things: "and it's not like the 500 parking spots wouldn't come in handy either" I actually dont have major issues with this project OUTSIDE of that detail. This is one of the densest urban neighborhoods in the country. Traffic is already a standstill on weekends/gamedays. So why the F would you encourage people to drive more by including all these parking spaces?? I dont understand where this rule comes from that for a development to be approved, there has to be a huge garage along with it. Completely backwards thinking in an urban area like this. Heres a thought, take the L or a bus. And if you're coming in from out of state or the burbs, well tough toenails, figure out a plan B. Our cities should not have to cater to a BS car culture. Second comment I'd like to address: "And the suburbanization of our city's neighborhoods rolls on." Huh? This development is the opposite of suburban..its extremely dense, what a city SHOULD be. Isnt that why you live in a city and not the burbs in the first place? I really don't understand what point you're trying to make.

quint

Tue, 23 Dec 2008 16:48:42 -0600

Kfunk, this is simply the latest evolution of that same project. I think the giant parking lot you are reffering to is owned by the Cubs. They are going to put their own parking lot/ restaurant / hall of fame / modern ballpark amenities on that site as soon as they are sold. That project has been in the works for about 5 years.

aaronsinger

Tue, 23 Dec 2008 16:47:54 -0600

Kfunk, do you mean the McDonald's, or the parking lot right by the stadium where the hot dog place used to be [southeast corner of Clark & Waveland]?

Albanyparkour

Tue, 23 Dec 2008 16:38:36 -0600

From the website: "A traffic study of the proposed development is close to completion and will be released to the public as soon as it is done." That will make a very funny read. Really, this is simply dragging suburban planning into a city neighborhood. Which is fine, when you think about the suburbanite hordes who desend on the neighborhood regularly. They'll feel more at home.

Kfunk

Tue, 23 Dec 2008 16:37:22 -0600

I think this post is confusing theis development with the giant hotel/parking complex that was planned for Clark between Addison and Waveland. I had never heard of this proposal and it seems dumb considering they want to tear down existing buildings (sportsworld, goose island, Bar Louie, etc..) to basically create a homogeneous mega-mall with a CVS, Dominicks, and Best Buy. This just strikes me as way out of place. Hello Mr. developer guy- build on the giant empty frkn parking lot across the street. Bottom line is whatever is built should respect the neighborhood.

Stealth

Tue, 23 Dec 2008 16:28:24 -0600

BTW even the proposed diagram, which I guess was supposed to make the project look appealing, looks depressing with that big ass shadow crawling over the area. It's a big depressing-looking canyon.

Stealth

Tue, 23 Dec 2008 16:26:42 -0600

So what happens when they can patch together Wrigley Field any longer? When one too many chunks of concrete falls on the head of a little old lady from Barrington and the very reason for all this construction has to be torn down (and it WILL be torn down someday. It's not like this is a facility that's just for show and not for actual use).

quint

Tue, 23 Dec 2008 16:19:45 -0600

I agree with Static that the issue here is the scale of the project. It is simply too large from an aesthetic view. It is nice to see the setback on the Clark side of things which should help but they really need to make a deal with AT&T to grab some of thier space on Sheffield which would then allow them to set back the Addison facade as well. And throwing a Best Buy or something similar is really a questionable call in terms of planning. It really is not needed in this area especially since you already have one just 10 blocks south. I also really doubt that average citizens are walking into the Alderman's office and complaining that any area around Clark and Addison is underused. I don't think that adding 500 spots is that big of a deal though. The traffic is typically (though not always) bad about an hour before an after games. Chances are that if you live in the area you already know when to avoid driving past. If you are staying in the hotel on game days then you probably aren't going to be driving that car anyway that day.

Louis Frascogna

Tue, 23 Dec 2008 16:13:18 -0600

Increased traffic, thinner sidewalks, another uniform looking building. I don't necessarily like it, but you have to admit, that is one ugly corner right now. The developer could get more creative, but I suppose the price of this land demands some pretty high density development. God, I hate getting off at Addison when I'm going to a game, I can't imagine getting off at Addison after a long workday.

Scooter Libbby

Tue, 23 Dec 2008 16:07:58 -0600

Just what Clark between Addison & Cornelia needs, a sidewalk made even narrower with trees in the way.

DaleyGrind

Tue, 23 Dec 2008 16:05:55 -0600

And the suburbanization of our city's neighborhoods rolls on. Oh, and Tom Tunney's a douche.

staticfritz

Tue, 23 Dec 2008 15:48:18 -0600

One of the major problems I and other residents have with this development is the sheer size of the project. That image is conveniently angled to hide the fact that the building would be as tall as the highest parts of wrigley field - 9 stories...or 2-3 times higher than any surrounding building. It establishes a precedent in the neighborhood for tall downtown-like structures. Another concern is that the area can barely handle the traffic load as it is (ever try to drive around lakeview during a game?).