I would say, and I don't think I am alone here, that Navy Pier is one of the most under utilized pieces of Chicago real estate. Sure it has its charms, the ferris wheel, the newly added balloon ride, the IMAX and a smattering of restaurants, most of which are unremarkable. So it begs the question, how, can Navy Pier be better utilized?
I've often argued in my blog about how Chicago needs a casino. People are going to gamble, no matter what, why not keep them from going to Indiana (or Des Plains). At first I thought maybe to place a casino in the theater district, that it would compliment the area well and add something else to do in the area, not to mention density. Could, however, Navy Pier be another, better location? There are pro's and cons. A casino itself would be great here, but I don't think it could be the typical hotel/casino combo that has worked out so well in the past, as Navy Pier has poor automobile access/transit access. I happen to feel though that Navy Pier is a wonderful asset that we aren't using to it's fullest potential.
In addition to being a tourist destination, bringing in more outside money that would be taxed, it would add lots of jobs. The critics say that it would be a magnet for corruption, well maybe, but if you got a national chain of casinos in there, like Harrah's, the chances of some shady business going on would be greatly diminished. I welcome your thoughts on the matter.
Tuesday, December 29, 2009
Wednesday, October 7, 2009
Life after 2016
Let me start of by saying that I was a supporter of the Chicago 2016 Olympic bid. I think it could have revitalized parts of the south side if done properly. I know that many argued that it would be done in classic Chicago fashion, with the usual suspects benefiting, but I was optimistic that it would have turned out differently. Moot arguments to say the least. So now what?
The public schools and the violence that surrounds them should be priority numero uno. I think saturating the area with police to at least slow down the tide of violence while social programs reach out to try and figure out/fix whatever it is that has gone horribly wrong at home. At the schools themselves, that's a trickier task. the school that Derrion Albert attended has an abysmal 5% performance rating...5%! Charter schools will help, but not everyone can afford to go to these schools. I think that Chicago is just a small part of a larger problem in America when it comes to education. Kids just don't give a damn. I say that at the risk of sounding like my father, but I also speak from a position of experience. When I was in high school I didn't give a damn either, and the teachers didn't do much to drive home the fact that without a good education, my prospects for living a productive life were severely diminished. Luckily I figured that out on my own.
So I don't think that this problem is limited to this generation (wipper snappers). If you look at developing countries like India, you see a thirst for knowledge, a hunger to learn that drives many of them to attend college. They see the importance of education. So what is it about American schools/teachers/students/society that is failing to convey this critical message? Why do so many students not aspire to better their lives? One argument is that they view their prospects as hopeless, that because of their parent's current financial situation there is little reason to try. Yet education is the perfect tool to help dispel this myth that you can't make it no matter what you do. I don't care where you start in life, with a proper education you truly can make anything of your life. It's this message that isn't reaching students, be it the fault of parents, teachers the CPS or all three.
The movie Boiler Room quoted Notorious BIG best: "Either you're slingin' crack-rock, or you've got a wicked jump-shot." Nobody wants to work for it anymore. There's no honor in taking that after school job at Mickey Dee's, honor's in the dollar, kid.
I think parents are the front line of reversing this train of thought. They HAVE to take a more active roll in instilling the ideas of the importance of education. Secondly, teachers have to reinforce this while the students are at school, and lastly, the CPS has to do everything in its power to make schools safe and modern. The CPS also has to set higher standards for teachers, we need more qualified teachers, simple as that. With that would come higher salaries for teachers, which would in turn, draw more people to become more qualified teachers.
I think it's imperative that we address this problem of lack of passion in education on all levels. Get people in the CPS who really, really care about this, social programs to get parents to understand it starts with them, qualified teachers that are passionate about teaching and school programs that really drive home the importance of education to students. I can't help but believe that a lot of our problems Chicago and America faces in general, could be greatly contained, even reversed with highly educated and motivated kids instead of gang bangers that beat honor roll students to death.
The public schools and the violence that surrounds them should be priority numero uno. I think saturating the area with police to at least slow down the tide of violence while social programs reach out to try and figure out/fix whatever it is that has gone horribly wrong at home. At the schools themselves, that's a trickier task. the school that Derrion Albert attended has an abysmal 5% performance rating...5%! Charter schools will help, but not everyone can afford to go to these schools. I think that Chicago is just a small part of a larger problem in America when it comes to education. Kids just don't give a damn. I say that at the risk of sounding like my father, but I also speak from a position of experience. When I was in high school I didn't give a damn either, and the teachers didn't do much to drive home the fact that without a good education, my prospects for living a productive life were severely diminished. Luckily I figured that out on my own.
So I don't think that this problem is limited to this generation (wipper snappers). If you look at developing countries like India, you see a thirst for knowledge, a hunger to learn that drives many of them to attend college. They see the importance of education. So what is it about American schools/teachers/students/society that is failing to convey this critical message? Why do so many students not aspire to better their lives? One argument is that they view their prospects as hopeless, that because of their parent's current financial situation there is little reason to try. Yet education is the perfect tool to help dispel this myth that you can't make it no matter what you do. I don't care where you start in life, with a proper education you truly can make anything of your life. It's this message that isn't reaching students, be it the fault of parents, teachers the CPS or all three.
The movie Boiler Room quoted Notorious BIG best: "Either you're slingin' crack-rock, or you've got a wicked jump-shot." Nobody wants to work for it anymore. There's no honor in taking that after school job at Mickey Dee's, honor's in the dollar, kid.
I think parents are the front line of reversing this train of thought. They HAVE to take a more active roll in instilling the ideas of the importance of education. Secondly, teachers have to reinforce this while the students are at school, and lastly, the CPS has to do everything in its power to make schools safe and modern. The CPS also has to set higher standards for teachers, we need more qualified teachers, simple as that. With that would come higher salaries for teachers, which would in turn, draw more people to become more qualified teachers.
I think it's imperative that we address this problem of lack of passion in education on all levels. Get people in the CPS who really, really care about this, social programs to get parents to understand it starts with them, qualified teachers that are passionate about teaching and school programs that really drive home the importance of education to students. I can't help but believe that a lot of our problems Chicago and America faces in general, could be greatly contained, even reversed with highly educated and motivated kids instead of gang bangers that beat honor roll students to death.
Tuesday, June 9, 2009
What does the (new) new economy mean for Chicago
I was reading an article in the June issue of Wired. One of the many touch points was how businesses of tomorrow will not be the hulking, bloated, top down giants we are used to, but rather nimble, interchangeable, low-drag companies that wont crash the entire economy if they happen to fail. I love progress, especially when it creates new jobs, financial stability and educes innovation.
However, what does this mean for Chicago architecture? What will happen to our great skyline, and other skylines when the giants that once needed all the 50 story, AAA rated, office buildings are gone. Will our skylines stall, frozen in time like steel, glass and concrete monoliths from a bygone era? Who will fill up the Sears (yeah yeah) Tower when there are no more Willis Insurance companies to fill them up?
If Wired's predictions are correct and we will have a slew of startups and fewer mega corps, then what will this mean for urban sprawl? If you look at Chicago from even some of the highest views in Google Earth, it looks like a giant gray urban octopus, spiraling off the bottom of Lake Michigan. Some even consider Chicago a mega region that extends past Illinois and that's today. What about tomorrow when you have far more smaller companies that can't afford downtown Chicago?
Will these startups even be in the Midwest? It doesn't take an economic crash and the virtual collapse of Detroit to see that the technology sector and big pharma are going to be dominating the playing field for years to come. If you believe The Milken Institutes's map of top tech cities Chicago ranks #14 on the list of fifty hot spots. California has five cities ranked higher and we barely beat Toronto. I know these lists are often times arbitrary and most are non scientific city vs. city bash fests, but deep down we all know there is some grain of truth to them. I've touched on this before in previous blog postings, but I think it's time to take a fresh look at these ideas now that it seems there is some light at the end of this very dark economic tunnel.
In addition to some of things I've written about before, such as city wide WiFi, leading clean energy, genetic research and same sex marriage, I think there are some key lessons we can learn from Detroit, the economic meltdown and the possible future of business. Just like Detroit being in the position of being able to rewrite the automotive game (assuming they can get their act together) What other games are there that Chicago can rewrite and capitalise upon? Again, I say clean energy and genetics. The world's need for energy will exponentially increase as time goes on and the population goes up. As will diseases and the need to combat them.
The windows to capture these markets is closing fast, now is the time to create the right conditions to grow these businesses. I say, raise the gas tax instead of the income tax, this will promote a more centralized, city focused, anti sprawl mindset, and with the governments push for HSR, it's the right time. Sales and income taxes must be lowered, this shortsightedness is forcing people out of the city and out of the state. Quinn, if your listining, you got the wrong idea. Start by allowing legal unions between same sex couples. If Chicago is going to be the leader in any field, we have to be able to draw in the best tallent, and by denying basic civil rights to certain people we are limiting the chances of that tallent to want to move here. Let California seem like the close minded state, we'll gladly take their tax payers and tallent. Citywide WiFi and green transportation, green roofs and finishing up the last 4 miles will be the icing on top of the pervervbial cake.
Is Chicago up to these changes? Will we roll with the coming punches or will we become just another rust belt ghost town?
However, what does this mean for Chicago architecture? What will happen to our great skyline, and other skylines when the giants that once needed all the 50 story, AAA rated, office buildings are gone. Will our skylines stall, frozen in time like steel, glass and concrete monoliths from a bygone era? Who will fill up the Sears (yeah yeah) Tower when there are no more Willis Insurance companies to fill them up?
If Wired's predictions are correct and we will have a slew of startups and fewer mega corps, then what will this mean for urban sprawl? If you look at Chicago from even some of the highest views in Google Earth, it looks like a giant gray urban octopus, spiraling off the bottom of Lake Michigan. Some even consider Chicago a mega region that extends past Illinois and that's today. What about tomorrow when you have far more smaller companies that can't afford downtown Chicago?
Will these startups even be in the Midwest? It doesn't take an economic crash and the virtual collapse of Detroit to see that the technology sector and big pharma are going to be dominating the playing field for years to come. If you believe The Milken Institutes's map of top tech cities Chicago ranks #14 on the list of fifty hot spots. California has five cities ranked higher and we barely beat Toronto. I know these lists are often times arbitrary and most are non scientific city vs. city bash fests, but deep down we all know there is some grain of truth to them. I've touched on this before in previous blog postings, but I think it's time to take a fresh look at these ideas now that it seems there is some light at the end of this very dark economic tunnel.
In addition to some of things I've written about before, such as city wide WiFi, leading clean energy, genetic research and same sex marriage, I think there are some key lessons we can learn from Detroit, the economic meltdown and the possible future of business. Just like Detroit being in the position of being able to rewrite the automotive game (assuming they can get their act together) What other games are there that Chicago can rewrite and capitalise upon? Again, I say clean energy and genetics. The world's need for energy will exponentially increase as time goes on and the population goes up. As will diseases and the need to combat them.
The windows to capture these markets is closing fast, now is the time to create the right conditions to grow these businesses. I say, raise the gas tax instead of the income tax, this will promote a more centralized, city focused, anti sprawl mindset, and with the governments push for HSR, it's the right time. Sales and income taxes must be lowered, this shortsightedness is forcing people out of the city and out of the state. Quinn, if your listining, you got the wrong idea. Start by allowing legal unions between same sex couples. If Chicago is going to be the leader in any field, we have to be able to draw in the best tallent, and by denying basic civil rights to certain people we are limiting the chances of that tallent to want to move here. Let California seem like the close minded state, we'll gladly take their tax payers and tallent. Citywide WiFi and green transportation, green roofs and finishing up the last 4 miles will be the icing on top of the pervervbial cake.
Is Chicago up to these changes? Will we roll with the coming punches or will we become just another rust belt ghost town?
Monday, March 16, 2009
Should we let it all fall apart?
Someone recently said that change only comes when you hit rock bottom. Or another way to say it; if it ain't broke, don't fix it. Well, America's economy may be down, but I would hardly call it out. That's a good thing right? I'm not 100% convinced it is. Let me preface this by saying that this approach isn't applicable to all sectors, but lets focus on the auto industry for the sake of argument.
I don't believe that there was a lot of thought put into the future of the American auto industry. Why not? The writing was on the walls! I think none of us are really innocent. We should have been demanding change from Detroit as apposed to flirting with quaint ideas of electric and hybrid cars. So far Detroit only managed to come up with ONE car to carry the torch of the US auto industry into the future? The Volt. Good job. I'm not being sarcastic. Truly, good job. Now give us 12 more options. But is a shift like this even possible with the old guard still at the helm of Detroit? What will it take to convince American business (not just Detroit) that the old way needs a revamp? We invented capitalism, why cant we get it right? What can we do to prevent our financial institutions and businesses from being ran by greedy idiots? Should we let it all go to hell and hope we have what it takes to rise from the ashes smarter, faster and better? That's a dicey proposition.
Energy Independence, Nanotechnology, Genetics, and yes, even simple things like cars. I believe these are huge growth sectors that America is in the greatest position to capitalize upon. We need a new breed of company and leadership that is going to charge full steam ahead in these areas. We need CEO's that aren't obsessed with big bonuses, companies that don't do things on the cheap while still being profitable and keeping shareholders happy. Who are going to be the new leaders? I think we are on the cusp of learning how to create an economy of this nature, but if we let the same old school way of doing things prevail, we will have squandered one of the greatest wake up calls we have ever had.
Are we lucky that the economy isn't worse, or have we not been pushed far enough to enact true change? I'm hoping that we are smart enough to figure out the next move without having to start from scratch, but only time will tell.
I don't believe that there was a lot of thought put into the future of the American auto industry. Why not? The writing was on the walls! I think none of us are really innocent. We should have been demanding change from Detroit as apposed to flirting with quaint ideas of electric and hybrid cars. So far Detroit only managed to come up with ONE car to carry the torch of the US auto industry into the future? The Volt. Good job. I'm not being sarcastic. Truly, good job. Now give us 12 more options. But is a shift like this even possible with the old guard still at the helm of Detroit? What will it take to convince American business (not just Detroit) that the old way needs a revamp? We invented capitalism, why cant we get it right? What can we do to prevent our financial institutions and businesses from being ran by greedy idiots? Should we let it all go to hell and hope we have what it takes to rise from the ashes smarter, faster and better? That's a dicey proposition.
Energy Independence, Nanotechnology, Genetics, and yes, even simple things like cars. I believe these are huge growth sectors that America is in the greatest position to capitalize upon. We need a new breed of company and leadership that is going to charge full steam ahead in these areas. We need CEO's that aren't obsessed with big bonuses, companies that don't do things on the cheap while still being profitable and keeping shareholders happy. Who are going to be the new leaders? I think we are on the cusp of learning how to create an economy of this nature, but if we let the same old school way of doing things prevail, we will have squandered one of the greatest wake up calls we have ever had.
Are we lucky that the economy isn't worse, or have we not been pushed far enough to enact true change? I'm hoping that we are smart enough to figure out the next move without having to start from scratch, but only time will tell.
Monday, March 9, 2009
Obama Reverses Bush Stem Cell Policy
AP
WASHINGTON (March 9) – President Barack Obama on Monday cleared the way for a significant increase in federal dollars for embryonic stem cell research and promised no scientific data will be "distorted or concealed to serve a political agenda."
Finally. This is great news for America. While private companies have been able to research stem cells, up until now, there has been no government funding in this area. All that has changed, which city is going to be the Silicon Valley of genetic research? Obviously I'm hoping its going to be Chicago. As I've stated in previous posts, I believe there are a range of issues, social, financial and urban, that are on the cusp of change throughout the United States, and whatever city or mega-region embraces these inevitable changes first is going to gain a great foothold in an ever transforming and competitive global economy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
