[HN Gopher] The Last Men's Hotel in Chicago
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       The Last Men's Hotel in Chicago
        
       Author : kgwgk
       Score  : 65 points
       Date   : 2021-04-18 12:24 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (newrepublic.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (newrepublic.com)
        
       | bsanr2 wrote:
       | "Like his friend and like his son, Mike strongly believes in
       | caring for what and who are already here. In every one of the
       | many conversations we have from May 2020 to February 2021, he
       | shares with me, in his quiet, passionate voice, his vision:
       | shuttered schools across the south and west sides remodeled,
       | their doors opening like petals for women and children fleeing
       | violent homes or for other Chicagoans in need of shelter while
       | they wait for housing vouchers to come through, classrooms
       | converted to dormitories, cafeterias serving whoever needs to
       | eat."
       | 
       | It should be noted that this is unlikely to happen,
       | unfortunately.
       | 
       | https://cepa.stanford.edu/content/school-closures-and-gentri...
       | https://prospect.org/education/gentrification-school-closing...
       | 
       | Like Campus 805 in Huntsville, Alabama, they're much more likely
       | to be torn down or redeveloped into a play-space for new
       | transplants. Any sort of public service runs directly counter to
       | the purpose of shutting down those schools in the first place.
        
       | hellbannedguy wrote:
       | I would like to see America build more of these.
       | 
       | Even lightening building codes, and zoning requirements (allow
       | for very small rooms). If the Infrasctructure bill promised more
       | of this type of housing I would be thrilled. I'd be happy with a
       | few public restrooms strategically placed around cities, but I
       | guess I'm the only one that needs easy access to a bathroom!
       | 
       | 1. It's obvious homlessness is just getting worse. I just heard
       | the head of the Federal Reserve comment on the increasing size of
       | the homeless encampment mext to his office.
       | 
       | 2. We need building codes that encourage small simple housing
       | units.
       | 
       | 3. I like the hotel doesn't have a list of rules. I feel giving
       | people some control over their lives is very important. I like
       | there are no mandatory religious meetings, or curfews. Treat a
       | man like a thinking adult, and you might be suprised with the
       | result?
       | 
       | 4. Yes--I understand this place is in disrepair, but why couldn't
       | we built simple housing? I sometimes think authorities make
       | projects more complicated because they secretly don't want
       | anything built, especially for the poor.
       | 
       | 5. Oh yea, America needs more people like thus guy:
       | 
       | "Wesley Duran, a porter at the hotel. "I try to give everyone
       | respect, treat people fairly here. There's too much hatred in the
       | world for me to go that way. We've gotta be nicer to one
       | another."
        
         | perardi wrote:
         | Ugh, I hate to pull this out, by: NIMBY-ism.
         | 
         | To a first approximation nobody wants an SRO on their back
         | yard. Me? I am just fine with it, I have lived near SROs for
         | _years_. But...oh whatever, I'll be blunt: Karen doesn't want a
         | giant building full of itinerant men on her block, and she is
         | going to fight _tooth and nail_ to prevent such a thing.
        
           | caturopath wrote:
           | A big part of the missing SROs are the lack of ones that
           | don't target itinerant men, such as are found in much of the
           | world. The accommodations aren't the problem, the perception
           | is -- plenty of medium- and high-income people in low-density
           | areas participate in house shares.
           | 
           | But since SROs are illegal almost everywhere in the US, the
           | few that have stuck in our memory are the ones for folks who
           | didn't have any other real choice, rather than the ones that
           | were simply the best choice.
           | 
           | I'm not sure how perception might shift. If I were to
           | spitball, steps might include finding catchy names that
           | combine student housing, nursing homes, and general-audience
           | SROs and finding a couple flagship projects where luxury
           | towers have high-floor SROs geared toward minimalist
           | tech/finance bros and rich people in need of a crash pad.
        
             | bmarquez wrote:
             | I was about to comment the exact same thing.
             | 
             | There needs to be SRO's catered to non-poor people just
             | needing a place to crash while exploring a city,
             | minimalists, etc.
             | 
             | Outside America the hostel/guesthouse scene worked well for
             | me as a longer term traveler, I even met others doing the
             | "digital nomad" thing and fairly well-off people so there
             | isn't a stigma like in America. When I mention the concept
             | of hostels (even private room ones) to less-traveled
             | Americans, some rolled their eyes and made comments about
             | personal safety, poverty, and "not having your own big
             | space."
        
               | caturopath wrote:
               | This isn't the only place where this happens in urbanism,
               | of course.
               | 
               | One such issue is busses. People with a choice will
               | gladly ride trains and streetcars, but busses are
               | stigmatized.
               | 
               | It turns out that if you design a bus line a certain way,
               | busses are every bit as good a transportation system as
               | light rail up to a pretty high throughput, and often
               | cheaper (always cheaper upfront). But even places with
               | really good Bus Rapid Transit lines, folks don't want to
               | get on a bus to get them where they're going faster.
               | 
               | This is HN, I suspect many of us have taken company
               | busses. I've known tons of people making over 500k/yr who
               | took a bus to work in the US. And that was a bus that
               | gets stuck in traffic! People not wanting to take a bus
               | is not fundamental to the mode, it's a perception thing.
               | 
               | In much of the world, there's no stigma, and everyone
               | will gladly take a bus if that's the best way to get
               | where they're going.
        
           | gwright wrote:
           | I know I'm working from incomplete data and confirmation
           | bias, but it seems to me that those who fight against
           | permanent facilities also seem to be against taking action
           | against ad-hoc encampments. This just one of an almost
           | endless set of contradictions I see in discussions of public
           | policy these days.
        
             | bilbo0s wrote:
             | I'm fair certain Karen is leading the charge to shut down
             | ad-hoc encampments as well. Let's be honest, we have a lot
             | of Karens in the US, and they're well known for not liking
             | things like tent cities.
        
               | [deleted]
        
             | brendoelfrendo wrote:
             | The conclusion we can draw from this is that "people" (in
             | quotes because, as you say, this is an incomplete data set)
             | don't want to solve the problem of homelessness, they
             | simply want to remove the visible signs of it in their
             | local area. Make them go somewhere else, as it were.
             | 
             | To be fair, this is not necessarily one person holding a
             | contradictory position, but the only realistic outcome of a
             | process where people can't agree on a solution; several
             | groups agree the encampments are a problem, but if they
             | can't agree on a solution than the only action taken is
             | removing the encampments.
        
           | Spooky23 wrote:
           | Lol. Only on HN.
           | 
           | I got rid of an SRO in my neighborhood. It was a shitshow...
           | drug deals, issues with open containers and prostitution, car
           | break ins, etc.
           | 
           | There are NIMBY assholes. But there are people who just want
           | to live their life peaceably. Something like an SRO can turn
           | from OK to a nightmare with a change in management or
           | ownership. Nobody in their right mind wants one nearby.
        
           | barry-cotter wrote:
           | If you want to use gendered raced insults go for it but if
           | you would prefer to be more accurate and inclusive you could
           | use NIMBY, middle class homeowner or environmentalist.
        
           | bombcar wrote:
           | So let's be realistic and admit these buildings do NOT have
           | to be built in residential areas with Karens abounding. The
           | perfect is the enemy of the good here; let them be wedged
           | into industrial areas or other "not as desirable" parts of
           | town.
           | 
           | Trying to pretend that the "bad part of town" can be removed
           | if we just figure out the magic steps is part of the problem.
        
             | andrew_v4 wrote:
             | Not sure I completely agree, but I definitely do think this
             | kind of project can be derailed by proponents who want to
             | be uncompromising about it and don't think it's acceptable
             | to compromise in something like location because its harder
             | to get built where people don't want it.
             | 
             | An example people probably won't like is those mixed income
             | buildings (can't remember where now) that had separate
             | entrances for the subsidized units. It's definitely not
             | egalitarian in some sense, but if it allows more subsidized
             | housing to be built for people that need it, is it really
             | better just to not do it?
        
               | perardi wrote:
               | Mm, yes, this is closer.
               | 
               | You see this with other goods too, notably cars. Creating
               | a car that meets all contemporary safety standards is
               | hugely expensive.
               | 
               | Is that safety a net good? Yes. Does it have societal
               | costs? You betcha.
        
               | bilbo0s wrote:
               | It was NYC. (Manhattan.) And they didn't have separate
               | entrances for _subsidized_ units, they had separate
               | entrances for wealthy penthouse owners who really did
               | have greater security concerns than the run of the mill
               | residents living on lower floors. People who can afford a
               | 20 to 50 million dollar penthouse do think long and hard
               | about security.
               | 
               | But the masses simply ignored the service provision
               | aspect and screamed "Why do you guys have a poor people
               | door!?!?!"
        
               | oh_sigh wrote:
               | It is more expensive to build a separate entrance for
               | certain classes, not less expensive.
               | 
               | And those kind of affordable housing schemes are a joke
               | from a social perspective. Yes, it's great if you win the
               | lottery. But it doesn't do much for the 99.998% of people
               | who don't win the lottery.
        
               | nitrogen wrote:
               | It's probably still a net win to build separate entrances
               | if they would lose significantly more money on decreased
               | value of the non-subsidized units than the separate
               | entrances would cost.
        
             | perardi wrote:
             | So how are we dealing with transit?
             | 
             | We are going to build giant housing projects (with what
             | capital or grants) and then create mass transit to them?
             | 
             | How's that ended up working so far?
        
             | renewiltord wrote:
             | Based on SF, it appears that any such attempt will fail on
             | the grounds that you are attempting to put these people
             | "out of sight, out of mind".
        
             | seanmcdirmid wrote:
             | It's not like Karen doesn't have a point. I live in Ballard
             | and our property crime rate has skyrocketed ever since the
             | homeless camps took over a few parks. One camp over in the
             | U district is even famous for hosting a bicycle chop shop
             | where components are stripped from stolen bikes, which the
             | SPD won't do anything about. Not wanting drug needles and
             | smashed car windows in your backyard really isn't
             | unreasonable.
             | 
             | There are no easy solutions to these problems, at anyrate.
             | We will all have to make a few trade offs, but they have to
             | be more reasonable than dumping all of the problem in a few
             | places.
        
             | stopwithslurs wrote:
             | Can you people stop using my mother's name as a slur that
             | means obnoxious white woman? I'm used to this bigotry on
             | Reddit but why is it ok here? I'm so sick of it.
        
               | Dig1t wrote:
               | I do agree with you, it would be super frowned upon to go
               | around doing the same thing with common names of other
               | ethnicities. I don't think its right that we're okay with
               | low-key disparaging one race but not another. At one
               | point in time I think people would have considered that
               | to be racist, but I guess that's not a thing anymore.
        
               | sarakayakomzin wrote:
               | would you like to speak to a manager?
        
           | baron816 wrote:
           | It's not just NIMBY-ism, and NIMBY-ism isn't what drove these
           | away. What it is is pretty much the minimum mage--housing has
           | to meet a minimum threshold in quality or else it can't
           | exist. Never mind that people might still be willing to live
           | there and are able to make their own decisions. And some
           | people might not have other options.
           | 
           | To many, this seems like exploitation. They'd rather have
           | people living on the street than have a business make money
           | off of them.
        
             | bilbo0s wrote:
             | Bingo.
             | 
             | And it's not even the exploitation. Believe it or not, it's
             | the fact that there is no one to hold liable if things go
             | wrong. At root, it's about on which head does liability
             | rest. You don't meet code, firefighters rush in, and the
             | staircase collapses. Who do the cops and the firefighters
             | go after? If it's the owner of the SRO, then no real estate
             | investor will build one. (At least, not one that isn't up
             | to code.) You can try to loosen the code, but the
             | firefighters are only going to allow you to cut so much
             | before their unions have your picture up on billboards
             | around town as the big, bad, slumlord pushing for
             | substandard housing.
             | 
             | Owning a lot of real estate is not a picnic, and you learn
             | a lot of things you never knew before about how local
             | politics work.
        
               | Spooky23 wrote:
               | My dad ran section 8 programs for a decade or more. They
               | meet higher code standards than many suburbia "luxury"
               | apartments.
               | 
               | Slumlords who don't maintain buildings to code are bottom
               | of the barrel renting to a very limited and desperate
               | clientele. Encouraging that is nuts.
               | 
               | The notion that evil firefighter unions are making real
               | estate expensive by advocating for codes that put them
               | out of business is probably the most ill-informed comment
               | I've read in some time. Absurd. Getting rid of balloon
               | frames and cocklofts raised construction costs... but
               | saved thousands of lives.
        
         | maxerickson wrote:
         | My small town has turned down apartment buildings for reasons
         | like 'preserving the character of a run down building built
         | after 1970' and 'not wanting to have apartments near a planned
         | business hotel'.
         | 
         | The people opposing the projects absolutely don't want them
         | built. For the one, there was also a discussion of having more
         | poor people in the area that is a few hundred feet from the
         | poorest census block in the county.
        
         | DoreenMichele wrote:
         | I live in a hundred year old SRO in a blighted downtown area.
         | It's how I got back into housing after years of homelessness.
         | 
         | I wanted to be an urban planner before life got in the way, so
         | I see all the things wrong in my downtown and have some idea of
         | what broke and why.
         | 
         | So one of my online projects is a website called Project: SRO
         | trying to put together info about where things went wrong and
         | how we could course correct.
         | 
         | http://projectsro.blogspot.com/
        
       | viklove wrote:
       | With the bar on the top and the uncloseable bar on the bottom,
       | this site was too claustrophobic for me to commit to reading the
       | whole article.
        
         | dang wrote:
         | " _Please don 't complain about website formatting, back-button
         | breakage, and similar annoyances. They're too common to be
         | interesting. Exception: when the author is present. Then
         | friendly feedback might be helpful._"
         | 
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
        
         | tyingq wrote:
         | They named the div at the bottom nicely, such that
         | $('.paywall').remove() in the js console removes it.
        
       | throwaway894345 wrote:
       | Wow, I used to walk by this all the time (I lived in the South
       | Loop and worked in the Loop). I never realized it was the last
       | one. It's the one noticeably dodgier block in the area.
        
         | robbyking wrote:
         | I assume that's why it's been allowed to stay open, not vice-
         | versa.
        
         | snypher wrote:
         | For what reasons would you say it was dodgier?
        
           | cozzyd wrote:
           | Not OP, but I wouldn't say it's dodgier, but rather that it
           | feels like a time capsule from the past: https://www.google.c
           | om/maps/@41.8760356,-87.630659,3a,75y,34...
           | 
           | It doesn't help that it's across the street from a prison (ht
           | tps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metropolitan_Correctional_Cent...
           | ) .
           | 
           | (edit, looks like OldHand2018 said basically the same thing I
           | did!).
        
           | throwaway894345 wrote:
           | I would get harassed on that block far more often despite it
           | being considerably less dense than just a bit farther north
           | (business) or south (residential). Maybe "dodgy" isn't the
           | right word. You can also have a look around for yourself--the
           | buildings on either side of this block are quite a bit nicer
           | (although that on it's own isn't a good proxy for dodginess):
           | https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8761663,-87.630677,3a,75y,31.
           | ..
        
       | perardi wrote:
       | I suppose this is the last men's hotel, as in, literally for men-
       | only, in Chicago.
       | 
       | But there are still single-room occupancy buildings, or SROs,
       | around. They are largely clustered in Uptown. I would link to
       | them, but, perhaps unsurprisingly: not much of a web presence.
       | 
       | And let me tell you, as one of those gentrifying tech folks
       | living in the new or refurbished developments in Uptown and
       | Edgewater: there are some nice folks there. One of them gave me a
       | clicker randomly to help me train my dog. Walk by these buildings
       | every day, they always compliment my dog.
        
         | perardi wrote:
         | And this is an excuse to link to this really thorough
         | documentation of the architecture and history of Uptown, which
         | has had a wild history.
         | 
         | https://chicagoflaneur.com/2020/04/24/portrait-of-chicago-up...
        
         | throwaway894345 wrote:
         | Where are some of these SROs at? Are they along Sheridan north
         | of Montrose? That seems to be where things are the most dodgy
         | (which isn't to say they aren't nice people, only that you
         | notice the stark contrast when you cross Montrose on Sheridan
         | or Hazel).
        
       | OldHand2018 wrote:
       | This block of Chicago is really interesting. It's like going back
       | in time to when American cities were far seedier places than they
       | are now.
       | 
       | It survives in part because the neighbor across the street is the
       | Metropolitan Correctional Center [1] (an architectural
       | masterpiece that was ruined by painting it about 10 years ago).
       | The other reason it survives is that many buildings are owned in
       | full by people that just aren't interested in huge piles of
       | money. When they pass away, their children will surely cash out
       | and another skyscraper will rise.
       | 
       | There are quite a few hole-in-the-wall lunch places along this
       | block. My favorite was a fried chicken place with some homemade
       | (?) hot sauce. Around the corner is a fantastic old-school pizza
       | place and I think the guy who runs it owns most of the buildings.
       | 
       | [1] https://www.bop.gov/locations/institutions/ccc/index.jsp
        
         | pkkim wrote:
         | Also the site of Chicago's first Chinatown.
         | https://chicagodetours.com/forgotten-chinatown-chicago/
        
         | chitowneats wrote:
         | I worked at this intersection for half a decade. Your analysis
         | is spot on. As for the chicken, you must be referring to
         | Chicken Planet: http://www.chickenplanetchicago.com/
        
           | OldHand2018 wrote:
           | I had to look it up because I knew it by location and not
           | name. It was Mickey's, not Chicken Planet.
           | 
           | The pizza place is Boni Vino and the lunch crowd is floor
           | traders and guys with thick Chicago accents. Full bar at
           | lunch.
        
           | kevinmchugh wrote:
           | Chicken Planet is great but it's not fried, and the hot sauce
           | is wanting
        
         | kgwgk wrote:
         | I visited Chicago years ago and that prison is one of the I
         | remember. I wondered if the place in the article was in that
         | area but I was too lazy to check... Thanks!
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-04-19 23:01 UTC)