Interesting stat on Chicago Bars/Taverns from the Sun Times

In 1990, Daley's first full year as mayor, the city had 3,299 bars. Today, the city has only 1,320.

- from a Sun TImes article 12/27/04http://www.suntimes.com/output/mcnamee/cst-nws-mcnamee27.html

RSMBob wrote:In 1990, Daley's first full year as mayor, the city had 3,299 bars. Today, the city has only 1,320.

Quite the crusader, he. And does he not realise that almost all the city revenue these days is from his special taxes on cigs and booze? How will those 'minority' trucking and construction firms keep getting the big contracts if he does away wit all de bars?

Bars don't kill people. People kill people. Bars are good. As the sociologist said (cited in the Sun Times article): Primarily, the saloon is a social center. It is the workingman's club.

Cavemen go there too.

Antonius

Well, his father got rid of the brothels and gambling dens that were once our main attraction to out of town conventioneers and jobbers, in the shadow of every train station and every great center of commerce like the Merchandise Mart stood a parallel world of whorehouses, 26 games, and so on... a curiously combination of the Puritan and the practical, these Daleys.

Can we actually establish cause and effect? That is, can we say with reasonable certainty that it was the policies of the Daley administration, and not, say, changing times, attitudes, and social classes, that caused bars to die out?

I've never been to a bar that didn't also serve food, and I've never gone to a bar just to drink. I know many others my age go out to drink, but they tend to go to clubs and places significantly larger than the old neighborhood bar.

I think what we're seeing is perhaps a combination of two things: policies that make it harder to open and maintain a bar, and a clientele that is moving away from the 15-stool bars of 15 years ago in favor of the martini bars/cigar bars/clubs of today. And I know there were dance clubs and such in 1990, but perhaps not on the same scale as today..

All speculation, of course.

And I know the article author was tongue-in-cheek, and admits heartily that it can't be daley's fault for all of 'em, but still

gleam wrote:
I think what we're seeing is perhaps a combination of two things: policies that make it harder to open and maintain a bar, and a clientele that is moving away from the 15-stool bars of 15 years ago in favor of the martini bars/cigar bars/clubs of today. And I know there were dance clubs and such in 1990, but perhaps not on the same scale as today.

Ed,

I'm guessing your're right, and add to that mix of factors the current real estate market which makes some neighborhood joints financially untenable. We used to live on Southport near Belmont, and I drove by there last month and found (not surprisingly) that several bars and a bakery are now residential buildings -- the real estate is just too dear to support a bar or other small scale retail enterprise when you can convert to a multimillion dollar dwelling.

Hammond

gleam wrote:Can we actually establish cause and effect? ... .

I'm sure other factors including those which you suggest are at play but I am quite certain that the decrease in the overall number of bars is in good measure the result of policy emanating from his Immense.

I'm also sure that nowadays it's infinitely easier for some established entrepreneur to get a license for a martini bar in a trendy part of town than it is for some little guy to open an honest and decent watering-hole in one of the 'neighbourhoods'. The effect is vaguely reminiscent of legislative approaches to 'improving' the working classes of various countries in Europe with silly restrictions that only really affect part of society.

Antonius

You raise a good point, Ed, and that surely has something to do with it, but there is one thing that's clear, which is that the Daleys' regulations have made it so impossible to get a liquor license for a new tavern that natural attrition is cutting the numbers; whether old places close in the same or greater numbers, there aren't new places opening as there used to be.

gleam wrote:Can we actually establish cause and effect? That is, can we say with reasonable certainty that it was the policies of the Daley administration, and not, say, changing times, attitudes, and social classes, that caused bars to die out?

I've never been to a bar that didn't also serve food, and I've never gone to a bar just to drink. I know many others my age go out to drink, but they tend to go to clubs and places significantly larger than the old neighborhood bar.

I think what we're seeing is perhaps a combination of two things: policies that make it harder to open and maintain a bar, and a clientele that is moving away from the 15-stool bars of 15 years ago in favor of the martini bars/cigar bars/clubs of today. And I know there were dance clubs and such in 1990, but perhaps not on the same scale as today..

All speculation, of course.

And I know the article author was tongue-in-cheek, and admits heartily that it can't be daley's fault for all of 'em, but still

There was an article in Chicago Magazine sometime last spring or summer that talked about just this thing. Turns out, it IS a mandate of Daley's, carried out by his appointed commissioner (who's name escapes me just now). They are able to accomplish this through the one-two punch of making it extremely hard to either get or transfer a liquor license and initiatives whereby precincts are voted dry (sometimes at the urging of the neighborhood citizens, but more often at the urging of an administration friendly alderman). There used to be what were commonly referred to as "old man's bars" on nearly every block (OK...that's a slight exageration, but not MUCH of one). These have been gradually dissapering as the owners die off and the neighborhoods gentrify.

stevez wrote: There used to be what were commonly referred to as "old man's bars" on nearly every block (OK...that's a slight exageration, but not MUCH of one). These have been gradually dissapering as the owners die off and the neighborhoods gentrify.

Well damn.

I suppose I'm also missing part of the effect by living in Logan Square, where there are still a huge number of those corner bars (all with Old Style / Cerveza Fria signs). You see even more if you head up pulaski from Belmont to Lawrence. Almost certainly one a block up there.

-ed

Thanks, Stevez... That's what's going on. Just about NO new licenses in 'hoods and very difficult transfers. Not impossible, but very... hmm... I would guess expensive...

gleam wrote:I suppose I'm also missing part of the effect by living in Logan Square, where there are still a huge number of those corner bars (all with Old Style / Cerveza Fria signs). You see even more if you head up pulaski from Belmont to Lawrence. Almost certainly one a block up there.

In some neighbourhoods there still are relatively a lot but it's just a matter of time. The decrease in the overall number in, for example, Pilsen is very striking to me.

Antonius

gleam wrote:I've never been to a bar that didn't also serve food, and I've never gone to a bar just to drink.

Ed, this is the most shocking statement I've read today (and yes, I have been keeping up with the moto thread). Are you serious?

How/where do you meet people in Logan Square? When we lived in Printers' Row, nearly all our very good friends were people we had met through the local bars. (And my regular drink is club soda, by the way.) Especially in pre-baby days, the local tavern was like another room in our house. It was great to know that we could just stop by and find a bunch of people to hang out with, people ranging in age from 21 to in their 60's, from architects to ironworkers. It was the network of people we knew through the bars that made our neighborhood feel like a Neighborhood.

****
Regarding the factors contributing to the steep decline in number of bars: one factor is the migration into the city of people with a, may I say, "suburban" mindset. That is, folks who think the idea of living in the city is cool, but once here find that they actually don't like the reality of the city. Some specific examples include those who move to Printers' Row and then complain about the Pacific Garden Mission and those who move to Fulton Market and then are shocked to hear trucks delivering meat at 5:30 am. This sort of attitude is behind a lot of the efforts to vote a particular precinct dry, and the result is a big loss: not just for the bar owners whose livelihood is taken away from them, but also for the small networks of neighbors and friends who used to have a central place to come together. It's exactly small neighborhood places like these old bars that help make Chicago a city and not Schaumburg or Disneyland or whatever the mayor's ideal is.

A few comments:

1) A lot of people do not head out to local taverns anymore due to the cost. It is just much cheaper to drink at home.

2) Many also drink at home to avoid any DUI/DWI issues which are more aggressively enforced than they were 15-20 years ago.

Amata wrote:
Ed, this is the most shocking statement I've read today (and yes, I have been keeping up with the moto thread). Are you serious?

How/where do you meet people in Logan Square? When we lived in Printers' Row, nearly all our very good friends were people we had met through the local bars. (And my regular drink is club soda, by the way.) Especially in pre-baby days, the local tavern was like another room in our house. It was great to know that we could just stop by and find a bunch of people to hang out with, people ranging in age from 21 to in their 60's, from architects to ironworkers. It was the network of people we knew through the bars that made our neighborhood feel like a Neighborhood.

Well, I don't drink much at all, and I can't stand the smell of smoke. If chicago goes all-nonsmoking, it might make it a more likely place to find me, but even then I doubt it... I'm not a very social creature in the hanging-out-in-bars-or-coffee-houses-meeting-random-people sense. It never appealed to me. I'm shy, what can I say?

-ed

jlawrence01 wrote:A few comments:

1) A lot of people do not head out to local taverns anymore due to the cost. It is just much cheaper to drink at home.

2) Many also drink at home to avoid any DUI/DWI issues which are more aggressively enforced than they were 15-20 years ago.

You're definitely right on both counts. But that's where the local neighbourhood bar in a city is such a nice social institution. Not expensive, within walking distance for a lot of people and more or less easily reachable by mass transport ...

I must say, when I'm out in the suburbs (here or by New York) and see a bar with a full parking lot, it makes me a little nervous...

A

I no longer go to many bars, working in for 11 years will do that to you. But Daley is truly a piece of sh*t. The reason we have less bars is because of Whiney the Squeaking Mayor. He has made it difficult for the small guy to buy a bar. Almost impossible to open a new bar that doesn't serve food. The best thing that could happen to this city would be to get rid of that arrogant pr*ck Daley.

And not to mention all he's done for Chicago Public Schools since he "took over." I'm not as angry as the above poster, though. You want clean politics: don't live here.

We'll all be pulling out more dough to eat out and drink within the City limits. I don't have ALL the details, but I know restaurant taxes are going to astronomical heights. He's not punishing the residents, right? Just the
tourists and convention crowd....it's about the almighty dollar, and I THINK some people voted for him.... I have to live within the city limits, I'm a recently hired Chicago Public School teacher. I'll still pay taxes for the food, I HAVE TO because I live here. It certainly is a choice, however.

gleam wrote:

I've never been to a bar that didn't also serve food, and I've never gone to a bar just to drink.


Ed, this is the most shocking statement I've read today (and yes, I have been keeping up with the moto thread). Are you serious?

Lots of very interesting people don't end up in bars. I know because I'm one of them.

I kinda missed out on some good exchange in this thread, and I never got to add my bit of wisdom (which I have bandied about to other hounds...)

The notion that EVERY new bar in Chicago seems to come from the same pre-fab kit of pub-ness. The idea that someone in the Daley administration has this idea that if a bar is gonna exist in Chicago, well it's gonna remind him of Dublin damn it!

Think about it. Look at all the bars that have opened up around you (if you are in the city). How many are not versions of something British or Irish. I mean, last night, we had another of those ultra-satisfying meals at Halina's, and even on the far NW side in this quite Polish area, there is a fake pub called Celtic something. Figger that out.

A day without an Irishman.

Ever drive(or drink) down South Western Avenue?

"We're the South Side Irish as our fathers were before, we come from the Windy City and we're Irish to the core, from Bridgeport to Beverly from Midway to South Shore, we're the South Side Irish -- let's sing it out once more."

Ahh, those were the days.....ducking beer bottles flying through the air at 3am.

We didn't go for the food, that's for sure.

I believe it's restaurant groups that really have muddied the waters....

Yeah, i was shocked when I walked Southport a few months back-- I guess I had just popped over and hit what I needed for the last couple of years and not looked at the street as a whole-- but it seems to have only three kinds of businesses now: Irish bars, ice cream shops, and boutiques for young women. It's practically a mall.

Vital Information wrote:Think about it. Look at all the bars that have opened up around you (if you are in the city). How many are not versions of something British or Irish. I mean, last night, we had another of those ultra-satisfying meals at Halina's, and even on the far NW side in this quite Polish area, there is a fake pub called Celtic something. Figger that out.

Mike's Ale House in it's original incarnation eschewed Irish-ish tchockes. The Polish bars springing up throughout the NW side tend to go in for a shiny Euro-disco look. I've been in the Celtic-something place on Lawrence I think you're referring to, and in some ways it's more honestly Irish than the nostalgic Irish places you're thinking of. The guys at the bar all have accents from the Ould Sod [as do the owner and bartender], peer grimly into their drinks and look like they hate their old ladies, and there are copies of Irish newspapers with fresh football scores scattered about. The place is mediocre [for the love of God, don't order the chips with curry sauce!], but I think authentic in it's mediocrity.

And, just because there are so many Polish folks out this way, that doesn't mean that there aren't still plenty of Germans, Irish, and Italians still lurking around on the side streets.

Giovanna

The loss of neighborhood bars in Chicago is one of the saddest things that Daley has accomplished. True enough, economics has lots to do with it. If a guy rolling in dough like Phil Stefani simply must sell the original family namesake to make room for condos and retail, how does the guy running a corner tavern stay open rather than sell the lot and retire? The regentrifying areas also don't have the patrons for these kinds of places anymore. If fewer blue collar guys live in the parish, there will be fewer guys on the barstools. But don't underestimate what the administration has done, yanking licenses and refusing new ones unless the place is some faux Irish burger bar.

Part of the problem is clearly the public perception of what kinds of bars are welcoming and not "scary" or strange. Resi's stays mostly empty to moderately crowded, while a few doors down what was Schulien's is now the perfectly pleasant but unaccountably, wildly popular O'Donovan's. Just changing the theme to Irish, or vaguely Irish, makes a huge difference. Other recent examples are Bistrot Zinc --> Mystic Celt, Little Bucharest --> Declan's, and Benz --> Brownstone. Even dumps like Bernie's accross from Wrigley have turned their fortunes around by installing wood paneling and a sandblasted sign with gold paint out front.

One of the most interesting examples, for me, is the contrast between the fortunes of Cullen's and Blue Bayou, run by the same folks and directly accross from each other on Southport. Both lovely places, physically. Both used to have quite good kitchens, but that has been far from true for some time now. Both are child-friendly, esp. early. Yet, the Irish place is always, 100% of the time, much more crowded than its fraternal twin with the New Orleans theme.

My perception is, that the business model for North Side bars is to pull in the young professional Lincoln Park/Lakeview white kids 7 days a week, whatever it takes. Young women need to feel comfortable in the bar for young men to go there. Somewhere along the way, the campuses of the Big Ten have instilled the ideal of the Lincoln Park Irish pub as the ultimate spawning grounds.

Still and all, this is a great bar town. Probably the best.
And don't forget, we have one of the greatest public gifts on the internet at

www.chicagobarproject.com

JeffB wrote:Part of the problem is clearly the public perception of what kinds of bars are welcoming and not "scary" or strange. Resi's stays mostly empty to moderately crowded, while a few doors down what was Schulien's is now the perfectly pleasant but unaccountably, wildly popular O'Donovan's. Just changing the theme to Irish, or vaguely Irish, makes a huge difference. Other recent examples are Bistrot Zinc --> Mystic Celt, Little Bucharest --> Declan's, and Benz --> Brownstone. Even dumps like Bernie's accross from Wrigley have turned their fortunes around by installing wood paneling and a sandblasted sign with gold paint out front.

You know it is a bit of a chicken and egg kinda thing, but Jeff, are adding to my theory that someone in the Daley admininstration insists on only Irish bars, by noting that the bar market in Chicago seems to be insisting on Irish bars as well.

My thing, is (and having lived in Cardiff), the Irish/British model is certainly a good model for bars. On the other hand, when ALL of them are that way, and they show up like some kinda Invasion of the Body Snatchers thing, and the ale is served cold...

Rob

Vital Information wrote:and the ale is served cold...

Which brings up a pet peeve of mine. Why is ale/stout/bitter so seldom served at the proper temp in this town? I can understand why it's so cold at the trixie bars, but I get served ice-cold Guiness by guys with thick Irish accents [and i don't mean South-Side Irish ]. Why, oh why?

Giovanna

For the past 5 years or so, the Guinness company has marketed "Guinness Extra Cold" in Ireland and England, which is even colder than the pint you might find in a bar in the states. It's quite refreshing.

As for the correct temp of regular Guinness, I've had problems with both extremes--too cold, but also too warm. Actually, the places that serve it too warm are bars that should know better--bars that pride themselves on their beer list, but seem to have it in their heads that Guinness s/b served at room temp or slightly below. Guinness should be between about 39 and 45 degrees--not ice cold, but certainly not warm.

The best pint in the City, in my opinion, and my opinion only, is Celtic Crossings at Clark and Chicago. On the northwest side, I like Fast Eddies, at about 6000 Northwest Highway.

As much as I hate to recommend a bar in a hotel, Kitty O'Shea's in the Chicago Hilton & Towers serves a proper pint of Guiness.

john m wrote:For the past 5 years or so, the Guinness company has marketed "Guinness Extra Cold" in Ireland and England, which is even colder than the pint you might find in a bar in the states. It's quite refreshing.

When I was in Ireland a few years ago they had already started with the extra cold campaign and it was already quite widespread, if I remember correctly. You could still get Guinness at the traditional temperature but many places also had it cold. They also were pushing then "Breó", a white (not Belgian 'wit'!)* beer which was pretty good.

A more depressing development at that time (and one lamented by a number of people to me) was the soaring popularity of imported Budweiser among the youth of Ireland. They were turning their backs on the black stuff. The appearance of Breó and Extra Cold and the popularity of Bud were, I assumed, not wholly unrelated developments.

Antonius

P.S. I agree with Steve about the Guinness at Kitty O'Shea's. The main problem with that place (aside from the high prices) is the number of t.v.'s blaring from all corners of the rooms.

*Years later I see that this Guinness product is described as having been in the Belgian style but my recollection of it is that it was not especially close to a typical 'witbier' of the Hoegaarden-sort

I'm a fan of Vaughan's on Northwest Hwy for Guinness, though when the father was still behind the bar at the original location on Milwaukee, which was razed for a Police station, it was like drinking ambrosia, as opposed to a really good pour of Guinness.

7-8 years ago I had a conversation with Himself as to what made his, Vaughan's, Guinness taste so much better than anyplace else in town and he said they cleaned the lines each and every day. He was a bit in his cups at the time so I am not vouching for the veracity of his statement, just repeating.

Vaughan's now has food, though I have never, surprisingly, eaten there. I've not been to John M's pick of Fast Eddie's, though that just popped to the top of my Guinness must-try list.

Enjoy,
Gary

Vaughan's Pub & Grill
(773) 631-9206
5485 N Northwest Hwy
Chicago, IL 60630

Gary,

Vaughan's food is good. In addition to the basic bar food (burgers, etc.) they offer good fried chicken, a nice steak sandwich, and a very good Irish sausage, rashers and egg sandwich. They also do a good mixed grill.

I like drinking in Fast Eddies a bit more--Vaughan's can get quite crowded, and the seating arrangements are a bit awkward. Still, the pint is good, and the staff and clientele enjoyable.

G Wiv wrote:7-8 years ago I had a conversation with Himself as to what made his, Vaughan's, Guinness taste so much better than anyplace else in town and he said they cleaned the lines each and every day. He was a bit in his cups at the time so I am not vouching for the veracity of his statement, just repeating.

Gary:

I believe it. A good friend of mine in Belgium runs a great little café (full disclosure!) in Leuven and I've spent quite a few nights there till closing time and beyond (anywhere from 3:00 to 4:30 a.m.) and every night, he would clean the lines (or at least one of them — he only has a few things on tap*). In Belgium, as I understand it, most good cafés do that; it's expected. Here in the States, just about no one does it and far too often you can taste the results (every two weeks is the recommended schedule in the industry in this country, I believe).

Antonius

* One of which is Westmalle Dubbel.