CHICAGO | General Developments

[k1052]

Originally Posted by jpIllInoIs

I hope not..those are the scourge of may cities and are getting panned by the urban observers as on trend, bad architecture. and they are usually built with either colorful panels that fade quickly or pomo bullshit fake historical fronts. Leave those for the 3rd/4th tier cities. And Chicago will never allow sticks thankfully bc of the fire code.

We already manage a lot of cheap looking modern and Pomo shit already just with higher construction costs.

[LouisVanDerWright]

As others have mentioned, the fire code here is not going to be reduced to IBC. Therefore stick framed garbage like Texas Donuts ain't happening. And why should it? We have the exact same archetype of construction but for us it is the TOD midrise. Virtually the same construction style, just done with prefabricated heavy gauge steel studs and little to no parking. Why do we need or want garbage stick framed buildings surrounding a precast garage?

The other thing that will prevent those is lot size. Our standard blocks are at best 125' deep and there are not a whole lot of places where you can find more than say 10 lots contiguous. Many of those Sunbelt abominations (texas donuts in particular) are built on giant parcels because you simply can't fit all that programmatically on a small/narrow site.

[k1052]

I would not have thought basically allowing four plus ones with modern materials to be built would be such a controversial idea here. These plus old courtyard buildings are what make our high density neighborhoods possible.

[Via Chicago]

4+1s have been controversial from the beginning so dont know why that would surprise you. that said, while historic courtyard buildings are one of chicago's finest housing styles, thats mainly because of their build quality (craftsman era), their human scale despite their size, and the generous garden space/setbacks they provide for residents. the stuff getting slapped together in Phoenix hardly compares.

[k1052]

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

As others have mentioned, the fire code here is not going to be reduced to IBC. Therefore stick framed garbage like Texas Donuts ain't happening. And why should it? We have the exact same archetype of construction but for us it is the TOD midrise. Virtually the same construction style, just done with prefabricated heavy gauge steel studs and little to no parking. Why do we need or want garbage stick framed buildings surrounding a precast garage?

The other thing that will prevent those is lot size. Our standard blocks are at best 125' deep and there are not a whole lot of places where you can find more than say 10 lots contiguous. Many of those Sunbelt abominations (texas donuts in particular) are built on giant parcels because you simply can't fit all that programmatically on a small/narrow site.

Perhaps I should have been more specific. I'm suggesting using the IBC to resurrect the Chicago four plus one citywide. No structured parking.

[The Lurker]

Originally Posted by k1052

I would not have thought basically allowing four plus ones with modern materials to be built would be such a controversial idea here. These plus old courtyard buildings are what make our high density neighborhoods possible.

They can be dense and urban but more often than not they are cheap, ugly, and ticky tacky. We don't want to open the floodgates for those, although admittedly the whole 'glass box on podium' formula isn't much more attractive or urban.

[LouisVanDerWright]

^^^ Yes, and my point is that's already what is getting built all over the place in the form of TOD. Go look closely while they are building them, it's a 4+1 but usually with retail instead of parking and steel studs instead of wood. I don't think we will see that change.

[k1052]

Originally Posted by Via Chicago

4+1s have been controversial from the beginning so dont know why that would surprise you. that said, while historic courtyard buildings are one of chicago's finest housing styles, thats mainly because of their build quality (craftsman era), their human scale despite their size, and the generous garden space/setbacks they provide for residents. the stuff getting slapped together in Phoenix hardly compares.

I know 4+1s are shall we say frowned upon architecturally here but those ugly buildings do a lot of the heavy lifting in actually housing the population.

[Chicago Shawn]

Originally Posted by k1052

Perhaps I should have been more specific. I'm suggesting using the IBC to resurrect the Chicago four plus one citywide. No structured parking.

It won’t, because the mid-century 4+1’s fail our current zone code by having too much FAR and exceed MLA (minimum lot area), in addition to not meeting parking minimums. While TOD policy allows for significant reduction in on-site parking, the classic 4+1 stills fails on FAR and MLA. I agree though that they play a very significant role in providing density and market rate affordable housing in our lakefront neighborhoods.

[Via Chicago]

Originally Posted by k1052

I know 4+1s are shall we say frowned upon architecturally here but those ugly buildings do a lot of the heavy lifting in actually housing the population.

i dont disagree, and the reason areas like Rogers Park/Edgewater have remained affordable for segments of the working class is because these do exist. that said, having dated someone for a while that lived in one (and one better maintained than most), i dont envy anyone who gets stuck in one. many of the older courtyard buildings provide far more gracious housing at comparable cost, despite their age. sadly they will never be built again and what we have is what we will have forever.

[k1052]

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

^^^ Yes, and my point is that's already what is getting built all over the place in the form of TOD. Go look closely while they are building them, it's a 4+1 but usually with retail instead of parking and steel studs instead of wood. I don't think we will see that change.

I wouldn't describe the TOD zones as all over the place. The city is full of nonconforming buildings outside the radius and many neighborhoods are going to fight off expansions like the north side is when bus TOD was getting proposed. Typically stick builds have been cheaper on average which is why so many are getting built elsewhere.

[k1052]

Originally Posted by Via Chicago

i dont disagree, and the reason areas like Rogers Park/Edgewater have remained affordable for segments of the working class is because these do exist. that said, having dated someone for a while that lived in one (and one better maintained than most), i dont envy anyone who gets stuck in one. many of the older courtyard buildings provide far more gracious housing at comparable cost, despite their age. sadly they will never be built again and what we have is what we will have forever.

I lived in a succession of 4+1s in Lakeview and dated people who lived in them. They're not sexy at all but I could afford them. Which given the crisis in housing affordability sweeping the country seems like a consideration we should make in planning for the future. Chicago does not yet have an affordability crisis, I'd like to keep it that way.

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by k1052

I lived in a succession of 4+1s in Lakeview and dated people who lived in them. They're not sexy at all but I could afford them. Which given the crisis in housing affordability sweeping the country seems like a consideration we should make in planning for the future. Chicago does not yet have an affordability crisis, I'd like to keep it that way.

If we could allow cheap, dense, small buildings like this to get built everywhere in the city, we wouldn't need silly proposals by silly people like rent control.

But then, how would Aldermen be able to exact their control over their fiefdom if we did that? After all it's Alderman first, loud community activists second, rest of the community last.

[LouisVanDerWright]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

If we could allow cheap, dense, small buildings like this to get built everywhere in the city, we wouldn't need silly proposals by silly people like rent control.

But then, how would Aldermen be able to exact their control over their fiefdom if we did that? After all it's Alderman first, loud community activists second, rest of the community last.

The proof is in the pudding, who did the "activists" target and unseat in the last election? The aldermen who allowed the most TOD-like construction in their wards.

I'm hoping Lori succeeds in stomping prerogative and then the city can just implement the TOD policy without political interference from communists and angry local grandmas who are mad about parking. The correct policy is to flood the market with as much new supply as it will bear. Period. End of discussion.

[Busy Bee]

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

...from communists...

Alright Joe

[marothisu]

New construction permit issued for the vacant lot at Schiller abs Sedgwick. A new 9 story, 105 unit building with ground floor retail.

[The Lurker]

^^^ Right across the street from this guy?

Originally Posted by the urban politician

Old Town condo project being scrapped. New owner planning 254 apartments, already has at least partial financing (equity I believe through crowdfunding).

1400 N Orleans:



https://therealdeal.com/chicago/2019...uxury-rentals/

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by The Lurker

^^^ Right across the street from this guy?

Yeah. Diagonally across the street along Sedgwick.

[The Lurker]

Awesome! This area doesn't see a lot of action.

[the urban politician]

Renderings of this weird looking building over here: https://chicago.curbed.com/2018/1/23...gwick-schiller

Wow this intersection is about to get a serious shot in the arm.