CHICAGO | General Developments

[Via Chicago]

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

Okee dokee, I'm sure the masses would have gotten together and just decided to spend this money on trail upgrades, they wouldn't have just blown it on cheeseburgers and chochskis or anything...

Or we could have the government make these decisions, because they're demonstrated extremely responsible fiscal management skills.

Well, 71% of the US economy is based on consumer spending. As we've seen with the recent recovery, the uber rich of the world hoard wealth, hide it offshore or in shell companies, or invest it rather than spend it. So, if wealth inequality wasnt at the extreme it is now and wages hadnt stagnated for the past 30 years while COL has increased, yea its possible the average middle person people would maybe be able to buy a few extra big ticket items, and government would be collecting more tax revenue, which could fund other things. But clearly the solution to the problem is cutting taxes on the wealthy even more.

I dont think we as a society should have to sit around and hope the whims of multi billionaires just so happen to align with infrastructure projects so we can actually get them done. Ken Griffin makes $90,000 a fucking hour. this is change he found under his couch cushion. the painting hanging over this dudes shitter probably costs more. but yea, lets all bow down to our benevolent hedge fund overlord who found it in his heart to kick some asphalt our way while he actively uses the rest of his wealth to support politics that actively undermine the working class and exacerbate the inequality that has allowed him to to solidify himself as part of the 0.01% in the first place.

[the urban politician]

^ Ken Griffin wasn't born with a silver spoon in his mouth (like Trump) but had help along the way. Still, he was able to rise out of the middle class to where he is today.

I think that says as much as your narrative. It is still much easier to increase one's wealth and social standing in the modern day United States than in any other civilization at any other time in human history.

[pilsenarch]

Originally Posted by marothisu

2) There's a lot of wealthy people in Chicago - maybe you've noticed, maybe not. On average, the guy worth $10M down the block from you isn't going to be taking the Pink line to work, even if it's more efficient. They're probably going to be driving themselves or someone driving for them on average. There's a reason why the parking ratios on the more high end developments is higher than the more normal market rate stuff.

I have to expand on this a little. I've designed condo towers in downtown Chicago and the developers I've worked with use a ratio of less than 1:1 basis for parking sales - partly for the same reasons you suggest: when a rich tenant/owner wants to drive somewhere, they are driven by someone else. Sure, there are car enthusiasts who want to house their cars in the building, but it typically adds up to less than one per unit...

[ardecila]

^ Strange. Literally every condo project I worked on, including some very high end ones, assumed a 1:1 ratio or higher, because even car-free buyers would eventually become sellers at some point and they wanted to make sure the pool of potential buyers was not limited. (Corollary: condos without a parking space are often a great deal if you don't care about resale!)

For the Pilsen project, there's no big mystery here. It's a massive four-story warehouse with the first floor at grade. In Chicago, you can't build ground-floor residential without a zoning variance, and even then it's not very desirable for privacy and security reasons. Imagine a rear unit facing the alley at grade, ugh. So the developer fills up the ground floor with as much parking as they can fit, and puts all residential on 2/3/4. These apartments are mostly small 1BDs, so the developer might have maxed out his allowable units anyway.

[marothisu]

Following is the percentage of households in various community areas of Chicago that have 0 vehicles available:
* Loop: 42.1%
* Near North Side: 41.3%
* Uptown: 41.3%
* Armour Square: 40.5%
* Edgewater: 39.4%
* Lakeview: 36.1%
* Rogers Park: 36.1%
* Near West Side: 30.7%
* Lincoln Park: 30%
* Logan Square: 22.6%
* West Town: 22.4%
* Albany Park: 21.3%
* Lincoln Square: 20.2%
* Near South Side: 20.1%



Following is the percentage of households in various cities that have 0 vehicles available:

1. NYC: 54.5%
2. DC: 36.2%
3. Boston: 35.4%
4. San Francisco: 31.2%
5. Philadelphia: 31.1%
6. Baltimore: 30.7%
7. Chicago: 26.5%
8. Detroit: 25.3%
9. Pittsburgh: 23.9%
10. Cleveland: 23.5%
11. Miami: 19.9%
12. St. Louis: 19.7%
13. Minneapolis: 18.2%
14. Milwaukee: 17.9%
15. Seattle: 16.6%
16. Atlanta: 15.2%
17. Portland: 14.7%
18. Los Angeles: 12.1%
19. Indianapolis: 10.5%
20. Dallas: 10.2%
21. Columbus: 9.8%
22. Houston: 8.3%
23. Charlotte: 7.4%
24. Austin: 6.9%
25. San Diego: 6.6%
26. Oklahoma City: 6%
27. San Jose: 5.5%


If you took Chinatown (Armour Square), Loop, Near North Side, Near South Side, Lincoln Park, Lakeview, North Center, Uptown, Edgewater, Rogers Park, and Lincoln Square you'd get a "non car ownership" percentage of 34.9% for an estimated 2015 population of 560,438.

[Vlajos]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

^ Ken Griffin wasn't born with a silver spoon in his mouth (like Trump) but had help along the way. Still, he was able to rise out of the middle class to where he is today.

I think that says as much as your narrative. It is still much easier to increase one's wealth and social standing in the modern day United States than in any other civilization at any other time in human history.

I have no problem with Griffin or his gift (I do despise Trump though). But the US is not the most socially mobile country in the world.

http://www.epi.org/publication/usa-l...ries-mobility/

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by Vlajos

I have no problem with Griffin or his gift (I do despise Trump though). But the US is not the most socially mobile country in the world.

http://www.epi.org/publication/usa-l...ries-mobility/

Ok fine, throw in the U.K. as well.

But unless you plan to move to Slovenia, Chile, or Italy, we are doing quite well. And we are also a tremendously huge nation with a gargantuan economy--so opportunities abound.

[Vlajos]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

Ok fine, throw in the U.K. as well.

But unless you plan to move to Slovenia, Chile, or Italy, we are doing quite well. And we are also a tremendously huge nation with a gargantuan economy--so opportunities abound.

You read the chart wrong. France, Germany, Canada, Finland, Norway, etc. are all countries where it's easier to improve your economic well being.

[SamInTheLoop]

^(^) Ok, way off-topic, but this is just too 'rich'.

You're reading the chart 'backwards'. Those at the bottom of the chart have the highest social mobility. Those at the top have the lowest. The US is of course, much nearer the top. (the US and UK have relatively low social mobility compared with peer countries) This is actually a very well known phenomenon (although perhaps clearly not well known enough - you know with today's world of right-wing echo chamber/alternate reality bubble and fake news competing with each other and all!) in recent decades - that there is emperical evidence that the US has moved far from its mythical/yesteryear 'land of opportunity' label. Many, many other countries - today - and their policies offer a far better chance that one will change the socioeconomic status that they were born into over the course of their life.

(^ sorry - Vlajos - you beat me to it!)

http://www.epi.org/publication/usa-l...ries-mobility/

[Steely Dan]

let's please get back on topic folks.

subsequent off-topic posts will be deleted.

[pilsenarch]

Originally Posted by ardecila

^ Strange. Literally every condo project I worked on, including some very high end ones, assumed a 1:1 ratio or higher, because even car-free buyers would eventually become sellers at some point and they wanted to make sure the pool of potential buyers was not limited. (Corollary: condos without a parking space are often a great deal if you don't care about resale!)

I'm not sure how you 'worked on' condos, but my information is coming directly from developers that I have designed for and who've made a career in working in downtown Chicago - attempting to make money. If you read correctly, I didn't necessarily say that they built less than 1:1, but they didn't sell 1:1. If you're familiar with the downtown real estate market (I also have a managing broker's license) in most of the larger condo developments with regard to resale it is rather easy to purchase or, if necessary, rent a space in the same project if the condo in question doesn't come with a space... but, alas, this is rarely a problem. In the current climate where most of the developments are designed for rental - not even for a quick flip to condos - and for a clientele that might just spend a good part of their life renting, they are 'selling' even less parking...

Most of these luxury condo buyer's, or sellers, could give a * about whether their multi-million dollar condo is married to a 50k, at most, parking space... the reality is, the spaces are always there to be had...

[the urban politician]

^ More evidence to what you are talking about is how there are bulk parking spot sales/auctions in condo buildings from time to time. There is definitely a bit of a glut in condo parking downtown.

In the building where I own a condo they auctioned off about 30-ish parking spots a few years ago.

[urbanbydesign]

Originally Posted by Mr Downtown

As an observer of urban planning nationwide, I should point out that Portland is really the outlier in trying push a car-free agenda along its new rail lines. Even in the Pearl District, savvy developers might have preferred to include some parking to appeal to folks who have jobs in Lake Oswego or parents in Tigard, or who head to Lincoln City every weekend in summer. Remember that less than 20 percent of trips are journeys to work, which are about the only trips it's reasonable to assume will regularly be made by transit.

Why not underground parking? The water table is only about 10-15 feet below ground, so it gets expensive fast to go down more than a level and a half.

I hope you won't go away with feelings hurt, as we enjoy and need thoughtful discussion of urban design issues.

Thanks for answering the underground parking question - that's good to know! If that's the case it makes the engineering of Chicago's skyline just that much more impressive.
I agree about your impressions of Portland, though I think other municipalities are also trying to engineer the car-free lifestyle. But living there has colored my world view of how cities ought to plan, I assume. Part of my surprise about development patterns here were things like a McDonalds (or banks)with a drive through in the west loop, big box stores right by the red line, and all these parking off sets near major transit nodes. When I was originally positing about this I mainly wanted to know if it was developers not knowing better or caring, or if it was a broader planning issue by the city. Which I feel like you answered, so thank you.
I'll try not to be but hurt, so thanks. I watched you get your teeth kicked in for months over the FOTP issue. While I didn't necessarily agree with you either, it was appalling to watch everyone gang up on you. If you are still on here then I should grow a thicker skin. I just don't appreciate being "shouted down" over asking a question or validating an impression. Especially over planning, architecture, and development.
I love living here, regardless, and it's great to see all the activity going on.

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by marothisu

And neither of us knows how many stalls of parking are going in this Pilsen conversion, so there's literally no point in talking about that part of it other than it's great someone is doing something with that factory - and it's mixed use.

Per the developer's zoning change request, they are planning 99 units and 52 parking spaces, with three retail spaces. The parking and retail exist in a one-story annex to the factory building at the corner of 21st/Laflin.

I mis-spoke earlier when I said the first floor was at grade. It is actually half a story above grade, which is good for residential units, and there is a basement below which will ALSO be turned into (some crappy-ass) apartments.

[Le Baron]

Originally Posted by Le Baron

I heard Blackstone is kicking out the retail tenants in the Sears Tower by January to redevelop. I presume the tenants under the lobby and also presume this could be the start of extending the building via a low-rise into the south plaza. Apologies if discussed previously and I missed.

Heard from a source that demo of the retail spaces (believe lobby, lobby +1 and lower lobby levels) is to start next Friday or the week after. Source also indicated that Blackstone adding higher end restaurants and other retail. Believe there will be entrances on all four sides of the building. Unclear if plans include a low rise on southern portion of the block - although I recall seeing a Crain's article along those lines some time back. Think a couple tenants (bank) staying.

[MultiModal]

Originally Posted by Le Baron

Heard from a source that demo of the retail spaces (believe lobby, lobby +1 and lower lobby levels) is to start next Friday or the week after. Source also indicated that Blackstone adding higher end restaurants and other retail. Believe there will be entrances on all four sides of the building. Unclear if plans include a low rise on southern portion of the block - although I recall seeing a Crain's article along those lines some time back. Think a couple tenants (bank) staying.

It does include extending the base to the sidewalk on the south side and moving the entry to the skydeck. The most interesting part of the project in my opinion was that they are planning on adding a grocery story.

[SolarWind]

December 20, 2016

[SolarWind]

December 20, 2016





^ Near 933 W Van Buren

[SolarWind]

December 20, 2016



http://westloopcollection.com/

[SolarWind]

December 21, 2016