CHICAGO | General Discussions

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by moorhosj1

She thinking about having kids soon? That’s why we required one during our last move.

Yeah we're planning kids right now, which is actually why we might end up going to a 2 bedroom place in South Loop instead even though it's not my favorite area.

We are going to buy property anyway somewhere, ideally within a year or so of moving. Pretty sure we'll be able to get more bang for our buck against rental prices and what we want by purchasing probably in one of those 2-10 unit north side condo buildings.

[sixo1]

@marothisu: You might want to consider Hyde Park. Lots of green space for kids.

(Sorry for getting off topic.)

[marothisu]

Take a look at the newest Census numbers vs. the 2019 estimates, it's interesting to see just how close or far off some of the community areas were.

In this listing, a number of negative means that the 2019 estimates are that many people underestimated from the 2020 real number. A positive means the Census overestimated. Yes I understand it's 2019 vs. 2020. Still interesting to look at.

1. Near North Side: -12,163 people (-11.53%)
2. Near West Side: -4711 (-6.94%)
3. Chicago Lawn: -4579 (-8.19%)
4. New City: -4185 (-9.59%)
5. Near South Side: -4066 (-14.12%)
6. The Loop: -3643 (-8.61%)
7. West Englewood: -3301 (-11.13%)
8. West Town: -3083 (-3.51%)
9. Austin: -2830 (-2.93%)
10. North Lawndale: -272 (-7.82%)1
11. Grand Boulevard: -2380 (-9.68%)
12. Gage Park: -2062 (-5.21%)
13. Hyde Park: -1974 (--6.7%)
14. West Lawn: -1776 (-5.28%)
15. Woodlawn: -1170 (-7.25%)
16. Washington Park: -1738 (-13.68%)
17. Lake View: -1734 (-1.68%)
18. South Shore: -1517 (-2.81%)
19. Englewood: -1448 (-5.94%)
20. Greater Grand Crossing: -1322 (-4.2%)
21. Kenwood: -1162 (-5.29%)
22. East Garfield Park: -1058 (-5.29%)
23. Lincoln Park: -1027 (-1.46%)
24. West Garfield Park: -1012 (-5.81%)
25. Hegewisch: -906 (-9.04%)
26. Brighton Park: -897 (-1.99%)
27. McKinley Park: -746 (-4.69%)
28. Chatham: -701 (-2.21%)
29. Hermosa: -581 (-2.41%)
30. Lower West Side: -548 (-1.62%)
31. Burnside: -521 (-20.62%)
32. Archer Heights: -495 (-3.49%)
33. Edison Park: -413 (-3.58%)
34. O'Hare -343 (-2.56%)
35. Armour Square: -292 (-2.1%)
36. Calumet Heights: -273 (-2.09%)
37. Beverly: -236 (-1.18%)
38. Norwood Park: -219 (-0.57%)
39. Forest Glen: -191 (-0.97%)
40. Fuller Park: -172 (-6.7%)
41. Rogers Park: -153 (-0.27%)
42. Morgan Park: -118 (-0.56%)
43. Montclare: -83 (-0.58%)
44. Pullman: +20 (+0.29%)
45. Riverdale: +97 (+1.34%)
46. Avalon Park: +213 (+2.25%)
47. Dunning: +298 (+0.69%)
48. Roseland: +346 (+0.89%)
49. Oakland: +428 (+6.3%)
50. North Center: +429 (+1.22%)
51. Belmont Cragin: +434 (+0.56%)
52. Clearing: +503 (+2.06%)
53. Mount Greenwood: +562 (+3.02%)
54. Logan Square: +671 (+0.94%)
55. West Elsdon: +757 (+4.12%)
56. South Lawndale: +758 (+1.06%)
57. Bridgeport: +778 (+3.58%)
58. West Pullman: +934 (+3.58%)
59. Auburn Gresham: +1031 (+2.3%)
60. Douglas: +1034 (+5.1%)
61. Humboldt Park: +1199 (+2.21%)
62. Jefferson Park: +1287 (+4.91%)
63. West Ridge: +1344 (+1.74%)
64. Edgewater: +1353 (+2.4%)
65. North Park: +1355 (+7.72%)
66. South Deering: +1370 (+9.71%)
67. Albany Park: +1410 (+2.91%)
68. Portage Park: +1579 (+2.51%)
69. Irving Park: +1590 (+3.06%)
70. Lincoln Square: +1609 (+3.97%)
71. Washington Heights: +1677 (+6.69%)
72. Garfield Ridge: +1705 (+4.81%)
73. Uptown: +1797 (+3.14%)
74. Avondale: +1861 (+5.13%)
75. East Side: +1967 (+9.05%)
76. Ashburn: +2258 (+5.49%)
77. South Chicago: +2636 (+9.66%)

[Steely Dan]

ChiSoxRox has spent a bunch of work calculating weighted population densities (WPD) by census tract for all of the nation's MSAs over 1M people over in the general census results thread in city discussions.

The overall good news is that most MSAs got denser over the past decade. The even better news locally is that Chicago's MSA actually increased in weighted population density for the first time since at least 1950!


2010 Chicago MSA WPD: 8,613 ppsm

2020 Chicago MSA WPD: 9,012 ppsm

Change: +399 ppsm (+4.6%)


This is the result of the combined forces of very strong core growth in the city's central area and a massive slowdown in new sprawl development on the exurban fringe following the great recession

[the urban politician]

Let’s take the “where should Marothisu rent a place?” talk to the ‘Chicago General Discussions’ thread perhaps?

[sentinel]

This is more of a Chicagoland/suburban thing, but nonetheless very cool for the entire region. I'm very familiar with this place and how lovely it is, glad to see it's getting some neat recognition (also considering my go-to brewery borders it):

Palos Preserves Named Largest ‘Urban Night Sky Place’ In The World

https://chicago.cbslocal.com/2021/08...ght-sky-place/

https://www.darksky.org/our-work/con...preserves-u-s/

[SIGSEGV]

Originally Posted by sentinel

This is more of a Chicagoland/suburban thing, but nonetheless very cool for the entire region. I'm very familiar with this place and how lovely it is, glad to see it's getting some neat recognition (also considering my go-to brewery borders it):

Palos Preserves Named Largest ‘Urban Night Sky Place’ In The World

https://chicago.cbslocal.com/2021/08...ght-sky-place/

https://www.darksky.org/our-work/con...preserves-u-s/

But... they close at sunset? Hopefully the fix that?

[sentinel]

Originally Posted by SIGSEGV

But... they close at sunset? Hopefully the fix that?

The individual grove/park/preserve entrances are closed, but you can still park on dedicated parking areas alongside certain roads, such as along 95th near Maple Lake, certain areas along Archer Ave, 107th along Saganashkee Slough, etc.

[SIGSEGV]

Originally Posted by sentinel

The individual grove/park/preserve entrances are closed, but you can still park on dedicated parking areas alongside certain roads, such as along 95th near Maple Lake, certain areas along Archer Ave, 107th along Saganashkee Slough, etc.

Awesome, thanks! I'll have to check it out next time I rent a car.

[Chisouthside]

Originally Posted by sentinel

The individual grove/park/preserve entrances are closed, but you can still park on dedicated parking areas alongside certain roads, such as along 95th near Maple Lake, certain areas along Archer Ave, 107th along Saganashkee Slough, etc.

Thanks, just pinpointed a couple spots on google maps thanks to your suggestions.

[Chi-Sky21]

Originally Posted by sentinel

The individual grove/park/preserve entrances are closed, but you can still park on dedicated parking areas alongside certain roads, such as along 95th near Maple Lake, certain areas along Archer Ave, 107th along Saganashkee Slough, etc.

I don't recommend parking on the side of Archer at night in that area unless you have a death wish , people run off the road there a lot. You can always camp at Bullfrog lake if you want. You talking about Imperial Oak brewery? Hit that place up after bikerides all the time.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by Chi-Sky21

I don't recommend parking on the side of Archer at night in that area unless you have a death wish , people run off the road there a lot.

you might also cross paths with Resurrection Mary.

[sentinel]

Originally Posted by Chi-Sky21

I don't recommend parking on the side of Archer at night in that area unless you have a death wish , people run off the road there a lot. You can always camp at Bullfrog lake if you want. You talking about Imperial Oak brewery? Hit that place up after bikerides all the time.

I meant pullover driveways that lead into smaller preserves, not along the street, sorry should have clarified. Yes, Archer is notoriously dangerous at night. IO brewery is a great little oasis there that I frequent. Too much maybe?

There's also a really nice parking lot off 95th, on the north side of Maple Lake that is great for stargazing at night.

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

you might also cross paths with Resurrection Mary.

Ooohh, I know of many many stories.

Point is, I personally think it's fantastic that such a quiet place is getting recognition, a little validation that natural areas have significant value in large, urbanized settings.

[SolarWind]

Originally Posted by sentinel

This is more of a Chicagoland/suburban thing, but nonetheless very cool for the entire region. I'm very familiar with this place and how lovely it is, glad to see it's getting some neat recognition (also considering my go-to brewery borders it):

Palos Preserves Named Largest ‘Urban Night Sky Place’ In The World

https://chicago.cbslocal.com/2021/08...ght-sky-place/

https://www.darksky.org/our-work/con...preserves-u-s/

Originally Posted by SIGSEGV

But... they close at sunset? Hopefully the fix that?

With permission, I'm sharing an email that Mike McNerney sent to the Northwest Suburban Astronomers (NSA Club):

I received a response from the FPCC administrator handling the Urban Dark Skies Place designation for the Palos preserves. I expressed the desire to have after hours access for night sky viewing and imaging. I explained that I’m a member of NSA and IDA and that I, along with all of our members, understand the protocols of protecting nature in the process of our endeavors. I also told him that many members of our group live in Cook County, so he wouldn’t feel I was a lone wolf. Here’s his response:

Thank you so much Michael for writing this. I really, really, appreciate your feedback, concerns and eagerness to enjoy our preserves. I am scheduling a meeting with my team later this week to discuss this more. I, or someone else on my team, will get back with you once we have our internal meeting, to keep you in the loop on where we are, and hopefully provide some alternatives to you. Will keep you posted.

Anthony Daniel Tindall
Policy & Sustainability Manager
Office of the General Superintendent
Forest Preserves of Cook County
69 W. Washington, Suite 2040 • Chicago, IL 60602-3155

Prior to the email exchange with Anthony Tindall, Mike spoke with a Ranger:

The Ranger’s take was that, for the foreseeable future, they expect after hours access to be limited to planned “hosted” events for the public (of which there are none yet), and access to camping at Bullfrog Lake (which Cook County residents can do now). He didn’t have an answer about the question of space to allow for telescopes to be set up. Bullfrog has a small parking lot for tent campers at the end of a sizeable parking lot. The big lot has a decent horizon and is on top (or near to the top) of a hill. That’s where we had basecamp on Utopia. Groups could always get a permit for a special event under the regular permitting process, but it’s pricy. It’s geared toward TV shows and films shooting overnight.

Mike mentioned Amazon's 'Utopia' series had their basecamp in Palos Preserves. Here's Mike McNerney's IMDb page if you're interested.

Finally, here's a link to a light pollution map of Palos Preserves. You can zoom out and see light pollution for the rest of the world. It also has overlays for prior years showing how light pollution is increasing over time.

[sentinel]

Originally Posted by SolarWind

With permission, I'm sharing an email that Mike McNerney sent to the Northwest Suburban Astronomers (NSA Club):



Prior to the email exchange with Anthony Tindall, Mike spoke with a Ranger:



Mike mentioned Amazon's 'Utopia' series had their basecamp in Palos Preserves. Here's Mike McNerney's IMDb page if you're interested.

Finally, here's a link to a light pollution map of Palos Preserves. You can zoom out and see light pollution for the rest of the world. It also has overlays for prior years showing how light pollution is increasing over time.

Thanks for sharing that - last month, my best friend filmed a number of scenes near Maple Lake (or one of the adjacent sloughs) for an upcoming big-budget Amazon sci-fi series called "LightYears"..he's described the premise to me over the course of filming, and it sounds pretty bonkers/amazing.

[BrinChi]

Curious whether anyone thinks it's necessary to get a building permit to perform about $5,000 worth of tuckpointing. It would include replacing about 100 bricks. The mason I'm working with is already licensed with the city, but is it risky to skip the permit? I'm in a landmark district so I could get my permit fees waived, but looks like that process takes 90-120 days lol.

[Steely Dan]

^ we've never bothered with permits for various tuck-pointing projects on our 3 flat. I think that kinda minor shit just falls under regular maintenance.

But we're not in a historic district, so I don't know if those have special rules.

[LouisVanDerWright]

Originally Posted by BrinChi

Curious whether anyone thinks it's necessary to get a building permit to perform about $5,000 worth of tuckpointing. It would include replacing about 100 bricks. The mason I'm working with is already licensed with the city, but is it risky to skip the permit? I'm in a landmark district so I could get my permit fees waived, but looks like that process takes 90-120 days lol.

Literally just did a project this size. Getting permits didn't even cross my mind.

For most smallish ongoing maintenance items like this, the city doesn't want to be involved. Just make sure you are doing it right so if the city does show up, you can tell them to get lost because you are just keeping up your property the right way.

Oh and please don't use cement bearing mortar mix. Ideally your contractor is using 4 parts sand to one part lime. Type O will work too which is 7 parts sand to one part lime and one part cement. Anything with too much cement will destroy your old masonry.

[BrinChi]

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

Oh and please don't use cement bearing mortar mix. Ideally your contractor is using 4 parts sand to one part lime. Type O will work too which is 7 parts sand to one part lime and one part cement. Anything with too much cement will destroy your old masonry.

Is Type N acceptable for Chicago brick? I believe it's 1 part Portland cement, 1 part lime, and 6 parts sand, and that's what both masons I got the best quotes from said they use. One of them said they would use O upon request but that's not their recommendation.

[LouisVanDerWright]

^^^ Either type will work, type O is basically what they would have used for everything 100 years ago. But it's very soft and doesn't need to be THAT soft. So it's OK to have a small amount of Cement in there and go with N.

For my buildings I use Type O when it's just patching empty joints. It cleans up better and is super easy to work with. If there lintel work, rebuilding, grind and point, then yeah, N is probably better because it's a bit stronger and you want to really glue any bricks you loosened up tightly in place. O is nice because you can just smash it into the joints and still broom it off 30 min later.