CHICAGO | General Discussions

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

^ There is no doubt that the city will have to adapt.

Where I take issue is with this ill-conceived effort by some to take this predicament and try to convince everyone that it was a good thing all along.

No it wasn't.

Not sure anyone is really saying that though. I interpret it as more like - this is not ideal, but we (i.e. people with real skin in the game) can use it as an opportunity to create some real positive out of it too with various changes. And I believe that's absolutely correct. Commercial owners/landlords are going to have to adapt since they could be facing foreclosures and what not. This is why I think some will ultimately almost be "forced" to consider converting some space to residential. And honestly, creating more pockets of 24-hour neighborhoods within the Loop is a good thing. It's just how we've arrived up until this point is not necessarily a good or ideal situation. But it's an opportunity to create some positive changes at the same time instead of doing nothing about it.

[Rizzo]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

^ There is no doubt that the city will have to adapt.

Where I take issue is with this ill-conceived effort by some to take this predicament and try to convince everyone that it was a good thing all along.

No it wasn't.

I don't think anyone knows yet. 70% of people could say they want full remote now, but maybe after a few years discover they've become boring people, want to digitally disconnect and create a better division between home and work life.

Technology has made us more connected and efficient, but I don't think it makes us emotionally or physically better off. Companies can make some false promises and just because you can work anywhere, at any time...as long as you get your work done doesn't always guarantee you won't feel invisible pressures to perform.

As others pointed out, employees won this round making remote work normal when it was once unimaginable in some places and a positive side effect was some major reductions on spending and more saving . Now that it's commonplace, let's see if 100% remote may be an over-correction. I believe the hiring dilemma explained by marothisu is true, perhaps more-so in his industry, but I'm convinced a hybrid model will gain common acceptance, and perhaps those that declined the offers may find initial opportunities plentiful, but potentially not long lasting.

I'm sorry for going beyond the urban planning dilemmas. Yeah it's bad, because adjustments work better when they happen over longer periods of time, not in haste during a pandemic. Some loop spots may be difficult to adapt -ground floors of office buildings that seem programmatically hardwired for banking or lunch restaurants, which will now be less attractive to rent. This is why River North and the West Loop are excellent models because of their mixed use nature and presence of finer grain architecture.

I'm curious how remote work will impact mobility and city services. Will public transportation deteriorate? Will leisure travel no longer be subsidized by business travel? Will tax burdens shift to residential areas from commercial real estate?

Finally, I'm happy to be in Chicago. I think we have the right formula for a healthy downtown in the future. Imagine if our downtown was less interesting or was a homogenous collection of faceless office towers and parking decks surrounded by interchanges. That's a reality in many major American cities.

[Chi-Sky21]

Well if the shift was going to happen we are very lucky to have filled out everything at the confluence like we did 1st. Those offices will still get filled up and now some of the old office building will become residential. It is a win win. Saving my money now so I can get one of those new pimp condos in the old Chase building. 8)

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

Where I take issue is with this ill-conceived effort by some to take this predicament and try to convince everyone that it was a good thing all along.

No it wasn't.

Originally Posted by marothisu

Not sure anyone is really saying that though..

Originally Posted by Handro

It could ultimately make cities significantly better, .

[OrdoSeclorum]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

I don't know what's going to happen. Like you my instinct is that WFH is bad news for cities. But I might be surprised and it's good. Or it might end up being a less big deal than I expected. I don't know. It's probably bad.

But if it's bad for cities then by the same principles it's going to be especially bad for suburbs. Any thesis that says "the suburbs will benefit from WFH at downtown's expense" is probably half-baked. Suburbs exist so that people can access downtown. That's it.

If commuters don't need to access downtown and can stay in the burbs because of WFH then the places that benefit are the places those people go to on vacation. Ski towns. Beach towns. Places that are full of family and connections. Attractive places that are cheap and connected, The Ozarks, The Red River Gorge, The Blue Ridge Mountains.

I think there's evidence that those places are seeing an increase in demand due to WFH. But interesting, vibrant downtowns like Chicago's are places that people go on vacation. I've worked from home exclusively for two decades and that's *why* I live in Chicago. I like it here and it's where I moved when I didn't any longer have to work in a suburban cube farm.

I expect that WFH is fine for S.F. and NYC. There are enough people that want to move to those downtowns that supply and demand will take care of it. And places like Boise and Nashville and Portland that are appealing but don't have any universities, infrastructure or industry-focus to speak of should benefit too. I expect that the most significantly impacted are places where people HAVE to be but don't WANT to be. It's easy to think of a number of urban centers like that, but that list includes almost every suburb of every city. Most exist almost solely because of people trying to get as far away from work as the rules of geometry permit. Those residents are the ones most likely to decamp to whatever environment suits them best.

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by OrdoSeclorum

Suburbs exist so that people can access downtown. That's it.

^

[thegoatman]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

^

What a dumb take lmao. There's a growing number of self sustaining suburbs like Naperville and Oak Brook that has all the amenities a suburbanite needs. Lots of people here rarely or never go downtown.

Even in other cities, Atlanta for example. When I lived there, there were PLENTY of suburbs that were filled with people that never went to downtown/midtown/buckhead. Alpharetta, Roswell, Sandy Springs, Marietta, Kennesaw, etc.

[Handro]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

^ This entire post is, literally, word for word, a textbook example of:



You are taking a currently bad predicament and using reverse logic to make it sound like it was a good thing all along. People do it all of the time, as I said.

In 2019, you never would have viewed people staying in their homes all day and NOT commuting downtown for work as a good thing. Everybody here loved how much the CTA and Metra trains were full of people, and how the streets downtown were crowded with workers walking around and going to lunch, and then having drinks at happy hour. Many of you loved boasting about daytime population increases and comparing ridership stats between cities. Food trucks, Amazon HQ2, it was all the rage around here. Am I to believe that that magically all disappeared?

You've been claiming the downfall of cities due to covid since like April 2020, yet here is Chicago--a city famed for its stagnation--building thousands of new units and operating a reltively healthy real estate market.

Looking for a benefit (like prefacing a thought with "could", which you seem to have taken issue with) in an unprecedented shift the ways society functions is not a coping mechanism, unlike say, hoping for the downfall of cities to justify an anti-urban mindset that existed long before COVID.

The fact is that small-c conservatives hate cities and want them to fail because they feel insecure about living in sprawling, wasteful, boring places. My neighborhood is as healthy as ever, with more people out and about during the day. There are about 300 new multi-family units breaking ground this year within a quarter mile of me, and I'm nowhere near downtown. The Loop will need to be reimagined, which is a long time coming considering it had become basically a giant office park.

Cities are fine, lots of people like living in them regardless of what they do for a living, and changes in work habits are long overdue considering the massive leaps in technology and productivity. It's going to be scary for some people, but they'll adjust.

In 2019, you never would have viewed people staying in their homes all day and NOT commuting downtown for work as a good thing.

I still don't think people staying home all day is a good thing, which is great because that's not what WFH means for most people. It means flexibility to work and live without sitting stagnantly in an office 9 hours, plus commuting. You have an extremely rigid, myopic view of the way people should live and it will do you a major disservice in the coming years as these huge changes take place. I suggest loosening up a little bit and enjoying some fun new possibilities.

[marothisu]

^ I just want to point out again that Chicago's December 2021 resident employed population is actually now above that of December 2019 before the pandemic started. This is actually really great news considering NYC, SF, LA, Philadelphia, Boston, DC, Miami, Orlando, Detroit, Minneapolis, San Jose, San Diego, Houston, etc are still below theirs.

Which cities are up in which Chicago is in company with for example? Austin, Tampa, Phoenix, Jacksonville, Dallas, Seattle, Portland, Atlanta, Indianapolis, Charlotte, ..


I'm not sure what peoples' fascination is with wanting to see Chicago fail but it's actually right now doing much better than the majority of its peers (i.e. Alpha cities, walkable/dynamic cities, etc) in this regard. I believe the office space lease situation is also much better in Chicago than it is in NYC and SF.

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by marothisu

I'm not sure what peoples' fascination is with wanting to see Chicago fail

^ Where are you seeing this 'fascination with wanting to see Chicago fail' ?

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by Handro

You've been claiming the downfall of cities due to covid since like April 2020, yet here is Chicago--a city famed for its stagnation--building thousands of new units and operating a reltively healthy real estate market.
h

^ You seem to be focused on apartment buildings.

Office is doing poorly except for in the hot Fulton market. Office landlords are facing foreclosure.

I don't think it's a downfall of cities, I think Chicago will adapt. I just am not going to pretend that it's a good thing like you are doing. Sorry, we just have to agree to disagree.

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

^ Where are you seeing this 'fascination with wanting to see Chicago fail' ?

Oh it's a general comment and not necessarily directed to anyone on here specifically. It's heavily out there on other social media venues for years and years.

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by thegoatman

What a dumb take lmao. There's a growing number of self sustaining suburbs like Naperville and Oak Brook that has all the amenities a suburbanite needs. Lots of people here rarely or never go downtown.

Even in other cities, Atlanta for example. When I lived there, there were PLENTY of suburbs that were filled with people that never went to downtown/midtown/buckhead. Alpharetta, Roswell, Sandy Springs, Marietta, Kennesaw, etc.

Downtown Chicago is luckily MUCH more important to our region than downtown Atlanta is to that region.

However, lets not kid ourselves. Most of suburban residents around here do not orient their lives in the least around going downtown, especially in the WFH era where the Metra trains sit half empty and will continue to do so forever.

[marothisu]

I do agree that's a bad take about the suburbs LOL There are many, many reasons why people live in the suburbs. I'm sure that one reason given is one of them - of the many..

[ChiMIchael]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

^ Where are you seeing this 'fascination with wanting to see Chicago fail' ?

Urbanist Twitter

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by ChiMIchael

Urbanist Twitter

I'd say it's not that but more like suburbanist and townie Twitter.

[thegoatman]

urbanist twitter loves chicago. it's the american flag/blue lives matter flag/let's go brandon folks that hate chicago.

[galleyfox]

Originally Posted by thegoatman

urbanist twitter loves chicago. it's the american flag/blue lives matter flag/let's go brandon folks that hate chicago.

In this particular instance, urbanist twitter from other cities were projecting their issues onto Chicago, more so than hating it.

Philadelphia urbanist twitter was discussing their pandemic and WFH troubles which are indeed very serious. Philadelphia currently has high unemployment, has lost a good portion of job-holding residents, and relies on employment taxes to meet the city budget.

Then they latched onto a suburban Chicago guy’s tweets complaining about Metra and the Loop that had some serious exaggeration.

Loop retail struggles and office vacancies don’t quite compare to Philadelphia’s current upheaval. Yeah, it’s a serious issue that the Loop will have to muddle through for the next few years, but the neighborhoods are doing well and picking up the slack, and it’s a good time to be a city that relies on property taxes and not on employment/wage taxes.

[pilsenarch]

Originally Posted by OrdoSeclorum

Suburbs exist so that people can access downtown. That's it.

This is close to being the truth. Suburbs, by definition, exist because of their proximity to downtowns. There are all sorts of reasons for this, some including a desire to travel into downtown for work or pleasure, but some, and most importantly, are based on simple logistics. For example, the distance between any of these suburbs, downtown, and ORD and MDW.

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by pilsenarch

This is close to being the truth. Suburbs, by definition, exist because of their proximity to downtowns. There are all sorts of reasons for this, some including a desire to travel into downtown for work or pleasure, but some, and most importantly, are based on simple logistics. For example, the distance between any of these suburbs, downtown, and ORD and MDW.

^ You obviously know it all