HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > Proposals


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #21  
Old Posted May 8, 2024, 7:41 PM
Zapatan's Avatar
Zapatan Zapatan is offline
DENNAB
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: NA - Europe
Posts: 6,128
It's insane, out of all the buildings to protest in Downtown Chicago, it's one that's nowhere near the top 100 tallest buildings in the city.

I hope a 3-400 footer can still happen here even if they chop it a bit.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #22  
Old Posted May 8, 2024, 7:47 PM
Toasty Joe Toasty Joe is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2020
Location: Wicker Park, Chicago, IL
Posts: 402
True. And before the live part there was a Q&A section with voted-on questions which were mostly rational and supportive of the density, so I feel like the alderman felt the support. My concern is many of the speakers against seemed well-connected.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #23  
Old Posted May 8, 2024, 11:28 PM
BVictor1's Avatar
BVictor1 BVictor1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 10,432
The alderman said several times that he wanted to leverage this project for improved traffic and pedestrian safety measures.

They're waiting for feedback from IDOT and that study wasn't ready.

The alderman said there was a need to build aster are no cranes in the skyline and building is pretty much stagnant while the demand is there.
__________________
titanic1
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #24  
Old Posted May 9, 2024, 12:31 AM
Zapatan's Avatar
Zapatan Zapatan is offline
DENNAB
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: NA - Europe
Posts: 6,128
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVictor1 View Post
The alderman said several times that he wanted to leverage this project for improved traffic and pedestrian safety measures.

They're waiting for feedback from IDOT and that study wasn't ready.

The alderman said there was a need to build aster are no cranes in the skyline and building is pretty much stagnant while the demand is there.

Hm, sounds like good news if he's not totally against the project but we'll see.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #25  
Old Posted May 9, 2024, 2:07 AM
glowrock's Avatar
glowrock glowrock is online now
Becoming Chicago-fied!
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Chicago (West Avondale)
Posts: 19,691
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toasty Joe View Post
Extremely frustrating. It's still all up to the alderman, who said he hasn't made up his mind. I suspect it'll be chopped a bit because these are a particularly vocal group of people, but who knows. It's outside the historic district and not exactly replacing anything worth preserving, but people were pleading with him like their life depended on it. It was surreal. There were some YIMBY voices there but most called up to speak were against.
Everyone already residing in a nearby high rise should have immediately been banned from commenting against this proposal. Bunch of damned hypocrites!

Honestly, the alderman should have just cut off comments and supported the project. These nimby schmucks need to disappear permanently!
__________________
"Deeply corrupt but still semi-functional - it's the Chicago way." -- Barrelfish
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #26  
Old Posted May 9, 2024, 3:27 PM
Zapatan's Avatar
Zapatan Zapatan is offline
DENNAB
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: NA - Europe
Posts: 6,128
Maybe they're not actually going to influence the alderman's decision and are just an annoyance.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #27  
Old Posted May 9, 2024, 3:43 PM
dreamy-developer dreamy-developer is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2024
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 18
A new piece from Block Club Chicago on the project.

https://blockclubchicago.org/2024/05...alderman-says/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #28  
Old Posted May 9, 2024, 3:55 PM
pianowizard pianowizard is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: SE Michigan, US
Posts: 959
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zapatan View Post
I hope a 3-400 footer can still happen here even if they chop it a bit.
Since 150 m (492.13 ft) is often used as the threshold for a "skyscraper", I hope there won't be any height chop. Chicago currently has the 11th most skyscrapers based on said threshold:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...st_skyscrapers
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #29  
Old Posted May 9, 2024, 5:02 PM
VKChaz VKChaz is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: California
Posts: 582
Quote:
Originally Posted by left of center View Post
Ridiculous. This is why we have a housing crisis in this city and country. No one wants anything built anywhere, and then go on and complain that they can't find any affordable places to live.

These people don't own that property. The city should have a planning and zoning department that can construct a grand plan for city development, developers can submit plans that are then reviewed by the planning board, and everyone else can literally shut the $%@# up.

Build. Build. Build. Drown the city with supply, and watch housing prices and rents start to moderate and fall. The city will flush with new property tax dollars and we can fund all sorts of things to help our communities.

So unbelievably frustrating.
Though I agree with some of the sentiment, is there a feeling that developers are being constrained en masse? My sense was Chicago is compartively pro-development. And vast amounts of land sit undeveloped because of some mix of interest rates and lack of demand.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30  
Old Posted May 9, 2024, 7:15 PM
Toasty Joe Toasty Joe is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2020
Location: Wicker Park, Chicago, IL
Posts: 402
Quote:
Originally Posted by VKChaz View Post
Though I agree with some of the sentiment, is there a feeling that developers are being constrained en masse? My sense was Chicago is compartively pro-development. And vast amounts of land sit undeveloped because of some mix of interest rates and lack of demand.
Chicago is fairly pro-development, but aldermen often appease NIMBYs by chopping the height of proposals or make otherwise anti-urban changes. In times where interest rates are making it harder to build, every little bit matters and the density that we usually chop off to appease NIMBYs is too valuable to lose.

That being said, there's lots of reasons why vast amounts of land sit undeveloped:
- property taxes structured favorably to an empty site vs. a land value tax that would promote active use
- lack of proper infrastructure in & around large, former industrial lots means higher cost to build
- soil contamination on some former industrial sites is costly to clean up, typically requiring gov't help ($)
- NIMBY homeowners whose main investment has been their home like to see it continue rising in value and fight new developments from the start, costing time & money in the process that leaves too many developments as dirt lots
- interest rates, but only more recently
- labor & materials costs

- lack of demand is harder to attribute, because we don't really know what the demand would be if new housing were built there, only speculate given the local market and run forecasts. And it can change if the city adds a new bus route or something. Obviously it depends where we're talking, but at a metro level, housing prices in Chicagoland have risen some of the highest in the nation recently, and new construction numbers are very low. Vacancy rates should be 5-10% but are commonly 1-3%, maybe a little higher in some neighborhoods. These things are 100% related and help prove there is (growing) demand. Otherwise prices would be remaining the same or falling. May as well let the developers take the risk and maybe get some public works projects while they're at it.

Last edited by Toasty Joe; May 9, 2024 at 8:24 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31  
Old Posted May 9, 2024, 7:52 PM
Zapatan's Avatar
Zapatan Zapatan is offline
DENNAB
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: NA - Europe
Posts: 6,128
Quote:
Chicago is fairly pro-development, but aldermen often appease NIMBYs by chopping the height of proposals or make otherwise anti-urban changes. In times where interest rates are making it harder to build, every little bit matters and the density that we usually chop off to appease NIMBYs is too valuable to lose.
Why appease NIMBYs in the first place? Can they actually do anything?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #32  
Old Posted May 9, 2024, 8:17 PM
VKChaz VKChaz is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: California
Posts: 582
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zapatan View Post
Why appease NIMBYs in the first place? Can they actually do anything?
Presumably they could vote for a different aldercreature. If enough people are upset, they could elect someone very anti-development
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #33  
Old Posted May 9, 2024, 8:35 PM
BVictor1's Avatar
BVictor1 BVictor1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 10,432
Quote:
Originally Posted by VKChaz View Post
Presumably they could vote for a different aldercreature. If enough people are upset, they could elect someone very anti-development
The 2nd Ward is more than Old Town. He'd win re-election.
__________________
titanic1
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #34  
Old Posted May 9, 2024, 8:37 PM
Toasty Joe Toasty Joe is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2020
Location: Wicker Park, Chicago, IL
Posts: 402
Quote:
Originally Posted by VKChaz View Post
Presumably they could vote for a different aldercreature. If enough people are upset, they could elect someone very anti-development
Exactly. Hopefully it nets out with the new density but not enough people pay attention to local politics or care who their alderman unless they disagree with new developments or the roads are in rough shape (potholes, ice/snow removal). So there's always that risk.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #35  
Old Posted May 10, 2024, 2:00 PM
ORD2010 ORD2010 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 45
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #36  
Old Posted May 10, 2024, 2:29 PM
r18tdi's Avatar
r18tdi r18tdi is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,461
Reply With Quote
     
     
End
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > Proposals
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:23 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.