CHICAGO | General Developments

[marothisu]

I have a new map...Residential Up Conversions/Down Conversions. Red means down conversion (i.e. 2 unit building to SFH) and blue means up conversion (i.e. manufacturing building to 90 units). Data is from 1/1/2016 to present

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1OAC4tpuQVShZuV5Avx3XSpMCMfA&usp=sharing

[left of center]

Wow, that's a LOT of down conversions. Some are pretty significant too (3 or 4+ unit converted to SFH).

While the amount of new condo/apartment construction across the city is very impressive, a lot of those household gains are offset entirely by whole neighborhoods with declining density and unit numbers. This is why getting larger projects approved out in those neighborhoods is so important, in order to keep up the vibrancy and foot traffic that supports the local businesses that make those neighborhoods so unique.

Thanks for all the extensive and exhaustive work, marothisu!

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by left of center

Wow, that's a LOT of down conversions. Some are pretty significant too (3 or 4+ unit converted to SFH).

While the amount of new condo/apartment construction across the city is very impressive, a lot of those household gains are offset entirely by whole neighborhoods with declining density and unit numbers. This is why getting larger projects approved out in those neighborhoods is so important, in order to keep up the vibrancy and foot traffic that supports the local businesses that make those neighborhoods so unique.

Thanks for all the extensive and exhaustive work, marothisu!

Yes, there's a lot of down conversions, but most of the up conversions are way, way bigger than the down conversions so all together, it's probably not net negative. West Town for example has up conversions that add up to 90+ units gained. If you add up the down conversions it's not even close to that - much lower in actual unit loss.

[PKDickman]

Originally Posted by marothisu

Yes, there's a lot of down conversions, but most of the up conversions are way, way bigger than the down conversions so all together, it's probably not net negative. West Town for example has up conversions that add up to 90+ units gained. If you add up the down conversions it's not even close to that - much lower in actual unit loss.

The 2 and flat deconversions are just part of the ebb and flow of the market. They will more than likely net out in the end.
Those 2 SRO conversions on LaSalle with losses of 75 an 83 units will be tougher to absorb.

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by left of center

Wow, that's a LOT of down conversions. Some are pretty significant too (3 or 4+ unit converted to SFH).

While the amount of new condo/apartment construction across the city is very impressive, a lot of those household gains are offset entirely by whole neighborhoods with declining density and unit numbers. This is why getting larger projects approved out in those neighborhoods is so important, in order to keep up the vibrancy and foot traffic that supports the local businesses that make those neighborhoods so unique.

Thanks for all the extensive and exhaustive work, marothisu!

That is because zoning conversions. That requires a lot more legwork, and often a zoning change.

Down conversions require nothing at all. This city is wired to reduce density as the least path of resistance.

[left of center]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

That is because zoning conversions. That requires a lot more legwork, and often a zoning change.

Down conversions require nothing at all. This city is wired to reduce density as the least path of resistance.

Which is sad and counter intuitive to what the city should want and in actuality really needs. More density = more people = more business = more property/sales tax revenue = a more successful city overall. Its a virtuous cycle, where urban development begets even more urban development.

[marothisu]

Speaking of zoning (LOL!) a few new applications came in that I can see (probably more tomorrow):

1) Kind of cool looking older 3 story building at 2719-25 W Cermak (Cermak and ~ California) is looking to get approval to put 16 units on the 2nd and 3rd floors - keep the ground floor retail:

https://www.google.com/maps/place/2719+W...1eb59ab32!8m2!3d41.8516716!4d-87.6939348

2) Former Paderewski Elementary Learning Center at 2221 S Lawndale (Lawndale and Cermak) to be converted into 45 elderly affordable housing units

https://www.google.com/maps/place/2221+S...14724ab6b!8m2!3d41.8510454!4d-87.7170307

[wchicity]

Anyone know if the Bridgeford Foods development in the West Loop is getting started anytime soon? Seems like that proposal has been around for quite some time now.

[Fvn]

Originally Posted by wchicity

Anyone know if the Bridgeford Foods development in the West Loop is getting started anytime soon? Seems like that proposal has been around for quite some time now.

180 N Ada? If so construction is underway and is currently awaiting a tower crane

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by wchicity

Anyone know if the Bridgeford Foods development in the West Loop is getting started anytime soon? Seems like that proposal has been around for quite some time now.

I think the plan commission approved it either last week or the week before

[OhioGuy]

Was this development in Andersonville ever approved? The Curbed article said “the mixed-use building could break ground by spring of 2018.”

Transit-oriented apartment development proposed for Andersonville corner


From DNA Info

[killaviews]

^^^ The alderman gave the thumbs up, but I don't think it went through zoning or anything yet.

[r18tdi]

Originally Posted by wchicity

Anyone know if the Bridgeford Foods development in the West Loop is getting started anytime soon? Seems like that proposal has been around for quite some time now.

I would assume Bridgford needs a buyer/equity partner to break ground. They are food people, not developers.

[wchicity]

Originally Posted by r18tdi

I would assume Bridgford needs a buyer/equity partner to break ground. They are food people, not developers.

Got it. Didn't realize they were the ones heading up the development.

[Rizzo]

Has anyone heard about this for the Walgreens in river north at Ontario and Clark? It’s just a store replacement, but certainly a nice enhancement. No more parking lot

http://camburasandtheodore.com/in-the-works/

[LouisVanDerWright]

Ugh could we just get a real development where that Walgreens is??? McDonald's and Walgreens are really preserving the last remnants of the old river north for future generations aren't they?

[left of center]

^ Yeah, that's pretty annoying. Nothing about this location calls for low density crap like this. Them building a new store pretty much ensures it will remain a one story retail shitcake for at least another decade...

[the urban politician]

The fact that those goofballs still think off street parking is needed is what's really annoying.

How many skyscrapers and hotels will be needed in the immediate vicinity before they realize that they aren't in Morton Grove?

[Ned.B]

Originally Posted by left of center

^ Yeah, that's pretty annoying. Nothing about this location calls for low density crap like this. Them building a new store pretty much ensures it will remain a one story retail shitcake for at least another decade...

Two Story!

Actually if, as it appears, the store is all on the second floor, what is on the first? Parking open to the street? It might hold the corner better, but I don't know if it makes the pedestrian experience much better.

[harryc]

Even on a cold snowy day - still gets a lot of traffic. commuters avoiding crossing the street.


Feb 12