CHICAGO | General Developments

[Busy Bee]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

...because they’ve never taken a financial risk in their lives and they never will...

Dismissive much?

I mostly agree with your anti-gentrification nimby posture, but do you realize how unbelievably haughty and tone-deaf that sounds? How in the hell can you with any confidence say that about any other human being without knowing them?

[Tombstoner]

Originally Posted by Busy Bee

Dismissive much?

I mostly agree with your anti-gentrification nimby posture, but do you realize how unbelievably haughty and tone-deaf that sounds? How in the hell can you with any confidence say that about any other human being without knowing them?

Unfortunately, everyone--left, right or center--trades is gross generalizations about privilege, victimization, (dis)advantage, etc. without understanding that there are actual human beings with very diverse life experiences behind those generalizations. The aggregated data erases all that. While it's right to call that out, it's pretty unavoidable.

[Gedung Tinngi]

Fantastic to see so much activity in Woodlawn.

I see a lot of the neighborhood changes as I go to my favorite coffee shop in Chicago at the corner of 53rd and Woodlawn Ave. Robust Coffee Lounge. Home of the Mocha Diablo.

Very interested to see the new development start immediately east of that intersection.

Thanks for posting the list to that development map, Marothisu!

[moorhosj1]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

^ That can snowball if more developers get into the game.

What the anti-gentrification activists will never realize (because they’ve never taken a financial risk in their lives and they never will) is that private investment is a very, very delicate thing. To cultivate it you have to sit back, be supportive, and let small people invest and make money. We’ve lost the ability to cultivate that in our cities it often seems. We need to bring that back. That is the only way the south side comes back. Period.

It’s tough to revitalize a neighborhood by pissing off the people who actually live there. Plenty of small-time developers are in the game, Crains reports on them all the time, so does marothisu.

[the urban politician]

I think Chicago has been decent at courting big players. After all, nothing strokes the ego of a Alderman or a Mayor than schmoozing with top executives and making headlines. Small developers will never have that clout.

And that is the fundamental issue here. To this day, rebirth of a neighborhood CAN ONLY happen when hordes of regular small time people come in and build, rehab, etc. That usually requires less Government intrusion and a feeling of stability (ie I’m not worried that some local Aldermen can suddenly game the rules against me at a whim next week and make all of my efforts suddenly worthless).

Big companies can absorb such losses, but a small guy can sink and is thus far more likely to be risk averse.

If this is happening in Woodlawn then that is wonderful. Ultimately, no matter what, a Sterling Bay or a Related will never make a whole neighborhood come back. They can maybe build out the skeleton but it’s the smaller guys who “decorate it”, so to speak.

[moorhosj1]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

And that is the fundamental issue here. To this day, rebirth of a neighborhood CAN ONLY happen when hordes of regular small time people come in and build, rehab, etc. That usually requires less Government intrusion and a feeling of stability (ie I’m not worried that some local Aldermen can suddenly game the rules against me at a whim next week and make all of my efforts suddenly worthless).

As you stated before, it is a demand problem, not a supply problem. The demand is created by having amenities people want in a neighborhood, like good schools, transit, libraries, parks, grocery stores, safety, and so on. This is typically provided by government and non-profits, which is exactly what the city has been doing.

Once the demand exists, no community group will stop the revitalization (see: Pilsen and Logan Square).

[Kngkyle]

I've been eyeing some of those new construction SFHs in Bronzeville and Grand Boulevard. Might pull the trigger one of these days and do my part to gentrify the area.

[thegoatman]

Originally Posted by Kngkyle

I've been eyeing some of those new construction SFHs in Bronzeville and Grand Boulevard. Might pull the trigger one of these days and do my part to gentrify the area.

Please do. Ignore the dumb activists, the south lakefront needs the diversity and income. It's a great part of the city thats developing well.

[BrinChi]

Originally Posted by Kngkyle

I've been eyeing some of those new construction SFHs in Bronzeville and Grand Boulevard. Might pull the trigger one of these days and do my part to gentrify the area.

Come on down! I did this 3 years ago and there's no looking back. There's so much potential just need more people to keep the city making the right investments and to patronize the new food and retail such as Emeche, Little Sandwich House, Sip & Savor, Cleo's Southern Cuisine, Truth Italian, Norman's Bistro, Virtue. (I have no financial stake in any restaurants mentioned)

[tjp]

Originally Posted by marothisu

Here's a map for 2021 of all the multi unit housing that was permitted new construction in Chicago. In total, it's 7271 new units - I counted 1000 S Michigan which is 738 units. If you don't count that then we're talking about 6533 units.

Some of these permitted are pretty close to one another so you will want to zoom in some places, especially in Bronzeville and Woodlawn where you have multiple clusters of 4 or 5 permitted right next to one another.

https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer...934883789&z=13

In total there's 309 buildings on this map, and 159 of them are ones that I believe are on vacant/surface lots. There are some of the tear downs that are also part vacant/surface lot and part tear down. I counted townhome developments as part of this too.

This is so cool. I'm encouraged Pilsen is seeing the development of so many small MF buildings, even if larger developments are increasingly difficult to build.

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by tjp

This is so cool. I'm encouraged Pilsen is seeing the development of so many small MF buildings, even if larger developments are increasingly difficult to build.

Well most of it is zoned RT-4 or B3-2 so it's easy to put up a 3-flat where a workers cottage or vacant lot used to be. If you can get a double lot you can do a 6-flat. Major corridors are dash-2 so you can do 3 apartments above a store. Anything bigger than this will require a zoning change from the alderman.

[the urban politician]

^ Yeah, Pilsen is well along in the gentrification game, but somehow they still voted in that asstard. I think that early on during gentrification, the gentrifiers are those hipster types who don't even vote, so the organized community groups threatened by them put in Aldermen who fight to keep them out.

Then, as a neighborhood matures, the gentrifiers have their shit together and start voting in earnest, and then you get more Scott Waugespack, Tom Tunney types of people who, while always prone to hack-douche-like behavior, aren't completely beholden to Marxist nonsense and actually UNDERSTAND that investment is a good force for a neighborhood.

[ardecila]

LOL no. Once the neighborhood reaches a certain wealth threshold, the alderman will just downzone everything to RS-3 and make all the old 3-flats and 4-flats nonconforming, and you can't even put up a 2-flat without kissing the alderman's ring for a spot zoning. That's what happened in West Town, Ukranian Village, Bucktown, Logan Square, parts of Lakeview, etc...

This is arguably worse than anything Sigcho has done, since it's not just anti-development but it also serves the interests of wealthy homeowners. Sigcho actually deserves some credit for proposing and passing an ordinance against deconversions, even if I disagree with a lot of other stuff he's done. I'm very interested to see how he handles the planning for the Jesuit site at 18th/Newberry... will he take the opportunity to get a big amount of affordable housing for the community, or will he prioritize low density over everything else?

[the urban politician]

^ Sigcho just stumbled into passing policies that happen to align with the pro-density crowd right now.

But that is short sighted. Many north sided Aldermen have been very supportive of large, market rate TOD projects in their neighborhoods over the past few years. No point in even asking Sigcho for permission to build one unless it was 100% low income housing or something of the sort.

It's only going to be a matter of time before Pilsen will move to a new phase where large scale new construction will be needed. These piddly little shacks and 2 flats just don't cut it. A new Alderman will be needed down the road.

[ardecila]

I agree with you about the need for denser housing... but I'm not sure a Waguespack type moderate alderman would actually allow TODs in Pilsen either.

In gentrified wards on the North Side it seems to be a crap shoot whether you get a good alderman (e.g. Matt Martin, Walter Burnett, Hopkins) or a bad one (e.g. Waguespack, Michele Smith).

[thegoatman]

Originally Posted by Toasty Joe

Looks like Alderman Hopkins confirmed the Walgreens on North & Wells withdrew from the Moody/Fern Hill development (with David Adjaye)... source: Preservation Futures Twitter

I'm not thrilled to hear, as that corner deserves more than a 1 story "meh" structure, but maybe it will be developed with more density later down the line. Can certainly keep the facade for lobby/retail?

preservationists are cancer. NIMBY's in disguise. they're acting like that walgreens is the Hagia Sophia or something, it's a fucking one story walgreens with a parking garage, tear that shit down. That site is wayy to close to downtown, a tower should 100% be erected there.

Hoping the same faith for that walgreens in river north

[marothisu]

I created another map for multi unit new construction permits but this time for all of 2020 and 2021. In total 593 buildings of which 308 of them were on vacant/surface lots. There are a bunch of the tear downs that are actually partially on vacant/surface lots. In total this accounts for at least 11,867 units. Not every single one of these have been built yet but a large percentage have or are currently under construction.

I'll probably modify this later to show difference in height (before and after). There's definitely some areas that have gotten taller - northside for example on some of the main streets like Halsted have seen some 1 and 2 story buildings demolished for 4 or 5 story buildings creating a more uniform streetscape in height which is nice.


https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer...767413926&z=12

[Jibba]

Originally Posted by thegoatman

preservationists are cancer. NIMBY's in disguise. they're acting like that walgreens is the Hagia Sophia or something, it's a fucking one story walgreens with a parking garage, tear that shit down. That site is wayy to close to downtown, a tower should 100% be erected there.

Hoping the same faith for that walgreens in river north

I don't know how much value PC actually places on this building; they may be wanting to position it as a bellwether for the preservation of contemporaneous buildings around the city. In any case, I don't imagine Walgreen's pulled out because of pressure from any preservationists.

[thegoatman]

43 Green in Bronzeville has begun construction.

[thegoatman]

Also any updates on this?

https://chicagoyimby.com/2021/01/zon...orth-side.html