CHICAGO | Economic & Business Development

[OrdoSeclorum]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

^ Neat perspective.


For me, the sweet spot is to buy a decent but not huge home in the burbs, use their schools, and visit the city often.

"Why should I put my shopping cart away when some other shopper will eventually move it for me? It's best for me personally if I make someone else do that."

This is why we need unified regional government. Some people will behave parasitically until they are forced to do what's right.

[ski_steve]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

^ Neat perspective.

Now, Covid clearly changed that. There is pretty much zero reason to go to Chicago

I wouldn't say that's true for areas outside of downtown. I sold my place in July (Lincoln Park) with multiple offers, over listing. I do think its much slower downtown... neighborhoods sound like they are going fast still.

[galleyfox]

Originally Posted by ski_steve

I wouldn't say that's true for areas outside of downtown. I sold my place in July (Lincoln Park) with multiple offers, over listing. I do think its much slower downtown... neighborhoods sound like they are going fast still.

Capital One looks to shed big suburban office

“The credit card giant has its nearly 165,000-square-foot Rolling Meadows space up for sublease as it plans to move some of its suburban employees into the city while others will work remotely even after the COVID-19 pandemic.”

https://www.chicagobusiness.com/comm...uburban-office

One thing that hasn’t been discussed much is that the suburbs can be walloped by work from home just as much as the city. Very few companies will be able to do 100% remote, but sending the interactive public facing employees downtown and making the back office workers remote is a very real outcome.

I think the Chicago Tribune is a valid voice of Midwestern suburban residents, but it can’t really capture the attitude of people who came to the city of Chicago to escape that lifestyle and mindset.

That’s been the central tension in the Chicago area. There’s no doubt the companies would prefer to be based in Lake and DuPage, but the white collar Big 10 and Ivy grads they most want to hire won’t come to them.

[jpIllInoIs]

Originally Posted by galleyfox

Capital One looks to shed big suburban office

“The credit card giant has its nearly 165,000-square-foot Rolling Meadows space up for sublease as it plans to move some of its suburban employees into the city while others will work remotely even after the COVID-19 pandemic.”

https://www.chicagobusiness.com/comm...uburban-office

One thing that hasn’t been discussed much is that the suburbs can be walloped by work from home just as much as the city. Very few companies will be able to do 100% remote, but sending the interactive public facing employees downtown and making the back office workers remote is a very real outcome.

I think the Chicago Tribune is a valid voice of Midwestern suburban residents, but it can’t really capture the attitude of people who came to the city of Chicago to escape that lifestyle and mindset.

That’s been the central tension in the Chicago area. There’s no doubt the companies would prefer to be based in Lake and DuPage, but the white collar Big 10 and Ivy grads they most want to hire won’t come to them.

This was announced internally about 3 wks ago. A good friend was thrilled to get reassigned to DT when work in office returns. But corporate has said work from home till August is likely.

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

^ Neat perspective.

I’m not sold on home ownership in Chicago, but hey, maybe there is something there.

For me, the sweet spot is to buy a decent but not huge home in the burbs, use their schools, and visit the city often.

Many people on this forum detest that idea for reasons that I understand, but I find that to still be the best value proposition and millions of normal people agree with me.

Now, Covid clearly changed that. There is pretty much zero reason to go to Chicago and nobody in power right now has even cared to realize how economically disastrous that is. I’m not surprised, of course, as since Rahm Emanuel left office this region has utterly lacked a champion who is willing to fight diligently for the local economy. We have a bunch of half-asleep laggards at the wheel right now and it’s very disconcerting.

Actually, there are many parts of the city itself that are experiencing properties with multiple offers causing it to go above listing price. Not only in areas like Portage Park, Jefferson Park, Norwood Park, Archer Heights, West Lawn, etx but also Edgewater, Lakeview, etc. I have a map going, privately. In fact for October, I have record of 437 properties in the city of Chicago itself selling for more than its public sale price. There were probably more, and also this isn't counting anything I don't have access to like a house selling for only $2K under its list price but having some $10K concession of the owner doing something for the next owners before closing.

There's been multiple articles in Crains on this dating back to September in the city proper itself. Many people takimg advantage of cheaper interest rates in cheaper but safe areas like those I mentioned.


Also regarding Texas. Great for them but if you actually break down the real data they arent as good as anybody else at attracting the college graduates. As discussed in here, Chicago is doing better than any of the top 7 cities in the US and even better than Austin.

To whomever said Texas is basically like Saudi Arabia..spot on. I have a coworker who was here in nyc for awhile but born and raised in Texas. He moved back a few years ago - very conservative guy. He told me the same exact thing that because they have oil, and the state government actually owns a lot of it, they can subsidize via government a lot of that stuff. He likened it to how China or Saudi Arabia funds a lot of its public things, and called people here in the US idiots for thinking Texas is that much different from either of those countries.

It is indeed great for them that they do have no income tax, which has led to fairly high property tax. However, wages are pretty relative. Companies will find Texas attractive due to this, but realize it means the COL is lower and therefore they don't pay people as much especially because no income tax. If you take a look at Census data, you'll see the Dallas area and Chicago areas aren't super different in percentage of households paying under 30% of their gross earnings towards housing.

2019 5 year ACS - percentage of households where rent is 30%+ of their gross income:
Nashville MSA: 45.4%
Charlotte MSA: 45.7%
Minneapolis MSA: 45.9%
San Francisco MSA: 46.2%
Dallas MSA: 46.3%
San Jose MSA: 46.4%
Seattle MSA: 47%
Washington DC MSA: 47.3%
Austin MSA: 47.5%
Phoenix MSA: 47.7%
Indianapolis MSA: 47.9%
San Antonio MSA: 48.5%
Chicago MSA: 48.7%
Baltimore MSA: 48.8%
Atlanta MSA: 49%
Boston MSA: 49%
Houston MSA: 49%
Jacksonville MSA: 49.6%
Denver MSA: 49.9%
Detroit MSA: 49.9%
Portland MSA: 49.9%
Philadelphia MSA: 51%
Las Vegas MSA: 51.5%
NYC MSA: 52.4%
Tampa MSA: 52.7%
Sacramento MSA: 54.2%
Orlando MSA: 55.5%
San Diego MSA: 56.7%
Los Angeles MSA: 57.4%
Riverside, CA MSA: 58%
Miami MSA: 62.6%

2019 5 year ACS - percentage of households where rent is 50%+ of their gross income:
Nashville MSA: 20.4%
Dallas MSA: 20.8%
Charlotte MSA: 20.9%
Seattle MSA: 21.6%
Minneapolis MSA: 22%
Austin MSA: 22.2%
San Jose MSA: 22.4%
Washington DC MSA: 22.4%
San Antonio MSA: 22.5%
Jacksonville: 22.6%
Indianapolis: 22.8%
Phoenix MSA: 22.9%
San Francisco MSA: 23%
Denver MSA: 23.1%
Atlanta MSA: 23.4%
Houston MSA: 23.7%
Boston MSA: 24.3%
Portland MSA: 24.5%
Las Vegas MSA: 24.8%
Chicago MSA: 24.9%
Baltimore MSA: 25.1%
Tampa MSA: 25.6%
Detroit MSA: 26.3%
Orlando MSA: 27.1%
Philadelphia MSA: 27.5%
Sacramento MSA: 28%
NYC MSA: 28.1%
San Diego MSA: 28.7%
Riverside, CA MSA: 29.7%
Los Angeles MSA: 30.1%
Miami MSA: 33.5%


2019 5 year ACS - percentage of households in owner occupied units with a mortgage paying 30%+ of their gross income towards housing:
Indianapolis: 19.7%
Minneapolis MSA: 21.3%
Charlotte MSA: 22.8%
Detroit MSA: 23.7%
Nashville MSA: 23.9%
Atlanta MSA: 25.1%
Dallas MSA: 26%
Austin MSA: 26.1%
Houston MSA: 26.2%
Baltimore MSA: 26.3%
Denver MSA: 26.4%
Washington DC MSA: 26.6%
San Antonio MSA: 26.8%
Jacksonville MSA: 27.3%
Portland MSA: 28.7%
Phialdelphia MSA: 28.9%
Seattle MSA: 29.1%
Chicago MSA: 29.9%
Boston MSA: 30.1%
Tampa MSA: 30.2%
Las Vegas MSA: 30.7%
Orlando MSA: 30.8%
Sacramento MSA: 32.9%
NYC MSA: 33.8%
San Jose MSA: 34.2%
San Francisco MSA: 35.5%
Riverside, CA MSA: 39%
San Diego MSA: 39.2%
Miami MSA: 40.7%
Los Angeles MSA: 42.2%

[SIGSEGV]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

^ Neat perspective.

I’m not sold on home ownership in Chicago, but hey, maybe there is something there.

For me, the sweet spot is to buy a decent but not huge home in the burbs, use their schools, and visit the city often.

Many people on this forum detest that idea for reasons that I understand, but I find that to still be the best value proposition and millions of normal people agree with me.

If everyone thought the same way, there would be no central city. That's how you can tell the actions are parasitic.

[Chi-Sky21]

Yeah the thing with Texas is.....it is Texas...just like people telling me to move to Indiana...it could be half the price of here or less..i still would not care. you know why? Because it is Indiana!

[Tom In Chicago]

^Dollar Stores and Dairy Queens. . . even in Austin. . .

. . .

[SIGSEGV]

The stimulus bill includes $150M for computing at Argonne (and also some smaller amounts supporting projects at Fermilab/UChicago, e.g. $6M for CMB-S4 which is all over the country but in which UChicago plays a leading role, and $30M to upgrade SURF in South Dakota, presumably for the Fermilab-based DUNE experiment).

[the urban politician]

If Rahm were in office, I could see him going out hard to reel Discover into the 78. I don’t know if Chicago has that kind of leadership any more. But we’re going to need it!

[skysoar]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

If Rahm were in office, I could see him going out hard to reel Discover into the 78. I don’t know if Chicago has that kind of leadership any more. But we’re going to need it!

Its obvious that we don"t have that type of leadership in Chicago at this time. This was my greatest fear with a Lightfoot administration. Rahm Emmanuel, love him or hate him he was a great driver of Economic vitality in the Chicago area. Also Rahm seemed to have more control over Downtown Aldermen as it related to Downtown"s large development projects, as very few projects were downsized as has become routine now.

[Chicago_Forever]

^ I don't think Rahm's influence had anything to do with the height of any proposals. Most if not all major projects were "downsized" while Rahm was in office. 400 LSD, One Chicago, Salesforce, Equinox, etc., all got a haircut or started the process while Rahm was mayor. Don't get me wrong, I think Rahm had some great attributes and had a lot of influence but I also believe some give him too much credit.

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by Chicago_Forever

^ I don't think Rahm's influence had anything to do with the height of any proposals. Most if not all major projects were "downsized" while Rahm was in office. 400 LSD, One Chicago, Salesforce, Equinox, etc., all got a haircut or started the process while Rahm was mayor. Don't get me wrong, I think Rahm had some great attributes and had a lot of influence but I also believe some give him too much credit.

The posters above were talking about economic vitality, not various buildings getting built. I completely agree with them regarding Rahm - he was great for getting companies to open up shop or expand in Chicago. Hell, he even got Amazon to consider Chicago in basically the final cut for HQ2 when nobody internally on that board at Amazon in the beginning was seriously even considering Chicago. A major reason was because of him (and I have at least one friend who worked on the proposal - Rahm was huge in this effort apparently). A lot of other stuff - say what you will about him but he was actually great at expanding this type of thing in the city.

[Chicago_Forever]

I understand and agree with the part about Rahm being great at bringing businesses, and in turn, economic vitality to the city. I'm not denying that and anyone who does is either lying or in denial. Rahm was the city's biggest and most visible cheerleader with lots of connections/influence. However, I don't agree with the part about him having control over Alderman resulting in fewer buildings being downsized which is what Skysoar said.

[marothisu]

The 2019 ACS (5 year) came out a few weeks ago. I haven't had a lot of time to go over it but one thing I did recently look at was change in households making $100K+. There are a few community areas with some crossover in other CAs, but it's small. The geographic components being compared are the same.

In total, only 9 of the 77 community areas actually lost households in this category. Multiple areas actually lost overall occupied housing units but gained in $100K+ households: Lincoln Square, Forest Glen, Archer Heights, West Elsdon, Portage Park, Montclare, Belmont Cragin, Greater Grand Crossing, Mount Greenwood, Clearing, North Center, Armour Square, Dunning, Roseland, Jefferson Park, and Washington Park.

2018-2019 Change in $100K+ Households
1. Near North Side: +2006 households
2. Lincoln Park: +1831 households
3. West Town: +1684 households
4. Lake View: +1323 households
5. Logan Square: +1264 households
6. Near West Side: +1155 households
7. Portage Park: +898 households
8. Lincoln Square: +833 households
9. Avondale: +824 households
10. Near South Side: +760 households
11. Edgewater: +757 households
12. Lower West Side: +644 households
13. Austin: +470 households
14. Norwood Park: +464 households
15. Bridgeport: +452 households
16. South Shore: +432 households
17. West Ridge: +422 households
18. The Loop: +403 households
19. Hyde Park: +401 households
20. Chatham: +398 households
21. Uptown: +355 households
22. Rogers Park: +351 households
23. New City: +348 households
24. Humboldt Park: +340 households
25. Chicago Lawn: +335 households
26. West Lawn: +312 households
27. West Pullman: +284 households
28. Forest Glen: +282 households
29. Morgan Park: +281 households
30. Ashburn: +279 households
31. Albany Park: +269 households
32. North Center: +266 households
33. Irving Park: +263 households
34. Gage Park: +260 households
35. O'Hare: +257 households
36. Auburn Gresham: +250 households
37. Greater Grand Crossing: +227 households
38. Dunning: +218 households
39. Hermosa: +209 households
40. Archer Heights: +194 households
41. South Chicago: +172 households
42. Brighton Park: +160 households
43T. Garfield Ridge: +145 households
43T. North Park: +145 households
45. Kenwood: +140 households
46. Mount Greenwood: +123 households
47. Belmont Cragin: +115 households
48. East Side: +110 households
49T. East Garfield Park: +109 households
49T. Montclare: +109 households
51. West Elsdon: +108 households
52. Roseland: +102 households
53. Douglas: +98 households
54. Edison Park: +97 households
55T. Clearing: +85 households
55T. South Lawndale: +85 households
57. Armour Square: +77 households
58T. Oakland: +75 households
58T. West Garfield Park: +75 households
60. Jefferson Park: +74 households
61. Woodlawn: +46 households
62. McKinley Park: +41 households
63. Grand Boulevard: +35 households
64. Calumet Heights: +32 households
65. Riverdale: +26 households
66. South Deering: +19 households
67. Avalon Park: +5 households
68. Washington Park: +1 households
69. Fuller Park: -7 households
70. Pullman: -17 households
71. Burnside: -22 households
72. Beverly: -23 households
73. Washington Heights: -27 households
74. North Lawndale: -36 households
75. Hegewisch: -61 households
76. West Englewood: -78 households
77. Englewood: -116 households


2018-2019 $100K+ Households Percent Change
1. New City: +39.01%
2. Lower West Side: +33.25%
3. Chatham: +32.28%
4. Archer Heights: +29.17%
5. West Garfield Park: +28.2%
6. Greater Grand Crossing: +25.25%
7. Chicago Lawn: +23.83%
8. Gage Park: +23.68%
9. Avondale: +23.37%
10. Riverdale: +22.61%
11. Oakland: +21.55%
12. East Garfield Park: +19.85%
13. South Shore: +19.79%
14. West Pullman: +18.44%
15. Hermosa: +18.1%
16. South Chicago: +17.9%
17. West Lawn: +17.6%
18. O'Hare: +16.32%
19. Humboldt Park: +16.18%
20. Bridgeport: +15.92%
21. Auburn Gresham: +14.01%
22. Portage Park: +13.86%
23. Lincoln Square: +12.88%
24. Hyde Park: +12.3%
25. Lincoln Park: +11.25%
26. Logan Square: +11.2%
27. Austin: +11.13%
28. Brighton Park: +11%
29. Near South Side: +10.83%
30. Armour Square: +10.65%
31. Edgewater: +10.47%
32. East Side: +10.31%
33. Morgan Park: +10.02%
34. Montclare: +9.74%
35. Near West Side: +9.54%
36. West Town: +9.45%
37. West Elsdon: +9.26%
38. Rogers Park: +8.91%
39. Douglas: +8.25%
40. North Park: +7.72%
41. Ashburn: +7.57%
42. Forest Glen: +7.44%
43. Near North Side: +7.2%
44. West Ridge: +7.06%
45. Norwood Park: +6.55%
46. Albany Park: +5.96%
47. Kenwood: +5.82%
48. Lake View: +5.65%
49. South Lawndale: +5.56%
50. Roseland: +5.26%
51. Uptown: +4.55%
52. Dunning: +4.54%
53. Clearing: +4.2%
54. McKinley Park: +4.18%
55. Irving Park: +4.16%
56. Edison Park: +4.14%
57. The Loop: +3.73%
58. Mount Greenwood: +3.72%
59. Woodlawn: +3.57%
60. Garfield Ridge: +3.44%
61. South Deering: +3.44%
62. North Center: +3.26%
63. Calumet Heights: +2.95%
64. Belmont Cragin: +2.77%
65. Jefferson Park: +2.01%
66. Grand Boulevard: +2%
67. Avalon Park: +0.74%
68. Washington Park: +0.3%
69. Beverly: -0.62%
70. Washington Heights: -1.41%
71. Pullman: -4.17%
72. North Lawndale: -4.42%
73. Hegewisch: -7.05%
74. Fuller Park: -9.59%
75. West Englewood: -10.06%
76. Burnside: -17.74%
77. Englewood: -23.2%

2018-2019 100K+ Change to Total Household Change Ratio
i.e. for every change in 1 total housing, this many $100K+ households were added. Asterisk (*) next to the name means there was an overall reduction in occupied housing units but a gain in $100K+ households. CAs that lost $100K+ households not included:

1. Lincoln Square (*): 416.5
2. North Park: 72.5
3. Forest Glen (*): 25.64
4. Lincoln Park: 25.43
5. Morgan Park: 20.07
6. Archer Heights (*): 11.41
7. Gage Park: 9.29
8. West Elsdon (*): 7.71
9. O'Hare: 7.34
10. West Lawn: 7.09
11. Portage Park (*): 6.8
12. Montclare (*): 6.41
13. Ashburn: 6.34
14. Belmont Cragin (*): 6.05
15. Edison Park: 5.11
16. Chicago Lawn: 4.35
17. Bridgeport: 3.9
18. Norwood Park: 3.8
19. West Ridge: 3.77
20. West Garfield Park: 3.57
21. Avondale: 3.28
22. Lower West Side: 3.13
23. Garfield Ridge: 3.02
24. Logan Square: 2.93
25. Near West Side: 2.84
26. West Town: 2.46
27. Greater Grand Crossing (*): 2.36
28. Hermosa: 2.18
29. Mount Greenwood (*): 2.08
30. Albany Park: 2.05
31. Clearing (*): 1.98
32. Edgewater: 1.92
33. Lake View: 1.81
34. Brighton Park: 1.8
35. Irving Park: 1.74
36. Chatham: 1.69
37. Hyde Park: 1.64
38. North Center (*): 1.59
39. East Side: 1.57
40. Near North Side: 1.52
41. East Garfield Park: 1.51
42. West Pullman: 1.42
43. Near South Side: 1.41
44. Armour Square (*): 1.4
45. Auburn Gresham: 1.29
46. New City: 1.15
47. Austin: 1.07
48. Dunning (*): 1.05
49. Humboldt Park: 0.9
50. The Loop: 0.76
51T. South Shore: 0.72
51T. Woodlawn: 0.72
53. Douglas: 0.69
54T. Rogers Park: 0.64
54T. South Lawndale: 0.64
56. Roseland (*): 0.63
57. McKinley Park: 0.6
58T. Jefferson Park (*): 0.55
58T. Oakland: 0.55
60. Kenwood: 0.53
61. South Chicago: 0.5
62. Uptown: 0.46
63. Calumet Heights: 0.45
64. Riverdale: 0.32
65. Grand Boulevard: 0.21
66. South Deering: 0.19
67. Washington Park (*): 0.08
68. Avalon Park: 0.05

Top 25 Overall for Total $100K+ Households
1. Near North Side: 29,855 households
2. Lake View: 24,743 households
3. West Town: 19,496 households
4. Lincoln Park: 18,110 households
5. Near West Side: 13,263 households
6. Logan Square: 12,554 households
7. The Loop: 11,219 households
8. North Center: 8417 households
9. Uptown: 8165 households
10. Edgewater: 7987 households
11. Near South Side: 7779 households
12. Norwood Park: 7544 households
13. Portage Park: 7377 households
14. Lincoln Square: 7302 households
15. Irving Park: 6588 households
16. West Ridge: 6396 households
17. Dunning: 5021 households
18. Albany Park: 4780 households
19. Austin: 4691 households
20. Garfield Ridge: 4361 households
21. Avondale: 4350 households
22. Rogers Park: 4292 households
23. Belmont Cragin: 4264 households
24. Forest Glen: 4072 households
25. Ashburn: 3964 households

2019 Top 25 Overall Percentage $100K+ Households
1. North Center: 59.72%
2. Forest Glen: 58.41%
3. Lincoln Park: 55.9%
4. The Loop: 54.14%
5. Near South Side: 53.71%
6. Edison Park: 52.32%
7. Near North Side: 52.22%
8. West Town: 51.55%
9. Mount Greenwood: 51.3%
10. Beverly: 49.22%
11. Near West Side: 46.35%
12. Lake View: 46.27%
13. Norwood Park: 44.14%
14. Logan Square: 41.5%
15. Lincoln Square: 39.8%
16. Jefferson Park: 36.15%
17. Garfield Ridge: 35.45%
18. Portage Park: 32.81%
19. Dunning: 32.44%
20. Irving Park: 32.04%
21. Avondale: 31.89%
22. North Park: 30.86%
23. Ashburn: 30.2%
24. Morgan Park: 29.42%
25. Albany Park: 28.27%

2019 Top 25 Overall Total $200K+ Households
1. Near North Side: 14,065 households
2. Lake View: 9973 households
3. Lincoln Park: 8526 households
4. West Town: 7276 households
5. Near West Side: 4838 households
6. The Loop: 4372 households
7. North Center: 4020 households
8. Logan Square: 3980 households
9. Near South Side: 3146 households
10. Edgewater: 2273 households
11. Uptown: 2139 households
12. Lincoln Square: 2031 households
13. Norwood Park: 1890 households
14. Irving Park: 1888 households
15. Forest Glen: 1605 households
16. Portage Park: 1519 households
17. Hyde Park: 1494 households
18. West Ridge: 1420 households
19. Beverly: 1204 households
20. Avondale: 1073 households
21. Edison Park: 956 households
22. Albany Park: 954 households
23. Kenwood: 869 households
24. Rogers Park: 776 households
25. Bridgeport: 766 households

2019 Top 25 Overall Percentage $200K+ Households
1. North Center: 28.52%
2. Lincoln Park: 26.32%
3. Near North Side: 24.6%
4. Forest Glen: 23.02%
5. Near South Side: 21.72%
6. The Loop: 21.1%
7. Edison Park: 20.51%
8. West Town: 19.24%
9. Lake View: 18.65%
10. Near West Side: 16.91%
11. Beverly: 16.09%
12. Logan Square: 13.16%
13. Hyde Park: 11.24%
14. Lincoln Square: 11.07%
15. Norwood Park: 11.06%
16. Mount Greenwood: 10.04%
17. Irving Park: 9.18%
18. Kenwood: 9.08%
19. Avondale: 7.87%
20. Edgewater: 7.76%
21. North Park: 7.59%
22. Uptown: 7.01%
23. Portage Park: 6.76%
24. Jefferson Park: 6.73%
25. Morgan Park: 6.58%

[IrishIllini]

News around the Mag Mile has been very doom and gloom...

[sentinel]

Originally Posted by IrishIllini

News around the Mag Mile has been very doom and gloom...

Um, care to elaborate?

[wchicity]

Originally Posted by sentinel

Um, care to elaborate?

Macy's at Water Tower Place, the flagship Gap, and Express all announced closings within the last week.

To be honest, when tourism rebounds, I think Mag Mile will rebound. The above brands weren't exactly high growth or trendy by any means pre-COVID. All were heavily reliant on tourism, as they all have other locations in other city neighborhoods.

[Chi-Sky21]

I wonder if they will update that part of the building, put in more windows maybe instead of giant blank slab facing the street above ground level? I think those floors are mostly retail and not mechanical.

[Chicago_Forever]

^ Exactly! I think this is an opportunity for the owner of WTP to do a facelift of the building which I hope would include getting rid of the blank walls.