HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > General Development


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #31681  
Old Posted Dec 30, 2015, 3:44 AM
marothisu marothisu is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Chicago
Posts: 6,890
Quote:
Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright View Post
That's the thing, there is no finite number. The fact that there isn't a finite number is why cities exist. When more successful people and businesses concentrate in one place, more opportunities to become successful are created. The more densely concentrated these businesses and individuals are, the more intense this agglomeration effect becomes. The more opportunities, the more people come looking for them and in turn start the cycle anew and generate even more opportunities themselves. That's why humans concentrate in cities to begin with.

So when a bunch of ritzy businesses like Scofflaw open up, you get aspiring mixologists flocking to work there. They all open more mixology bars like the whistler or Lost Lake and in turn the next crop of opportunities is generated. The owners of Scofflaw have done quite well for themselves and so have their subsequent offspring. Why? Because the initial risk taken and burst of creativity generated something new which is of value.

Point is, the more successful we are at creating desirable environments like Logan Square, the more rapidly we will see other parts of the city go down the same road.
Well, there is a finite number right now, but it's really big - so big that most people can't imagine it. That's why I mentioned to spend a lot of time in Manhattan. NYC has it on a large scale, even if their COL is pretty high, it doesn't matter because tons of people make enough there. Chicago is the same way, but there's enough people here who don't understand that realm of the world that they call it into question. I spent a lot of time growing up in NYC and LA, but at the same time - when I moved to Chicago, I never could understand how there could be so many millionaires. Thought it was all a big lie, etc for the first bit of living here before realizing something about money and how many people actually have it. Someone with a salary of $90K in Chicago without kids is going to be spending some of it freely. There's more people in this type of situation, even people in their 20s, than most people even realize.

Chicago has always had it - it's a city and congregated by people looking for success who are able to get it at varying levels. We are now seeing it in the form of jobs within tech and consulting where literally tens of thousands of jobs have been created in this realm in the last few years and will be in the next few years. A lot of the people getting the jobs are not 45 year old guys with 3 kids (though some certainly are. A large majority are younger people, millennials, without a family and money to spend because the jobs pay pretty well on average (I saw two job postings at Avant recently for software developers. The high end for one was $150K and the high end for the senior position was $190K. These salaries even in NYC would be considered pretty high).

And the thing about creative engines congregating close together is an important one. The restaurant/bar one is obvious, but a little less obvious perhaps to some people are the startups that have happened here. There have been a bunch formed by guys who used to work in the area at larger companies like Motorola, IBM, Accenture, etc and now even Groupon and said "Whatever, I'm forming my own business." Making startups here is not only important from a jobs, revenue, new housing, etc perspective but they also attract talent - and some of that talent will eventually spin off and make their own companies as well and hire even more people into the city if they're successful too.
__________________
Chicago Maps:
* New Construction https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer...B0&usp=sharing
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31682  
Old Posted Dec 30, 2015, 3:49 AM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is offline
TL;DR
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: the city o'wind
Posts: 16,429
Quote:
Originally Posted by PKDickman View Post
Don't know if they have a long term expectation.
That 150,000 number was from '03 and was a gee whiz number for the next 20 yrs.
And that's for Chgo Ave to the Stevenson, Lake Mich to the river/Halsted

I can tell you what it is zoned for.

Figure an average zoning of DX-7
That's around 120,000 DUs per mile. Figure all 1 bdrm. avg occupancy of 1.25.
151,000 ppm times approx 9 sq miles.
1,080,000 people.

But there is a lot of dedicated non-residential land use down there.
Parks, museums, Civic buildings etc, have to suck up at least half of the gross sq miles
Forget museums and civic. The whole southwest quadrant of that area, 1.5 sq. mi. is unusable for residential due to industrial/service zoning and railyards.
__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31683  
Old Posted Dec 30, 2015, 4:26 PM
marothisu marothisu is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Chicago
Posts: 6,890
I guess this is good news in some ways. WeWork just signed a 112,000 sq ft lease at the former CPS HQ (125 S Clark).

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/reale...s-headquarters
__________________
Chicago Maps:
* New Construction https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer...B0&usp=sharing
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31684  
Old Posted Dec 30, 2015, 5:11 PM
emathias emathias is offline
Adoptive Chicagoan
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: River North, Chicago, Illinois
Posts: 5,157
Quote:
Originally Posted by PKDickman View Post
Don't know if they have a long term expectation.
That 150,000 number was from '03 and was a gee whiz number for the next 20 yrs.
And that's for Chgo Ave to the Stevenson, Lake Mich to the river/Halsted

I can tell you what it is zoned for.

Figure an average zoning of DX-7
That's around 120,000 DUs per mile. Figure all 1 bdrm. avg occupancy of 1.25.
151,000 ppm times approx 9 sq miles.
1,080,000 people.

But there is a lot of dedicated non-residential land use down there.
Parks, museums, Civic buildings etc, have to suck up at least half of the gross sq miles
I'd be ecstatic if the Central Area hit a half-million people. Heck, I'll be pumped if the Central Area population manages to hit 300,000 in my lifetime.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31685  
Old Posted Dec 30, 2015, 8:18 PM
PKDickman PKDickman is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 565
Quote:
Originally Posted by emathias View Post
Heck, I'll be pumped if the Central Area population manages to hit 300,000 in my lifetime.
How long do you intend to live?

Not only would it require 100,000 more DUs, but it would require at least 2 new elementary schools (frankly they need another one already).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31686  
Old Posted Dec 30, 2015, 9:45 PM
emathias emathias is offline
Adoptive Chicagoan
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: River North, Chicago, Illinois
Posts: 5,157
Quote:
Originally Posted by PKDickman View Post
How long do you intend to live?

Not only would it require 100,000 more DUs, but it would require at least 2 new elementary schools (frankly they need another one already).
The City's forecast for 2020 is between 215,000 and 230,000. If it ends up at 225,000 in 2020, that would mean the Central Area would need 50,000 DUs (assuming you mean "domestic units") at a 1.5 household size ratio to get to 300,000. 1.5 residents to units is what the central area is averaging today.

In 2020 I'll turn 47, so if I lived to be 80, which seems like a reasonable estimate, the Central Area would only need to add 1,516 units per year for me to see a population of 300,000. I could be wrong, but I believe the Central Area has been averaging more like double that for at least the past 15 years. If 2020 hits a population of 225,000 people, we'd only need to average a little over 3,000 units per year for another 15 years to hit 300,000 central area residents. I'd be 62. Again, that seems completely within the realm of the possible.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31687  
Old Posted Dec 31, 2015, 12:00 AM
PKDickman PKDickman is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 565
Quote:
Originally Posted by emathias View Post
The City's forecast for 2020 is between 215,000 and 230,000. If it ends up at 225,000 in 2020, that would mean the Central Area would need 50,000 DUs (assuming you mean "domestic units") at a 1.5 household size ratio to get to 300,000. 1.5 residents to units is what the central area is averaging today.

In 2020 I'll turn 47, so if I lived to be 80, which seems like a reasonable estimate, the Central Area would only need to add 1,516 units per year for me to see a population of 300,000. I could be wrong, but I believe the Central Area has been averaging more like double that for at least the past 15 years. If 2020 hits a population of 225,000 people, we'd only need to average a little over 3,000 units per year for another 15 years to hit 300,000 central area residents. I'd be 62. Again, that seems completely within the realm of the possible.
I'm not sure what forecast your referring to. The one I referenced was from the "Central Area Plan" and it estimated 150,000 by 2023 in the area from Lakefront along Division to Wells to Chicago to Halsted to 26th to the Lakefront.

If they upped that to 230,000 by 2020, they better get on the stick.

Latest estimates put that area at 125,000. The 150,000 estimate was do-able. 230,000, not so much.

Even if you extend it to include the complete Near North Community Area the pop only goes up to 150,000. You would still have to add 40,000 DUs by 2020 and fill them to catch up with that estimate. (DU stands for dwelling unit)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31688  
Old Posted Dec 31, 2015, 3:00 AM
the urban politician the urban politician is offline
The City
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Chicago region
Posts: 21,375
^ I believe the Central Area by that plan is defined by North Ave to i55, and from the lakefront to about Halsted
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31689  
Old Posted Jan 1, 2016, 8:19 PM
Randomguy34's Avatar
Randomguy34 Randomguy34 is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Chicago & Philly
Posts: 2,420
Happy New Years everyone! We are far enough into the future where the events in Back to the Future II is considered the past. To commemerate the new year, here's a picture of Walter Payton's extension from their website.


http://www.wpcp.org/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31690  
Old Posted Jan 2, 2016, 3:29 AM
emathias emathias is offline
Adoptive Chicagoan
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: River North, Chicago, Illinois
Posts: 5,157
Quote:
Originally Posted by PKDickman View Post
I'm not sure what forecast your referring to. The one I referenced was from the "Central Area Plan" and it estimated 150,000 by 2023 in the area from Lakefront along Division to Wells to Chicago to Halsted to 26th to the Lakefront.

If they upped that to 230,000 by 2020, they better get on the stick.

Latest estimates put that area at 125,000. The 150,000 estimate was do-able. 230,000, not so much.

Even if you extend it to include the complete Near North Community Area the pop only goes up to 150,000. You would still have to add 40,000 DUs by 2020 and fill them to catch up with that estimate. (DU stands for dwelling unit)
The Central Area Plan is older than the Central Area Action Plan, which is what I referenced (check page ES-6). The "Central Area" as described in that is more like North to the Stevenson, to Halsted with extra to Ashland immediately west of the Loop. Basically the Near North Community Area (80,000), the Loop (29,000), the Near West Side (55,000) and the Near South Side (21,000). Adding up the 2010 population of the full community areas for those, you get about 185,000. Even assuming that the Near West Side includes more than the portion used for the "Central Area Action Plan," the Central Area Action Plan states that population in the area was around 165,000 in 2007.

One differentiation may be how the City counts residents versus how the Census does. The City may count all students, whereas a good number of students may end up listed for the Census in their parents homes. That's pure speculation, though.

Last edited by emathias; Jan 2, 2016 at 3:42 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31691  
Old Posted Jan 2, 2016, 2:18 PM
Kenmore Kenmore is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Uptown
Posts: 641
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Dan View Post
my dad grew up in the '50s in a 3 bedroom bungalow on the south side that housed 8 people. mom and dad, 3 boys, & 3 girls.

- mom & dad's bedroom

- boys bedroom.

- girls bedroom.

most middle class families don't/won't live like that anymore.

today that same bungalow would be doing well to house 4 people.
maybe in middle class white America but similar housing in the now Hispanic bungalow belt still sees those kinds of densities.

and it's nice to see suburbanites like TUP still lecturing people about density
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31692  
Old Posted Jan 2, 2016, 4:07 PM
harryc's Avatar
harryc harryc is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Oak Park, Il
Posts: 14,989
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Dan View Post
my dad grew up in the '50s in a 3 bedroom bungalow on the south side that housed 8 people. mom and dad, 3 boys, & 3 girls.

- mom & dad's bedroom

- boys bedroom.

- girls bedroom.

most middle class families don't/won't live like that anymore.

today that same bungalow would be doing well to house 4 people.
Pretty much the norm on my street these days - Oak Park.


Bigger bedrooms, and more baths, and a bigger kitchen. But same idea as back in the "good ol" 1920s.
__________________
Harry C - Urbanize Chicago- My Flickr stream HRC_OakPark
The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either. B Franklin.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31693  
Old Posted Jan 2, 2016, 9:55 PM
the urban politician the urban politician is offline
The City
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Chicago region
Posts: 21,375
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenmore View Post
and it's nice to see suburbanites like TUP still lecturing people about density
^ I've lived in dense, walkable urban environments for 7 years of my life.

I also pay way more Chicago property taxes than the vast majority of city residents--something that's about to increase even more when I close on a 6 flat I'm buying in Wicker Park.

So I'm not your typical "out of touch" suburbanite.

And let me remind you, living in the burbs is not my 1st choice (not that I am going to bad mouth where I live).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31694  
Old Posted Jan 2, 2016, 11:12 PM
Tom Servo's Avatar
Tom Servo Tom Servo is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,647
I lived in a city once; I pay Chicago property taxes; I post on a forum dedicated to civic development; I'm not a suburbanite


This place is too goofy.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31695  
Old Posted Jan 3, 2016, 12:03 AM
the urban politician the urban politician is offline
The City
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Chicago region
Posts: 21,375
If I'm going to be dragged into this silly discussion about my urban "cred", I will simply state that in the many years I did live in bustling urban cities I lived car free and used mass transit and my own two feet for nearly all of my transportation needs, including grocery shopping. This is unlike a certain snarky person who just posted here who frequently bitches and moans about traffic and parking and admittedly can't understand why people wouldn't use their cars to get groceries.

Last edited by the urban politician; Jan 3, 2016 at 12:17 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31696  
Old Posted Jan 3, 2016, 3:25 AM
PKDickman PKDickman is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 565
Quote:
Originally Posted by emathias View Post
The Central Area Plan is older than the Central Area Action Plan, which is what I referenced (check page ES-6). The "Central Area" as described in that is more like North to the Stevenson, to Halsted with extra to Ashland immediately west of the Loop. Basically the Near North Community Area (80,000), the Loop (29,000), the Near West Side (55,000) and the Near South Side (21,000). Adding up the 2010 population of the full community areas for those, you get about 185,000. Even assuming that the Near West Side includes more than the portion used for the "Central Area Action Plan," the Central Area Action Plan states that population in the area was around 165,000 in 2007.
Yes, they added he rest of the near north (the only piece of the city with anything approaching downtown density) they also added the the full near west side all the way to Rockwell. The then cut out Goose island and the industrial strip that Ardecila was talking about.

But in doing so they increased the area to about 13.4 sq miles so the density still works out to 17,000 ppm and they diluted the percentage of non-residential land use.

Quote:
Originally Posted by emathias View Post
One differentiation may be how the City counts residents versus how the Census does. The City may count all students, whereas a good number of students may end up listed for the Census in their parents homes. That's pure speculation, though.
No, they're just using census data. Current estimates put the expanded Central Area's pop at around 190,000 so their projection is doable.

If growth keeps up at this rate by, 2030 the central will have the population density of Belmont-Cragin.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31697  
Old Posted Jan 3, 2016, 3:49 AM
harryc's Avatar
harryc harryc is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Oak Park, Il
Posts: 14,989
Clyborn / Division

CITY FARM - INDUSTRIAL SCALE




__________________
Harry C - Urbanize Chicago- My Flickr stream HRC_OakPark
The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either. B Franklin.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31698  
Old Posted Jan 3, 2016, 2:44 PM
harryc's Avatar
harryc harryc is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Oak Park, Il
Posts: 14,989
Gonella Gone

1/2 - just E of Chicago / Odgen / Milwaukee



__________________
Harry C - Urbanize Chicago- My Flickr stream HRC_OakPark
The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either. B Franklin.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31699  
Old Posted Jan 3, 2016, 2:58 PM
harryc's Avatar
harryc harryc is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Oak Park, Il
Posts: 14,989
Lake / Morgan

A bright new day
__________________
Harry C - Urbanize Chicago- My Flickr stream HRC_OakPark
The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either. B Franklin.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31700  
Old Posted Jan 3, 2016, 3:18 PM
harryc's Avatar
harryc harryc is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Oak Park, Il
Posts: 14,989
Brooklyn Bowl 1/2

Fulton Bowl would imply really fresh ingredients.




__________________
Harry C - Urbanize Chicago- My Flickr stream HRC_OakPark
The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either. B Franklin.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > General Development
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 8:36 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

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