CHICAGO | General Developments

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by marothisu

Pilsen is a good area - so I'm torn because gentrification means it will lose its character which is NOT what I want and many others don't want. On the other hand, I'm for the advancement of the community. if Pilsen doesn't want gentrifiers, then they need to make sure their community is advancing with how they want it, otherwise it becomes an easy target for gentrification. If the prices there rise, it can become less of a target usually, but if prices stay the same or even go down for property, then they aren't doing themselves any favors.

I'd much rather have some other parts of town gentrify long before Pilsen. I wish EGP could, for example.

I recognize that this is a concern many people have, but I guess it doesn't bother me as much because it has been happening in cities throughout human history. Change is the norm.

Besides, at least Chicago has ample amounts of available affordable housing supply for people who end up moving out of Pilsen.

But what's the practical solution? If you love Pilsen's historic building stock, gentrification is the only way to see it preserved. How else is anybody going to realize the return on the capital investment of fixing it up and bringing it back up to Chicago's ridiculous building code requirements?

I'm fine with affordable housing, but have you guys walked through some of Pilsen's buildings? They look pretty on the outside but are in pretty damn rough shape on the interior. You can tear it all down and build drab, cinder-block one story boxes with plastic plumbing, all while preserving the existing community. Or, you can gut rehab, fix leaning floors, put in new copper plumbing and 1.5" water service (which costs $17,000) because the city forces you to do so, repair the falling brickwork, etc etc etc and actually have a chance to KEEP the historic Chicago architecture that's there. But then rents have to go up.

Which one do you want? You can't have both, so you might as well come to terms with gentrification.

[Via Chicago]

i mean im fine with that, except for the fact that lots of landlords are trying to charge post-renovation prices for units that are anything but. i toured one place on Throop which was like you described...1 bedroom. uneven floors, cramped layout, exposed wall mounted furnace for heat, laundry machines in a 5' high crawlspace, bedroom in the interior of the unit without any windows or airflow, and a concrete streetscape without any shade trees.....wanted 1100+. lol. i went to edgewater and got a charming, spacious unit for less, and 2 blocks from the lake. chasing the hip neighborhood of the moment is rarely worth it as a renter.

[Near North Resident]

Originally Posted by rlw777

Obviously home value appreciation is not a bad thing. I'm arguing that the way that we assess property taxes is a bad thing. Is it really the best thing for a community to force Grandma and Grandpa to move out of the neighborhood they lived in and contributed to their whole life? Or could we maybe just figure out a way to make property taxes more predictable for those people who live in gentrifying neighborhoods?

taxes for senior citizens are basically frozen... they are majorly reduced for long term residents

[PKDickman]

Originally Posted by Near North Resident

taxes for senior citizens are basically frozen... they are majorly reduced for long term residents

Technically it freezes the assessment, The actual tax goes up when the levy goes up.

It is also limited to household incomes less than $55k from all sources incl, Social security, tax exempt interest and dividends. pensions, government assistance, rental income etc.

If you figure a couple getting $35 k from SSA, a modest pension or cashing out some Series EE bonds will put you over the top pretty quick.

[LouisVanDerWright]

Originally Posted by Via Chicago

Everything you once loved will one day become condos.

Its the sad eternal truth.

Depends on your perspective. If you are middle class and of European ancestry, everything you once loved becomes slums. Just as these areas were gradually co-opted by immigrants or African Americans, the suburbs that came of white flight will follow. Just look at Cicero, Maywood, Berwyn, etc. (not saying these came of white flight, but they were the next step after the construction of Lawndale, Austin, etc.)

Eventually Tinley Park or Lisle might become home of this group or that. It's the natural cycle of things, but is greatly exaggerated in Chicago because the city was slapped up so quickly out of nowhere. Everything in every neighborhood (up until the first wave of gentrification after the initial construction and then depreciation) is virtually the same age. Everything wears out at the same time. Everything needs a new roof at the same time. Everyone decides to up and leave for the next fashionable place to live at the same time whether that's the post war suburbs or gentrifying core areas today.

[LouisVanDerWright]

Originally Posted by gallo

Here's the front elevation of the Alley building (3228 N Clark) redevelopment that I mentioned last week. The developer is committing to preserving the terra cotta facade of the existing building. 24 units, 6 parking spaces (including 1 for car share). Great smaller TOD! There was literally no community opposition to this project at our meeting last night and it was fully supported by everyone who voted.


courtesy of Jonathan Splitt Architects Ltd.

This is fantastic. The Alley facade actually works perfectly as a pedestal for this larger structure. Nice development, will add a lot to the area while preserving the original character.

Originally Posted by Via Chicago

living life?

or do you happen to be under the impression that whoever finishes with the biggest bank account balance on their deathbed wins?

I buy and rehab properties because I enjoy creating things, but also very much to make money. A lot of people like to paint us profit motivated developers as greedy and evil, but most people I know who do this are more interested in the satisfaction of seeing the old made new. I want more money, but not because I want another fancy car. I want money so I can buy more and larger buildings and then rehab them even better than the last building I did. Being able to afford a nice car is just a perk to me (and I'm still driving a Honda, just a top of the line one).

This is an extremely capital intensive business and you have to really be willing to put it all on the line to go anywhere beyond "casual landlord". Most people on salary don't even begin to comprehend the unique stresses and rewards of having to come up with your own paycheck. I get paid a lot of money, but not til after I've devoted like 6-9 months of work to a project and put hundreds of thousands of dollars on the line. It's not easy, but it's worth it. Just my 2 cents from someone who now just does development, property management, and landlording for a living.

Originally Posted by PKDickman

Technically it freezes the assessment, The actual tax goes up when the levy goes up.

You mean they will have to pay more if the government raises taxes? Well that's just ridiculous, seniors might actually have some skin in the game when it comes to supporting policies that increase taxes if that were the case.

If you figure a couple getting $35 k from SSA, a modest pension or cashing out some Series EE bonds will put you over the top pretty quick.

Lesson number 1 for receiving welfare: be poor.

[Jibba]

Originally Posted by george

Land-use qualms aside, the cutlines for the masonry panels...egads!

[spyguy]

[the urban politician]

^ Must. Build. Now.

[Ryanrule]

Originally Posted by Via Chicago

Everything you once loved will one day become condos.

Its the sad eternal truth.

I think my town full of relatives in northern Michigan is safe for a few centuries

[Ryanrule]

Originally Posted by rlw777

Obviously home value appreciation is not a bad thing. I'm arguing that the way that we assess property taxes is a bad thing. Is it really the best thing for a community to force Grandma and Grandpa to move out of the neighborhood they lived in and contributed to their whole life? Or could we maybe just figure out a way to make property taxes more predictable for those people who live in gentrifying neighborhoods?

They could sell, take that fat stack and rent until dead, with a Caribbean and vegas trip each year.

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by spyguy

Really glad to see this thing increase in size. This was on an article in Crains in May 2014 listed as a potential 2 story retail building. Let's hope something goes there soon. Another lot bites the dust

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/reale...in-river-north

[Rizzo]

At least the lowrise had better design caliber. This thing is terribly bland but I'll take it.

[west-town-brad]

Long time observer here, first time poster...

I have a question for those in the industry... Are the cinder blocks that are being used locally for new 3-flat construction today (post recession, so from 2013 onward) the same as the split face block used up until the boom ended in 2008 or so?

Are these blocks really the same thing and do they have the same issues with water intrusion? Or did builders learn how to avoid? It's really hard to find any information online that is recent and most information only mentions buildings from the early 2000s and specifically calls out 'split face block'.

Thanks!!

[Busy Bee]

Welcome! And I'd like to know this too.

[ardecila]

^ Split-face blocks were problematic in many condo buildings because
A) they usually weren't painted and are very porous, so they allowed moisture in
B) they were flashed improperly, so moisture couldn't vent or wick out.

The blocks themselves are perfectly good to use, so long as you detail the building correctly to handle moisture.

To answer your question more directly, it seems like most builders these days are using standard CMU blocks at side/rear walls (not split face) and painting them on the outside with an elastomeric paint. This (in theory) solves Problem A. I haven't looked closely at the flashing details to see if they've gotten better, which would solve Problem B.

[harryc]

Signs of an old alley that was "incorporated" at some point long ago.


Not the original floor.

[Near North Resident]

sorry to correct you harry, but that is Chicago/Wells, not orleans Thanks for the awesome pics as usual!

[Via Chicago]

oh cool, more handsome well maintained vintage stock getting torn down for soulless condos. love it.

[emathias]

Originally Posted by Via Chicago

oh cool, more handsome well maintained vintage stock getting torn down for soulless condos. love it.

Yeah, I always liked that building more than most of the other vintage in the area. The first floor had lost a lot of things, but it could have been restored and integrated with a new building - or the whole block could have been (no one really mentioned the grey buildings north of there that were also destroyed but as a whole it would have made a cool block and a tall, thin building in the middle would have been interesting).