CHICAGO | General Discussions

[Via Chicago]

on a different topic, but we've talked about how poorly chicago treats its tree canopy in the past, and this is only compounding it. andersonville has some of the most beautiful trees in the entire city, it should be criminal to do what theyre proposing

https://www.wbez.org/shows/wbez-news...4-a71b841d6064

in my own neck of the woods theres a 100+ year old elm on my block, among other old growth trees, and i have massive anxiety about what will happen when the water main project eventually hits our street

[maru2501]

agree that economics are going to take over to the south even more. These places are just too close to the center city now to sit there

[Steely Dan]

From what I’ve seen, the theme of the show is blowing your wad on the ugliest doorframe known to man, leaving you with no money to finish basic shit that the house needs.

it's funny because it's true.




disclaimer: my wife is shamefully a bit of a HGTV addict.

[Via Chicago]

most of the people driving the current trends in housing are young transplants, and as a transplant the vast majority simply have zero exposure to life south of cermak and never will. they want the image of urban living theyve been sold, which is new trendy apartments in a "name brand" neighborhood, boutiques, and hip restaurants. they want a turnkey neighborhood, not one they actually have to become involved in at a grassroots level where change will take place over a period of 20-30 years.

trying to sell them on a modest home a couple blocks over from a trucking route, used car lots, 3rd shift diners, heavy industry, inhabited by the working poor is not gonna happen. will it happen eventually? sure everything that is possible will happen eventually and its not exactly prophetic to say one day these neighborhoods will be desirable once they north/nw side is completely tapped out. but in the meantime most are not gonna accept living in areas where the their neighbors arent mirrors of what they see themselves as being, or wanting to be.

having grown up here, i can see through the marketing and the image that a lot of people are invested in selling, and i dont have any need to impress people with my zip code or my countertops. but at the same time i realize im not most people (at least in the sense of my peer group and those i come into contact with on a daily basis).

[maru2501]

McKinley Park is rolling over right now. Lots of the OG Pilsen pioneer hisptery kids who are now priced out of Pilsen (and Bridgeport)

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by Via Chicago

but yea in general people need to get over this fetishization of new construction, or the notion that if its not a complete gut job with all the newest finishes (which are trendy for precisely 1-2 years) its somehow not a serviceable home.

i think many people also need to get over the notion that SFH is the ONLY acceptable living situation for a family.

we picked up a 2,300 SF 3 bed/3 bath in the heart of lincoln square, but it's a duplex-down in a 3-flat. if you could lop off the top 2 units of our building, our home would immediately jump ~$150,000 because OMG!!!!! SFH!!!!!

we could never afford to live as comfortably in the neighborhood we do if it weren't for multi-family housing. lincoln square SFH's are out of our league.

Originally Posted by marothisu

"don't go west of Western."

with the way logan and avondale have blown up, i think we can officially relegate "don't go west of western" to the history books.

anyone still playing the game by that rule hasn't been paying attention for quite some time.

"don't go west of western" almost seems hilariously quaint in 2019.

[Handro]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

True except that literally every. Single. Conversion. Was in Bucktown

Lol true, and many on the same damn street at that. I remember being annoyed by her very predictable obsession with Bucktown, but not as much as the hosts proclamation that "it was time" to deconvert a very standard Chicago two-flat into a SFH "like it was supposed to be"

[Via Chicago]

i dont have a problem with home improvement shows but that one just seems so superficial and tone deaf.

like, This Old House does that whole genre right and it was the originator to boot. but i guess that dosent get the same sorts of ratings. its a shame that WC Rehab simply dont seem to be a crew/production company that does or are interested sensitive restorations.

ill give them credit that theyre at least not doing teardowns (from a facade standpoint anyway), but the finished products are really just the worst.

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by Via Chicago

i dont have a problem with home improvement shows but that one just seems so superficial and tone deaf.

like, This Old House does that whole genre right and it was the originator to boot. but i guess that dosent get the same sorts of ratings. its a shame that WC Rehab simply dont seem to be a crew/production company that does or are interested sensitive restorations.

ill give them credit that theyre at least not doing teardowns (from a facade standpoint anyway), but the finished products are really just the worst.

My favorite was an episode where they rehabbed a 4 flat. They decided to keep it as a 4 flat rental, and she did her usual--finding vintage, TOTALLY unreproducible fixtures for each unit that are highly unique and styled in her particular way.

I was thinking, "dude, what landlord would want that shit? One thing breaks and it's nearly impossible to replace". Clearly she does not understand the rental real estate business whatsoever and it shows, because last I had checked their finished building never sold to anyone.

[Via Chicago]

i mean its like the equivalent of Bar Rescue. some caricature of an actual person comes in and throws a bunch of visual diarrhea against the wall and jets off to the next place, and it makes for decent background entertainment while youre folding laundry or whatever but it dosent actually make for a good home or a good neighbor. all they need to find is one sucker.

[moorhosj]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

we picked up a 2,300 SF 3 bed/3 bath in the heart of lincoln square, but it's a duplex-down in a 3-flat. if you could lop off the top 2 units of our building, our home would immediately jump ~$150,000 because OMG!!!!! SFH!!!!!

You overall point of how our society fetishizes SFH's is true, but there are also some practical reasons why a SFH would be that much more expensive. Not having an HOA payment is one, as the present value of 30 years of a $500/month HOA is about $115k.

Another example, before we moved the people above us woke up at 5am everyday to stomp around their apartment, this woke up my son at 5am. EVERY. SINGLE DAY. Now that we don't share any walls he is consistently sleeping until 6am. 1 hour a day for two working parents is pretty significant.

I also have the freedom to build whatever garden I'd like in my entire backyard. I also have garage space for a large workbench (valuable to me).

[VivaLFuego]

There's also a whole wide world beyond the city limits with very affordable single families and small-scale multi-families that are exceedingly affordable, in safe neighborhoods, with walkable amenities and a 20-30 minute Metra ride from the Loop.

There are expensive neighborhoods, but there is no regional affordable housing crisis.

[VivaLFuego]

Originally Posted by moorhosj

You overall point of how our society fetishizes SFH's is true, but there are also some practical reasons why a SFH would be that much more expensive. Not having an HOA payment is one, as the present value of 30 years of a $500/month HOA is about $115k.

Nitpick: unless the condo association is run terribly with rampant waste and skewed priorities, the HOA assessment is just front-loading your ongoing maintenance and capital expenses, and potentially even gaining some maintenance efficiencies due to pooled resources. A building is a building whether it's one unit or 100, and it will depreciate and require maintenance and upkeep - whether that's through paying people to do it, or through the time, sweat, blood, tears, and hassle of your sweat equity. The latter is either a feature or bug of SFH, depending on your personality.

Also, the depressed sales price of the condo (due to the assessment) also lowers its property tax bill relative to its overall/lifecycle cost of ownership, but that is probably at least somewhat offset by the tax advantage of mortgage interest deductibility.

[Via Chicago]

hell, the bnsf from berwyn is faster than the average L commute (15 minutes on average). the housing stock is also significantly better than what you will find in many of the "hot" neighborhoods (like Bridgeport or Pilsen). craftsman bungalows for 200-250k for days.

[Handro]

Originally Posted by Via Chicago

hell, the bnsf from berwyn is faster than the average L commute

Yes there are a number of city neighborhoods that are as car dependent as a suburb, while being a longer commute to downtown and with less space than you could get outside the city.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by moorhosj

Not having an HOA payment is one, as the present value of 30 years of a $500/month HOA is about $115k.

our association fee is $350/month, and ~50% of that is for the insurance bill, which SFH's have to pay as well. another 30% is for water, sewer, and garbage, which SFH owners have to pay as well.

so 20% of $350 is $70/month x 30 years = $25,000.

$25,000 is "new roof" money, which SFH homeowners also have to pay for periodically as well, so....................


i'm not saying that SFH's don't have their advantages, but the vast majority of them in the "in" neighborhoods on the northside are out of the price range of your typical middle class family (like mine), so if location is a top priority for you, thank Pizza God that chicago has a wealth of larger-unit, low-rise multi-family flat buildings. the ones with duplexed units offer a good deal of space to a family with children, but without the hot neighborhood SFH price tag.

would i like to have my own private yard and a garage? sure, but i wouldn't pay an extra $150K for it. if that stuff had been more of a priority for us than location and transit access, then we'd probably be living in portage or jeff park right now.

portage and jeff park are certainly fine enough places, but they don't scratch my urbanism itch nearly as well as a neighborhood like lincoln square does.

[VivaLFuego]

Originally Posted by Via Chicago

hell, the bnsf from berwyn is faster than the average L commute (15 minutes on average). the housing stock is also significantly better than what you will find in many of the "hot" neighborhoods (like Bridgeport or Pilsen). craftsman bungalows for 200-250k for days.

Indeed. The BNSF, Rock Island, and MD-W all have compelling options.

Berwyn and Blue Island both have walkscores in the 85+ range in their downtowns, along with <25 minute travel times to downtown, complete sidewalk networks, very affordable and architecturally interesting housing stock. Beverly deserves mention, though the economics are questionable unless you're a city employee because even though it's relatively affordable, the prices are still bid up by folks with the residency requirement.

Elmwood Park and Franklin Park start to push the boundaries on travel time due to the way the MD-W is scheduled, but they get honorable mentions. Forest Park is also in the mix though my impression (whether backed up by data or not) is that it's less consistent in re: being able to assume safety walking on the street.

[Via Chicago]

forest parks downtown is actually far more advanced than berwyn or some of the other surrounding inner burbs. theyve built a really tight knit group of antique/resale stores that reminds me of what andersonville has sort of become, along with a vibrant stretch of restaurants and bars.

berwyn suffers a bit from actually not really having a gravitational downtown, and instead being split up into several more distinct but isolated commercial corridors. ogden on the south, cermak in the middle, depot district along the BNSF, and roosevelt on the north. cermak actually seems to have the most potential into turning into something really interesting, but it needs a road diet and some new ideas. roosevelt has actually done pretty well at attracting some oak park spillover, and of course has benefited from some longtime stalwarts like Fitzgeralds. the rest is unfortunately a bit auto sewer, but the architecture and cohesiveness is decently in tact, outside of the occassional drive through. the housing stock has also almost entirely avoided the tear down trend, but i do worry about what happens when developers start moving in and seeing dollar signs. right now its mostly just flips.

[moorhosj]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

but without the hot neighborhood SFH price tag.

But with the hot neighborhood condo price tag. My insurance is $100/month and water/sewage/garbage is less than $100/month, so the differences exist on both sides.

The commute from Irving Park is a little faster than Lincoln Square and I have more options (2 Metras/Blue line). It is certainly more "suburban", no disagreement there.

In the end, we looked at Lincoln Square, but the homes that we liked were out of our price range, had bidding wars or sold before they even hit the market. From what we heard many of the homes don't make it to the MLS and you need an "in" to get the best places.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by moorhosj

But with the hot neighborhood condo price tag.

for sure. our place would be appreciably less expensive if it were transported out to somewhere like jeff park, no doubt.

but i get the sense that there are a lot of double income middle class families on the northside looking for homes in that $350-$400K sweet spot.

good luck finding a SFH in that range in any hot neighborhood. maybe a complete train-wreck that needs $100K just to restore the MEPs back to functional, but there goes the budget sweet spot.

that's where chicago's legacy of larger units in flat buildings can be so advantageous to families who place their highest priority on location. a unit like ours gives us a pretty house-like home (sans private yard and garage), but at a price point that allows us to live right where we want to, which is nice.



in any event, irving park is a lovely area as well (my best friend grew up near irving/elston, so i spent a fair bit of time over by there back in the 80s/90s).

i'm sure you're quite happy with your house there. isn't it great to live in a city with so many realistic options for middle class families?

imagine the cross to bear of trying to raise a family in a city like SF on a middle class income, fuck.........