CHICAGO | General Developments

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by VivaLFuego

^Thats why I said at current zoning....There's room for a few hundred thousand people to fit in the densely-zoned Washington Park and Lawndale neighborhoods (with a great deal of RM-5 and RT-4), but huuuuuge swaths of the city are at RS-3 and often much lower. Heck even the west town area (East Village, UK Village etc) are at RS-3, and in terms of most of the city of Chicago those are fairly densely built. Other than Englewood, Garfield Park, Washington Park, Lawndale, there arent many neighborhoods with much developable land, and even in those isolated areas they are mostly 25-50% vacant, tops. I'd like to see the city adopt a comprehensive value capture plan for transit-oriented development and significantly upzone areas within 1/4 mile of transit stations, and welcome Planned Development proposals for highrises within a block of transit stations, regardless of neighborhood, but unfortunately much of our transit infrastructure is doomed to be underutilized (and therefore, broke) by low density zoning.

Are you a CBP member? Become one today! Fight the fight! Change this city, one mind at a time

[ginsan2]

*taps fingers*
Only a few more days till the CBOT vote...

[lalucedm]

Originally Posted by SamInTheLoop

What people keep apparently forgetting is that all of these particular outmigration trends existed in the 90s as well. Have outmigration trends accelerated more than inmigration trends during this decade? I think not. Another thing people overlook are the massive amounts of residential development that have occurred this decade outside of the central area. We've had an massive acceleration this decade of residential development both within and outside of the central area. Just to name a couple outside-of-central-area neighborhoods I've recently been impressed with the amount of residential construction - McKinley Park and Bridgeport. It truly is amazing what's happening.......you guys who actually think Chicago could be losing population this decade should apply for jobs with the Census Bureau - I'm sure you'd climb up through the ranks very quickly!!

I agree. It's certainly not only a "thin sliver by the lake" that's having new construction. Bridgeport and McKinley Park are good examples, but there's amazing amounts of construction even further south than that. Canaryville, for example, is full of (really crappy) new houses, everywhere. In Bronzeville and in Kenwood, there's the CHA redevelopments as well as many private developments. The firm I work for is involved heavily in developments both in South Shore and one further west on the border between Grand Crossing and Englewood, both market-rate. What I find interesting, though, is that, except for the CHA redevelopments, all of this is happening while by and large leaving the older housing stock intact. Most development is happening on vacant lots, as infill to areas that lost density when the city declined. Someone must be buying this stuff or it wouldn't continue being built. Apparently, for example, the Stateway Gardens redevelopment is selling pretty well (low price points help...) The city is redeveloping, throughout. Therefore, I can't see it losing population this decade. Maybe there is a black flight, but someone is taking over in their wake, apparently.

I'd estimate capacity at current zoning to be about 3.8 or 3.9 million, because the city hit 3.6+ in 1950 at less-than-current zoning, so we know it can hold at least that.

[VivaLFuego]

Originally Posted by lalucedm

I'd estimate capacity at current zoning to be about 3.8 or 3.9 million, because the city hit 3.6+ in 1950 at less-than-current zoning, so we know it can hold at least that.

Household size was much larger then.

[Abner]

Originally Posted by lalucedm

I agree. It's certainly not only a "thin sliver by the lake" that's having new construction. Bridgeport and McKinley Park are good examples, but there's amazing amounts of construction even further south than that. Canaryville, for example, is full of (really crappy) new houses, everywhere. In Bronzeville and in Kenwood, there's the CHA redevelopments as well as many private developments. The firm I work for is involved heavily in developments both in South Shore and one further west on the border between Grand Crossing and Englewood, both market-rate. What I find interesting, though, is that, except for the CHA redevelopments, all of this is happening while by and large leaving the older housing stock intact. Most development is happening on vacant lots, as infill to areas that lost density when the city declined. Someone must be buying this stuff or it wouldn't continue being built. Apparently, for example, the Stateway Gardens redevelopment is selling pretty well (low price points help...) The city is redeveloping, throughout. Therefore, I can't see it losing population this decade. Maybe there is a black flight, but someone is taking over in their wake, apparently.

Yes, I specifically mentioned that if the city is gaining population, it's because of Hispanic immigration, predominantly to South and Southwest Side neighborhoods (McKinley Park being a prime example) and to a lesser extent Northwest Side neighborhoods like Avondale. The dominant demographic change going on in Chicago is the transition from a plurality-black city to one composed of nearly even numbers of black, white, and Hispanic residents. That's happening because black families are moving out and Hispanic families are moving in. I just don't think this downtown building boom is going to have a huge effect on the population of the city because it's dwarfed by these other things going on.

The question isn't really whether new developments are going up, but whether those developments bring more people into the city than are lost in other ways. For example, abandonment is still happening in Washington Park, Englewood, and other neighborhoods. The effect of new developments in those neighborhoods is tempered by steady housing abandonment. And, as people keep mentioning, the size of the households moving into new developments is much smaller than the size of those leaving the city. It's easy to brush over this fact, but the effect on overall population is huge.

[SamInTheLoop]

Originally Posted by honte

^ Sounds good. Did you notice if it still puts a big, blank wall up against the BCBS plaza?

Wish I could say for sure. I was too focused on (unsuccessfully) getting something useful out of the salespeople on the Arquitectonica tower...

[Eventually...Chicago]

Originally Posted by Abner

I just don't think this downtown building boom is going to have a huge effect on the population of the city because it's dwarfed by these other things going on.

I understand your point. I know i am guilty of attributing mass amounts of population gain to a few marquee projects in the central area. But, i still don't understand how what has happened in the south loop over the past 10 years will not make more of an impact on the city's population than any other area. There was vitually nothing from roosevelt to cermack and now it is being filled on every block.

Perhaps if there really was a significant amount of in-city shuffling around, the population number itself would not change. But i don't see any of the other affluent areas of the city losing population as a result of this, which leads me to believe that there is real city growth happening in the downtown area.

[Via Chicago]

Originally Posted by ginsan2

*taps fingers*
Only a few more days till the CBOT vote...

Things just got a lot brigther...

[Marcu]

Originally Posted by Eventually...Chicago

I understand your point. I know i am guilty of attributing mass amounts of population gain to a few marquee projects in the central area. But, i still don't understand how what has happened in the south loop over the past 10 years will not make more of an impact on the city's population than any other area. There was vitually nothing from roosevelt to cermack and now it is being filled on every block.

Perhaps if there really was a significant amount of in-city shuffling around, the population number itself would not change. But i don't see any of the other affluent areas of the city losing population as a result of this, which leads me to believe that there is real city growth happening in the downtown area.

Keep in mind a lot of those new luxury condos are second homes for people from Barrington, Lake Forest, etc. so their presence in the city won't count in the opulation figures since the house in the burbs is the primary residence. Also, many baby boomers have winter homes in Florida and the condos are only there for the summer, which mat also not count in the census as a primary residence.

In any case, the whole discussion about Chicago's population is not really all that important. What is important is that the city is progressing and moving forward and is undoubtedly in better shape than 5, 10 or 20 years ago. I only brought it up because I fear some of us may overlook Chicago's remarkable achievement if it doesn't result in poplation growth this decade.

[Eventually...Chicago]

^^^ Agreed!!

[Eventually...Chicago]

I really, really like the river walk idea. I think that over the next few years that this can really become an enormous asset to connect downtown to the surrounding areas by the river. I also think that is something that can be enjoyed year-round. Particularly in the downtown area where you could have an indoor-ish walkway right down at the river line. I love how the river looks when it starts to freeze over and there are huge chucks of ice floating in it.



Daley unveils Riverwalk updates

Businesses, better access planned


By Gary Washburn
Tribune staff reporter

July 6, 2007

Mayor Richard Daley is welcoming seven summertime businesses, including five cafes, to the banks of the Chicago River today in the first phase of a plan to expand the number of pedestrian attractions on the city's Riverwalk between Lake Shore Drive and Franklin Street.

Several restaurateurs operated on the river's south bank downtown during the warm months of 1998 and 1999, but the reconstruction of Wacker Drive, which runs along the river, put a temporary end to retail operations.

The new eateries on the river's edge, offering fare ranging from French cuisine to hot dogs, are O'Brien's Restaurant; caffécafé; Cyrano's Café; Robinson's #1 Ribs; and Mustard and Onions Grill.

Bike Chicago, a bicycle rental, will have drop-off locations at its new Riverwalk location and at Navy Pier and the McDonald's Cycle Station in Millennium Park. Women-Eye will sell arts, crafts and souvenirs made by low-income businesswomen.

All of the businesses will operate seven days a week, except Women-Eye, which will be open only on weekends.

Later this month, Shoreline Sightseeing will open the city's newest water taxi service at the west end of the Riverwalk, joining Wendella Boats, Mercury Sightseeing Boats and Chicago's First Lady in river operations.

Daley's plan calls for adding more vendors over the next few years and ultimately working with the private sector to build year-round concessions on the Riverwalk.

The Riverwalk now is chopped up by bridge structures between Michigan Avenue and Franklin, but the city is planning to construct under-bridge connections that would allow pedestrians to walk its roughly 1-mile length uninterrupted. The first such pathway is on the drawing boards for Michigan Avenue, said Cathy Hudzik, an assistant to the mayor.

[Eventually...Chicago]

Could someone who understands the markets better than i do explain what is so bad about the ICE/CME merger?

The way i understood it is that the trading operations and company headquarters would still be located in chicago. I interpreted this as the influence of the mighty chicago derivatives markets taking an exchange from atlanta. I just worry that with CBOT & CME together that perhaps the mutual competition that drove them to grow and innovate may be relaxed.

But, of course, i could be all wrong!

[bnk]

Originally Posted by Eventually...Chicago

Could someone who understands the markets better than i do explain what is so bad about the ICE/CME merger?

The way i understood it is that the trading operations and company headquarters would still be located in chicago. I interpreted this as the influence of the mighty chicago derivatives markets taking an exchange from atlanta. I just worry that with CBOT & CME together that perhaps the mutual competition that drove them to grow and innovate may be relaxed.

But, of course, i could be all wrong!

In SSC there is a thread dedicated to this topic.

CBOT/CME Merger

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=490991

[laro3]

once we merge we will be the biggest and strongest exchange in the world,new york mercantile exchange look out were comming for u next....

[bnk]

Originally Posted by laro3

once we merge we will be the biggest and strongest exchange in the world,new york mercantile exchange look out were comming for u next....

Is that even a possibility? What about the courts and anti trust monopoly type laws? Would this even be politically feasible?

[Via Chicago]

Originally Posted by bnk

Is that even a possibility? What about the courts and anti trust monopoly type laws? Would this even be politically feasible?

yea, i think its unlikely. but if this merger does go through, CME/CBOT will be so dominating i wouldnt even worry about other exchanges. they will be THE game in town (or world).

[laro3]

thats what ice wanted to do a.k.a goldman

[honte]

Hey all,

McGraw-Hill mentions in an article this month that Murphy / Jahn has been hired to do three buildings at the U of C, not two as previously reported.

These are "a 24,000-sq-ft South Campus Chiller Plant and 40,000-sq-ft West Campus Utility Plant, both expected to be complete this fall, and the not-yet-started 38,200-sq-ft addition to the Joseph Regenstein Library."

Overall, good news! And, as I recall, the extension to the masterpiece Reg is going to be tasteful and respectful of the existing building.

[SolarWind]

July 6, 2007

[SamInTheLoop]

Man - is Spertus an absolute gem or what! This gives me optimism that real Architecture - architecture with a capital "A" (completely forward-thinking, without a hint of timid, apologetic BS moves) is truly making a comeback in this city...