CHICAGO | General Developments

[SamInTheLoop]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

Those pics of some of the pending projects in the neighorhoods excite me because ever since the bust, the neighborhoods haven't gotten much love.

Sure, there has been infill condo development here and there, but nothing like the 1999-2008 period. Ever since the condo bust most of the action has been downtown.

I am really hoping that the cork is popping for another neighborhood boom. I miss the days in the early 2000's when I would be driving or walking around the neighborhoods seeing construction projects all over the place. It would be nice to get back to that, both on the north and south sides.

A recent decline in Chicago housing prices is not a good sign, but I think the fundamentals are still good--people still want to be in the city, interest rates are low, banks are lending again. Heck, just last week a large housing development for Tri-Taylor was about to get started. Seeing new contruction in the neighborhoods, particularly an off-the-beaten-path area like Tri-Taylor, is as good a sign as any that the city is back on track towards a major rebound.

Couldn't agree more. This cycle has not been as broad/widespread yet as the previous one....part of that is just the sluggish to-date - and slower than expected - for-sale housing market, part of it has been the capital markets' (and developers themselves) dominantly strong preference for bigger-is-better, centrally-located (prime submarkets on the edge of downtown are ok too, but core still preferred - over and at the expense of everything else), and part of it has been the tremendous strength of the apartment and hotel markets - for each of which there are various reasons why new construction projects are/have been heavily-focused in the core.

At least the above has been the case for the first 40-50% of this cycle. The next 50-60% of this cycle will start to be different, and I sense I really agree with where you're coming from here as well. While the core will still of course be the obvious center of gravity for new construction, and particularly large-scale new construction - and will remain highly sought after by developers and investors, it will be joined much more by an increasing number of neighborhoods as the for-sale housing market gains steam, and the debt markets in particular (developers too, but the key is their financiers) will increasingly be more comfortable with investing in neighborhoods and smaller-mid scale projects. I see there being some evidence of this for sure appearing throughout 2015, but 2016 is when I really anticipate it blossoming in obvious fashion....

[UrbanLibertine]

I actually lived in Brooklyn and Queens because Manhattan was too smothering (and insanely expensive). Yes, there are still a few parts of the borough which have been preserved, for the most part, and have a wonderful pedestrian feel (SoHo/NoLIta, West Village, East Village, Washington Heights/Inwood).

But other than the neighborhoods I just listed, I don't know if there are many other neighborhoods where developers aren't trying to get mid and highrise developments pushed through. The LES already has half a dozen midrises and SPURA will only make it feel less pedestrian. 500'+ buildings keep encroaching closer to Canal and Houston, changing parts of TriBeCa and Hudson Square. The whole West Side from MePa to the Lincoln Center is undergoing massive change. There are now mid-rise proposals all over Harlem.

Originally Posted by marothisu

I find a few things interesting about your post. While NYC has many, many high rises, even in Manhattan there are many lowrises including row homes. Furthermore, when you get into the other boroughs, you find way more of this, especially in areas of Brooklyn and Queens.

I find it funny that people think that NYC is only Manhattan. Even then, there are many low rises in Manhattan

[Via Chicago]

I agree that those rowhouse/lowrise streets are far and away the most beautiful/interesting parts of any city. People have this "density at any cost!" mentality, but humans are designed to engage with things at a human scale. I recently visited NYC for the first time, and I spent hours just exploring the little narrow row house side streets. Skyscrapers make for nice postcards but not much else. The area around Prospect Park floored me. Theres just nothing like that here. And I was really impressed by just how much in tact most of the little residential parts of Manhattan were as well. Chicago feels so disjointed in comparison.

So yeah, I would definitely say NY does low rises exceptionally well and anyone who says it dosent just hasnt left Times Square.

[the urban politician]

^ I think you'll get that in Chicago's neighborhoods, but outside of the Gold Coast not much of that exists downtown

[Via Chicago]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

^ I think you'll get that in Chicago's neighborhoods, but outside of the Gold Coast not much of that exists downtown

Eh, to an extent. What i was impressed by there was the cohesiveness. With a typical Chicago side street you maybe have a handful of nice historic homes, some teardowns, an ugly 4+1 on the corner, some scraggly trees, a couple mature trees etc. And after a couple blocks you probably hit a poorly planned commercial strip, and then an expressway underpass, etc. And the pedestrian experience is kind of removed from the homes, since we have front lawns. This is the issue that rowhouses address so well, especially when combined with a narrow sidestreet and mature vegetation. And the street life has a vibrancy that we just lack.

But yes, the Loop is definitely a different beast than Manhattan and theres not much sense comparing the two. My point was just more...I fully support well designed low density projects and I actually think we need more of them.

[UrbanLibertine]

I lived in Park Slope about 50 feet from Prospect Park and down the block from Grand Army Plaza, and while technically Chicago doesn't have any areas that look exactly like that, Lincoln Park and Hyde Park have some beautiful intersections between housing and parkland. It sucks because I'm sure Washington Park, Garfield Park, and Humboldt Park used to as well.

Did you make your way around all of Prospect Park? If you head east or SE along the perimeter of the park, near Prospect Lefferts or Prospect Park South, the physical appearance changes substantially. There are vacant, trash-strewn lots and a hideous Wendy's with a large parking lot.

Originally Posted by Via Chicago

I agree that those rowhouse/lowrise streets are far and away the most beautiful/interesting parts of any city. People have this "density at any cost!" mentality, but humans are designed to engage with things at a human scale. I recently visited NYC for the first time, and I spent hours just exploring the little narrow row house side streets. Skyscrapers make for nice postcards but not much else. The area around Prospect Park floored me. Theres just nothing like that here. And I was really impressed by just how much in tact most of the little residential parts of Manhattan were as well. Chicago feels so disjointed in comparison.

So yeah, I would definitely say NY does low rises exceptionally well and anyone who says it dosent just hasnt left Times Square.

[Via Chicago]

Originally Posted by UrbanLibertine

I lived in Park Slope about 50 feet from Prospect Park and down the block from Grand Army Plaza, and while technically Chicago doesn't have any areas that look exactly like that, Lincoln Park and Hyde Park have some beautiful intersections between housing and parkland. It sucks because I'm sure Washington Park, Garfield Park, and Humboldt Park used to as well.

Did you make your way around all of Prospect Park? If you head east or SE along the perimeter of the park, near Prospect Lefferts or Prospect Park South, the physical appearance changes substantially. There are vacant, trash-strewn lots and a hideous Wendy's with a large parking lot.

I agree, Lincoln Park probably comes closest, and we do have some wonderful, albeit limited, rowhouses near Depaul. But I do worry how the teardown culture of Lincoln Park is laying waste to so much of that. It seems everyone is kinda fine with saying that we have given this neighborhood over to developers to combine lots and throw up McMansion at the expense of charming homes, and I think we are losing some of what makes our city special. And yes, driving through the West Side is rough when you consider what used to be there (although there are still some nice intact sections).

As far as Prospect, I did see a little of what you describe. I just got the general impression NY is better at preserving what they have, and having the built environment meet the street in a really engaging way. Anyway, dont want this to get too far OT.

[UrbanLibertine]

I agree 100%. Aside from the obvious urban issues (crime, segregation, schooling), the 2 things that bother me the most about Chicago are: the abundance of vacant lots and the culture of teardowns. As a planner, it drives me absolutely crazy. I hate how some of the city's most beautiful neighborhoods (Lincoln Park, Bucktown, the East Village, etc) have had their character partially destroyed by the McMansion obsession.

New York does have a more firm culture of preservation (especially in neighborhoods like the UES and UWS, Park Slope, and BoCoCa), but a lot of the reason the teardown culture isn't as prominent there is due to the high land value costs. The same can be said for the reason vacant property is more likely to get developed there. Why sit on a vacant lot that's worth $10 million when you can sell it and retire? There are very, very few parcels in this city that are worth even a fraction of the price that a comparable NYC parcel would be worth. And the neighborhoods in NYC that have a lot of teardowns (Williamsburg, Astoria, LIC, Gowanus) are some of the city's most unattractive neighborhoods.

Originally Posted by Via Chicago

I agree, Lincoln Park probably comes closest, and we do have some wonderful, albeit limited, rowhouses near Depaul. But I do worry how the teardown culture of Lincoln Park is laying waste to so much of that. It seems everyone is kinda fine with saying that we have given this neighborhood over to developers to combine lots and throw up McMansion at the expense of charming homes, and I think we are losing some of what makes our city special. And yes, driving through the West Side is rough when you consider what used to be there (although there are still some nice intact sections).

As far as Prospect, I did see a little of what you describe. I just got the general impression NY is better at preserving what they have, and having the built environment meet the street in a really engaging way. Anyway, dont want this to get too far OT.

[lu9]

http://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/20150...et-lumber-yard

Failed Trader Joe's Site on Division Will Soon Be Apartment, Retail Complex

[killaviews]

Refeshing news and a nice update with pictures on 1020 W. Lawrence. Glad to see this moving forward.

http://moss-design.com/lawrence-house/

[UrbanLibertine]

Kinda looks like a more toned-down version of 1237 West Fullerton.

Originally Posted by lu9

http://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/20150...et-lumber-yard

Failed Trader Joe's Site on Division Will Soon Be Apartment, Retail Complex

[bcp]

^ i can confirm...there is an excavator, trailer and port-0-potty on site...finally!!

across the street i'm getting the sense that something may be going on...Moonshine closed (finally?) and the trees in the sidewalk have been cut down (unfortunately).

[Ned.B]

Originally Posted by Via Chicago

I agree, Lincoln Park probably comes closest, and we do have some wonderful, albeit limited, rowhouses near Depaul. But I do worry how the teardown culture of Lincoln Park is laying waste to so much of that. It seems everyone is kinda fine with saying that we have given this neighborhood over to developers to combine lots and throw up McMansion at the expense of charming homes, and I think we are losing some of what makes our city special. And yes, driving through the West Side is rough when you consider what used to be there (although there are still some nice intact sections).

Thankfully Lincoln Park east of the brown line has at least 5 landmark districts, two of which encompass many blocks, so some of that character will persist in spite of all the tear downs.

[Arm&Kedzie]

^^ I could see the Logan Square, Humboldt park, wicker park, and bucktown group of neighborhoods becoming world class neighborhoods in the next 10-20 years. 606 trail is kicking up a lot of development over by me. Milwaukee ave is booming. There is a bit of development happening on the north side of Humboldt park... but if it ever really takes hold ... as it should. that park is massive and has lakes, beaches, streams, baseball fields, tennis courts, etc... should have a dog park. But what a draw! So much potential. If that happens you have continuous un-interrupted cool neighborhoods with no major highways and strip malls tearing apart the urban fabric stretching dozens of blocks in all directions. Just a matter of time before Logan Square development moves to Humboldt... while United Center Development moves up from the south. I know unfortunately we are talking decades... but still cool to know it Will Happen.

[ardecila]

Don't think you're giving Chicago enough credit. We have thriving pedestrian strips on Armitage, Milwaukee, 18th, Chicago, 26th, Lawrence, Devon, Lincoln, etc. Also Division, which notably has a lot of new infill.

[marothisu]

As we know there's been a lot of hotel movement in the last year in Chicago. A lot of focus has been on conversions or new construction, but what about renovations? I've seen a number of permits for already established hotels upgrading their rooms like the Marriott, Sheraton, Embassy Suites, InterContinental, etc... Would be interesting to get a list together for that too because there's a lot of money that has been and is being moved around just for hotel renovations.

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by ardecila

Don't think you're giving Chicago enough credit. We have thriving pedestrian strips on Armitage, Milwaukee, 18th, Chicago, 26th, Lawrence, Devon, Lincoln, etc. Also Division, which notably has a lot of new infill.

^ I couldn't agree more.

Unfortunately I think we are in an era of history right now where New York is sort of the epitomy of everything the urban elite views as "right" or the "standard bearer" for what cities should be, and everything is viewed from that lens.

I'm not saying that will necessarily change, but views do change. New York was viewed as a grimy, slummy, crowded city until it came into vogue fairly recently. Chicago's wider avenues and relatively lower density as a result of being a streetcar city may yet be appreciated in the future. What needs to happen first is cleaning up crime ridden areas and infill of vacant lots. This is happening, but I'm sure we all wish it would happen faster.

[joeg1985]

Originally Posted by marothisu

As we know there's been a lot of hotel movement in the last year in Chicago. A lot of focus has been on conversions or new construction, but what about renovations? I've seen a number of permits for already established hotels upgrading their rooms like the Marriott, Sheraton, Embassy Suites, InterContinental, etc... Would be interesting to get a list together for that too because there's a lot of money that has been and is being moved around just for hotel renovations.

Hotels actually renovate their rooms on a scheduled basis regardless of market conditions. If I remember correctly from my hotel working days they typically do this every 3 to 4 years. So it is slightly less impressive than adding 3000 new rooms to the market.

[joeg1985]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

^ I couldn't agree more.

Unfortunately I think we are in an era of history right now where New York is sort of the epitomy of everything the urban elite views as "right" or the "standard bearer" for what cities should be, and everything is viewed from that lens.

I'm not saying that will necessarily change, but views do change. New York was viewed as a grimy, slummy, crowded city until it came into vogue fairly recently. Chicago's wider avenues and relatively lower density as a result of being a streetcar city may yet be appreciated in the future. What needs to happen first is cleaning up crime ridden areas and infill of vacant lots. This is happening, but I'm sure we all wish it would happen faster.

What do you mean result of being a streetcar city? Most cities across this country small and large had numerous streetcar lines at the turn of the last century.

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by joeg1985

Hotels actually renovate their rooms on a scheduled basis regardless of market conditions. If I remember correctly from my hotel working days they typically do this every 3 to 4 years. So it is slightly less impressive than adding 3000 new rooms to the market.

Well yes, but how many do they typically do? I've seen some big time renovation work come through in permits in the last handful of months.