CHICAGO | General Developments - v2.0

[r18tdi]

Originally Posted by arCHItecture_

Four stories
20 units
Retail
No parking spaces (!)

kylorenyellingmore.gif

[left of center]

Originally Posted by gebs

Halsted and George? So is this replacing what was once The Union? Did anyone else on this forum drink 40 beers with me for $10 at that fine establishment?

A friend's girlfriend lived at Racine and George in the mid 00s, and we would walk over to the Union pretty frequently. Great memories ... or lack thereof

Nostalgia aside, this looks like a great development.

[pip]

Originally Posted by Jstange059

Everyone’s favorite new courtyard building is now looking just about complete

This is amazing! What company is building this - if you know, and does this company have plans to build more like this?

[left of center]

Originally Posted by pip

This is amazing! What company is building this - if you know, and does this company have plans to build more like this?

Hayes Properties is the developer of 4907 N Paulina.

Courtyard buildings are effectively banned in Chicago due to the rezoning done in the 1960s. The city's zoning now calls for large setbacks from the rear property line (typically allowing for accessory structures like garages however). My understanding is that the developer was able to get the alderman's okay on allowing this by going 25% affordable in the building. Not sure if this can be replicated citywide however, since other alderman may not allow it in their wards.

Yet again more reasons for: 1. Upzoning the city and 2. Abolishing aldermanic prerogative.

[Randomguy34]

^ to your point, upzoning is not enough, the entire zoning code has to be rewritten. Pritzker's Missing Middle build would have reduce setback requirements and legalized courtyard apartments, effectively breaking the Chicago zoning code and forcing a rewrite

[left of center]

Hopefully the bill is back on the agenda when the state assembly reconvenes in November...

[Jstange059]

A by-right project is being proposed for 6130 N Sheridan to replace the former Kindred Hospital structure. The developer is proposing a project similar in design to the condominium project currently under construction at 6150 N Sheridan. Designed by Hanna Architects, this proposed project is a 5-story, 59-unit building with 36 2-bedroom units, 20 3-bedroom units, and 3 4-bedroom units with 59 car parking spaces and 59 bike parking spaces.

Because this project is located in the private zone under the Lakefront Protection Ordinance, this project will undergo Lakefront Protection review by the Chicago Plan Commission.

[pip]

Originally Posted by left of center

Hayes Properties is the developer of 4907 N Paulina.

Courtyard buildings are effectively banned in Chicago due to the rezoning done in the 1960s. The city's zoning now calls for large setbacks from the rear property line (typically allowing for accessory structures like garages however). My understanding is that the developer was able to get the alderman's okay on allowing this by going 25% affordable in the building. Not sure if this can be replicated citywide however, since other alderman may not allow it in their wards.

Yet again more reasons for: 1. Upzoning the city and 2. Abolishing aldermanic prerogative.

Goodness...

Long shot. But hopefully there is an effort to rescind this rezoning done in the 1960's

[Jstange059]

https://www.hpherald.com/evening_digest/...12d3d04-bb26-44d6-8522-577e4e4a916e.html

42 units, consisting primarily of 2 bedroom units. Developed by KLEO, who also developed the KLEO Art Residences. Looks like it’ll have quite a unique shade structure facing Garfield Boulevard

[Bonsai Tree]

I thought this was a SoCal development for a second. . .

[Randomguy34]

There's now a pending permit for the Backbeat Hotel at 3255-57 N. Halsted St. Chicago's midrise boom continues.


https://backbeathotel.com/

[Jstange059]

It’s nice to see new buildings rising in West Garfield Park
Some background on the project: https://chicagoyimby.com/2026/06/groundb...e-development-in-west-garfield-park.html

[twister244]

So here's an interesting story about the Congress theater....

https://blockclubchicago.org/2026/08/11/...ld-slow-redevelopment-of-iconic-theater/

Why am I posting this? Well - Apparently, according to the article, there was a permit filed July 1st:

The group was able to use power from the building, which recently got what appeared to be a new power panel installed for maintenance work, he said. Developers filed a permit July 1 for masonry repairs and other exterior work as part of the overhaul, according to the city’s building permit data. The permit has yet to be issued.

Also of note:

Construction on the historic building was set to begin earlier this year, but it has encountered logistical delays. La Spata said it’s still very close to being finalized and he expects to hear an update from Department of Planning and Development officials this week.

But - I have seeing this line from La Spata's office for months now..... And it also seems like he's trying to use this rave as an excuse to justify further delays on the project. There's no actual damage that was reported by the article.

[VivaLFuego]

Originally Posted by ardecila

The more northern area is known as "The Gap". It was kind of like a mini Lincoln Park, with middle-class people coming in (mostly Black) and rehabbing the old rowhomes during the 1980s. During this era, the neighborhood was downzoned to RS-3 which only allows single-family homes... they also created a Landmark District protecting the neighborhood. So it's basically locked into that 1980s mindset of economically marginal areas where property values are far below replacement costs where homeowners/SFH are good and density of transient tenants paying insufficient rent to support adequate maintenance to counteract depreciation of old housing that has been cheaply subdividied to the maximum extent allowed is bad.

Just improving accuracy here on the off chance anyone is interested in more nuanced understanding of the persistence of SFH zoning and resistence to the universal tropes of YIMBYism.

[Jibba]

Originally Posted by VivaLFuego

Just improving accuracy here on the off chance anyone is interested in more nuanced understanding of the persistence of SFH zoning and resistence to the universal tropes of YIMBYism.

If the property values (i.e. demand for the area) are low such that resultant rents cannot cover maintenance, how is there demand from single owners for the same? Or is it that the single-family product has a value (by type) more so than that of multi-family? Questions are not in contention to any assertions of yours; I'm one of your interested persons.

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by VivaLFuego

Just improving accuracy here on the off chance anyone is interested in more nuanced understanding of the persistence of SFH zoning and resistence to the universal tropes of YIMBYism.

Did you miss the rest of my post? Bronzeville south of 35th is booming with market-rate 3-flats/6-flats or even denser.

The demand is there, but The Gap specifically is hampered by a long-ago downzoning. Arguably it should have the same or greater demand since it's a bit closer to downtown & IIT.

If you want to defend single-family zoning in Chatham or something, that's a different story but Bronzeville is objectively a desirable area that is growing as fast or faster than the city average.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by ardecila

Bronzeville is objectively a desirable area that is growing as fast or faster than the city average.

Yep!

Douglas CA:
2010 - 2020: +11.3%
2020 - 2024: +3.9%

Grand Boulevard CA:
2010 - 2020: +12.1%
2020 - 2024: +2.4%

Oakland CA:
2010 - 2020: +14.9%
2020 - 2024: +2.0%

Kenwood CA:
2010 - 2020: +7.1%
2020 - 2024: -3.6%


Keep in mind, those 2020 - 2024 figures are merely CB estimates.

And given the CB's atrocious track record of estimating Chicago........

[Randomguy34]

Speaking of Bronzeville, this seems to be the only neighborhood in the entire city that's still building new greystones. Here's a new 4-flat proposed for 419 E. 50th St, presented at the April Permit Review committee. Certainly a big reason is that many blocks in Bronzeville are landmark districts, so buildings have to match the architectural character of the block. But surely it can't be that expensive to use limestone cladding for the facade, right?

Also for anyone curious, here's the company that's sourcing the limestone: https://www.readingrock.com/custom-cast-stone






https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-wTvkg0KUw

[sentinel]

^^Looks nice, but I really do not understand this desire to look backwards than forward. That design is already dated

[cloudbod]

^ imo dated is a term for cars, phones, clothes, and hairstyles, but not architecture. Sullivan was annoyed at the resurgence of classical styles in his era too, so you're in good company, but I feel like the typical person doesn't think of architecture as benefitting from continual aesthetic innovation in the same way they would with fashion design or technology design.