CHICAGO | General Discussions

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by ardecila

Jewel is behind the times for sure, but Trader Joe's sees equal numbers of walk-ins vs drivers. The drivers are people like me that live a few miles away from South Loop, but it's still the closest TJ's location.

With Jewel having two other locations on Roosevelt (at Canal and Ashland) I wonder if they will look to redevelop this site at some point. I assume there is some CRE landlord in the mix as well.

Hopefully Jewel does to that location what it did in the Gold Coast a handful of years ago by allowing a developer to build a tower on it and just put the Jewel back in the ground floor.

2015:
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.9037...7i13312!8i6656

2021:
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.9037...7i16384!8i8192


Also what happened to Treasure Island in LVE recently is promising too - getting rid of that and its parking lot and building something dense from a people and also built environment perspective.

Originally Posted by Investing In Chicago

At what point is an area so small that it doesn't matter? What you linked is like 15 buildings in 2 linear blocks, i'd wager almost every large city with residential highrises has something similar to that. If you go east or west of that block, the residential density drops significantly.

Again, my point is that comparing density to Manhattan is disingenuous because:
1. the density isn't including all of the people in the neighborhood
2. the area is so tiny that it is basically meaningless

This isn't a better or worse scenario, as I much prefer the scale/pace of Chicago overall, but it just isn't all that meaningful.

If you go east of that area? You mean into Soldier Field, Shedd Aquarium, and the lake? Not sure why you would mention EAST of there. Of course it drops in density - nobody lives there!. In any case, it's pretty easy to have a big drop off of density when you're already at 135K ppsm. But the area west of that is still dense by most any standard. Between Roosevelt, State, Michigan, and 15th st (train tracks) is 72,031.6 ppsm.


The following area is 69,748 ppsm. I didn't include Dearborn Park in this and keep in mind this includes the vacant land west of Roosevelt Collection along the river. I can think of 3 high rises currently U/C in this area and another that opened after the census was taken. If we assume 90% of the units will be taken and all things equal and literally no other developments happening, then the area would be at 75k - 80k ppsm density. Given the development going on here in the last handful of years and how there's still multiple vacant lots left, it wouldn't surprise me at all to see this area approaching 100k ppsm or over it in 2030.

No i'm not saying this is Manhattan (though Manhattan as a WHOLE is around 75K ppsm) but this is fairly dense by any standard.

[the urban politician]

^ Totally!

The Jewel and the BP station near Roosevelt/Wabash are ABSOLUTE PRIME sites for some serious density

[Investing In Chicago]

Originally Posted by marothisu

Hopefully Jewel does to that location what it did in the Gold Coast a handful of years ago by allowing a developer to build a tower on it and just put the Jewel back in the ground floor.

2015:
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.9037...7i13312!8i6656

2021:
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.9037...7i16384!8i8192


Also what happened to Treasure Island in LVE recently is promising too - getting rid of that and its parking lot and building something dense from a people and also built environment perspective.




If you go east of that area? You mean into Soldier Field, Shedd Aquarium, and the lake? Not sure why you would mention EAST of there. Of course it drops in density - nobody lives there!. In any case, it's pretty easy to have a big drop off of density when you're already at 135K ppsm. But the area west of that is still dense by most any standard. Between Roosevelt, State, Michigan, and 15th st (train tracks) is 72,031.6 ppsm.


The following area is 69,748 ppsm. I didn't include Dearborn Park in this and keep in mind this includes the vacant land west of Roosevelt Collection along the river. I can think of 3 high rises currently U/C in this area and another that opened after the census was taken. If we assume 90% of the units will be taken and all things equal and literally no other developments happening, then the area would be at 75k - 80k ppsm density. Given the development going on here in the last handful of years and how there's still multiple vacant lots left, it wouldn't surprise me at all to see this area approaching 100k ppsm or over it in 2030.

No i'm not saying this is Manhattan (though Manhattan as a WHOLE is around 75K ppsm) but this is fairly dense by any standard.

Well east of what you posted isn't the lakefront, it would be Indiana and Prairie, which are relatively low density.

My point is, even the area Between Roosevelt, State, Michigan, and 15th st is pretty tiny. I'm not arguing that it isn't dense, because it is dense.

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by Investing In Chicago

Well east of what you posted isn't the lakefront, it would be Indiana and Prairie, which are relatively low density.

My point is, even the area Between Roosevelt, State, Michigan, and 15th st is pretty tiny. I'm not arguing that it isn't dense, because it is dense.

You misread what I wrote as far as the boundaries. I included to the Metra Tracks which is east of Indiana

Originally Posted by marothisu

..
The area of South Loop between Roosevelt, 14th, Wabash, and the Metra tracks near LSD is now 131,932 ppsm as of the 2020 Census.

..

It's definitely a small area relatively (hence why I used the word "pocket" and not "neighborhood" but still pretty dense. Regardless, removing at least the weirdness of Dearborn Park down to 14th st, South Loop is already at 70k ppsm. Give it 10 years and don't be surprised if that area is > 100k ppsm by then.

[Steely Dan]

What's far more interesting about south loop density to me than tiresomely comparing it to anything in NYC, is comparing it against itself to where it was just 30 years ago.

The growth is the key here, not some dumb argument about whether or not it feels like some part of Manhattan.

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

What's far more interesting about south loop density to me than tiresomely comparing it to anything in NYC, is comparing it against itself to where it was just 30 years ago.

The growth is the key here, not some dumb argument about whether or not it feels like some part of Manhattan.

Yes, precisely (even though I was comparing). The trajectory is such that it's possible to reach those very dense 100K+ ppsm levels especially after the current U/C high rises are complete and filled pretty well plus some extra ones at Riverline and some future ones over the next handful of years we don't even know about yet. A lot of room for growth. Then we have The 78 with its 10,000 proposed residential units. Well if those are mostly built and also filled pretty well.....

[Investing In Chicago]

Originally Posted by marothisu

You misread what I wrote as far as the boundaries. I included to the Metra Tracks which is east of Indiana


It's definitely a small area relatively (hence why I used the word "pocket" and not "neighborhood" but still pretty dense. Regardless, removing at least the weirdness of Dearborn Park down to 14th st, South Loop is already at 70k ppsm. Give it 10 years and don't be surprised if that area is > 100k ppsm by then.

You're correct, I did miss that part.

I agree with you on the trajectory of the South Loop, it's incredible how much it's grown, but it has a long way to go in my opinion.

[LouisVanDerWright]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

What's far more interesting about south loop density to me than tiresomely comparing it to anything in NYC, is comparing it against itself to where it was just 30 years ago.

The growth is the key here, not some dumb argument about whether or not it feels like some part of Manhattan.

I don't want Chicago to be like NYC, not at all.

I want Chicago to be like Chicago. I want all the urban renewal damage repaired with similar density. I want 3.5 million residents in the city limits. I want downtown to be like it was only moreso. I want all the brownfields plowed under and filled in with more Chicago.


1909 Burnham Plan Paris on the Prairie or bust bitches.

[Steely Dan]

^ yes, the constant Chicago dick measuring against New York is one of my least favorite aspects of this town.

Total "second city syndrome".

[twister244]

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

I don't want Chicago to be like NYC, not at all.

I want Chicago to be like Chicago. I want all the urban renewal damage repaired with similar density. I want 3.5 million residents in the city limits. I want downtown to be like it was only moreso. I want all the brownfields plowed under and filled in with more Chicago.


1909 Burnham Plan Paris on the Prairie or bust bitches.

+1,000,000 on this post.

[sentinel]

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

I don't want Chicago to be like NYC, not at all.

I want Chicago to be like Chicago. I want all the urban renewal damage repaired with similar density. I want 3.5 million residents in the city limits. I want downtown to be like it was only moreso. I want all the brownfields plowed under and filled in with more Chicago.


1909 Burnham Plan Paris on the Prairie or bust bitches.

All of this, agree 100% (although I would have also been okay with "betches")

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

^ yes, the constant Chicago dick measuring against New York is one of my least favorite aspects of this town.

Total "second city syndrome".

It never ends, though, does it?

People who want Chicago to be New York should shut up already and move their wannabe douche asses to New York

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

It never ends, though, does it?

People who want Chicago to be New York should shut up already and move their wannabe douche asses to New York

It's not just people wanting Chicago to be New York, much of it just regular old inferiority complex stuff.

Like back when the sears tower was the planet's tallest building, it wouldn't have been unusual to hear a Chicagoan say to a visitor: "the sears tower is the tallest building in the world. It's even taller than any of the skyscrapers in New York!" <chest puffed up>

Like, no shit, if it's the tallest building in the world, then it would stand to reason that it would be taller than any skyscraper in any city anywhere. And yet that deep-seated second city inferiority complex shit still seeps out and clings to anything that might somehow demonstrate that Chicago is better than New York.

It's so fucking dumb.

But I guess it's a part of the city's DNA at this point.

[untitledreality]

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

I want Chicago to be like Chicago. I want all the urban renewal damage repaired with similar density. I want 3.5 million residents in the city limits.

https://www.historicaerials.com/viewer

Get after it.

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

I don't want Chicago to be like NYC, not at all.

I want Chicago to be like Chicago. I want all the urban renewal damage repaired with similar density. I want 3.5 million residents in the city limits. I want downtown to be like it was only moreso. I want all the brownfields plowed under and filled in with more Chicago.


1909 Burnham Plan Paris on the Prairie or bust bitches.

For full disclosure, I was only comparing because someone made the comment. After having lived in NYC for 5 years (plus 2 others as a part time resident) I mostly agree with your statement especially if it relates to how some of the built environment is. There are obvious things that I wish Chicago had more of but it's not necessarily specific to NYC or anything.

[Chi-Sky21]

We can never be inferior to New York, we have alleys and do not leave our garbage on the street.

[Tom In Chicago]

^oh do shut up!

. . .

[left of center]

Originally Posted by Chi-Sky21

We can never be inferior to New York, we have alleys and do not leave our garbage on the street.

Alleys, while very useful from an urban planning perspective, are not the only defining feature making a city great. By your logic, St. Louis is a superior city to NYC because it has alleys while most of NYC does not.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by Chi-Sky21

We can never be inferior to New York, we have alleys and do not leave our garbage on the street.

Textbook.

[Investing In Chicago]

Had some friends who wanted to try Pequod's Pizza in Lincoln Park last weekend, and have to say it was very average at best. I don't understand the hype for that place. It is very bready (even for deep dish) and way way too salty.
I've read other Chicago forumers here recommend it to others, and I just don't get it.