CHICAGO | General Developments

[Marcu]

Originally Posted by VivaLFuego

http://www.chicagojournal.com/main.a...416&TM=52462.2

Burnett brokers deal for West Loop mid-rise
Condo complex to help build Rosa Parks Apts.

By TIMOTHY INKLEBARGER
Contributing writer

Excerpt:

Emphasis mine.

Say hello to some more vacant West Loop retail space and more overpriced West Loop residential. Though I suppose it's better than the lot sitting vacant for the next 30 years.

Who buys these units? I for the life of me do not understand why anyone would buy in the West Loop at current price levels.

[the urban politician]

^ People like Eric Sedler do

[cbotnyse]

Originally Posted by Marcu

Who buys these units? I for the life of me do not understand why anyone would buy in the West Loop at current price levels.

I actually found the west loop to be more reasonably priced compared to the south loop, especially in terms of new construction.

[Taft]

Originally Posted by cbotnyse

I actually found the west loop to be more reasonably priced compared to the south loop, especially in terms of new construction.

Agreed. Compared to other upscale neighborhoods, as well. I definitely don't think housing in that neighborhood is ridiculously priced. I mean, I think just about every neighborhood is a bit overpriced right now, but West Loop isn't particularly worse than most neighborhoods and is better than many.

Taft

[VivaLFuego]

Originally Posted by Taft

Agreed. Compared to other upscale neighborhoods, as well. I definitely don't think housing in that neighborhood is ridiculously priced. I mean, I think just about every neighborhood is a bit overpriced right now, but West Loop isn't particularly worse than most neighborhoods and is better than many.

Taft

Really, it seems pretty overpriced to me considering how undesirable it is for anyone other than an auto-driving commuter. At least in parts of South Loop, and certainly anywhere Gold Coast/Streeterville/River North, you're actually in the thick of a bustling city and all that has to offer. West Loop is a desolate wasteland devoid of pedestrian activity and interesting retail other than some very nice and very expensive restaurants near Randolph/Halsted and some snooty clubs along Lake and Fulton.

[emathias]

Originally Posted by VivaLFuego

Really, it seems pretty overpriced to me considering how undesirable it is for anyone other than an auto-driving commuter. At least in parts of South Loop, and certainly anywhere Gold Coast/Streeterville/River North, you're actually in the thick of a bustling city and all that has to offer. West Loop is a desolate wasteland devoid of pedestrian activity and interesting retail other than some very nice and very expensive restaurants near Randolph/Halsted and some snooty clubs along Lake and Fulton.

Well, the eastern part of the West Loop is noticeably better than it was even five years ago, but that part of the West Loop probably also close enough to the Loop to support the pricing just for location. My brother lives at Ogden/Ashland/Monroe, though and that area really isn't conducive to much except awesome skyline views from his 8th floor unit, which probably support those prices. You can see that view in the background of this pic of my dad last Thanksgiving:


I like the West Loop, but when I bought I bought in River North because I couldn't see a path for the West Loop to get to the necessary density within a reasonable timeframe exactly because of people like Eric Sedler. If he can be overcome, the West Loop could become one of the best area neighborhoods in 15 years, but if he gets his way it'll still be languishing in 30.

[cbotnyse]

Originally Posted by VivaLFuego

Really, it seems pretty overpriced to me considering how undesirable it is for anyone other than an auto-driving commuter. At least in parts of South Loop, and certainly anywhere Gold Coast/Streeterville/River North, you're actually in the thick of a bustling city and all that has to offer. West Loop is a desolate wasteland devoid of pedestrian activity and interesting retail other than some very nice and very expensive restaurants near Randolph/Halsted and some snooty clubs along Lake and Fulton.

I completely disagree! "desolate wasteland devoid of pedestrian activity!" wow. no way! The restaurants along Randolph are great, and throw in all the Greek places on Halsted and its some of the best dining in the city. The are also a good hand full of watering holes all around the west loop. Its also very CTA friendly with buses running east on every other block going into the loop.

The South Loop is what is desolate! Of course it has great access to the lakefront, but outside of that there is barely any dining/drinking or retail options. (especially east of Michigan)

[Marcu]

^ From what I've seen, the western part of the West Loop is no more than 5-10% cheaper than the South Loop. I think people are/were buying into the area because of the growth potential and driving up pricing without realizing that with the current political climate and land use regulations in the area that's never going to happen.

The mix of students, ethnic restaurant districts, converted warehouse + new condo housing stock, and the draw of United Center could have turned the area into something truly unique in Chicago. Doesn't look like we'll see that any time soon.

[cbotnyse]

Originally Posted by Marcu

^ From what I've seen, the western part of the West Loop is no more than 5-10% cheaper than the South Loop. I think people are/were buying into the area because of the growth potential and driving up pricing without realizing that with the current political climate and land use regulations in the area that's never going to happen.

Why do you think there is no growth potential?

[VivaLFuego]

Originally Posted by cbotnyse

Why do you think there is no growth potential?

See:

Sedler, Eric
WILCO
Ald. Fioretti.

I hope Burnett gets as many high-density projects in his ward approved soon as possible, because he's probably toast the next election cycle due to 1) growing NIMBYism in all parts of his ward 2) reduction of his former power base of Cabrini-Green residents.

[cbotnyse]

Originally Posted by VivaLFuego

See:

Sedler, Eric
WILCO
Ald. Fioretti.

outside of a google search of these names, I dont know anything about the apparent problems they are causing. Can you give me a brief explaination? I still don't see how the west loop has not grown in the last 5-10years. I think it is fast becoming a very diverse and livable neighborhood, much more so than the south loop. The only thing the south loop has going for it is the proximity to the lakefront, IMO. (and taller buildings I guess)

[emathias]

Originally Posted by cbotnyse

outside of a google search of these names, I dont know anything about the apparent problems they are causing. Can you give me a brief explaination? I still don't see how the west loop has not grown in the last 5-10years. I think it is fast becoming a very diverse and livable neighborhood, much more so than the south loop. The only thing the south loop has going for it is the proximity to the lakefront, IMO. (and taller buildings I guess)

It's grown, it's just that the people named are trying very hard to limit the growth and density. It's an area as well-equipped as anywhere in the city to handle density, though, so all the roadblocks just kill otherwise worthy projects, raising the prices so that fewer people can afford to move in, which slows the growth and limits the diversity of the area.

I understand the desire of some in the area not to turn into River North, but there is a vast difference between focusing projects on good planning and architecture and arbitrarily limiting heights, unit sizes and parking allotments, which is what Eric Sedler, et al, are doing.

[emathias]

I apologize if I've missed a previous mention of this, but is there any plan on what will go into the building Barney's currently occupies when it moves across the street into their new digs?

[cbotnyse]

Originally Posted by emathias

It's grown, it's just that the people named are trying very hard to limit the growth and density. It's an area as well-equipped as anywhere in the city to handle density, though, so all the roadblocks just kill otherwise worthy projects, raising the prices so that fewer people can afford to move in, which slows the growth and limits the diversity of the area.

I understand the desire of some in the area not to turn into River North, but there is a vast difference between focusing projects on good planning and architecture and arbitrarily limiting heights, unit sizes and parking allotments, which is what Eric Sedler, et al, are doing.

well I certianly dont agree with that at all. I believe the density should always be dictated by demand. However I do not fell like it is artifically keeping prices higher, of course I dont think thats the intent either.

Even with these restrictions the west loop is still a great neighborhood and nothing at all like the "desolate wasteland" previously described. Once these restrictions are lifted, which they probably will someday, the area will continue to grow.

[Jibba]

Originally Posted by emathias

I apologize if I've missed a previous mention of this, but is there any plan on what will go into the building Barney's currently occupies when it moves across the street into their new digs?

For some reason (either I heard it on this board or from someone at the actual store) I am thinking that the "co-op" label along with other similarly-priced labels will occupy the entirety of the current store and all of the more upscale brands will occupy the new store. I also could be wrong.

[VivaLFuego]

Originally Posted by cbotnyse

outside of a google search of these names, I dont know anything about the apparent problems they are causing. Can you give me a brief explaination? I still don't see how the west loop has not grown in the last 5-10years. I think it is fast becoming a very diverse and livable neighborhood, much more so than the south loop. The only thing the south loop has going for it is the proximity to the lakefront, IMO. (and taller buildings I guess)

They all seek to prevent high unit density and a healthy mix of smaller/affordable and larger housing (which could combine to actually support vibrant retail strips with pedestrian activity 18-hours-a-day), and they increase the cost of development through their demands thereby increasing the cost of housing. They also demand way too much off-street parking (see pedestrian friendliness, above). So you're left with a neighborhood almost as expensive as Gold Coast but without the desirability/urbanity and just generally inferior other than its proximity to a major expressway interchange.

By so severely limiting development potential, they also deprive the city budget of potential tax revenue that could avert the need for property tax hikes.

If you define "South Loop" as around 18th street then I'd largely agree with you in terms of overall deadness, but time was that was considered "Near South Side" and South Loop actually referred to the Printer's Row area, generally between Congress and Roosevelt, which has much much MUCH more going on than West Loop, not to mention superior relative location to the best urban assets of Chicago.

[cbotnyse]

Originally Posted by VivaLFuego

They all seek to prevent high unit density and a healthy mix of smaller/affordable and larger housing (which could combine to actually support vibrant retail strips with pedestrian activity 18-hours-a-day), and they increase the cost of development through their demands thereby increasing the cost of housing. They also demand way too much off-street parking (see pedestrian friendliness, above). So you're left with a neighborhood almost as expensive as Gold Coast but without the desirability/urbanity and just generally inferior other than its proximity to a major expressway interchange.

By so severely limiting development potential, they also deprive the city budget of potential tax revenue that could avert the need for property tax hikes.

If you define "South Loop" as around 18th street then I'd largely agree with you in terms of overall deadness, but time was that was considered "Near South Side" and South Loop actually referred to the Printer's Row area, generally between Congress and Roosevelt, which has much much MUCH more going on than West Loop, not to mention superior relative location to the best urban assets of Chicago.

Halsted, Madison and Randolph are some of the most vibrant, pedestrian friendly streets in the city. When compared to the south loop (south of Roosevelt, east of Michigan), the west loop blows it away as far as dining/drinking and retail. I'm not saying its better, because of the lakefront and cultural options the SL has, its just a matter of what you prefer to have in a neighborhood. And the west loop is just as close to the loop as Printer's Row is, furthermore Congress is probably the least pedestrian friendly street in the city. I dont see the "much much MUCH more" that is going on. I mean, name one restaurant besides Bar Louie in Printer's Row. I cant even think of a single bar either.

And comparing it to the GC is silly, the GC has a 100 year head start as a residential neighborhood.

I just did an exhaustive search for my girlfriend for a one bedroom condos in the entire downtown area and found the west loop to be the lowest priced of all neighborhoods bordering the loop, especially for new construction.

Like I said, I dont agree with the restrictions at all, but I dont think its having the detrimental effects you're stating.

[Mr Downtown]

I also find myself a little puzzled by discussions of the West Loop as a dead zone. When I bike through there, it seems to have a perfectly respectable street-level retail scene--moreso than the South Loop--and feels reasonably friendly to pedestrians. Is it East Lakeview? No, but no neighborhood anywhere in North America ever again will be. We just cannot reassemble that combination of tiny apartments and tiny retail spaces with lots of well-off young people living there. (If you think the mere physical combination of density and ground-level retail spaces is sufficient, I invite you to stroll along 71st Street in South Shore).

Skyscraper streets do not generate retail; they seem to extinguish it. Exhibit 1: Sheridan Road in Edgewater. Or any street in East Streeterville. The streetscapes we admire and enjoy walking, around the world, are those with maximum six-story buildings.

[Taft]

Originally Posted by cbotnyse

Like I said, I dont agree with the restrictions at all, but I dont think its having the detrimental effects you're stating.

I largely agree. I can see how the restrictions and demands made of new developments could theoretically push prices up. However, comparing prices in the West Loop with South Loop, River North, Streeterville or the Loop, the West Loop comes off looking relatively cheap, especially as you go west of Halsted.

What I do agree with is that those other neighborhoods are (or are quickly becoming) "nicer" neighborhoods to live in, in terms of density and amenities. I personally look at the neighborhood as an upscale "up and coming" neighborhood. It is a nice neighborhood, it is getting better and it's proximity to the loop will only keep that trend going, IMO. The prices are a bit high, given that, but still lower than the alternatives surrounding the loop.

As prices continue to slide (that's my prediction, anyway), West Loop could look like a pretty good investment in the near future.

Taft

[emathias]

Originally Posted by Mr Downtown

...(If you think the mere physical combination of density and ground-level retail spaces is sufficient, I invite you to stroll along 71st Street in South Shore).

South Shore isn't terrible, just less wealthy. If you wanted more wealthy people there, you'd start by improving transit access to the Loop, but until Metra Electric starts being run like the "L," I don't think that area's gonna be popular with the kids these days.

Originally Posted by Mr Downtown

Skyscraper streets do not generate retail; they seem to extinguish it. Exhibit 1: Sheridan Road in Edgewater. Or any street in East Streeterville. The streetscapes we admire and enjoy walking, around the world, are those with maximum six-story buildings.

Sheridan Road isn't vacant because it's surrounded by high-rises, it's vacant because it's less than a block from the Lake and therefore is freezing cold 8/12 months of the year. It's also become more or less a defacto extension of LSD, with speeding cars racing up or down it half the time. Those two factors MORE than negate any plus OR minus factor the high rises have. Plus, the hi-rises there aren't designed to be conducive to street-level retail.

The best retail districts in the world have been that way for decades, if not a century, so many of them were built before highrises. Many others are in cities that simply don't allow highrises. I think this particular argument of your is a little disingenuous. :-)

Both State Street and Michigan Avenue have quite a few 12+ story buildings along them and I'd argue once you're over 12 it doesn't make much difference. 5th Avenue in New York is also a helluva shopping street and it's nearly 100% highrise. There are also shopping streets in Boise, Seattle, Portland and San Francisco that are dominated by high rises. If most shopping districts don't have high-rises, it's because most cities and neighborhoods don't have highrises, not because highrises don't lend themselves to retail.