CHICAGO | General Developments - Page 1491

Via Chicago · #**29801** Posted **Jul 31, 2015, 3:18 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kenmore

Chicago should see a massive boom when sea level rise and climate change renders large swaths of America uninhabitable in 50-100 years, it's unavoidable at this point.

if/when this transpires, i think our country and world is going to have bigger problems on its hands than worrying about petty real estate maneuverings

also, not as if Chicago and everywhere else wont suffer effects as well. we're talking about the entire collapse of an ecosystem. chicago is predicted to have the climate of Austin. have you ever lived through an Austin summer?

ChiTownWonder · #**29802** Posted **Jul 31, 2015, 3:19 PM**

well finkl and sons is moving operations to the south side would provide jobs to the area right? Chicago needs more industry to provide jobs, heavy or light.

LouisVanDerWright · #**29803** Posted **Jul 31, 2015, 3:43 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Via Chicago

(also, not as if Chicago and everywhere else wont suffer effects as well. we're talking about the entire collapse of an ecosystem)

That's absurd and exactly why so many people don't take global warming seriously. The ecosystem is not going to "collapse" it is going to change rapidly and unpredictably, but life always finds a way. Most scientists aren't worried about nature's ability to adapt to climate change, they are worried about the extinction of species adapted to the current climate (which is the entire idea of evolution). So while it's going to kill all the cute pandas and rare treefrogs, it's not going to wipe out life on earth or make wheat and corn or the more adaptable species go extinct.

The main downsides of global warming is the massive negative effect it is going to have on today's way of life for humans. We are going to see a lot of places simply get devastated by it. Huge parts of Asia's coastal plains are going to be flooded where massive portions of the human race live. Places like California, Arizona, and Texas are going to become even more arid than they already are. But life on earth is not threatened by this, in fact, for most of the history of life on earth there were no ice caps at all, they've only existed on and off for the past 50-70 million years which is like 1% of the billions of years that life has been around.

As absurd as the conversation sounds, Chicago does stand to benefit from this. It is predicted that the upper midwest will only become warmer and see more moisture pushed out of an increasingly Mediterranean like Gulf of Mexico. Meanwhile the entire sunbelt from Florida to LA will be devastated by drought, flooding, or just conversion to straight up desert. What happens to Texan cities when the climate switches to that of Northern Mexico? What happens to LA and Vegas when it turns out the 5 year drought is permanent? What happens to Miami when the entire Florida peninsula is submerged? We already saw what happens to NOLA when hurricanes get bigger. At this point its pretty clear humans are not going to do anything about this and I'm not sure we could even if we tried. So the consequences are all that is left to discuss.

Via Chicago · #**29804** Posted **Jul 31, 2015, 3:55 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

The main downsides of global warming is the massive negative effect it is going to have on today's way of life for humans. We are going to see a lot of places simply get devastated by it. Huge parts of Asia's coastal plains are going to be flooded where massive portions of the human race live. Places like California, Arizona, and Texas are going to become even more arid than they already are. But life on earth is not threatened by this, in fact, for most of the history of life on earth there were no ice caps at all, they've only existed on and off for the past 50-70 million years which is like 1% of the billions of years that life has been around.

life is resilient. bacteria can survive in all sorts of extremes. that dosent mean what we're left with will be a pleasant place for our children or grandchildren to live.

and when i say collapse, i am talking about local collapses. "native" vegetation and species will largely cease to exist. the health of the lake will be decimated. this whole notion that Chicago will be this gleaming oasis in the middle of chaos is fairly shortsighted, esp given that the economy will have been destroyed/transformed in ways we cant even begin to understand if what you describe comes to pass. we are all in this thing together im afraid

UPChicago · #**29805** Posted **Jul 31, 2015, 4:20 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Via Chicago

if/when this transpires, i think our country and world is going to have bigger problems on its hands than worrying about petty real estate maneuverings

also, not as if Chicago and everywhere else wont suffer effects as well. we're talking about the entire collapse of an ecosystem. chicago is predicted to have the climate of Austin. have you ever lived through an Austin summer?

Where was this predicted?

Guess I'm moving to Calgary

Near North Resident · #**29806** Posted **Jul 31, 2015, 4:28 PM**

My mind boggles... what better day than a slow Friday at least

The alarmism these days... just off the charts

Then people repeat it like its fact!

Anyhow, back to real estate, care to enlighten us on some surefire predictions of the future in the real estate market?

Via Chicago · #**29807** Posted **Jul 31, 2015, 4:40 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by UPChicago

Where was this predicted?

Guess I'm moving to Calgary

http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/imp...n/midwest.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/e...es-like-texas/

sentinel · #**29808** Posted **Jul 31, 2015, 4:41 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Near North Resident

My mind boggles... what better day than a slow Friday at least

The alarmism these days... just off the charts

Then people repeat it like its fact!

Anyhow, back to real estate, care to enlighten us on some surefire predictions of the future in the real estate market?

Yeah...this isn't alarmism:

http://io9.com/california-has-lost-t...s-w-1721184866

Pray very hard that this never happens to the Great Lakes.

As for predictions, I wonder how quickly developers (both big and small) will pounce on the revised TOD ordinance, in terms of if/when we'll start to see an avalanche of new, non-highrise developments. Sooner or later? At the same time, I think it's a little disappointing that so much of the South and West sides were seemingly neglected in the creation of denser TOD zones, or am I misreading the maps that were presented along with the new ordinance?

Near North Resident · #**29809** Posted **Jul 31, 2015, 4:50 PM**

Its called a drought, california and all of the southwest was in a substantially damper period over the last 100 years before it started... wouldn't surprise me to see 100 years of pretty bad droughts there, and of course the lake is going to be dry in january... all the snow where the water comes from is frozen! Once it starts to melt the lake fills up again. Hey look its July 31st 2015 and the lake is full... SCIENCE

http://www.helmtech.com/FolsomLake/ webcam <----

The overpopulation in california is a problem, but the problems are incredibly overstated and there is nothing technology can't fix eventually.

That article you linked is nothing more than poorly worded alarmism.

Skyguy_7 · #**29810** Posted **Jul 31, 2015, 4:51 PM**

^^That comparison image is from a year and a half ago. The lake level is back to normal.

And I apologize for continuing the OTPs, since it's a CHICAGO development thread..

Via Chicago · #**29811** Posted **Jul 31, 2015, 4:54 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skyguy_7

^^That comparison image is from a year and a half ago. The lake level is back to normal per Google Earth, dated 2015..

ignorance is bliss

Rizzo · #**29812** Posted **Jul 31, 2015, 5:51 PM**

The above photos from July 20, 2015 are accurate although earlier this year it appears the lakes were at much higher levels which is what Google captured. I believe the drought has something to do with the wild fluctuations. But global warming could easy make the views above permanent or worse.

Baronvonellis · #**29813** Posted **Jul 31, 2015, 5:58 PM**

California just needs to build some desalination plants and they'll be fine. My hometown of Cape Coral, FL has been doing reverse osmosis desalination since 1977. First city in the US to do so! Florida already has 33 desalination plants!

ChickeNES · #**29814** Posted **Jul 31, 2015, 6:12 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by sentinel

As for predictions, I wonder how quickly developers (both big and small) will pounce on the revised TOD ordinance, in terms of if/when we'll start to see an avalanche of new, non-highrise developments. Sooner or later? At the same time, I think it's a little disappointing that so much of the South and West sides were seemingly neglected in the creation of denser TOD zones, or am I misreading the maps that were presented along with the new ordinance?

The developer for the proposed Hyde Park hotel at 53rd/Dorchester actually cited the new TOD ordinance during the community meeting. I think we'll start seeing other proposals taking advantage of it very soon.

PKDickman · #**29815** Posted **Jul 31, 2015, 6:27 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by pilsenarch

Chicago is in the midst of redefining itself... somebody posted recently some stats on #of empty units, empty lots, etc... that's concerning, but that is the old definition of Chicago where nobody wanted to live in filthy, noisy downtown...

It was I who posted it.
We've all heard about the new millennials and how twenty somethings want to live in a vibrant downtown.

But it's not new. We're a big city and we've always attracted twenty somethings to us. Even in the mass exodus of 1970-1980 their losses were a fraction of any other age group.

The problem is that they age out of the city.

This is to show retention of various age groups in the city.
The number for 10-14 year olds is the 2010 count in that age group minus the 2000 count of <5 year olds.

I ran a similar chart for '90-'00 and it looks pretty much the same.

They hit 35-40 and the pack up their kids and leave the city.

In fact all the gains we've made in twenty somethings since 1980 (including the 2010 gain that haven't aged out) have been more than offset by the losses when they hit 35. Even more if you could count the children they take with them.

Quote:

Originally Posted by pilsenarch

That, as we are all aware of, is drastically changing and as it does, we need to keep this in the forefront of our planning minds as the city inevitably starts to ever-so-slowly expand back into those abandoned neighborhoods...

It is happening too slowly.
If we expect to capitalize, long term, on the influx, we have to have the the abandoned neighborhoods ready when they are.
Otherwise we're doomed to be the frat house for the suburbs.

marothisu · #**29816** Posted **Jul 31, 2015, 6:34 PM**

The increase of percentage of people 20-34 years old from 2000 to 2013 in Chicago is actually tied with NYC if you can believe it. Los Angeles has actually shown negative change, and so has Dallas, San Francisco, Seattle, and Austin. Chicago is slightly above Houston and Portland. The top two that I've seen so far are DC and Philadelphia. DC is at almost +5% where as Chicago and NYC are +0.7%. Though to NYC and Chicago - DC is a lot smaller so easier to change for that high of a percentage.

I want to run the numbers for 1990 to 2013 and see what that looks like.

ChiTownWonder · #**29817** Posted **Jul 31, 2015, 6:37 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Via Chicago

ignorance is bliss

so where is this water going? I learned in like 3rd grade about the water cycle, and that we have the same amount of water on earth now as we did however many million years ago, it just changes states and places, so what gives

marothisu · #**29818** Posted **Jul 31, 2015, 6:42 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChiTownWonder

so where is this water going? I learned in like 3rd grade about the water cycle, and that we have the same amount of water on earth now as we did however many million years ago, it just changes states and places, so what gives

They must not have taught you that clouds don't just automatically form because there's moisture in the air. There has to be the right conditions, and when the right conditions don't occur, you can get a drought. And having clouds also doesn't automatically mean rain. The amount of buildup for just one drop of rain is a lot more than people think. Just because water has been evaporated into the atmosphere doesn't mean there's automatically going to be rain directly from it somewhere in the world. It's obviously less proportional than you're thinking.

ChiTownWonder · #**29819** Posted **Jul 31, 2015, 6:43 PM**

• Video Link

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nP2hxZhekPM

i just saw this video today and noticed a couple of comments by the people in it. it is a podcast who's topic this episode was about a shooting in Chicago. Most of the members reference the crime rate, one saying it is relatively high again. the guy in the black hat mentions he was there 3 times this year and said it was really nice (at 2:55). it kinda shows how the media is keeping people away and people never know how nice the city really is.

ChiTownWonder · #**29820** Posted **Jul 31, 2015, 6:45 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by marothisu

They must not have taught you that clouds don't just automatically form because there's moisture in the air. There has to be the right conditions, and when the right conditions don't occur, you can get a drought. And having clouds also doesn't automatically mean rain. The amount of buildup for just one drop of rain is a lot more than people think. Just because water has been evaporated into the atmosphere doesn't mean there's automatically going to be rain directly from it somewhere in the world.

right, but what i'm asking is how does global warming result in this drought, does the excess carbon in the air make it hard for the clouds to form/ rain to fall?