CHICAGO | General Developments [Archive] - Page 418

LouisVanDerWright

Jun 21, 2018, 8:18 PM

wtf is that base. awful.

That base is why the West Loop is blowing up! Haven't you heard how midrises are the sole reason for lively street life? Buildings like this and Circa 922 are why there are Michelin star restaurants all over the place in the West Loop.

:rolleyes:

This is one of the buildings I was referencing the other day. The majority of residential Midrises in the West Loop are dirt. We are lucky to get one with chain stores in the base because most of them just have grade level parking. The only contribution midrises like this make to street life are driving all the pedestrians away from wherever they are built and over towards the historic building stock (which has nothing to do with why the West Loop is a popular successful neighborhood of course) on Fulton and Randolph.

the urban politician

Jun 21, 2018, 8:19 PM

Blank ground level.

Yeah, I'll take a parking podium over this

LouisVanDerWright

Jun 21, 2018, 8:21 PM

"Honey I Blew Up The Six-Flat"

:haha::haha::haha:

This is one of the funniest comments I've seen on SSP. So true, they want to be a Rodgers Park front porch six flat but what they got instead is the bastard child of OBP and a Belmont Ave jumbo happy brick six flat. This is easily one of the worst buildings in the entire city, i would say comically bad if it weren't totally destroying what was shaping up to be quite a handsome intersection between MCDs and the nice lowrise project across the street.

KWillChicago

Jun 21, 2018, 8:26 PM

Anyone want to buy a bridge for their backyard?

https://chicago.curbed.com/2018/6/21/17480780/chicago-avenue-bridge-for-sale

woodrow

Jun 21, 2018, 8:37 PM

HOLY SHIT I just realized where this is. They couldn't even activate the the NW corner of the building? Cater corner from McD's, with their 1000's of employees and visitors? What a shit box. Look how squat the ground floor is!!! Ugh.

aphedox

Jun 21, 2018, 11:57 PM

Anyone want to buy a bridge for their backyard?

https://chicago.curbed.com/2018/6/21/17480780/chicago-avenue-bridge-for-sale

Is the bridge in bad shape or do they just want to widen the street? If it's in good shape and just isn't big enough, why doesn't the city just move it to Erie St so they can knock out two birds with one stone?

Kumdogmillionaire

Jun 22, 2018, 1:10 AM

Is the bridge in bad shape or do they just want to widen the street? If it's in good shape and just isn't big enough, why doesn't the city just move it to Erie St so they can knock out two birds with one stone?

I could think of a handful of reasons why that would be impossible without major adjustments in the bridge's size and shape, effectively rendering the project pointless and cost ineffective

left of center

Jun 22, 2018, 1:21 AM

Is the bridge in bad shape or do they just want to widen the street? If it's in good shape and just isn't big enough, why doesn't the city just move it to Erie St so they can knock out two birds with one stone?

The size is the issue. Chicago Ave is a two lane street, and like many of the north branch bascule bridges, it was built allowing only one lane of traffic in each direction. They all are (Chicago Ave included) notorious choke points, which is why these bridges are unfortunately biting the dust.

I really wish the city found some feasible way to keep the bridge superstructure and somehow widen it. Looks like even 4 or 5 feet would allow for two lane traffic, since its already a lane and a half in each direction. I imagine the reasoning is that it is immensely more expense as compared to demolishing it and starting fresh.

We've lost too many historic bridges in this city (as well as historic buildings, but that's another story...). Considering how proud Chicago purports to be about having the largest number of movable bridges in the world, the city certainly doesn't act like it.

Anyone have any ideas as to what will happen to the historic east bridgehouse when the bridge is demolished?

ardecila

Jun 22, 2018, 2:03 AM

Wait, the Sun-Times' coverage of the story mentions that the historic bridge will be replaced by an "interim" bridge, probably another Bailey bridge like the one on Division.

Seriously, CDOT? This bridge is in such bad shape that it has to go, now, but we still can't scrape up enough money to actually replace it? Bailey bridges are literally the bridges they put up in struggling third-world countries like Sudan or in war-torn regions to preserve an important supply line. Not the kind of thing we should have in the vaunted North Branch Corridor.

Meanwhile we're building flashy new replacement schools and remodeling L stops all over the South Side, not to serve a need but just so Rahm can grab some sweet South Side votes.

Randomguy34

Jun 22, 2018, 2:11 AM

The 260 unit Salvation Army Site got approved by the plan commission. NIMBYs were mad that there were only 9 parking spots. Block Club Chicago reported the story, and this is my favorite quote from it :haha:

Jeannine Norlander, a West Loop resident who moved to the 1500 block of Monroe from the suburbs three years ago, said the rapid redevelopment and growing traffic congestion in the area may cause her to move.

“We figured we’d get out now before the next mess started,” Norlander said. “We are really unhappy with this development going up across the street.”
https://blockclubchicago.org/2018/06/21/multimillion-dollar-redevelopment-of-salvation-army-freedom-center-get-key-approval/

ithakas

Jun 22, 2018, 2:18 AM

:haha::haha::haha:

This is one of the funniest comments I've seen on SSP. So true, they want to be a Rodgers Park front porch six flat but what they got instead is the bastard child of OBP and a Belmont Ave jumbo happy brick six flat. This is easily one of the worst buildings in the entire city, i would say comically bad if it weren't totally destroying what was shaping up to be quite a handsome intersection between MCDs and the nice lowrise project across the street.

I'm going to reserve judgment on this one until they install the steel cladding and windows, and clean up the precast. It is a Booth Hansen building, after all.

It's definitely nicer than an '00s Lakeview precast facade in my opinion. The 'brick' is a deeper red with less-pronounced mortar lines, and no arbitrary fake beige stone breaking up the pattern.

The base treatment has always been awful...

10023

Jun 22, 2018, 7:01 AM

But remember guys, midrises make for a better urban environment. That's what our resident Europhile keeps telling us, and no way he could be wrong! *rolls eyes*
Modern highrises make a bad street presence obligatory (garage bays, etc).

This is just shitty design for no reason, and there should be something in the code that prevents things like this.

And it has nothing to do with Europhilia, just a desire for good urbanism... which Europe tends to do better than America for a whole host of historical and contemporary reasons, and so it would be silly not to take lessons from European cities.

Kumdogmillionaire

Jun 22, 2018, 2:55 PM

Street presence isn't popular in the West Loop because of overhanging fears of store fronts or first floor homes getting robbed. If they had fences giving them some breathing room then it would be more likely for them to have first floor residences, but that would mean a significantly smaller floor plate and less return on investment. I think the blank walls are ugly, but they do make sense, especially the older ones. Chicago can't pretend to be a city without gang violence like London and Paris can. Certain privileges come with being an ancient city. For the second time today I will tell you to live in the real world. In the real world, many side streets in Chicago will not be attractive for retailers, and are just dangerous enough that they are not going to have sidewalk fronting homes at the prices they are trying to rate. This is why high rises win out for me in this city on an urban design level. Real world is > fantasy Euro land

moorhosj

Jun 22, 2018, 3:20 PM

Street presence isn't popular in the West Loop because of overhanging fears of store fronts or first floor homes getting robbed.

This is a painfully weak argument. Buildings all around this one have residences on the first floor. You can see them in some of the pictures already posted. You can see more of them from streetview (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8830101,-87.6552288,3a,75y,214.86h,82.91t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s6pnHZXaPwZ6PLBCFLI8bSQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656).

Chicago can't pretend to be a city without gang violence like London and Paris can. Certain privileges come with being an ancient city. For the second time today I will tell you to live in the real world.

Take your own advice, this area is one of the nicest, fastest growing parts of the entire city.

JK47

Jun 22, 2018, 3:30 PM

Certain privileges come with being an ancient city. For the second time today I will tell you to live in the real world. In the real world, many side streets in Chicago will not be attractive for retailers, and are just dangerous enough that they are not going to have sidewalk fronting homes at the prices they are trying to rate. This is why high rises win out for me in this city on an urban design level. Real world is > fantasy Euro land

Yeah I scared away a burglar using a claw hammer when he tried to force his way through a window of a basement unit I was renting in Cambridge, MA. Really nice place on a quiet leafy residential side street. Since then I don't do units at or below ground level.

sentinel

Jun 22, 2018, 4:02 PM

The West Ridge library/senior housing combo has rise quickly:

https://blockclubchicago.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2018/06/library-2.jpg
(Image: Linze Rice/Block Club Chicago - sorry, can someone please re-size this image to make it smaller).

Reminder of what the completed building will look like:
https://blockclubchicago.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2018/06/wr-lib-5.png

https://blockclubchicago.org/2018/06/19/colorful-new-west-ridge-library-rises-at-the-corner-of-western-and-pratt/

Steely Dan

Jun 22, 2018, 4:18 PM

^^ wow, i went past there last week and wondered what was going on there.

if it turns out anything like that rendering, that's gonna be one hell of a great addition to that intersection.

two other things i noticed around my neighborhood (lincoln square):

1. fencing has gone up around the lot of the old burned down lincoln square lanes bowling alley on lincoln (just north of that wretched POS McD's). does anyone know what might be going up there?

EDIT: i found it. it looks to be a 2 story pre-school in addition to small retail space on ground floor fronting lincoln. too bad it's so ugly :(, but better than a vacant lot i suppose.

https://www.aldermanoconnor.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Lincoln-Sq.-Kiddie-Rendering.jpg
source: https://www.aldermanoconnor.com/kiddie-academy-coming-to-lincoln-square/

2. fencing and two excavators are on site of the parking lot for the chase branch at lawrence/ravenswood (opposite the mariano's). i vaguely remember a redevelopment plan for that site, but can anyone refresh my memory?

Busy Bee

Jun 22, 2018, 4:19 PM

Just... wrong. I can't muster up a paragraph response to that dookie pile.

Near North Resident

Jun 22, 2018, 5:05 PM

Anyone want to buy a bridge for their backyard?

https://chicago.curbed.com/2018/6/21/17480780/chicago-avenue-bridge-for-sale

when the heck are they going to put the new division st. bridge in? They took that old POS down 4 years ago, said they'd replace it in 2 years and so far nada

Vlajos

Jun 22, 2018, 5:27 PM

^^^ Steely, that new building where the bowling alley was is atrocious. Such a wasted opportunity.

The Chase branch is being redeveloped into apartments. Lawrence is getting so much better it's great to see.

https://chicago.curbed.com/2017/6/19/15829740/chicago-apartment-development-ravenswood-lawrence

Steely Dan

Jun 22, 2018, 5:39 PM

^ thanks for the refresher on that chase project.

it looks pretty good. nice to see it finally underway.

lawrence through LS is on a pretty good tear these days.

in addition to the other lawrence stuff already posted in this thread, i noticed that another pair of what look to be 6 flats are going up over by california.

and yeah, that pre-school going up on lincoln is a true turd, but i suppose it'll fit right in next to that even turdier McD's and its freaking .5 acre surface parking lot.

speaking of which, will land in LS ever get expensive enough to force redevelopment of our three most horrible drive-thru/parking lot fast-food parcels (the aforementioned McD's on lincoln, and the Wendy's and BK on lawrence)?

Vlajos

Jun 22, 2018, 5:47 PM

^ West of Western on Lawrence is still pretty bad, but as you noted, there are some developments going up. The BK pisses me off and single story government building across from it.

The way Lawrence is developing east of Western though, it seems like it's only a matter of time for it to jump over.

Steely Dan

Jun 22, 2018, 5:58 PM

^ those government buildings on lawrence (the god awful 70s post office (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.9686286,-87.6912002,3a,75y,318.1h,88.6t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s4LsyAlUa3DGyIEtit6bqdw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) and illinois employment office (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.9686278,-87.6906664,3a,75.2y,338.39h,87.27t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s1difxN6pusRnSxh8lD-SOA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)) are probably more problematic than the BK (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.9686299,-87.6902881,3a,64.4y,214.17h,84.53t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sonmN00u9zpUvZRPyLpYWHA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) in the long run because BK can always be sold and redeveloped, but ugly-ass anti-urban government buildings like those have a nasty habit of sticking around for far too long.

Randomguy34

Jun 22, 2018, 6:23 PM

This is big first step to expanding TOD to all bus routes

Emanuel proposes expansion of transit-oriented development to bus routes
Mayor Rahm Emanuel is proposing an expansion of the city’s transit-oriented development policy to include real estate projects along the city’s busiest bus routes, in a move he said would boost development and create more affordable housing.

Since Chicago expanded the city’s transit-oriented development ordinance in 2015, there have been more than $2 billion in projects creating 8,000 new housing units under the program, according to the mayor’s office.

Emanuel said he plans to introduce an ordinance to the City Council in 2019 to expand transit-oriented projects to one or more bus routes.

“The goal is to take a very successful policy and expand it in the city,” Emanuel said. “There’s nothing sacrosanct about (transit-oriented development) being around rail. We want to think fresh, think new and drive new development and more affordable housing.”

The mayor’s office is focused on heavily traveled bus routes on Western, Ashland and Chicago avenues and 79th Street. If approved by the City Council, the policy would be rolled out on one or more of those routes.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/columnists/ori/ct-biz-tod-expansion-proposed-ryan-ori-20180622-story.html

the urban politician

Jun 22, 2018, 7:02 PM

^ That's awesome news!

But I wonder how that will be implemented? Will the zoning apply to entire corridors or just near bus stops? And what happens if bus stops are removed or moved?

Baronvonellis

Jun 22, 2018, 7:25 PM

Also don't forget the Levy Senior Center and Social Security buildings on Lawrence with large surface lots too! I was surprised to see a 5 story building go up on Lawrence though. Usually every walkup building around the northside is max 4 stories unless it's a TOD building. It seems real tall for Chicago, almost like something from New York. I'd love to see taller walkup buildings like that too.

I'd rather have a vacant lot by McD's than than ugly school that will be around for the next 30 years. I could wait a few years, till something better could go in there personally.

And I wish someone would redevelop those ugly 1 story retail shops on Western next to Walgreens. I'm glad Lawrence around LS is overall improving, and that development at the chase bank is really good and needed!

^ those government buildings on lawrence (the god awful 70s post office (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.9686286,-87.6912002,3a,75y,318.1h,88.6t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s4LsyAlUa3DGyIEtit6bqdw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) and illinois employment office (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.9686278,-87.6906664,3a,75.2y,338.39h,87.27t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s1difxN6pusRnSxh8lD-SOA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)) are probably more problematic than the BK (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.9686299,-87.6902881,3a,64.4y,214.17h,84.53t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sonmN00u9zpUvZRPyLpYWHA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) in the long run because BK can always be sold and redeveloped, but ugly-ass anti-urban government buildings like those have a nasty habit of sticking around for far too long.

Tcmetro

Jun 22, 2018, 7:43 PM

This is big first step to expanding TOD to all bus routes

Emanuel proposes expansion of transit-oriented development to bus routes

http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/columnists/ori/ct-biz-tod-expansion-proposed-ryan-ori-20180622-story.html

As much as I like TOD, the bus routes are horrifically slow and unreliable even if service levels are decent. I can't imagine there are as many choice riders on the crosstown bus lines and that people living in new developments in these areas would be more likely to drive.

Vlajos

Jun 22, 2018, 8:01 PM

And I wish someone would redevelop those ugly 1 story retail shops on Western next to Walgreens. I'm glad Lawrence around LS is overall improving, and that development at the chase bank is really good and needed!

They are ugly, but Elizabeth is in there, one of my favorite restaurants. And the soccer store is great.

k1052

Jun 22, 2018, 8:45 PM

As much as I like TOD, the bus routes are horrifically slow and unreliable even if service levels are decent. I can't imagine there are as many choice riders on the crosstown bus lines and that people living in new developments in these areas would be more likely to drive.

The city is supposed to finish installing transit signal priority on Ashland and Western this year so those make some sense. One would hope that this would provide some incentive (or even a funding mechanism) for additional deployments and other improvements that would reduce travel time and increase reliability.

the urban politician

Jun 22, 2018, 8:50 PM

What having TOD zoning on major bus routes does is dramatically increase density through the city, instead of huddling it around L stops. I mean, this is really exciting, I can see this leading to a major transformation of the cityscape.

In addition, the city is looking at providing low interest loans for investors to acquire property in high income areas as long as they provide affordable units in at least 20% of their units for 15 years. I may look into taking advantage of this.

Both of these items could go a long way toward keeping the city affordable.

OrdoSeclorum

Jun 22, 2018, 10:16 PM

Emanuel proposes expansion of transit-oriented development to bus routes

http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/columnists/ori/ct-biz-tod-expansion-proposed-ryan-ori-20180622-story.html

[low whistle] That sounds amazing. TOD within 600' of an Ashland bus stop is basically a block east and west of Ashland and pretty much continuously. It's incredible to think how much nicer the entire west side of the city could be in just six or seven years, with parking lots and auto parts stores turning into neighbors and customers for local businesses.

the urban politician

Jun 22, 2018, 10:23 PM

Randomguy34

Jun 22, 2018, 10:43 PM

[low whistle] That sounds amazing. TOD within 600' of an Ashland bus stop is basically a block east and west of Ashland and pretty much continuously. It's incredible to think how much nicer the entire west side of the city could be in just six or seven years, with parking lots and auto parts stores turning into neighbors and customers for local businesses.

Chicago's TOD actually expands to 1320' for most streets (2640' for Pedestrian streets). If Western or Ashland is selected, a large stretch of the city can be covered. I can see the Near West Side and West Town in particular benefit from this change.

left of center

Jun 22, 2018, 11:29 PM

The expansion of TOD to the major bus routes (Western, Ashland, Chicago, 79th) is awesome news! Especially for Ashland and Western since, as two lane streets, they do not provide a great pedestrian experience and promote a more auto-sewer feel as drivers tend to feel more comfortable on those wider streets and drive faster and more aggressively. Increased density will help with this by allowing for more retail serving pedestrians. The city should also take steps to make the pedestrian experience on those streets more attractive as well, such as curb extensions. The city has been doing a good job of adding concrete islands for pedestrian crossings on Western and Ashland, and should expand on that as well.

pip

Jun 22, 2018, 11:53 PM

Wow! I am really for this.

Mister Uptempo

Jun 23, 2018, 3:25 AM

Emanuel proposes expansion of transit-oriented development to bus routes

http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/columnists/ori/ct-biz-tod-expansion-proposed-ryan-ori-20180622-story.html

Any chance that the CTA will take another stab at proposing full-blown BRT (or maybe even LRT) along Western and/or Ashland if the TOD expansion proves successful?

Busy Bee

Jun 23, 2018, 3:56 AM

Would love to see LRT on some of the heaviest routes, but my gut tells me if we ever see that it's 20+ years away unfortunately. I think it's gonna be a Cta culture change that introduces serious entertaining of that level of ambition.

west-town-brad

Jun 23, 2018, 1:02 PM

Just drop/lower the parking minimums altogether... NIMBYs won’t notice until it’s right next door and by then it will be too late.

10023

Jun 23, 2018, 2:56 PM

There should never be artificial parking minimums anywhere. Americans don’t need more convincing to rely on their cars to get around, and developers will provide as much parking as is needed in order to meet real demand.

Parking limits might make sense in areas where city planners want to actively discourage driving by non-residents (i.e., where roads are congested but transit access is good). Parking minimums never make sense.

PKDickman

Jun 23, 2018, 3:32 PM

Just drop/lower the parking minimums altogether... NIMBYs won’t notice until it’s right next door and by then it will be too late.

The 1-1 ratio is a product of the 70s and one of the biggest mistakes we've made.
The ratios of the 50's were much more realistic and still seem to conform to vehicle ownership patterns today.
It was 1-1 for sfrs & 2 flats, then was .75 for apts, .5 for studios and .6 for apts & .4 for studios as densities got higher.

Mr Downtown

Jun 23, 2018, 4:40 PM

Rizzo

Jun 24, 2018, 6:36 AM

aaron38

Jun 24, 2018, 1:04 PM

On street parking really should be for visitors, friends and family. Senior citizen parents from out of town want to come visit, where are they supposed to park? Or should they not come?

J_M_Tungsten

Jun 24, 2018, 1:22 PM

Train, bus, cab, uber, etc... depending on how long they stay and where they are in the city, these options are probably cheaper than street parking. Also, they don’t need to worry about their car.

the urban politician

Jun 24, 2018, 1:50 PM

I actually think ride share services and automated cars are quickly going to make it completely unnecessary to own an automobile

Rizzo

Jun 24, 2018, 2:40 PM

On street parking really should be for visitors, friends and family. Senior citizen parents from out of town want to come visit, where are they supposed to park? Or should they not come?

They can take the bus, train, taxi or carshare. Heck those are ultimately the best options for seniors.

Density exists where there is transit...use it.

In realty, parking is only scarce along the lakefront areas. The stigma of hard to find parking will cause prospective buyers and renters to choose a different neighborhood if that is their principal concern.

I realize people want it all. Big city living close to transit and space for the car. But you can’t have everything. The argument for more density for more residents and its benefit to the local economy far outweighs the benefits of convenient parking.

left of center

Jun 24, 2018, 10:44 PM

Any chance that the CTA will take another stab at proposing full-blown BRT (or maybe even LRT) along Western and/or Ashland if the TOD expansion proves successful?

I think both Ashland and Western are prime for BRT or even light rail routes. They would have excellent connectivity to existing CTA infrastructure as well, as both BRT/LRT routes would be able to connect to the Brown (Ashland is only a 2 block walk from the Paulina stop) and O'Hare Blue. The Western route has a station on the Forest Park Blue and Pink line, and is only 2 blocks from the 35th/Archer Orange, while the Ashland route has the Pink/Green transfer station and a station on the Orange line.

The city wouldn't even need to eliminate a lane of traffic for the ROW, they can simply use the parking lane for the dedicated route. Figure doing it that way would be an easier pill to swallow for politicians, since I'm sure voters would scream bloody murder if either of those two pivotal corridors were given a road diet.

Khantilever

Jun 24, 2018, 11:29 PM

Sometimes it's worthwhile to ponder how and why such requirements arose in the first place. If you just throw out all off-street parking requirements, you've given neighbors a huge reason to oppose any new development. Now you might also say that neighbors should have no influence over what gets developed, or that free on-street parking should never be allowed—but that's simply not the world we live in.

This is a fair point. But the parking that we end up with at the end is negotiated with Aldermen anyway—regardless of what the rules are. I like to think of underlying zoning as simply the opening position for the developer; the less restrictive, the greater the bargaining power to get what the ultimately want.

And what eliminating these minimums may accomplish is providing greater flexibility so that, in those cases where the community would not mind less parking, it is easier to develop with less parking. Otherwise, the community can reinsert parking that meets or exceeds the old minimum through the Alderman.

KWillChicago

Jun 25, 2018, 12:37 AM

Are there any functional rail tracks left in chicago aside from those that run through lower rivernorth? Those ones that start around wolf point and go to, i believe navy pier?

harryc

Jun 25, 2018, 1:04 AM

Mr Downtown

Jun 25, 2018, 2:56 AM

Are there any functional rail tracks left in chicago aside from those that run through lower rivernorth? Those ones that start around wolf point and go to, i believe navy pier?

I'm not sure what you're asking. Those tracks are no longer in service, though they have not yet been formally abandoned.

Of course, Chicago has many hundreds of miles of active railroad tracks.

KWillChicago

Jun 25, 2018, 3:18 AM

My bad. I was referring to railcars like sanfran. Those tracks I was previously referring to were railcars, right?

Busy Bee

Jun 25, 2018, 3:22 AM

Does he mean streetcar?

KWillChicago

Jun 25, 2018, 3:23 AM

Yes I was. Sorry, idiot moment.

aaron38

Jun 25, 2018, 4:39 AM

Doesn't work that way in the hoods - e.g. Dakin / Sheridan - take a streetview tour - note the total lack of garages .

What I’m saying is, for any redevelopment in those neighborhoods, a market based analysis of the parking required should not be allowed to count on street parking at all.
I agree with eliminating minimums. But if a developer thinks he needs 10 spots to sell his units, he has to build those 10 spots.

left of center

Jun 25, 2018, 4:46 AM

Yes I was. Sorry, idiot moment.

If you are referring to the streetcar rail lines in general, there are actually quite many of them left. It was too expensive and labor intensive to remove all of them, so much of it was simply covered in asphalt. They were partially dismantled pretty haphazardly though, so that the remaining trackage isn't continuous or contiguous, rather bits and pieces scattered throughout the city.

If you are referring to the Carroll Ave ROW tracks that cross the north branch of the river at the C&NW railbridge, then no that was never used for transportation as far as I know. Rather, it was a freight line that serviced Navy Pier (back when it was actually used for commercial/naval shipping purposes) and the factories along the north bank of the main branch of the river.

10023

Jun 25, 2018, 10:17 AM

Are there any functional rail tracks left in chicago aside from those that run through lower rivernorth? Those ones that start around wolf point and go to, i believe navy pier?

I’ve thought about this too. It would actually be pretty great to make a short east/west light rail line here, given how much western River North and Streeterville have been developed.

Would that even be possible? Do they actually still go to Navy Pier?

harryc

Jun 25, 2018, 10:24 AM

I’ve thought about this too. It would actually be pretty great to make a short east/west light rail line here, given how much western River North and Streeterville have been developed.

Would that even be possible? Do they actually still go to Navy Pier?

IIRC that is exactly why the ROW has been preserved, to the point of cantilevering 300 N LaSalle over it, and plans to cantalever 300 N Calrk over it as well.

Yes the tracks go down Carol - Kinzie - North Water to Park or Orleans - but the old tracks would not be used, it's the ROW that has been preserved. This is a special sneaky path to travel along the N bank of the river already grade separated as you pass under the bridge ramps for each street that crosses the river.

Mr Downtown

Jun 25, 2018, 2:49 PM

The tracks in Carroll Avenue were a single-track freight line to the mouth of the river, eventually extended out to Navy Pier. The last customers was the Sun-Times, for delivery of newsprint rolls. The line has been out of service for nearly 15 years, but Union Pacific has never legally abandoned it; undoubtedly they want the city to buy back the concession it gave them for free in 1848. Once a year, UP lowers the bridge next to Kinzie St. and runs a Hi-Rail truck across it and out to the end of track.

Those tracks have called out to planners since the Jane Byrne era, first with vague plans for a light rail line, then with the Central Area Circulator of the 1990s (which ultimately found a Carroll Avenue alignment geometrically unusable), then with a BRT scheme for which Trump Int'l Hotel & Tower left space, and now with CCAC's Connector project. (http://ccac.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/Consolidated-Connector-PDF.pdf)

It's the grade-separated right-of-way, not the actual track, that's important. Unfortunately, it's five blocks of a very tempting alignment—with no good way to get to either end. That's why a BRT use, much like the McCormick Place Busway, has always seemed most logical to me.

ardecila

Jun 25, 2018, 3:18 PM

Is like to see the city move beyond simple TOD and have various levels of TOD. Example:

TOD-A: near major transit nodes, such as where multiple L and major bus routes intersect. Minimal parking and basically downtown-level density permitted

TOD-B: near L stops and major bus routes. Basically the same TOD zoning already in practice

TOD-C: near Divvy stations and along lesser bus routes. No boost in density, but decreased parking requirements.

The mayor is proposing something similar. Each bus route will be studied and a corridor plan will be created that specifies bulk, density, and parking requirements. It will not be a set of uniform city-wide rules like the initial TOD ordinance, or like what you proposed above... sounds like it will be highly location-specific. This is interesting, because the Zoning Ordinance was always supposed to apply city-wide. I don't think it's ever had sections that were specific to certain areas of the city, with narrow exceptions like a few historic areas or around Wrigley Field... so while the current Zoning Ordinance is like a set of neutral/flexible rules for a board game, this bus-TOD thing is a step toward actual city planning in Chicago. Unfortunately a more intricate set of rules will only hand power to politicians, bureaucrats and zoning attorneys and add one more hurdle for developers, so ultimately we might end up with a better-planned city at the cost of a decreased housing supply. Also, the city has to back it up with well-educated, intelligent and pragmatic planning staff. I am not confident this will happen...

Presumably the bus-TOD plan will allow greater bulk and density, and lower parking requirements along some or all of the four initial corridors, with the highest intensity at major intersections where transit routes cross.

These four bus routes have been targeted for (some) improvements, so it makes sense to concentrate new development along them. On the other hand, I would hate to see new development erode the fine-grained urbanism that currently exists along Chicago Ave or similar streets. Lots of independent businesses, highly pedestrian corridor, already pretty dense with few obvious redevelopment sites. These kind of corridors are rare in Chicago, so I hope the plan for Chicago Ave at least is on the conservative side and focuses on areas west of California. I will also be interested to see how much the bus-TOD guidelines borrow from the existing P-street rules, which already offer a blueprint for highly urban streets but are agnostic about density.

west-town-brad

Jun 25, 2018, 4:15 PM

The mayor is proposing something similar. Each bus route will be studied and a corridor plan will be created that specifies bulk, density, and parking requirements. It will not be a set of uniform city-wide rules like the initial TOD ordinance, or like what you proposed above... sounds like it will be highly location-specific. This is interesting, because the Zoning Ordinance was always supposed to apply city-wide. I don't think it's ever had sections that were specific to certain areas of the city, with narrow exceptions like a few historic areas or around Wrigley Field... so while the current Zoning Ordinance is like a set of neutral/flexible rules for a board game, this bus-TOD thing is a step toward actual city planning in Chicago. Unfortunately a more intricate set of rules will only hand power to politicians, bureaucrats and zoning attorneys and add one more hurdle for developers, so ultimately we might end up with a better-planned city at the cost of a decreased housing supply. Also, the city has to back it up with well-educated, intelligent and pragmatic planning staff. I am not confident this will happen...

Presumably the bus-TOD plan will allow greater bulk and density, and lower parking requirements along some or all of the four initial corridors, with the highest intensity at major intersections where transit routes cross.

These four bus routes have been targeted for (some) improvements, so it makes sense to concentrate new development along them. On the other hand, I would hate to see new development erode the fine-grained urbanism that currently exists along Chicago Ave or similar streets. Lots of independent businesses, highly pedestrian corridor, already pretty dense with few obvious redevelopment sites. These kind of corridors are rare in Chicago, so I hope the plan for Chicago Ave at least is on the conservative side and focuses on areas west of California. I will also be interested to see how much the bus-TOD guidelines borrow from the existing P-street rules, which already offer a blueprint for highly urban streets but are agnostic about density.

I fear for my own life when trying to cross all of these streets: western, ashland, chicago aves. none of these are pedestrian friendly but I hope they become that way in time.

west-town-brad

Jun 25, 2018, 4:33 PM

Looks like work on the Margie's Candies building will be starting again.... the site has been dead/mid-construction for the past 6 months or so....

INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR ALTERATIONS TO AN EXISTING 2 STORY MIXED USE BUILDING WITH BASEMENT. WORK TO INCLUDE BUILD OUT OF 4 GROUND FLOOR COMMERCIAL UNITS, 20 SECOND FLOOR RESIDENTIAL UNITS AND COMMON ROOF DECK AS PER PLANS. **Certified Plan Corrections Project - Conditional Permit: Subject to field inspections **

1965 N. Milwaukee Ave. Issued June 22, 2018

marothisu

Jun 25, 2018, 7:32 PM

There's a zoning application for the site at 1505 N Dayton which is currently a parking lot/industrial 1 story building. Proposal is to build a new 9 story building with 197 units and 56 parking spaces. This is across from So No East.

NiHao

Jun 25, 2018, 9:49 PM

The tracks in Carroll Avenue were a single-track freight line to the mouth of the river, eventually extended out to Navy Pier. The last customers was the Sun-Times, for delivery of newsprint rolls. The line has been out of service for nearly 15 years, but Union Pacific has never legally abandoned it; undoubtedly they want the city to buy back the concession it gave them for free in 1848. Once a year, UP lowers the bridge next to Kinzie St. and runs a Hi-Rail truck across it and out to the end of track.

Those tracks have called out to planners since the Jane Byrne era, first with vague plans for a light rail line, then with the Central Area Circulator of the 1990s (which ultimately found a Carroll Avenue alignment geometrically unusable), then with a BRT scheme for which Trump Int'l Hotel & Tower left space, and now with CCAC's Connector project. (http://collections.carli.illinois.edu/cdm/landingpage/collection/uic_bru)

It's the grade-separated right-of-way, not the actual track, that's important. Unfortunately, it's five blocks of a very tempting alignment—with no good way to get to either end. That's why a BRT use, much like the McCormick Place Busway, has always seemed most logical to me.

Any maps of all this?

moorhosj

Jun 25, 2018, 9:52 PM

Any maps of all this?

Map of the connector proposal. (http://ccac.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/Consolidated-Connector-PDF.pdf)

NiHao

Jun 25, 2018, 10:31 PM

Map of the connector proposal. (http://ccac.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/Consolidated-Connector-PDF.pdf)

Neat. Really needs to be a navy pier to museum campus line though.

SolarWind

Jun 26, 2018, 1:02 AM

June 25, 2018

https://imgur.com/fBTNjf3.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/GJmeoRh.jpg

Via Chicago

Jun 26, 2018, 2:54 AM

https://i.imgur.com/GJmeoRh.jpg

bad home depot kitchen backsplash strikes again.

do we have a running tally of how many buildings have done this yet, and do we have an over/under on how many years it will be before theyre all trying to un-do it because its "so mid-teens"

aaron38

Jun 26, 2018, 3:43 AM

do we have an over/under on how many years it will be before theyre all trying to un-do it because its "so mid-teens"

Given the number of buildings I see with really bad 50s/60s jagged stone facades, I'd say about 50 years minimum.

Rizzo

Jun 26, 2018, 5:46 AM

I’m alright with the random stone patterns on the ground in a plaza or something, but can’t stand them on a wall.

VKChaz

Jun 26, 2018, 9:03 AM

I fear for my own life when trying to cross all of these streets: western, ashland, chicago aves. none of these are pedestrian friendly but I hope they become that way in time.
4-lane streets require more signaled intersections. I shudder seeing people trying to cross some streets. And increased density would only make it more necessary.

Via Chicago

Jun 26, 2018, 5:17 PM

Given the number of buildings I see with really bad 50s/60s jagged stone facades, I'd say about 50 years minimum.

speaking of, can anyone explain how this ever became a thing:

https://pi.movoto.com/p/461/09901549_0_UIYjr7_p.jpeg

was there just like one particular salesman on the SW side 30-40 years ago who managed to convince everyone this was a good idea

sadly it seems to still occur. i was walking through LV the other day and a team was out there on scaffolding chipping away at the original brick face of a gorgeous 3 flat. no effort to preserve the bricks at all, and the original facade (what was left of it) looked to be in great shape. it was heart wrenching and im scared to go back down the block and see what theyve super glued up in its place....

Busy Bee

Jun 26, 2018, 5:38 PM

^"Formstone" did just as much if not more damage to brick rowhouses on the east coast. It's just one of those things that can only be explained with bad taste, much like metal awnings and yard ornaments.

LouisVanDerWright

Jun 26, 2018, 6:27 PM

speaking of, can anyone explain how this ever became a thing:

https://pi.movoto.com/p/461/09901549_0_UIYjr7_p.jpeg

was there just like one particular salesman on the SW side 30-40 years ago who managed to convince everyone this was a good idea

sadly it seems to still occur. i was walking through LV the other day and a team was out there on scaffolding chipping away at the original brick face of a gorgeous 3 flat. no effort to preserve the bricks at all, and the original facade (what was left of it) looked to be in great shape. it was heart wrenching and im scared to go back down the block and see what theyve super glued up in its place....

LV? Little Village?

Unfortunately this was just in Vogue for a while when historic buildings we're considered obsolete.

Most of the time when you see it done today it's because there is a major structural fault you can't necessarily see from the outside. These old facade bricks were placed with such perfect tolerances that it's nearly impossible to repair them with modern "skilled" labor. Once brick rot sets in to a pre WWI facade, it's pretty much done for. I tried to replace just a few bricks on a building I own that were butchered by an idiot with a grinder and the whole section of facade basically started pealing off so we stopped after two bricks and just replaced those and filled the cracks in the bricks we were trying to repair with mortar.

emathias

Jun 26, 2018, 6:34 PM

LV? Little Village?

Unfortunately this was just in Vogue for a while when historic buildings we're considered obsolete.

Most of the time when you see it done today it's because there is a major structural fault you can't necessarily see from the outside. These old facade bricks were placed with such perfect tolerances that it's nearly impossible to repair them with modern "skilled" labor. Once brick rot sets in to a pre WWI facade, it's pretty much done for. I tried to replace just a few bricks on a building I own that were butchered by an idiot with a grinder and the whole section of facade basically started pealing off so we stopped after two bricks and just replaced those and filled the cracks in the bricks we were trying to repair with mortar.

I'm not sure what you mean? I live in an 1890s building, and we had bricks near the foundation eroding. We had them replaced, plus a piece of "decorative" limestone, and it seems fine now. They also ended up tuckpointing nearly all the bricks on within about 3 feet of the ground on that face. Are you referring to bricks that are exclusively facade and have not structural purpose?

Via Chicago

Jun 26, 2018, 8:54 PM

PKDickman

Jun 26, 2018, 9:40 PM

yes Little Village. i cant speak to why they were doing what they were doing. all i know is i saw a gorgeous 1800s era facade getting chucked off the side of the unit with crowbars and crashing to the ground below with alarming speed and im not sure i buy that A) there was a problem to begin with, B) a problem couldnt have somehow been addressed more sensitively.

They stripped a fine gray-stone three flat on Wolcott.

https://s15.postimg.cc/ve5erc33v/wolcott.jpg

Frankly, I would have preferred the Barney Rubble look.

Investing In Chicago

Jun 26, 2018, 9:51 PM

The lot that houses The Weiner Circle on Clark in Lincoln Park is for sale - almost a guarantee it will be redeveloped.
The potential bad news is that the beautiful 5 story grey stone immediately to the South is part of the package, not sure if that building is protected, but both lots are being marketed as a "development opportunity".

https://www.google.com/maps/place/W+Wrightwood+Ave+%26+N+Clark+St,+Chicago,+IL+60614/@41.9301324,-87.6435289,3a,75y,239.44h,111.04t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s0z-PVhS-ZwDWsU0MAxwifg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!4m5!3m4!1s0x880fd30c04b9ab7b:0xaf02af7443c2c41a!8m2!3d41.9296739!4d-87.6429531

west-town-brad

Jun 26, 2018, 9:51 PM

They stripped a fine gray-stone three flat on Wolcott.

https://s15.postimg.cc/ve5erc33v/wolcott.jpg

Frankly, I would have preferred the Barney Rubble look.

once the cornice goes.... which likely happened slowly over 40 years of skipped maintenance...

PKDickman

Jun 26, 2018, 9:58 PM

once the cornice goes.... which likely happened slowly over 40 years of skipped maintenance...

I think your confused. There was no problem with the stonework.
They removed it because they wanted it to look like the after shot.

west-town-brad

Jun 26, 2018, 10:09 PM

I think your confused. There was no problem with the stonework.
They removed it because they wanted it to look like the after shot.

cornice likely fell off years ago or was ripped off due to maintenance cost. in the 2007 streetview shot it's already missing.

what I'm saying is that once the cornice is gone (and this is my opinion only) you've kind of lost the character of the building anyway.

left of center

Jun 26, 2018, 10:39 PM

the urban politician

Jun 26, 2018, 10:47 PM

They stripped a fine gray-stone three flat on Wolcott.

https://s15.postimg.cc/ve5erc33v/wolcott.jpg

Frankly, I would have preferred the Barney Rubble look.

That's an absolute crime!

Rizzo

Jun 26, 2018, 11:05 PM

Going off on a tangent here. But the change of that facade is clearly a matter of taste and it’s a bad choice. These newer facades of flat aluminum panel or synthetic composites just don’t look all that great after 10 years. Already a couple similar homes in my hood have a dirty look that’s not that elegant patina with age you see on older buildings, but a dirty motel look with streaks of dirt and oil canning damage.

I know it’s not the case with everyone, but a good number of condo building facades are not maintained like they should be until they get really really really bad. Technically a yearly gentle powerwash to metal and glass facades should be part of a maintenance schedule.

So it’s a shame when a durable, long lasting material is removed and replaced with a cheap alternative. It’s not as low maintenance as one might think.

AMWChicago

Jun 26, 2018, 11:14 PM

As awkward as it is, it at least makes the streetscape interesting. Not like everyone in the neighborhood is gonna do this. It's just an experiment. Even if it looks bad, at least it diversifies the reso wall along the sidewalk.

AMWChicago

Jun 26, 2018, 11:17 PM

Map of the connector proposal. (http://ccac.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/Consolidated-Connector-PDF.pdf)

This is one of those things I wish could just appear over night. Would be amazing to have this overlay of infrastructure. Almost like the Musk Loop. I wish a multi billionaire would just write the check so it could be built. Because transit like this would spur so much development and likely only have positive outcomes. It just needs the cash to happen. :no:

VKChaz

Jun 26, 2018, 11:25 PM

The building (2616-2618 N Clark) is rated Orange by the Landmarks Commission. Hopefully they will deny any demolition permit, after the designated 90 day hold (assuming the developer decided to go that route). It really is a gorgeous building.
The google image doesn't even do the building justice. It is really striking when approached from the street. That is one that has to be preserved.

modkris

Jun 27, 2018, 12:11 AM

The photo of the building on Wolcott is totally washed out and makes it look horrible. This is actually really nice looking in person although the previous design looked very good as well. The door on the new version is bright orange, like almost traffic cone orange. This is now a very modern single family home much like you'd see in Dwell magazine.

ardecila

Jun 27, 2018, 12:34 AM

^ Ironic as the architect was Studio Dwell... I believe this building would have been a total teardown candidate, except that the existing building offered more volume and smaller setbacks than current zoning would allow, so the architect convinced the client to re-use the shell of the old building at great cost. They sliced atriums through the building, installed extensive steel framework throughout, and excavated the basement significantly. May have done some underpinning to the foundation as well.

They may also be keeping the option open to re-subdivide the lot in the future, the side lot is just a big yard and driveway right now but the house is worth more at re-sale if it comes with a second developable lot... the home would lose its lawn but there is also thousands of SF of decks and balconies on the home itself

glowrock

Jun 27, 2018, 1:07 AM

My condo building has 1 parking stall for 9 two bedroom units. All the other multi-family buildings on my street have 6-20 units and 0-1 spaces. Street parking is still easy. For larger buildings, it should be up to the developer.

You’ll always here complaints about parking from neighbors who generally have off street parking. I’ve never understood how any of those complaints have merit. No one is stealing your private garage.

There must be enough SFH or alley garages as well in that case. Of course street parking doesn't tend to be terrible in truly residential neighborhoods that don't border major retail/commercial zones, say like the one I happen to live in (for the time-being!)

Aaron (Glowrock)

PKDickman

Jun 27, 2018, 1:40 AM

10023

Jun 27, 2018, 9:17 AM

They stripped a fine gray-stone three flat on Wolcott.

https://s15.postimg.cc/ve5erc33v/wolcott.jpg

Frankly, I would have preferred the Barney Rubble look.
That’s not even a good-looking modern house. Cheap construction for sure.

10023

Jun 27, 2018, 9:32 AM

Map of the connector proposal. (http://ccac.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/Consolidated-Connector-PDF.pdf)
Very cool, thanks for posting. What are the realistic prospects for this actually happening?

Also, they use a lot of comparisons to London in that document, so you can all just deal with it when I do the same. ;)

Mr Downtown

Jun 27, 2018, 2:32 PM

^1 in 50 chance. It's a bunch of business leaders and real estate guys (not the real heavy hitters) who meet a few times a year to view a PowerPoint about progress of their "study" and then make observations like "my wife and I were in Frankfurt last year and we saw these trolley-car things running around, right in the middle of the streets. And it looked like there were normal people riding them. Why couldn't we have something like that in Chicago?"

LouisVanDerWright

Jun 27, 2018, 2:58 PM

That's an absolute crime!

No, that is what they wanted.
It is a 4200 sqft bldg on a 6600 sq ft parcel. They have another 1000 buildable feet.
The set back is the same as neighbors, although it may be one - two feet taller than it should be.

They would need a zoning change to subdivide, because they could only cut out a 1250 sqft lot and still be conforming.

No, that building maxes out the zoning. Where are you getting 4200 SF from? It's a much larger building than that. They even cut out floor sections as was mentioned above so they could add a small penthouse for the rooftop deck without increasing the total SF.

That said the owner is a young investment banker type and absolutely had to have the smarthome look. He chose to destroy a historic building and repurpose it as his own mini mansion. He also paid dearly for doing that as old buildings don't like being ripped apart completely and mutilated. They essentially had to rebuild it completely structurally. Virtually nothing but certain sections of the Chicago common brick remains. They basically built a new construction mcmansion inside of an old building's brick walls without actually demolishing it completely. Total waste of time and money in my opinion. When you really look at what the project yielded they probably spent twice as much money just so they could keep certain sections of old Chicago common brick walls which they could have just built new from salvage brick for a fraction of the cost.

Even in light of the zoning/FAR issue, you don't have to keep all four walls standing to retain FAR. You just have to keep one above grade wall of only one floor high. If you look at the rear and side of the building you will notice they even cut out huge sections of brick to put in massive bands of glass requiring the existing structure be shored up while a new steel header is placed under it. They didn't even leave the header exposed which would have been a good design choice.

This entire project puzzles me but I guess you can never really account for other people's "taste".