CHICAGO | General Developments

[george]

Hear, hear!^

[PKDickman]

Originally Posted by the pope

In an entirely small tiny piece of news, the property two parcels south of the Filter Coffee house (1373 N Milwaukee) is being renovated. Absolutely no visible progress on the outside, but if you walk the alley, they are putting in what appears to be a new floor. Also, no idea of future plans aside from getting the building "ready". I know this is small, but its nice to see some of the gaps along Milwaukee be filled in.

Landmarking was the best thing that ever happened down there.
All the property owners were waiting for the second coming of Joseph Freed.
They didn't do jack to improve their buildings because they thought that someone was just going to tear them down and build a big honkin' strip mall.

I suspect that more permits have been issued since it got landmarked than were issued in the thirty years previous.

[Nowhereman1280]

I have a feeling that the building boom in that area has more to do with the fact that Wicker Park / Bucktown is rapidly approaching the point where it will surpass Lincoln Park as the second most expensive neighborhood in Chicago after Gold Coast. Though the landmarking does get full credit for preventing all the new renovations from being teardowns replaced by strip malls.

[Vlajos]

Sounds good, thanks for passing on.

[george]

Originally Posted by PKDickman

Landmarking was the best thing that ever happened down there.
All the property owners were waiting for the second coming of Joseph Freed.
They didn't do jack to improve their buildings because they thought that someone was just going to tear them down and build a big honkin' strip mall.

I suspect that more permits have been issued since it got landmarked than were issued in the thirty years previous.

Quite the contrary, there are those who are opposed to landmarking because it limits the average homeowner of what & how they can rehab their building. Some have gone as far as filing suit against the city landmarks ordinance. Properties without landmark status sometimes sell for more because they're more flexible and attractive to rehabbers & developers. There's always the other side of the coin. Nowherman has a point, Wicker Park has become wildly popular to locate your trendy business and cash in.

[the urban politician]

^ I think that's a stretch. I don't think Landmarking is all that limiting unless you plan to make drastic changes to the exterior.

It can't be that much more painful than the already existing and time-consuming permit process that everybody has their arm twisted into doing as it is.

[george]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

^ I think that's a stretch. I don't think Landmarking is all that limiting unless you plan to make drastic changes to the exterior.

It can't be that much more painful than the already existing and time-consuming permit process that everybody has their arm twisted into doing as it is.

Call it what you want, but it's a reality in this neighborhood. I personally am in favor of landmarking. It's saved many buildings altogether or from a botched rehab. I'm just reporting a sentiment, that without a doubt, is out there.

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by Nowhereman1280

the fact that Wicker Park / Bucktown is rapidly approaching the point where it will surpass Lincoln Park as the second most expensive neighborhood in Chicago after Gold Coast.

Seriously? Do you have evidence of that?

Maybe I'm looking in the wrong places but I can scarcely find anything less than maybe $7-800k in Lincoln Park. Such properties are still available in WP/Bucktown.

Lincoln Park is pretty much off the charts when it comes to property prices

[the urban politician]

I would love to see this area developed more densely:

Rosehill rezoning approved
October 20, 2011 By Patrick Boylan

The City Council Committee on Zoning, Landmarks and Building Standards approved a proposal Tuesday to rezone parts of Rosehill Cemetery to classification RM-5, allowing the development there of a residential multi-unit property.

[untitledreality]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

I don't think Landmarking is all that limiting unless you plan to make drastic changes to the exterior.

Agreed. Also, any extra hassles or limitations incurred due to landmarking is more than offset by the property tax freeze benefits in my opinion. It provides a huge incentive for developers and individuals to rehabilitate existing structures over new construction... case in point, Milwaukee Ave.

[PKDickman]

Originally Posted by george

Quite the contrary, there are those who are opposed to landmarking because it limits the average homeowner of what & how they can rehab their building. Some have gone as far as filing suit against the city landmarks ordinance. Properties without landmark status sometimes sell for more because they're more flexible and attractive to rehabbers & developers. There's always the other side of the coin. Nowherman has a point, Wicker Park has become wildly popular to locate your trendy business and cash in.

I have lived in wicker park for nearly thirty years and most of that in a landmarked building.

The people who sued over the ordinance because they think it limits their ability to max out density (it doesn't, but you might have to be very creative to acheive that goal)

Most of stuff on Milwaukee is already built well over the FAR, so that wasn't the issue.

Wicker park has been a "hot" neighborhood for decades
Division and Damen came alive, and Milwaukee was still run down and woefully under utilized.

There is still a lot of upperfloor space that is kept vacant or as storage.

[N830MH]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

I would love to see this area developed more densely:

Rosehill rezoning approved
October 20, 2011 By Patrick Boylan

The City Council Committee on Zoning, Landmarks and Building Standards approved a proposal Tuesday to rezone parts of Rosehill Cemetery to classification RM-5, allowing the development there of a residential multi-unit property.

Oh, boy! They will ever relocated all dead people out of cemetery, huh? I didn't think so either. They can't have digging out by dead people. How is possibilites why they wanted digging all dead people out of old cemetery?

[Ch.G, Ch.G]

Originally Posted by N830MH

Oh, boy! They will ever relocated all dead people out of cemetery, huh? I didn't think so either. They can't have digging out by dead people. How is possibilites why they wanted digging all dead people out of old cemetery?

[EarlyBuyer]

Originally Posted by sentinel

Public looks outstanding; I love that it's simple but still appears very refined.

EarlyBuyer, will you be able to take interior photos of the public spaces for the Aqua Radisson Blu before it opens? I remember reading that the soft(?) open was planned for Nov. 1st?

SamintheLoop or any other members, any word of progress/plans/renderings regarding the old Waterview/Shangr-la site/shell?

Hey sentinel, I'm out of state on an extended work project and won't be able to take any pictures. The Radisson Blu officially opens on 11/1/11 (nice date choice!), however will likely have a soft opening a day or two prior to that.

[bnk]

http://www.sustainablebusiness.com/i...splay/id/23052

FedEx Opens Enormous Green Roof at Chicago O'Hare Airport





The FedEx Express cargo facility at Chicago's O'Hare International Airport is now topped by a huge green roof - 175,000 square feet - the size of three football fields.

The roof is plainly visible from planes as they land at one of the world's busiest airports. The only airport that has a bigger one is in Frankfort, Germany.

Although it's the largest by far, there are 12 other green roofs at O'Hare and Midway airports. Airports mostly consist of large areas of impermeable concrete surfaces - green roofs cool the urban heat island effect and help with stormwater management. They also reduce airport noise, reduce air pollution, and lower energy costs by 35% a year.

"Green roofs act like a sponge for heat, light and water and they conserve energy by maintaining a constant temperature inside the building. They also help to collect storm water," explains FedEx Deputy Commissioner of Sustainability Amy Malick.

FedEx calculates it will save $0.20 cents per square foot of green roof per year on energy costs alone and it will absorb about two million gallons of storm water each year, which would otherwise run off into the sewer system.

Like many green roofs, this one is covered with sedum - a low-growing, drought- tolerant plant....

[Rizzo]

Originally Posted by bnk

http://www.sustainablebusiness.com/i...splay/id/23052

FedEx Opens Enormous Green Roof at Chicago O'Hare Airport





The FedEx Express cargo facility at Chicago's O'Hare International Airport is now topped by a huge green roof - 175,000 square feet - the size of three football fields.

The roof is plainly visible from planes as they land at one of the world's busiest airports. The only airport that has a bigger one is in Frankfort, Germany.

Although it's the largest by far, there are 12 other green roofs at O'Hare and Midway airports. Airports mostly consist of large areas of impermeable concrete surfaces - green roofs cool the urban heat island effect and help with stormwater management. They also reduce airport noise, reduce air pollution, and lower energy costs by 35% a year.

"Green roofs act like a sponge for heat, light and water and they conserve energy by maintaining a constant temperature inside the building. They also help to collect storm water," explains FedEx Deputy Commissioner of Sustainability Amy Malick.

FedEx calculates it will save $0.20 cents per square foot of green roof per year on energy costs alone and it will absorb about two million gallons of storm water each year, which would otherwise run off into the sewer system.

Like many green roofs, this one is covered with sedum - a low-growing, drought- tolerant plant....

I keep a sample of midwest sedum near my office window to show clients. I forgot to water it for two months. It really does endure some harsh conditions

[Nowhereman1280]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

Seriously? Do you have evidence of that?

Maybe I'm looking in the wrong places but I can scarcely find anything less than maybe $7-800k in Lincoln Park. Such properties are still available in WP/Bucktown.

Lincoln Park is pretty much off the charts when it comes to property prices

I don't know where you are looking but rents in LP tend to hover around $2 a square foot in LP. My friend had t 500 sf studio for $800 a month there last year. Wicker Park is in the exact same range. Wicker Park is starting to get more ridiculous especially because there aren't SRO's there like there are in LP.

Originally Posted by PKDickman

Wicker park has been a "hot" neighborhood for decades
Division and Damen came alive, and Milwaukee was still run down and woefully under utilized.

That's not true at all. Wicker Park was a shit hole until about ten years ago when it started developing. Hell I remember when it was no good and I've only been living down here for 6 years or so. Wicker Park was like Humboldt Park up until then: a few bright patches, but mostly overrun with gangs.

[bnk]

.........

[lawfin]

Originally Posted by Nowhereman1280

I don't know where you are looking but rents in LP tend to hover around $2 a square foot in LP. My friend had t 500 sf studio for $800 a month there last year. Wicker Park is in the exact same range. Wicker Park is starting to get more ridiculous especially because there aren't SRO's there like there are in LP.



That's not true at all. Wicker Park was a shit hole until about ten years ago when it started developing. Hell I remember when it was no good and I've only been living down here for 6 years or so. Wicker Park was like Humboldt Park up until then: a few bright patches, but mostly overrun with gangs.

That is simply not true at all. WP was dicey in the early-mid 1980's. By the early-mid-1990's in had turned the corner and had moved main stream. By the late 1990's it was already being referred to as Lincoln Park west this has only accelerated through the 2000's. I kinda know because I was there.

Just as a first approximation to verify your claim I ran a redfin search on WP and Western LP.. I pulled out land and other and left condo townhouse and sfh selected.

Prices in western LP are 35-40% higher than WP. SFH are not even in the same sport let alone league SFH price in LP are about 2.2X those in WP.

Condos you are closer to the mark as prices are similar but that is driven by the fact that are a lots of 1bd and even effeciency type condos in LP driving prices down that presssure is not present in WP.

For instance searching 2bd+ condos shows shows that LP is about 20% more expensive than WP. 3bd prices diverge even more with LP being 40-45% more expensive than WP.

Bottom line LP is very much more expensive than WP.

rents I do not know as much about....but I would think that for similar sized units the underlying truth that LP is more expensive would still hold. LP has way more smaller 1bd / effeciency style units driving avg. rents down. That is not present in WP

[lawfin]

Originally Posted by PKDickman

I have lived in wicker park for nearly thirty years and most of that in a landmarked building.

The people who sued over the ordinance because they think it limits their ability to max out density (it doesn't, but you might have to be very creative to acheive that goal)

Most of stuff on Milwaukee is already built well over the FAR, so that wasn't the issue.

Wicker park has been a "hot" neighborhood for decades
Division and Damen came alive, and Milwaukee was still run down and woefully under utilized.

There is still a lot of upperfloor space that is kept vacant or as storage.

Yes, mostly