CHICAGO | General Developments

[LouisVanDerWright]

DP (post, not penetration)

[LouisVanDerWright]

In other news:

The PD for the old Marshall Field/Macy/Olsen Rug building up at Diversey and Pulaski was filed this week. Plans have apparently improved from the rumors we heard here a while ago. They are planning on keeping much of it manufacturing (500,000 SF!! To be converted into an expansion of one of the local factories which I can't disclose yet, but it will employ up to 1,500-2,000 people!!!) and there will be 82 live-work units averaging 2,500 SF for artists and small businesses. There has been some conversation about the top floor becoming a high-tech hub potentially gravitating towards additive manufacturing (3D printing) and marketing the live-work spaces to start ups from the new technology institute downtown. They are also pursuing a major grocer and Vice-mayor/Alderman Suarez said they are talking to Marianos which I'd say is sorely needed given the complete lack of a big-name grocer anywhere west of the Freeway in Avondale and Logan Square.

All talk of a charter school or self storage has been (thankfully) removed from the conversation. Unfortunately plans call for a crap ton of parking despite the upcoming investment in the Healy Metra station. It is really a shame to see buildings like the Brachs factory bite the dust when it is quite clear that these industrial behemoths can again be restored to functioning assets for the city given the right political and economic will.

[Rizzo]

^ I really really like that building. Great news to hear that it's being put to good use

[UPChicago]

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

Ughhhh no. Terrible idea. Why the hell would we trash perfectly good structures that make our city historically significant and architecturally interesting? Seriously, name one good reason why we couldn't keep the existing "blighted" structures and force the poor developers to build on the 65% of the block that is already vacant? This idea is exactly what would destroy Chicago, it smacks of the terrible ideas of the urban renewal era.

In fact, the city should give homeowners a shot at these lots first, but then open it up to everyone. I have a proposal for the city to help them use up all these lots: Give me every single lot you own East of the Green Line and West of Washington Park and I'll build a goddamn brand new neighborhood in about 10 years time. If they just gave this land away to developers and promised to keep the taxes low for X years, then some of these areas would transform over night. If they give the land away for free it is already a built in subsidy for developers because land doesn't depreciate so you want it to be as low of a portion of your basis as possible. I would LOVE to control that much land zoned RM-5 and RM-6 in such a prime location (not currently, but as soon as I'm done with it and the Obama Library opens up as the centerpiece of my new neighborhood). Seriously, screw every other project proposed in the city right now, if Rahm really wanted to fix things, then he'd do something like that. The numbers would work if you gave ONE developer that much land in such a small area.

Of course the problem with that is then you'd have the locals freaking out about "gentrification". "Oh poor us, we completely trashed this place and are now being forced out of it" doesn't buy much sympathy from me.

If one developer had that much land I'm more than sure they would raze the current structures and not develop it piecemeal, especially on blocks that are largely vacant. Why would a developer logically keep 5-10 structures on a complete block instead of razing them and building something new, if they owned the entire block?

[LouisVanDerWright]

Originally Posted by UPChicago

If one developer had that much land I'm more than sure they would raze the current structures and not develop it piecemeal, especially on blocks that are largely vacant. Why would a developer logically keep 5-10 structures on a complete block instead of razing them and building something new, if they owned the entire block?

Because they don't own them? I am saying the city should give them only the vacant land they already own, not that we should abuse eminent domain again like we did in the 1950's and 1960's. In terms of the macro economics of the idea, you'd see historic building stock preserved simply because it is fucking cool. Seriously, why haven't developers razed every historic building in the hottest neighborhoods in the city like Wicker Park and Lincoln Park? Because there is significant demand for original features, especially for the kinds of extravagant finishes you see in a lot of lakefront structures that were the ritziest buildings in the city in their time.

[Mr Downtown]

Who knew that the main reason middle class parents don't choose to raise children in Hamilton or Fuller Park is lack of new product?

[LouisVanDerWright]

Originally Posted by Mr Downtown

Who knew that the main reason middle class parents don't choose to raise children in Hamilton or Fuller Park is lack of new product?

Build it and they will come. New Markets tax credits can actually make the proposition pretty attractive especially if the land is free. Money is cheap enough right now to make it almost easy to pull something like that off if you could raise the equity. The problem is most investors are too timid to try something high risk, high reward like that. It's not like there is nothing worth living near down there. Both IIT and U of C are adjacent and it is a short jaunt from the loop on the EL. The schools are obviously a problem, but I think it can be overcome if you can provide the product for cheap enough.

[Vlajos]

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

In other news:

The PD for the old Marshall Field/Macy/Olsen Rug building up at Diversey and Pulaski was filed this week. Plans have apparently improved from the rumors we heard here a while ago. They are planning on keeping much of it manufacturing (500,000 SF!! To be converted into an expansion of one of the local factories which I can't disclose yet, but it will employ up to 1,500-2,000 people!!!) and there will be 82 live-work units averaging 2,500 SF for artists and small businesses. There has been some conversation about the top floor becoming a high-tech hub potentially gravitating towards additive manufacturing (3D printing) and marketing the live-work spaces to start ups from the new technology institute downtown. They are also pursuing a major grocer and Vice-mayor/Alderman Suarez said they are talking to Marianos which I'd say is sorely needed given the complete lack of a big-name grocer anywhere west of the Freeway in Avondale and Logan Square.

All talk of a charter school or self storage has been (thankfully) removed from the conversation. Unfortunately plans call for a crap ton of parking despite the upcoming investment in the Healy Metra station. It is really a shame to see buildings like the Brachs factory bite the dust when it is quite clear that these industrial behemoths can again be restored to functioning assets for the city given the right political and economic will.

Wow, the bolded is amazing!

[Chi-Sky21]

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

Of course the problem with that is then you'd have the locals freaking out about "gentrification". "Oh poor us, we completely trashed this place and are now being forced out of it" doesn't buy much sympathy from me.

^^You had me until you went this route. The people still there are not always the ones who have trashed the neighborhood. They have stayed through the bad times either because that is THEIR neighborhood and or there are no better options for them. Belittling them does not help you make your point. Some old moms and pops that have stayed through it all have every right to grumble if they are forced out because the area later gentrifies and makes it unaffordable to them. The issue is not an easy one to deal with, yes we all want these areas to come back to life, but you can't just rip out what and who was there to put in YOUR vision of how it should be.

[UPChicago]

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

Because they don't own them? I am saying the city should give them only the vacant land they already own, not that we should abuse eminent domain again like we did in the 1950's and 1960's. In terms of the macro economics of the idea, you'd see historic building stock preserved simply because it is fucking cool. Seriously, why haven't developers razed every historic building in the hottest neighborhoods in the city like Wicker Park and Lincoln Park? Because there is significant demand for original features, especially for the kinds of extravagant finishes you see in a lot of lakefront structures that were the ritziest buildings in the city in their time.

Yea but I think gentrification in those kinds neighborhoods is easier being that the housing stock is more in tack than on the south side. I wouldn't say use eminent domain per se but let developers have the vacant lots and buy out the owners of the remaining lots.

For example in the above case, if a developer owned all the vacant lots on this block why would they spare the remaining 4-5 buildings on the block?

[r18tdi]

Originally Posted by UPChicago

if a developer owned all the vacant lots on this block why would they spare the remaining 4-5 buildings on the block?

Because interesting, diverse streetscape?

[LouisVanDerWright]

^^^ Why wouldn't they? There is value in that existing building. Why would they spend $120k demolishing it and another $1.2 million building the exact same thing in its place when they could renovate the existing structure for maybe $500k total? There is a reason people rehab buildings instead of tearing them down and that is that it is cheaper to rehab them. A good rehab costs $80-100/SF, new construction starts at $150/SF and goes up from there.

Originally Posted by Chi-Sky21

The issue is not an easy one to deal with, yes we all want these areas to come back to life, but you can't just rip out what and who was there to put in YOUR vision of how it should be.

Well actually you can do that and, in fact, developers regularly do that. This is a global city. Cities don't just sit around and wait for people and businesses just because of nostalgia (of course unless the nostalgia is big enough to support those businesses). This is a city of change and if there are people who can't or refuse to adapt to change then why would they expect anything else to happen but for them to be pushed out of a changing neighborhood?

[joeg1985]

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

In other news:

The PD for the old Marshall Field/Macy/Olsen Rug building up at Diversey and Pulaski was filed this week. Plans have apparently improved from the rumors we heard here a while ago. They are planning on keeping much of it manufacturing (500,000 SF!! To be converted into an expansion of one of the local factories which I can't disclose yet, but it will employ up to 1,500-2,000 people!!!) and there will be 82 live-work units averaging 2,500 SF for artists and small businesses. There has been some conversation about the top floor becoming a high-tech hub potentially gravitating towards additive manufacturing (3D printing) and marketing the live-work spaces to start ups from the new technology institute downtown. They are also pursuing a major grocer and Vice-mayor/Alderman Suarez said they are talking to Marianos which I'd say is sorely needed given the complete lack of a big-name grocer anywhere west of the Freeway in Avondale and Logan Square.

This is fantastic news! I was just wondering about these empty buildings while taking the Hiawatha north this past weekend. They would make some incredible loft spaces. Especially if they pulled in a major grocer.

Would these be 1,500 to 2,000 new jobs or jobs that are being moved in from elsewhere?

[Chi-Sky21]

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

Well actually you can do that and, in fact, developers regularly do that. This is a global city. Cities don't just sit around and wait for people and businesses just because of nostalgia (of course unless the nostalgia is big enough to support those businesses). This is a city of change and if there are people who can't or refuse to adapt to change then why would they expect anything else to happen but for them to be pushed out of a changing neighborhood?

Yes gentrification happens, I have NO problem with that. I have a VERY big issue with using eminent domain to come in gobble up blocks, forcing people out, and putting in whatever some politically connected developer wants to put in there.....most likely using TIF funds. Which is how I fear all these Utopian ideas of redeveloping the south side would turn into.

[Vlajos]

Originally Posted by joeg1985

This is fantastic news! I was just wondering about these empty buildings while taking the Hiawatha north this past weekend. They would make some incredible loft spaces. Especially if they pulled in a major grocer.

Would these be 1,500 to 2,000 new jobs or jobs that are being moved in from elsewhere?

Good question. When will this news be announced?

[UPChicago]

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

^^^ Why wouldn't they? There is value in that existing building. Why would they spend $120k demolishing it and another $1.2 million building the exact same thing in its place when they could renovate the existing structure for maybe $500k total? There is a reason people rehab buildings instead of tearing them down and that is that it is cheaper to rehab them. A good rehab costs $80-100/SF, new construction starts at $150/SF and goes up from there.



Well actually you can do that and, in fact, developers regularly do that. This is a global city. Cities don't just sit around and wait for people and businesses just because of nostalgia (of course unless the nostalgia is big enough to support those businesses). This is a city of change and if there are people who can't or refuse to adapt to change then why would they expect anything else to happen but for them to be pushed out of a changing neighborhood?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to being argumentative just debating a little of course I do not expect you to agree with me. I understand your point completely about targeting infill development. The problem with infill development is it seems to require many small developers and individual owners coming in an area and developing lots. These areas on the southside are so vacant that I personally can't really picture infill development taking hold for many many many decades. With so much vacant land, a large developer is more fitting to come in and redevelop large swaths than smaller developers and individuals attempting infill.

I kind of look at it like this, if you are missing a tooth you replace that one tooth, if you are missing teeth you get dentures. lol

There are people doing infill development down there on more intact blocks. My sister unfortunately purchased a condo on 58th and Calumet in 2008 and there are developers renovating and building on those blocks but the housing stock is also more intact.

All of the buildings on the right have been renovated.

[LouisVanDerWright]

^^^I'm not saying that a bunch of different developers should come in and piecemeal try to buy these lots off the city. I am saying ONE developer should get all the lots in a large area for FREE from the city so that they can make a proforma to build on all those lots work. If you got a massive developer or just someone really devoted to the idea, it would be a piece of cake.

Originally Posted by Chi-Sky21

Yes gentrification happens, I have NO problem with that. I have a VERY big issue with using eminent domain to come in gobble up blocks, forcing people out, and putting in whatever some politically connected developer wants to put in there.....most likely using TIF funds. Which is how I fear all these Utopian ideas of redeveloping the south side would turn into.

I very directly stated that I am AGAINST using eminent domain for anything along these lines. The city already owns all the lots featured in the website that spurred this conversation and therefore can give them freely to whomever they like without having to condemn anything.

Originally Posted by joeg1985

Would these be 1,500 to 2,000 new jobs or jobs that are being moved in from elsewhere?

My understanding is that most would be new jobs as a result of a large expansion of a local business. I'm not sure whether the local business is going to keep their existing factory as well, or consolidate everything into the new space. Also, I am not sure when they will actually announce this, but it must be coming soon since they already applied for the PD zoning change.

[Vlajos]

Thanks LVDW, that is great news.

[marothisu]

I found a way around buying land on the south side and paying tons in property tax. These things are actually pretty nice....

http://www.canoebayescape.com/

[marothisu]

According to Curbed, the new South Loop campus for the British School has started construction:
http://chicago.curbed.com/archives/2...oop-campus.php