Milwaukee Avenue Development Boom (Chicago, Time: homes, to live, zoning)

[Chi-town Native]

Originally Posted by Vlajos

Yes, that's what developers do. They push the envelope knowing it will likely be shot down and then compromise so the NIMBYs feel good about themselves.

You might want to read the CNT report...

Btw, do you even know what NIMBY means? Please explain how it applies here, and I wil save you some trouble by reminding you most people don't want (or have no opinion) of out-of-compliance height buildings in someone else's neighborhood either.

[Vlajos]

Originally Posted by Chi-town Native

You might want to read the CNT report...

Btw, do you even know what NIMBY means? Please explain how it applies here, and I wil save you some trouble by reminding you most people don't want (or have no opinion) of out-of-compliance height buildings in someone else's neighborhood either.

Yes, I am very familiar with NIMBYism.

[Attrill]

Originally Posted by BleedCubbieBlue

I love how hipsters don't mind increasing the rents for people that are priced out when they move in to neighborhoods, but when developers come in and build apartments that price them out they start complaining. Deal with it. Money talks BS walks.

For starters, the word "hipster" should be added to the filter for this board, it is so abused it is unbelievable.

Secondly, you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. The opposition at the Candela meeting last week was certainly not headed up by "hipsters". The opponents were actually calling supporters of the project hipsters, and dismissing their opinions and any facts they presented without any consideration ('cause they're hipsters, so they obviously suck). The developer was directly called a "hipster" multiple times during the meeting. None of the people walking the neighborhood posting flyers and collecting signatures to oppose the project could even remotely be considered "hipsters".

The bulk of people who are opposed to the project come from two different groups:

- Longtime neighborhood residents who are involved in community groups (primarily older and Hispanic)
- Residents who live in the area directly impacted by the development, who fear problems with parking, traffic, and the buildings blocking out light for their block. This is a pretty diverse group, but is generally too old to be considered "hipster".

Overall I support the project, as long as there are concrete plans from the CTA and CDOT addressing a number of congestion issues. I'm also waiting to see what the plan will be for retail and how much of the parking will be dedicated to retail. Parking for retail creates many times the traffic that parking for residents does, and as a single lane road Milwaukee is limited in the traffic it can handle. Any retail developments with a lot of parking need to be on 2 lane roads like Fullerton or Western.

[Attrill]

Originally Posted by Chi-town Native

That all rings true, but it's also why this development is so damned depressing. Even with that community effort and framework in place, the developer still is trying for a 33% boost in the stories, right out of the gate - and the alderman is entertaining it instead of telling the guy to respect the plan. There will be no one exception to the rule, whatever he gets becomes the standard all the rest will be judged by.

The proposal initially went to GGNA (Greater Goethe Neighborhood Assoc.) which then pushed it forward to the Alderman noting that they did not approve of the project since it is out of character and scale with the surrounding neighborhood buildings. That said, they wanted discussions to begin to help give direction to the developer. There were also a number of other requests involving things like affordable housing units and concrete plans for staging areas and traffic control during construction.

This is pretty much how all projects in this area have been handled for at least the last decade, and is how projects like 2129-33 N. Campbell, 2550 W. Fullerton, 2340 N. California, 2211 N. Milwaukee, and many others are currently being handled. The main idea behind handling it this way is to get public feedback to the alderman before he makes any decisions. It isn't perfect, but it has worked well in this area for a long time. The 2293 Milwaukee project is drawing a lot of interest from outside the area (for good reasons) and that interest is pretty much destroying the normal process that is followed. What is normally neighboring residents telling a developer what their concerns are has turned into a pissing contest about who lives where and for how long, accompanied by vicious ad hominem attacks. Hopefully it will settle down into a real discussion in the next couple months.

[ChicagoMeO]

One question - how are all these people going to get on the Blue Line when its already jammed?

[chet everett]

Thanks for posting the link. I have often had to dig through these kinds of things.
http://www.cityofchicago.org/dam/cit...n_Part%201.pdf

Let's see what this one says.

De-population?

Ha!

Population and Household Size
• Population within the Study Area and surrounding
community has remained at a relatively stable number and is
not projected to change significantly.

• Within a 1-mile ring, the population grew by 2.7% since
2000 with an estimated total population of 70,400 in 2007.
Population is projected to increase slightly by 2012 (1.3%) to
an estimated total of 71,324.

How far UNDER the 2010 census where those estimates?

So what under the CTA crowding that Drover and other experince, was that anticipated some 8 years ago?

Why did they recommend "transit oriented development"?

Commuting
• The most common form of transportation to work in all three
radii was driving alone, with almost 45% of employed
residents commuting this way. An additional 21.5%
carpooled, the third highest mode of transportation.

Consistent with the FACT there has been NO signficant "de-population" the CTA ridership numbers show marked increases in the targeted stations of the Blue Line --
Average Station Entries
Chicago Transity Authority Trains
Blue Line - O'Hare
1999-2006
California/Milwaukee
Year Weekday Saturday Sunday/Holiday
1999 2,711 1,400 876
2000 2,892 1,468 909
2001 2,271 807 524
2002 2,469 941 627
2003 2,980 1,564 1,018
2004 2,979 1,665 1,049
2005 3,188 1,808 1,224
2006 3,447 1,963 1,309
Average Station Entries 2,867 1,452 942
Western/Milwaukee
Year Weekday Saturday Sunday/Holiday
1999 2,763 1,352 864
2000 2,889 1,387 909
2001 2,948 1,375 922
2002 3,246 1,567 1,042
2003 3,341 1,599 1,062
2004 3,509 1,758 1,176
2005 3,814 1,896 1,280
2006 3,988 1,955 1,350
Average Station Entries 3,312 1,61

While it may seem like a good idea to have "community meeting" my experience is that such things other devolve into something more like the cheering section at a roller derby match, with increasingly incoherent arguments fueled by adrenaline not logic. The "build everything" cheerleaders may or may not funnel more of the kind into the meetings than the "slow down and see how packed things already are" type but in either case these shouting matches don't expose any reliable information for rational decision making.

The city should instead rely on the same kind of data shown above and additional information that was in the linked report like "vehicle counts" as well the data about economic activity inside the study area vs 'leakage' of shoppers spending money elsewhere.

[MassVt]

Unfortunately, one of the side effects of pushing subway/commuter line use is the overcrowding that eventually ensues. The ever-increasing subway use will inevitably lead to missed trains due to overcrowding..

Another example of first-world, elite city problems. I'm sure that any development along Milwaukee Avenue will tout its access to the Blue Line, but people will just have to expect delays, and packed subways. Ads for apartments and condos near such lines will emphasize the availability of mass transet, but there will be problems that will go hand-in-hand with them, and this is one of them..

Going car-less can be great, but there are some consequences..

[Chi-town Native]

Originally Posted by Attrill

The proposal initially went to GGNA (Greater Goethe Neighborhood Assoc.) which then pushed it forward to the Alderman noting that they did not approve of the project since it is out of character and scale with the surrounding neighborhood buildings. That said, they wanted discussions to begin to help give direction to the developer. There were also a number of other requests involving things like affordable housing units and concrete plans for staging areas and traffic control during construction.

This is pretty much how all projects in this area have been handled for at least the last decade, and is how projects like 2129-33 N. Campbell, 2550 W. Fullerton, 2340 N. California, 2211 N. Milwaukee, and many others are currently being handled. The main idea behind handling it this way is to get public feedback to the alderman before he makes any decisions. It isn't perfect, but it has worked well in this area for a long time. The 2293 Milwaukee project is drawing a lot of interest from outside the area (for good reasons) and that interest is pretty much destroying the normal process that is followed. What is normally neighboring residents telling a developer what their concerns are has turned into a pissing contest about who lives where and for how long, accompanied by vicious ad hominem attacks. Hopefully it will settle down into a real discussion in the next couple months.

I agree, it's the system in use in places that have already gone through these growing pains & it's as good as it's gonna get.

[Chi-town Native]

Originally Posted by Vlajos

Yes, I am very familiar with NIMBYism.

You Keep Using That Word, I Do Not Think It Means What You Think It Means | Know Your Meme

NIMBYism generally rears its ugly head as it pertains to things we all need but don't want in our backyards. Sewage treatment plants. Jails. Tanneries.

I fail to see how a high rise even remotely qualifies. This would be a case of NIMBYism if the people opposing the project were instead pushing for it to go in a different neighborhood or a different block of Milwaukee.

I would encourage you & other folks to not throw that word around for the same reason I encourage my longterm neighbors not to throw around hipster, like Attrill described. It is juvenile, and as it's also usually just incorrect in the context it is inherently counterproductive. While I think this proposal needs to be scaled down, I'd like to see a more rational discussion about why that is. The idea this is a "NIMBY vs hipster" battle is so stupid I can't shake my head fast or far enough to display my irritation.

As for the Blue Line, I let a train packed to the gills go past me this morning at Belmont instead of trying to push my way on like a jagoff. While I don't think it's fair to hold a single developer/development up as being the straw that will break the camel's back, I think it is inevitable that we'll see more and more people demanding better Blue Line service, so there's no time like the present to start incorporating that into these discussions.

[MassVt]

Apartment and condo ads absolutely push access to mass transit as part of their appeal. Years ago, this probably wasn't as important, but in the US of 2014, it can be a deal breaker..