Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If you were to project Chicago's and Chicagoland's future in terms of density, what might both look like?
Imagine you were able to see both city and metro area in, say, 2020, 2030, and 2040, what would you be seeing in terms of density?
Just some ideas here to get clear what I'm getting at....
• how far out going north, west, and south will the downtown area spread? will there be a circle line on the CTA to run its perimeter?
• will we see more CTA rapid transit lines built in the city, but unlike the past, not necessary to connect the periphery to the core in its spoke and wheel fashion? would such extension fo the system be designed to build up density in the city's three sides? would you expect to see more CTA rail extension into the suburbs other than the just the current minimal ones into places like Ev, OP, Sk? Will CTA become more DC Metro and BART like in the process, covering a much wider area than just the city?
• would you expect to see a N. Lake Shore Drive form of high rise wall on the S LSD, filling in the gap from McCPl to Hyde Park?
• will the downtown high rises spread westward, perhaps crossing the Kennedy into Greek Town and beyond (especially if the park cover for the expy were built)?
• what happens in underutilized land on both the south and west sides? There is a lot of unused industrial land and trackage? Will the cost of energy and the need to centralize and maximize public transportation lead to heavy redevelopment in these areas? Will large scale residential projects be built, given that land for a true master plan can be assembled, making them highly attractive to a developer?
• desirable lakefront neighborhoods on the North Side like the Old Town triangle area, Lincoln Park, Lakeview have been able to keep a most livable and delightful form of density....highly urban yet in many cases not tall at all....will these areas continue to maintain that form of density or will they become increasingly high rise, even beyond the wall of the lakefront on streets like LSD, Sheridan, LP West, Clark?
• Density has always followed the lakefront. Could you imagine seeing such density along the branches of the Chicago River, both north and south of the downtown area? Could the river become a high rise corridor?
• Would you expect to see any second cluster of high rises away from the downtown area in the city? Maybe in places like Uptown, perhaps Hyde Park?
• How about the O'Hare/Rosemont area? even more density?
• Will proximity to the city make urbanized suburbs rich in public transit like Evanston or Oak Park even more dense?
• What will places like Oak Brook and Schaumburg look like? Their high rises are still centered around the car, edge city fashion. Both are famed for shopping. But shopping has changed from the mall era as people seek an urban fabric; lifestyle centers reflect that. Could places like Oak Brook and Schaumburg become more city like, more walkable, with ways made to tie together the high rises?
• How far out will the metro area spread? will it spread at all, given the cost of energy? could it even contract to a degree in area (certainly not population) as the fringe becomes less and less economically viable?
• Will the trend of Loop residential buildings continue, its population continuing to grow as it truly does become more of a real mix of residential and commercial?
• Will River North fill in with high rises to look more like the Loop and the Streeterville/Mag Mile areas?
Again...these are just ideas. I'm interested in what you see as to the future density of Chicago and Chicagoland.
If you were to project Chicago's and Chicagoland's future in terms of density, what might both look like?
Imagine you were able to see both city and metro area in, say, 2020, 2030, and 2040, what would you be seeing in terms of density?
Just some ideas here to get clear what I'm getting at....
• how far out going north, west, and south will the downtown area spread? Natural limits are hard to breach -- look at how the River City development on southwest end of Loop lags, or how the old post office is such a white elephant, folks do not like to live on the "wrong side" of rail lines / expressways / even viaducts will there be a circle line on the CTA to run its perimeter? No. How would something like this get paid for? CTA has no extra cash. City is broke (the reason the parking meter deal is in the news is because it was THE LAST ASSET the cuty could find a buyer for after selling Skyway, City underground garages, outsourcing parks maintenance and who knows what else...) State is worse than broke. Chicago friendly current administration has found no way to ship funds to Chicago, won't change going forward...
• will we see more CTA rapid transit lines built in the city, but unlike the past, not necessary to connect the periphery to the core in its spoke and wheel fashion? would such extension fo the system be designed to build up density in the city's three sides? would you expect to see more CTA rail extension into the suburbs other than the just the current minimal ones into places like Ev, OP, Sk? Will CTA become more DC Metro and BART like in the process, covering a much wider area than just the city? NO, same answer as above -- impossible to PAY FOR THIS!
• would you expect to see a N. Lake Shore Drive form of high rise wall on the S LSD, filling in the gap from McCPl to Hyde Park? NO -- the Lakefront Protection zoning prohibits that kind of development. There is more likelihood that the lakeside portion of McCormick Place will be torn down and replaced with greenspace.
• will the downtown high rises spread westward, perhaps crossing the Kennedy into Greek Town and beyond (especially if the park cover for the expy were built)? While there is ABSOLUTELY NO WAY that anykind of freaky space era decking will cover the Kennedy. Idiots in Oak Park have wanted that for 50 years. No way to pay for it. When it comes to west of Loop residential there are already a handful of more than four story residential buildings out there. For the most part there is NOT great demand for these buildings -- one big reason is that if you go up even 30 stories the "view" from Greektown is largely of highrises that block your ability to see anything even remotely interesting -- no way to see the Lake or Lincoln Park or Wrigley Field or Soldier Field, from places closer to those sites you do get some cool views. People pay for views in high rises...
• what happens in underutilized land on both the south and west sides? There is a lot of unused industrial land and trackage? Yes there is. Daley knew this. It was not the topic of amusing press conferences. He had an army of developers that he would routinely try to convince to redevelop these sites. The developers had ZERO takers and that won't change Will the cost of energy and the need to centralize and maximize public transportation lead to heavy redevelopment in these areas? No. The firms that have had success with industrial facilities out past Bolingbrook have a lesson -- access to 55 & 80 trumps access to 94, ability to build cheap on green sites blows away the hassles of dealing with union mandates and brown sites. Energy is cheap when you are right under the corridor that links Illinois nukes to the rest of the national grid. Will large scale residential projects be built, given that land for a true master plan can be assembled, making them highly attractive to a developer? Developers do not like large projects for just their size, they like projects with the demographics to be profitable. Selling cheaply built home to suckers in Oswego is profitable when those suckers think they are getting "a new Naperville" with the implied good schools, nice parks, well developed core of amenities. Just as the suckers learned the hard way that Oswego could not deliver there is no reason to believe a mega builder will even attempt to spin a yarn about some sort of "New Chicago" unless there is some sort of outsourced RoboCop "New Detroit" police force to clean up the mess. Cripes even I would cringe at the horror of that to allow a mega builder to bulldoze acres of Chicago...
• desirable lakefront neighborhoods on the North Side like the Old Town triangle area, Lincoln Park, Lakeview have been able to keep a most livable and delightful form of density....highly urban yet in many cases not tall at all....will these areas continue to maintain that form of density or will they become increasingly high rise, even beyond the wall of the lakefront on streets like LSD, Sheridan, LP West, Clark?You ever watch the late night TV real estate guys? Guess what the REITs that own the stuff that is rented out for princely sums in Near North areas operate on the same principal CASH FLOW BABY! No way those REITs sell golden egg laying geese for higher density buildings that may end up in the red. Real estate investors are pretty risk averse, throwing away high current returns is not prudent. The reason that stuff around Edgewater has gotten "recycled" is that the old grannies that lived there are dying off. Near north has too health a mix to need redevelopment
• Density has always followed the lakefront. Could you imagine seeing such density along the branches of the Chicago River, both north and south of the downtown area? Could the river become a high rise corridor?Exceedingly unlikely -- views are lacking, transit options are lacking, even park space is lacking. Why would a developer try to go against so many trends. Has this happened in NY? I don't think so. The US real estate market is not like China, you don't have some wacky central planning authority turning nothingness into a full blown city overnight
• Would you expect to see any second cluster of high rises away from the downtown area in the city? Maybe in places like Uptown, perhaps Hyde Park? CHA building have been torn down, nobody misses 'em. City of Chicago professional planners that encouraged high rises in South Loop has led to a glut of high rises with lots of forced landlords that underwater on something that did not gain consumer acceptance despite the scale of south Loop streets and public transit -- if it did not work there it won't work elsewhere...
• How about the O'Hare/Rosemont area? even more density? Rosemont is dying. The efforts to put in retail are a desperation move that has low probability of success (as an aside retail is not healthy. Dollars per square foot for even nicer malls are taking big hits. Go to even Woodfield -- folks spending $25 for Blackhawks Championship T-shirts cannot make up for the loss of sales seen in places that used to sell luxury goods...). No one wants to live by airport. Few folks really want to even work by one -- offices in the Loop are more desirable.
• Will proximity to the city make urbanized suburbs rich in public transit like Evanston or Oak Park even more dense? Have you ever been to a meeting of suburban Zoning Board? Folks in Oak Park or Evanston do not want high density developments, getting zoning variances for any kind of multi-family is very challenging. The relative lack of demand also means developers are not really clamoring to build buildings with no takers...
• What will places like Oak Brook and Schaumburg look like? Their high rises are still centered around the car, edge city fashion. Both are famed for shopping. But shopping has changed from the mall era as people seek an urban fabric; lifestyle centers reflect that. Could places like Oak Brook and Schaumburg become more city like, more walkable, with ways made to tie together the high rises? Schaumburg has far more office space around Woodfield than Oak Brook does. Some of it is pretty well leased (Zurich Insurance is a biggie) but other buildings have languished with excessive vacancies. Motorola is hurting bad, retrenching even in its more core communications / government sectors as shifts in those demand areas drive downsizing. Traffic sucks in the vicinity of the mall, and it is unlikely to ever get better because it is not really suitable for any kind of consolidation. The Pace hub south of the mall is not well used nor situated as any kind of anchor... Things in Oak Brook are different but not really better. Oak Brook has a HUGE reliance on the presence of McDonalds in the rise east of the mall as well as more sprawling campus adjacent to golf areas to the south. Other offices in Oak Brook are frankly pretty sad. The high rise north of the mall is in Oakbrook Terrace and cooperation between the towns has never been good. Elmhurst has much more forward thinking residential developers that have increased condo and rental options near the mall as well as rail centric core while also leveraging attractive amenities.
• How far out will the metro area spread? will it spread at all, given the cost of energy? could it even contract to a degree in area (certainly not population) as the fringe becomes less and less economically viable? Stabilize. Places like Harvard are signs of over expansion to the north, but as industrial sites are either built a new or revitalized (like massive BP investment in Whiting...) there are some fringe areas that become healthier. It is NOT ABOUT DENSITY! No one wants to have a high rise in the blast radius of a refinery. If there are some decent houses a fair distance away that is all you can hope for. That is pretty basic principle of land use that some folks that get mesmerized by throngs in tank tops partying after an athletic championship lose sight of ...
• Will the trend of Loop residential buildings continue, its population continuing to grow as it truly does become more of a real mix of residential and commercial? No mas.
• Will River North fill in with high rises to look more like the Loop and the Streeterville/Mag Mile areas? No. Zoning is different, so is demand. I think AMA building is going to get redeveloped but that is a rare site and I am not sure if the relative costs of pretty modest office on a pretty large site ever made sense there.
Again...these are just ideas. I'm interested in what you see as to the future density of Chicago and Chicagoland.
• would you expect to see a N. Lake Shore Drive form of high rise wall on the S LSD, filling in the gap from McCPl to Hyde Park? NO -- the Lakefront Protection zoning prohibits that kind of development. There is more likelihood that the lakeside portion of McCormick Place will be torn down and replaced with greenspace.
i was thinking more along the lines of air rights over the IC tracks, something you see in Museum Park, McCormick Place, among others. Is there any restriction placed on redevelopment above the tracks or does development only apply to what's directly east of there?
Well the tracks are not city property for one thing...
Quote:
Originally Posted by edsg25
i was thinking more along the lines of air rights over the IC tracks, something you see in Museum Park, McCormick Place, among others. Is there any restriction placed on redevelopment above the tracks or does development only apply to what's directly east of there?
In one of Daley's "master plans" for those areas there were conceptual drawings of how to link those areas with parkland built on decks over the rail lines. I think the rail companies were kind of willing to cede the air-rights IF the City agreed to build appropriate access ways to the rail lines. That would have meant the kind of expressway sized ramps so that excavations were possible. Pretty sure the costs were just insane and the real utility was nil -- toss in the remote but real potential for some geological fault to turn those decks into some kind of horror movie scenario and it is no surprise that a few nice underground passages and elevated walkways on standard bridge-type trestles were chosen to update access to the Museum Campus from points west...
The city does not really need create some kind of "big dig" like Boston as there is are ample alternatives to LSD and the greenspace near it is pretty solid...
If there is demand for housing (especially a demand for high-rise housing), then yes these places will get built and will densify, hopefully according to a larger plan that emphasizes a certain neighborhood development. What I mean by that, is building neighborhoods that are manhattan-esque, or Wicker Park-esque, that extend the density, energy and vibe of places like River North or Wicker Park along the riverfront or into West Loop.
How woul this demand come about? Part of it would be organic growth in demand based on more and more younger people wanting to move here and live here. But that does have its limits - I personally love it, but not every young person wants to live in Chicago or walkable environment. We would basically need to attract young people here from other cities in a bog way. Young people are definitely coming here, but we need more and more. We basically have to be the best freakin city around, and create the DESIRE to want to live here. Part of it could also come as the result of higher energy costs requiring people to look for environments to live and work in, that do not require car ownership.
But currently, that is an uphill battle...the city and state are very broke, and the city needs to keep focusing on attracting all sorts of companies, from a very diverse range of industries, to WANT to relocate here. We have always had a large financial footprint (finance, trading, accounting, insurance etc) but the company needs to start trying to attract other types of industries to the Loop...engineering firms, for example. But in order to do that, the city needs to improve the public schools. Engineering types tend to want to settle down and get married and have kids quickly, so they will need a stable, safe public school system that meets their expectations.
Another strike against us, is the horrible winters; this is one thing that other cities have used against us for attracting new companies.
Well, the city does actually have some talented people in its planning department...
There are well known "demand modifiers" that the actual professional urban planners have TRIED to get going in the South Loop -- they have granted some developers ENORMOUS latitude to attract retail development in along south Wabash and other streets, made commitments to increase the appeal of Jones High School, upgraded transit at stops like Roosevelt and whole bunch of mostly positive things. Heck I think about the only thing they have not done is try to steer people into the area, maybe they ought to hire the staff of The Oak Park Regional Housing Center ...
There are some "chicken and egg" issues -- a big venue like Buddy Guy's tends to create a bit of "black whole" effect that sucks away the ability of smaller more neighbor friendly place to develop a following, and the young people that vote with their feet seem to have a pretty homogenous standard for their entertainment BUT trying to force feed stuff on an area with its own savvy college kids from Columbia and such means you can't just rely on some "mega booker" to program places...
Meanwhile you've got that whole saga of Podolsky trying to finance some of the "art venues" in Pilsen that went south and that sorta scares off any investors from similar efforts...
The traditional tools and incentives that planners typically use have been distorted and kind of broken in Chicago with the over emphasis of "outraged aldermen" and connected insiders bypassing / short circuiting a normal professional progression -- firms like WalMart have dealt with "activists" in plenty of other setting but when even an inconsequential thing like a chicken sandwich store gets condemned by the elected Mayor of a city with a population of MILLIONS (hey did you catch that press conference where Rahm condemned the morons in Springfield from backing away from their marriage equality path? NO? How is that...) it just drives commercial real estate brokers to pour themselves a large glass of their favorite distilled beverage and avoid any "values conflict"...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Link N. Parker
It's all about supply and demand.
If there is demand for housing (especially a demand for high-rise housing), then yes these places will get built and will densify, hopefully according to a larger plan that emphasizes a certain neighborhood development. What I mean by that, is building neighborhoods that are manhattan-esque, or Wicker Park-esque, that extend the density, energy and vibe of places like River North or Wicker Park along the riverfront or into West Loop.
How woul this demand come about? Part of it would be organic growth in demand based on more and more younger people wanting to move here and live here. But that does have its limits - I personally love it, but not every young person wants to live in Chicago or walkable environment. We would basically need to attract young people here from other cities in a bog way. Young people are definitely coming here, but we need more and more. We basically have to be the best freakin city around, and create the DESIRE to want to live here. Part of it could also come as the result of higher energy costs requiring people to look for environments to live and work in, that do not require car ownership.
But currently, that is an uphill battle...the city and state are very broke, and the city needs to keep focusing on attracting all sorts of companies, from a very diverse range of industries, to WANT to relocate here. We have always had a large financial footprint (finance, trading, accounting, insurance etc) but the company needs to start trying to attract other types of industries to the Loop...engineering firms, for example. But in order to do that, the city needs to improve the public schools. Engineering types tend to want to settle down and get married and have kids quickly, so they will need a stable, safe public school system that meets their expectations.
Another strike against us, is the horrible winters; this is one thing that other cities have used against us for attracting new companies.
Are you seriously thinking that the massive depopulation of a failed city over time can be reversed?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Way too many questions...
