Future Of, Chicago's neighborhoods, is it getting worse, North Side, South Side, West Side, and Central (Princeton: insurance, crime rates)

[chet everett]

Originally Posted by beaniemac

I don't agree. the way they're going with the taxing, people will be taxed/priced out of the south and west sides as well.

People are not stupid. The standard mantra of "top three factors for real estate" being "location, location, location" can be expressed "value"!

It is often mentioned how Chicago is less costly than Manhattan or San Fransico, but those cities have vastly different economic opportunity than our own. My own knowledge of relative trends in employment strongly suggest that portions of Chicago will soon have see glut of space unless there is some MASSIVE boost to economy. The very "stratified" nature of desirable Chicago region work locations / residential areas is rather unique in terms of how much really is tied to things like race and historical patterns of employment. Some firms that are soon to shift their multi-decade HQ will send some hard to predict shocks through the whole region. While there is good range of employers the side effects of intra-region moves are going to create ripples that, together with potential negatives of politics, could build to tsunami of changes...

Folks in MANY areas, especially those with notorious low property values / high crime / poor schools are going to continue to LEAVE. The pressure on more desirable areas that due emphasis on market value to tax burden may become intense. The right kind of politician that wants to exploit this could REALLY be a wildcard...

[emathias]

Originally Posted by MannheimMadman

Between living in the suburbs, the south side, the north side and nw side, I have found no demonstrably large difference in cost of living. Groceries seem to be the same, gas (as mentioned) might be marginally expensive, and taxes (within cook county) are the same. I find that people's gas and nicor are comparable, as is ComEd.

I would like to see evidence that the opposite is true.

Per-square foot costs in the city tend to be higher in desirable areas than in the suburbs. In less-desirable parts of the city, property tax can be much lower than in desirable parts on a per-housing-unit basis.

[MannheimMadman]

Originally Posted by emathias

Per-square foot costs in the city tend to be higher in desirable areas than in the suburbs. In less-desirable parts of the city, property tax can be much lower than in desirable parts on a per-housing-unit basis.

Fair enough. Then again, aside from Andersonville, I have never lived in, what would objectively be described as desirable, area.

[artillery77]

Originally Posted by chet everett

People are not stupid. The standard mantra of "top three factors for real estate" being "location, location, location" can be expressed "value"!

It is often mentioned how Chicago is less costly than Manhattan or San Fransico, but those cities have vastly different economic opportunity than our own. My own knowledge of relative trends in employment strongly suggest that portions of Chicago will soon have see glut of space unless there is some MASSIVE boost to economy. The very "stratified" nature of desirable Chicago region work locations / residential areas is rather unique in terms of how much really is tied to things like race and historical patterns of employment. Some firms that are soon to shift their multi-decade HQ will send some hard to predict shocks through the whole region. While there is good range of employers the side effects of intra-region moves are going to create ripples that, together with potential negatives of politics, could build to tsunami of changes...

Folks in MANY areas, especially those with notorious low property values / high crime / poor schools are going to continue to LEAVE. The pressure on more desirable areas that due emphasis on market value to tax burden may become intense. The right kind of politician that wants to exploit this could REALLY be a wildcard...

I think I like how you started. Chicago has different economic strengths. It is first in many things, but the 2nd city in the two things that make values spike. New York is the primary city for finance, but Chicago holds its own with CME and an impressive banking industry of its own. Silicon Valley's lofty valuations stay where they are because the rest of the country (and a fair amount of the international world) is pouring money into the area at an unprecedented rate. For years domestic FDI has seen half land in this little Bay Area. Chicago has tech, but not nearly to scale

Chicago also has great distribution, manufacturing, law, marketing, liberal arts, retail and is well planned. It's day of reckoning with City Hall and financial reality has finally drawn nearer. Chicago won't be able to spend like the Silicon Valley, because companies in Chicago need to make money. Silicon Valley really likes its ability to continue to draw in buyers for pieces of companies that don't make money. Rather than assume it is a phenomenon that must come to an end at some point, local politicians have budgeted for every cent and then some for it to continue forever. If Chicago can pull up and show it is not Detroit, maybe it's tech and medical expansion can continue.

If I had the money, I'd buy everything around Garfield Park and start fixing it up. Someday someone's going to want to make that Park great again.

[OyCrumbler]

Originally Posted by artillery77

I think I like how you started. Chicago has different economic strengths. It is first in many things, but the 2nd city in the two things that make values spike. New York is the primary city for finance, but Chicago holds its own with CME and an impressive banking industry of its own. Silicon Valley's lofty valuations stay where they are because the rest of the country (and a fair amount of the international world) is pouring money into the area at an unprecedented rate. For years domestic FDI has seen half land in this little Bay Area. Chicago has tech, but not nearly to scale

Chicago also has great distribution, manufacturing, law, marketing, liberal arts, retail and is well planned. It's day of reckoning with City Hall and financial reality has finally drawn nearer. Chicago won't be able to spend like the Silicon Valley, because companies in Chicago need to make money. Silicon Valley really likes its ability to continue to draw in buyers for pieces of companies that don't make money. Rather than assume it is a phenomenon that must come to an end at some point, local politicians have budgeted for every cent and then some for it to continue forever. If Chicago can pull up and show it is not Detroit, maybe it's tech and medical expansion can continue.

If I had the money, I'd buy everything around Garfield Park and start fixing it up. Someday someone's going to want to make that Park great again.

The odd thing is that Chicago has slowly developed into the main headquarters for a major industry, but it's pretty much been ignored because it's not a particularly flashy industry. Over the last decade or so major corporation involved with food processing and agricultural commodities have moved their headquarters to Chicago, and mostly the city rather than its suburbs.

[PerseusVeil]

Originally Posted by OyCrumbler

The odd thing is that Chicago has slowly developed into the main headquarters for a major industry, but it's pretty much been ignored because it's not a particularly flashy industry. Over the last decade or so major corporation involved with food processing and agricultural commodities have moved their headquarters to Chicago, and mostly the city rather than its suburbs.

Shh! We're hoping people don't notice so we can land something sexier

[IrishIllini]

Originally Posted by PerseusVeil

Shh! We're hoping people don't notice so we can land something sexier

Lol, let them notice and lets land something sexier! Lots of positive developments in Chicago's tech scene. Hope to see that continue.

[KoNgFooCj]

https://www.wired.com/2015/10/radica...re-skyline/amp

I love this idea. Imagine making the loop bigger. This would give Millennium Park a more Central Park aesthetic. Buildings on all sides. The city needs more room anyway.

[dtcbnd03]

The Grant / Millennium Park bookends were intended to replicate central park but I don't think we should totally surround it with skyscrapers.

Also, the city does not need more room with endless land to the north, south and west. I think you're saying you want more lakefront...which is exactly why Friends of the Park fights so hard to protect lakefront parkland. Because once you build on it you have to spend billions just to extend the lakefront...when all you had to do was build 100 yards off the lakefront and have all the same amenities, views, parks, etc. that you would have anyways.

[DavePa]

Originally Posted by KoNgFooCj

https://www.wired.com/2015/10/radica...re-skyline/amp

I love this idea. Imagine making the loop bigger. This would give Millennium Park a more Central Park aesthetic. Buildings on all sides. The city needs more room anyway.

Chicago isn't NYC and never built to be a NYC. One on Chicago's great assets ..... IS ITS OPEN FRONT LAWN OF PARKS TO A BIG BLUE LAKE.

I think the one thing money was wasted on was all that went into converting the former Meig's Field to the Northerly Island Nature refuge..... then Rahm Emanuel announced in January 2019. To return it to a Class D airport again.

https://aviationdaily.news/2019/01/12/276/

I almost thought it was a Onion news story .... But guess that idea is dead now?

But I don't think this Northerly Island Park gets much attention for how much was spent. Compared to a Millennium Park and River Walk and revamped Navy Pier.

I'd rather just see more green-park space added between Navy Pier along the Playpen and Oak St beach extended further out with a more buffered beach further from LSD.

There is this covering of the Rail tracks along LSD across from Soldier Field too. That can then get more high-rises.

A Wisconsin developer who’s best known for sports stadiums wants to deck over train tracks near Soldier Field and McCormick Place and create a multibillion-dollar development. There is this covering of the Metro Rail tracks along LSD across from Soldier Field too. That can then get more high-rises.

https://www.chicagobusiness.com/comm...-soldier-field.

But I read Lori Lightfoot SLAMMED the idea then. So that s dead.

I don't expect Grand downtown projects from Lori Lightfoot. Even for LSD during her reign. Most will say too much wasted. Yet Chicago's TOURISM Industry would never have reach current levels without many of these projects.

One option a few years ago of LSD changes. Some was burying parts and more a boulevard for the rest. I saved the rendering of the extended Oak St beach and park space without burying it As the STATE in 2017 quickly said NO. Then a unburied version came. Something eventually will happen with LSD. But not anytime soon under a new Administration and debt.

The was the story on the Buried LSD proposed in early 2017 and the one picture in the middle of the link belie..... shows a split image of before and after. WITH new parkland along the Playpen section of LSD too.

The more you build in projects and Parkland. The more needed to maintain it all too.....

https://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/2017...ound-oak-ohio/

This was a then rendered unburied version.
Credits: VOA Associates