What is Chicago missing (Bridgeport, Oakland: condo, townhouse, neighborhood)

[tmac9wr]

I think one of the things that could help Chicago would be a revitalization of the South Side. Obviously everyone would love to see this happen...but is there any plan to help make this happen? I know this would have happened if the Olympics came to Chicago, but they didn't...so what now?

My idea focuses on a group of people I love to hate: Hipsters. You all must know what hipsters are, but if not, they're these ultra liberal modern-hippie douches. However, they're usually very artistic (or at least try to be), and they like to move into areas that are cheap, gritty, and edgy...this is their way to strike back at the world or something.

Since they're into artsy-tartsy type of stuff, they do their best to change the environment they live in. They did it in Williamsburg, and now apparently since Williamsburg has become too "conformist", they're moving to Bushwick...which is a neighborhood which has seen better days. You're likely to see lots of murals going up on blank walls when they're around...




(All pictures from Bushwick)

When there's some, there comes more. These are young, "hip" people, that love to party, so there will be a demand for bars, clubs, etc, wherever they go...and they will make bars out of the grungiest of places...




Are they weirdos? Yes...is it going to completely revive the South Side? No. But it's a start.

Look at what has happened in Williamsburg: first it was a place for the artists to go because they couldn't afford Manhattan. Then more of them came, and eventually started a community, and it spread throughout the entire neighborhood. Now Williamsburg is thriving and the hipsters are being priced out because now all of a sudden it's a desirable place for everyone. Not just youngsters hung up on getting drunk, doing blow, and listening to crazy music.

If these types of people can start being attracted to some of the Northern neighborhoods of the South Side, maybe somewhere directly Southeast of US Cellular Field, then they could be able to make some changes which could benefit the neighborhood.

Please keep in mind, I'm trying to make these suggestions by looking at a map, not by actually experiencing what these areas are like. So if this notion seems completely ridiculous then feel free to suggest a more suitable area!

[surlycue]

^^Wow, that is a long winded way of saying gentrification.

I doubt that hipsters painted most of those murals. Those look more in line with the kind of murals you'd see in Little Village or Pilsen which are normally done by ethnic locals rather than hipster transplants.

And gentrification is a problem/solution slippery slope that been debated to death on this board.

[Thepreacherswife]

Originally Posted by sky1949

At the outset, I'll admit my bias... I'm a pilot and owner of a small plane. Before Hizzoner illegally tore up the runway, literally, in the middle of the night, Meigs Field was a delightful place to fly in to. Bring it back.

The sad irony of the Meigs debacle is that Mrs. Daley (supposedly the one who wanted a park where Meigs was) may not live to see "Northerly Island" be anything but an overgrown piece of land with the old terminal building still standing there as a silent monument to CGX.

[tmac9wr]

Originally Posted by surlycue

^^Wow, that is a long winded way of saying gentrification.

I doubt that hipsters painted most of those murals. Those look more in line with the kind of murals you'd see in Little Village or Pilsen which are normally done by ethnic locals rather than hipster transplants.

Almost 100% sure all those murals were done by hipsters. If you click the link, you'll see where I got the pictures. Remember, these guys are mostly aspiring artists, actors, etc. It actually shows hipsters painting those murals.



(That guy doesn't look black or Puerto Rican--the two majority races in Bushwick)

Yea I suppose I could have said gentrification to shorten the post, but I figured I should have gone into some detail as to how it would happen. Anyone can say "it should gentrify" and then leave it at that, but ask yourself who's going to want to move into an area like that?

Are college grads going to move there? Hell no. Who would want to live in an area like the South Side at this point? It's empty and packed with crime. It's downright decrepid in many areas. That's not going to appeal to most populations who have any form of money, except hipsters.

So yea, basically I'm saying gentrification would be best for the South Side, but hipsters would be a good fit for the first wave of a new form of population in the neighborhood. As they help the area become more trendy, more young professionals--and as a result, developers--will start looking at the South Side as a new frontier.

And gentrification is a problem/solution slippery slope that been debated to death on this board.

Perhaps for some neighborhoods, but who could argue against this for the South Side? It would add a possible alternative image to a neighborhood whose image couldn't possibly get worse. Would you rather people associate the South Side with hipsters, or hideous crime, extreme poverty, and a population without hope?

[Avengerfire]

There are not enough hipsters,yuppies,artists,and musicians to gentrify even half of the south side.

[chicagocubs]

OK: for a Chicago native that has lived outside of the city for many years...what does Chicago lack?? Two words for you:

decent weather.

I would move back in a minute if I could take the winters. And, I am pretty sure a lot of other Chicago ex-pats would, too.

Unfortunately, that is one thing that nobody, not even the illustrious mayor, can control.

[thePR]

Originally Posted by chicagocubs

OK: for a Chicago native that has lived outside of the city for many years...what does Chicago lack?? Two words for you:

decent weather.

I would move back in a minute if I could take the winters. And, I am pretty sure a lot of other Chicago ex-pats would, too.

Unfortunately, that is one thing that nobody, not even the illustrious mayor, can control.

People say that but look at New York's population.

[Drover]

Originally Posted by tmac9wr

I think one of the things that could help Chicago would be a revitalization of the South Side. Obviously everyone would love to see this happen...but is there any plan to help make this happen? I know this would have happened if the Olympics came to Chicago, but they didn't...so what now?

What now is we can barely maintain public services right now, much less create some sort of master plan to revitalize the south side. But there has been some work done both in the public and private sector. South Loop has been booming for a decade now and has brought gentrification all the way down to Cermack. I believe there was a TIF created in the Brighton Park/Gage Park neighborhoods designed to stabilize the area by creating "ghetto insurance" of sorts -- if you bought a house there and paid a little extra for the premium, you'd be reimbursed if your home lost value after a certain number of years. The idea was to attract the professional class to these neighborhoods. Unfortunately, it does not appear to be working.

Finally, all of the public housing along the Dan Ryan has been torn down and much of it replaced with mixed housing. That has made a huge difference in the immediate area. It's still not the safest lace in the world but it's worlds better. But not a lot of thought was given to the impact of displacing all these residents would have on the neighborhoods they were displaced to, and now there are neighborhoods and even some suburbs that were once hanging tough but are now starting to sink, such as Marquette Park, Chatham, Ashburn, and the progress South Shore was making has basically ground to a halt if not started to reverse.

[urbanpln]

Bronzeville has seen a fair amount of revitalization over the past 15 years. Improvements in the Gap started in the early 1990's and has continued, although, at a slower pace than the Central and South Loop communities.

The State Street corridor between Cermack and 40th Street has been constantly improving since the public housing developments came down. New mixed income commmunities are being developed on the sites. Construction has slowed down considerably since the economy tanked but, continues even today. New mixed income rental and CHA units are being constructed. Market rate and for sale units also exist and, will increase when the real estate market comes back.

The North Kenwood/Oakland community, located between 36th and 47th Street east of Vincennes Avenue, experienced the greatest growth of all the mid-south side communities during the same period. Several thousand units of new and rehab units were constructed. Most of the investment was private but, new public housing was also constructed in the form of scattered mixed income communities.

Most of the construction has come to a halt but, there is still heavy interest in these communities. Although much has been done there is still a lot to be done.

[Lookout Kid]

Originally Posted by tmac9wr

\Are college grads going to move there? Hell no. Who would want to live in an area like the South Side at this point? It's empty and packed with crime. It's downright decrepid in many areas. That's not going to appeal to most populations who have any form of money, except hipsters.

Most of the hipsters I know ARE college grads, though many have only a BFA--which doesn't exactly translate into a solid middle class job without some serious gumption to go with it. And Pilsen is technically a South Side neighborhood that has a pretty substantial hipster population already. It has already started. The "South Loop" has basically come into existence in the last few years, and the amorphous boundaries keep moving south. Hyde Park's prosperity is spreading north through Kenwood and Oakland. Gentrification of the South Side has already established a beach head, and it is steaming ahead rapidly.