Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Chicago Is America's Last Remaining Affordable Skyscraper City

chicagobusiness.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 111 posts

Re: Chicago Is America's Last Remaining Affordable Skyscraper City

#21

Post by beefalo »

maxsilver wrote: post #15
bunderbunder wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But still, they may be biased. Chicago is affordable compared to many other big cities, but getting from there to "last remaining" probably requires a careful choice in the cutoff for what you'd call a "skyscraper city". About an hour and a half north you'll find another American city that has skyscrapers, and also has a cost of living that's somewhere between half and 3/4 of Chicago's.

> "About an hour and a half north you'll find another American city that has skyscrapers" If Milwaukee counts as a "skyscraper city", then practically every city in the US counts, and the term becomes mostly meaningless.

It really should be "city livable without a car" because that is what really separates Chicago from all of the other affordable midwestern cities.

Re: Chicago Is America's Last Remaining Affordable Skyscraper City

#22

Post by remyp »

sparrish wrote: post #7

Only if you mean "Skyscraper city with lower prices because of higher crime".

I would encourage you to venture over to Wikipedia and sort the violent crime rates per 100,000 people[1]. Chicago is 28th, behind Oakland, Houston, Atlanta, and Miami.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_cities_b...

Re: Chicago Is America's Last Remaining Affordable Skyscraper City

#23

Post by bumholio »

I'm not entirely sure I follow the logical argument: regulation is relaxed along transit arteries, allowing developers to build and sell more units there at market rates, thereby keeping the market prices in check; that's great.

But I would assume someone capable of paying market rates, typically still owns a car. That car still needs a parking space, so even if the owner does not use it for his daily commute, the presence of the car still has an impact. I would furthermore assert that many if not most middle class citizens living alongside good transit do not actually use it for work, because of the complexity and inconvenience. It certainly seems that way and the article puts forward no hard numbers.

So there should be a marginal decongestant effect from encouraging high density in those areas, but the same rules could be applied everywhere for an even stronger effect on market prices. The task of the mayor then becomes to get transit to those newly developed areas and keep congestion down; not to coax developers to build where transit is - they will do that by themselves simply for the market premium transit options afford to their investments.

Re: Chicago Is America's Last Remaining Affordable Skyscraper City

#24

Post by weberc2 »

RubenSandwich wrote: post #9

I'm going to dispute this claim. Pittsburgh, PA has skyscrapers[1], defined as any building with or over 40 floors, and is more affordable then Chicago[2]. In fact Atlanta, GA also fits in this category as well. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tallest_buildings_in_P... [2] https://www.numbeo.com/cost-of-living/compare_cities.jsp?cou...

The tallest building in Iowa is 44 stories in Des Moines, and it's far more affordable than any of the three. But I would never call DM a skyscraper city.

EDIT: Downvoters, what's up? Do you object to "Tallest building in IA is 44 stories" or "DM is more affordable" or "DM is not a skyscraper city"? None of these are particularly controversial, and the first two are empirically true.

Re: Chicago Is America's Last Remaining Affordable Skyscraper City

#25

Post by core-questions »

brian-armstrong wrote: post #20
remyp wrote: post #5

I've lived in Chicago for nearly 10 years and will continue preaching its advantages to anyone who will listen. Crime isn't as big a problem as people think it is (it's isolated to a few long-disadvantaged neighborhoods), it's affordable, cars are optional, and we have two airports to escape the winter weather.

Nah. The job opportunities for people newly graduating are piss poor in Chicago compared to elsewhere. A lot of old opinions on work prevail, compared to new flexibility in working that we're seeing. Also, having lived in the suburbs for a while, I was shocked how much casual racism is present there. Chicago is in many ways trapped in the past. It's corrupt and dirty. When I see billboards for strip clubs above spraw…

> I was shocked how much casual racism is present there.

Why does this shock you in a city with such a ridiculously high crime rate for specific demographics? People are making conclusions - some of them less than ideal - based on observation. The only way that's going to stop is if the murder rate stops being similar to a sub-saharan african country.

Re: Chicago Is America's Last Remaining Affordable Skyscraper City

#27

Post by nwah1 »

Rents are always going to be high for any dense city, but lighter touch regulations can make it less sprawled and car-centric. The transit-oriented development policies mentioned do just that.

Donald Shoup is a transit scholar who has shown in detail the distorting effects of mandatory minimum parking requirements.

Re: Chicago Is America's Last Remaining Affordable Skyscraper City

#28

Post by vanadium »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #6
remyp wrote: post #5

I've lived in Chicago for nearly 10 years and will continue preaching its advantages to anyone who will listen. Crime isn't as big a problem as people think it is (it's isolated to a few long-disadvantaged neighborhoods), it's affordable, cars are optional, and we have two airports to escape the winter weather.

Chicago native who fled for Central Florida. I love Chicago, but taxes will have to rise to eye watering levels [+] to pay back pensions that should’ve never shortfalled in the first place. [+] http://midwest.chicagofedblogs.org/?p=3096 (How Should the State of Illinois Pay for its Unfunded Pension Liability? The Case for a Statewide Residential Property Tax)

I live in an unincorporated area two blocks from the border of Chicago.

By getting the whole "municipality" thing out of the way and falling under county jurisdiction, property taxes are reasonable (and we pay for emergency services from adjacent municipalities), lot sizes are bigger, more choice over who delivers our services (like, say, trash), and we have the benefits of both Chicago and the surrounding areas.

Granted, Cook County and the State of Illinois all have their problems with unfunded pensions, but removing one layer definitely helps.

Re: Chicago Is America's Last Remaining Affordable Skyscraper City

#29

Post by JumpCrisscross »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #11
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> taxes will have to rise to eye watering levels [+] to pay back pensions If voter demographics keep rebalancing towards the young and un-pensioned, those pensions will probably be slashed quite a bit.

Not before they’re due, and it’s written into the state constitution (Article XIII, Section 5). Those obligations (~$105 billion) won’t be shed. “Benefits to public employees are protected under the Illinois Constitution, and a recent attempt to reduce the unfunded liability by reducing retirees’ benefits was struck down by the Illinois Supreme Court” http://www.chicagotribune.com/ct-illinois-pension-law-court-...

> it’s written into the state constitution

Which can be amended if there is popular will. I don’t think state pensions are enforceable under federal law.

Re: Chicago Is America's Last Remaining Affordable Skyscraper City

#30

Post by droopyEyelids »

bumholio wrote: post #23

I'm not entirely sure I follow the logical argument: regulation is relaxed along transit arteries, allowing developers to build and sell more units there at market rates, thereby keeping the market prices in check; that's great. But I would assume someone capable of paying market rates, typically still owns a car. That car still needs a parking space, so even if the owner does not use it for his daily commute, the pr…

Chicago is definitely enough of a 'big city' that people choose to forego car ownership.

I work in an office of developers, and people only tend to get a car once they have kids, and then they only have one car for the family.

Post reply on HN