A 1905-built greystone at 1325 West Cornelia Avenue just off the Southport Corridor in Lake View has been demolished, to be replaced by a two-unit building. After pending in the Chicago Data Portal for 78 days, a permit for demolition came through on July; a week later, it had been razed. Carlos Group was the demo contractor, at a reported cost of $20,000.
07/30/2026. Little more than the front columns remain. Photo by Daniel Schell
Photo by Daniel Schell
According to real estate records, Coen Developers LLC purchased the property in June for $1.575 million. Also in June, they filed an application to erect a three-story plus basement, two-unit frame construction building on the site. Details in the pending permit include a private rooftop deck with a pergola and rear covered decks. A detached three-car garage would have its own roof deck and pergola accessed by a stairway. Six-foot wood privacy fencing and a five-foot wrought iron fence will enclose the lot. Michael Cox & Associates is the architect of record; Coen Developers will handle their own general contracting duties.
Photo by Daniel Schell
Photo by Daniel Schell
Photo by Daniel Schell
We did a site visit on Thursday, July 30, and found little more than the first-floor front facade still intact. A follow-up visit on the first of August revealed nothing but a hole in the ground. It is anticipated that new construction will begin immediately.
08/01/2026. Photo by Daniel Schell
Photo by Daniel Schell
Photo by Daniel Schell
Site context of 1325 West Cornelia Avenue, via Google Maps
Though the reported cost is not yet available in the pending permit, given the property’s purchase price, plus the 1.5-to-1 parking space to dwelling unit ratio, it is expected that the two new residences will be delivered as for-sale condos.
Subscribe to YIMBY’s daily e-mail
Follow YIMBYgram for real-time photo updates
Like YIMBY on Facebook
Follow YIMBY’s Twitter for the latest in YIMBYnews
This makes me ill. The craftsmanship in a 1905 home is exceptional & will never be matched. To tear it down for a cookie cutter condo bldg is just more stripping away of the quality of architecture that shapes our neighborhoods & our city. Shame on that developer. Shame on that alderman.
If you look at blogs from 1905, you’ll read a lot of comments like “oh good, someone’s building another entire block of cookie cutter greystones 🤦🏻♂️” and “at least they put the front door on the left side instead of the right side like every other greystone on the block”
The more things change, the more they stay the same.
I know you’re trying to be funny, but this type of graystone is easy modified, converted and expanded into high demand, high priced real estate. There are multiple examples on this very block, including my former apartment at 1339 W Cornelia which was renovated into a four story single family home. Tearing down the entire structure literally makes no sense, except maybe for the pocket books of the demolition and construction companies
Jk, it literally does make sense to someone. That’s why they’re doing it. Glad to know your former home was renovated, but that happened because someone was willing to put the money into it and accept the risk. Sentimentality doesn’t get the work done.
I assume by “work” you area alluding to the need for more housing in Chicago, or similar. If that is correct, there is no “work” here. Adding density? No. Impacting affordability? No. Improving a struggling neighborhood? No. Addressing blight? No. Is adaptive reuse of a graystone risky in an upscale area full of renovated, remodeled or expanded graystones that attract, not repel, home buyers? No.
What you describe (cannibalizing two flats for gigantic oversized homes cosplaying as two flats) makes me more ill than this demolition.
What I wish more developers were doing was building additions onto these greystones to turn them into the same square footage as these modern double duplexes that are replacing them. Keep most of the historic detailing on the 1st & second floors, & build gut rehabs for basement, 3rd floor addition, & rear additions.
The alderman has nothing to do with this. You don’t understand how this all works.
Replacing brick with a frame – guess that makes it cheaper to tear down next time.
Sad 🙁
Write your alderman!
This could been renovated into a home and sold for 7 figures, I’m sure somebody would have jumped on it.
Too bad….
“This could been renovated into a home and sold for 7 figures, I’m sure somebody would have jumped on it.”
Unfortunately, people in this market seem to prefer the modern style. The generic condos that replace the greystones tend to sell rapidly.
IMO these old Greystones are narrow and cramped. Yeah, they look great from the outside but I would not want to live in one.
Well if you live in Naperville you’re not allowed to post here Jim Hilly. This is a space for people with taste.
This neighborhood has been hollowed out by the number of gut renovations that destroy multifamily for one gigantic home. Destroyed the character of the neighborhood more than full demolition IMO.
Disgusting. This is why Europeans mock Americans, we have zero appreciation for our built heritage.
I couldn’t agree more! Europe has buildings that are over 1000 years old! What do we have?
Pretty sure they mock us for more than this.
Luckily, this graystone wasn’t an extraordinary beauty, was just ok.
Some Alderman should put on the books that all greystones in the city are protected historic landmarks and should be treated as such. They should not be allowed for tear downs unless extreme circumstances.
No, it would take half the alderman in the city council plus one to accomplish that and that ain’t happening. Get real.
Some people in this city are obsessed with Chicago looking the exact same as it did when they were children. Luckily, they are not the majority.
I bet the people actually living in this 4-story modern building will like it much more than the small, 100 year old, cookie-cutter, poorly-insulated construction that came before it
You should move to Houston if you love cheap plastic buildings so much. Chicago is wasted on you.
People ARE moving to Houston, and leaving Chicago. Houston grows 10% every decade while Chicago has lost 25% of her peak population, and their homes are STILL cheaper than ours. Turns out people value affordable housing more than they value living in a tourist attraction.
Houston will be under the Atlantic Ocean in a couple of hundred years, while Chicago will be high and dry. And good luck with finding a house with a basement in Houston!
Hard to believe that lot value in Lakeview/Southport is $1.6M. I’m not so sure it’s going to be replaced with a duplex. More likely a SFD.
They applied for a permit to build 2 units, and that’s what the city approved. Why would you say it’s “more likely” to be a single family home?
Property rights need to be respected. I had an initial reaction of concern after viewing the first photo; then realized it was not my personal view that should rule.
It’s probably faster for these developers to tear down and build new, but is it cheaper? I know a gut rehab would require rear and top floor additions, and the basement needs to be dug out. But don’t they save on building materials? Would a finished gut rehabbed greystone demand a higher price than a new construction frame build?
Weather it would be cheaper or not depends on a lot of variables.
Every 2 or 3 flat in this city has a load-bearing wall running right down the center of the building from the basement to the roof: 2-3 bedrooms on one side; kitchen, living, dining, bath on the other. In today’s market people want open plan, which means you have to span those load-bearing walls to give you that open space.
Turning the 700-1000 sqft basement into additional living space requires digging down and under-pinning the existing foundation – your adding more foundation under the existing one – which is esp hard to do if you have lannon stone instead of concrete foundations.
The back porch would need replacing because of code. Or you could add an addition to the building but you’d still need stairs.
A new roof, probably a tear off and you’d need the roof structure redone or reinforced to be able to have a deck or solar panels or esp an additional space up there.
Basically it all adds up $ wise. Yes, it’s possible but it takes a special kinda developer to accomplish this. It also takes longer, sometimes much longer and that means paying your loans every month while you’re doing the build-out.
It also takes a special – read rich – buyer to pay for all this and still give the builder their profit.
I can see where the builder who’s more interested in profit than finesse would prefer a tear-down and who’d just use the same basic balloon framing plans they paid for once to carry them through ASAP.
I can see that you don’t know anything about architecture or structural engineering; I can also see that you are a know-it-all. Your cost examples and common sense for modifications are nonsense. You don’t understand what the character of a neighborhood means. These demolitions are okay in the burbs but destroy the historic roots of a city neighborhood. Neighboring homeowners have invested great sums of money into their properties because of the feel of the neighborhood. This is very destructive.
Just because I point out the obvious hurdles in reusing these old structures doesn’t mean I’m against rehabbing them. It’s called reality.
As a GC, I’ve renovated a 100+ year old building. I used architects and structural engineers in the process. You don’t know what your talking about.
Are there any old buildings left in lake view? 😂
Buildings keep falling and then people wonder why we have a housing shortage? 😕
Just ugly transformer robot buildings that look like they are about get up and kill on command.
That junk won’t stand half as long.
Once was time a craftsman took time to built something bout of love and respect for art and value
You want to live in something that was thrown up in 30 days?
Hey it’s your funeral 😂
Tearing down a two flat to build a two flat is not contributing to a housing shortage. The hundreds of two flats that have been turned into single family homes inside the husk of a greystone shell is the real culprit of the shortage of housing in Lakeview.
I second the suggestion of Calloused. Chicago is losing its history. This is becoming a real issue worth fighting for.
The history will always be there. You cannot lose your past, you can only lose your future.
As someone who appreciates the greystone charm but lived in vintage buildings for decades, it’s often true that the floors squeak and sag, the floor plans are problematic for contemporary renters/buyers, the electrical and plumbing infrastructure and the kitchens and bathrooms are usually very outdated, the basements are unusable as living spaces, and the streetfront charm is often the lipstick on cramped, less-than-enchanting interiors. I’m guessing the floorspace will be doubled in the new building, and with 2026 features and finishes in a pricey neighborhood the future occupants will live happily with a non-greystone exterior. It’s happening all over Lake View, where a new $2M+ building does not have to include brick or stone exteriors. I like these old blocks as much as anyone, but replacing them in hot/desirable neighborhoods with more expansive, contemporary interiors is not hard to understand.
Most of these units are just 2BR, very small 8×8 or 8×10 rooms with little or no closet space. I love vintage buildings too, but yes most people wirh this kind of money to spend aren’t wanting bedrooms or rooms like this. Converting them to single family and finishing the basement is the only way to get any appreciable space out of them.
A truly disgusting act. I wonder what kind of crap will replace this.
Globalism step by step. Erase history.
I just got back from a trip to Scotland. Edinburgh and Glasgow are absolutely gorgeous. The neighborhood streets outside of the central areas are lined with brown sand-stone and grey limestone buildings, often with bay windows and subtle variations. It makes walking through their neighborhoods a genuinely pleasant experience. Also, there are almost no privately owned cars traveling the city at any time, day or night (esp in Glasgow), since this type of construction didn’t accomodate private car ownership. Here, on the other hand, walking the streets is usually a frustrating, disappointing experience as so many of these beautiful old buildings bite the dust for cheap new construction with ample parking, or sometimes we loose a greystone so the neighboring mcmansion can have a yard. Returning to Chicago is genuinely depressing.
Gross
Do they salvage any materials from these tear downs or does it get completely bulldozed?
they usually salvage the brick as its the heaviest and easiest to do. But it depends on the demo company.
Beautiful masonry building replaced with plywood and plastic. Disgusting.
Another heritage and character defining building lost to build another cheap and soulless piece of trash.
Barbarism
Richard Nickel is looking down in sadness on this destruction.