A reader sent in this Zoning Notice he received in the mail last week. We're not sure why this seems to be the same zoning notice filed by Ald. Shiller in March. Perhaps a savvier reader can help explain.
Incidentally, the two multi-unit homes it will affect are two of the five remaining homes from the days when the 4600 block of Winthrop was segregated and designated for African-Americans only. The descendants of those residents are aware that the buildings may be torn down and regret losing part of their history on Winthrop.
In other wards, the block club would have been notified and the proposal would have been discussed with interested block club members members. It would then go before a zoning committee made up of various representatives from the community.
ReplyDeleteThanks for the great info. I live on that block and I was not aware that at one time it was a segregated community - it's always interesting to find out about the place that you live!
ReplyDeleteI wouldn't mind having more condos here my block, seems like it's moving from a majority of rentals to majority condo ownership. There will be 180 more low income rentals soon enough, though...if they ever start building at Wilson Yard! :)
"The descendants of those residents are aware that the buildings may be torn down and regret losing part of their history on Winthrop."
ReplyDeleteFunny, I don't hear the same from the descendants of Af-Am residents who used to live in the Cabrini Green or Robert Taylor towers that are now torn down.
I'm friends with many of the former Winthrop residents and they hate to see homes they grew up in and about which have fond memories get torn down. Doesn't mean it shouldn't be done.
ReplyDeleteJust like anyone else, they hate to see their childhood memories fall to the wrecking ball. What makes it a little bit different for them than for me is that they know about five generations of folks who've lived in each house, so there's a LOT of history there for them.
I don't know who you talk to BillyJoe but there are quite a few people from Robert Taylor who have very fond memories of living there during its first 5 years before things went downhill fast. Even now there is a contingent of residents who didn't want to leave that neighborhood or the RT community they were a part of even though they do want better living conditions.
ReplyDeleteUU and truman square neighbor are right to point out that if those residences are torn down that we will be removing a bit of our history. I think it is important for all of us not to forget that there was a segregated community living amidst what is often assumed to be the all-white ethnic northside.
True to my nickname, I'm confused. Which exact buildings does this zoning change impact? Trying to decipher the "Premises Affected" paragraph is like decoding an Enigma message.
ReplyDeleteAnd if, as mentioned in the post and comments, this is impacting residential units, why is the "Current Zoning" a shopping district, and the "Proposed Zoning" residential? How do these affected residential buildings exist in the current shopping district zoning?
So confused...
Yeah, I'm confused too. Could we put the Bat Light out for Hugh, or someone else who can decode this?
ReplyDeleteIn the original post Hugh said that written letters were required 15 days before a hearing. So, I guess this is it. I laughed that it said "for more info contact Helen Shiller." Yeah, call her and more info will be yours! The letter should really say, "for more info haul your ass down to City Hall just so you can find out what will be happening on your street. Then, watch her attempt to wax poetic to her colleagues about some issue while she throws in a few insults to her constituents in attendance at the hearing you chump!"
ReplyDeleteMy guess is that it is either an SRO (permitted by rights in an RT4) or simply a "little assistance" for this particular would-be developer who used to live in the neighborhood because the financing either wouldn't work or would work better with that number of units. I suspect that he might be willing to make a portion of the units "affordable" under her ordinance and he needs more density to make it happen.
"I think it is important for all of us not to forget that there was a segregated community living amidst what is often assumed to be the all-white ethnic northside."
ReplyDeleteSaskia: We have the national media regularly reminding everyone that Chicago is the "most racially segregated city in America," although personally I don't actually think we're unique in that regard.
" . . .if those residences are torn down that we will be removing a bit of our history."
Saskia: Chicago has been busily excavating its history for the past two decades. These homes are pretty insignificant to other things (Comiskey Park, the rehab of Soldier Field, et cetera) that have been made "history" by the city's march into modern times and the future.
Unique? No. Having something to do with the power brokers in this city? Absolutely.
ReplyDeleteIf not for your whole post but for this second part, I call B.S. You value social history as much as I do. That's good.
I'm confused too. What part of that block are we talking about? Half of it was already redeveloped about four-five years ago. (Those ugly monstrosities of condo buildings on the north end of the block on the west side. My apologies to anyone who lives in those, but what awful design and the lack of greenscaping is wretched.) The other half of that side of the block are vacant lots, if I remember, and the opposite side is CHA housing and on the corner is that huge condo building built again about 4 years ago. So what am I missing?
ReplyDeleteHas anyone figured out exactly what is going there? SROs or Market Rate?
ReplyDeleteI dunno why the double notification
ReplyDeletemaybe the boundary changed
I would but the earlier & most recent letters next to each other & carefully compare
"How do these affected residential buildings exist in the current shopping district zoning?"
ReplyDeletewe say the current use is non-conforming, it's not illegal if the existing buildings existed prior to being zoned B3-3
also, in general, residential is allowed in B districts (but retail commercial uses are not allowed in R)
B3 is our most permissive B zoning, so perhaps the B3 zoning was imposed to allow something like transitional living of some kind