After years of denials, a letter of intent that's been much discussed but never seen, and do-it-yourself non-corporate logos, we finally have a definite answer, from Target itself:
"Great news! The new Target store at Broadway and Montrose in Chicago near you is scheduled to open on July 21, 2010. We're excited to bring you the unique merchandise and clever concepts you can find at Target. We set up each store with your needs in mind to provide you with an enjoyable experience. That's why you'll find a one-hour photo center, FOOD AVENUE, optical center and full-service pharmacy at most of our locations. If you ever have any questions, you can always write back or call us at (800) 440-0680. You can also help your community by having a REDCARD and enrolling in our TAKE CHARGE OF EDUCATION program. For more information about our community giving program, please visit www.target.com/tcoe. Thanks for writing. Hearing your feedback helps us serve you better."
July 21, 2010? 9 more months? Geez, why so long? Oh that's right, the housing is the #1 priority. Gotta get those new residents registered to vote for the 2011 election. You're so clever Helen.ReplyDelete
Everyone look at the little birdie....ReplyDelete
I'm happy about the Target, but when does the slum next door to it open???ReplyDelete
Actually, Miss Kitty, 9 months is pretty speedy for this type of operation. Its the waiting to get started that made it seem so long.ReplyDelete
Lets hope that now these posts will focus on the real issue of the housing instead of propaganda about the Target, which was always going in.
I think they were shooting for early next year for opening the residential portion of Wilson Yard.ReplyDelete
Target opening will provide a nice photo opportunity for Da Mare and Shiller.
She appears to be semi permanently attached to his "rearish area" anyway so the photogs better get some close angled lenses.
She's going to Springfield for the CTA. Showing up at Olympics rallies in Washington Park. Bullshit Committee chairmanship.
Oh yeah. She's scared. She should be.
CTA hikes. Property tax hikes. Fish farms. Parking meter hikes. 400 thousand plus residential units from TIF money.
Not to mention the riot video and her "response".
Plus she will face at least one candidate who is adequately funded and experienced.
Have fun, aldermen. Behold your political futures end.
Won't the presence of Target potentially help clear up some of the problem residents in the area? I would think that if Target is there, they would have an interest in making sure that area doesn't get too ghetto, but maybe I'm just being a bit hopeful.ReplyDelete
I wonder if property values might go up due to the new store and that might help force out some of the problem tenants.
I admit that I don't know too much about this kind of thing, but maybe you guys can explain why Target coming to Uptown is a good or bad thing.
d - my point is, you can see the housing is priority. It was started before Target. The original plan - way back - was to have the retail components completed first.ReplyDelete
The Target in itself is likely a good thing for Uptown.ReplyDelete
Now a new Target will mean more traffic. That's ok. I expect that.
What is horribly wrong is how all the Target related traffic is going to come in and out on Broadway.
Horrible traffic planning. If the residential portion didn't exist or was only one building there could have been an entrance/exit also built on Montrose.
Plus not tying in a new EL stop into the Target and the College was stupid.
The Senior building could have been built above the Aldi to free up the corner of Montrose and Broadway.
the question is will the property value increases which will probably follow Target be off-set by possible issues with the housing project?
If the housing is well populated and maintained, who knows? We may all be pleasantly surprised.
If the housing follows the history of a host of other housing projects in this ward ...?
If the entire Wilson Yard project was handled property and if public concerns were actually integrated into the planning, Target's coming would be appreciated by a lot more people.
Due to how Helen went about scoffing public opinion and the political fanangling (admitted to by the architect) which went into making this happen - there's a huge question mark over this entire thing.
Add to that, Helen's failed history as a social engineer, I'm afraid that a lot of people are more than a little apprehensive towards what effects Target's presence, +/-, will do to the community.
It should be a good thing. It could be a good thing; but Helen's reverse-Midas touch is worrisome.
If Wilson Yard is going to be primarily for seniors, won't that help cut down on the problems the other projects have?ReplyDelete
I'm not sure what the typical profile of a problem tenant would be since I'm guessing that a lot of the gangbangers still live with family.
...the property value increases which will probably follow Target...ReplyDelete
it's not clear to me that proximity to a Target improves property values
that's the thing. WY isn't gonna be primarily for seniors no matter what those old signs say.ReplyDelete
"it's not clear to me that proximity to a Target improves property values"ReplyDelete
As a property owner, and someone who would be affected either good/bad by WY,I'm trying my best to go "half full" on this, as much as possible.
According to Shiller's site: "One (building) is for seniors with 99 one-bedroom apartments. The other building is 84 units and has 1, 2 and 3 bedroom apartments."ReplyDelete
Given the unit sizes of the 84 unit building (on Broadway), its residents will clearly out number the seniors.
I only hope Holsten has the balls to apply the same screening standards he utilizes outside of the 46th ward. That's going to be the real issue.
I'm a little weary of the constant "Boo, Shiller" sentiments on this site. I'm no fan of the woman, but Jesus, not all the ills of the world (or even of Uptown) can be pinned on her, and constantly ragging on her does nothing to solve the problems that my beloved neighborhood suffers from. It's annoying. Sing a different damned song once in a while.ReplyDelete
A different songReplyDelete
(you go, Spinner.)
Spinner, you can trust me when I tell you that we're not laughing with you.ReplyDelete
ZM: Spinner's my NAME, ya doofus. And I'm not defending Shiller at all--just saying the blaming Shiller for everything from gang violence to global warming is friggin' TIRESOME.ReplyDelete
blaming Shiller for everything from gang violence to global warming is friggin' TIRESOME.ReplyDelete
Go take a nap, then.
Don't blame Shiiller blame the people the voted for, the businesses that support her and the other Alderman.ReplyDelete
It's real simple vote her out.
Also get a strong enough candidate to run against her.
Shillers motive is to keep things the same. Low income ghettos with high value Target. It neutralizes. Extreme good with extreme bad.ReplyDelete
I'm all for low income housing if the elements of crime are not allowed. Senior housing is good but you get apt owners that dont' care. Honestly, low density scattered site housing is good. It helps people see opportunity but if you build something that turns into a slum, it continues to be a continuation of their life. The non senior housing is destined to be a blight of the neighborhood because quite frankly, people will not see anything to life themselves outside of their blight. Why improve when you do not have to. Its human nature to do as little as possible when you don't have to.
As far as the low-income housing segment of WY, pardon my lack of memory, but is there a 'waiting list' as far as who's signed up? Do we know how this complex will be populated?ReplyDelete
And is it up to the Holstein group, in terms of who gets in?
You know what might go a long way toward breaking down divisions in the community--if some of you would stop stigmatizing the WY building and its future residents as people living in a "slum" with no sense of a future, or a cabrini-esque project (clearly, you all have no clue about Cabrini or else you'd realize how strained a comparison that is), or future criminals. That might lend a little credibility to your claim that you really want to work with everyone in the community across economic lines to make sure Uptown is a good place to live.ReplyDelete
What you all keep forgetting is throughout her time as Alderman, and even when Uptown was at its most aesthetically displeasing, we did not have the level of violence and gang activity that we've seen develop in the last four years. So continuing to make a direct connection between SHiller, poor people and subsidized housing (which predated many of you in this community), and crime, and effectively ostracizing and stigmatizing these people before their arrival tends to over-simplify the problem and set up any future leadership for a big fat failure.
"we did not have the level of violence and gang activity that we've seen develop in the last four years"ReplyDelete
Uptown Writer, I submit you have forgotten the violence and crime of past decades back when Uptown had the nickname "Arson Alley," but the recent uptick in gang crime is concerning nonetheless.
That said, if Alderman Shiller's concentrating of subsidized housing in Uptown is a dismal failure, for decades analysts will be asking how anyone let her go ahead with her plan to build the Wilson Yard project.
Even before Wilson Yard opens it's doors, Uptown already has so much subisidized housing that more twice the percent of residents live below the median income level than CHA maximum housing guidelines allow. In other words, CHA refuses to spend a dime on any more subsidized housing in Uptown. Alderman Shiller is using TIF funds instead.
If "The Uptown Experiment" is another failure like Cabrini Green, analysts will also be asking how Alderman Shiller was allowed to build subsidized housing units at over $450,000,000.00 per unit construction cost with no public oversight. (if they aren't asking that already)
They will also be asking why a judge threw a TIF lawsuit out of court, refusing the public a fair trial to fight for some kind of public oversight.
They will also be asking if cities should abandon the idea of public housing altogether.
Urban Planners have called Wilson Yard "a future slum for Uptown." When experts call a plan "a future slum" there is cause for concern.
Make that: "over "$450,000.00 per unit construction cost."ReplyDelete
Shiller may like being able to grease Peter Holsten's palms with TIF dollars, but not that much. :)
i guess this means Target will miss yet another xmas rushReplyDelete