Or, perhaps Ald. Shiller can let us know just exactly what our twenty-plus years of taxes and $112 million are buying. Kudos to City Clerk Del Valle for his part in TIF transparency.
Thursday, January 28, 2010
ANOTHER Amendment to WYTIF? So Much For Transparency
So what are we paying for now?
An alert reader let us know that Wilson Yard TIF Amendment #2 - yes, a new Amendment - has been listed on City Clerk Miguel Del Valle's website. Although it's more than we can decipher, there's a sneaking suspicion that it's meant to carve out the Maryville parcels for the new proposed development (and new TIF). Maybe someone more familiar with Cityspeak and Legalese can translate. Check out the revised maps starting on page 96.
Or, perhaps Ald. Shiller can let us know just exactly what our twenty-plus years of taxes and $112 million are buying. Kudos to City Clerk Del Valle for his part in TIF transparency.
Or, perhaps Ald. Shiller can let us know just exactly what our twenty-plus years of taxes and $112 million are buying. Kudos to City Clerk Del Valle for his part in TIF transparency.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Alderman Helen Shiller continues along the "Screw You" path of governmental transparency.
ReplyDeleteIt appears this amendment pulls parcels OUT of the original Wilson Yard TIF - Perhaps for a new TIF? Perhaps a developer does not want those parcels included for any number of reasons. I am curious to know more.
ReplyDelete"Screw You Taxpayer"--Kids In The Hall
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aWEnqC1uPu0
While she's at it, could she parcel OUT my block, too?
ReplyDeleteI'm not enjoying the TIF ride, and I'd like to get off.
If she's so willing to make amends for people who don't live in the ward, maybe she'd do a solid for one o' her peeps.
I can see now why she neglects other business in the ward. She is so busy with TIF's there is no time for anything else. Wonder what she did before she figured out how to get her hand in the TIF money pot?
ReplyDeleteToo many low income demographics in the area is not encouraging to businesses. But if all you do is build towers and towers of low income (yes senior citizens are low income too), what business owner is going to locate nearby?
ReplyDeletePromises of Trader Joes looks good on the development proposal, but TJs ain't going to locate if the demographics do not meet their targeted audience.
These Uptown TIF are thinly disquised vehicles for building low income housing.
Yes, you got a Target at Wilson Yards, but what else are you going to get. Subway and nail salons.
They better have damn good security at Wilson Yards because people will not shop there if there is a beggar or a panhandler every 20 feet.
Why do you need to build Senior housing at the lakefront at probably $250,000 or more per unit. There are entire apartment buildings in foreclosure in the area, that you can buy for a lot less and with renovation make them suitable for Seniors.
Once you have 100 or more low income units in the area you will bring down your chances of having a high quality business locate there.
"These Uptown TIF are thinly disquised vehicles for building low income housing."
ReplyDeleteWell stated WillieG. Sadly, I couldn't agree more.
WiilieG: It's difficult to sync your appraisal with areas like the Clybourn corridor, West Town and the near South Side. Granted, Berdoff's isn't going to locate in Uptown but Trader Joe's will and it's all the more likely when there is more housing (low, moderate, mixed and market), less empty parcels and high quality and hub transportation.
ReplyDelete"...Berdoff's isn't going to locate in Uptown but Trader Joe's will..."
ReplyDeleteanyone who believes any of this developer's claims, god protect fools
pls don't dignify the TJ thing by even mentioning it in a blog comment
they've got you right where they want you when you're debating TJ, coming or not, and not looking at the project and its concessions and subsidies from your pocket
Suzanne,
ReplyDeletewill a "higher end" retail establishment set up shop in an area with high density low income housing?
Personally, I kinda' doubt it as that's not their targeted market.
The type of retail which normally surrounds low income housing is the likes of which we see on Broadway, currently.
Not that there isn't a need for lower end retail, nor am I besmirching such; but, I'm having trouble sync'ing your comparison of TIFs which are used in areas with existing higher end retail, and lower "affordable" housing concentrations with TIF composition/usage in the 46th.
Yes. There will be a Target, but that Target will be surrounded by low income housing.
Is there an example of that anywhere else in the city, or the nation, for that matter?
Not saying Target, or that Wilson Yard, won't be successful; but, neither have history on their sides; and the lack of true public input (and the skepticism generated by Shiller's curious tactics) only complicates matters via lack of community support.
With one modification to Willie's statement, I agree:
These Uptown TIF are thinly disquised vehicles for Shiller to build low income housing.
(and, don't even get me started on the effects of pedestrian and wholly non-Chicago-esque architecture Shiller's been approving)
Now, about your comment regarding high quality transportation hubs ... ;)
Ms. Elder, if Shiller bothered to take the $3 Million she just used to purchase ANOTHER low income housing unit on Eastwood and instead, put that money towards the Wilson El rehab, I might agree...
ReplyDelete...but instead, Shiller continues to not share details with her constituents who actually pay the bills for her deeds... and ignores the 'high quality' transportation aspect you mentioned..
I agree regarding Trader Joe's...I doubt they are going to want to set up shop in a ghetto neighborhood. It'll just be more of the same...fast food restaurants, beauty/nail salons, maybe another wig shop, a currency exchange or payday loan or more stores selling hip-hop gear.
ReplyDeleteI heard that TJ's and Aldi have the same owner. That's what we'll get...another Aldi.
ReplyDeleteWhat I wouldn't give for a Costco here...
ReplyDeleteHugh, breathe, dear, breathe. My point isn't dependent upon Trader Joe's, per se. Rather, the distinction I was drawing was between a high-end boutique retailer like Bergdoff's and a multi-outlet street-level retailer like Trader Joe's, Strack and Van Til, Starbucks or another similar retailer.
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure I know what you mean, Yo, when you say "higher end" retail. In the areas I cited in my original post, there's a lot of good mid-range retail with plenty of subsidized housing nearby--Crate and Barrel, Old Navy, etc. Lot's of those retailers pioneered those areas in the shadow of the old cabrini high rises so I'm not much buying the scare drama that proximity to subsidized housing kills retail.
The status of retail in Uptown, particularly along the north end of Broadway is NOT hobbled because of the housing mix in Uptown.
Think about it. There are areas, like those I first mentioned, that have a housing mix similar to Uptown, some are not even as toney and yet there's quality retail there.
There is a similar housing mix in Edgewater and the retail is better. Couple of explanations account for the differences; most, I think, revolve around the Alderman, property owners and the type of space available and/or some combination thereof.
"higher end retail" meaning Target/TJ, etc.
ReplyDeleteI see your point on Cabrini Green, but didn't those retailers go in since the towers were going down and the city was trying to revitalize the area to, essentially, erase the failed model of staked subsidized housing?
It's not like Starbucks and AT&T were gung ho to invest into a subsidized neighborhood.
And, you are absolutely correct: subsidized housing does not hobble retail development - especially on Broadway.
Someone else does the hobbling.
And, in our case, that someone else is looking to .. well, I'm not sure what the hell she's looking to do, but the community's trust has been exhausted and that's why any sentence with "Shiller" and "TIF" in it, needs to be highly scrutinized.
That's the interesting bit, Yo. Many of the retailers were in long before the towers came down. C&B was a north end anchor years before the CHA renewal plan was even conceived. And the Clybourn corridor sure hasn't been stymied by Lathrop Homes.
ReplyDeleteNot saying things didn't go super-nova after the towers came down (they did) but early investors---the kind we'd like to see in Uptown---were there and the smart retailers made out by adopting early.
Funny how WYTIF looks similar to WTF.
ReplyDeleteAnother comment, why does the alderman not post what is going on?
ReplyDeleteI would just like a straight answer.
I don't want any development in Uptown until Shiller is gone. And that better be in a year from now.
ReplyDeleteIf you were here like I was when WY was in its infancy, you would remember a lot of very attractive promises to get us all on board. WY was going to transform Uptown. Housing built for teachers, policemen, firemen. A movie theater, and Target. All we got ws the Target and I'm still waiting for that to fall through.
Nothing, I repeat nothing good will come of a TIF in Uptown with Shiller involved. All the promises for the Maryville property sound exactly like the WY promises. And all we got from WY was jack sh*t from a parcel of land that could have transformed the neighborhood.
Actually Suzanne, you're wrong here. Many of the businesses use pretty sophisticated software these days that tracks income and demographics block by block when deteriming where to open their stores.
ReplyDeleteNo Lathrop Homes did not block development of the Clybourn corridor. But look all around the Lathrop Homes. It's an island of public housing. Surrounded by higher income. That area of Lakeview never had the density of low income during the past 20 years like there is in present day Uptown. Further, much of the development in the area was well on its way before TIF mania hit Chicago.
Demographics are exceedingly important. If this wasn't the case, why aren't there decent grocery stores on the west side of Chicago?
The TIF myth is that it will bring a bounty of development to a neighborhood. But the TIF isn't being used to develop and support businesses. Businesses that give people jobs. [Yeah we got a Target store.] But imagine what would have happened if the big bucks used for the Target had been spent instead on making low interest business loans of $500,000 to $1,000,000 to business owners that would not ordinarily think of locating in piss poor Uptown. You'd get a lively business district up and down Broadway and into the side streets of Montrose, Wilson and Lawrence.
I'd bet you'd have had a lot more jobs in the end too.
And what about the promise that the housing at Wilson Yards was going to be mixed income? That would have helped. But like everything else, we were lied to.
If you believe this TIF will be better than the last one, then I have a fish farm in Uptown, I'd like to sell you.
I think what your seeing now is the only trick she knows folks. She can't show her face in Uptown because people know what she is really doing - and people are furious. This is her only real re-election tactic that she knows. Unfortunately for her, this is the last bit of money she will be handling in this ward.
ReplyDeleteGood luck Helen.
We have been paying the price for living in a shoplifting neighborhood for years. There is an ABC pricing system that chain stores, such as our local Jewels at Montrose and Sheridan use. ABC pricing permits a local store to price goods using a cheaper price list in poorer neighborhoods than in expensive neighborhoods. However, because shoplifting has been so high in Uptown, the local Jewel charges the highest premium price usually charges in their upscale store in fancy suburbs like Lake Forest and Winnetka.
ReplyDeleteWillieG, I think we're arguing the same points ;-)
ReplyDeleteLOOK-EE! retail!
ReplyDeletefeh
if F. Marty has you all debating the prospects of retail revival in Uptown while he dips DEEP into your wallet, he's got you right where he wants you
Sedgwick has been so effective in this mis-direction, I'm sure he has on his team a lobbyist AND a marketing firm
Uptown of all places should know better
at this point in the life of this so-called project it's not about named national chains, it's all about creating a virtual basket of benjies - your benjies
let's step back and think about this
ReplyDelete* steps to park, steps to lake, lake views - this is in effect Lakefront "Park East" property for god's sake
* Chicago's north side
* blocks to el, blocks to entertainment distrct
* oversized land
* multiple buses incl. express downtown buses at door
let's take F. Marty @ his word that he is the developer & has a contract to buy - he's not lining up the zoning & subsidies to flip - it's not exactly like we taxpayers need to sweeten the pot to attract a developer, right? as if this lot would not develop but for a TIF subsidy?
if this project needs a public subsidy, then every project in Chicago needs a public subsidy and let's all admit to each other that every construction project in the City will be a public works project
Let's tell F. Marty good luck, but sorry we have other priorities, the well is dry, we simply can't afford to break off a piece of our property taxes to guarantee his profits
the park angle - if the field house needs a rehab, what say let's budget for it, let's sell bonds, you know, the old fashioned way, like our fore fathers did
ReplyDeletepushing a bunch of public money across the table to a developer so he can push one corner back to us for a public project ain't nothing but a cheap-ass shell game
anyone who falls for this would probably think 3-card monty under the el tracks is a fair dinkum
and the parking angle - F. Marty must be hoping like hell he gets his zoning change & subsidy package pushed thru b4 the WY & Truman garages open and residents try driving up & figure out there's no room at the inn, their little cars are unwelcome under the roofs they helped build
ReplyDeleteanother fascinating aspect of this project is how a Chicago alderman parlays an local extra-curricular role as parking maven into a multi-million dollar subsidy to a campaign contributor
ReplyDeleteno where in City or state law is Parking Czar enumerated amongst the powers & duties of an alderman
but a vague promise of free parking along Chicago's lakefront is key in co-opting neighbors
let's all admit to each other that every construction project in the City will be a public works project
ReplyDeleteWill be ...?!
How 'bout: already is
How else would these troglodytes get re-elected?