via Uptown Coalition for Responsible Development:Dear Neighbors,
There's news, and it's good! Your efforts have made a difference! We received a response from Alderman Shiller, and she's halting the approval process for the Montrose/Clarendon mega-center, at least for now. Congratulations.
Here's a excerpt from what the alderman said:
"Until all of these discrepancies are clarified and a public hearing (including adequate time for questions and answers) has been held, the project will not be heard by the Community Development Commission, the Chicago Plan Commission, the City Council Zoning Committee or the City Council Finance Committee."
So the rush to approval is halted -- for now. But I'm sure you realize that we're not out of the woods yet. We must keep up with the maneuvering around this parcel of land, and we must continue to make it clear to this developer, or succeeding developer, that we will not accept a proposal which will harm the neighborhood. We need to reinforce the message that we are in favor of development, but only responsible development, and that we will work our tails off to halt irresponsible, harmful plans.
The coalition core group met last night to discuss Alderman Shiller's letter and our next steps. Everyone agreed that we need to keep the pressure on. Last night we decided to plan a community meeting for the week after the 4th of July... so look for more on that. If there are developments and we need to hold a community meeting sooner, we'll definitely let you know.
The full text of Alderman Shiller's letter is below. More information is available on our web site at http://uptowncoalition.org.
Thanks once again, neighbors!
For the coalition,
David Hemmings
A big thanks to this blog for helping keep concerned residents (like yours truly) informed!
ReplyDeleteGood news? This is horrible news. That's why Uptown is and always will be a crackhead playground. First step: get rid of Shiller!
ReplyDeleteIt's the lakefront, I don't see why people are upset about a highrise.
ReplyDeleteThank you Uptown Coalition- and everyone that signed the petition and sent personal emails to officials already.
ReplyDeleteIt's a great message that we are not opposed to new development in our neighborhood, we just need to see it done responsibly.
Let's keep working so we can truely show them the impact of this addition of traffic to that already congested corner.
So Shiller all of the sudden seems concerned enough halt the process? Interesting - just beware of the changes she'll make to the plan in the meantime while it sits idle. In the end, this project will look nothing like anything that has been planned.
ReplyDeleteKeep the pressure on.
Let's learn something from WY.
This is great news. The only fly in the ointment is that Shiller stated in her letter that she is still pursuing the creation of the Maryville TIF (Montrose Clarendon).
ReplyDeleteQuote:
“Having said this, the creation o(the Montrose Clarendon TIF District is another matter.”
“assuming it is done by a property tax paying entity, the increment that results will be available for improvements at Clarendon Park.”
The word “assuming” makes me suspicious that alternate plans in the pipeline may include more low-income housing.
Also taking money from the schools, park district etc. - handing it over to consultants and developers and then returning only a small percentage back to the park district is a big black hole of tax dollar waste.
I am glad to hear this news. Lets hope the owners of the property keep it clean, presentable and free of drunks and dope-heads that use to hang around until something is decided what is to be done with this vacant property. Us neighbors hope its not a Shiller project like the one that was in the making.
ReplyDeleteBaby steps.
ReplyDeleteI have to give Shiller props for doing something I have yet to have seen her do, previously: respond.
So +1 to Helen, for today.
uptown lady is right. If its a TIF, you better believe they'll be low income housing. Shiller will say "its the only way to make the numbers work."
ReplyDeleteWiseguy- the drunks are still using the area and the owners do not maintain it very well now. The sidewalks/snow was not shoveled once this winter and the bushes overgrow the sidewalks. The grass was about 10 inches tall before it finally got cut the first time this summer.
ReplyDeleteNo one works there so it's not a priority for them to keep it up as they really should.
I'm a bit skeptical as to why Shiller REALLY halted progress. Also, I'm a bit nervous about some of the slanted propaganda doled out regarding this development. Seems that anyone with a computer fully understands the Architecture and Construction business and aren't afraid to convince others of their interpretation.
ReplyDeleteEveryone, please stay open minded and realistic. Responsible development is our goal but inappropriately stomping development based on misinformation is potentially more damaging to the community.
Marcus:
ReplyDeleteI can tell you aren't one of the people that would have been living in it's shadow.
UNREAL...how short-sighted some people are about this development.
ReplyDeleteThere are high-rises up and down the lake front. You live in a city, there are going to be high-rises built on vacant land. This is Chicago, not the suburbs.
The more condo owners living here will be better for this neighborhood. Think about it, with more condo owners there will be more “well-to-do” people looking out for one another, which will result in less crime. Not to mention the more people with money (condo owners) that come into this area, the more likely new businesses will pop up, and the neighborhood will turn. They can’t build enough condos for this development, as far as I’m concerned.
NickR, it's certainly possible to have too many condos. Adding hundreds of units to the market won't help with traffic and parking issues in the neighborhood, for instance.
ReplyDeleteThere's no objection to development; in fact, I'd venture from the tone of comments, the majority are in favor of something being done, it just needs to be done smartly and responsibly.
Amazing how short-sighted we are.
Yo said: "I have to give Shiller props for doing something I have yet to have seen her do, previously: respond. So +1 to Helen, for today."
ReplyDeleteSorry, my friend, I disagree. No points for doing what every other alderman and every manager in corporate America does: responding to people in her unit. Any manager who doesn't respond and communicate simply isn't doing her job and will soon be without one.
By responding, Shiller is now rising to the minimum standards her job requires. No bonus points for that.
TSN - don't get me wrong. This curious and surprising demonstration of responsibility doesn't excuse decades of failure -by any stretch.
ReplyDeleteI agree with ya on that.
But, when our beloved alderman does do something that she should have done (or, better: been doing) - and what people have been clammoring for her to do, I'm of the mind to do that whole "give credit where credit is due" thing.
And, if all we UU commenters do is bitch/moan/complain and then ignore something like this ...
Well, that's just inviting bad karma.
It's an election year..... Actions in the next 5 months should not cloud the past 4 years of her head in the sand.
ReplyDeleteShe needs to go. If she runs and wins, we will see the same action she exhibited prior to "enlightenment" of being an alderman.
Do not be fooled.
HMMMMMMM.
ReplyDeleteI know this may surprise some of you who have read my rants over the years, but I'm a wee bit cynical regarding Shiller's motives for doing this.
My guess is she and her pet aldermanic candidate, Don "Really, Ima independent" Nowotny, figured out it would not be helpful to his campaign to rile up the voters living near the Maryville site.
This whole Maryville business is one reason I'm guessing Shiller won't run. Pushing this before an election was stupid if she planned to run again.
Think about it, with more condo owners there will be more “well-to-do” people looking out for one another, which will result in less crime.
ReplyDeleteThink about it, we are being promised a hotel, condos and senior housing. Think about it, Wilson Yards was supposed to have Mixed Income Housing.
Think about it, Wilson Yards is all low income housing now. Think about it, what would we really get?
Unlike in the movies..."Build it and they will come." doesn't necesarily hold true in the real world. Evidence of this can be found in Sedgewick's south loop projects. Even their Waveland Ave has (or has had) a couple of forclosures. A significant addition of condos in an area with a several-month inventory of condos will pressure the prices downward. While we didn't buy our condo to get rich, I also don't want it to lose value whilest subsidizing new condos.
ReplyDeleteThe proposal as presented is essential twice as big as anything in the immediate area. Park Place, 1/2 mile south is comparable in height but there's no eight story parking garage behemoth obscuring the entire block. It's also essentially twice as big as anything Sedgewick has developed thus far. Almost by definition, that puts it out of scale for the neighborhood.
If traffic and parking issues were my main concern I would live in the burbs.
ReplyDeleteIt is absolutely hilarious how the nimbies keep spewing the same nonsense over and over.
But I really dont think in the end the nimbies will win. Its not like the market is ripe for new housing right now anyways. It was gonna take time for this to happen anyways.
They probably puffed up what was going to be there so that they can scale it back and make everyone feel good about themselves.
Now if we could channel this nimby energy into something useful like closing lawrence house and rehabbing it, that would be great.
I am surprised that nimby pressure couldnt stop wilson yard though.
Thats one nimby thing I could get on board with.
Not traffic and congestion worries.
Just worries over concentrated poverty. Thats something worth organzing against
geofredo, don't you feel just a little awkward calling people who live near the proposed development "NIMBY"s when you don't live anywhere near the proposed development yourself?
ReplyDeleteIt's always easier to tell other people what should go up in their back yard, isn't it, when your back yard is nowhere nearby?
I think we all out to go to your neighborhood and tell you what color you should paint your home and call you names and tell you to move to the burbs if you don't agree with our color choices.
geo,
ReplyDeleteit's "nimbys", not "nimbies".
C'mon .. if you're going to flail about with weak-assed and ultimately drivel-ridden arguments, at least get one thing right, wouldja'?
Though, this one was funny:
But I really dont think in the end the nimbies will win.
So, when is construction going ot begin on this project?
*sigh*
Step 1, cancel ambitious project.
ReplyDeleteStep 2, wait and get reelected.
Step 3, announce a massive low-income housing development.
See a pattern here?
I didn't love the project, but honestly I cannot take another step in the wrong direction with more affordable housing. We have our fair share. Let's focus on creating real opportunities for the people that are already here instead of continuing this silliness.
Stash - awesome post.
ReplyDeleteWhy anyone else would think differently is beyond me. Afterall, this is Shiller we are dealing with.
How does the expression go...
ReplyDeleteFool me once, shame on you (Alderman Shiller) - Fool me twice, shame on the citizens of Uptown!
George Bernard Shaw said...If history repeats itself, and the unexpected always happens, how incapable must Man (Uptown Citizens) be of learning from experience.
George Santayana (1863-1952), who said in The Life of Reason (5 volumes, 1905-6): "Those (citizens of Uptown) who cannot remember (or were not aware of) the past (i.e., who they elected) are condemned to repeat it (by it, think of gang violence, gunshots, and a disgusting polarization)."
sigh
ReplyDeletewhen we have to pick on minor grammar errors, wow,
i love it. anyways.
I am in uptown so frequently i feel like i live there. But hey I feel that what happens in uptown affects me in rogers park and how rogers park goes that i will protray myself as a local.
notice im going into grammar hell
and not capitalizing the is
ok i would any time of day
greenlight a project that would replace a haven for ne'redowells
with something with normal people in it any day. regardless of concern for traffic and congestion.
if your traffic and congestion is full of good people who cares?
when its traffic and congestion filled with impoverished trouble makers, forget about it.
ok, thats apples and oranges with the house color.
if painting my apartment building fuschia kept the gangbangers away, hell do it.
I think one thing we call all agree on is that your alderwoman is an idiot and should be voted out.
oops fuschia,
ReplyDeleteor may i did spell it Rite.
oh well,
i know you guys dont like the nimby name.
My only personal nimby project is gangbangers.