"When discussing economic development during my campaign, I committed to two things:
- Supporting economic development based on best practices
- Developing a zoning and development committee made up of diverse representatives and experts in the community to guide me with making decisions about developments in the 46th Ward.
Throughout this community process, I purposefully remained neutral to ensure committee representatives heard from the community, the developer, and the City in as much of a respectful manner as possible.
Tonight, I am proud to say that the process we have created has been a success. Due to many of the thoughtful concerns regarding this proposal, including the amount of TIF funds requested and the density and size of the development, I have concluded that I cannot support this development at this time. Twenty-seven members out of thirty that participated in the meeting voted no to this project. Out of the twenty-seven that voted no, 14 had specific conditions and changes that if were met, would reconsider. The committee seriously reviewed the pros and cons of this proposal and are willing to forgo this development proposal at this time.
We will communicate the must-have changes of the 14 committee members to Sedgwick to see if they are willing to make these changes and we will get back to the committee with their response in the coming weeks.
I want to express how excited I am about the future of the 46th Ward. We are in an amazing and unique position to welcome and assist good development which will in turn create jobs for our community and provide needed tax revenue. We have so much to offer from our workforce to our location on the lake with access to biking, express buses, the Red Line and the new Entertainment District. I truly believe that we must continue to support the recommendations laid out in the 46th Ward Master Plan and we will succeed with moving our community forward.
I want to say thank you to the 46th Ward constituents who trusted me and our staff with this process. We worked hard to make sure you were informed of every detail possible and in return you continued to trust us to do the job we set out to do. I also want to say thanks to the committee members of the Zoning and Development Committee. They made this outcome successful as we work to refine our process. We will continue to improve on this process and see positive changes in our ward.
We have an amazing future ahead of us!
P.S. Meeting minutes and voting results will be posted later today on our website at http://james46.org/projects/46th-ward-zoning-development-committee/the-lighthouse-at-montrose-harbor-corner-of-clarendon-and-montrose/"
Update: Curbed Chicago says: "The Lighthouse at Montrose Harbor gets the ol' Heave-Ho."
Update: The meeting minutes are now posted and available here.
Gee whiz,
ReplyDeleteI wonder if the commenters here who called Cappleman a sell out and a tool of "Mare 1%" will comment on this.
This was easier to predict than a Cubs losing season.
Go, James, go!!
ReplyDeleteThank you for your community support!
I am very happy and three cheers to the Aldernman and all the other concerned that contributed to this ending once and for all.
ReplyDeleteI was hoping to see this get voted through, but I'm certainly impressed with the fair and open way that the decision was handled.
ReplyDeleteCappleman did a stand-up job of remaining neutral and considering the wishes of the majority of the community when it came to this decision.
Hopefully a new plan / group comes along to turn this property into something beneficial soon.
For some reason everyone I see today is smiling. :)
ReplyDeleteI wonder if the commenters here who called Cappleman a sell out and a tool of "Mare 1%" will comment on this.
ReplyDeleteI certainly will. Woo hoo! Yippie! Jump for joy! No ugly tax-wasting development in my front yard!
With that said, let me remind you that the real votes are already in. Cappleman, at the behest of the Mayor, has taken away YOUR rights, has stifled YOUR ability to dissent in this city, and has done it all without so much as consulting the people of this city. The alderman and his colleagues are supporting a truly corrupt individual.
Aside from our basic rights, let's address the support these alderman have for a budget that axed half of mental health services and cut library staff by a fifth. Lets talk about the slush-fund the mayor controls- you know, the money accrued through TIFS. The same money, the PEOPLE's money (almost a billion over the last two years), that will see 15 million handed over to the Chicago Mercantile Exchange, and see 20% of it used to fix a budget hole that we did not create. But hey, taking money from bleeding schools to fix a budget deficit created by mismanagement and overspending, that is SHARED SACRIFICE right? Give me a break.
Cappleman is like Obama, and this vote AGAINST Sedgewick is just like the sweetheart deal Obama struck with the Attorneys General yesterday to let the banks off with a 20Billion dollar settlement. He can tout a victory and say he made the banks pay! But he'll leave out the fact they caused 700 billion in damamges and many men should be doing time because of it.
I'll fix the El! I'll scare off shitty developers! I'll put more police cameras up! Buuuut...I won't stand up for your constitutional rights or vote for the good of the people.
27 out of 30 Zoning Committee members voted against the current plan = 90%.
ReplyDeleteLast June, the community was polled and 488 out of 547 voted against the then-current plan = 89.21%.
Two things:
- Sedgwick, if it wants to have the support of this community, needs to do something drastically different than what they've been doing.
- So much for those who say the 46th Ward Zoning Committee doesn't adequately represent the community's wishes.
I'm on this committee and voted no. I have no doubt that a developer will come along, maybe even Sedgewick, and build something tall and revenue-producing on this land. Uptown needs something there, but not the current project. I thought Uptown United made a lot of good points in their letter. I was also guided by a friend who was on the 48th Ward's Zoning Committee. He said that Ald. Smith always said "wait for the best deal. Having land sit vacant for two years is better than having a bad project there for 75 years." Uptown deserves better than the current project offered and Sedgewick's rush meetings and drop-dead-dates didn't make me any more inclined to vote in favor of their current offering. You know that sign that hangs in offices----Your lack of planning does not constitute an emergency for me? That's how Sedgewick's rush-rush-rush deadlines felt to me. Work with us, Sedgewick, or get out of the way and let someone else in who will.
ReplyDeleteSo much for those who say the 46th Ward Zoning Committee doesn't adequately represent the community's wishes.
ReplyDeleteAs one who, initially, had questioned that concept, I'm very happy to stand corrected.
Chitown/Philly:
ReplyDeletePoliticians, world leaders are bad people with very, very few exceptions.
Anyone who is a political leader should be looked upon with distrust. Period.
What kind of person wants to be a leader? Answer: Someone who likes to have control and power over "followers". Where have our "leaders" gotten us these past few thousand years? Nowhere. Technological advance without any social development in terms of understanding what we are. That's why wars never end. We don't learn from our past. That's why developers, influence peddlers, small and big time crooks and con men who are "well respected gentleman" run it all.
Chitown, I think is correct. Apparently Cappleman supports the vicious, fascist regulations that a very conservative, reactionary former IDF "helper" who, in the 1990 war in Iraq fought for Israel, not the U.S. and A. And whose father was part of Irgun a terrorist organization in 1948.
You need to take a better look at Rahm Emmanuel. And anyone who supports his counter productive and really, self destructive ideas on how to run a city by FORCE.
And you need to take a look at why a mild mannered alderman goes along with him.
What does Stu Piddy's (or ChiTown's) comments have to do with the topic at hand?
ReplyDeleteWOMAN: I didn't know we had a king. I thought we were an autonomous collective.
ReplyDeleteDENNIS: You're fooling yourself. We're living in a dictatorship. A self-perpetuating autocracy in which the working classes--
WOMAN: Oh there you go, bringing class into it again.
The transparency is refreshing, it's a shame that the density was such a concern and I'm afraid that attitude will come back to bite the neighborhood but the TIF and developer made this really unattractive. +1 for Cap
ReplyDeleteSo Stu Piddy, are we better off with a world without leaders? Should we not have individuals like George Washington? MLK? Gandhi? All three were leaders who were not just interested in "control" and "power over followers".
ReplyDeleteAlso, it's a denial of history or just naive to suggest that civilization hasn't "advanced" throughout history. Are we perfect? absolutely not, but we're much closer to it today with a world with greater freedom than ever before.
As someone who was absolutely against the old Sedgwick plan and somewhat more hopeful about the Lighthouse plan, I'd like to know what will constitute a plan most of us can get behind?
ReplyDeleteAre we "Anyone but Sedgwick? Or "Anything without TIF" ?
Is there anything Sedgewick could reasonably do to get the neighborhood's support? What are those things?
I'm just curious because on its face, I didn't think the Lighthouse plan was bad and I'd kill for a better gym and grocery store nearby. I also really liked the fact that Cappleman had agreed to accept funds to help our low income neighbors make their rent rather than opening up a lot more subsidized housing in an already saturated area.
Am I confused? FYI, I own my condo on Agatite.
So there we go....Uptown raises the bar. I had my doubts about the process like Yo but felt it deserved the benefit of the doubt.
ReplyDeleteIf Sedgewick would like to work with the community and find a creative solution to the well defined issues the door is still open.
However, if another developer is interested they have a lot of material to study on the do's and don'ts of proceeding in Uptown. And a transparent process to boot. Nothing happened here that would scare away a good developer.
Whatever and whenever something gets built it is going to be nice...kudos to Alderman James!
Just for fun:
ReplyDeletePrepare for a shitty development at Maryville as well, because I assure you he will RAM IT THROUGH! Mark my words. This is only the beginning.
- Phil, 1/18/12
I really don't know enough about this to take a position. I am sure there is a ton of politics involved.
ReplyDeleteGood for James to at least try to have community input and stand by his word.
I hope the people that are involved in this know what they are doing.
"I hope the people that are involved in this know what they are doing."
ReplyDeleteBased on the discussion at the meeting last night, I put the percentage of people who "know what they are doing" at about 20%. Some of the objections to the development were completely irrational and not grounded in reality.
For example (paraphrasing):
"Why are you here telling us what you're going to do with land that you don't even own?"
"There can be no loading dock on the alley." This, after Alderman Cappleman has explained ad nauseum that ANY development will have a loading dock on the alley.
"There can be no TIF funds." That's not a valid reason to object to this project because any future development on that site will include TIF funds. That bears repeating. Any future development on that site will include TIF funds.
I enjoyed reading the minutes, and while I had some doubts about this particular proposal, I am now equally skeptical of some of the community representatives who comprise this board.
ReplyDeleteGranted, I am reading minutes of something I did not attend, and can only assume the transcriber did the best they could to summarize the meeting. I'm certainly grateful for a more transparent process than many Uptowners are used to,
BUT....
I do hope that the comments provided to Sedgewick were a bit more helpful than those provided to the public.
It's the "lack of public transportation/no one will use it anyway" - type comment that jumped out at me, but many of the pros and cons are conflicting.
Honestly, I would not have lost any sleep over this verdict either way - it's not that I don't feel affected, I just see benefits and risks. But I would hate to see this vote construed by the community of developers at-large as Uptown's unified voice squawking, "Not here! Nothing here! Too much, too big, too ambitious! Too close to me!"
That's probably not the case, but "Grocery store too big" does sound a wee bit simplistic. Hopefully, some of these groups prepared statements, such as the well-crafted UNC letter.
P.S. I was going to question how a representative that did not attend voted anyway, but on review see at least 1 rep. in both attended/did not attend lists. Presumably, a typo.
Nugatory said:
ReplyDeleteThat's not a valid reason to object to this project because any future development on that site will include TIF funds. That bears repeating. Any future development on that site will include TIF funds.
January 24, 2012 8:12 PM
IrishPirate said:
flawed logic.
If the TIF didn't exist do you think that no developer would be interested in developing that property? It's a rhetorical question. The answer is obvious.
Now since the TIF exists I fully expect that some TIF money will likely be used for any development, but it's not a metaphysical certitude. What is a metaphysical certitude? Me making a sarcastic comment. It's written in the DNA of the known universe.
As for many people on the zoning committee not having a basic understanding of the proposed development or planning process that goes with the territory. You don't have to be a development expert though to oppose the use of TIF money for this development.
Now here is how I would suggest Sedgwick or any future developer approach the development. First, get the idea of using a massive amount of TIF money out of your pretty little heads. Could it happen? Sure. Is it likely, nope.
Limit the use of TIF money to the "low income housing donation" and the cost of the fieldhouse renovation.
Second, forget the retail. I suspect the retail portion of the development is largely driving the DEMAND for TIF money. That and developers have just gotten used to demanding TIF money.
Third, donate the eastern portion of the property to the Park District in exchange for a big increase in the density of the development. Also acquire some of the neighboring properties to ameliorate the negative impact on immediate neighbors and allow a larger footprint for the development.
Fourth, a building at that location is almost an ideal "transit friendly development". Set aside parking for an I-GO car sharing service AND use car elevators above most of the parking spots to increase available parking by a factor of about 80 percent at a relatively low cost per additional parking spot. I've seen it done downtown. Essentially two cars could be parked in most spots. One at deck level and one raised on a car elevator above the spot.
That's it for now. I need to call the President and give him my critical response to his SOTU address.
Too bad. This property will now sit vacant for years, maybe another decade? More? I hope people realize we're in an economy with little development going on.
ReplyDeleteTime will tell, "Unknown," but I disagree with you. I'd rather have the property lie vacant than have a bad development go up that we're stuck with for the next 75 years, but remember that Sedgewick has had an exclusive right to the property by paying the nuns for an option. They claimed on Monday----after much prodding and hemming and hawing----that the option runs out in April and that's why they have this rush-rush deadline. They can either renew their option and continue to pay the nuns for rights to develop, or they can let the option expire and open the door for other developers to come in. I choose the second option, BTW---but I don't have that choice! As far as no construction going on, really? Right here in Uptown/46th Ward, let me see----there's 3750 Halsted, the other big project that the Z&D Committee is voting on, there's the huge Admiral By The Lake building that just finished more than a year of construction at Foster & Marine, there are two buildings in the works for Chicago Lakeshore Hospital at 4720 Marine and 850 Lawrence, and there's the big Dominicks at Foster & Sheridan that was completed less than a year ago. BTW, the 4720 Marine building is in a TIF zone, but I understand---maybe incorrectly---that there will be no TIF funds used for the $20MM project. Refreshing if true.
ReplyDeleteI'm on the Z&D committee and I spent a lot of time studying the documents and polling my neighbors. I didn't vote on a whim. It was a rough decision, but I feel I made the right one about this particular project. I want to see development there, but not the one on the table.
"many of the pros and cons are conflicting."
ReplyDeleteThat was the format of the discussion. Someone would raise a pro or con point, and then we would attempt to raise an opposing viewpoint, to get the discussion going. Conflicting pros and cons was the idea, at the alderman's suggestion.
IP said:
ReplyDelete"If the TIF didn't exist do you think that no developer would be interested in developing that property? It's a rhetorical question. The answer is obvious."
If the TIF didn't exist no developer would touch this property with a ten foot pole, certainly not a developer worth a damn or one looking to deliver a proper urban high-rise. The "prime lakefront property" myth has not standing.
Nugatory said:
""I hope the people that are involved in this know what they are doing."
Based on the discussion at the meeting last night, I put the percentage of people who "know what they are doing" at about 20%. Some of the objections to the development were completely irrational and not grounded in reality.
For example (paraphrasing):
"Why are you here telling us what you're going to do with land that you don't even own?"
"There can be no loading dock on the alley." This, after Alderman Cappleman has explained ad nauseum that ANY development will have a loading dock on the alley.
"There can be no TIF funds." That's not a valid reason to object to this project because any future development on that site will include TIF funds. That bears repeating. Any future development on that site will include TIF funds"
Spot the F on
"I'm on the Z&D committee and I spent a lot of time studying the documents and polling my neighbors. I didn't vote on a whim. It was a rough decision, but I feel I made the right one about this particular project. I want to see development there, but not the one on the table."
ReplyDeleteCould you give an estimate of how many found the density to be their primary objection?
Thanks Zoning committee! Thanks alderman James!
ReplyDeleteThanks James that is leadership.
ReplyDeleteI have a feeling they know Sedgewick can't finance this project and will never build what they promised.
I am neither 100% for or against the development. I have been following along since the beginning and quietly observing all of this. I am seeing a pattern here that others have also noted. The NIMBY's appear to be totally unreasonable (and unclear) with regards to their "demands" for the space. Heres a few highlights (or lowlights, rather)
ReplyDeleteThe ill-informed concerns about curtain wall construction.
In my professional life I am directly involved in the architecture and construction industry in the city of Chicago. I am intimately aware of both building construction, building design, and he process with the building department through which permits are issued, plans are reviewed, etc. It is entirely ridiculous to assume that because a developer has not been a part of a project with curtain wall construction in the past, that it is a concern. First of all, the developer is not building anything. The developer hires a General Contractor. That GC then hires a sub-contractor to perform the actual installation. Any GC in this city who would be involved in any construction of this nature will have prior direct experience with curtain wall. To an even stronger degree, a sub contractor is a SPECIALIST in their field and as such, this concern is just flat out silly. Not to mention, Curtain wall consruction is one of the simplest and fastest methods of building shell design and construction that there is!
The current building being somehow "historic".
This is a JOKE. The existing building(s) on the site are garbage. They have no historical value whatsoever. To make such an arguement is ludicrous. So it was designed by an architect that has a tiny bit of name recognition...not even everything Frank Lloyd Wright did was a gem folks! The building should be demolished immediately. A parking lot would better serve the community than the garbage that exists there now, especially that it has become a haven for squatters, litter, graffiti, dead animals, etc.
TIF
Ok, so some here argue that NO project should be built on that land without a TIF. Meanwhile the developer (and I assure you, any subsequent developer will echo the same sentiment) has said that NO project WILL be built without a TIF. Sorry folks, a TIF is essential and inevitable no matter how much kicking and screaming goes goes on. Really ask yourself..i mean REALLY ask yourself...what is better, a NON-TAX PRODUCING, abandoned, deteriorating eye-sore haven for filth and increasing opportunity for crime, OR a brand new development providing many jobs, market rate homes (that this community desperately needs), a high end grocery store (also absent from the community currently) reguvination to an increasingly crime prone area, AND a steady flow of tax dollars to the city. YES, the first 2+ decades are associated with the TIF...but what if nothing is built?..what happens in the next 2+ decades then???...oh yeah, nothing! no tax dollars to the city. ZERO)
Again, I am not convinced this particular version of the project is best but the overwhelming negativity of the folks who post here and elsewhere online as well as the terribly negative attitude of most of the folks at these meetings is pretty unfortunate and sad.
"Could you give an estimate of how many found the density to be their primary objection?"
ReplyDeleteNone. The objections dealt with lack of faith in Sedgewick to get the project completed, and doubt that Mariano's would be building two enormous supermarkets (65000sf----bigger than the new Dominicks) within a mile and a half of each other. Sedgewick says they have a signed lease from Mariano's, but the doubts were expressed and I was there to vote for the residents in my block club area, so I did. No one mentioned any misgivings about density.
My feeling all along was it was just going to be a Mariano's and the rest would never materialize. They would the real estate market didn't improve like they had predicted.
ReplyDeleteOne of the very last things said in the meeting by Alderman Cappleman is that there will be development on that land. I look forward to it.
ReplyDeleteThanks GG
ReplyDeleteGG,
ReplyDeleteA big thank you for all of your time as well as the other members of the zoning committee and your effort to get accurate info out to the community. It is much appreciated by this neighbor!!!!!
The fact that there is this much discussion about development on that property is a huge improvement over what has happened in the past. Agree or disagree with what the opinions of others, information and conversation about future projects is how a community is supposed to work. Something will be built there, but not everyone will be happy with it. But everyone who wants to be included has had more than a few chances to be part of the discussion.
I absolutely reject your either-or premise jimcls260. Just because something isn't white doesn't mean it's black. Just because the community doesn't want a 300 million dollar development of uncertain imppact on the neighborhood doesn't mean we want to maintain the current condition indefinitely. I've urged the Alderman to investigate the use of imminent domain; make the good sisters "use it or lose it" in respect to their tax exempt status; get this property on the regular tax rolls as soon as possible. (which I truly believe can be done quicker than 24 years). I reject the premise that because it's a TIF it must remain a TIF. If developers can't think outside the box, they have no business building in Uptown.
ReplyDeletejimcls
ReplyDeleteWould you please elaborate on what you think is unreasonable from the NIMBYs? I'm sure most people here consider me one, even though I've stated many times that I am FOR developing this site.
I was skeptical about the committee process here and whether or not James would listen. As of today, that's gone.
Sleeping better now....for now
Besides Alderman James his staff deserve a shout out for a job well done, Abby in particular.
ReplyDeleteThis new process isn't perfect, what process is. Considering the short time they had to organize and the magnitude of this project all involved came through.
It is good to hear density wasn't the main issue among the committee members.
Happy New Year of the Dragon!