Quite a few of you e-mailed me wanting to see a closer look at the building. jeff-0 moaned in the comments section wanting a better peak because he didn't get his lazy ass to the meeting. So, as the hot new media outlet for Rogers Park, here is the exclusive concept drawings for 7015 North Sheridan Road - The "Starter high-rise," as taken from the Hell Hole's secret spy cam, deep inside the meeting room.
This 79 foot high building offers what one consultant up front said was, "Ms. Abels' retirement fund."
Joe seemed to think that the crowd was "split" on the project.
Once again, Joe was NOT paying attention!
Even Katie Hogan told them to reject the plan, posted by Ann Sullivan at 10:04 AM today.
If Alderman Moore thought the crowd was 50/50, indeed he must have fell asleep during the meeting.
So, why do I call this the "The Starter high-rise?"
Make no mistake, Connie Abels is testing the waters on the Lakefront Protection Ordinance, while other bigger shots wait in the wings. Once they find Alderman Moore's tolerance for re-zoning, the paid informercial/community meetings won't be far behind.
And I'm not talking the small fishes like the Aronson's, Coe's and Block's.
I'm talking big fish like Loyola University, McHughes, Whitman Corp, Pritzker's and Wirtz's - who will then come in and build 20-30 and 40 story high-rises - making Connie Abels small time little 79 foot high-rise look really like a poor retirement home.
38 comments:
Speaking of poor, a Connie Abel walk-in supporter last night, one Louis Brody (sp) spoke up in behalf of Ms. Abels and her project, proclaiming ...."we have too much low income in Rogers Park"!
Was Mr. Brody speaking to Connie Abels the citizen, Connie Abel the realtor or Connie Abel the board member on Rogers Park Community Council?
The Alderman needs to stop any speculation about this proposed development by immediately declaring his opposition to ANY deviation from what is allowed on this site according to the LPO.Speaking of legacys, how about this for a legacy--'49th Ward Alderman Joe Moore was the first in the City of Chicago to allow an exception to the 50 year old LPO. Thus the precedent was set for what followed on Sheridan Rd.......!!'
Based on the drawings........I like this building. It would be the most refreshing and interesting structure built in Rogers Park in the last 75 years. Make it as green as possible and LEED certified. Much better than the pseudo revisionist vintage blah that gets built day in and day out in this city.
I'm still not clear (and no I have not yet read the LPO) exactly how this structure would in any way bring harm to the lakefront? Ok so if it is built...the sky is the limit I hear ya. Would if they got it all wrong back when the LPO was written by excluding Sheridan rd for this kind of development? Just because it is written does not make it right. If it were proposed any further east I would say absolutely no. What if it is ammended and the max height you could build was 79' and no higher?
What if.............
Come on Charlie! Once the door is open...it's a slippry slope. Why start making exceptions to the LPO.
It continues to serve us well, keeping Rogers Park the unique (in all the city), lakefront community it is. Once exceptions are made, it's just the begining.
My perspective on Connie's plan and the meeting:
1. Nice plans. IF said building got built nicely as planned, retail spaced rented, nice dining on top, it would be awesome and I would totally support it.
2. Bad presentation: Connie's presentation was awful on so many levels it's tough to know where to begin. Lame presentation that did not clearly communicate vision; ill prepared to address protection matters (and other issues that may be piddling details but are important); contradictory statements; lack of ownership of past mistakes; tin ear to community concerns and past neighbor issues; no mention of financing (at least til the point I left at about 9 pm).
I walked into the meeting ready to voice my SUPPORT for the project. I walked out thinking "Connie ain't the one to do this." She gave me loads of reasons to doubt her management abilities.
Which is too bad. I liked the drawings and could even get past the "slippery slope" objection (which is compelling, imo). Frankly, I thought it was arrogant of Connie to bring the plan before us and then be so unprepared and unprofessional. It was a sign of disrespect, which, ultimately, mirrors her past neighbors' concerns which seemed to be "you've been a crappy neighbor for decades with this property, why should we believe that you'll now be a good neighbor?"
rpobserver said: Come on Charlie! Once the door is open...it's a slippry slope.
To what.......were not talking about a community with 100% single family homes. From my window I can see 2 buildings that are at least 7 stories high. They don't wreck my day. Where are all the liberal accepting open minded thinkers?
Where are all the forward thinking liberal greenies that are supposedly the backbone of Rogers Park? Oh yea they all moved to Evanston 20 years ago.
Again I ask.....how does this get in the way of my enjoyment of the lakefront? Something by the way I take advantage of every day.
Come on folks can't you look at both sides of an issue ever?
Here is an idea. Let's fill Sheridan rd with these buildings and close off the street to all traffic except bicycles, pedestrians and pubblic transportation. Think of the truely amazing beach side community we could build then! We could have are very own Venice Beach of the midwest. Sheridan rd full of people night and day combining the best that Urban/Natural living has to offer.
Now that is a visionary "Big Picture" meeting at which I would love to take part in.
I too thought that the crowd was more against than for this proposal. While I appreciate Connie's idea about a restaurant with lake views and providing some parking, I just don't see this building as appropriate for the space.
To me, the design is okay, BUT it clashes with the surroundings in height and style. The architecture in RP is more consistent than inconsistent. There are mainly vintage buildings, homes & 2-flats with some exceptions (4+1s etc...).
This neighborhood is a place where people stay. I look forward to growing old with you guys really- never a dull moment!
I almost died at the meeting when James alluded to possible influence with Connie's zoning lawyer. It was awesome.
Craig- that is hilarious that woman gave you her card and it said Remax(see last post). True life is way better than fiction.
But back to the point, I agree with many of you that the building would be much more appropriate on Morse Avenue or Howard. Not everyone will agree.
And just because people have ideas about how a community should be developed thoughtfully- doesn't mean that they are all "negative" and against all development.
It was nice to see many of you there!
> I walked out thinking "Connie ain't the one to do this."
Don't worry. She's not. She's fronting for someone who for some reason doesn't think their identity will help their cause. She's the friendly neighborhood face.
Moore routinely lies to us about the ownership of the development projects he works for. He told us "Chad" Zuric is the owner of the Adlephi. He told us Rich Aronson was the owner of the Pinewood in attempting to hide Robert Coe. He told us Block owned those buildings near the Morse El Stop. I could go on. It is important that we insist that the developers who ask for our support fully coomply with our City's economic disclosure requirements. It seems our City and our Aldermen are all to willing to let them slide.We have a right to know EXACTLY who we are being asked to change the laws of our City to accommodate.
Hey QA,
That certainly seems a resonable and very responsible approach to the present and future development direction of our unique "main street on the lake".
Well said QA
hey fellow hellholers-
i did a little analysis of the proposal since the meeting last night. there is a fair amount of reading but i feel strongly about this issue so i tried to be as thorough as possible.
RogersParkReview.blogspot
Remember Vilma!
" ... Matlak is in danger of going the way of aldermen Jesse Granato and Vilma Colom, who in 2003 were ousted by voters largely over the issue of overdevelopment."
Build the structure!
The proposed project in not in the park!, however it is on one of the busiest streets in Chicago. Sheridan Road deserves bold architectural statements. Zoning is like a coloring book, the best pictures/stuctures are drawn/built outside of the line/box. Variation in city-scape architecture is a pleasure of urbanism.
Joe on Estes
Right Joe, just like Sheridan Rd. between Devon and Hollywood.
Hey Gary,
Thanks for that thoughtful and very well written commentary. I know exactly how you feel when you talk about your conflicted thought regarding such a bold development. I am in complete agreement with you in terms of the potential sucess and what impact it would have were it to fail miserably. The idea of granting a varience to the law should certainly not be taken lightly and I don't assume that it is.
I also wonder just who will spend this kind of money on a condo with very limited natural light, commercial operations top and bottom? Then I just drive around the city and wonder why people buy 1/2 the condos they do. There is no real common wisdom that prevails here, I'd guess that the condos would have no problem selling. The idea that the project includes a restaurant in order to provide for the community a much desired service is in my opinion a much larger risk. Of course that is largely dependent on it's concept,management, quality of product and service. I don't believe in the idea that "if you build it they will come" You don't have to look far to know that is rarely the case.
I welcome such bold and contoversial projects such as this. I believe it helps to gauge the pulse of the neighborhood and provides a little comfort that Rogers Park is and will remain one of the most unique neighborhoods in the City
Weather or not it should be built in it's proposed location is a question that at this point I am not able to answer. I would like to think most people are in the same position.
Thanks for raising the bar and thanks for being so honest.
> Who is financing this?
Sad that there are many people out there who read your question and know the answer, but they won't answer you because they don't want you to know.
Once the zoning change is approved, a banker pal might finance all or most of the construction cost on the basis of the project pro forma. After all, a lot on W Morse between Clark and Ravenswood fetched a $20M mortgage for Aldermanic pal Steve Golgovan.
But in the mean time, architects and Aldermen and zoning lawyers like J. J. Banks don't come cheap. On 12/23/05 Abel took out a mortgage on 7015 N Sheridan for a $1.5M line of credit (Cook County Recorder of Deeds document number 0536132044). This is not a serious attempt at financing the construction, it is financing the project development. Significantly, the loan was collateralized by, not only Abel's house, but also with the building next door to the south.
7015 N Sheridan, PIN 11-32-111-004 "Lot 7" Abel's house
7001-7013 N Sheridan, AKA 1154 W Lunt, PIN 11-32-111-003 "Lot 8"
This second property is the 4-story, 72-unit, red brick rental apartment building on the NE corner of Sheridan & Lunt. You may recall this is one of the buildings Abels described as "you can't afford to drop it" in an attempt to convince us her plan is unique, one-of-kind, special, and represented no generalized threat to streetscape of Sheridan Road. This building is owned by a trust and managed by and taxes are paid by Rany Management.
Robert Yassan
Rany Management
1950 W Montrose Ave
Chicago, IL 60613-1036
(773) 728-9000
Web page includes a listing for an apartment available in 7001 N Sheridan.
So one answer to your question is: whoever owns 7001 N Sheridan is helping finance Abels' project.
Who owns 7001 is tough.
welcoetosumthinernother said: Look at the bigger picture, the one that's bigger than your self-centerd I-want I-want selves. think about the people that have to deal with it on a daily basis.
We are those people.
Hugh said: Who owns 7001 is tough.
I know who owns it. Do some more research. I bet you can figure it out if you dig deep enough.
Connie told us 7001 N Sheridan was already rehabbed.
7001 N. Sheridan once housed an "up-scale" restaurant. I can't recall the name but I do know it went 'belly up' for lack of business.
rpobserver said: 7001 N. Sheridan once housed an "up-scale" restaurant. I can't recall the name but I do know it went 'belly up' for lack of business.
The Distant Mirror
Was run by the current owner at the time. It was a Tapas restaurant.
Blogger Bob said: Let's see if I win the prize Charlie on "Who is the owner of 7001 - 7013 N. Sheridan AKA 1154 W. Lunt Ave:
Well you were close and partly correct, however they sold it in 2001.
Hint: The same owner bought at least 2 other properties in RP at around the same time. At least one is also located on Sheridan rd.
Happy Hunting Bob.
hey charlie-
thanx. as i just commented to hugh, that peice could have been anyone's thoughts after leaving that meeting with as little information and hard data as we were given. in this vacuum, no one is right or wrong. it's all speculation, feelings and opinions except for the research hugh and others are doing.
the only truth for me is that the lpo should not be touched and the presentation did not make anywhere near the case to alter the lpo imho. there are still, far too many questions that need answers.
they need to present the VIEW. are we just to beleive that it as good as advertised, because honestly, i don't think it is.
and of course, again it's just another opinion.
Don't let the door...!
whachamacallit said: To Charlie
Unless you live on that block you don't have to deal with it everyday.....don't anyone fantasize that they do.
# posted by welcometochicagonowohome : 2:46 PM
Well I did live on that block for 10 years and if i STILL LIVED THERE my train of thinking would be no different.
What's up with the fantasizing?
>The 30+ parking spaces proposed at 7015 will just about solve the parking requirement problem she would be facing when it comes time to condo 7001 / 1154.
7001 is currently 72 rental apartments. Condo conversions are specifically exempt from parking requirements. They would only have to add parking if they added units.
Parking and Loading
> ... 2 PENTHOUSE units ...
Claims made by Abels:
1. The parking is for rental.
2. The top floor is for a restaurant.
3. The street level is for retail.
We as neighbors have NO WAY to hold a developer to claims like this. It's a blunder to take them too seriously. In evaluating these presentations it is important that we consider not only what they SAY they are going to do, but also what they are PERMITTED to do. Say business is slow on the top or the bottom. Once the project is approved and built, the owners own it, and they would be perfectly within their rights to, for example:
Sell the parking spaces.
Remove the glass top floor entirely
Convert the top floor or the ground floor to residential condos.
Sell the top floor or the ground floor as commercial condos.
Duplex the top two floors and create two smashing Great Rooms.
Etc.
In March, 2005 Reza Toulabi sold Rogers Park's most beloved home, the Emil House designed by Frank Lloyd Wright, to James Pritzker for $1.7M.
Frank Lloyd Wright's Bach House Auctioned
Moore Fact Check
> Joe Moore beat him to the punch though by moving to downzone to R1 before the auction took place.
This never happened. Rogers Park's most beloved home the Emil Bach House is STILL grossly overzoned, a single-family home sitting duck in an RT4 district., marked for demolition and tear-down.
Moore lied to the Tribune he would downzone, we all read it and took our minds off of it. The zoning change was never submitted. Moore proposed some rezonings last fall in a series of neighborhood meetings, and the Bach House was conspicuously absent. Moore has since begun introducing the legislation to accomplish his rezoning plan, and the Bach House is not included in that, either.
You can look it up
7415 N Sheridan
Zoning Map
Right you are 'chicagostonepro'. There is a landmark designation marker in the front.
Chicagostonepro-
i am in complete agreement with you.
if you have the time, please link to 24/7howardwatchers and read the "stop the development. we need a plan" post i wrote and tell me what you think.
Part of the dynamics of the 'Community Master Plan' should be an oversight/approval community group to preview with the ability to "yea or ney" development proposals. It seems to me that the current RP process is in reverse. For example, the community should be oversighting its development (obviously based the 'Master Plan') not a group like the Alderman's handpicked "zoning advisory board" group. Is this not the kind of process they use in Edgwater?
Right you are, Anne!
Moore Fact Check: Bach House Downzoned
Here's an excerpt from the Chicago Tribune:
8 Minutes of Going, Going, and Wright House is Gone
March 9, 2005
In February, Ald. Joe Moore (49th) proposed a city ordinance to rezone the property from multifamily housing to single-family homes.
Moore Fact Check: February 2005 Legislative Initiatives
Here's ALL of the legislation Moore introduced in February, 2005:
New Business Introduced by Aldermen
BY ALDERMAN MOORE (49th Ward):
To classify as an RS2 Residential Single-Unit (Detached House) District instead of an RT4 Residential Two-Flat, Townhouse and Multi-Unit District the area shown on Map Number 17-G bounded by:
West Pratt Boulevard; the alley next west of and parallel to North Sheridan Road; the alley next south of and parallel to West Pratt Boulevard; and a line 100 feet east of and parallel to North Lakewood Avenue.
A zoning change for the south side of Pratt, W of Sheridan, including the Beth Shalom temple.
No zoning change for the Bach house was introduced. Moore lied to us thorugh the press to take our atteniton off the Bach House. The Bach House was never rezoned. The Bach House and the GREEN SPACE next door to it to the south are STILL zoned RT4, same as the Abel house, same as ALL of the recent tear-downs in our neighborhood.
Did you know Reza Toulabi, owner of Reza Restaurants was indicted and convicted criminal? See http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F2/875/122/179284/
for information
Did you know Reza Toulabi, owner of Reza Restaurants was indicted and convicted criminal? See http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F2/875/122/179284/
for information
Post a Comment