A meeting to review a proposal for the construction of a five-story, 24-unit condominium building with three commercial storefront spaces at 2001 W. Howard (southwest corner of Howard and Damen).
The meeting will take place tonight, 7:00 p.m., at the Pottawattomie Park Fieldhouse, 7340 N. Rogers.
Building owner Gus Rizakos, his architect, Irene Zemenides and his attorney, Sylvia Michas, will present the plans. The meeting on this proposed development originally was scheduled last June, but was postponed due to a serious illness in the architect's family.
The lot is 13,038 square feet in size and is zoned B1-2. A commercial building, which houses the Tastee Sub fast food restaurant and several storefront churches, currently occupies the site and would be demolished to make way for the new development.
The current zoning would permit the construction of 13 dwelling units. The owner is requesting a zoning change to B1-3, which would allow him to construct up to 32 dwelling units. His proposal calls for only 24 dwelling units.
Blognotes #1: Expect a real barn-burner tonight. Alderman Rainey is busing in her people from Evanston who have had enough with the problems and crime that this property and the people who hang out there have caused Evanston residents.
Blognotes #2: Long, long ago, a one-time Rogers Park blogger, who has since pulled the plug on blogging, blogged about this neighborhood eyesore.
The Hugh Report: Gus Rizakos has a long history of being dragged into housing court by the City of Chicago, now Moore has been hired to do a custom change to our City's laws for him.
The BEST zoning attorney money can buy in Chicago!
Sylvia Christine Michas
Date of Admission as Lawyer by Illinois Supreme Court: November 8, 2001
Law Offices of Samuel VP Banks
221 North LaSalle #3800
Chicago, IL 60601-1509
Regular readers will of course recall Sam Banks is the brother of Alderman William Banks, long-time Chairman of the City Council Committee on Zoning, and that the lead attorney in the Banks family law firm lately is aldermanic nephew, James J. "Jar Jar" Banks, the most successful attorney in the history of Chicago! He NEVER loses a zoning change!
You may recall Banks as the zoning attorney/lobbyist for the Connie Abels legacy project on Sheridan Road and of the recent TIF subsidy for 6610-28 N Sheridan, among many others.
And Banks has in turn hired a high-power team of legislative consultants to ease this zoning change through the halls of power, sprinkling the way with great wads of cash:
$500.00 3/10/2006 to Citizens for Joe Moore
$500.00 2/25/2005 to Citizens for Joe Moore
$250.00 3/1/2001 to Citizens for Joe Moore
$250.00 7/18/2005 to the Democratic Party of the 49th Ward
$500.00 2/23/2004 to the Democratic Party of the 49th Ward
27 comments:
Sun-Times Letters to the Editor
Thank you for finally illuminating a problem that community activists, residents, and preservationists have known about for decades, that zoning is for sale in the city of Chicago.
Ostensibly enacted to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the general public, the City of Chicago has made a mockery of that ideal by turning the Zoning Ordinance into nothing more than a full employment plan for real estate developers and zoning attorneys, not to mention the most effective fund-raising tool for politicians.
While the abuses of the Hired Truck Scandal can be easily corrected by firing dozing workers and recouping the cost of a little wayward asphalt that has gone missing in the middle of the night, the messes made by bad development will linger throughout our neighborhoods for generations.
For far too long, our neighborhoods have been prostituted for the profit and gain of a few, to the detriment of many. Unfortunately, many of our city's aldermen and the Zoning Board of Appeals have been all too willing to help facilitate that process by acting as the . . . Well, perhaps we need not complete that metaphor.
They say that when the cat's away, the mice will play. Unfortunately, the cat is dead and the mice have taken complete control of the house.
The fact that the professional recommendations of the Department of Planning and Development and the Department of Zoning are often brushed aside is a matter of routine for those of us who have to bear witness to this corrupted process. Community residents are at the mercy of a system that is so completely slanted in favor of developers that it borders on criminal.
Zoning meetings are always during business hours and last for hours, making attendance by the general public difficult. The public notification process is a joke, and is seldom properly enforced anyway. Ironically, the onus is now on the community to figure out when these zoning hearings occur since the notification process was quietly amended last November, eliminating the requirement that developers notify property owners within 250 feet when a zoning hearing is scheduled to take place. Furthermore, the signs required to be posted on the property announcing a zoning change often disappear, or are never posted to begin with.
If a community resident somehow does manage to make it down to City Hall for a hearing, agenda items are regularly taken out of order, or taken off the agenda all together. A favored trick of the aldermen is to defer potentially contentious zoning issues without notifying community stakeholders beforehand, many of whom have arranged to take time off from work in order to testify. Of course, the zoning attorney and developer are always warned well in advance that their case has been deferred, so as to not waste their precious time. Those hearings are then quietly rescheduled.
Unfortunately, these techniques are a time-honored tradition in Chicago and ensure minimum public participation from the very people who will be affected most by these dubious overdevelopment proposals.
The Sun-Times has discovered the tip of the iceberg regarding the issue of exploitative zoning in Chicago. We encourage your paper to continue to delve deeper into this story, much like you did with the Hired Truck Scandal.
Jonathan Fine, president;
Michael Moran, vice president,
Preservation Chicago
I wonder about this Evanston alderman bussing in people so that they may raise a fit about this property. If the dilapidated buildings are going to be torn down, wouldn't these angry Evanston people be happy that something new is going up in its place? Or are they just going there to yell about past problems?
Abe, One of the serious problems in this ward is just that.
Joe and his developer buddies have a long running history of letting these buildings go to total shit, then coming to the community with a infomercial touting progress.
By then the community will accept anything at face-value because the problems have grown so bad, they'll take anything, including 'Play-to-Play zoning.
I'm all for Alderman Rainey and the Evanston residents voicing their concerns. I hope my readers show up to this meeting and do the same.
Lying Joe Moore isn't going to bully this neighborhood anymore. I expect this meeting to be like the recent 7-Eleven project that got nixed.
I don't understand. Don't we want development like this? It would replace a known trouble spot and eyesore. It would not displace any "affordable" housing as there are no apartments on that plot now. It would further the development of Howard Street leveraging the positives of the Evanston High Rise, Gale Field House, Gateway, and the Howard El redevelopment.
Are we for contentious meetings for the sake of conflict, or do we want positive change?
I don't know the history of who owns what, who is in bed with who, and all that inside stuff. I absolutely thank Craig and the others who expose the backside of these things for bringing that stuff to light.
However, I for one say if anybody wants to pour a couple of million dollars into on of the worst corners in my neighborhood I say Heck yes!
Alderman Rainy is busing people in to voice legitimate complaints about the current state of affairs at that corner. On the surface that sounds like a good idea until you DO look at the alternative: handing that property over to a well-connected slumlord who intends to overdevelop the property (the fact that his plans call for 24 units does not guarantee he won't later revise the plan to the full 32 once the zoning is changed). Therefore, Rainey and company will be there to cheer on the change in the zoning, which is exactly what Joe wants them to do.
Regarding this property:
1. With all the empty condominiums already choking Rogers Park, do we really need another 24?
2. What happens to the churches?
3. There ARE apartments on this property (my friend lived in one for a period - it was located above the bar) so what happens to those residents?
4. Why can't we find developers willing to work within the current zoning structure for the property?
5. Last but no least, why do we have to settle for a slum lord for this property - doesn't Joe know any reputable landlord/developers?
- PEACE-
"Alderman Rainey is bussing in her people from Evanston ... "
how will this affect Moore's usual democratic process, gazing out over the crowd and WAG-ing,
"Well, it looks like the residents are just about evenly divided ... "
i could say a lot about this whole thing, but i will just say a couple- first, i agree with i live here too. yes we do want change. a city, a neighborhood, a person, even, that doesn't change, dies.
but second- zoning is not like criminal law. i am not really sure you can even define for me what it would mean to "lose" a zoning case. the reason it doesn't happen, regardless of the lawyers involved, is that zoning law is a balancing act between private property and public good. to chisel it in stone is to kill a community. private capital is what builds all cities. don't let property owners build what they want, and they go elsewhere. when someone wants to do something that is not in accord with the exact wording of the current statutes, all parties, including the neighbors MUST consider the consequences, including the consequences of doing nothing and allowing property to decay. nothing sits still in this process.
all zoning is a compromise. when a non-compliant plan comes out the other end of the zoning process, everyone has given a little. that is the was it HAS to be.
Rizakos in housing court
2004-M1-401715: 2001-09 W HOWARD
2002-M1-402116 & 2002-M1-402627: 4000-18 N AUSTIN (AKA 4000-12 W IRVING)
1997-M1-404509 & 1999-M1-401486: 200-08 S HALSTED, 17-17-222-006
1998-M1-402072: 5700-16 N WESTERN, 13-01-423-035
Clerk of the Circuit Court Cook County
I can't be there, but I'm hoping someone will ask Mr. Rizakos, what's the deal with the Skokie Board of Education suing you for $100K in 1997?
1997-M2-002731
YES YES!! We need more condos.... the better to saturate the market until the greedy, unwise developers have to knock their places down to the prices middle-income people can afford.
That was my first thought.
My second thought is, what financial entity will finance yet another condo project at this hour in this housing market in Chicago, the city with the 2nd-largest inventory of unsold houses and condos in the U.S., and the city that has the MOST adjustable-rate loans set to reset, in the U.S.
It is so ludicrous to build anything in this market climate that you have not already committed to that my question tonight will be, Who Is Financing This? And who will absorb any losses if the project is a business failure?
I certainly have nothing against a large condo project at this blighted corner. A multiuse building-residential for 3 or 4 stories with the ground floor given to retail, would seem ideal, and the way to build for an energy-short future in which fewer people will be able to front single-family homes and more people will want to live within an easy walk of retail and other city amenities.
However, given who the developer is and his relationship with our Alderman, you have to question the entire situation.
My feeling is that this project will be partly or wholly, one way or the other, underwritten by the taxpayers of Chicago, like the TIF-underwritten rehab on Sheridan Road, and so much other residential and retail development of the past 20 years. It will probably be one more instance of privatizing whatever profits are to be made while socializing whatever losses are incurred, at no risk to the developer.
It also seems to be part of a familiar pattern in this neighborhood-which is that slumlords are permitted, even encouraged, to slumify their properties, then are given whatever they demand in order to redevelop property that would never have been blighted had they not owned it; with the taxpayers' money insulating the developer against normal business risk.
Aren't you supposed to be done with your blog cocksucker?
natas, if you dislike Craig and this blog so much, why are you still here? We're done with you and your smart ass mouth. Do us all a favor and go back to your buddy Joe. You two deserve one another.
Craig,
Thank you for this blog, and for sticking it out in the face of the awful attacks you suffer. I am normally all for "Freedom of Speech", but I suggest you ban/block natus, as this person offers nothing in the way of constructive debate, and is simply a vile anti-Craig basher.
I see that you seem to have disabled moderation, probably so that you can let the blog flow without your constant supervision, so, if possible leave it like this and block the useless commentors such as natus that offer nothing constructive.
The feedback from last nights forum would seem to indicate that the community is very much in favor of this development.
Fargo Woman, please note there are NO apartments at this address currently, it is a single story commercial building with no apartments above.
Per code, as a new construction, the development will provide 24 -1 per residential unit- off street parking spaces. 18 will be below grade accessed from a ramp down from the alley, and the other 6 spaces at ground level, inside the building, also accessed via the alley.
The building will be solid masonry with face brick on all four sides. The 24 apartments will be a combination of 2 and 1 bedrooms with 9 foot ceilings.
There will be 3 commercial storefronts of about 1000 SF each, these could also be configured as 2 spaces depending on leases. That would result in 1 space of 1000 SF, and the second of 2000SF.
Some people suggested the type of commercial tenants that would desired-Tasty Sub will be gone for good and not a tenant in the new space, to them I say, great ideas, now go out and broker a deal. Find a tenant of your wishes and make a deal happen. Or, start your own business and lease one of the spaces.
The owner/developer claims that the entire project will be self financed. However, even if this is not 100% true, commercial lending is still very much available, so are mortgages for decently qualified people.
If (when) the zoning variance is granted a restricted covenant is attached to the title, meaning that even though the requested zoning would allow for 32 residential units, the restricted covenant would attach to the property with the terms of this plan. IE only for 24 units.
2 units would be set aside as "moderate income". This is a City program, it is based on something like 80% of the median income, or sum-such, so the debate of whether or not these are "affordable" is another issue. However, this City program now also places the 2 units in a Land Trust, so that they remain in the "Affordable Housing" pool in perpetuity.
The time frame for the project was given as basically 1 year to get the zoning approval and building permits, with construction to take an additional year... We all know this is the City that works, so in my humble opinion, realistically we would be talking a minimum of 2 years, and up to 3 before the construction is finished with an additional year for the sales. Just look at the Adelphi, Fire Station, Cole Hole, Lerner Site, or any other development to get the idea of how long it really takes to get a project not only started, but finished.
In response to some of the previous posts:
1) Fargo Woman: Nobody is "handing over" the property to a slumlord to be developed. Gus Rizakos already owns the building; no transaction is taking place.
2) The North Coast: Mr. Rizakos says that he is financing the project himself. According to everybody at the meeting last night (developer, owner, architect, alderman) there are no plans to use any public money for this project.
I am one of the people from Evanston who is very concerned about this property. Besides being a rundown eyesore, it attracts bad behavior and drives away law-abiding people.
While I do have qualms about a slumlord being rewarded with a zoning change, in the end my most pressing concern is the impact this property has on the community. If someone gets rich eventually doing the right thing for the neighborhood, that's fine by me. The developers aren't asking for extravagant allowances on this property: it will be five stories tall, which seems reasonable for the area, with two or three commercial spaces on the ground floor. In other words, if the development goes forward as planned, it seems that they will be asking for little concession from the community, but may be giving something of significant quality in return.
My only concern is that the building does remain high-quality, with decent materials used for the structure, reputable businesses on the ground level, and well-equipped units that will sell for market rate. If this turns into another slum property, many in this community will be infuriated.
Hi southevanstonian.
I was at the meeting last night and it was I who voiced concerns about the project's financing.
I was satisfied with the developer's answer, which is that the development is being "self-financed".
I like the project perfectly well and feel it is the type of building that is appropriate for both that street and for the city in general.
I really like the way Mary Rainey tore into the developer and castigated him for being such a very poor neighbor and for "creating this mess" on Howard St. She expressed the central concern of everyone present- the conflict between our desire to see an attractive new building such as the one proposed being built there, and our distrust of a developer who has so far been a cause of blight and problems.
I suggested to Joe Moore that he could, in return for granting the desired zoning variance, insist that Tasty Sub be shut down and evicted.
I believe that our alderman can make a very strong case that this business is a nuisance and endangers the neighborhood, and I believe that nearby residents ought to loudly and repeatedly insist that Tasty Sub be shut down.
Thinking of this in perspective to Morse, this strip mall sounds exactly like the Golden Mini Mart strip mall. Which one of us here in RP wouldn't absolutely love for this mall to get torn down? It's also been nothing but trouble, and the only business that's of any worth there is the Thai restaurant, and they could potentially lease the new space that was built, which would be a hell of a lot nicer. Not to mention that that space could be used a ton more effectively, and a 4 story building could comfortably fit there. Would any of you out there object if this mall was torn down and something else put in?
The same issues lie with the strip mall where the bar was town down, across the street and on the other side of the EL tracks. None of the store fronts match, it's all obviously old and decrepit, but for some reason, they're treating each store as a separate entity. They redid some of the store fronts, but it was not done very carefully, or with any quality. I have a feeling that that new building that they're putting in where the bar was is going to make the stores around it look even shabbier, not to mention that it will definitely stand out as being new and different. If those 2 malls got torn down completely, and new buildings were put in, (both with multiple levels of residential along with one level of stores, that would make Morse a million times nicer.
I agree, VJ.
I was hoping that the entire strip of fronts on the west side of Morse, at Glenwood, would be raised and developed into a large multi-use bldg with retail on the ground floor, and real presence.
The north coast -- your question about the financing was an important one. I'm glad the issue was raised, and if the answer holds, I'm satisfied with that too.
By the way, the Evanston alderman is *Ann*, not Mary. And she did perfectly express the neighbors' outrage at the state of that corner. We are fed up and want some positive change.
So how do we get the great joey moore to move on morse? It's a lot more likely that new buildings on morse would get new businesses to move in fairly quickly, especially since its around here that all the condos have been put up/redone in this part of RP. Lots of middle-income people who are just starved for business and restaurants in this neighborhood. 99% of the time my husband and I go outside of RP to Lincoln Park, Downtown, Wrigleyville, or Ravenswood for shopping and restaurants. And I know that we should be patriotic to your own neighborhood business, but there's nothing really around here.
Storefronts that are dirty, covered in litter and sometime even graffiti, and just not inviting.
@V&J; have you been over to Gruppo at Jarvis Square? I have been there several times and never disappointed with the meal.
I agree that both strip malls on the south side of Morse between the alley and Wayne & Glenwood (respectively) are eyesores. I think eventually they may go, but we can't have it all at once.
Thie Morse Theater, and the 2 new buldings west on Morse as well as the conversions on Greenview and the Block bldg. rehab all bode well for Morse. I have some hope now, which I am glad for.
Rogers Park does have some restaurants worth visiting. V&J - next time you want a nice meal, try Amphora, African Harambee, Gruppo di Amici, Jamaica Jerk, Morseland, Lake Side Cafe, or Cafe Suron. They all serve fine food and are worthy of your business.
Try Taste Food and Wine right next to Gruppo. Free wine tastings on Monday night from 6-7:30 and an approachable staff as well. http://www.tastefoodandwine.com
I am a fan of the chicken wings at Morseland!
I have been to Cafe Suron multiple times, Gruppo Di Amici once (I dunno, it wasn't really to my liking, but thats my personal taste). Haven't had a chance to go to the Wine store, though that's a more specialized thing that can only be visited once in a while.
Hopefully eventually Morse will become clean and nice.
Post a Comment