Dear Neighbor,
I am writing to invite you to attend a meeting to review a proposal for the construction of a three-story, 23-unit condominium development at 7525 N. Wolcott. The site is currently occupied by Amber Automotive, an automobile repair business.
The meeting will take place on Monday, February 11th, 7:00 p.m., at Jordan Community School, 7414 N. Wolcott.
Dan Schwegel, who owns both the property and the auto repair business, will present the proposal. He will be joined by his architect, Roula Alakiotou, and his attorney, William Hennessey.
The lot is 16,145 square feet in size and is zoned C1-2. Mr. Schwegel proposes to close his auto repair business and re-adapt the existing building to a residential use. The current zoning would permit the construction of 16 dwelling units. The owner is requesting a zoning change to RM4.5, which would allow him to construct 23 dwelling units.
I am interested in hearing your views on the proposed development before I decide whether or not to support the zoning change. If you are unable to attend the meeting, please share your thoughts by replying to this e-mail or calling my office at 773-338-5796.
Sincerely,
Joe Moore
Blognotes: Call it 'pay to play'. Call it 'hint of possible influence'. Call it a Infomercial. Whatever you want to call it, looks like Joe Moore and his political machine are going to pocket some $2500 dollars on the deal.
Schwegel, Daniel
Chicago, IL 60626
$500.00
6/27/2005 Individual Contribution
Democratic Party of the 49th Ward
Schwegel, Daniel
7525 N. Wolcott
Chicago, IL 60626
Occupation: Auto Shop
Employer: Self
$1,000.00
10/17/2006 Individual Contribution
Democratic Party of the 49th Ward
Schwegel, Daniel
7525 N. Wolcott
Chicago, IL 60626
$500.00
3/2/2006 Individual Contribution
Citizens for Joe Moore
Amber Automotive
7523-25 N. Wolcott
Chicago, IL 60626
$250.00
Individual Contribution
Citizens for Joe Moore
Amber Automotive
7523-25 N. Wolcott
Chicago, IL 60626
$250.00
Individual Contribution
Citizens for Joe Moore
I say if the current zoning allows for 16 condos, only 16 condos should be built. Say no to this zoning change.
14 comments:
Condos ,Condos everywhere but few are selling! So let's build more & more to sit empty.
Great idea since condos sell so well in RP!!
It's better that it just being an empty store or lot, which always draw crime. At least most new condos are attractive, though some sort of more useful business, like another grocery, or even another restaurant (one that doesn't have Italian as most of the menu), would also be nice.
We can debate all day, but we all know this guy will get what he wants because he has already paid off the guy who makes the decisions.
v&j I agree with what your saying, I believe there is a business currently on the lot so since it is not empty do we need condos just because little joey revieved contributions from the builders so joey will push thru their request.
Maybe as you stated build something a store or rest. but more condo now? Let's face it its like the Tribune story a few Sundays ago stated it is a legal bribe!
At what point does one apply for and possibly receive financing for developing condos on property one already owns? The reason I ask is because there might be a chance that he got the funding - or at least is getting the funding - dependant upon a plan he presented as early as a year or two ago when lenders still thought building more of these cracker boxes was a good idea. If you notice, his contributions to Moore date back to 2005 so maybe that's when he got his initial funding for this and he feels he has no choice but to go forward with that rather than a new business or restaurant.
Looking at the architects' renderings however gives me pause. Couldn't they have made it just a touch more UGLY?
Obviously, this is his property and he can and will do whatever he wants to with it - ugly condos and all. The only say we can have in the matter is whether he stays within the precribed limit of 16 or gets to cram in 23 units. Even then we're only kidding ourselves that we have a say unless a busload of us attend this meeting and speak out with very loud voices . . . and present the facts and figures to back our arguments with. Otherwise, Joe's just going to do what he pretty much always does anyway.
QUESTION: Regardless of what it's zoned for, what, if any, accomodation is he making for parking? If it's an auto business right now then parking probably isn't much of an issue - you park your car in the garage for work. But if that property is now to be used for residential purposes, then where are the residents going to park?
Just asking . . .
- PEACE -
What kind of lunatic is this builder? Has he seen all the foreclosures that are hitting the market like bugs on a windshield?
Has he seen the developers getting foreclosed on $14MM loans?
Has he seen what is happening to unsold condos in glossy downtown highrises?
Is he financing it himself, or is he getting public money in some form?
He can build the 16 units, for the place, even empty, would be a vast improvement on the business there. Go ahead, add to the glut, give us more condos to sink like stones in this market.
Lots of Suddenly Very Affordable new condos in our near future, for sure.
But there is no need for him to build 23 units.16 is enough. It's not such a great-looking complex, if the rendering supplied is any guide. Looks boxy and boring.
Is that a prison shown in the rendering? Or maybe a hospital wing?
I drive past this address every day. I vote 100% yes to the up zoning if it results in a quality residential use. Frankly, this is a nearly perfect case for the upzoning as; the current use is an automotive shop, the lot adjoins the Union Pacific rail road, is on a block of residential housing, and is very close to Howard Street. The current use as an automotive shop does not fit well on the essentially residential street.
As far as parking, the developer will by law have to provide 1 off street parking place per residential unit. And, as an auto shop currently, it takes up a lot of street parking spaces. There is always overflow from that place parked in the street. All the points about a tough market are on target, but remember, a developer TODAY is looking 2-3 years ahead. And, if we want to change the lot from a commercial use to residential, any developer needs enough units to make it a viable project for them as well as for the numbers to make sense to a lender.
It looks to me like it's going to take 2-3 years for this mortgage mess to finish unwinding, and for prices to hit bottom.
If developers were smart about numbers, we wouldn't see so many places being planned at the peak of the lunacy, in 2005.
But it's their money and their call.
As I said, I'd support 23 units if this place were just a tad better-looking. God, but it's fugly.
From the pictures not very atractive, wonder f they left out green space like the condo at morse and greenview
and wonder wher the gas meters will hang
all Joe Moore memos start out "I", no matter what
Joe Moore is Joe Moore's favorite topic
Joe has now put the development "on hold" because "...the developer, Dan Schwegel, refused to guarantee he would develop the project as proposed if he received the requested zoning change."
Read: The developer didn't cough up enough moolah.
thanks for raising the gas meters issue
I'm sick & tired of seeing them
gas meters are Chicago's lawn ornaments for the new millennium, our gazing balls or lawn jockeys or seasonally-attired geese
the alderman take cash, approve variances to build corner-to-corner on the lots, and then neighbors get to look at the row of gas meters lined up out front on the sidewalk for the rest of time
I'm with Hugh.
I'm glad this fugly project is on hold. My feeling is that the developer is having a difficult time finding a lender dumb enough who still has the wherewithal to finance yet another fugly building in a city (and country)fairly well stuffed with unsold inventory.
If major lenders freeze foreclosures, as Dubya is trying to make them do, that means that many more millions of borrowers will be able to sit in houses they aren't paying for that much longer, which means that the lenders will be having to carry these bad loans on the books. That sort of interferes with their ability to churn out loans for crappy developments in overdeveloped neighborhoods loaded with unsold condos.
Not many developers can come up with the cash to finance themselves on a large development. Terzakis is one of the few, and I'll just bet that his planned condo complex on Howard St gets deferred for a few years, until things totally bottom out and the market is back on solid ground again.
Post a Comment