SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/index.php)
-   General Development (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=86)
-   -   CHICAGO | Post Office Redevelopment (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=192697)

pilsenarch Feb 23, 2016 2:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by emathias (Post 7344224)
Does anyone else wish that Netflix or Hulu would revive that Starz series "Boss" with Kelsey Grammar to finish off the story arc? I really enjoyed the show and didn't like that it was kind of left hanging.

YES, but not only because it was an awesome series, but they used my home to film scenes of one of the main characters... the $$ were awesome also :)

Kumdogmillionaire Feb 23, 2016 4:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by k1052 (Post 7345406)
British developer won't give up Old Main Post Office without a fight



http://chicago.suntimes.com/news/7/7...-without-fight

:koko:

Hahahahaha, talk about delusional developer. Eminent domain this idiot and develop this blight ASAP Rahm

SamInTheLoop Feb 23, 2016 4:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by urbanpln (Post 7344744)
This is the typical strategy the City uses to motivate absentee land owners, especially those who have large prime locations. It sends a message that it's time to start the develop process and/or partner with someone who can help you get it done. The City probably feels that this developer has missed the current development cycle, but needs to start gearing up for the next. The same strategy was used on the Riverside Site. DPD made the legislative move of placing the site on the acquisition list (within the River South TIF), and one year later threaten to issue an RFQ (seeking qualified developers to purchase the site). The owner, or majority owner (a London billionaire who's on the U.S. no-fly-list) partnered with Related or is in the process of working out a deal.


While true, and who knows - this kook could finally give in and be persuaded by this city action to come to terms with Sterling Bay and sell to them in the next few weeks (and he certainly has no longer than that - if he even has that long) - this isn't an idle threat. The law is very clearly on the city's side here - it has quite broad powers of eminent domain (for public benefit - not merely public use.....and there is very ample case for that here).....whether anyone agrees with the city's powers here or not is beside the point, because the law at present says the city does have this power. They just have to give whatever notice the law states and provide "just compensation" (which one has got to admit, might be interesting in this case to see how low the city (really Sterling Bay of course in the end) can get away with in its compensation.......


Addendum: I'm not sure if the city necessarily feels that this project has missed the current property cycle. If they do, they perhaps shouldn't necessarily feel so. This economic/property/construction cycle will have longer legs than many suspect.....I'm looking for at least a few more good years, and perhaps up to a couple more on top of that..........

rlw777 Feb 23, 2016 5:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by k1052 (Post 7345406)
British developer won't give up Old Main Post Office without a fight



http://chicago.suntimes.com/news/7/7...-without-fight

:koko:

Quote:

"I don’t think this would happen anywhere else in the world. If they use eminent domain in that way, it would mean they could choose any building in the city and just say, ‘We can take that property and pay what we want to pay,’ " - Davies’ project manager
Ha... Welcome to Chicago jackass!

LouisVanDerWright Feb 23, 2016 5:53 PM

^^^ Lol, who buys real estate in a market (and apparently entire country) you don't understand at all? The unique feature about Chicago in this case is that the city is relatively proactive in not putting up with bullshit like some more pliant governments in small government States. This is just how the law works here and there is nothing you can do about it. Uncle Sam giveth (literally in this case) and the Boss taketh. You got your turn, now you're done.

Ryanrule Feb 23, 2016 8:21 PM

Hes lucky we aint breaking his knees for good measure.

the urban politician Feb 23, 2016 8:57 PM

Did Davies inherit all his wealth? He clearly doesn't know what he is doing.

urbanpln Feb 23, 2016 10:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SamInTheLoop (Post 7345606)
While true, and who knows - this kook could finally give in and be persuaded by this city action to come to terms with Sterling Bay and sell to them in the next few weeks (and he certainly has no longer than that - if he even has that long) - this isn't an idle threat. The law is very clearly on the city's side here - it has quite broad powers of eminent domain (for public benefit - not merely public use.....and there is very ample case for that here).....whether anyone agrees with the city's powers here or not is beside the point, because the law at present says the city does have this power. They just have to give whatever notice the law states and provide "just compensation" (which one has got to admit, might be interesting in this case to see how low the city (really Sterling Bay of course in the end) can get away with in its compensation.......


Addendum: I'm not sure if the city necessarily feels that this project has missed the current property cycle. If they do, they perhaps shouldn't necessarily feel so. This economic/property/construction cycle will have longer legs than many suspect.....I'm looking for at least a few more good years, and perhaps up to a couple more on top of that..........

The City will move forward to acquire as quickly as possible, but it won't happen overnight. Davies will fight, and eventually lose unless he partners with someone, or sell. By the time it's settled, this development cycle will be over.

urbanpln Feb 23, 2016 10:32 PM

The move by the City is positive and will result in movement in the redevelopment process. I believe Davies will feel the pressure.

ardecila Feb 23, 2016 10:35 PM

nvm

ChickeNES Mar 3, 2016 5:42 PM

Unpaid property taxes on Old Post Office at $627,000 and counting
Alby Gallun - Crain's Chicago Business - 3/4/2016

Quote:

The unpaid property taxes don't help Davies' cause. He didn't pay any taxes on the building in 2015 and missed a deadline yesterday to make the first of two payments due this year, according to the Cook County Treasurer's website. In all, he owes the treasurer $627,414 in taxes on the Post Office and a building he owns next door.

That includes $423,622 in overdue taxes and penalties from last year. Depending on how quickly the city moves to seize the Post Office, the county could move to auction off the taxes in its annual tax sale in June if Davies doesn't pay his 2015 bill, said Bill Kouruklis, chief deputy treasurer of Cook County.
http://www.chicagobusiness.com/reale...600000-in-back

I'm shocked, shocked, to find that a person who lives in a tax haven is delinquent on his taxes. Should make it even easier for the city to seize it through eminent domain.

Kumdogmillionaire Mar 4, 2016 12:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChickeNES (Post 7357552)
Unpaid property taxes on Old Post Office at $627,000 and counting
Alby Gallun - Crain's Chicago Business - 3/4/2016



http://www.chicagobusiness.com/reale...600000-in-back

I'm shocked, shocked, to find that a person who lives in a tax haven is delinquent on his taxes. Should make it even easier for the city to seize it through eminent domain.

I know very little about property law, but wouldn't not paying one's taxes make it as simple as filing an eviction from the Mayor's office, or something of that sort? I feel like this makes taking the Post-Office back extremely simple

Mr Downtown Mar 4, 2016 3:13 AM

No. First of all, the county collects property taxes, not the city. Second, there's a process that has to be followed when seizing delinquent property, including a redemption period when the delinquency can be cured. Then the delinquent property normally must be auctioned to the highest bidder.

Kumdogmillionaire Mar 4, 2016 8:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Downtown (Post 7358399)
No. First of all, the county collects property taxes, not the city. Second, there's a process that has to be followed when seizing delinquent property, including a redemption period when the delinquency can be cured. Then the delinquent property normally must be auctioned to the highest bidder.

Interesting, so what would be the fastest legal approach to reclaim the Post Office then? Or is that the route they are likely to take

Mr Downtown Mar 4, 2016 3:19 PM

Illinois allows "quick-take" eminent domain (get control now, court determines the price later) for lots of purposes, including redevelopment. So the process now playing out is the fastest. It doesn't mean Davies can't or won't slow things a bit with a lawsuit.

Politically, the mayor is walking a fine line. He'd love to have a successful big project of some kind, but he's already perceived by much of the city as caring only about downtown. He won't want to be dogged for years by a court fight with Davies and public discussion of the $multimillions spent on condemnation when there's no obvious, slam-dunk use for the building.

ithakas Mar 4, 2016 3:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Downtown (Post 7358778)
Politically, the mayor is walking a fine line. He'd love to have a successful big project of some kind, but he's already perceived by much of the city as caring only about downtown. He won't want to be dogged for years by a court fight with Davies and public discussion of the $multimillions spent on condemnation when there's no obvious, slam-dunk use for the building.

To answer your question, no, Mr. Downtown does not like the mayor.

F1 Tommy Mar 4, 2016 3:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Downtown (Post 7358778)
Illinois allows "quick-take" eminent domain (get control now, court determines the price later) for lots of purposes, including redevelopment. So the process now playing out is the fastest. It doesn't mean Davies can't or won't slow things a bit with a lawsuit.

Politically, the mayor is walking a fine line. He'd love to have a successful big project of some kind, but he's already perceived by much of the city as caring only about downtown. He won't want to be dogged for years by a court fight with Davies and public discussion of the $multimillions spent on condemnation when there's no obvious, slam-dunk use for the building.

He must have someone in mind for a takeover of the project or he would not be pushing this. And he can add plenty of fines with court assistance due to the abandonment and lack of care to the property.

And if Mr. Downtown does not like the Mayor he should atleast have enough intelligence to not let that cloud his judgement on all matters related to the Mayor....His viewpoints would hurt the city in several instances.

ithakas Mar 4, 2016 3:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by F1 Tommy (Post 7358786)
He must have someone in mind for a takeover of the project or he would not be pushing this. And he can add plenty of fines with court assistance due to the abandonment and lack of care to the property.

Yes, Sterling Bay has been pushing for eminent domain since they were pushed out of the project.

Walgreens was looking for up to 1 million square feet, so they bring them in, get Abbott or one of a handful of giant healthcare companies without downtown space to take a piece, move Matter or open their own biotech incubator, and make the Post Office the gateway to the IMD, as our secondary CBD.

sentinel Mar 4, 2016 4:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ithakas (Post 7358784)
To answer your question, no, Mr. Downtown does not like the mayor.

Perhaps, but Mr. D does have a valid point: Rahmbo isn't as indestructible as he may have appeared in the past, mostly due to many boondoggles of the past year, so the last thing he needs is another legal issue, even though he may be in the right with such an eminent domain case as massive as this. As it currently stands, the Old Main Post office is a massive eyesore and requires a lot of money to redevelop....however, repurposing as a multi-tenant commercial office space is not the best use, it would be a massive waste of money and space:

-the floorplates are odd and reconfiguring for even a large open floor plan for a company like Walgreens or McDonalds is woefully inefficient (it would take at least five minutes to walk from one end of the office to the other, this building is THAT massive).

-asbestos, asbestos, asbestos. The bears repeating that this is the single largest issue regarding redevelopment, as the remediation costs are ridiculously high.

-I still think it should be broken up into a hotel (north third), a federal field office (south third), and a massive library/research center/data center/archive/international agency for the main, middle third. Build a fully enclosed or even a retractable, large winter garden space on the roof and you have a beautiful and more importantly, globally relevant icon that can help draw more people from around the world.

k1052 Mar 4, 2016 4:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sentinel (Post 7358842)
Perhaps, but Mr. D does have a valid point: Rahmbo isn't as indestructible as he may have appeared in the past, mostly due to many boondoggles of the past year, so the last thing he needs is another legal issue, even though he may be in the right with such an eminent domain case as massive as this. As it currently stands, the Old Main Post office is a massive eyesore and requires a lot of money to redevelop....however, repurposing as a multi-tenant commercial office space is not the best use, it would be a massive waste of money and space:

-the floorplates are odd and reconfiguring for even a large open floor plan for a company like Walgreens or McDonalds is woefully inefficient (it would take at least five minutes to walk from one end of the office to the other, this building is THAT massive).

-asbestos, asbestos, asbestos. The bears repeating that this is the single largest issue regarding redevelopment, as the remediation costs are ridiculously high.

-I still think it should be broken up into a hotel (north third), a federal field office (south third), and a massive library/research center/data center/archive/international agency for the main, middle third. Build a fully enclosed or even a retractable, large winter garden space on the roof and you have a beautiful and more importantly, globally relevant icon that can help draw more people from around the world.

The only real argument I see here against office space is that the floor plates are big. If a tenant is taking 500K or 1M square feet they'd be stacked over a bunch more floors in an office tower anyway so the time to walk the space seems less important. Most people will mainly interact with their own work groups anyway and probably utilize central shared conference facilities.

The renovation will surely be very expensive so the new landlord's mind will be on who can pay the most rent. Seems to me the answer is huge companies looking for lots and lots of class A office space.


All times are GMT. The time now is 9:43 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.