Wow. I hadn't quite realized the scale of the towers along Clark. If the actual construction resembles this model at all, South Loop will really start to form it's own ecosystem and become less of an appendage of the Loop.
|
^ Yeah, and they will make Dearborn Park seem ever more out of place. Which is good, since DP sucks and needs to go
|
Quote:
I think it looks great, and gives a great idea of what we will be looking at very soon, even though the buildings will be somewhat different in the end |
DP wouldn't be so bad if they opened up some of the gates for through traffic.
|
Quote:
Quote:
DP, which I join those who hate those walls, gives a bit of much needed green space in the midst of all that development. Remember the "park" on top of the British school? Well, um yeah. DP1 has not one but two parks, one right behind the station that is packed at all times, and another at the corner of Roosevelt and Clark that is used for all sorts of park-ish things, the tennis courts are busy, etc. |
The only thing that's going to change Dearborn Park is GREEN. Not trees, but cash money buyouts by a real estate company with deep pockets. The process would take years with the process of so many units and obligatory hold-outs. That said, I honestly don't see the market supporting such an action for at least 25 years, if well ever.
|
Quote:
The big Tokyo developers will spend 20-30 years acquiring blocks piecemeal, turning them into surface parking in the interim. They will face hold outs and simply wait for the next generation. |
Quote:
Green space aside, the problem with Dearborn Park is the development's utter contempt for its surroundings. It cuts off all through streets, walls itself from the surrounding neighborhoods, and is designed as a private gated subdivision in the center of the city. No one here is saying that DP isn't a product of its times. Yes, it brought vitality to the South Loop at a time when the city was on a hard downhill decline, but its time is up. It needs to be opened up to the rest of the city, or redeveloped entirely. Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
And actually, some of the properties in DP1 are indeed large condo buildings... |
Quote:
|
I don't really have a problem with DP's form... it's relatively dense and Plymouth is a nice quiet walk in between Printer's Row and Roosevelt, but they really need an entrance on Clark! And Having an entrace at State and 11th would be nice too. And maybe some retail spaces on State somehow? That side of the street is so dead.
|
Quote:
I think unless you can persuade 100% of owners to sell, you'd have to do a hostile takeover and tear down all but the holdout houses, tear out the landscaping, stop shoveling snow, etc. Just utterly destroy the resale value of the holdout homes. |
Quote:
The majority of the units in DP1 would fall under the denser condo buildings along Clark and Polk, and along State from Polk to Roosevelt. I would imagine typical deconversion rules would apply to these. In either case, all of this would be decades out at best. By then, with the age of the buildings, its not hard to imagine that a good majority of owners would rather accept a buyout than a crippling special assessment for major repairs. The property values would most likely have risen to the point that many owners might be happy to simply sell and move on. There's no right or wrong answers, its all conjecture and fantasy at this point. |
^ I agree that the multifamily are a little bit easier than the townhomes. I know fee-simple is the standard practice for any townhomes built by Belgravia (including the ticky-tacky Via Como on Grand, if that's the one...) It's not uncommon for other developers to build townhomes this way either.
|
Why can’t the redevelopment of DP be done in a piecemeal fashion, the same as any neighborhood? Of course the blessing of the HOA is required, but if that’s granted—admittedly, a big “if”—you don’t need to buy everyone out.
|
Quote:
|
All the "white townhomes" of DP1 (144 units in seven clusters) are a single condominium association. That would be a tough, tough deconversion. That association also controls all access along Clark. I'd hoped the Target would lure them to unlock the Clark Street gate; instead they put another lock on it so you need the code to get out as well as in.
Lowest-hanging densification fruit is the "Garden Homes," the vaguely PoMo townhouses near Plymouth and Roosevelt, with the garages next to Roosevelt. That site was to have held DP1's third highrise until it became clear circa 1984 that was an unrealistic dream. You'd have the smallest number of units to purchase; I don't think they've aged/weathered particularly well; the site is suitable for a highrise especially if it has vehicular access from Roosevelt, and the PD wouldn't even have to be amended. You'd have to wear an asbestos suit to any public meetings, though . . . |
But asbestos is good now right?:koko:
|
Where there's a will, and demand, there's a way.
Right now there is still too much developable land in the South Loop so nothing will happen for the forseeable future. But combine diminishing vacant sites with higher property values, perhaps a new L stop (for the 78), and aging of the Dearborn Park properties to the point where there will be a substantial increase in maintenance costs, and eventually that whole neighborhood will be vanquished. I'm pretty sure the city will have a lot of leverage with a developer who wants to upzone DP parcels that he plans to develop, one of which would be to force him to reconnect some streets that are currently cul de sac'd or walled off. |
All times are GMT. The time now is 7:24 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.