This morning I spoke with Rafael Leon, the executive director of the Chicago Metropolitan Housing Development Corporation, about the development planned for the intersection of Clybourn Avenue and Larrabee Street.
The development, which is a partnership between Chicago Metropolitan and Related Midwest, will comprise 80 condos, several of which will be sold to the CHA and sold at affordable rates.
The building will feature a green roof and indoor and outdoor parking, but it will not have any retail. Leon says that including retail in the development would be too risky because it would have to compete with the destination retail of North Avenue.
Leon says he is currently negotiating with the Chicago Department of Planning and Development to try to secure Tax Increment Financing for the development. Because of those negotiations and due to the uncertain market, he isn’t sure what the construction timetable will be, but he hopes to break ground in October or November.
The development will be designed by Brininstool + Lynch. I hope to have some better renderings soon, but for now, all I’ve got is this little photo from a recent Inside Lincoln Park article.
“Affordable rates”? All housing that sells is affordable to someone. I’m sick of this doublespeak, and am saddened that “affordable housing” has become an accepted term for “low-income housing”.
I wouldn’t go as far as to refer to the use of the wording “affordable rates” as doublespeak; it is more of a euphemism, which isn’t quite the same thing.
I’m not sure what the problem is with using the term “affordable rates”. I’m sure that any person wouldn’t exactly feel proud, if their living situation is referred to as “low-income housing”. “Affordable” housing sounds a lot less demeaning and harsh.
Were you also saddened when “mentally disabled person” became an accepted term for “retard”? And in terms of racial, religious, and sexual orientation terms, I won’t even go there.
I do agree that PC has definitely run amok in a lot of instances, but in many cases, including this one, I really don’t see what the problem is with it.
Sir Isaac,
It’s not PC to say “mentally disabled.” You have to say “differently abled.” Sigh.
Affordable and low-income housing are two separate things; perhaps overlapping in some contexts. This development is proposed Low Income Housing Tax Credits… which is generally regarded as targeting middle income households earning 50-60% of the area median income as defined by Census statistics. We’re talking about moderate-to-middle income families earning wages between $20,000 to $45,240…. that’s about where our current college grads start off earning out of school. LIHTC housing is “affordable” in its rental rates to the incomes targeted. I would argue that it is not low-income or poor people’s housing. Most LIHTC developments have minimum income limits which require tenants to demostrate capacity to pay the rent on their own.
Pardon my mistake about the LIHTC program… but still talking about the same priciples. CHA tenants can earn up to 80% AMI and still be eligible for assistance, by the way.
There is very little “affordable housing” built in the city that isn’t low-income housing. That’s why it’s doublespeak.
I’ll say it again. All housing that SELLS is affordable. “Affordable housing” should be called “manipulation of the real estate market to suppress prices”.