Triangle Neighbors Association and the office of Ald Tom Tunney (44th) are working to curb new condo developments along commercial strips in Lake View, says Jim Ludwig, president of Triangle Neighbors.
Ludwig told community members at a meeting on Wednesday night that projects have the potential to “threaten our commercial district.”
“When you have owners above commercial districts verses renters, you have high expectations for peace and quiet and less traffic expectations,” he says. He adds that businesses are needed to keep residential taxes lower, saying, “If you lose your commercial district, you’ll kill your neighborhood.”
Ludwig points to a condo development above the nightclub Circuit, 3641 N Halsted St, which some condo owners complained about a few years ago. He didn’t know of any current project that threatens Lake View’s commercial district, but he says some might disrupt traffic.
For example, a proposed Koenig & Strey GMAC and MK Development Group condo development at the site of Brompton Body Shop, 3532 N Halsted St, might increase traffic congestion, Ludwig says. Representatives from the developer attended the last Triangle Neighbors meeting in May to ask for C3 zoning instead of C2 in order to build more units.
This is amazing. I’d agree if they were complaining about the loss of ground floor retail to residential. But they’re worried about there being too many residents with money to spend living too close to businesses? And all because a couple people have complained about noise? I think we need MORE people living above the shops in our commercial districts in Lakeview, not fewer. We need to add density to support more businesses within walking distance, particularly around the train stops.
The greatest threat to our commercial districts is groups like this trying to undermine the market because they don’t want traffic blocking their cars and they don’t want anyone else to be able to enjoy what Lakeview has to offer. Traffic engineers are increasingly agreeing that urban street traffic isn’t such a bad thing — better to have a little traffic than to have a place where nobody wants to be. I say you’re welcome to move here, welcome to live in a condo above a store on Clark, and you’re welcome to spend money in my neighborhood. It’s a great neighborhood and we could use more real urbanists here to help balance out the voice of these groups.
I hope Alderman Schulter is listening – the huge new condo building that’s being proposed for the lot opposite the Trader Joes/Crate & Barrel outlet on Lincoln in North Center will bring traffic to a standstill. Most residents don’t want permit parking, but when it gets that bad, watch the inevitable happen – and then the merchants lose in the long run.
I think one of the issues here is the nature of the commercial that results when residential units are above it. My guess is that the neighborhood group has a more sophisticated take on this than you’re giving them credit for.
Residential owners demand too strict of limits on first-floor commercial units, squeezing out the bars, restaurants and other uses that contribute to commercial vitality. A neighborhood can’t live off of radiology centers and dry cleaners alone.
If you want to see a vivid illustration of the negative effects of the current scheme, just count the storefront vacancies along Belmont Ave between Ashland and Western, and the low-quality uses in the remainder of them. The neighborhood group is on the right track here, I think. They’re not complaining about commercial development; they simply want viable commercial development.
Simple solution. Or simple to me and my simple mind.
Covenant that limits the use of the ground floor retail to restaurants or clubs with liquor licenses.
Voila!
On to the next subject please.
As for increasing traffic……….please.
Even hundreds of condos would not greatly impact the traffic around there. I got news for everyone………NOT everyone in a given building are all on the road at the same time.
If the condo building is not required to provide at least 2 parking spaces per unit, then the parking problems increase exponentially. You can see this in action during the weekends around the Southport corridor – there are few commercial parking lots available to the public, and street parking is mostly restricted to permit – only spaces.
Joe, I can only speak for a few of the merchants I’ve come to know over the past decade in the area you described – the dirty little secret is that many of the building owners don’t care if the ground floor is leased out or not – they’re happy if the storefront sits vacant, as long as it’s not a bar or a restaurant. Zoning by another name, you could call it – I was on the Roscoe Village Neighbors Assn. in the late 90’s, and you could already see the rents for those storefronts being priced to keep out businesses that the owners didn’t want in that location.
Dmac,
I’m sure you’re right as to the older buildings / owners. Different story for the new condos, where the real estate tax rates are killing on new commercial space.
irishpirate,
Not simple. To place a covenant on land you have to own it. An owner would be limiting his resale value by creating that sort of restrictive covenant. Why an owner do that? Disinterested concern for the future of the neighborhood? I’m sure there are lots of those owners out there!
Joe,
hey, I have a simple mind.
Hi, property owner, I’m Alderman Pirate. You want it upzoned so you can build 40 percent more units. How does this covenant look? Not bad, huh. Now about those hookers and campaign contributions……
It can be done. Not easily, but it can. Other option is to use a covenant to forbid the conversion of the property to condos. That way you can build the same thing or something similar. You would get the benefit of the additional people in the neighborhood, probably more because there would be roommate situations, without the worries about condo owners trying to “quiet down” the area.
I think the concern about condo owners above businesses on major entertainment strips is valid. Some people are just idiots. I remember some crazed realtor who lives in the area near Armitage and Sedgewick trying to vote the precinct dry.
I have no problem with property owners working to make the clubs and restaurants better neighbors. But unless we are talking HUGE problems trying to vote them dry is just wrong and counterproductive.
Ok, next I will discuss my 3 point plan for withdraw from Iraq and the eventual human colonization of Mars.
How about just telling the NIMBYs to shut the hell up? If they buy a place right over a noisy bar, its reasonable to expect noise. Kind of like buying a house near the airport, or a condo overlooking Millennium Park. Its infuriating when people move into an established area and begin an immediate campaign to change it to suit their preferences.
Jane,
You are so completely missing the point here. This is not a NIMBY effort, and these are not newcomers at Triangle.
Joe – excellent point regarding the tax issues; completely forgot about that factor.
Ok, I really have to take issue with this. I live in a condo above a Walgreens across the street from two 4am bars. Nobody in my buildings wants to shut the bars down. But I’ve been to community meetings where residents who do not even live on the block — who live in single family homes back in the neighborhood — want to get rid of the 4am bars on MY block. So I don’t want to hear anyone claiming that the people who love living on vibrant commercial streets would for some reason want to jeopardize the viability of their street. I think it’s the people who want to live in a low-density, single-family neighborhood who are jeopardizing the viability of our commercial streets.
Dmac- Most of the buildings in the Lake View area are only required to have one parking space per unit. Developers try to get in more parking per unit to raise sales prices of condos.
The issue of congestion is related to the surburbanization of the city with big box stores going in along Clybourn and Elston. While not everyone is getting in their cars at the same time, a lot of people choose to drive to these areas to shop regularly and do so from greater distances leading to more traffic overall.
Triangle Neighbors, Tom Tunney, and other neighborhood groups in Lake View are NOT trying to kill the commercial districts. Every neighborhood group in the area understands completely that the vitality of the commercial districts is important to a successful neighborhood. Jim Ludwig is the owner of Roscoe’s bar on Halsted, so he is very attuned to the issues of the area. He has been in leadership positions in both the residential neighborhood groups and business chambers in the area.
To everyone who thinks that people who live on commercial streets wants the activity in or around their building, do some research into the Circuits night club issue on Halsted. This was referenced by Ludwig above. About five or six years ago, the Dakota condominium was built on Halsted in Boystown. Several owners in the building (NOT the established neighborhood groups) complained repeatedly about the Circuits night club next door. Apparently, the owners only visited their potential property during the day when their real estate agents sold them the property. These owners went as far as to get a referendum on the ballot to try to vote the precinct dry in order to get the night club closed, which thankfully failed. This is the type of conflict everyone is trying to avoid for other developments on vibrant commercial districts. Also, many developers will promise their condo buyers that they will not put in any type of “smelly” establishment on the ground floor, which excludes restaurants, cafes, bars, etc. All of which leads to a less vibrant neighborhood.