You neglected to add "community shelter" under residential uses.
December 10, 2008 at 1:29 AM
Community shelter has been added.
December 10, 2008 at 11:21 AM
We already have affordable housing at Lincoln Park: Atrium Village Apartments and the new Clybourn Condos. There is also a mixed-income housing development in Old Town at Division and Clybourn. As a homeowner and voter, I strongly oppose low-income housing AND shelter in my backyard – the site of the Children’s Memorial Hospital. Any efforts for these two uses need the support of the precincts directly affected by this addition. Vi, you are opening yourself up for a hotly contested re-election if you put low-income housing/shelter in this location. You will have many single-issue voters coming out in support of an opponent.
December 10, 2008 at 2:01 PM
I highly doubt low-income housing would ever be approved at this location. This is the center of Lincoln Park and a stone's throw from DePaul University. I can't imagine too many parents wanting their kids living in dorms a 1/2 block from subsidized housing. This use would hurt the school. In addition, we have to think of a use that will help the local storefronts replace the business they will lose when Children’s closes. Low income housing would certainly cause many of these high end store fronts to close their doors for good. The perfect use for this site is a high end boutique hotel with commercial and housing mixed in. The hotel will bring needed business to the store fronts currently dependant on Children's employees. The additional housing will also support current business in the area. What worries me about this project is the current state of the economy and the difficulties any developer will have financing this project. The easy solution would be for a developer to look to federally funded projects such as public housing, schools, or senior centers. We residents will have to work diligently to ensure this does not happen.
December 10, 2008 at 5:56 PM
As a resident of Kemper Place, immediately east of the hospital, we would like to insure that the Orchard frontage be confined to low rise residential(not to exceed three floors). Further we would not want substantial traffic,cars or trucks,created by the redevelopment on Orchard. The character of this part of the project should blend and complement the adjoining area.
December 19, 2008 at 5:14 PM
This blogosphere is not easy to figure out.
December 30, 2008 at 11:47 AM
As a homeowner in the area, there are three things we definitely don't need:- Another shelter or low-income housing- A giant condo tower- More McMansionsWhat would be nice would be:- Rowhomes for middleclass residents being forced out of the neighborhood by McMansions and the requisite prices- A replacement for the Barnes & Noble on Diversey that is being replaced by yet another inappropriately large grocery store development- An Alderman who LISTENS to her consituents (not her donors) and doesn't ruin this golden opportunity for Lincoln Park
January 9, 2009 at 11:19 AM
Had difficulty posting, just checking to see if I can get on.
January 9, 2009 at 11:24 AM
No community shelter or affordable housing. There is lot of affordable housing within few miles of this location. Please do not destroy this area. I agree with comments that if affordable housing is proposed then there will be lot of opposition as well as Vi probably loosing his seat.I like the idea of boutique hotel with open green space.
January 19, 2009 at 3:49 AM
No community shelter or subsidized housing, please! This is likely the largest redevelopment opportunity in the middle of Lincoln Park, and needs careful planning. A nice hotel with some residential units will serve the neighborhood, the university, and add some more housing units. I also second (or 3rd or 4th) the lack of leadership from Vi Daley. Try to represent the interests of the people that elect you.
January 26, 2009 at 10:35 AM
No affordable housing or community shelter. I agree with the previous posts that Vi Daley should pay attention to the residents and not take them for granted. Clark street is in shambles with so many closed stores. Vi should not adhere to donor demands like she did by agreeing to Latin school take over of open Lincoln park area for soccer field. Thanks to active residents who were able to reverse some part of it.
January 31, 2009 at 1:32 PM
Community housing would destory the center of Lincoln Park and DePaul Univesity for that matter. How many parents want their children to be housed 1 block from a bunch of low income housing projects? Wake up Vi Daley!
February 3, 2009 at 11:55 PM
As for the comments: why would parents want their college students to be housed close to low-income housing? Why would I (a 27 year resident of the neighborhood) want to live close to the college students? My fear is that DePaul will buy the property and we will more college students living in our neighborhood. More drunks tearing up our property, more residents that don't care about the neighborhood since they are just here for school and will move on.And thank you, Vi, for opening the process to everyone.Let's put politics aside folks and come up with a plan!
February 4, 2009 at 2:37 PM
DePaul has already stated they are not interested in the property. Also, DePaul has been in the neighborhood longer than any of the current residents. Their presence has helped to create the neighborhood that Lincoln Park is today.
February 5, 2009 at 9:49 AM
Vi - Put money aside and think of what is best for the neighborhood. Lincoln Park is a special neighborhood with a lot of character. Please do not destroy it. I really don't want to have to move to Naperville.
February 5, 2009 at 9:51 AM
Residential uses must include options that benefit the residents of the neighborhood, increase the tax base and improve the safety and security of the neighborhood. Crime and violent crime has become a significant factor in Lincoln Park, you cannot invite more crime into this neighborhhood. Children must be able to walk the streets to their schools. Shelters and such will drive the families out of this area.
February 28, 2009 at 8:55 AM
Affordable/low-income housing would be a welcome addition to the neighborhood. There is a shortage of this kind of housing and as the economy crumbles, the need will be greater. Lincoln Park is already a v bland and homogenous rich neighborhood, we needn't be paranoid about those who have less living nearby.Lets not threaten or berate Vi Daley in our comments please. I don't always support her (and have even voted against her), but we should maintain a civil tone in our debates.
April 11, 2009 at 5:17 PM
As a homeowner and voter, I strongly oppose low-income housing or shelter a block from my house.A boutique hotel is the best way to enhance the neighborhood.
July 11, 2009 at 6:12 PM
Affordable/low income housing would NOT be a welcome addition to this area. Low income housing was the reason everyone fled the city to the suberbs back in the 80's. Don"t make the same mistake again. I think Naperville is a little short on low-income housing... out it there!
July 16, 2009 at 7:46 AM
How about a "town square" type of thing similar to Lincoln Square where there are mixed uses - including a boutique hotel, unique high-end stores, ice skating rink/pool or activity center for kids, a new grade school (since all ours are so good that they are overloaded with applicants) a center stage/platform for live outdoor performances, and a tiny bit of residential housing mixed in?
October 15, 2009 at 5:24 PM
As a resident of this area, we need options that benefit the neighborhood for those who already live there, there are plenty areas of low-income housing in the city and bringing that to this location would destroy the great character of this great neighborhood. I support low-rise housing (i.e. townhouses, rowhouses, single family,etc.) and possibly a boutique hotel or small grade school for those from the area. NO TO SHELTERS OR LOW INCOME ON THIS SITE!!!
February 13, 2011 at 6:15 PM
Post a Comment