
Fair Warning
The city has reserved the right to wipe out this block for a developer to be named later.September 14, 2007 By Ben Joravsky
In 1994, Imre Hidvegi and Edgar Alvarez opened Chicago Soccer, a soccer supply store, in a vacant storefront on the 4800 block of North Western. “It was just the two of us, and we did maybe $50,000 in business” to start, says Hidvegi.
Over the last 13 years, business has taken off. Chicago Soccer now clears more than $3.5 million a year in sales and has become a driving force on the local soccer scene, providing uniforms to schools, youth leagues, and adult clubs throughout the area.
On July 31, however, the city sent Hidvegi and Alvarez a letter warning them that it may use its power of eminent domain to take their property. “You don’t know what this is doing to us,” Hidvegi says. “My business is at stake—we have 30 employees. Why are they doing this?”
He’s not the only merchant on the block asking that question. The city’s reserving the right to buy all the property on the east side of Western between Lawrence and Ainslie so that a developer yet to be selected can build a development to be determined sometime down the road.
The block in question is part of the Western/North tax increment financing district. As faithful readers know, a TIF puts a 23-year cap on the amount of property taxes in a given area that goes into the public coffers, diverting any new revenues into a fund controlled by the mayor. By law it’s a tool reserved for use in blighted communities that otherwise would not attract development. Instead the bulk of TIF money goes to affluent, gentrifying neighborhoods like the Loop and the near south side. TIFs are supposed to build the tax base, but they wind up diverting over $400 million a year from entities like the schools, the parks, and the county. Instead of making the city more livable, they’ve driven up property taxes to the point that it’s becoming difficult for working-class and middle-class residents to afford their homes. And of course there’s the issue of transparency—TIFs are virtually off the books, not itemized on any tax bill or budget.
On top of all that, the use of TIFs makes a mockery of the rights of property owners, as the merchants on Western Avenue are learning. Traditionally the city reserves its power of eminent domain for large-scale projects—parks, schools, hospitals, highways—that benefit the public. With TIFs in the picture, the city effectively uses eminent domain to transfer property from one private owner to another—typically to a well-connected developer.
In the case of Western Avenue, we’re talking about a stretch of 20 storefronts, bounded on the south by a Walgreens on Lawrence and on the north by Dental Corner, a dentist’s office on Ainslie. Outside the Walgreens is a small public square with a statue of Abraham Lincoln, inscribed with the quote, “Free society is not, and shall not be, a failure.”
“There’s nothing wrong with this block. It’s a great place to do business,” says David Smarinsky, who owns and operates Dental Corner. “We’ve been here since 1984. We have a list of about 2,500 patients. People move out of the neighborhood but they remain our patients. We don’t think it’s blighted at all.”
The block has a mix of businesses, including a tire store, a bridal shop, a real estate office, a Subway, a comic book store, and a restaurant, Thai Nippon, which has a sign in the window saying, “Closed for remodeling, we’ll be open soon.” True, three of the storefronts are vacant; one’s splattered with pigeon droppings. But all in all this stretch of Western looks like an ordinary north-side commercial strip—there are dozens like it in Edgewater and Rogers Park.
The acquisition letters set off a panic among the merchants affected. But their local alderman, Eugene Schulter of the 47th Ward, insists that the acquisition authorization letter’s part of a process he’s initiated over the last couple of decades to protect small businesses. Schulter says he’s routinely bombarded with calls from developers eager to buy up property and tear it down so they can build big-box monstrosities “like you see on Clybourn near North Avenue.” He claims the threat of eminent domain wards off that kind of development: if property owners can’t sell their property, big-box developers can’t buy it up.
Over the last year or so, Schulter commissioned a planner to put together a model of development for the block that includes two six-story buildings with retail on the first floor and 85 units of condos on the upper floors. When merchants saw a drawing of the model last month they pointed out that there was already a glut of condominiums in the area. Schulter assured them that it was only a model and that nothing was set in stone. “This is about protecting the merchants and property owners, not hurting them,” says Schulter. “I would never do anything to hurt them.” In the coming months, he says, he’ll work with residents and merchants to finalize a plan.
Should the merchants feel reassured about their survival? The city’s track record is mixed on TIF-funded projects. As Schulter points out, 46th Ward alderman Helen Shiller has protected some existing businesses affected by the Wilson Yards TIF development. At the same time, the city has plowed over businesses with TIF deals in Roseland, Bridgeport, Jefferson Park, Edgewater, Rogers Park—the list goes on and on. “I will make sure that merchants and property owners are protected,” says Schulter. “If they want to stay, I will make sure that any request to develop that property has a place for them to stay.”
But there are still problems for property owners under the threat of eminent domain. For one thing, it’s harder to get bank loans for improvements or expansion. “What bank is going to lend me money if they know the city might take my property?” asks Hidvegi. And even if merchants were invited to return to whatever gets built on the block, they’d most likely be coming back as tenants rather than tenant-owners. “We may wind up paying rent for less space,” says Hidvegi—not to mention no equity.
As the merchants see it, there’s a certain perversity to Schulter’s logic. At the very least they think there must be a less obstructive way to protect a block from decimation than by reserving the right to decimate it.
The larger lesson is clear: the merchants of Western Avenue had better be vigilant. Otherwise a demolition order could be coming their way.  Send a letter to the editor.
From the Reader blogs Clout City Mick Dumke: Aldermen hold another hearing on the parking meter lease deal. Their conclusion: it still stinks. Thursday at 7:49 pm
|
Flag as inappropriate
Poor Richard at 6:59 PM on 9/13/2007
This stinks to high heaven. Why not simply downzone the properties to prevent big box development?
Flag as inappropriate
prescott at 8:54 AM on 9/14/2007
It's about time someone did something about the "blight" in Lincoln Square -- god knows all the rich yuppies moving in are really letting the neighborhood go. Perhaps next they can tear down that "eyesore" music school on Lincoln.
Ben, thank you for keeping the public informed about the roughshod ways of our city government.
Flag as inappropriate
mack at 1:55 PM on 9/14/2007
Let's pick some folks now to prep to run against Daley in 2011. And NOT the usual list of political prima donnas who will pretend to be interested in running but are really afraid to, for example, Jesse Jr., Gutierrez et al. There has to be some one of integrity and intelligence to start working toward running. Maybe former prosecutor Patrick Collins, or for school head Paul Vallas or current alderman Toni Preckwinkle? Ben, you could help out by doing insightful articles on possible candidates. It will take four years to create the organization to dump Daley. And as long as Daley is mayor the city will continue to be corrupt to the nth degree at every level. But aren't the flowers lovely.
Flag as inappropriate
Sue at 9:52 PM on 9/14/2007
This is an outrage, how can the city take over someones livelyhood for a bunch of condos. Someone needs to stop the madness!
Flag as inappropriate
Jim P at 4:05 PM on 9/15/2007
Mack's ideas are interesting and this could be the time for that kind of leadership. Would reporting about experienced politicians who exhibit those qualities make a difference?
Flag as inappropriate
Lonny at 11:37 PM on 9/18/2007
Ok Mack,
your dream of replacing the Mayor would be nice if it would be possible. If Jesse jr. or Luis decide to run, or maybe not, or maybe, or maybe not (that is showing great leadership) then someone can jump into the ring, but there are very few leaders to look up to. No one is fighting condo developments and their developers, no one is standing in the Mayors way, no one is fighting for the city, they just "protect" their residents. It will be an appointed person at an appointed time...
Flag as inappropriate
funnyboy at 4:08 PM on 9/19/2007
What kind of double-talk is Schulter saying? I wish he cared as much about the people of the ward as he does riding lead in the beer parades on Lincoln Ave.
Flag as inappropriate
Hugh at 4:39 PM on 9/25/2007
Lincoln Square in city's sites
Already has authority to condemn land along Western Avenue
September 12, 2007
BY DAVID ROEDER Sun-Times Columnist
Condemnation is their way of knocking property owners' heads, making them sell out or fix up. It's a powerful weapon, and its excessive use distorts the marketplace while curbing civil liberties.
More...
http://www.suntimes.com/business/roeder/552394,CST-FIN-roeder12.article
Flag as inappropriate
Rogers Park Girl at 8:11 AM on 11/15/2007
Forget about getting someone to run against Daley. Let's just all demand Federal prosecutors to investigate and prosecute political corruption. If we elect people who vow to do this, maybe it will actually happen. Maybe the pressure will force him to not run next time. And when we get him out of office, two words: TERM LIMITS. It's time! Let's not have a Daley III ever.
This whole TIF thing is so sick.
Flag as inappropriate
Sheri Reda at 11:56 AM on 11/19/2007
If you are concerned, please come to a community meeting at Chicago Soccer, 4839 N. Western, at 7pm on December 5th.
Flag as inappropriate
jeanne at 7:10 PM on 11/28/2007
This project doesn't seem beneficial to anyone but the mayor,alderman Schulter and the developers.This is another example of the government robbing its citizens to give more to the privileged. I wonder if the community association has an attorney? Perhaps an attorney could prove that this project is illegal or unlawful. There seems to be tear down mania going on right now with no regard to historic preservation, public opposition, or future vacancies. It seems a risky strategy to gamble with a 'if we build it they will come' philosophy. After all, there are existing businesses in this area who are partly responsible for the renewed interest of this area. The city shows no interest in helping small businesses or its residents.Further more, if there is interest in beautifying this area why not try streetscaping or adding additional greenspace? It would preserve the character of the neighborhood,as well as existing local businesses.
Flag as inappropriate
Tired at 11:13 PM on 11/29/2007
This is getting ridiculous. Everything is going up in Chicago. When is Daley and the Alderman going to wake up. Buildings are being torn down all over the North Center and Lincoln Square area and what are we getting. Certainly nothing any middle class person can afford anymore. What happened to helping families? With all that is going on, why not put some of the money into the community with prices people can afford. Leave the neighbors that have helped build the community alone. Enough with the condos!
Flag as inappropriate
big box boycotter at 10:19 AM on 11/30/2007
The reason Lincoln Square is so attractive to me is because it still has some semblance of "community" with its small mom-and-pop shops and semi-pedestrian plaza (would be great to make it "pedestrian-only").
I cringe every time I see another Starbucks+World Gym+Condo go up -- there is already a glut of unsold condos in the neighborhood, there are loads of 2-3-4-flat houses for sale or rent, and we have several great boutique shops that I'd rather not see get muscled out by chain stores - which take money out of the neighborhood.
Let's see; property taxes are going up while real-estate is going down, and our Alderman thinks destroying our downtown will increase revenues?
Meanwhile I see money wasted every summer on resurfacing streets that don't need resurfaced, but the police are too busy (doing what? giving out parking tickets?) to get rid of gangs and graffiti.
It's plain to see that the city/ward are more interested in putting money in their own pockets than providing an environment for local businesses to grow and homeowners to improve their own properties.
Flag as inappropriate
Margaret Aguilar at 2:52 PM on 12/4/2007
Last year a request for a "zoning change from B3-2(max height=55 ft) to B3-5 (max height=80 ft)

Estimated proposed height 65 - 70 ft at the 6th floor penthouse

7,600 sq ft commercial space
20 commercial parking spaces
110 residential parking spaces

6 story building at the penthouse level on East side of building
66 Residential condo units" for the north side of Irving Park, between Wolcott and Ravenswood.
This "big box" would have added to the already congested traffic and lack of neighborhood parking and was opposed by a group of community residents over a period of about a year. Finally at the last neighborhood meeting a zoning change was approved which allows for a smaller development. As it was noted on the Northcenter Neighbors blog: "Much to our surprise! The Alderman only allowed 'property owners' a vote. He only allowed 1 vote per address [even multi-unit apartment buildings!]. This is different then what he had communicated in the past when he allowed residents a vote and not just property owners vote." This blocked me, a resident of the community for over 20 years, from voting since I am not a property owner as well as the 10 other adults who live in our building. In the comments session I noted that the qualification of being a property owner to vote went out after the Revolutionary War. At the previous meeting when that provision was not enforced, or even announced, the voting went the other way by a large margin. All of this under the control of Mr. Schulter.
I will see you at the neighborhood meeting on December 5th.
Flag as inappropriate
Margaret Aguilar at 3:03 PM on 12/4/2007
This is a correction of my previous comment.
Last year a request for a "zoning change from B3-2(max height=55 ft) to B3-5 (max height=80 ft). Estimated proposed height 65 - 70 ft at the 6th floor penthouse 7,600 sq ft commercial space 20 commercial parking spaces 110 residential parking spaces 6 story building at the penthouse level on East side of building 66 Residential condo units" for the north side of Irving Park, between Wolcott and Ravenswood. This "big box" would have added to the already congested traffic and lack of neighborhood parking and was opposed by a majority of community residents over a period of about a year. Finally at the last neighborhood meeting a zoning change was approved which allows for a smaller development. As it was noted on the Northcenter Neighbors blog: "Much to our surprise! The Alderman only allowed 'property owners' a vote. He only allowed 1 vote per address [even multi-unit apartment buildings!]. This is different then what he had communicated in the past when he allowed residents a vote and not just property owners vote." This blocked me, a resident of the same apartment in the community for over 20 years, from voting since I am not a property owner; as well as the 10 other adults who live in our building. In the comments session I noted that the qualification of being a property owner to vote went out after the Revolutionary War. At the previous meeting when that provision was not enforced, or even announced, the voting went the other way by a large margin. All of this under the control of Mr. Schulter.
I will see you at the neighborhood meeting on December 5th.
Flag as inappropriate
fed up at 9:01 PM on 12/4/2007
I have lived in the 47th ward for twenty six years. Ilive about a block away from the Lawrence and Western intersection. 15 years ago this was a safe, affordable working class neighborhood. All differnt kinds of people lived here, and got along with each other. In a segregated city like Chicago, the 47th was unique. now the neighborhood is overrun with yuppies who all appear to be waiting for an episode of "Friends" to break out. Schulter has been bent on changing the complexion (literally) for years. The last thing our neighborhood needs is another ugly overpriced condo dump. The 4800 block of Western is in no way blighted. The best thing to do is get in Schulter's face as a community and let him know he is an elected official who should be representing the people, and not some Daley connected developer. I am VERY sad to see what has happened to the neighborhood where I raised my son, and equally sad tosee so many of my friends and neighbors forced out of the community. Everyone come to the Dec. 5th meeting or contact Schulter and let him know how you feel.
Flag as inappropriate
shocked at 1:05 PM on 12/7/2007
We NEED people like you to continue to have your voices heard. DEMAND to be heard. We can overturn mean Gene if we devote this week to any ideas you may have. Dec 12th is the day of doom or of freedom. Go for it!!!
Flag as inappropriate
Former Lincoln Square Resident at 10:01 PM on 12/10/2007
I think the author here is a bit disingenuous on how he describes the use of TIFs. TIFs are a legitimate planning tool that allow for money earned from property taxes of a new development to be reinvested into the community that earned the property taxes. That could actually help Lincoln Square!
Secondly, I think that the corner in question is kind of blighted. When I lived in Lincoln Square, I went to that Walgreens often, but the boarded-up restaurant has been awful for awhile. Something should be done, but the city should problem-solve to incorporate the existing businesses into the new development if there is one. Keep Chicago Soccer - No More Potbelly's!
Flag as inappropriate
truth at 1:22 AM on 12/16/2007
Do you really think that this is about businesses alone. There is a bigger question as to the hidden agendas of the alderman of this city and country. When they send a letter to you and tell you to get out of your house then you will smell the shit. Wake up. You should be smarter than that. What are TIF's really supposed to be used for. Most have no clue. Hold the City responsible. $500,000,000. Shit that's a lot of our money. Freebie for the developers. How would you like it if your mama had to hit the streets?
Flag as inappropriate
truth at 10:17 PM on 9/29/2008
It has been almost a year and what has become of Schulter's mega plan? Liar liar pants on fire. No longer trying to strong arm and steal people's businesses. Now the dust has settled he can go about visiting his local spots for free meals.
Flag as inappropriate
Mr. Z at 2:37 PM on 6/10/2009
Schulter got too comfortable in his seat and it is time for him to go.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugene_Schulter
Take a look at the corruption he was convicted with for hiring his son... Patronage,,,
Add a comment