DePaul Purchasing Riverfront Property

[Benny B]

Well, your insight proved to be correct on "building a new arena," but it seems the location was a bit off.  And I'm not sure how much the city will care to cough up for development of property DePaul already owns.  Its now widely reported to be at Sheffield and Fullerton on what is now a street level parking lot and also bounded by Seminary and Altgeld (or Montana - I forget which is which).

Don't forget that Avenue was also wrong on the architectural details, the list of contractors, the number of porta-potties, the construction traffic patterns, the number of parking spaces, the landscaping plan, which city official signed the permit, and which way the flag on the crane would blow.

[The Special Brew]

The northwest x of Sheffield n Fullerton??? 

No way they could get away with it there....there's a strip mall there. Too congested, Fullerton's a two lane street, etc.

FWIW, latest CSN article, mentioning both properties discussed above.

http://www.csnchicago.com/ncaa/news/DePaul-looking-to-build-new-arena-land-C?blockID=677786

[T-Bone]

No way they could get away with it there....there's a strip mall there. Too congested, Fullerton's a two lane street, etc.

FWIW, latest CSN article, mentioning both properties discussed above.

http://www.csnchicago.com/ncaa/news/DePaul-looking-to-build-new-arena-land-C?blockID=677786

There's three ways to go with this. 
1. On campus at Sheffield and Fullerton.  Requires massive infrastructure overhaul for Fullerton Ave and Sheffield.  It's just not that big and gets backed up even now.  Causes massive headaches for the City.
2. Finkl - Requires a massive decontamination having being used as a steel plant.  They were one of the "cleaner" steel plants, but decades and decades of pollutants.  Could require significant infrastructure upgrades - Courtland Ave Bridge, and intersection of Kennedy with Armitage (and all points in between).  The infrastructure upgrades could be staged to offset traffic woes.  AND the Courtland Ave Bridge has Chicago Landmark status...  (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cortland_Street_Drawbridge)
3. Morton - Again would require cleanup, but not to the extent that Finkl would.  A bit farther from campus.  Might need some infrastructure updates (Elston is always potholed over there). 

Feasibility:
3, 2, 1.

Cost:
3, 2, 1.

Desire of DePaul (collectively):
1, 2, 3.

The city could possibly kick (condemn) the land over to DePaul in return for building a public park (I would guess with boat access - seems the current administration really likes boating) on one of the sites (aside from option #1).  And the city does love it's tax dollars that could be generated by the site. 

That's my two cents.  No inside information. 

[The Special Brew]

I wouldn't be entirely shocked to see a TIF created for this....much as I despise the damn things. I agree with all your points, but at Shel and Ful just makes no sense for a city planning POV. This is Chicago, so that gets thrown out the window.  I can't imagine that strip mall would be condemned. Plus, there's far too many NIMBY'ers in LP. Never allow it to go forward in the time frame DePaul wants.

[JWags85]

No way they could get away with it there....there's a strip mall there. Too congested, Fullerton's a two lane street, etc.

FWIW, latest CSN article, mentioning both properties discussed above.

http://www.csnchicago.com/ncaa/news/DePaul-looking-to-build-new-arena-land-C?blockID=677786

Its not so much a strip mall as a Depaul Welcome Center.  That location would be insane, but I just can't see it being feasible.  Lincoln and Halstead gets congested as it is, and with an arena a block west?  That would be nuts.

[T-Bone]

I wouldn't be entirely shocked to see a TIF created for this....much as I despise the damn things. I agree with all your points, but at Shel and Ful just makes no sense for a city planning POV. This is Chicago, so that gets thrown out the window.  I can't imagine that strip mall would be condemned. Plus, there's far too many NIMBY'ers in LP. Never allow it to go forward in the time frame DePaul wants.

It was those NIMBY'ers in LP that got Lounge Ax's license taken away!  Move in behind a place that has bands on a strip of bars, expect to have some noise - sack of d!cks! 

Yeah, it will be a TIF - and actually might make sense for either Finkl or Morton site, in terms of developing a fairly non-existent tax base.  And I despise TIFs as well.  Possibly even some EPA dollars for cleanup. 

I'm looking forward to seeing what happens.

[Benny B]

Its not so much a strip mall as a Depaul Welcome Center.  That location would be insane, but I just can't see it being feasible.  Lincoln and Halstead gets congested as it is, and with an arena a block west?  That would be nuts.

Of course, this is the city that has a ballpark that's in the middle of a residential area, 4 miles from a major highway (excluding LSD).

If DePaul and the City wanted to make it work, they probably could, but "major overhaul/redesign" would be an understatement.  It's one thing to have 30,000 people descending on a densely populated Northside neighborhood in the summer time; it'd be altogether worse to have 10,000 people descending on a similar locale during a snow event.

[Avenue Commons]

The city could possibly kick (condemn) the land over to DePaul in return for building a public park (I would guess with boat access - seems the current administration really likes boating) on one of the sites (aside from option #1).  And the city does love it's tax dollars that could be generated by the site. 

That's my two cents.  No inside information. 

Great analysis.

City of Chicago could seize the land under emminent domain principles and turn it over to DePaul because of the considerable economic impact the new area would cause.

The US Supreme Court case is Kelo v. City of New London if you are interested in reading about it. Kind of crazy that can happen in America, but it's 100% legal and goes on all the time.

Not that I know anything about this stuff. I'm just some troll throwing "junk" up on message boards for kicks...........

[hdog1017]

Has DePaul reached out the Chicago Public League baskeball coaches about these plans?  It seems that hold all the basketball power in the Chicagoland area these days. 

[T-Bone]

Of course, this is the city that has a ballpark that's in the middle of a residential area, 4 miles from a major highway (excluding LSD).

If DePaul and the City wanted to make it work, they probably could, but "major overhaul/redesign" would be an understatement.  It's one thing to have 30,000 people descending on a densely populated Northside neighborhood in the summer time; it'd be altogether worse to have 10,000 people descending on a similar locale during a snow event.

The major differences in the venue sites (despite the obvious age and attendance) are the feeder streets.  wrigley has two E-W feeder streets (Irving Park - 4 lanes mostly from the Kennedy, and Addison - two lanes but converted to 3 at times near the park), a major N-S feeder in Clark (at least going north, south is a cluster) and possibly throw in relatively easy access to LSD - never had to drive that way post-game though.  Add in wrigley's remote parking, it also improves things (though I have no idea how much people actually use it).

But yeah, the seasonal difference could also contribute to additional difficulties.  Fullerton would be a nightmare.

[GGGG]

Its not so much a strip mall as a Depaul Welcome Center. 

I find that funny.

[Avenue Commons]

Well, your insight proved to be correct on "building a new arena," but it seems the location was a bit off.  And I'm not sure how much the city will care to cough up for development of property DePaul already owns.  Its now widely reported to be at Sheffield and Fullerton on what is now a street level parking lot and also bounded by Seminary and Altgeld (or Montana - I forget which is which).

Did you read the news articles? My source was 100% correct about the Morton Salt location.

Now THIS might warrant an apology.

[JoBo2756]

Fullerton and Sheffield location would be sweet. Used to walk by there every morning on the way to work.

Right near a huge red/brown/purple line, so people can easily buzz in and buzz out (as they do all summer long for Cubs and Sox games) if they ride the rails.

I just don't think there is a ton of space there. Houses jut into the square block pretty prominently. It would be like putting a stadium right behind McCormick on MUs campus, towards Wells. Just not a ton of space there.

[MUFC9295]

I wouldn't be entirely shocked to see a TIF created for this....much as I despise the damn things. I agree with all your points, but at Shel and Ful just makes no sense for a city planning POV. This is Chicago, so that gets thrown out the window.  I can't imagine that strip mall would be condemned. Plus, there's far too many NIMBY'ers in LP. Never allow it to go forward in the time frame DePaul wants.

Aaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrggggghhhhhhhh!!!   I hate that focking word (TIF).

[GGGG]

Aaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrggggghhhhhhhh!!!   I hate that focking word (TIF).

DePaul wouldn't need TIF anyway since they are not-for-profit.  They would likely just negotiate some sort of "payment for services" and agree to some sort of parking tax.

[kcasper13]

I was a home owner on Sheffield and Armitage 5bks away from either site mentioned.  I often thought about this topic. They'd need to build it on the river.  The problem with the river locations is the remediation work that is required on the land, but assuming they'd get past that, DePaul basketball would be back.  

The neighborhood association would never allow it on Fullerton.  There are 250 houses/Units worth more than 2MM in a 10 block radius from Sheffield/Fullerton intersection or something like that.  Money can build great venues, but it can also stop venues from forming.  And my experience with the Sheffield Neighbors Association is that they would do everything to keep this from happening.

Also, I spoke with someone on their board of trustees (or something similar, I can't remember) and he said they have surveyed dozens if not a hundred sites and they can't get any cleared for one reason or another.  He seemed resigned that it would never happen.

It would be great to get DePaul back and might be important for MU, since I think we are in for another  conference mix-up.  I can't put the why, into words, but I think DePaul having a good brand helps us.

[The Special Brew]

DePaul wouldn't need TIF anyway since they are not-for-profit.  They would likely just negotiate some sort of "payment for services" and agree to some sort of parking tax.

I'm vehemently and violently (well, not that bad) against TIF's...just a terrible creation. But I'm totally up to speed on how the work, get created and who may take advantage of them. I don't know that there are limits as to how the City Council can create them but they're generally to spur development. I'd guess there's no way DePaul would get it at Ful and Shef, but they could get it for one of the other locations.

[Benny B]

I was a home owner on Sheffield and Armitage 5bks away from either site mentioned.  I often thought about this topic. They'd need to build it on the river.  The problem with the river locations is the remediation work that is required on the land, but assuming they'd get past that, DePaul basketball would be back.  

Someone needs to go out there, bury a bunch of asbestos, toxic waste, tires, PCB's, etc. and get the land in the emergency Superfund cleanup program.

In all seriousness, any land on or near the Chicago River would likely be a high priority if designated for remediation... but even expedited through the assessment stages, it's still going to be at least a year to do the actual cleanup.  At a minimum, they're probably be looking at two years before they can even start pouring the foundation.

However, I found out that there is already remediation work going on around the Finkl Steel site... maybe those gears have already been set in motion.

[GGGG]

I'm vehemently and violently (well, not that bad) against TIF's...just a terrible creation. But I'm totally up to speed on how the work, get created and who may take advantage of them. I don't know that there are limits as to how the City Council can create them but they're generally to spur development. I'd guess there's no way DePaul would get it at Ful and Shef, but they could get it for one of the other locations.

Not sure you read my post, but I don't even think DePaul would need one....they likely wouldn't have to pay property tax anyway since it is a non profit.

[The Special Brew]

Not sure you read my post, but I don't even think DePaul would need one....they likely wouldn't have to pay property tax anyway since it is a non profit.

The City routinely grants them for anything and everything because an entity asked for it or the City wants it. Not well stated, but my point, as a follow up to yours, was that I'm not sure DePaul is eligible to take advantage of a TIF for the reason you stated and others. For remediation work on one of the other properties...possibly.

TIFs aren't really a matter of 'need.' There's a TIF in Uptown for 5 acres of prime lakefront property just off Montrose. Do you think a developer needs $30M of city money to develop it? Hell no, but it wants it and will get it.

[GGGG]

Isn't a tif just a break on property taxes that is phased out over time?  Since depaul doesn't pay property tax they wouldn't need a tif.

[Ellenson Guerrero]

Doesn't matter that DePaul is a non-profit. The point of a TIF is not to raise the value of the specific site, but rather the area as a whole. You set up a TIF district, where the increased tax revenues from that district (due to the increased property values of the area surrounding the new development) are paid into a separate account used to pay back the municipal bonds issued to finance the project. So the city will still be theoretically getting an increase in tax revenues from the stadium even if DePaul isn't paying taxes because the lot across the street will see a spike in property value (and thus tax). Basically the TIF is used to try and jump start development, using the future benefit the city receives from the development to jump start the whole process. While they are probably over used in certain cities (such as Chicago), there is probably an appropriate economic justification for them.

[GGGG]

Thank you. I should have realized that.

[The Special Brew]

Doesn't matter that DePaul is a non-profit. The point of a TIF is not to raise the value of the specific site, but rather the area as a whole. You set up a TIF district, where the increased tax revenues from that district (due to the increased property values of the area surrounding the new development) are paid into a separate account used to pay back the municipal bonds issued to finance the project. So the city will still be theoretically getting an increase in tax revenues from the stadium even if DePaul isn't paying taxes because the lot across the street will see a spike in property value (and thus tax). Basically the TIF is used to try and jump start development, using the future benefit the city receives from the development to jump start the whole process. While they are probably over used in certain cities (such as Chicago), there is probably an appropriate economic justification for them.

The future rationale of TIF's make sense. The problem is that it simply doesn't work.  The City freezes taxes for a period of time (upwards of 10 years or more). The bulk of the taxes that are supposed to go to city services like police, fire and schools instead goes into the TIF account. That money is then used to spur development (read: given to a developer), and yes, in theory, raise property values and thus property taxes thereby paying for the years of frozen (and lost) tax revenue. The problem is that the system is abused and TIF's are routinely placed in areas for development where it's not needed, including the Loop, and the city just loses revenue, nevermind the fact that we're simply handing developers tens of millions of dollars to do their job, which is, ya know, to develop.  Then again, the City's revenue structure is such a mess that we end up with privatized parking system where got raped on the value of the parking system....

Off the soapbox. If you're interested in more (from an anti-TIF POV), read Ben Joravsky at the Chicago Reader.

[Avenue Commons]

Someone needs to go out there, bury a bunch of asbestos, toxic waste, tires, PCB's, etc. and get the land in the emergency Superfund cleanup program.

In all seriousness, any land on or near the Chicago River would likely be a high priority if designated for remediation... but even expedited through the assessment stages, it's still going to be at least a year to do the actual cleanup.  At a minimum, they're probably be looking at two years before they can even start pouring the foundation.

However, I found out that there is already remediation work going on around the Finkl Steel site... maybe those gears have already been set in motion.

Does Chicago or its Mayor have any contacts in DC that could help with this?