Chicagoist: Uptown’s Wilson Yard Continues to Get No Love

lamgray

Mon, 08 Dec 2008 15:27:10 -0600

ackack. . .Have you BEEN to Uptown and really experienced what its like? The diversity is completely segregated. . unlike its neighbor Ravenswood. . .there I have neighbors with all different incomes and backgrounds, and its fantastic.

lamgray

Mon, 08 Dec 2008 15:23:17 -0600

I remember this being the big plan to break dirt on this in 2004, and yet, still no where with it. . .I lived in Uptown during this time, and was against the plan for it b/c it wasn't well devised, and Alderman Shiller (who is terrible and doesn't even live in uptown). Ward, I did the same, I live in Ravenswood too, which is SO LOVELY (and mixed income too). Has anyone been to and spent some time in Uptown lately. When I was there at Wilson and Sheridan in 2004-2006, everything east of the red line was a not so good part of town. . .everything west was pretty nice. Now, its gotten even worse. I'm all about low-income housing mix. . .but the problem people were arguing at the time there is that Uptown already had the highest low income housing in the city. . .adding more and concentrating (like it was east of the red line) will only increase the odds of a caprini green scenario happening again. . . spread it out, actually make it a mixed balance instead of putting all the lower income folks in tiny houses in concentrated areas in the ward. You can see as the concentrated low income housing has increased, so has the amount of crime in the area. . .esp in the concentrated pockets. The area also has a metadone clinic and homeless shelter too. At the time, Shiller had no idea what it was like to get harrassed everytime she walked the two blocks to the train, to have her apartment broken into by a neighbor in the building, to have prostitutes in between the building fence and trash bin/parking lot, to have drug trades across the street, or to have to call the cops on several occassions when a crazy heroin or meth addict wouldn't let you get by to get in the gate to your apartment. Why? Because her office was there and her neice lived there at the time, not Shiller. I love enthusiasm, but Shiller is doing nothing to help out people of lower income or to better her situation. . the houses are not nice, they are all consentrated in one area (cross west of the train tracks and its a totally new and gentrified neighborhood). . .her one art fair a year is cool. . but other than that, she's degrading a neighborhood that has a TON of potential. The Wilson Yard is a BAD idea.

James Cappleman

Sat, 06 Dec 2008 13:30:51 -0600

I brought up the Wilson Yard TIF in the election because it did not follow some basic standard principles of sound urban planning. (Just look at the main entrance of Aldi's on this site and observe what we've seen so far.) While it is true that there was community input with this TIF, what's not reported is that this community input has been ignored. There was also a Wilson Yard Task Force, but they met during the business day and the meetings were frequently canceled with less than 24 hours notice. There were never any minutes of these meetings, no notice of what decisions were made, and no one was allowed to know the names of the individuals who served on this task force. The housing portion is controversial because area residents have been asking for the same standards used for low-income housing that is used throughout the rest of Chicago and the rest of the country... mixed-income housing. The current plan falls below the standards of housing advocated by CHA and HUD. This does not have to be an "us versus them". It would just take a commitment by Ald. Shiller to abide by the use of best practices for affordable housing used throughout the country and she will not make that commitment. It would take a willingness to work with the community to find a workable solution, but we're labeled as haters of the poor. Unfortunately, the residents had no other recourse and it's the second lawsuit filed by residents to make their voices heard in the 46th Ward. That is the real tragedy.

ackack

Fri, 05 Dec 2008 13:48:01 -0600

Sorry - 178 units does not even come close to a Cabrini, Stateway or Robert Taylor. I worked in all three of those projects and the thing that people have a hard time remembering is that they were communities. There was an interesting article in the Atlantic this summer about this issue http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200807/memphis-crime. Similar situations to this are taking place from Zion all the way down to Riverdale right now. I won't ever say that the high rises were a good idea - but they were people's homes just tearing them down and sending people away is not a solution. Low income housing needs infrastructure and resources. Uptown has those. I don't know the answer - but NIMBY doesn't seem to be it. It's the most diverse neighborhood in a terribly segregated city. I don't think I can agree that Schiller hasn't adapted to development in her ward. I think she's trying to balance it. I can't say she's always successful but Uptown has always been a delicate balance. BTW - I was just stating my choices as a member of the neighborhood. I have given up assuming anything about people's motivations in regard to race or class. But after I had to start writing letters to keep a soup kitchen afloat after use went up 300% this year.

UTV

Fri, 05 Dec 2008 10:58:54 -0600

You know, that's the problem with this whole discussion. People who want to change business as usual in Uptown are immediately decried as racist, classist, or any other number of -ists. From my experience in Uptown, I know that absolutely no (sane) Uptowner - condo owner or not - would advocate pushing out the poor. But this particular model of public housing is a proven failure. And I do mean failure in the most abysmal sense of the word. My criticism is about this particular housing model and Shiller's inability to adapt to a changing neighborhood for the good of the ward. My criticism is not of low income housing, the poor, or races other than my own (which could be half Puerto Rican, half Aleut for all you know). Placing simplistic avatars on the sides of this debate is the kind of poisonous rhetoric that halts progress and causes division in neighborhoods.

jimbo

Fri, 05 Dec 2008 09:39:47 -0600

@Ackack - Schiller's not being a voice for low income people. She's desperately trying to keep her constituency in a changing neighborhood. And for the record, bad urban planning does not equal low income housing. Concentrated low income housing in high-rises has historically been a loser, regardless of which side of the issue you're on.

ackack

Fri, 05 Dec 2008 09:18:16 -0600

I love that 'bad urban planning' = low income housing in Uptown. With the development that has exploded in the neighborhood - low income people need a place to live (as many of their homes were converted to condos). I am sure that it would be easier to just not give them anything and pretend they don't exist, but I admire Schiller for being a voice for them. Not a lot of people are. I volunteer (and live) in the ward west of Uptown. We run a soup kitchen on tuesday nights. People who live on the block have gone to the Alderman to complain about the people we feed and the disruption to the neighborhood. They're really not welcome anywhere. Push them out of Uptown, I don't know if there is anywhere for them to go. Is that a solution? I don't know what the perfect answer is, however historically Uptown has been a place of refuge for people in need and has a social service infrastructure to support it. My choice has been to accept and try and help my neighbors. I am OK at shopping at a Target next to low income homes. Poor people are part of the world as well and I think my obligation as a citizen of the world is to witness and help.

UTV

Fri, 05 Dec 2008 07:06:11 -0600

The reason I moved from Uptown was the eagerness of Helen Shiller and her allies to make the same old mistakes in order to keep the status quo and not disturb her constituents. I moved exactly one ward west, and I can tell you, the difference is night and day.

Ward Up

Thu, 04 Dec 2008 18:49:34 -0600

This botched plan could have been averted if Mayor Mumbles had done his job. Instead, Daley let Alderman Helen Schiller play with her toys and pander to the activists who demanded a repeat of bad urban planning. The "have-nots" screamed the loudest and were able to stick it to the "haves." Drag it out. Appeal it until it's dead. Or until Holstein and other parties are bought off or give up.

Uptown Girl 32

Thu, 04 Dec 2008 17:54:57 -0600

It's doubtful that the woman who joined the city's first black mayor would hire Holsten Development, the company that demolished many of the projects in Chicago, to build more projects. That makes as much sense as some of the comments on the Obama birth certificate post. And it's single-room-occupancy.

Crackalack

Thu, 04 Dec 2008 16:54:17 -0600

Word, what the hell is a standing-room-only hotel? I'm also a former Buena Park resident, and putting 200 low-income housing units there does sound like a terrible idea. Montrose and Broadway isn't a great area, but it's not terrible, let's not make things worse.

jmagic

Thu, 04 Dec 2008 16:50:10 -0600

Pathogen - the Robert Taylor homes was exactly what came to mind when this was first proposed.

Pathogen

Thu, 04 Dec 2008 16:42:27 -0600

As a homeowner in Buena Park (the so-called more "gentrified" part of Uptown) I can not abide by a plan to consolidate 200 low-income housing units into such a small space. As history has taught us, concentrated low-income housing does not work - look no further then Cabrini Green and the Robert Taylor homes. While I both sympathize and empathize with the poor and less fortunate the only true way to make this development succeed is through mixed-income housing - the same policy gaining momentum in other large metropolitan areas (including Chicago). I love Buena Park and Uptown for its diversity and history. However, the Wilson Yard Development as it is now constituted does not make for a diverse neighborhood.

jmagic

Thu, 04 Dec 2008 16:16:09 -0600

the affordable housing component is the one that seems to stick against the gentrification crowd the most. it's this whole idea of getting everyone - rich, middle class, poor and gangbangers - to live side by side in this eutopia that is our beloved city. and while that's all well and good for some folks, others know that it just isn't possible. if you put in a Target and low-income affordable housing next to condos and single family homes what the fuck do you think is going to happen there? probably a couple B&E's and some auto thefts for starters. couple in some drug deals and just general homelessness and you've got yourself a West Side neighborhood on the North Side.

jjlthree

Thu, 04 Dec 2008 15:54:12 -0600

"standing-room-occupancy hotels" How much does it cost to stand for a night? A weekend? A month? Oh editor . . . .

happyfunball

Thu, 04 Dec 2008 15:50:32 -0600

Word. And a solid article on local politics.

jimbo

Thu, 04 Dec 2008 15:48:12 -0600

A pair of 10 story low income towers doesn't seem like a bright idea, regardless of which side of the political spectrum you subscribe to.