By Ed Lowe
Senior Writer
Plans offered by the Fourth Presbyterian Church for a high rise development on land west of the well known church at Chestnut St. and Michigan Ave. have been temporarily put on hold. Several ad hoc neighborhood groups have expressed concern at the increased density that the building would bring to an already crowded neighborhood. Ald. Burton Natarus (42nd) has withdrawn his support for the project based on community concerns.
Reports circulated by a suburban newspaper chain suggest that the Alderman has single-handedly killed the project. Nothing could be further from the truth.
The already densely developed Magnificent Mile neighborhood has had a spurt of development over the past decades. The Fourth Presbyterian Church is a fixture in the area, and has been since before most of this development ever began. Properties like Water Tower Place, the Hancock Building and the Bloomingdale Building at 900 N. Michigan Ave. are all within a block of the proposed condo development. The Fourth Presbyterian lot, to the west of the church structure, and containing some 62,000 square feet, would hold some 240 condominiums in addition to six floors which would remain a part of the church's complex. The height of the proposed structure, which has run into such a maelstrom of protest from nearby groups, would be 64 floors. Considering that the Hancock is 102 Stories tall, this building would be well within the parameters of the neighborhood.
Objections to the property range from increased traffic density to "shading." "Shading" is the term used by people who are already located in nearby buildings who feel that the new construction would cause their access to direct sunlight to be impacted by the proposed construction. However, many of the people who have expressed their concerns about "shading" are in properties to the south of the proposed building, so they would not experience a reduction in sunlight. Density and traffic concerns are certainly valid, but Rev. John Buchanan, pastor of the church, points out that most of the neighborhood traffic is attracted by the restaurants, highly successful retail establishments and hotels that surround the property.
The location of the development has been erroneously reported as being at "850 N. Michigan Ave." The property is actually much further west than Michigan Ave. and would probably have to use a Chestnut St. or Delaware St. address to accurately reflect its location.
In an exclusive interview with Inside, Rev. Buchanan gave his reaction to the neighborhood's campaign to prevent the church from constructing the building. "The neighborhood groups, from the outset, have been pretty much opposed to the plan on the basis of what they consider to be density problems and congestion as well as shadowing," he said. "We think that the project is not as problematic as our neighbors think it will be. We don't feel that the traffic impact from this condominium tower will significantly make the problem worse.
"We think that the condominium is a pretty benign use of this property. Parking has been planned for the development and we are making sure that the City's requirements are fully met. We would not add at all to the parking problem in the neighborhood and we designed the garage so that the people would not be waiting outside to get into the facility. People planning to park in the building would drive in off the street to access the parking in the building. We don't think that would be a major thing.
"The property as planned will be a joint development with Edward R. James and Associates and Opus North Corporation, both of whom are experienced high rise developers."
Rev. Buchanan clarified that the existence of a fall-back plan, as reported by the Chicago Sun-Times in a recent issue, was not correct. That report said, "The church's contract with the developers foresaw the possibility of city rejection. It provided for a lower payment, down to $13 million, if the city insisted on a smaller building." His response to this report was: "That actually was a misunderstanding and there was actually no fall-back plan. We have not talked about that and I think it was an honest misunderstanding. It was based on some information we had provided regarding the cost of our part of the facility and they got that wrong. We don't have a fall-back position."
With regard to the position taken by Ald. Natarus, Rev. Buchanan told Inside, "The alderman and I have had multiple conversations. I regard Ald. Natarus as a friend and our relationship goes back many years. We're certainly aware that there's lots of building, and that building generally is a pretty good thing for the City. Our project would take property that isn't currently on the tax rolls and put it on the tax rolls so that it would generate between $5 and $7 million dollars annually for the City. We know that the City needs the money."
The church would occupy about 75,000 square feet of space on the first six floors of the proposed building, which would be used for church expansion and to serve the church community needs and those of the City in general.
"We haven't started any conversations regarding a compromise on the plans we have proposed," said Rev. Buchanan. "We're still trying to figure out the meaning of what the Alderman has said and what our best strategy would be in this instance. We're looking ahead toward a presentation in front of the plan commission, the zoning commission and, ultimately, the full City Council. We understand the realities of politics in the City. We hope that the official position of city officials will be that this is good for the City and good for the neighborhood.
"Any change in the plans would have to run through the democratic process that governs the church. We just haven't done that yet."
Various developments are possible on property owned by the Scottish Rite Masons only a block from the Church and subject to the same community concerns as the Fourth Presbyterian proposals. Rev. Buchanan was reluctant to comment on someone else's problems but acknowledged that the same community interest groups will confront both developments.
With regard to the protesting groups, Rev. Buchanan said, "[There is] some inconsistency within the protesting groups which is why the church is maintaining its position. As to the ‘shadowing effect,' there's shadowing from lots of other buildings. Many of them were built long after the church was a part of the City and no one seemed bothered by their development. We don't think that this proposed building will contribute significantly to this problem. It's a very slender and graceful building."
In charge of the project for the church is Allison Cooper Chisholm whose official title is Director of Project Light. She clarified that the builders who are planning the development are actually purchasing the air rights above the sixth floor level, for the condo development.
The co-developer of the project, Jerry James of Edward R. James and Associates, also spoke about the plans being advanced for the building. James' company has been in business since 1949 and has built several high rise apartment buildings in the Chicago area. They are now working on a couple of high rise apartment buildings in the Minneapolis area. James told Inside that the plan for the building would present a mix of one, two and three bedroom apartments with several penthouse units included. Prices would range from the high $400,000s to well over $1 million for the penthouse units. Clearly, this will be luxury housing for a neighborhood that values such units.
The James Company will be working in conjunction with Opus North Corporation, another builder active in North Side developments.
The classic conflict between neighborhood groups interested in preserving the ambiance of their area, versus the right of property owners to develop land to its highest and best use, is in play in this project. Over-development is always a concern and any addition to the area's housing stock should be carefully examined as to its impact on the community. On the other hand, a stance some would characterize as NIMBY (Not In My Backyard) doesn't help the City meet its constant need for increased revenues. A compromise may be in the future of this project, which will leave both neighborhood groups and the Church's interests less than fully satisfied. |
