by Ronald Roenigk
PublisherBattle lines have formed over the proposed Armitage Halsted Landmark District. Once-friendly neighbors are now pitted against each other in a protracted fight over the future of Lincoln Park's most desirable and unique commercial district.
Some 225 Lincoln Parkers packed a community meeting Thursday night at DePaul's Schmidt Academic Center, 2320 N. Kenmore Ave., to debate the pros and cons of the new designation. Emotions ran high during the nearly three-hour cheering and jeering session with many people still wishing to speak as the meeting came to a close.
"We haven't had a meeting like this since [residential] permit parking," said Fritz Peterson, an area resident who ironically fought against "urban removal"—the city's teardown of old buildings—to help save historic properties in the area in the 1960s and 70s. And indeed there were accusations of mischief, threats and tampering similar to an old fashioned Chicago political campaign.
"I had two people call me at the store and threaten me," said Daniel O'Donnell, owner of Armitage Ace Hardware, 925 W. Armitage Ave., who has led the unenviable defense for the area's commercial property owners. "My gal who was handing out meeting notices at the Armitage el stop was accosted by some people who tried to take her fliers and threatened to have her arrested. We posted these same notices all over the area but they were ripped down and taken out of stores...Other people have told me they can no longer shop in my store. Now I know how the gladiators felt about walking out into the Coliseum."
O'Donnell's fliers ask for a moratorium on landmark preservation for three years, during which time owners would upgrade the Victorian look of 15 properties. With the help of the alderman the owners would control the facades of new and existing buildings. Unattractive new condos would be prevented by the revised zoning code and a landmark designation would not be needed.
The area being considered for landmark designation includes 130 mostly commercial and mixed use buildings, all located roughly on the west side of Halsted St. from Webster St. to Armitage Ave. and on both sides of Armitage Ave. from Halsted St. to Racine Ave. The east side of Halsted St. is not included because, ironically, about 30 years ago the city bulldozed the brownstones and graystones that once graced that side and permitted the construction of condominiums. The landmark process was put into motion in February of 2001 and may take until mid 2003 to implement.
While many people did have a chance to present their opinions Thursday, in the end, few seemed satisfied that the meeting accomplished much other than to put Ald. Vi Daley (43rd) squarely in the middle of the issue. She is likely to be the final arbiter of the proposal.
"We thought it was a very good meeting," said Chuck Eastwood, chief of staff for Ald. Daley. "The property owners, merchants and community groups all had a chance to get their points out and now we want to see what the final positions of all the parties will be.
"It's a difficult proposition and some of the response was unexpected but we understand that there are concerns about potential limitations over future use of their properties," said Eastwood. "We've always been very supportive of that area and we would like to sit down with the property owners to see what we can do to see that the zoning is as flexible as it can be."
But most of the affected property owners just want to be left alone. "I don't want the city as a partner in my building," said Francis Allred, a commercial property owner in the proposed Landmark area. "I don't want them telling me what I can and can't do with my property. I'm for the highest and best use and there is nothing wrong with that. "
"I own only one building but it's my future, all my personal wealth—it's my office and retirement plan," said Dr. Lori Portnoy, owner of Alpha Family Chiropractor, 954 W. Armitage Ave. "I can't afford to lose my building—just think about us."
While area residents were concerned mostly over preservation and the aesthetic appearance of the streets, by contrast many of the property owners were concerned over the economics of the proposal. "Any added regulations will add incremental costs to a property's overhead," said Gil Matar, chairman of the Lincoln Park Chamber of Commerce. "National chains are coming to Lincoln Park and mom-and-pop operations are leaving because they can no longer afford the cost of doing business here. No matter how much we all may like strolling down this street and keeping it the way it is, increased costs will only accelerate that transition."
"Last year I decided to rebuild my building," said Aaron Spivak, owner of 904 W. Armitage Ave. "I was going to make it my home and perhaps two floors of commercial. The current building's nothing special and not very good for retail but what I was going to build would have been. Nobody wants retail space with concrete stairs leading up the front. So I asked my tenants to vacate it in January so that I could rebuild it."
Unknown to Spivak and other area property owners at the time was that under the proposed designation, a moratorium was put on any new construction in the area. "I didn't find out about the Landmark Designation until I went in for my permits. As a result I was stuck with an empty building that I can't do anything with. I have a 3,000 square-foot lot, but the building is a small cottage, only 1,300 square feet. In an area that gets $400 a square foot for prime retail [when sold] you do the math. I have lost a lot of money and my future home." While he would like to tear down the small building in order to erect the much more valuable large building, he won't be able to tear it down if restricted by a designation.
But the tales of lost rents, fewer property rights and limited future uses swayed few residents in attendance as members of both the Ranch Triangle and Sheffield Neighbors associations spoke strongly in favor of the designation. The landmark initiative grew out of neighbors' concerns after two recent projects on Armitage Ave. that changed the facades of two buildings.
"We take the concerns of the property owners very seriously," said Brian Abramson, a board members of Sheffield Neighbors. "We have two alternatives, Landmark Designation or nothing at all. I feel the benefits outweigh the concerns."
A proposal by O'Donnell offered a third alternative but it has yet to take hold and many neighbors don't seem to want to even consider it. "We're asking for a three year moratorium on the designation so we can form our own community review and oversight board," he said. "I have commitments from 86 property owners representing 106 buildings to join in this plan, so why can't you put your trust in us? We've managed these properties pretty well for 100 years now. I have also commitments from 15 building owners who all want to do historic rehabs. We'll upgrade these buildings just like we've done with the others. All I'm asking is for you to give us a chance."
Due to downzoning many of the structures in the area could not be re-built today to their current density levels and property owners point out that economics and lower zoning will keep most of the properties from ever being leveled. But that argument against needing a protective designation swayed few.
Some property owners seem resigned to their fate. "We'll have this shoved down our throats just like downzoning and permit parking," said Tim Glascott, a lifelong resident of Lincoln Park and owner of a number of affected properties.
In a related development, a proposed extension of the Washington Square landmark district on the Near North Side has led to Ald. Burton Natarus' (42nd) introducing an ordinance into City Council that would exempt from landmark protection status those buildings whose owners object to the designation.
Printable Version