I remember a law office (maybe Joe Dvorak?) on the second floor of the Arcade. They left well before the shoe repair guy, the hair salon, the cleaners and the Chew Chew. Take a trip down memory lane and click on the tag "arcade." It is downright errie to read the posts from 2 years ago. Same problem, still no solutions.
Riverside Info » About Riverside
Arcade out to bid! Bids due May 15!!
(67 posts)-
Posted Wednesday May 27, 2009 23:46 #
-
The building is aready there. The space is defined. It is empty. Six-10 older folks living in the place and patronizing a coffee shop is not exactly high density. Rezoning Harlem or Pine or building the VC on an empty lot to four floors is high density. Getting sucked into this deal by the waving carrot of nine condos on a lot with no parking is high density. This is occupying a space we have to find a use for...
BTW -today there is an item that shows the Wxtrust debacle even screwed some of the South African prisoners who were on Robben Island - some bogus diamond deal these guys were fronting in Namibia.
Posted Thursday May 28, 2009 07:37 # -
I believe Flight already has a job, but his volunteer consultancy services would be highly valuable.
Yes, we want the Arcade to be fully occupied. That density remark is inapposite.
NO, there is not sufficient moderately priced housing for seniors. THAT is what there was a demand for downtown. Instead we got condos that cost more than many homes here. We have lifelong residents here who want to downsize. My building is very popular with seniors. Seniors who were living on fixed incomes have seen their bond yields and stock values tank on top of it. It is an idea worth considering. Also, we have areas that are zoned for assisted living. In a nursing home, you only get one room.
Law offices do not yield tax revenues. No great loss. The Chew Chew took over the shoe repair space. All the business tenants were kicked out by Wextrust.
Posted Thursday May 28, 2009 08:33 # -
Based on a quick and highly unscientific search on realtor.com, there are around 25 condos for sale in Riverside priced under $300,000. Quite a few have been on the market for a while. It seems to me that the demand for moderately priced housing is being served. Honestly, I don't see many Riverside seniors clamoring to move into a single room in a building next to the train. Still, it's an idea and deserves consideration.
I hate to say this, but sometimes buildings outlive their usefulness. Absent a complete rehab, for a specific and clearly defined purpose, I'm afraid the Arcade may be one of these. As much as I dislike advocating government intervention, I think it will be required to save the building and to ensure it is turned into something useful.
Posted Thursday May 28, 2009 08:53 # -
I just wanted people to consider some other use besides an office for bookkeepers or quaint rooms at an Inn, etc. There is no correlation between people who want to rent and those that buy. $300K is out of the question for many people - rental is a completely different market. Irrespective of what goes in to the upstairs, I think what most people would like to see go in downstairs is pretty much what was there - a few small businesses including a bar/rest (or vv.) It is the ground floor tenants that people want to see move in - but the deal has o be structured so that the tenants can make money - and that may not be easy or even possible to do.
If the Village got the building for nothing, who would invest the dough it would take to rehab the building? And then how would that person get his money and a profit back? What would the ground floor rents be? How much would the tenant have to invest tobe able to operate? What would he have to charge for what he sells? How much would his operating costs be? Is there enough of a market - with the Chew Chew and the Jem and the other nearby places already there to be able to confidently forecast enough volume for him to make expenses, overhead and a profit? What will be the effect of this place on the other aforementioned places we already have? hat about the space in the VC?
Restaurants have a voracious appetite for money, and you can't live on just a few customers. It may be necessary to think about this building for other uses, maybe some partial public sector use, which is what I said years ago. I'm sorry to say that I can't see anyone with their head screwed on investing the build out to go in that space. The profit potential just isn't there.
Posted Thursday May 28, 2009 09:10 # -
Here's the URL for the article on the Wextrust effect in Namibia...
Posted Thursday May 28, 2009 09:15 # -
Hmm, I had not heard anyone mention the possibility of the Arcade being used as an "Inn", until Spatny said he was just trying to come up with other ideas...
As someone not originally from the Chicago area, I absolutely love the idea of our town having an Inn or a B&B. Today, we simply have horrible options for our relatives and friends to come visit...especially when more than a mated couple wants to come at the same time.
Not to mention, I think it would directly support the idea/efforts of making Riverside a "destination". The location is perfect (central, train, views, stores, etc).
And I would think that it would also help support/make it a realistic possibility to have a financially successful restaurant co-located.
I have no understanding of what an Inn's business model looks like, but this is the most attractive idea I've heard for the Arcade so far~
Posted Thursday May 28, 2009 10:01 # -
KIM has done a pro-forma and has a plan - she will probably tll you how you can get involved...
Posted Thursday May 28, 2009 10:15 # -
Yes, this thing of having no B&Bs in town is a market niche. Visitors, relatives, etc.
You can buy a HOUSE in Riverside now for 300K. I'm talking 150K+. You think no one who lives here, who raised a family here, cannot afford 300K? You would be wrong.
If the business numbers don't work, how about that idea of forming a non-profit. Could preservation-minded investors not take tax deductions? I know the old owner used to say he could take deductions for empty storefronts because historical bldg. That was how he used to convince people to pay more rent. Anyway, then it could be used for something as long as it paid for its maintenance.
Remember the Sullivan house. We could be making boatloads of money off that today if it had been saved. Judy Barr Topinka once wrote about the tourism dollars we have lost by tearing down historic buildings.
Posted Thursday May 28, 2009 10:45 # -
You can buy a HOUSE in Riverside now for 300K. I'm talking 150K+. You think no one who lives here, who raised a family here, cannot afford 300K? You would be wrong.
Not sure I get your point. Mine is that there are a number of low-maintainence options available in Riverside for under 300K. I'm also pretty sure that most folks seeking to downsize from a larger home could afford this, so I think we agree. I don't know what the rental market is like, but there are a lot of apartments in Riverside, so that's available as well.
Remember the Sullivan house. We could be making boatloads of money off that today if it had been saved.
I agree that the Babson estate should have been saved. However, not so sure about the boatload of money. I've noted before that the public's interest in architecture and landscape architecture is limited. I don't think we have the critical mass of significant architecture to make Riverside a real tourist destination. I think more can be done, and I think we can market ourselves more, but we'll never be Oak Park. (And, incidentally, does anyone know if architourism in Oak Park actually generates revenue that trickles down to the taxpayer? I think most of the tours are run by the Frank Lloyd Wright Preservation Trust. I'm sure the tourists buy lunch in Oak Park, but we're not talking huge sums of tax revenue here, are we?)
Posted Thursday May 28, 2009 11:23 #
Reply »
You must log in to post.