Riverside Info » About Riverside

clear cutting downtown riverside

(32 posts)
  • Started 3 years ago by chrisrobling
  • Latest reply from spatny
1 2 3 4

  1. chrisrobling
    Member

    dear riverside info reader: this is an 11/28/2006 email that built on widespread negative reaction to the TIF document's eligibility memo. more on that later. best regards, chris robling
    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

    dear (recipient),

    my opinion:

    1. stop this plan
    2. re-direct to a truly comprehensive visioning and planning
    process, which will take one year and will thoroughly thrash out every
    point we need to cover
    3. hold the administration accountable for this outrage.

    i agree with your point re downtown.

    but their assertion is in my opinion even more insidious and thus more
    deeply troubling. if you read the 'eligibility memo' carefully, as i am
    sure you have, you find it is the most anti-preservation doc published
    by riverside certainly since the 1970 nhl designation. it is anathema
    to EVERYTHING the place is and stands for. it grounds a repudiation of
    the preservation ethic because it equates age with obsolescence. here
    is a flavor: " As a whole, the area suffers from poor design and layout
    which is manifested in several instances..."

    i am almost at the point of saying it grounds a clear-cutting of the
    downtown...

    almost.

    i do not think we have yet developed the basis on which to determine
    whether a tif in downtown is / is not called for. i am prepared to
    support a pay-as-you-go tif for dowtown, but NOT before all of the
    appropriate steps are taken, and CERTAINLY NOT on the basis of this
    outrageous doc (pls see below).

    i think a tif right now for harlem avenue might be a brilliant idea, and
    i wish i had thought of it. i just learned on sunday from jim louthen
    that berwyn is now -- under its reasonable new administration --
    initiating a sub-area plan for its side of the harlem / bnsf
    intersection. this is a once-in-a-generation opportunity for us to
    better develop a neglected part of our town which has the traffic to be
    successful inconcert with our neighbor.

    i am appalled at the notions of increasing traffic and 'modernizing' our
    downtown.

    the more i read, the worse this gets.

    best,

    chris

    Posted Thursday Dec 28, 2006 11:07 #

  2. Catherine
    Member

    Chris, thank you for joining the forum. At a recent meeting, one of the trustees - cannot remember which - said, "everyone keeps telling me to do it at Harlem, but how can we do it there? There are all those condos. Tell me what to do with Harlem."

    It's a good point a lot of people would be displaced. So many towns make money off Harlem Avenue. It makes me wonder how it happened that Riverside had housing develop there. THAT would have been a good place for ground floor shops with condos above.

    Posted Thursday Dec 28, 2006 16:17 #

  3. HRCollins
    Member

    chrisrobling - No one is going to "clear cut" downtown Riverside. It simply amazes me that some people think that downtown Riverside is going to become like the intersection of Harlem and Lake Street in OP/RF.

    If the TIF provides money to update the village'sbusiness districts infrastructure, provide some incentive to local shop owners to update or in another word "modernize" their physical plants or help a new business come to Riverside we should say job well done.

    I do not see great increases in traffic in downtown Riverside. It is not like a riverboat casino is going to be placed in Swan Pond.

    As I have posted before and change to Riverside will be done a slow controlled manner.

    Posted Thursday Dec 28, 2006 16:38 #

  4. MikeSedivy
    Member

    Chris - I find your input valuable, but do want to make sure I understand your global position. As I read through your posts, my summary is that 1) you recognize a need for a re-development of portions of the CBD, 2) you are not necessarily against a pay-as-you-go TIF, and 3) you obviously feel there was insufficient planning in the current Redevelopment Plan. Do you feel that a TIF with the proper Redevelopment Plan is something you would support? I apologize for the paraphrasing, but do want to make sure I understand your position.

    Posted Thursday Dec 28, 2006 16:57 #

  5. MikeT
    Member

    HRCollins-thanks for relieving my mind about a casino. I HAVE heard that mentioned.

    With apologies to Dostoyevsky, 'When there is no plan, all is permitted.'.

    So we need that plan, and it should be a village wide comprehensive plan, and not a 'MINI comprehensive plan' (a recent Village newsletter mentions this), and not a TRANSIT ORIENTED development plan. How about a Riverside Oriented Plan, an ROD?

    Let's put HRCollins' goals (and limits) in writing after the community has bought into these limits and goals.

    HARLEM
    Harlem is big and long. WHen we talk about Harlem, we need to say specifically where on Harlem. Is there anywhere on Harlem where there would not be displacement?

    I know there is a building on Burlington and HArlem that seems vacant and is for sale. That area seems to be commercial-ish if I recall.

    I heard that comment from Mr Scully, I believe. I am, of course, very sensitive to displacement. I live at 56 PIne, one of the properties targeted for displacement in the current tif plan.

    mike

    Posted Thursday Dec 28, 2006 17:02 #

  6. Catherine
    Member

    "No one is going to "clear cut" downtown Riverside. It simply amazes me that some people think that downtown Riverside is going to become like the intersection of Harlem and Lake Street in OP/RF."

    The B2 zoning ordinance allows wall to wall development of Village Common type buildings or, with more variances, worse. Until I see otherwise in writing, I will say the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

    "If the TIF provides money to update the village's business districts infrastructure, provide some incentive to local shop owners to update or in another word "modernize" their physical plants or help a new business come to Riverside we should say job well done."

    Also a good intention, but the desire to do this is not sufficient to qualify the town for a TIF. Local shop owners could also find their buildings "acquired" for more vertical structures.

    Posted Thursday Dec 28, 2006 18:23 #

  7. MikeT
    Member

    'Without a plan, all is permitted'. clear cutting is possible.

    To use the language of the Powell Doctrine,

    What is our exit strategy?

    When do we know we have met our mission's goals?

    is it all EAV as our measure of success? what is our horizon or payback period over which to evaluate initiatives?

    How much EAV increase do we need?

    Can we feasibly meet that goal thru retail, either thru cleaning fixing up buffing our current retail or thru incentives to other retailers?

    or if we cannot do it thru retail, does that mean we need to do it thru high density residential developments? how much rez dev do we need to get where we want to be?

    I guess some of these and more questions can be properly explored with planning sessions.

    mike

    Posted Thursday Dec 28, 2006 19:53 #

  8. ChrisHajer
    Member

    I don't think the money is in retail, at least not from improving what we have now. When the 1% sales tax increase was passed, the village stated that would net Riverside about $170K ($177K in another article) - so if 1% sales tax gets us $170K, then currently 8.75% gets us almost $1.5M. We'd have to double our sales to double that sales tax revenue. And at the time the proposal was being shopped around, Candi Grace spoke to the Central School PTA and said most of that sales tax revenue came from the east portion of Brookfield Zoo (if you go to the zoo, buy your hot dog at the Safari grill and your t-shirts at Seven Seas: you'll be helping Riverside with your tax dollars) and from the gas stations /convenience stores on Harlem Ave. Neither of those sales tax generating concerns are within the CBD, and also, those tax dollars are coming in large part from non-residents.

    I think it has to come from increased EAV, not a bump in sales tax revenue.

    Posted Thursday Dec 28, 2006 21:08 #

  9. MikeT
    Member

    ok. can someone tell me the factors that affect EAV for
    commercial property
    mixed use
    residential

    if eav is a goal, how do make it go up in each of these kinds of properties? the first two comprise the cbd proper. the last category is outside the cbd but in the current tif scope.

    thanks for any info

    mike

    Posted Thursday Dec 28, 2006 23:04 #

  10. CandiGrace
    Member

    EAV stands for equalized assessed value. It's how much the Cook County Asssessor thinks your property is worth multiplied by an equalization factor. So how do we make it go up? By making property more valuable. For example, if all the condos at the Village Center sell, then the EAV of that property goes way up.

    Posted Friday Dec 29, 2006 08:35 #

RSS feed for this topic

1 2 3 4

Reply »

You must log in to post.