Website Home   or   Forum Home

Riverside Info » About Riverside

1. MikeT
   Member

   In the 'But For The TIF, there'd be no development' thread, Mr Pilarz and Kim triggered questions to explore that have been in my mind and that I thought should have its own thread. It is actually at the base of this whole TIF initiative: 'the need to have a beautiful d.t.' as Katy Rush said in a Tribune article. But beauty might be in the eye of the beholder. Some might say a LaGrange/Oak Park, strong commercial presence is 'BEAUTIFUL'. Some might say THAT would be BLIGHT. Some might say a one horse slow quiet d.t. is BLIGHT.

   So a subtext of this thread could be: the CBD: BLIGHT or BEAUTY?

   Some questions are:

   *why has Riverside's CBD seem to be languishing for a fair period of time?

   In the 1987 general article on Riverside that pictured my home, 56 Pine, I noticed that it quoted the village manger at the time, struggling with the same thing that we are struggling with now. In it he says Riverside is basically a bedroom community.

   *what factors are needed for businesses to survive and thrive in Riverside (CBD?)?

   *is a TIF needed for businesses to come in? why can't they just do it the old fashioned American way: identify a market and serve it? Even if businesses / developers get incentives or help, is that all they need or are there other factors that might be present in Riverside that will impede success?

   *in the discussion, please feel free to include Harlem av if that seems to be relevant and productive

   *implied in this is the basic question behind the current debate, I think: what do you want Riverside to be like? Like Lagrange? or a quiet one horse town? When I hear the words in this forum such as 'thrive', 'success', 're-vitalized', what is meant?

   I think that the EDC view of 'success' might be different than other folks, say, the Olmsted society, to put a few names out there. Maybe not?

   Specifically I am talking about the non-Olmsted part of Riverside since the Olmsted part is protected.

   Mr Pilarz, for example said---
   The most important point is why do we need a TIF to create a CBD like LaGrange, Hinsdale, Western Springs and Oak Park?

   Mr Pilarz also mentions nat'l chains.

   Let's say we want nat'l chains here. What would be needed to attract and keep them?

   I heard from someone that Walgreens would not even LOOK at the Henninger site because it only sites in places with at least 20,000 people or something like that.

   What I am possibly suggesting is that those chains are smart and would not come to Riverside's CBD since there is no good pipe to bring people to their stores. Since we cannot mess w/ the roads (widen and straighten them, for example), if access is a significant factor, maybe we should make sure our vision of the CBD does not include chains.

   The hard nosed entrepreneurial business people should chime in, too. SHOW ME THE NUMBERS someone said recently.

   mike

   Posted Thursday Dec 21, 2006 01:57 #

2. Catherine
   Member

   I'll tell you what I see Mike. 70% of the residents responding to the Riverside NIU survery said they want FOOD downtown: restaurants, take-out, groceries, yet the TOD repeated emphasizes retail stores and services, which very few want. The market has been identified for all comers : SERVE IT! Even tourists would want to sit down and eat. And I don't mean Taco Bell! I'm sure food is an idea everyone can get behind, it will increase sales taxes, contribute to atmosphere, and not require gargantuan buildings.

   NATIONAL CHAINS? Get out of town, as the saying goes.

   IMO, the Olmsted vision near downtown has already been compromised by the development at Longcommon/Burlington.

   Downtown Oak Park and LaGrange are as ugly as sin, and too crowded to want to drive in. But at least they have peripheral arteries to stick the ugly stuff on where it can be avoided by the residents. We have only Harlem Avenue, an opportune site for the free market one would think.

   Posted Thursday Dec 21, 2006 08:26 #

3. idic5
   Member

   See my Toward an ROD thread for my views on d.t. vision.

   Yes, food, pizza for friends, families, and the kids' teams and the theatre kids afterthe practice ans shows.

   bicycle shop. strollers, both with babies and just strollers! pedestrian oriented development (POD)

   toward a rod, a pod, not a tod.

   Let's eat, folks! I have old time friends from Oak Park who I just discovered come each week to dine at the chew chew.

   And someone show me the numbers!

   no to nat'l chains. Riverside is unique. N of 1 as they say in social psychology.

   blue parrot. n of 1; everyone start singing LaMarsellaise!
   chew chew cool scott zimmer
   cool water tower - thank you mr wiaduck!
   fresh express - best oatmeal cookies and iced green tea. we dont need ya starbucks.
   little bohemian; THIS bohemian still loves his breaded pork tenderloin every once in a while for a treat;
   the foods. OPA!

   DO IT!

   mike

   Posted Thursday Dec 21, 2006 11:19 #

4. ChrisHajer
   Member

   Mike, when we want to go out to dinner, we go to Oak Park and LaGrange! It sure would be nice to be able to stay in town and have a choice of places to go.

   Chris

   Posted Thursday Dec 21, 2006 11:25 #

5. corbi328
   Member

   "yet the TOD repeated emphasizes retail stores and services, which very few want."

   Catherine,

   Can you be more specific as to what retails stores and services are outlined in the TOD that " very few want"? How do you know very few want those retail stores and services? Do you not consider restaurants to be retail stores and services?

   Posted Thursday Dec 21, 2006 11:37 #

6. Catherine
   Member

   Professional services, antique and gift shops, retail stores such as children's clothing and toys. Then see the NIU study for the percentage of people who want them, or want more. The percentage of professional services presently here substantially exceeds the percentage now present. No, I did not take restaurants to be retail stores as the term was used there, as they gave examples like antique and gift shops,which were wanted by few, children's clothes and toys (!), etc. The emphasis on open plate glass windows for businesses was prominently highlighted, yet this is not conducive to dinner, but to retail displays. I DO think a shop where children could spend their modest amounts of money in volume may have a market. They would certainly enjoy it anyway!

   Posted Thursday Dec 21, 2006 11:59 #

7. corbi328
   Member

   I can tell you that the Board of Trustees and EDC are not emphasizing professional services. We believe that market is saturated and feel that some of those businesses unnecessarily occupy valuable first floor storefront space that is more appropriate for retail businesses. Ideally we would like to see some of those professional services firms move to second floor spaces in the future.

   Just as an FYI, the EDC is considering a new survey that would provide more granularity about the types of businesses needed and wanted in the Village. If we do proceed, we hope to get input from all of you.

   Posted Thursday Dec 21, 2006 12:07 #

8. idic5
   Member

   I know scully mentioned wishing to do something with ogden and harlem during the 12-18 board mtg.

   1) is that corner riverside?

   2) does that bldng provide decent revenue to the village? by scully expressing a bitof pining for it, suggests it does not.

   3) Scully is rt - that corner is exposed to the greatest number of cars in town - assuming it is riverside, and there seems to be a lot of sq footage there too. edc people- are we getting a good return - revenue per sq ft there vs what we THEORETICALLY COULD get? just curious. I guess this philospohy major is thinking like a banker-general.

   I'm planning here, boss! +

   +a reference to cool hand luke;

   mike
   56 pine

   Posted Thursday Dec 21, 2006 16:58 #

9. Catherine
   Member

   Corbi, "granularity", love it. Well, you can't have too many surveys; I hope another will come. I cannot think how professional services generate sales or property tax. Do you mean the second floors of existing buildings that do not suit condos? Because in new buildings, condos on the second floor would at least generate property tax.

   Mike, I believe trustee Scully followed his remark by, "but there is a medical facility there." Perhaps he meant they have special protection, or possibly that it would be bad form to replace it with a Wal-Mart. One does look with pining (no pun intended) at Harlem Avenue, so perfect in its complete ugliness as to - after many, many years of suffering it - almost seem endearingly so.

   Posted Friday Dec 22, 2006 11:14 #

10. corbi328
    Member

    I did mean moving them to second floors of existing buildings. What's wrong with the word "granularity" when used in that context?

    As far as the corner of Harlem and Ogden is concerned, it is part of Riverside and it is currently occupied mostly by medical services oriented entities. In my mind that lot and the Harlem and Ogden avenue corridors should be part of the long term solution to our issue of a minimal commercial revenue base.

    Posted Friday Dec 22, 2006 12:10 #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply »

You must log in to post.