 |
| Is The Seville the next building to be fixed up? |
Mark Caplan was quoted by Benjamin Woodard as saying
On the flip side one could say this the future hasn't looked this bright for Rogers Park and Uptown since the eighties. These neighborhoods were not designed to be down and out. And the Astor House was not originally built with affordable or low income housing in mind. It is a beautiful terra cotta 1920's masterpiece. If the new owners want to restore it to its original splendor what is wrong with that?"This particular time in history is the worst gentrification I have seen" since the '80s, he said. "This is something we have to stop because it affects the survival of the community."
Rogers Park has amazing housing stock and lakefront location, is it a surprise that developers are finally fixing up the largest of the apartment buildings now? Looking at Astor House it looks like a typical fancy building in New York City off of Central Park on the upper west or east sides. The marketplace for apartments and homes in Rogers Park fell in the past due to white flight and the rise of the suburbs. The neighborhood's fortunes are changing as the city of Chicago is now booming. Marching onto the new owner's home will not change that fact. But this march was precipitated by the clumsy forceful manner that the new landlords tried to force out the tenants, as opposed to how the Farcroft building and its changeover was handled.
Please continue reading for more pictures and words
Last update 4/15/13 7:00 am
4/10/13 Blogger Update - Thought this blog post was lost, it wasn't. It just posted on the wrong day, it was supposed to have been posted on 2/28/13. Its entitled Astor Place on Pratt.
4/14/13 9:00 pm Blogger Update #2 - Rukidding brings up good points on how to fix up an old building of this size, in comparing and contrasting how the Farcroft renovation was handled compared with Astor Place's.
1) The old tenants of Farcroft were given 6 months to find a new place.
2) The tenants (of the Farcroft) were treated with respect and some that had troubles finding new places were given extra time and the mgmt. co. was very involved in helping them out.
3) There was no need to march on Mr. Pritzker's home with the way the former tenants were treated. Everyone should be so fortunate when a building changes ownership.
4) You should be praising his dedication to historical restoration and be thankful it is still a rental building for everyone to enjoy. (We do praise Mr. Pritzker for his dedication to the restoration of this building The Farcroft and is why so much time has been spent here illustrating that very point)
However Rukidding is not entirely correct on all points
1) It (Farcroft) was neither low income nor affordable but was almost being taken over by the city as there were so many code violations. The place was a dump. (Astor Place is a dump and Farcroft was never high income or unaffordable)
2) Should the citizens have just waited until the city took over and then tore it (the Farcroft) down because of the extensive repairs that were done to the building that only certain individuals can afford. (Is this not the same case with Astor Place? Can't imagine it is in much better shape than what the Farcroft was.)
7 comments:
The big loaded term gentrification has been thrown about in conjunction with Rogers Park in a serious fashion until recently.
It is true that once the large apartment buildings turn over and are rehabbed that you will see true demographic changes.
Farcroft's previous tenants didn't march on Pritzker's home somehow.
Looking at Farcroft versus the Astor house they are comparable buildings on many levels. Both built at about the same time, large elevator apartment buildings with lakeviews and near beautiful Lake Michigan beaches.
Astor House doesn't have the sound of low income housing either. John Astor was a real estate tycoon in the old days in NewYorkCity.
Oops *HASN'T been thrown about
OMG is there a protest somewhere that I missed?! LOLZZ!
Philip:
I wish you would do more factual blogging.
The old tenants of Farcroft were given 6 months to find a new place.
It was neither low income nor affordable but was almost being taken over by the city as there were so many code violations. The place was a dump.
The tenants were treated with respect and some that had troubles finding new places were given extra time and the mgmt. co. was very involved in helping them out.
There was no need to march on Mr. Pritzker's home with the way the former tenants were treated. Everyone should be so fortunate when a building changes ownership.
Should the citizens have just waited until the city took over and then tore it down because of the extensive repairs that were done to the building that only certain individuals can afford.
You should be praising his dedication to historical restoration and be thankful it is still a rental building for everyone to enjoy.
@rukidding, wish I could do more factual blogging too, :)
The posts posted are the info that can be gotten on time available, deep digging into stories like this isn't my forte, thats up to Benjamin Woodard.
What is my forte is restoration of damaged signs, mailboxes, etcetera and noticing some stuff that maybe others don't and at least pointing out what others may not now to them and taking pics of development.
Appreciate the info rukidding!
This illustrates the difference between a benign dictator billionaire fixing up a building where money is less of a concern and a corporation of different interests taking over a building that is trying to pinch every penny.
Much cheaper to try to get the tenants out with fake eviction notices than to do it the right way as Mr. J Pritzker did.
Post a Comment