Alternatively, you could strip the school down to its frame and reclad it as a luxury building, but you'd still need the PD for that part of the site if the number of units is higher than 30.īasically, a buyer looking to build 39 3-flats will be the low bidder. But the midrise option requires a PD, which then requires a planning review process and community meetings. You could build 39 3-flats covering the site, or a 117-unit midrise that preserves some open space and preserves the school. The Archdiocese doesn't control the land like your examples, the Sisters of Christian Charity do and I believe they act independently. Incorporating the school would probably only be financially practical if combined with additional development, but now you may be over F.A.R and the zoning appeal contingency may require a public park for conditional approval. Yeah, when I saw RT-4 zoning, it would be easier to develop 39 townhouse units as-of-right across the site. They have shown this time after time no matter if it's a downtown prime location (their parking lot that is now One Chicago) or various churches they have closed and sold off around areas like Pilsen. The catholic church is not going to take a hit on the value of this asset they are cashing out, that's for sure. You start setting aside portions of this land for various nonsense reasons and you have to cut down the price. Given the current zoning, any community meeting or feedback process is nonsense in this situation and a waste of time. BUT WAIT, it's zoned RT-4 so you can also build 3 flats as of right so the value of the dirt is even higher. Add some premium for it being continuous and you can easily get to $25 million based on building single family homes. Seems like it could work.ģ9 single family lots, at $600,000 per which is the going rate in this area for 125x25, gets you to a base value of about $23 million. Tear down all of the buildings except for the school and develop half of the land to leave enough for a flexible green space. Ronan's is quite elegant and breaks up the block in a playful way (though I wish it was as permeable at ground level as the 3rd design). is expectedly gee-whiz and will probably not age well (stylistically and maintenance-wise with all of those cantilevers, creases in the brickwork, and protruding window frames). I prefer the first design the most (the Ronan one). Haven't seen these proposals before but I'm a fan of the eclectic designs. The redevelopment of 1.65 acres on 63rd Street between Ingleside and Greenwood avenues would mark another step in fulfilling a 2020 ordinance requirement to boost Woodlawn’s affordable housing stock by redeveloping 52 city-owned lots.'

'WOODLAWN - City officials have released proposals from three development teams competing to build mixed-income housing on vacant, city-owned land along 63rd Street in Woodlawn. The redevelopment of 1.65 acres on 63rd Street between Ingleside and Greenwood avenues would boost Woodlawn’s affordable housing stock by redeveloping 52 city-owned lots. What’s Next For A Vacant Stretch Of Woodlawn’s 63rd Street? Developers Pitch Apartments, Lofts, Restaurants And More

Skyscraper forum southwest