University Buys Harper Court

The University's website announces the purchase and their plans here.

George Rumsey sent me a note saying that the University has purchased Harper Court from the Harper Court Arts Council for $6.5M.  The sale was announced at the TIF meeting tonight.

(More) From the University's website article:

Community discussions and surveys have generated a set of broad guidelines for 53^rd Street development," said University Chief Financial Officer Nimalan Chinniah. "We want to encourage more outdoor activity, greater diversity in dining and retail, and an environment that has more trees and landscaping. Parking and easy access will also be important considerations, and the development should carry forward, in some manner, the original purpose of Harper Court." (Emphasis mine.)

The University and the City are working together to make sure the gateway to our retail district has more parking and trees?  Does that remind you of anything?  They combined to destroy the commercial fabric of 55th Street and now they're coming for 53rd.  Retail is not a core competence for either the University or the City and it never will be.  I'd rather just trust market forces.

As one sharp observer of the south(side) stated, "The past is not dead.  In fact, it's not even past." 

Comments

[Eric]

Yikes, is this as much of a surprise as I think it is, or am I just not in the loop because I don't have a Herald subscription?

[DS]

My reaction is that I wish the university would stick to the business of education and get out of the one of manipulating Hyde Park.

Eric -- it's been coming for years.

[John]

My reaction is that the university and city should be in the business of contributing to the community. If Harper Court is developed with market rate rents and small businesses, or big businesses, with jobs to offer, the community will be better for it. The university is in a position to contribute to the development of Hyde Park and the south side. Hopefully, the old hags and their young, graduate student counterparts (mostly white liberals who have never stepped outside of Hyde Park into the greater southside and experienced the poverty of the surrounding neighborhoods, yet claim to be "progressive") with their so-called "community input" won't get in the way.

[withrow]

John above: "Hopefully, the old hags and their young, graduate student counterparts (mostly white liberals who have never stepped outside of Hyde Park into the greater southside and experienced the poverty of the surrounding neighborhoods, yet claim to be 'progressive') with their so-called 'community input' won't get in the way."

That's really classy, John. You invent an enemy and label it with ageist, sexist language. I don't know you, but I bet you could argue your points in a more constructive manner if you really tried.

[dls]

"The university is in a position to contribute to the development of Hyde Park and the south side."

Yes, according to the University's desires, not those of the actual residents of the communities. But then they're just old hags, so, really, why bother with them? :)

[John]

That was unclassy. But the point remains valid. It's not an invented enemy. It's a real obstacle to change in this neighborhood. The university needs to be checked, not thwarted. I'm sorry but I've lived in other academic communities and the problem is the same. So-called "progressives" stall any project that doesn't comport with their view of the community. A vocal minority, as well as the university in years long past, have done a lot of harm to Hyde Park, Kenwood, and the poor folks in the surrounding neighborhoods. What has the university done lately, however, that's so bad that deserves questioning its motives in the year 2008?

[withrow]

John, it's unrealistic to ask us to speak for unnamed academic communities. Somebody, somewhere else has done something you don't approve of. It may have some relevance here if you're talking about institutional issues that lend themselves to such generalizations, but you're not making much of a case and it only damages your case to refer to your neighbors so uncharitably.

Those "hags" are people who helped make Hyde Park one of the premier neighborhoods to live in for people who care about ideas. If you don't like HP, as it's been shaped by those "hags", then why not choose some other place to live. But I've spent a lot of time reading about the history of this neighborhood that I love and those "hags" are my heroes.

So, let's try to keep this on the plane of issues and institutions. My point is that 53rd Street basically works as is. That's what the market is telling us. The University-- and many other Hyde Parkers-- believe that some types of retail are missing from the current mix. Ok, I can agree with that. But, I don't agree that current commercial space occupants should be replaced. They're there for a reason. They serve someone, some community. Calling for their replacement is the same as saying that their customers are unwanted.

If the University replaces the Harper Court businesses with those of its own choosing, it will be re-making 53rd Street in its own image. I'm not saying that the folks who work at the University have evil motivations, just that that's what the institution is prone to do and their officers will tend to pursue the course most helpful to the University. That's what it did during Urban Renewal and that's what's likely to happen again.

The University has the resources to put additional commercial space on the market and rent it to those additional businesses they feel are important for their constituents. That's what they should do-- not knock out businesses serving people they think are unworthy.

John, it could well be that the University wants to re-make 53rd Street to appeal to people like you. Fine. But have some sense of history, of what that's likely to mean to other communities or even Hyde Parkers 50 years from now.

[John]

"My point is that 53rd Street basically works as is. That's what the market is telling us."

The market is not telling us that 53rd St works. The market is manipulated; below market rents. Have you ever tried buying a plant at Plants Alive in Harper Court? I did. I walk to their door at 12 noon on a Saturday. Not open, even though the sign says they should be open. I call. The lady tells me to come back on Monday. I come back on Monday. They take only cash. I try coming back the next day. Closed early. Would such a store survive in a competitive market? Should taxpayers subsidize Plants Alive, the mediocre Maravillas, or the artists store in Harper Court that a few people in HP find valuable? No. Where's the foot traffic in Harper Court? The question is whether those stores would be able to compete in a competetive market. I doubt it.
So yes, make the stores in Harper Court pay market rent and if they survive, fine. If not, so be it. But don't bring up "character" and "community" and all these canards to force taxpayers to subsidize the sense of community that a vocal minority determine these stores provide.

[withrow]

You point out a legitimate problem with my comments above. I was talking about 53rd Street working because commercial rents are high there. You're right that Harper Court is not working because rents are low there. Fair point. And I have no problem with Harper Court being sold to a developer who will put these three parcels together into something with additional commercial space. I'm against the University managing this and remaking Harper Court in its own image. And it would be a huge mistake to end up with fewer storefronts than we have now-- the biggest mistake possible.

BTW I_am_optimistic about the University being better than most entities for finding new space for some of the businesses currently there-- like the veterinarian that so many of the University's constituents depend upon.

John, if Plants Alive weren't in Hyde Park, where would you go to buy a plant? If there's somewhere else to go now, why not do so? Why try to get rid of a store you dislike as if that would solve a problem? Why not advocate for additional commercial space so that Plants Alive would have more competition?

And John, where have you gotten the idea that taxpayers are subsidizing Harper Court or Plants Alive or Maravillas?

[Otto]

"They take only cash."

Since when? They've gladly taken my credit card.

[Jennifer]

"Community discussions and surveys"---

Wait, are they referring to that one online survey that ended up not actually revealing anything terribly useful?