About

Posts by :

McMobil height meant to set precedent

To the Editor: McMobil appears to be a stalking horse for the University of Chicago’s plan to begin turning Hyde Park into a community of high-rises. I was sent a link to a brochure which the U. of C. has produced. If you look at the building’s picture in this brochure, you can see that(…)

Smaller building possible at McMobil

To the Editor: Proponents of the proposed 155-foot, 14-story high-rise on the McMobil site (they describe it as 140 feet and 13 stories, omitting the so-called “penthouse” on the top floor) claim that it would not be economically feasible to build a smaller building that would fit in with the one- to three-story buildings in(…)

Is the McMobil plan needed in Hyde Park?

To the Editor: Before going on any further in the McMobil plan, Hyde Park residents need to consider the following: Is there a demonstrated need for the McMobil Plan? Judging from the many Letters to the Editor published in the Hyde Park Herald, the expressed opposition of many community residents at the March 18 meeting(…)

McMobil will increase street life on 53rd

Dear Alderman Burns: I am pleased to lend my support for the Mobil site redevelopment. It is a progressive step in the revitalization of 53rd Street and Hyde Park as a whole. As a resident of Hyde Park for nearly 17 years who lives within two blocks of the proposed development, I must say that(…)

McMobil project height will start trend

To the Editor: The University of Chicago is well on its way to realizing its goal of revitalizing 53rd Street. We have a new movie theater, an all-night diner, several new restaurants and a high-end clothing store. Coming soon will be a music venue, five more new restaurants, a health club, a 130-plus room hotel,(…)

Verify first, then trust 53rd Street McMobil “community consensus”

To the Editor: Thank you, again, Hyde Park Herald for opening up your pages to different “voices” on the 53rd St. McMobil project, but again, please, do another investigative story to verify who were included (and NOT) included and who initiated “community consultation,” “surveys /polls/petition signing” and targeted approaches to residents or owners in the(…)