IBJNews

City not impressed with fixes proposed by Di Rimini developer

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint
On The Beat Industry News In Brief

What makes a developer think he can win approval for one design and construct an entirely different building? How did no one at the city notice until the structure was almost complete? What happens now? Those are the big questions surrounding the Di Rimini apartment project at the southeast corner of Capitol Avenue and St. Clair Street.

As reported in last week’s IBJ, the city’s Department of Code Enforcement issued a stop-work order in September for the project at 733 N. Capitol Ave., and Senior City Planner Jeff York gave developer Di Rimini LLC a list of 35 points where the project built differs from the one approved.

Developer Jeff Sparks met with city planners Oct. 1 to offer proposed fixes, but York said the developer’s offer was not adequate.
 

OTB real estate The Di Rimini project at 733 N. Capitol Ave. differs from the approved plan. (IBJ Photo/ Perry Reichanadter)

“The plans we received from Mr. Sparks were less than what we were expecting,” York said. “We are continuing discussions internally to figure out next steps.”

If the developer can’t come to terms with city planners, the current approval could be voided and ultimately the fate of the project could wind up in court.

The fact the project is almost complete could play in the developer’s favor. So why didn’t the city notice sooner? Because “the property owner is ultimately responsible for performing the work they say they will,” said Kate Johnson, a spokeswoman for the Department of Code Enforcement.

In this case, the developer secured permits for a project that matched the approved plans but went ahead and built something else, Johnson said. The department doesn’t inspect properties for plan compliance unless they receive a complaint.

“The fault is the developer’s,” York added. “We don’t have the staff to double-check to see if every project is built as approved.”

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. First, the Athenaeum is going to have to get past the hurdle with the Lockerbie residents and the agreement that the parcel would be residential. Second, and in my opinion, this prime piece of property should include parking, PLUS, a black box theater(s), some market rate and affordable artist housing and a plan to renovate and reconfigure the second story theater. I would negotiate to add the DeHaan property surface parking lot into the development mix, place a one story surface parking garage on the DeHaan lot on the street level (for the Dehaan tenants use during the daytime) and add a second story to the garage that would become an addition to the current second story theater and then change the direction of the theater by moving the stage across the alley and on top of the DeHaan lot parking. You can add all the stage elements that are currently missing from the Athenaeum stage to make it more attractive for use by Ballet, Opera and traveling productions. Plus, the theater changes would probably help solve some of the soundproofing issues. Alas,it does not seem to be a part of the strategic plan to conduct a study to determine best use of the property. Seems like the current plan is a quick and easy move that ignores the property best use/potential and any strategic property planning for the effect on future generations.

  2. I recall that MSA's pilings are still in the ground and hard to remove. It’s not likely any proposal will include significant underground construction/parking because of this. Start adding 2 floors of retail, 8 floors of parking and 5-10 floors of possible hotel, and/or 10-20 floors of residential, and you are at 30 floors already with possible expansion of all the uses. But then again I could be wrong.

  3. Accoriding to their website there is no deadline to the Do Not Call list. What is this article referring to??

  4. On what planet are they entitled to this largesse from the stockholders? These people make multi-million dollar salaries: Pay for your own personal travel.

  5. It matters because they're already paid enormously fat salaries: Pay for your own personal travel. Being "taxed on it" isn't a valid excuse--so what? They're still being gifted a raft of luxury perks from somebody else's money on top of an enormous, lavish salary.

ADVERTISEMENT