From Surf Wiki (app.surf) — the open knowledge base
McCarthy Building (Chicago)
Building in Chicago
Building in Chicago
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| name | McCarthy Building |
| image | McCarthy Building image2.jpg |
| caption | McCarthy Building on the southwest corner of Block 37. |
| location | 32 West Washington Street |
| Chicago, Illinois | |
| completion_date | 1872 |
| demolition_date | 1989 |
| floor_count | 5 |
| architect | John M. Van Osdel |
| name | McCarthy Building |
| embed | yes |
| added | June 16, 1976 |
| delisted | December 8, 1995 |
| refnum | 76000698 |
Chicago, Illinois
McCarthy Building was a five-story Chicago Landmark building in the Loop community area of Chicago, Illinois. Located in the southwest corner of the block on the northeast corner of North Dearborn Street and West Washington Street, the John M. Van Osdel designed building had been erected in 1872, but was demolished in 1989 during the clearing of what is known as Chicago's Block 37. In order to make way for Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley's redevelopment, the Chicago City Council had to revoke the privately owned building's landmark status in 1987.
Property history
The McCarthy building was on a piece of land owned by the McCarthy family for 100 years. It was bought by John Patrick McCarthy on May 1, 1847, and he built a home there for his family, which included six children. After the home burned in the Chicago fire of 1871, Mrs. McCarthy built a new home on a triangular tract of land farther south in Chicago, at Cottage Grove Ave. & 35th St., where Vincennes starts. Replacing the burned home was the five-story McCarthy building, which had a fireplace in every room. It had no elevator, but also no mortgage during the time the McCarthys owned it. From 1901 until at least 1947, the building was under lease to the Washington Shirt Co., which sublet the upper floors and two other street-level shops. The building was bought by a syndicate in 1946 for $550,000, the highest per-square-foot price—$180.92—in the neighborhood at that time.
Revocation of landmark status
The revocation of the landmark status was a hotly contested legal battle. In Landmarks Preservation Council v. City of Chicago, (125 Ill. 2d 164 (1988)) the Illinois Supreme Court refused to recognize the standing of several groups to challenge Chicago City Council ordinance that removed landmark status. The court found that the Landmarks Preservation Council of Illinois and the Chicago Chapter, American Institute of Architects lacked legal standing to make such a challenge because they could not "gain standing merely through a self-proclaimed concern about an issue, no matter how sincere." The court specifically rejected, as bases for standing, both the aesthetic interests of these parties and their "alleged right to participate in a public hearing" regarding the ordinance where the "municipality has bestowed that alleged procedural right apparently not as a legal entitlement but as a tool to assist the municipality in performing its legislative function."
22 West Washington
Notes
References
- (2007). "Illinois - Chicago Core Architecture Map". PlanetWare Inc..
- "McCarthy Building, View". University of Illinois at Chicago.
- "Illinois Court Opinions: No. 2--05--". FindLaw.
- Roeder, David. (January 17, 2006). "An Old Tradition: Do federal shenanigans lurk behind Berghoff". FindArticles.
- Chase, Al. Family Sells Property Held for 100 Years: Group Pays $550,000 to McCarthy Heirs ''[[Chicago Tribune]]'', August 4, 1946.
This article was imported from Wikipedia and is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Content has been adapted to SurfDoc format. Original contributors can be found on the article history page.
Ask Mako anything about McCarthy Building (Chicago) — get instant answers, deeper analysis, and related topics.
Research with MakoFree with your Surf account
Create a free account to save articles, ask Mako questions, and organize your research.
Sign up freeThis content may have been generated or modified by AI. CloudSurf Software LLC is not responsible for the accuracy, completeness, or reliability of AI-generated content. Always verify important information from primary sources.
Report