daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > World Development News Forums > General Urban Developments > DN Archives



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old July 21st, 2007, 07:57 PM   #761
High Life on LSD
BANNED
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 64
Likes (Received): 2

Quote:
Originally Posted by PrintersRowBoiler View Post
I saw a couple weeks ago that the ex-Butchers Dog is now a new bar... seems kinda like a grunge-type bar.
The new bar is called Villains Bar & Grill. This is what this neighborhood really needs. Places for young people to hang out. The Bar Louis and South Loop club are not enough. There are so many student in the area, the goal should be to keep them from going north to drink. I hate Churches of any kind, build those in the suburbs.
High Life on LSD no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old July 21st, 2007, 09:55 PM   #762
Chi_Coruscant
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 879
Likes (Received): 0

Probably the Legal Dept in the City Hall will say two words to Fioretti: "Can It!"
Chi_Coruscant no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 22nd, 2007, 09:06 PM   #763
InTheLoopSam
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 71
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chi_Coruscant View Post
Probably the Legal Dept in the City Hall will say two words to Fioretti: "Can It!"

That's exactly right - my feeling is this will never even make it to court after Legal has a chat with Little Bobby...
__________________
In The Loop, 24/7
InTheLoopSam no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 22nd, 2007, 09:11 PM   #764
InTheLoopSam
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 71
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Urban Politician View Post
Daley, Oh Daley, where art thou?

It's becoming clear that my very earliest hunches about Little Bobby are clear - that the Daley administration is going to need to quickly put him on a very short leash. He just can't be allowed to continue these charades and validate the positions of (highly specialized) special interest groups like the NIMBY group PDNA, much less be beholden to them...
__________________
In The Loop, 24/7
InTheLoopSam no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 23rd, 2007, 05:18 PM   #765
Prairie Avenue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 154
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by InTheLoopSam View Post
It's becoming clear that my very earliest hunches about Little Bobby are clear - that the Daley administration is going to need to quickly put him on a very short leash. He just can't be allowed to continue these charades and validate the positions of (highly specialized) special interest groups like the NIMBY group PDNA, much less be beholden to them...

Little Bobby? Fioretti won a historic election as a white guy in a black ward, carrying a Ward against an incumbent backed by Daley's organization and money, and won 2 to 1. Who are you to be calling the 2nd ward alderman names? And this isn't PDNA pandering, this is simply a politicain living up to his campaign platform. The community never backed XO, the change in zoning they obtained was built on campaign contributions and pay to play, and I wouldn't expect a Mayoral smack down anytime soon. Daley doesn't want to elevate Fioretti politically by engaging him in what would be a newsworthy confrontation, nor does Daley want to take a position that will draw the ire of many in his own neighborhood who have supported him. Look for a political solution.
Prairie Avenue no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 23rd, 2007, 05:21 PM   #766
Prairie Avenue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 154
Likes (Received): 0

PDNA Nimby

Weren't you there Saturday Sam? Did you hear anything from the PDNA officers NIMBY wise about the two projects other than an appreciation to the developers and Alderman Dowell for bringing their presentation pre planning department approval to the community, putting on a professional presentation and seemingly taking the views expressed and questions seriously? PDNA isn't NIMBY for projects that fit and go through the proper process.
Prairie Avenue no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 23rd, 2007, 09:23 PM   #767
slooparch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 95
Likes (Received): 5

Quote:
Originally Posted by Prairie Avenue View Post
Weren't you there Saturday Sam? Did you hear anything from the PDNA officers NIMBY wise about the two projects other than an appreciation to the developers and Alderman Dowell for bringing their presentation pre planning department approval to the community, putting on a professional presentation and seemingly taking the views expressed and questions seriously? PDNA isn't NIMBY for projects that fit and go through the proper process.
Saturday? You mean the GSLA meeting? The same meeting that hosted the X/O developers and where the significant majority of the attendees, including MANY members from the Prairie Ave District supported the project?

Is that the meeting you are talking about?

Oh, and, the two projects you speak of are not anywhere near your 'backyard'

Last edited by slooparch; July 23rd, 2007 at 09:26 PM. Reason: clarification
slooparch no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 23rd, 2007, 09:49 PM   #768
Mr Downtown
Urbane observer
 
Mr Downtown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,547
Likes (Received): 10

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chi_Coruscant View Post
Probably the Legal Dept in the City Hall will say two words to Fioretti: "Can It!"
Aldermanic prerogative is very strong in Chicago: I can only remember one instance where it was not honored. The Law Division vigorously defended the downzoning of the New York II site, and vigorously defended the 1350 North Lake Shore downzoning.

What we have not had, within living memory, is a downtown alderman who was not in the mayor's pocket--and now there are two. Well, I guess there were the Harold Washington years with Fred Roti, but Chicago was so desperate for anything downtown in those days that the only time Roti spoke up it was to block the White Sox stadium at Clark/Roosevelt.
Mr Downtown no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 23rd, 2007, 10:23 PM   #769
Prairie Avenue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 154
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by slooparch View Post
Saturday? You mean the GSLA meeting? The same meeting that hosted the X/O developers and where the significant majority of the attendees, including MANY members from the Prairie Ave District supported the project?

Is that the meeting you are talking about?

Oh, and, the two projects you speak of are not anywhere near your 'backyard'
I think you mean same group (GSLA) not same meeting. So backyard is literally backyard for you then? Supporting a development outside of two blocks away doesn't reject the NIMBY standard?

Did you find it offensive that Alderman Dowell questioned the developer as to whether he had followed through and met with the two nearest condo associations that she had requested -- notwithstanding the GSLA presentation at 18th State -- surely showing an understanding by the Alderwoman that GSLA approval didn't speak for the area at large.

Did GSLA approve of the mid rise project? I would think you would have railed against the relatively low denisty aspect of a seven story blocky building.
Prairie Avenue no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 23rd, 2007, 10:32 PM   #770
Prairie Avenue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 154
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Downtown View Post
Aldermanic prerogative is very strong in Chicago: I can only remember one instance where it was not honored. The Law Division vigorously defended the downzoning of the New York II site, and vigorously defended the 1350 North Lake Shore downzoning.

What we have not had, within living memory, is a downtown alderman who was not in the mayor's pocket--and now there are two. Well, I guess there were the Harold Washington years with Fred Roti, but Chicago was so desperate for anything downtown in those days that the only time Roti spoke up it was to block the White Sox stadium at Clark/Roosevelt.

Glad to see some realism creep in here. The proposed ordinance is the start of negotiations. It isn't like the exact block where Giles wanted to plop down X/O was critical to the project's success -- there are still areas in the hot south loop that may accomodate the project and frankly be better suited to from a traffic and infrastructure basis.

The fact is that there is a new political game in town. It will be interesting to see how this works out, but the conclusion that an alderman's prerogative in his own ward will be summarily squashed is not historically justified, especially for a project that was controversial and had strong opposition during the community unveiling phase. Let's not forget that Fioretti wasn't the first to promise changes -- at the community meeting at Glessner house Haithcock told the community that the X/O design would go through a series of changes before she would approve it, and then after she rushed it through during the campaign in at least three public meetings stated she was stopping the project. I don't recall any hue and cry about her statements then.
Prairie Avenue no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 24th, 2007, 12:17 AM   #771
ErmDiego
BANNED
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 154
Likes (Received): 2

Ok then

Quote:
Originally Posted by slooparch View Post
Saturday? You mean the GSLA meeting? The same meeting that hosted the X/O developers and where the significant majority of the attendees, including MANY members from the Prairie Ave District supported the project?

Is that the meeting you are talking about?

Oh, and, the two projects you speak of are not anywhere near your 'backyard'
Regarding the two projects presented this Saturday, his point is that you clearly have the Prairie District, that is a DPD named "historic" and "character District" with the only area in the South Loop metioned in any of the community plans with the stated goal of protecting the character and scale by professtional planners, and you want to encourage 45 stories where the tallest building to date is 20. And then you guys say nothing on a project on Wabash, where height and more modernism could and should be encouraged, and the developer plops out a 7 story building...room goes dud.

As to your assertion of many members from Prairie District at the GSLA X/O presentation, bull crap. Why not produce the sign in list. Almost all of the associations we have talked to in the Prairie District had no contact from the GSLA on this project at any time.

Due to the uproar after the GSLA Meeting for the X/O project, the Alderman received so many complaints she had to do another presenation at the Glessner House. It was clear where the residents stood at that Glessner meeting, and when seeing it go bad, instead of letting the actual impacted residents listen and ask questions, it looked like the GSLA chose to work arm and arm with the developer & GSLA audiance plants to counter the backlash with their chin wipes.

I have never seen a more hilarious set-up. You had Alderman Haithcock calling out a guy in the front row who she knew was not from the area, but was asked to come from someone else. You had the GSLA president then deciding to lecture the local residents at the same meeting of an area he had not even bothered to inform or seek input from, when he should shut up and listen. You even had a local agent wasting our time lecturing the audiance for 5 minutes, who as it turns out, had done work with the developer and was angling to get on this project sales team.

What you need to realize is that you do not only represent those paying members of the GSLA, but you also represent and should seek input from non-members. On such a critical project, it would be wise to consult those associations accutally impacted, who many of, were in the middle of their own development transition....common sense.
ErmDiego no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 24th, 2007, 01:16 AM   #772
BVictor1
Chicago's #1 Fan
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,186
Likes (Received): 882

Quote:
Originally Posted by Prairie Avenue View Post
Little Bobby? Fioretti won a historic election as a white guy in a black ward, carrying a Ward against an incumbent backed by Daley's organization and money, and won 2 to 1. Who are you to be calling the 2nd ward alderman names? And this isn't PDNA pandering, this is simply a politicain living up to his campaign platform. The community never backed XO, the change in zoning they obtained was built on campaign contributions and pay to play, and I wouldn't expect a Mayoral smack down anytime soon. Daley doesn't want to elevate Fioretti politically by engaging him in what would be a newsworthy confrontation, nor does Daley want to take a position that will draw the ire of many in his own neighborhood who have supported him. Look for a political solution.
Bullshit.

No one from the community was at the plan commission meeting when this project was approved. I spoke up in favor of It as well as Bonnie Sanchez Carter.

Bitching and moaning didn't truly begin until election time, and the demographics of the ward have totally changed in the last 10 years. The ward might have had a black majority a decade ago, but with all the new construction in the Soutl Loop, things have shifted, and the children of the cowards and the cowards themselves who abondoned the city 40 years ago have returned trying to flex their muscles.
BVictor1 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 24th, 2007, 01:21 AM   #773
slooparch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 95
Likes (Received): 5

The Chicago Journal called that meeting as split....it's pathetic to claim that the one's who support the project are not from the community, most of them indeed are.....

Just look at this forum, many of its participants who support this project live in the Prairie District....

But, most importantly, why do the neighbors in the district by default know what is best? Almost ALL professionals would agree that just the opposite tends to be true as you so conveniently point out to this forum every time you post.

And, the mid-rise on Wabash....totally appropriate, just as a high-rise is adjacent to the lake in the central core of Chicago.....

We also follow the general reactions of our attendees at our meetings...no need to belong as a paid member, as you and Tina are well aware of....
slooparch no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 24th, 2007, 01:27 AM   #774
slooparch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 95
Likes (Received): 5

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Downtown View Post
Aldermanic prerogative is very strong in Chicago: I can only remember one instance where it was not honored. The Law Division vigorously defended the downzoning of the New York II site, and vigorously defended the 1350 North Lake Shore downzoning.

What we have not had, within living memory, is a downtown alderman who was not in the mayor's pocket--and now there are two. Well, I guess there were the Harold Washington years with Fred Roti, but Chicago was so desperate for anything downtown in those days that the only time Roti spoke up it was to block the White Sox stadium at Clark/Roosevelt.
Mr. D....can you point out where an alderman successfuly took back an approved PD with approved community/resident support and approved DOP support?
slooparch no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 24th, 2007, 01:36 AM   #775
slooparch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 95
Likes (Received): 5

NIMBYS

Quote:
Originally Posted by Prairie Avenue View Post
Did you find it offensive that Alderman Dowell questioned the developer as to whether he had followed through and met with the two nearest condo associations that she had requested -- notwithstanding the GSLA presentation at 18th State -- surely showing an understanding by the Alderwoman that GSLA approval didn't speak for the area at large.
I think you got it backwards...the GSLA does indeed speak for the area at large (as witnessed by the attendees from the Prairie District), but does not necessarily speak for the NIMBYS. Alderman Dowell is right, both are very important for the developer to address, although both are not always of equal import.
slooparch no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 24th, 2007, 01:50 AM   #776
Sir Isaac Newton
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 346
Likes (Received): 0

Loopy, BVictor, Latoso, Chicago Shawn, or anyone else who was there when Fioretti met up with us at the Billy Goat a couple weeks before the election....I specifically remember someone asking Fioretti what his thoughts were on 830 South Michigan - and perhaps being the politician that he is, gave a vague answer that really didn't indicate whether or not he was for or against it. I could be mistaken, but I could have sworn that someone asked him a question about X/O - I think along the lines of whether or not he would try to block the development of it. I could have sworn his answer was along the lines of he wasn't the biggest fan of it in that location, but at the same time, he wasn't going to try to prevent it from being built in its current form either.

Does anyone else remember this?
Sir Isaac Newton no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 24th, 2007, 02:03 AM   #777
ErmDiego
BANNED
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 154
Likes (Received): 2

nm

Quote:
Originally Posted by BVictor1 View Post
Bullshit.

No one from the community was at the plan commission meeting when this project was approved. I spoke up in favor of It as well as Bonnie Sanchez Carter.

Bitching and moaning didn't truly begin until election time, and the demographics of the ward have totally changed in the last 10 years. The ward might have had a black majority a decade ago, but with all the new construction in the Soutl Loop, things have shifted, and the children of the cowards and the cowards themselves who abondoned the city 40 years ago have returned trying to flex their muscles.
Bonnie of the NSPB? oh what a surprise. Helps when DPD posts agendas and notices they call "public notices" after the meeting. They have even admited as such and fell back to the, posted in the paper.
ErmDiego no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 24th, 2007, 02:15 AM   #778
ErmDiego
BANNED
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 154
Likes (Received): 2

Quote:
Originally Posted by slooparch View Post
I think you got it backwards...the GSLA does indeed speak for the area at large (as witnessed by the attendees from the Prairie District), but does not necessarily speak for the NIMBYS. Alderman Dowell is right, both are very important for the developer to address, although both are not always of equal import.
Poeple now attend to make sure they are not misrepresented. Any member of a community organization that has accepted the responsibility of representing residents with integrity and refers to them as "NIMBY's" bears no right to the honor to represent them. Now all is understood.

So now you are going to make up false quotes for Alderman Dowell? I seem to forget the second part of the quote "although both are not always of equal import". Of course, I hear the GSLA claimed that at Saturday's meeting, everyone was up in arms about the X/O news and Alderman's decisions, when there was zero talk of such. Wow, keep digging.

I will give the GSLA credit for great thing from the meeting, at least someone held a developers feet to the fire about asking about developer quality and escrow. Props.
ErmDiego no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 24th, 2007, 02:30 AM   #779
slooparch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 95
Likes (Received): 5

deleted

Last edited by i_am_hydrogen; July 24th, 2007 at 02:33 AM. Reason: Posts containing personal insults will be deleted.
slooparch no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 24th, 2007, 02:45 AM   #780
InTheLoopSam
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 71
Likes (Received): 0

Delusional Prairie Ave. NIMBYs

Erm, Prairie Ave, Mr "Downtown", etc - you guys are all deluding yourself if you think there will be some sort of negotiation that changes the X/O project. Aldermanic prerogative does not apply in this situation. What you have is a PD that was approved, changing zoning specifically for this project in a very open, proper and transparent process, your bad taste in design and planning - and what contributes to a "historic" neighborhood's character notwithstanding. In the months that followed the developer spent several millions of dollars on the project as it was approved by the city. No court in the land would find against the developer in this case, as his vested interest is indisputable. He should not, and will not budge an inch - if Fioretti wants this to end up in court, he will lose and X/O will be built as currently designed. End of story.
__________________
In The Loop, 24/7
InTheLoopSam no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 11:36 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

Hosted by Blacksun, dedicated to this site too!
Forum server management by DaiTengu