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 November 21st, 2007, 03:47 AM   #381
NearNorthGuy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Chicago
Posts: 502
Likes (Received): 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by i_am_hydrogen View Post
Of course not. If that were the case, Mr. Downtown would have been banned a long time ago for some of his contrarian views. ErmDiego was banned not for his opinions but the way in which he expressed them. He also re-registered two additional accounts, which is per se a bannable offense.
Two additional accounts? That's pretty funny. Maybe I'll do that. I can have an argument with myself.

"You're full of it!"

"No I'm not."

"Yes you are."

OK, back to being serious. In my opinion, that sort of fraud deserves a permanent ban.
NearNorthGuy no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old November 21st, 2007, 04:05 PM   #382
PrintersRowChemist
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Chicago
Posts: 43
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by Prairie Avenue View Post
Best quote I ever heard from a developer on Haithcock was "Hell, she's one of the easy ones to work with, just find out how big she wants the check to be and you can get anything approved."

There are multiple differences and both of you know what they are. I'll give you two. First, the contributions should not be a quid pro quo for approval. Approval should be merit based on what it brings to the ward.
"Merit" according to whom? An approval process led by neighbors would result in no development. An approval process led by the alderman would just make it more political, which would lead to hindered development.

Haithcock was terrible as alderman. But Fioretti has not proven to be better or worse at this point. Wasting time dickering with X/O was... well a total waste of time (and resources). It was a political move from the start.

Maybe now he can start being productive and adding value to the ward. His performance thus far leaves me doubtful. Haithcock may have been an unpolished hack, but Fioretti is a slick, calculating politician. He slung buckets of mud in the election and played dirty tricks on David Askew. His general anti-development stance got him elected, so he will probably just stick to being obstructionist, if only for the sake of satisfying the nimbys.
PrintersRowChemist no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 21st, 2007, 06:18 PM   #383
Belacqua
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 153
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by PrintersRowChemist View Post
Maybe now he can start being productive and adding value to the ward. His performance thus far leaves me doubtful.
Let's hope so. I think he's finding (or at least as one of his constituents I'm finding) that it's a lot harder to get things done in the city bureaucracy when you're part of the opposition. There's very little actual power that the aldermen have in terms of getting things done day to day, since they're primarily legislators and still depend on the mayor's administration to actually do things in the ward, like fix sidewalks, deal w/ parking zones, etc. All the alderman can do is call the relevant dept and ask them to move things along, but there's no actual statutory authority there. If the city (the mayor) doesn't like you, or you symbolically block him at every turn, things will move a lot slower for your constituents. That's how they make you play ball. If there's a serious opposition bloc on the council that's one thing, but it's not there yet.

I voted for him, if only to get rotten to the core Haithcock the hell out of there, but unless he starts playing it a little smarter this is his one and only term. This X/0 move was astoundingly boneheaded. I really hope the expensive symbolic gestures end here and he saves his conscience for when it really matters.

Last edited by Belacqua; November 21st, 2007 at 06:24 PM.
Belacqua no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 22nd, 2007, 10:29 PM   #384
InTheLoopSam
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 71
Likes (Received): 0

[QUOTE=Belacqua;16619594]
I voted for him, if only to get rotten to the core Haithcock the hell out of there, but unless he starts playing it a little smarter this is his one and only term. This X/0 move was astoundingly boneheaded. QUOTE]


Bingo. This whole episode was the most heavy-handed pandering I've ever seen. It's just absolutely insulting to those with any degree of intelligence for Fioretti to contend the Kargil lawsuit had "no merits" as he is quoted in Chicago Journal, when in fact it was obviously a slam dunk. Yes, we all know that the city would have lost millions defending the lawsuit, but we also know what the outcome of the lawsuit would have been (the city would have lost) - and Fioretti realized this as well. For him to pretend he had any kind of legal standing is stomach-churning at best....
__________________
In The Loop, 24/7

Last edited by InTheLoopSam; November 22nd, 2007 at 10:52 PM.
InTheLoopSam no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 22nd, 2007, 10:50 PM   #385
InTheLoopSam
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 71
Likes (Received): 0

Fioretti - key quote in Wed. Trib

direct Fioretti quote from the Tribune - "We need for development to cool down to keep the neighborhood hot." I posted this for anyone who doubts my contention that our new downtown aldermen intend to slowdown the development approval process (this is already evident in the very sparse Plan Commission agendas (for downtown high-rises) since late spring/early summer. Rather than being a sympton of the condo market slowdown or credit crunch (these impacts would show up more in groundbreakings for projects that are already entitled), the slow down in the entitlement process itself is more of a reflection of the new aldermen's desires to slow down development overall (what I sometimes call 'chasing the community consensus phantom') - I just didn't think I would get so lucky with a quote so explicitly expressing his intentions...

Also, what is Fioretti suggesting - that he thinks it's his role to interfere with the free market in order to prop up prices or something? Folks - I'm telling you - this is a very misguided individual trying to make some sort of mark...
__________________
In The Loop, 24/7

Last edited by InTheLoopSam; November 22nd, 2007 at 11:13 PM.
InTheLoopSam no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 25th, 2007, 07:02 PM   #386
Prairie Avenue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 154
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by InTheLoopSam View Post
Also, what is Fioretti suggesting - that he thinks it's his role to interfere with the free market in order to prop up prices or something? Folks - I'm telling you - this is a very misguided individual trying to make some sort of mark...
How is it a free market? The whole process of guiding a development through purchase of the lot, zoning, planning development process etc., is dripping with politics every step of the way. To suggest it is the free market at work unless an alderman gets involved is lunacy.
Prairie Avenue no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 25th, 2007, 07:16 PM   #387
wrabbit
Registered User
 
wrabbit's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,162
Likes (Received): 5

More of a free market, then.
wrabbit no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 27th, 2007, 12:09 AM   #388
Prairie Avenue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 154
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by wrabbit View Post
More of a free market, then.
How? You can't be a little pregnant. Development is entirely political. Land use law is founded on the politcal (and non free market) nature of development, and Chicago is one of the most politicized in the country.

If the alderman simply gets out of the way and adds nothing to the process, he or she isn't promoting free market in development; they are simply letting development be dictated by other political elements that control the various processes. Haithcock had to sign off on everything before -- she merely did whatever the Mayor asked and received her tribute -- but developments still went through her as part of approval.

If the system were driven totally by market forces that may be a better system, but saying if Fioretti steps out of the way this system will work better due to market forces controlling development is a naive and unrealistic point of view, imho.
Prairie Avenue no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 27th, 2007, 04:59 AM   #389
wrabbit
Registered User
 
wrabbit's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,162
Likes (Received): 5

Quote:
Originally Posted by Prairie Avenue View Post
..... Development is entirely political. Land use law is founded on the politcal (and non free market) nature of development, and Chicago is one of the most politicized in the country.....
Land use law is founded on the state's inherent constitutional powers to promote and maintain public safety and welfare, which it in turn delegates to the municipality to implement on its behalf. Hence the incessant mantra of light, air & traffic concerns.

And I disagree that development is "entirely political" - it is all but entirely driven by a desire for monetary profit; the politicking is either a means to achieve profit, or a byproduct of it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Prairie Avenue View Post
.....If the alderman simply gets out of the way and adds nothing to the process, he or she isn't promoting free market in development; they are simply letting development be dictated by other political elements that control the various processes. Haithcock had to sign off on everything before -- she merely did whatever the Mayor asked and received her tribute -- but developments still went through her as part of approval.

If the system were driven totally by market forces that may be a better system, but saying if Fioretti steps out of the way this system will work better due to market forces controlling development is a naive and unrealistic point of view, imho.
This is a strawman argument - or at the very least you are responding to the wrong poster. Of course aldermen have an interest in new developments within their wards - how could they not?

Last edited by wrabbit; November 27th, 2007 at 05:05 AM.
wrabbit no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 27th, 2007, 09:13 AM   #390
qwerty1324
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Chicago
Posts: 899
Likes (Received): 33

not sure who has what view on what here but here is my two cents.

Anyone who moves into downtown or the downtown area and is astonished or oppossed to a new highrise needs to get a clue and realize they moved into downtown chicago. Its kinda like moving to a farm and then complaining about farms. You bought the place and if you had no clue what you were buying into that is your own fault for being so incredibly niave, not knowing where you bought.

If i bought on a farm and didn't like the farming area I can't imagine telling other people not to farm based on my own stupidity. I'm not a greedy person.
qwerty1324 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 27th, 2007, 04:53 PM   #391
InTheLoopSam
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 71
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by Prairie Avenue View Post
How? You can't be a little pregnant. Development is entirely political. Land use law is founded on the politcal (and non free market) nature of development, and Chicago is one of the most politicized in the country.

If the alderman simply gets out of the way and adds nothing to the process, he or she isn't promoting free market in development; they are simply letting development be dictated by other political elements that control the various processes. Haithcock had to sign off on everything before -- she merely did whatever the Mayor asked and received her tribute -- but developments still went through her as part of approval.

If the system were driven totally by market forces that may be a better system, but saying if Fioretti steps out of the way this system will work better due to market forces controlling development is a naive and unrealistic point of view, imho.

Wrabbit is correct - I should have stated "more of a free market". Markets are not at all like pregnancy. Markets are all about matters of degree. And "more of a free market" is almost always better than "less of a free market" Under obstructionist, heavy-handed Fioretti be prepared to get "much less of a free market"...
__________________
In The Loop, 24/7
InTheLoopSam no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 27th, 2007, 05:56 PM   #392
Prairie Avenue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 154
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by InTheLoopSam View Post
Wrabbit is correct - I should have stated "more of a free market". Markets are not at all like pregnancy. Markets are all about matters of degree. And "more of a free market" is almost always better than "less of a free market" Under obstructionist, heavy-handed Fioretti be prepared to get "much less of a free market"...
Under Haithcock how did that free market work on the West Side? Didn't she bow to what you would call the NIMBY groups there and allow them to develop the power to prevent high density, high rise structures in that area?

Last edited by Prairie Avenue; November 27th, 2007 at 05:57 PM. Reason: grammar
Prairie Avenue no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 28th, 2007, 02:53 AM   #393
PrintersRowChemist
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Chicago
Posts: 43
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by Prairie Avenue View Post
Under Haithcock how did that free market work on the West Side? Didn't she bow to what you would call the NIMBY groups there and allow them to develop the power to prevent high density, high rise structures in that area?
What do you mean when you say "West Side"? If you are talking about the West Loop, where there are density/height restrictions, please note that this neighborhood is not a part of the 2nd ward.

The portion of the West Side that is in the 2nd ward does not economically support density and tall buildings. Put differently, the free market does not demand density in these areas.
PrintersRowChemist no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 28th, 2007, 02:57 AM   #394
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
Under Haithcock how did that free market work on the West Side? Didn't she bow to what you would call the NIMBY groups there and allow them to develop the power to prevent high density, high rise structures in that area?
We'll maybe it's time to work together to reverse the crap development in the West Loop. But don't you also think that if Haithcock bowed to the NIMBY'S in the South Loop, we could have gotten the same architectural crap?
BVictor1 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 5th, 2007, 02:06 AM   #395
Prairie Avenue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 154
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by BVictor1 View Post
We'll maybe it's time to work together to reverse the crap development in the West Loop. But don't you also think that if Haithcock bowed to the NIMBY'S in the South Loop, we could have gotten the same architectural crap?
I don't think Haithcock bowed to anyone other than the almighty greenback. She certainly pandered and lied to many, and with her re-election chances in doubt was making all sorts of promises of neighborhood input as part of a new approval process but I don't think for a minute she would have ever followed through. If re-elected she would have gone back into hiding. Remember this is the woman who wrote a letter of support for XO, helped push it through the approval and upzoning process yet when voters called her on it lied and said she had no input on the upzoning and approval process because after all she was just one of 50 votes.
Prairie Avenue no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 30th, 2007, 10:53 AM   #396
ardecila
Jack-Of-All-Trades
 
ardecila's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: New Orleans/Chicago
Posts: 1,391
Likes (Received): 2

Rather than libertarian bickering about free markets, does anybody have anything solid to report about this? It's been nearly a month with no news.
ardecila no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 3rd, 2008, 06:42 PM   #397
Prairie Avenue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 154
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by ardecila View Post
Rather than libertarian bickering about free markets, does anybody have anything solid to report about this? It's been nearly a month with no news.
What would be solid? The sales center has been dead for months. Their representation of being underway with construction this Spring is obviously a non starter. There is no news forthcoming from them and they are continuing their litigation against the alderman.
Prairie Avenue no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 3rd, 2008, 07:25 PM   #398
Sir Isaac Newton
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 346
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by Prairie Avenue View Post
What would be solid? The sales center has been dead for months. Their representation of being underway with construction this Spring is obviously a non starter. There is no news forthcoming from them and they are continuing their litigation against the alderman.
They got a ton of contracts before Fioretti stepped in so they are already in decent shape, sales-wise. Also, in terms of "solid", I can say that I have seen a decent amount of advertising for X/O recently....on YoChicago as well as in a few Chicago newspapers as well.
Sir Isaac Newton no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 3rd, 2008, 09:07 PM   #399
Loopy
Chicago, USA
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 777
Likes (Received): 0

..

Last edited by Loopy; May 19th, 2010 at 02:44 AM.
Loopy no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 4th, 2008, 04:43 AM   #400
The Urban Politician
The City
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 5,935
Likes (Received): 21

Quote:
Originally Posted by Loopy View Post
I thought they dropped the suit when Fioretti retracted his downzoning measure. What is there to sue about now?
^ They're after blood now...
The Urban Politician 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 09:52 PM.


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