CHICAGO | General Developments

[Mr Downtown]

A supermarket a mile away (two miles to Whole Foods) is not within easy walking distance for most people. Even I think twice about the long, obstacle-strewn trip to Mariano's. If the South Loop is to become the kind of urban neighborhood we want it to be, there will need to be a supermarket in the Prairie District.

[wierdaaron]

It looks like there's developable land on the north side of Cermak to the west of Michigan. No question that the south loop, prairie district, or any part of town really could use more grocery stores. I just think that Michigan-McCormick stretch of Cermak is moving pretty quickly toward becoming a prominent entertainment district, which is better served by small retail than by a big grocery store.

I've never been to that new Mariano's without a zipcar. That section isn't super pedestrian friendly. That's Clark Street's problem, though.

[wierdaaron]

Rahm's going to propose a "Chicago River Corridor Special Sign District" to try to prevent more TRUMPs from happening.

Rahm Putting the Brakes on Large Signs Along Chicago River [Curbed Chicago]

[bcp]

gawd...we're saved! OT....but how are people taking to rahm? good / bad for the city / development?

this seems a little nanny-state to me...and of course completely subjective. visual clutter? this is a big city, visual clutter is part of what makes it great.

According to the Tribune, the ordinance is expected to be introduced next month, and its stated intention is to ensure that signs "do not detract from the character of the area, do not have a negative impact on the area, and do not create visual clutter."

[Vlajos]

Originally Posted by bcp

gawd...we're saved! OT....but how are people taking to rahm? good / bad for the city / development?

this seems a little nanny-state to me...and of course completely subjective. visual clutter? this is a big city, visual clutter is part of what makes it great.

According to the Tribune, the ordinance is expected to be introduced next month, and its stated intention is to ensure that signs "do not detract from the character of the area, do not have a negative impact on the area, and do not create visual clutter."

Rahm seems unpopular with the masses. However, the alternatives are awful. I pray he wins in February.

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by wierdaaron

Rahm's going to propose a "Chicago River Corridor Special Sign District" to try to prevent more TRUMPs from happening.

Rahm Putting the Brakes on Large Signs Along Chicago River [Curbed Chicago]

^ Wrong course of action. I can see Trump just laughing away at this news, perhaps to tears. This just insures that his tower with its gleaming T.R.U.M.P sign will dominate the riverfront, without any competition, for years and years to come. Totally playing into his hands..

[wierdaaron]

People who see this one sign ordinance out of context tend to react with "nanny state" sentiments, but the entire downtown area is covered by different signage regulations that, unknown to most people, are responsible for a lot of what people like about how the city looks. Without them, in some sort of libertarian fantasy alternate Chicago with no rules about aesthetics, the city would look like a complete and painful mess.



No nannies there!

So, people are free to not like things like this, but they need to understand that they've been benefiting from them their whole lives and they most likely couldn't even imagine how different things would be without them.

[LouisVanDerWright]

^^^That looks awesome, I wish Chicago had a district like that. Devon Ave. is about as close as it comes with all the flashing LED ropes.

Originally Posted by Vlajos

Rahm seems unpopular with the masses. However, the alternatives are awful. I pray he wins in February.

Amen. A lot of people don't like him, but that's because he is actually addressing issues that have sat for decades with nary a single serious attempt at solving them. The CPS is run by the mayor and it's current state is not a result of Rahm hating black people, it is a result of the CPS being left to stagnate for decades under Daley who never had the balls to stand up to the unions or the black voting block and make the politically costly moves necessary to bring the situation under control. These wounds have been festering under filthy bandages for decades and Rahm has come along and ripped the Band Aid off overnight. Of course the city is going to yelp a bit now, but eventually the wound is going to heal up a lot faster and cleaner if we start with a fresh scab and a fresh bandage.

The best politicians are the ones that leave all sides unsatisfied.

[k1052]

Originally Posted by Vlajos

Rahm seems unpopular with the masses. However, the alternatives are awful. I pray he wins in February.

Whoever followed Daley was bound to be unpopular since our former mayor was living in make believe land with regards to the city's various and extensive budget problems. At least Rahm has also been strongly pro-development and will wade into snake pits to push stuff forward (CMH redevelopment would never have happened for example).

[wierdaaron]

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

^^^That looks awesome, I wish Chicago had a district like that. Devon Ave. is about as close as it comes with all the flashing LED ropes.

Yeah, a district. If it was suddenly everywhere we'd all be on heavy anxiety meds and looking for the first bus out of here.

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

^^^That looks awesome, I wish Chicago had a district like that. Devon Ave. is about as close as it comes with all the flashing LED ropes.

Agreed. People are so protective of areas they don't live in. It's not like this is immoral. If you don't like it, then don't live there. It's as simple as that. It's not like they want to put bright lights everywhere. People act as if a few lights is going to ruin the city and send it into disarray. In reality, it would probably help with tourism. Not that I like Times Square, but look at that as an example. People eat that shit UP, and really, what is it? It's a bunch of bright advertisements, some guys dressed up as super heros walking around, and a makeshift plaza with some seats & tables in the middle surrounded by shitty food places nearby. There's absolutely nothing special about it, and yet it's a huge tourist attraction because of some bright lights. Do a ton of people live there? Not tons, but there's hotels.

[wierdaaron]

Times Square is also a product of strict signage ordinances (in their case, minimum signage and lighting as opposed to maximums). I wouldn't call that a nanny state.

If you want a neon signage district somewhere, you can have one. A lot of people want a peaceful, uncluttered riverfront, so we'll have one. These things are all the product of laws. You can't just look at one signage ordinance and say "how dare they?!" when you're standing in a city whose renowned beauty is a deliberate product of nearly identical ordinances.

[LouisVanDerWright]

Originally Posted by k1052

Whoever followed Daley was bound to be unpopular since our former mayor was living in make believe land with regards to the city's various and extensive budget problems. At least Rahm has also been strongly pro-development and will wade into snake pits to push stuff forward (CMH redevelopment would never have happened for example).

^^^ Exactly which is why all his potential opponents are populists. The last thing we need right now is a populist who will continue ignoring major issues at the behest of certain special interest groups who have largely benefited from Daley's negligence. Have you noticed who Rahm has been targeting? It's the populists like Fioretti and the rest of the Progressive caucus clowns. Like all Chicago mayors, he just needs to win his second election and consolidate power and he'll be king for as long as he chooses. I am willing to bet we will see at least 3 to 4 of the progressive caucus aldermen bite the dust in the next cycle:

Nick Sposato and Fioretti are both gone for sure. John Arena has a good chance of biting it too and Rahm's super PAC already has enough cash to bury two or three more aldermen of the Mayor's choosing.

Also, Joe Moreno is probably more vulnerable than he seems. He may have just gotten Will Guizardi elected, but he burned some significant bridges doing so (Guizardi beat Toni Berrios who is Joe Berrios', a member of the old guard of Chicago politics, daughter. Not a good way to make friends). I've also heard numerous stories that Moreno is pretty brazen with his alderbeast powers. I even had a neighbor whose house was going up for sale who was approached by someone from Moreno's office and asked to sell the property to one of the alderman's friends. I wouldn't have believed it if I hadn't seen a "1st Ward Alderman - Joe Moreno" vehicle double parked blocking my street during one of the open houses with my very own eyes. I'd say the odd's are 50/50 that he ends up in jail within the next 5 years.

[wierdaaron]

The nice thing about Fioretti running for mayor and not for re-election is that when he loses he wont be in charge of anything anymore.

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by wierdaaron

Times Square is also a product of strict signage ordinances (in their case, minimum signage and lighting as opposed to maximums). I wouldn't call that a nanny state.

If you want a neon signage district somewhere, you can have one. A lot of people want a peaceful, uncluttered riverfront, so we'll have one. These things are all the product of laws. You can't just look at one signage ordinance and say "how dare they?!" when you're standing in a city whose renowned beauty is a deliberate product of nearly identical ordinances.

My point wasn't about control. My point was about the thought of people in Chicago that having a district with bright lights is going to ruin the city of Chicago. And yes, of course - have a district somewhere with that. My indirect point was that it will increase tourism too because people are attracted to bright lights even if there's really nothing special about the area (i.e. Times Square).

I can understand the protectionist attitude related to this of some areas, and rightfully so, but even down to the "lighting the river" proposal, I really don't think that the people bitching up a storm and claiming it wouldn't even work have much experience traveling to various parts of the world outside of the US.

[Jibba]

Since we're on the subject:

http://politics.suntimes.com/article...09172014-239pm

I am all for this.

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by wierdaaron

The nice thing about Fioretti running for mayor and not for re-election is that when he loses he wont be in charge of anything anymore.

^ What makes you think his replacement won't be even worse?

When Fio-shitty was running for Alderman many years ago, believe it or not many of us thought he would be good for the job. He certainly seemed better than Haithcock.

Lets also not forget that as neighborhoods gentrify, their Aldermen get more and more pander-hacky. It's nice to have Aldermen that don't care much for rich, spoiled people--developers can steamroll a lot of density through without much trouble. With gentrification you eventually get a hack Reilly at the helm, whose entire ward is saturated with whiners (SOAR excepted--one of the rare community groups whose position on development I usually agree with).

[sentinel]

Keep forgetting about this even though it's in my hood..

The new Presence hospital Center for Advanced Care, on Sheridan and Surf


http://wolfmediausa.com/2013/03/15/o...ding-presence/

Webcam shows current progress on the 4th/5th floor slabs
http://www.workzonecam.com/projects/...th/workzonecam

[wierdaaron]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

^ What makes you think his replacement won't be even worse?

Well thanks to the redistricting that cut the south loop into 3 different wards that the aldermen most likely won't care about because their base is way south, I'm not even going to be in Fioretti's ward come 2015.

I'm mad at Fioretti at the moment because he's basically abandoned the 2nd ward. The wards official website is now 100% a Fioretti-for-mayor site with no community content whatsoever, and if you call the ward office phone number you get a fax machine squeal then disconnected. It seems that with the ward changing soon and his campaign, he no longer cares about doing his job (or even casting votes in person), so the 2nd ward as it is now has no alderman or office.

[the urban politician]

^ Sounds like a good time to propose an 80 story highrise