CHICAGO | General Developments

[Khantilever]

Instead of SNAP benefits, we ought to simply compel grocery stores to set 10% of their merchandise aside and sell below market price to a small subset of the needy population.

Grocery stores which open in food deserts need to set aside 20%.

[west-town-brad]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

^ Ugh, so damn confusing. Why does Government do this to every damn industry? They already fucked up healthcare with this byzantine nonsense...

What they don't understand is that just navigating the increased complexity increases costs. So all that will happen is that market rate rents will go up.

Ultimately the best solution is to gentrify the old fashioned way: one 3-flat at a time.

You don't think the builders helped write these rules? Both alderman who are pushing this take huge sums from the developer/building industry.

[LouisVanDerWright]

Originally Posted by west-town-brad

You don't think the builders helped write these rules? Both alderman who are pushing this take huge sums from the developer/building industry.

They've been doing this for years and never gave a rats ass about affordable housing. This is a lame attempt to score points with voters now that it's abundantly clear that these aldermen are blatantly corrupt. Trust me, no developer wants any of this crap. It's beaurcratic nonsense.

Oh and Mr DT, these corrupt fucks are trying to downzone everything they can so no, there shouldn't be a penalty to developers who want more. Just look at Rosa trying to zone Milwaukee from Kedzie to Central Park at b1-1 which is totally unreasonable. He just wants to rake every landowner on that strip over the coals.

[SolarWind]

September 29, 2017

[SolarWind]

September 29, 2017

[SolarWind]

September 29, 2017

[SolarWind]

September 26, 2017

[SolarWind]

September 26, 2017

[Randomguy34]

Originally Posted by west-town-brad

You don't think the builders helped write these rules? Both alderman who are pushing this take huge sums from the developer/building industry.

Related Midwest's president Curt Baily actually came to the city council meeting in support of the ordinance. While the language may be convoluted, it gives developers more leeway in how they can build affordable housing (affordable can be considered 80% AMI and be marketed to folks with 100% AMI, the units can be built as condos/rentals separate from original project). I find it highly unlikely a developer such as Related would openly support an ordinance that would shoot them in the foot.

[JK47]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

^ Ugh, so damn confusing. Why does Government do this to every damn industry?

If industries were better at managing their negative externalities and policing their bad actors the government wouldn't have a role to perform. Equifax is a prime example of the perils of letting private actors perform critical functions without oversight.

They already fucked up healthcare with this byzantine nonsense...

Coming from someone whose family has worked in healthcare and insurance for three generations now, healthcare was already fucked up. The worst that PPACA did was actually force the vultures that offered policies on the private market to provide policies that actually covered something. Prior to PPACA private policies were garbage (for example 93% of policies didn't provide any maternity coverage at any price, except in the handful of states that required it).

Insurance needs oversight. Case in point is AIG. Prior to being bailed out AIG approached the NY DFS (then DOI) and asked for permission to exchange the currency and CD's in their statutory reserves for life and health policies with the equivalent value of Mortgage Backed Securities (this was just as the crash was starting but before the contagion was traced to MBS's). Had there been no government oversight (that "byzantine nonsense" that lays out how insurance companies must maintain reserves, the assets their allowed to use, etc) then once those securities proved to be worthless there'd be no cash to pay out life or health claims to policyholders.

What they don't understand is that just navigating the increased complexity increases costs.

My corporate practice revolves around making sure my clients comply with the rules imposed by their home state. I have to track regulations in fifty states. The first time you go through a regulation can be a pain but by the 5th, 10th, 20th time it should be a breeze. This isn't that hard and the added cost, once the lawyer who is no doubt working on this already has seen this a few times, will be de minimis.

[10023]

Originally Posted by SolarWind

September 26, 2017

The way they've handled that wood paneling isn't very Apple-esque. Why is it parallel to the side of the building on one side and perpendicular on the other? It's bothering me so I imagine it would have given Steve Jobs an aneurysm.

[jc5680]

Originally Posted by 10023

The way they've handled that wood paneling isn't very Apple-esque. Why is it parallel to the side of the building on one side and perpendicular on the other? It's bothering me so I imagine it would have given Steve Jobs an aneurysm.

Glass walls… The seams run straight through, consistent inside and out.

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by 10023

The way they've handled that wood paneling isn't very Apple-esque. Why is it parallel to the side of the building on one side and perpendicular on the other? It's bothering me so I imagine it would have given Steve Jobs an aneurysm.

What's the alternative, doing a miter at each corner so the boards can change direction? That would be pretty fussy and also not very Apple-esque. Plus it would look awkward given the corners of the roof are already rounded, and it would complicate the placement of lighting, speakers, sprinklers, etc on the ceiling inside.

This way, it's just dead simple.

[10023]

Yes, I figured they would custom cut the boards (easy enough with today's technology) and have them round the corner. That would be much more elegant.

[10023]

Originally Posted by SolarWind

September 26, 2017

I guess this is a nice thing to have (and an ADA requirement), but how much will these things be used for being such eyesores? Hopefully not required at every street corner.

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by JK47

My corporate practice revolves around making sure my clients comply with the rules imposed by their home state. I have to track regulations in fifty states. The first time you go through a regulation can be a pain but by the 5th, 10th, 20th time it should be a breeze. This isn't that hard and the added cost, once the lawyer who is no doubt working on this already has seen this a few times, will be de minimis.

Had you read my post, you would have seen that the cost of lawyers wasn't really the factor that bothered me so much

[woodrow]

Originally Posted by 10023

Yes, I figured they would custom cut the boards (easy enough with today's technology) and have them round the corner. That would be much more elegant.

This was very much a specific design choice. It's Norman Foster, working for Apple, on a $62 million dollar store. They must have looked at a dozen different ideas for the ceiling / overhang. I am sure those boards are custom cut, just as the glass panes, some 36 feet long and made in Germany, were custom made, including the panes that were sent from Germany to Spain where they were modified for the corners (not sure why the glass manufacturer in Germany could not bend the glass). Point being, I would wager that almost every single thing is this store is custom. Hence the parallel boards were specific design choice.

Now whether it works aesthetically or not remains to be seen.

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by 10023

I guess this is a nice thing to have (and an ADA requirement), but how much will these things be used for being such eyesores? Hopefully not required at every street corner.

Doesn't seem like an eyesore to me. It's simple and clad in the same limestone as everything else along the river.

This section of riverwalk (north side of main branch, from Michigan to the Spire site) doesn't have any accessible entrances on the western end. Plus, the elevated street system ends kind of abruptly around the NBC Tower so disabled people are stuck and can't move further east without a lengthy detour.

[JK47]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

Had you read my post, you would have seen that the cost of lawyers wasn't really the factor that bothered me so much

Had you read mine you'd realize the same logic applies. After a few projects under the new rules you'd get the hang of it. Avoid it and you'll never get good at it.

[VKChaz]

Originally Posted by SolarWind

September 26, 2017

Seeing this "Riverwalk" sign reminds me the City now has a host of different riverwalks to navigate. There is the official City controlled walk which it promotes. But then we have these other stretches of privately run walks, each doing their own thing in terms of signage, access and design, and with more on the way. To minimize confusion and optimize people's experience, at some point it might be good for the city to see about pulling these walks into a cohesive presentation to users. e.g., a single map with a naming scheme to differentiate sections, explanations how to navigate from section to section where that may not be obvious, promotion of any retail that is present, and so on. This would benefit non-locals in particular (visitors who walked along the river near Apple might not even realize they completely missed the "official" city riverwalk). I could imagine the city may want to focus on promoting its walk while other properties may vary in their interest, but we should really focus on getting to the optimal experience.