CHICAGO | General Developments

[george]

^And 3 or 4 of those units in the original residential plan were set aside as affordable housing for Chicago area teachers/staff.

The city does give out 4am Liquor Licenses. 'The Shambles' west of Damen on Division St just recently got their 4am daily/5am Sat liquor license to compete w nearby rivals. Now InnJoy's Late Night Liquor License application ignites controversey through out Moreno's 1st Ward.

http://oururbantimes.com/barsclubsre...y-througout-mo

[PKDickman]

Originally Posted by george

^And 3 or 4 of those units in the original residential plan were set aside as affordable housing for Chicago area teachers/staff.

That is true, but that was not a specific concession to the community. It is, in fact, a requirement of the rezoning request.

But it is another thing that is no longer in the proposal.

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by george

The city does give out 4am Liquor Licenses. 'The Shambles' west of Damen on Division St just recently got their 4am daily/5am Sat liquor license to compete w nearby rivals. Now InnJoy's Late Night Liquor License application ignites controversey through out Moreno's 1st Ward.

http://oururbantimes.com/barsclubsre...y-througout-mo

The shambles has had it since at least May. I'll admit I was there last may until 4am once, and that article is from over a year ago.

This place just opened on Hubbard a few weeks ago and it's 4am/5am:
http://www.celestechicago.com/

This place opened in Streeterville either late summer or fall and it's 4am/5am:
http://www.bellwetherchicago.com/

This place is in Lincoln Park and about a year old. Same deal:
http://www.dropchicago.com/

The city are not the ones who are responsible for it unless certain districts have a moratorium on issuance of licenses - it's up to whether the neighbors want it or not on average, I believe.


https://www.cityofchicago.org/city/e...onprocess.html

In order to apply for a Late Hour License, applicants must first hold an incidental-consumption on premises or tavern liquor license.

If 50 or more legal voters reside within a distance of 500 feet from the licensed premises the applicant is required to send written notice to all legal registered voters within 500 feet of the licensed premises. The applicant must send notices via certified mail with a return receipt requested. The Department of Business Affairs and Consumer Protection can provide a sample notice.

The applicant is required to submit an affidavit stating that the local voters have been notified and that written notice has been provided to the local alderman informing him/her of the late hour application. A sign containing notice of the Late Hour License application must also be posted in a secured place conspicuous from the public way.

If there are more than 50 registered voters residing within 500 ft. of the applicant's premises, the applicant must obtain and file a petition, signed by a majority of the legal voters registered within the affected area, giving consent to the business to file a Late Hour License application. The license application must be submitted within sixty (60) days of the date the petition was signed by the first legal voter.

Please note that a majority of the legal voters living within 500 feet of the licensed premises may file a petition requesting the Commissioner of the Department of Business Affairs and Consumer Protection to suspend or revoke the Late Hour License privilege. Upon a finding to discontinue the late hour privilege, the Commissioner of the Department of Business Affairs and Consumer Protection may either revoke such privilege permanently or suspend it for a period of not more than 30 days.

[george]

Great research & fact finding from marothisu & Dickman! The 4/5am liquor license reinforces two realities. Nothing goods comes from being out after 2am and more vomit on the sidewalks.

[Vlajos]

Originally Posted by george

Great research & fact finding from marothisu & Dickman! The 4/5am liquor license reinforces two realities. Nothing goods comes from being out after 2am and more vomit on the sidewalks.

I don't know, I have had pretty good nights out past 2AM.

[LouisVanDerWright]

That's good to hear, I am totally in favor of more late night establishments in Chicago as long as they are well run. Was there a 5 AM category or something before? I could swear I remember hearing that the city was phasing out some form of late night liquor license a while back...

[Jibba]

^The common Chicago knowledge (among people I know, anyway) is that there was a moratorium placed on issuances of new late-night licenses, and that an establishment in possession of one would have to close before another one was up for grabs. No idea if that's true, though...

[LouisVanDerWright]

^^^ Yeah, I think that's what I heard as well, but apparently not...

[PKDickman]

Originally Posted by george

Great research & fact finding from marothisu & Dickman! The 4/5am liquor license reinforces two realities. Nothing goods comes from being out after 2am and more vomit on the sidewalks.

Thanks, but it wasn't research. It was from memory. I was at the meetings.
Although technically in the East village and outside of my sphere of nimby powers, it is on a border where we share input.

I was at the meeting yesterday also.

The update is that the design has changed to something reminiscent of an A&P from the early 1960s and, Smith never gave the school any contributions, claiming that he never got a bill.

http://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/20140...ing-excitement

[the urban politician]

^ As a parent myself, I just remain baffled by how silly parents are. "The safety of children" next to a grocery store? "The safety of children?"

I mean, what? And what's the deal with not selling liquor near a school? Seriously, we're talking about a Trader Joe's here, not Al's liquor store surrounded by bums drinking King Cobra in brown paper bags.

The children are not in danger! Stop being dipshits! Clearly these are just excuses, for whatever reason some of the people oppose TJs with ulterior motives but are using "the children" as a guise. Ahhh, NIMBY code.

[BWChicago]

Originally Posted by PKDickman

The update is that the design has changed to something reminiscent of an A&P from the early 1960s

Nah, A&Ps were colonial - the Andersonville Walgreens is one. This dulled down design is more like a Kmart or Korvettes.

Those NIMBYs are absolutely out of their minds.

[Rizzo]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

^ As a parent myself, I just remain baffled by how silly parents are. "The safety of children" next to a grocery store? "The safety of children?"

I mean, what? And what's the deal with not selling liquor near a school? Seriously, we're talking about a Trader Joe's here, not Al's liquor store surrounded by bums drinking King Cobra in brown paper bags.

The children are not in danger! Stop being dipshits! Clearly these are just excuses, for whatever reason some of the people oppose TJs with ulterior motives but are using "the children" as a guise. Ahhh, NIMBY code.

I know right? We used to cross 5 lane roads with 45 mph speed limits. It was just part of journey. That's why parents raised us to look both ways!

[george]

Originally Posted by PKDickman

Thanks, but it wasn't research. It was from memory. I was at the meetings.
Although technically in the East village and outside of my sphere of nimby powers, it is on a border where we share input.

I was at the meeting yesterday also.

The update is that the design has changed to something reminiscent of an A&P from the early 1960s and, Smith never gave the school any contributions, claiming that he never got a bill.

http://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/20140...ing-excitement

The update of the design did take a turn for the worse and Smith stuttered when asked about the money. BTW, is it Dickman as in 'Flow My Tears, the Policeman Said'?

[george]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

^ As a parent myself, I just remain baffled by how silly parents are. "The safety of children" next to a grocery store? "The safety of children?"

I mean, what? And what's the deal with not selling liquor near a school? Seriously, we're talking about a Trader Joe's here, not Al's liquor store surrounded by bums drinking King Cobra in brown paper bags.

The children are not in danger! Stop being dipshits! Clearly these are just excuses, for whatever reason some of the people oppose TJs with ulterior motives but are using "the children" as a guise. Ahhh, NIMBY code.

Kids should look both ways, true. But the cars that pick-up and drop-off on the Honore side of the school are for all the younger kids, pre-K, kindergarten, 1st grade. I've seen these kids run out into traffic with several near accidents. So there is very real danger issue.

[PKDickman]

Originally Posted by george

The update of the design did take a turn for the worse and Smith stuttered when asked about the money. BTW, is it Dickman as in 'Flow My Tears, the Policeman Said'?

No, it's the family name.
It was Dietchmanus
In it's original Lithuanian it means "Men with enormous
schwantzes".
Out of modesty my grandfather Americanized it.

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by george

Kids should look both ways, true. But the cars that pick-up and drop-off on the Honore side of the school are for all the younger kids, pre-K, kindergarten, 1st grade. I've seen these kids run out into traffic with several near accidents. So there is very real danger issue.

Oh come on!



Lets just take images of crying children and bring them to community meetings now.

Anyhow, yes I'm not saying that traffic can't be a hazard to children. But that is simply not a reason to not allow a grocer to set up shop on a commercial strip. Division is a commercial strip, after all. The right answer to this problem is for parents & kids to BE CAREFUL.

[george]

It's one of many reasons. I'd say the majority of the community are TJ's fans, but in that specific location is the big debate.

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by Vlajos

I don't know, I have had pretty good nights out past 2AM.

Same, and just because you're out after 2am doesn't mean you're going to be causing trouble. If Chicago wants to become more international and cater more to Asian and European visitors, then it needs to have more establishments that are open until 4am or whatever. Go to Spain - people are still eating and enjoying the night outside at 3am. This is what people expect when they visit a big city in America - late night stuff to do because in their city they can do it. A city like LA might be OK, but people bitch about how early the city closes.

People need to think more outside the box about this. In my opinion, it starts with extending outdoor curfew hours past midnight in the downtown tourist areas. There's many facets to being an international city and one of them is the ability to actually do things and not all of them drinking late night. You can do that in Chicago, but not in the capacity to which I'm thinking of. I'd love if people were still eating outside at 1am or 2am downtown in the summer. It would make the streets livlier for longer. I have actually had friends who grew up in other countries complain about this here. Most of America is like that, but it would be cool if Chicago could one-up NYC in this regard.

[XIII]

Originally Posted by george

It's one of many reasons. I'd say the majority of the community are TJ's fans, but in that specific location is the big debate.

There is no doubt that TJs fits the community makeup, but they picked a stinker of a place for it. That intersection is bad for normal pedestrians on good days and a TJs there will create a north avenue-esque traffic cluster in an intersection that was never designed for that use.

If they built this at division an damen, where the strip mall is, it would be a perfect placement. This configuration seems pretty forced. The original 5 storey proposal was a good fit.

[harryc]

Feb 26
Cold morning on the river.


Feb 28