CHICAGO | Politics and Current Events

[west-town-brad]

Originally Posted by Hourstrooper

https://chicago.curbed.com/2019/12/1...-all-ordinance

hopefully they find out a way to get this figured out bc as we all know there is no affordable housing crisis in Chicago lol.

If the requirement cuts too aggressively into profit margins, builders won’t be able to recoup already soaring construction costs or get financing from banks. Whether the city requires 10 percent affordable housing or 30 percent, the number of units is zero if a project never gets off the ground


This is scary stuff to be lead on to by freshman alderman such as the crazy sigcho-lopez and la spata whom have no experience at all with development and are pressing for this to be adjusted. how could they raise it to 30 percent when half of the time the 10 percent doesn't even get built, these people need to figure this out.

good news is this does not affect hospitality or office developments and it sounds like the main alderman running this osterman, is open to the developers standpoint. , but this is scary as heck for the future of tall residential buildings and for ruining the feasibility of them in our city.

Hopefully the "socialist revolution" lasts as long and is as effective as the tea party.

[k1052]

The wrong headed reaction to places like Pilsen and Logan Square becoming desirable neighborhoods so development must be opposed (which just makes more of the existing stock turn over instead) is a feedback loop. Obviously development wasn't restricted enough so take the ARO to 50% plus all on site or something lol.

[Vlajos]

Originally Posted by k1052

The wrong headed reaction to places like Pilsen and Logan Square becoming desirable neighborhoods so development must be opposed (which just makes more of the existing stock turn over instead) is a feedback loop. Obviously development wasn't restricted enough so take the ARO to 50% plus all on site or something lol.

Why don't these far left Aldermen just propose what they really want? To restrict people with more money from being allowed to rent in certain areas .

[tjp]

“Under the previous ordinance, the city, in over a decade, created just over 400 units of affordable housing and a few dozen units for families,” said Sigcho-Lopez. “The results are very clear: Over 40,000 Latinx residents left communities like Pilsen, Logan Square, and Humboldt Park, and 280,000 Black residents left the city because of a lack of affordable housing. Today, we tell the City Council that affordable housing is not an option; it is a priority.”

Ah, yes - a lack of affordable housing is the reason people are leaving the south and west sides, not violent crime or anything like that.

[k1052]

Originally Posted by Vlajos

Why don't these far left Aldermen just propose what they really want? To restrict people with more money from being allowed to rent in certain areas .

Rich people do the same thing fighting anything that might help other/poor-er people even tiny bit in their backyards. Lincoln Park NIMBYs are just the other side of the same coin.

Really the city has the power to fix the problem without the heavy handed ARO but it requires taking away some zoning power from the Aldermen.

[emathias]

Originally Posted by tjp

“Under the previous ordinance, the city, in over a decade, created just over 400 units of affordable housing and a few dozen units for families,” said Sigcho-Lopez. “The results are very clear: Over 40,000 Latinx residents left communities like Pilsen, Logan Square, and Humboldt Park, and 280,000 Black residents left the city because of a lack of affordable housing. Today, we tell the City Council that affordable housing is not an option; it is a priority.”

Ah, yes - a lack of affordable housing is the reason people are leaving the south and west sides, not violent crime or anything like that.

What a ridiculous thing for the Alderperson to say!

Nobody is leaving Chicago "because of a lack of affordable house."

They may leave because of crime, because of a lack of jobs in their preferred industry, or a lack of unskilled jobs. They may leave because of the weather. Or of either (or both) perceived and real racism. Maybe they'd rather leave the city if they can't stay in their preferred neighborhood. But it's patently ridiculous to say, "People are leaving the city because they can't afford Lincoln Park."

I know I'm preaching to the choir (lovely acapella, btw), but if people are willing to *leave the city* rather than just their neighborhood, it's not a problem with the *city*, it's a problem with the perception of where else in the city people feel comfortable living.

The Mayor's work to invest more in the neighborhoods is a good, rational, response to that problem. Taking all the money "invested" in creating "affordable housing" and instead investing it in better policing strategies in high-crime neighborhoods would be another rational response. Forcing a top-down, mandatory enforcement of police practices that foster trust in the communities is easier said than done, but would be another good choice.

So irritating.

Plus, not only do they force builders to build things that are unnecessary and actually contribute to the problem they claim to want to solve, but doing this ALSO contributes to the destruction of classic housing and buildings that many people like to see preserved. So annoying!

[LouisVanDerWright]

Originally Posted by k1052

Rich people do the same thing fighting anything that might help other/poor-er people even tiny bit in their backyards. Lincoln Park NIMBYs are just the other side of the same coin.

Hence why Logan Square Preservation and Logan Square Neighborhood Association are allies. It makes no sense what so ever if you have half a brain. You have a virulent NIMBY group who wants nothing more than to drive up the value of their already incredibly expensive real estate (LSP) working in lockstep with an organization that thinks the best way to reduce the rents in the area is to... drive up the value of the already incredibly expensive real estate in the area.

LSP wants to prevent all developments that might add supply because "it means losing a 'historic' frame two flat". LSNA wants to prevent all developments that might add supply because "it will cause gentrification".

Any rational observer will notice that both can't be right. You can't both drive up and reduce land values with the same policy. It's lunacy.

Frankly I wonder if groups like LSP are playing LSNA and know damn well that their policy will increase land values faster thereby undermining the hand of their "allies" and strengthening their own grip on the area. I had a conversation with the president of LSP the other day on facebook and he openly came out in support of aldermanic perogative.

I told him there way no way to prevent property owners from demolishing the property they own that is not protected by preservation laws. He responded that owners are welcome to build within the as-of-right zoning. When I told him that the existing zoning of a site they were blocking development of was for strip malls and drive throughs (B3-1) he told me, totally seriously/unironnically, "Don't worry, we can always block the driveway permit for the curb cut"...

Gee where else have we heard of alderman using their power to abuse curb cut permits? Also you are not allowing them to use their existing zoning if you are restricting them from having curb cuts that, in theory, only require an administrative approval.

[LouisVanDerWright]

In other, much more positive, news, we are seeing what happens to the shit bags who abuse our political system:

FBI investigating former Cook County Assessor Joe Berrios: report

POSTED 9:59 PM, DECEMBER 17, 2019, BY WGN WEB DESK, UPDATED AT 06:43AM, DECEMBER 18, 2019

CHICAGO — The former Cook County assessor could be the latest politician caught in federal crosshairs.

Investigators are digging into Joe Berrios’ time in office, in addition to his various political organizations, according to the Chicago Sun-Times.

The Sun-Times reported a federal grand jury subpoena shows investigators are looking into Berrios’ access to private planes and boats.

They also want information on any official action Berrios took in exchange for a benefit.

That includes setting or reducing property values as part of his work as assessor.

Berrios was ousted from his job as assessor in 2018, and later stepped down from his long-time position as head of the Cook County Democratic party.

https://wgntv.com/2019/12/17/fbi-inv...errios-report/

Of course don't forget that Luis Guitierrez and Joe Berrios are Carlos Rosa's political mentors. This is where he learned his behavior from. Can't wait for Berrios to go to jail. He can hang out with Burke, Madigan, and the gang there...

[k1052]

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

Hence why Logan Square Preservation and Logan Square Neighborhood Association are allies. It makes no sense what so ever if you have half a brain. You have a virulent NIMBY group who wants nothing more than to drive up the value of their already incredibly expensive real estate (LSP) working in lockstep with an organization that thinks the best way to reduce the rents in the area is to... drive up the value of the already incredibly expensive real estate in the area.

LSP wants to prevent all developments that might add supply because "it means losing a 'historic' frame two flat". LSNA wants to prevent all developments that might add supply because "it will cause gentrification".

Any rational observer will notice that both can't be right. You can't both drive up and reduce land values with the same policy. It's lunacy.

Frankly I wonder if groups like LSP are playing LSNA and know damn well that their policy will increase land values faster thereby undermining the hand of their "allies" and strengthening their own grip on the area. I had a conversation with the president of LSP the other day on facebook and he openly came out in support of aldermanic perogative.

I told him there way no way to prevent property owners from demolishing the property they own that is not protected by preservation laws. He responded that owners are welcome to build within the as-of-right zoning. When I told him that the existing zoning of a site they were blocking development of was for strip malls and drive throughs (B3-1) he told me, totally seriously/unironnically, "Don't worry, we can always block the driveway permit for the curb cut"...

Gee where else have we heard of alderman using their power to abuse curb cut permits? Also you are not allowing them to use their existing zoning if you are restricting them from having curb cuts that, in theory, only require an administrative approval.

This is why aldermen shouldn't have effective control over land use and permitting. It encourages an enormous amount of counterproductive and corrupt behavior from all sides.

[LouisVanDerWright]

Can't believe no one else wants to dance on Berrios' grave with me...

[jpIllInoIs]

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

Can't believe no one else wants to dance on Berrios' grave with me...

Ill dance when Madigan and Cullerton are in jail. Or at least out of power.
Meanwhile here's to your dance party

[tm30]

I remember reading a couple weeks ago that investors are decidedly shying away from Chicago properties now...

[Skyguy_7]

Originally Posted by tm30

I remember reading a couple weeks ago that investors are decidedly shying away from Chicago properties now...

That's because Illinois has come to be the worst-governed state in the union. Uhaul can't keep up. It would be insane to invest in this state right now, during the Exodus. While there's demand downtown, activity is pretty bleak everywhere else.

[IrishIllini]

^ What happened to buy low, sell high

[emathias]

Originally Posted by IrishIllini

^ What happened to buy low, sell high

That's what's being practiced now - it's just that the market believes values (or returns) will go lower (at least relative to other investment opportunities) before they go higher. And they're quite possibly right.

[SIGSEGV]

Blago's sentence commuted

[emathias]

Originally Posted by SIGSEGV

Blago's sentence commuted

Even the Republicans told Trump not to do it. But Trump's gunna be Trump. And also *pardons* Michael Milken. Not just commutes his sentence, but full-on pardons him. Maybe Milkin will be the last person who owns Trump enough now to loan him money every again ...

[Handro]

Honestly Blago's sentence was pretty harsh, I'd say he's served his time.

[Vlajos]

Originally Posted by Handro

Honestly Blago's sentence was pretty harsh, I'd say he's served his time.

I completely agree. He's served more than a reasonable amount of time for what he did.

[Bonsai Tree]

No. Shaking down a Children's Hospital is crossing a line for me. He should have stayed in prison for another 6 years.