View Single Post
  #3523  
Old Posted Apr 19, 2008, 1:32 AM
Abner Abner is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 577
Quote:
Originally Posted by VivaLFuego View Post
It's a really interesting subject, and it'd be interesting to hear from an actual political scientist who has studied this. But my gut, like with Steely, says that the aldermanic power system in Chicago spells bad news. I can't offer much other than my anecdotal experience and general take on history.
Aldermanic power in this city no doubt has lots of bad effects, but we shouldn't see it as a dichotomous choice between a strong mayor and strong aldermen. For example, one could imagine some powers (such as zoning) being controlled by stronger, more independent, and non-localized bureaucracies, and neither the mayor nor the aldermen would have any say over zoning variances. Or one could imagine a system in which there are no aldermen, only at-large elected representatives, or a middle ground where multiple representatives are elected from larger geographic units. I'm not claiming either of these would be a better system, I'm just saying they are theoretically possible. I realize that changes that drastic are basically an intellectual exercise.

Quote:
It's a really cool building, and I used to love smelling that bread all over the south side. But at the same time, I have trouble imagining a plausible re-use of it. The scale and construction doesn't lend itself to residential lofts, it's not a great manufacturing/warehouse site without substantial subsidy, and offices? What southside loft office market?
Yes, with every landmarking comes an opportunity cost: the building could be torn down and replaced with something else. But don't you think that at 55th and Wabash, the opportunity cost is extremely low? That is, there are tons of vacant lots available, and demolition of the Schulze building would be very unlikely to result in something "better" going up anytime very soon. I think the main problem is in securing the building against structural collapse, vandalism, and squatting, but if there were a government office tasked with securing landmarks and other historically significant buildings, it could be realistic to do so. Then the building could basically be mothballed until the neighborhood turns around.
Reply With Quote