Quote:
Originally Posted by the urban politician
I might be turning NIMBY as I age here, but if another out of town developer is just going to try to plop down a tower on a blank podium, collect their returns, and scram, then we have a problem. We might as well put this screwed up Aldermanic prerogative system to some sort of good use by extracting some good concessions here.
Now I know that the usual fuckface brigade will be out there whining about parking and congestion, but if they can be ignored, some sound design changes should be pursued. Any project that has 8 floors of blank podium simply must be declared unacceptable from the get go.
|
With respect to the risk of being a 'NIMBY', it doesn't take a NIMBY to address the policy problem here. Since 2006 there have been a few designs proposed for this location under two Aldermen. Before Reilly, Burt Natarus bragged that he promoted these developments because this form of property tax receipt comes to the City first and can be spent immediately. Other forms of tax revenue go to Springfield first and that was no good according to the Alderman.
The last community meeting regarding this location (2014) was really well attended, contentious and showed Reilly that there were enough voters in the neighborhood to unseat him if he got it wrong. Eventually, he scuttled the plan.
Although the previous lack of parking was a main issue, it was not the only one. The congestion is real and even now, traffic backs up and gridlocks from the Michigan Ave./Superior intersection through Rush and approaching Wabash. Add 325 cars to that ecosystem and nobody can move.
The area is packed with UBER drivers trolling for riders. One recent day, six UBER cars crossed the Michigan Ave./Erie St. intersection in a row on one light.
Simply, the area can't afford another tower built with dumb money and creating gridlock. The local businesses suffer, and Reilly will get an earful about this at his next meeting on March 13th.