Monday, February 23, 2009

Ald. Shiller Off To Vegas To Help Uptown Retail?

Inquiring minds want to know if Alderman Shiller will once again attend the RECON (Global Retail Real Estate Convention) in Las Vegas in May. We wonder how much new retail in Uptown is directly related to her attending this convention in the past?


  1. Her attendance has brought lots of great retail to Uptown, I guarantee that within the next year our neighborhood will at least see another liquor store, possibly even a dry cleaner or two.

  2. Or maybe she can spur on some retail in the form of eating establishments like this gem.

  3. it sounds like she's attended in the we know the last time?

    WHY on earth would she need to attend? talk about a boondoggle....and of course, we pay for them...

  4. Helen goes every year and that's been going on for a long time. Meanwhile, retail gets worse every year. I say she's found another way to get a vacation paid by us taxpayers.

    Really now, what has she learned from these Vegas trips after all these years? What's just one thing?

  5. Have any of you ever spoken to the women or heard her speak. She is the expert on everything Uptown and there is nothing that some "expert" on retail could teach her. However, she is happy to go to Vegas spend some time in the sun, maybe gather up some political contributions and continue telling herself how much the people of the 46th will appreciate her once her "Wilson Yard TIF Vision" is finished.

  6. And you can't forget Peter Holsten, another "exhibitor" at the trade show.

    "It'll be a huge boost that will bring a lot of people to the area," says Peter Holsten, president of Holsten Development, who was marketing the development's retail space this week at a trade show in Las Vegas. (quoted in Crain's in 2007)

    And after years of "marketing," what do we have? A Subway (just like the one on Wilson and Magnolia). Nail salons (just like the ones all over Uptown). And low-income, very-low-income, and extremely low-income housing.

    Oh, yeah, and Helen, Brendan and Peter's tans.

  7. Target needs to put up their damn "coming soon" sign. WHAT is the problem? Everyone says that they are coming. Well, put up the sign then. Include it on the "stores to open soon" list. Can someone please explain to me why the company will not do this?

  8. I agree Sassy, although as we can see, Target is not even being built right now. The housing is first. Helen has to make sure that gets in before anything else!

    Its no wonder why so many are skeptical about whether or not Target is coming. Hhhmmm... Helen, can you help us out a bit?


    If she would share a little information, she wouldn't have so many damn people pissed off at her - but then again, her word doesn't hold much water anymore.

  9. Sassy, apparently there is a city ordinance prohibiting Target from putting up such signage - according to our beloved alderman.

    ... meh.

  10. Interesting. I guess that ordinance didn't exist when they were building the Target on Peterson?

  11. Target isn't coming at least yet even if they own the property etc. they are leaving themselves a big out because of the economy.

    At least that is my opinion. I will be surprised if Target ever comes.

    My opinion again.

    I could see more housing in place of Target and Helen will say Target backed out because of the lawsuit or economy or both and it will just end up with more housing.

  12. Right. Peterson had the sign. Hugh, have you been able to identify any such ordinance? If they can construct outside the hours of city ordinances, I don't know why the city can't look the other way for a friggin' sign! Or, why a special exception can't be issued for a favored developer supposedly working for the public good.

    Ok. Enough ranting. As for Shiller's Vegas trips, I guess what happens in Vegas stays in Vegas (never to see the light of day in Uptown!)

  13. Here are a couple. Of course neither apply. What ordinance is she talking about?

    4-4-336 Improper business signs.
    (a) No sign shall be placed on the exterior of any business in the City of Chicago unless it is securely affixed to the property of the business. Unsecure methods of affixing a sign shall include, but not be limited to, attaching the sign with tape, string or staples.

    (b) This section shall not prohibit the use of canopies, awnings and marquees authorized by chapter 10-24 of this Code.

    (c) Any sign which is erected, altered or maintained in violation of this section shall be removed by the owner or operator of the business. Any person who erects, alters or maintains a sign in violation of this section shall be fined up to $200.00 for each offense. Each day that the violation continues shall constitute a separate and distinct offense.

    (d) If such sign is not removed, the City of Chicago may remove the sign and charge the expense of such removal to the owner or operator of the business.

    (e) Following a hearing conducted in accordance with its rules, the department of business affairs and licensing’s adjudication division may suspend or revoke any license issued to a business under the provisions of this Code, if a sign is erected, altered or maintained on the property of the business in violation of this section.

    (Added Coun. J. 7-2-97, p. 47096; Amend Coun. J. 7-27-05, p. 53211, § 1)

    8-4-270 Advertising and signs on buildings.
    No person shall post, stick, stamp, tack, paint, or otherwise fix, or cause the same to be done by another person, any notice, placard, bill, handbill, sign, poster, card advertisement, or other device calculated to attract the attention of the public, upon any building or part thereof, wall or part thereof, or window, without first obtaining the written consent of the owner, agent, lessee, or occupant of such premises or structure; provided, however, that no person shall paste, post, or fasten any handbill, poster, advertisement, or notice of any kind, or cause the same to be done, which exceeds 12 square feet in area without first obtaining a permit so to do from the building commissioner in accordance with the provisions of this Code relating to billboards and signboards; and provided, further, that this section shall not apply to advertising matter upon billboards owned or controlled by private individuals.

  14. I agree Sassy, although as we can see, Target is not even being built right now. The housing is first. Helen has to make sure that gets in before anything else!

    This is the genius of city planning through TIFs.

    Don't build the tax producing retail portion first. Build it later. Build the housing first. Votes are like taxes, only better.

  15. Votes are like taxes, only better.

    So true in Chicago!