Friday, January 20, 2012

Zoning & Development Votes Monday On Sedgwick/Maryville

Apparently the 46th Ward Zoning & Development Committee will meet on Monday evening to vote on Sedgwick's proposal for The Lighthouse At Montrose Harbor.  If you feel strongly about it, one way or the other, please contact your block club rep or your organization's rep and make your feelings known.  There have been several requests via email and on block clubs' Facebook pages for community feedback from the people who will be representing residents at the meeting.  Give them some help in knowing how to represent your vote.

Here are some links from Ald. Cappleman's website that may help you make up your mind:
Another link from the comments that we neglected to list:


  1. I went to all of the meetings and filled out a question each time on those silly little index cards.

    It didn't bother me that the question wasn't asked at the meeting given the time restraints and number of questions submitted.

    my question was not lewd, crude, mean, or obscene so why was it ignored this time? I've asked it on this blog, I've asked Rob Nash in answer.

    Thank you very much!

  2. For additional information and analysis of the Sedgwick proposal, see the Uptown Coalition for Responsible Development web site at

  3. In the community meeting a week ago Sedgwick stated that they almost double the ally west of the project (to accommodate traffic for loading docks and residential parking). From their most recent plan drawing, it actually only increased by 10' from 18 to 28. Why they always exaggerate the benefit community will get....

  4. Prepare for it people. And wake up, Cappleman is a joke. A liar. He's under the iron thumb of Mayor 1%.

  5. I cant wait for construction to begin on this project.Ive been to every meeting and find nothing wrong with it at all.I am excited that construction workers who have been out of work a long long time are going to have an opportunity to improve the mean streets of Uptown!!!!!No more bums or gangbangers ,just hard working Chicagoans spending money in Uptown!!

  6. jmisso, aren't you forgetting a few steps?

    Like, oh, the Zoning & Development Committee members taking a vote?

    We know at least one of those members (Uptown United) won't be supporting the plan as it is now proposed.

    Don't count your construction workers before they're hatched.

  7. I'm sorry, ChiTownPhilly, how and when exactly has the Alderman lied?

    Whether or not you support or oppose the plan is of little consequence.

    As I understand what has happened, last year the Alderman ran with a campaign to organize a Zoning & Development committee that would guide decisions related to development in the 46th Ward. That committee has been formed.

    In the meantime, the Alderman has facilitated several community wide meetings between the developer and residents. As a result of these meetings, the developer has made some changes to their plans.

    The Alderman's website has been continually updated with information from Sedgewick about the project and the Alderman has provided the community, also on his website, with clarifying answers regarding the TIF and transparency regarding interest shown in the property by any other developer.

    Now, after months of community input and community meetings, the 46th Ward Zoning & Development committee is going to vote next Monday on whether or not to approve the project.

    This isn't that difficult to follow. Now, again, how exactly is the Alderman a joke and a liar?

  8. Again, defending James. He is not a liar. He is not a joke.

  9. ChiTownPhilly, or should I say Mr. P. DV... just shut up already...LOLOL... you are the angriest skateboarder I have ever heard of.... give it a rest, take a breath, and be a positive force in live...

  10. Cappleman's ... A liar

    If you'd care to elaborate, I'm sure any folks would be happy to listen.

  11. The Z & D committee vote is completely non-binding, the final call falls where it always has...the Alderman.

    However Ald. James has said more then once the vote will strongly affect his decision.

    Ald. James has remained neutral to let the committee do their thing, to accuse him of being in the 1% pocket is a bit hostile (ChiTownPhilly).

    Let the process grind your committee representative or post your opinion on their website/facebook page, if your not sure who it is ask someone at the Aldermans office.

  12. Anybody who gives TIF money to an organization like Sedgewick has no business being involved in these decisions.

    Would any of us be given a loan after we fall into foreclosure?

    If the powers that be are wiling to hand over TIF dollars with what appears to be little oversight, well then it doesn't bode well for our future.

    I personally wouldn't mind some sort of development. Mariano's is a great grocery store, but I just can't see giving Sedgewick these TIF funds. No way.

  13. Cappleman said he was going to vote AGAINST the mayors "Sit Down Shut Up" ordinance to my face at the last community meeting. The next day, he tweeted at me saying he needed further info from the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) before making a final decision. The ACLU came out and urged ALL alderman to vote against this ordinance which is designed to stifle dissent and free speech.

    The next day, James voted FOR the ordinance, and gave the most pathetic, biased explanation in his Newsletter, which is the ONLY place he responded. He even went so far as to delete me from his facebook account when I pressed for a REAL explanation. I have not gotten a response from his office about further explanation and I don't expect I will.

    Again, as a gay man with experience in the fight for rights (or lack thereof) I expected him to stand up for his constituents. He folded like a lawn chair, and its clear why. Rahm Emanuel. Wilson El Funding. Etc. etc.

    Same old book, different cover.

    @Uptown Superhero, are you trying to scare me or something by alluding to the fact you know who I am? Unlike most of the commenters on this site (sans Jeff Littleton) I am not afraid to be known.

    Philip DeVon
    850 West Agatite #3
    Chicago IL 60640

    Oh wait, follow me on twitter too! @PhilipDeVon1

    Let's pray the Alderman surprises us all and actually votes NO. We can always hold out hope, but don't hold your breath.

  14. Gee, Philly, I had no idea you were disappointed in James's decision! [\sarcasm]

    Next, there's a TIF in place at Maryville. It was put through by the previous alderman with absolutely no community feedback or public meetings. Standard operating procedure for the time and regime. But the TIF is there. It's a done deal, as Helen so loved to say.

    So to me it's not a case of "TIF or no TIF?" To me, it's "How will we use the TIF to the best advantage for Uptown?" Now, something will have to be built there because that's the only way TIF funds will be generated. So the real question, to me, is "Do you trust Sedgwick to be the developer who builds something that will generate those funds and use them for the best benefit of Uptown?"

    I look forward to the answer, which the Zoning Committee will vote on this evening.

  15. TrumanSquareNabr has the question exactly right - can we trust Sedgwick? For me the answer is no, chiefly because the business I work for was burned by the foreclosure of the failed Sedgwick development at 1935 S. Wabash. This wasn't a near-miss, it was a disaster that might even have failed in a much better real estate market. I spoke to the receiver appointed by the court to manage the property during the foreclosure proceedings (Hayman Company) and got the strong impression that Sedgwick left a mess the likes of which they had never seen. For reference on the proceedings, you can look up chancery case #11-CH-18037 on the Clerk of the Circuit Court website.

  16. I don't accept the premise that since there is a TIF there must be a TIF. Unlike a bell, it can be "unrung."


  17. G8 and NATO Summits

    I appreciate all of the emails and phone calls that you have sent regarding the ordinances affecting the upcoming G8 and NATO summits in May of this year. When I voted on these, my ultimate goal was to balance our First Amendment rights with the value of public safety for you and all residents of Chicago.

    During the discussion about the proposed amendments, there has been a lot of misinformation clouding the issue at hand. I want to tell you firsthand what we were successful with securing:

    - No increases in fines for civil disobedience.
    - Nothing that will discourage the use of bull horns or personal signs.
    - The Superintendent of Police still cannot deputize untrained people for the NATO/G-8 event.
    - No changes to current surveillance camera practices.
    - Fees for parade applications can now be waived.

    With this ordinance, we now allow large protest gatherings to morph into a parade without a parade application, as long as the police commander is able to manage safety (traffic, etc).

    Up until a few days ago, the most controversial aspect of the ordinance was the increase in fines for civil disobedience, as relayed to various aldermen by the ACLU and constituents. After discussing these concerns with the Mayor's Office, the increased fines for civil disobedience were taken off the table. Afterward, the ACLU chose to reject the new amended version because of their concerns over the current use of surveillance cameras. However, the ordinance never addressed the use of cameras in anyway.

    In the end, I voted yes because the Mayor's Office made changes that I believe respected our right to free speech while also addressing my concerns for the safety of protesters and residents of Chicago.

  18. There's a difference between telling a lie and changing one's mind - especially when that person makes you aware of the possibility when new/differing information comes to light, and/or (as in this case) the mayor's office makes changes to the ordinance that James told you he was voting against.

  19. OK. Let's take all the emotion out of this. You have neighbors that are seriously and significantly against this developer. Right or wrong, don't you think the Alderman would go to great lengths to keep his loyal constituents happy more than bending to the will of a single questionable developer?

    Actions speak louder than words. What does the Alderman gain by moving the meeting forward? To me it seems like a happy developer and a lot of unhappy voters. He's smart, he must know this. Right?

  20. Per what James said during the meeting at Weis, Sedgwick is the only developer who has either the legal right or ability/resources/time to develop this site.

    The timeline argument is strongest since we'd be starting from square one as to what to do with this site, and how long can we go without any significant development in the ward?

    The legal rights issue is, IMHO, crap. This is Cook County after all. Anything is possible.

    Then again, Sedgwick's clan is ripe with the clouted, so I wouldn't be surprised if there are more curious motivations beind all of this, but ... conspiracy theories are tiresome.

    Anyway - I think James, as well as a lot of other people, recognize that Uptown needs new development blood injected, soon. And right now, Sedgwick may be the only entity that can get anything going for the foreseeable future.

  21. @ Just Askin'

    The developer is the one requesting the meeting be moved forward not the Alderman.

    Let the voting begin....for what its worth.

    @ ChiTownPhilly

    Rob Ross uses his real name too, not just me. If I was going to use a nickname would probably go with Jethro...

  22. Mister Random Philhero,

    Why are you hijacking this thread for your own personal agenda? I would never do such a thing.(SHIFTY EYE THING going on)

    Personally I'm not happy that the international conferences are coming to Chicago. It's has mucho downside and little upside for da city. For example the recent admission that the city will need to raise 65 MILLION dollars to host the conference doesn't make me glow with joy.

    It also gives the professional anarchists/nihlists who follow these types of events around the world the opportunity to physically trash a good hunk of downtown Chicago.

    I have no problems with peaceful protests like the overwhelmingly peaceful OWS movement, but I hate, let me say HATE, the idiots who follow these conferences around. They are the moral equivalent of soccer hooligans.

    Now the anti war protests at the 1968 Democratic Convention helped Nixon win a close election. In 2000 the glorious Ralph Nader movement, think bowel MOVEMENT, made George W Bush Prez. Thanks for that.

    Later this year we in Chicago will have the opportunity to watch the worst elements of the international left try to physically trash our city. We may also have some right wing agitators try to encourage them to make President Obama look bad prior to the election.

    Thankfully, the clown car that is the GOP Presidential race seems determined to drive off into the sunset like Thelma and Louise. However, if I'm wrong and Mr Morality becomes Prez in January 2013 and declares the Newtmenium don't blame me.

  23. Yo,

    Sedgwick may have an "option" to buy the property from the not so good sisters. They could almost certainly sell the option or partner with other developers to make this development work.

    There are plenty of other developers who could make a development there work.

    Let's assume that the Capplemaniac rejects Sedgwick's proposal. Does that mean it's dead? Maybe. Maybe not.

    In the earlier thread on Uptown United's position on the proposed development I stated my suggestions.

    I suggest people go back and read it and partake of my sugary goodness and Olympian intellect.

  24. Jeffrey,

    The Alderman moved the meeting because Sedgwick asked him to for their benefit. Why would he do that? My point is that he is allowing Sedgwick to put pressure on him. I think, given the nature of his constituents feelings that he would say "Hold on a tic, maybe I should put the needs of my constituents before a questionable developer".


    They don't have the resources. If they did, they wouldn't need TIF money.

  25. .. it's a bit of a moot point, considering the vote tally from last night. Just wanted to clear up that I was trying to make sense of James' perspective, not making an argument for/against Sedgwick.

    That said, I'm not terribly disappointed about the results.