So is it a community issue, or a property owner issue? Just wondering...
Anyone want to offer any insights on this issue?
According to Alderman Daley, it was appropriate to landmark the commercial district at Halsted and Armitage because the community wanted it, even though the property owners did not.
Yet when it comes to the residential side, only those who actually are the property owners get to "vote" to decide if they want landmarking or not. But the justification for landmarking in the first instance is that it is a "neighborhood character" issue, separate and apart from any particular piece of property.
So which is it - a neighborhood issue (in which case ALL in the neighborhood should have a say) or a personal property issue (but then, it was plainly not appropriate to landmark the commercial district)? Or do we just decide to discriminate against commercial property owners?
For the record, I was never invited to "vote" on whether I thought landmarking the commercial district was a good idea. Did you?
posted by The Grants @ 2:51 PM
1 Comments:
this is christine. At last nights sna board mtg chuck e. said that vi was counting tenants/registered voters as well as owner occupants and absentee owner votes.
He did indicate that the tenant votes would not count as much, my take is that the absentee owner votes may not count as much either since they can't vote for Vi.
Post a Comment
<< Home