|
Post by dog on Apr 1, 2014 16:35:06 GMT -6
The CBD (central business district) is designed to accommodate a wide variety of uses in a mutually advantageous setting that will result in the most intensive and attractive use of the city's downtown area. Ground floor retail sales, personal services and restaurants are encouraged with residential uses, professional services and general offices above the first floor. Manufacturing Districts Established. The following districts are hereby established primarily to accommodate enterprises engaged in the manufacturing, processing, creating, repairing, renovating, painting, cleaning, or assembling of goods, merchandise or equipment: M-1 light manufacturing and M-2 heavy manufacturing. Does a half fish farm/half pseudo-greenhouse fit into a retail, personal service, or restaurant classification or does it fit in a manufacturing, processing, or creating classification? The fact that a pet store has fish tanks is a weak arguement at best. A pet store is a retail store not a fish farm. You are obviously incapable of looking at this situation objectively. I would imagine this is why the city chooses to ignore you. You can't reason with the unreasonable. It makes me think that your investor may have realized the same thing and that would explain why he pulled the plug on doing something with his building. He probably didn't want to get in the middle of your personal vendetta against the city. Nice going, thanks to you we have one more vacant building downtown! Considering me unreasonable may explain why they ignore me, but why wouldn't they provide the rest of the public with the justification for their requirement? I am not really seeing many people other than you asking for justification. I would guess it isn't much of a priority for the rest of the public, unless they are just curious.
|
|
|
Post by northsider on Apr 1, 2014 16:48:03 GMT -6
I called you unreasonable because you continue to claim the city broke our zoning laws when I have laid out a reasonable case to justify M-1 zoning for aquaponics. You may disagree with my assessment but I fail to see where it goes against the law.
|
|
|
Post by greekgod on Apr 1, 2014 20:19:45 GMT -6
I called you unreasonable because you continue to claim the city broke our zoning laws when I have laid out a reasonable case to justify M-1 zoning for aquaponics. You may disagree with my buttessment but I fail to see where it goes against the law. northsider, If you review most of Kyle's post, they are prefaced by "I thought"..., "I think"......., "The council should"....."Why isn't the Council , and I'll paraphrase "answering my challenge" and when Councilman Hart does, Kyle is offended. Poor, poor man everybody is against Kyle. His "theory" on how an "Aquaponics Farm" should be zoned is more appropriate than what Kyle "thought" it should be does not mean the decision the City Officials make them "CORRUPT". Personally, I'll never walk into "Flips" again. I can vote with my feet. I really don't believe Kyle is helping our community with his post and that hurts my business, in my opinion, but I respect Kyle's right to protest. g
|
|
|
Post by job on Apr 2, 2014 5:01:28 GMT -6
Kyle, would you explain to the class how the Tort Immunity Act prevents you from filing a law suit alleging that your First Amendment rights have been violated?
|
|
|
Post by Kyle Mitchell on Apr 2, 2014 9:19:18 GMT -6
]I am not really seeing many people other than you asking for justification. I would guess it isn't much of a priority for the rest of the public, unless they are just curious. I agree, I don't think many people have asked our Mayor what his justification is. However, having raised the questions at public meetings, I expect that the would feel that they owe the public an explanation as to why they are turning away business.
|
|
|
Post by Kyle Mitchell on Apr 2, 2014 9:22:07 GMT -6
I called you unreasonable because you continue to claim the city broke our zoning laws when I have laid out a reasonable case to justify M-1 zoning for aquaponics. You may disagree with my buttessment but I fail to see where it goes against the law. I don't consider them giving requirements based on what seems appropriate to them instead of what our laws require as being reasonable.
|
|
|
Post by northsider on Apr 2, 2014 9:53:34 GMT -6
They obviously felt that aquaponics was more closely related to a vegetable and fish production facility which would be appropriate in a manufacturing/industrial zone as opposed to a retail facility which you claim. Keep in mind that this determination was based on the presentation that you gave. If the city arrived at a different conclusion than you did then you apparently didn't do a proper job of conveying how and why a fish farm/vegetable farm is appropriate for a downtown building. You claiming the city broke the law is just wrong.
|
|
|
Post by Kyle Mitchell on Apr 2, 2014 9:55:49 GMT -6
]northsider, If you review most of Kyle's post, they are prefaced by "I thought"..., "I think"......., "The council should"....."Why isn't the Council , and I'll paraphrase "answering my challenge" and when Councilman Hart does, Kyle is offended. Poor, poor man everybody is against Kyle. His "theory" on how an "Aquaponics Farm" should be zoned is more appropriate than what Kyle "thought" it should be does not mean the decision the City Officials make them "CORRUPT". Personally, I'll never walk into "Flips" again. I can vote with my feet. I really don't believe Kyle is helping our community with his post and that hurts my business, in my opinion, but I respect Kyle's right to protest. g I am not offended by his threat of legal action, I just see it as his acknowledgement that my using my First Amendment rights to make sure others know what they do is creating some results. I don't think everyone is against me, just a group of people with interests in not seeing the changes I am asking for. It is not that what I thought the requirement should have been not being given that makes me claim it is corrupt. It is that the requirement they gave does not follow our laws that makes me say it is corrupt. It is our Mayor refusing to give any justification and the group here that is very critical of me not being able to provide a justification in our laws that confirms to me that it is corrupt. I have said before on here that if they had given the requirement of agricultural zoning that it would have stopped the project and would have made it very hard for me to claim corrupt. A Special Use Permit requirement would have given the Council the chance to vote no on approval saying that they didn't think that it was appropriate, and it would have been hard for me to claim that was corruption. Why industrial zoning though, did our Mayor just not even read the ordinance? There have been multiple calls for boycotts of Flips on here over the years of my talking about the problems. I do understand that talking about the problems is not really good for business. That is why I did try working with our City leaders for years to try to change things without talking publicly. They were just unresponsive for a long time and then they became very vindictive, in my opinion. That is when I decided that we just need new leadership that will hopefully also bring with it a better attitude at City Hall.
|
|
|
Post by Kyle Mitchell on Apr 2, 2014 10:02:40 GMT -6
They obviously felt that aquaponics was more closely related to a vegetable and fish production facility which would be appropriate in a manufacturing/industrial zone as opposed to a retail facility which you claim. Keep in mind that this determination was based on the presentation that you gave. If the city arrived at a different conclusion than you did then you apparently didn't do a proper job of conveying how and why a fish farm/vegetable farm is appropriate for a downtown building. You claiming the city broke the law is just wrong. Where does our law say to go with a requirement that they feel is more appropriate? Wouldn't vegetable and fish production be more closely related to agricultural than industrial? If it were a result of me giving a flawed presentation, shouldn't they still be able to explain how that presentation justifies their industrial zoning requirement? I think that them not showing how their requirement is justified by our laws over the past couple of years is wrong.
|
|
|
Post by northsider on Apr 2, 2014 11:09:52 GMT -6
Section 17.32.040...the city could have viewed your fish farm/vegetable farm as a production facility as opposed to a retail business in assigning the M-1 zoning classification.
It's not appropriate for an AG designation because it doesn't fit into the AG definition: "The AG-agricultural district is designed to accommodate and protect existing agricultural development in areas with prime soils or where development at urban densities is not yet appropriate."
Finally, do you really expect the city officials to go out of their way to give you any type of explanations after the things you say about them? They ignore you for a reason. Is this approach wrong?.....perhaps Is it illegal?....no. Is it understandable from their perspective?.....most definitely!
|
|
|
Post by dog on Apr 2, 2014 11:51:21 GMT -6
17.32.040 Permissible uses and specific exclusions.permanent link to this piece of content
B.
Notwithstanding subsection A of this section, all uses that are not listed in Appendix A and have impacts in excess of the other uses listed, are prohibited. Nor shall Appendix A be interpreted to allow a use in one zoning district when the use in question is more closely related to another specified use that is permissible in other zoning districts.
You always quote the 2nd part of this but not the first. Wouldnt aquaponics have a more excessive impact than any other business listed in subsection A for the CBD? If not, which businesses listed would have a bigger impact than aquaponics? The part you always quote, is not about being a tool to determine which category an unlisted business would fit into, it gives the city a way to prevent someone from sneaking something into the zoning map. Look at the wording..........Nor should it be interpreted to ALLOW a use. There is no wording that says an unlisted use will be determined by the most closely related listed use.
|
|
|
Post by greekgod on Apr 2, 2014 14:52:15 GMT -6
Kyle, would you explain to the class how the Tort Immunity Act prevents you from filing a law suit alleging that your First Amendment rights have been violated? Kyle, Where are you? Please answer job's question. g
|
|
|
Post by Kyle Mitchell on Apr 3, 2014 10:18:32 GMT -6
Section 17.32.040...the city could have viewed your fish farm/vegetable farm as a production facility as opposed to a retail business in assigning the M-1 zoning classification. It's not appropriate for an AG designation because it doesn't fit into the AG definition: "The AG-agricultural district is designed to accommodate and protect existing agricultural development in areas with prime soils or where development at urban densities is not yet appropriate." Finally, do you really expect the city officials to go out of their way to give you any type of explanations after the things you say about them? They ignore you for a reason. Is this approach wrong?.....perhaps Is it illegal?....no. Is it understandable from their perspective?.....most definitely! Did you purposely leave out the word mass? The only business activity that requires industrial zoning is mass production and that is heavy industrial M-2, not M-1. Do you really think that growing plants and fish is mass production? You had already tried saying that the justification was creating light goods to be sold. Aren’t you just grasping at straws again? Isn’t growing food in Aquaponics considered a type of farming operation? It happens to be the requirement that the Zoning Administrator told me he told the Mayor should be required. Too bad our Mayor didn’t listen to the professional below him and require agricultural zoning, I wouldn’t be calling that corrupt. I would still argue that I feel a greenhouse is a closer business activity with the retail aspect and growing plants indoors, but I wouldn’t say that an agricultural requirement goes against our laws. You and some others seem to be caught up on the fish aspect of it. It really is not like a fish farm, because there is not a buildup of waste in the water and the fish are not packed into the tanks. It doesn’t create odors beyond that of a home aquarium. When I went to The Plant in Chicago, I walked right by the fish tanks and didn’t even realize it, after checking out the grow beds, I started looking for the tanks. Flannigan has a facility with six 6’ diameter by 4’ high tanks, in a greenhouse, you don’t even smell the aquarium smell until you are right over a tank, you take two steps back and you can’t smell it. I looked for the negative impacts that might make it undesirable for downtown and couldn't find any, I told all of this to the Mayor. It is a shame that I couldn’t have gotten the Mayor to go visit an Aquaponics facility. I asked him shortly after presenting to him if he had any concerns; I wish at some point he would have explained why he didn’t want it to exist here.
|
|
|
Post by Kyle Mitchell on Apr 3, 2014 10:30:08 GMT -6
17.32.040 Permissible uses and specific exclusions.permanent link to this piece of content B. Notwithstanding subsection A of this section, all uses that are not listed in Appendix A and have impacts in excess of the other uses listed, are prohibited. Nor shall Appendix A be interpreted to allow a use in one zoning district when the use in question is more closely related to another specified use that is permissible in other zoning districts. You always quote the 2nd part of this but not the first. Wouldnt aquaponics have a more excessive impact than any other business listed in subsection A for the CBD? If not, which businesses listed would have a bigger impact than aquaponics? The part you always quote, is not about being a tool to determine which category an unlisted business would fit into, it gives the city a way to prevent someone from sneaking something into the zoning map. Look at the wording..........Nor should it be interpreted to ALLOW a use. There is no wording that says an unlisted use will be determined by the most closely related listed use. You might as well list subsection A as well: A. The presumption established by this chapter is that all legitimate uses of land are permissible within at least one zoning district in the city's planning jurisdiction. Therefore, because the list of permissible uses set forth in Appendix A cannot be all inclusive, those uses that are listed shall be interpreted liberally to include other uses that have similar impacts to the listed uses.
B. Notwithstanding subsection A of this section, all uses that are not listed in Appendix A and have impacts in excess of the other uses listed, are prohibited. Nor shall Appendix A be interpreted to allow a use in one zoning district when the use in question is more closely related to another specified use that is permissible in other zoning districts.What is it that you consider the negative impacts of Aquaponics to be? I’ve said many times that I could not find them and asked for others to provide them as well. The extreme suggestions of a food mess being left behind if the business failed could happen with any food establishment as well. A leak and flooding is more likely to cause more damage in a vacant building. The Mayor was told that it was going to be a phased operation starting with just six small tanks. A conditional Special Use Permit would have allowed them control if it did create problems. Is that a trick question about impacts? Would you not expect me to say bars? I doubt that too many Aquaponics customers will be beating each other up or exposing themselves to urinate in the middle of the streets. The fish and plants don’t create noise like the bar music and people yelling, not that I really ever complained about the noise. I’ve always been in favor of the bar making money and people having a good time within reason, but there was a recent newspaper article that confirmed that the bars do create a negative impact. How about some other examples? A hair salon with their perms and other chemicals do create some very strong unpleasant odors. Do those chemicals just get rinsed down the drains? Aquaponics is a closed loop system with no chemicals and not connected to City sewer. Dry cleaners and printers can also create strong odors. We can hear dogs barking in our building at times, from the groomers next door. An auto repair shop also would create some loud noise. They both create much more noise than a water pump. As far as parking, the Majestic draws a lot larger crowds than an Aquaponics facility ever would and creates a bigger impact on parking. Ace, Walgreens the Majestic and many others each create more of a traffic impact than an Aquaponics facility ever would. In my opinion, subsections A and B together say that every business should be have a place somewhere in the list by using the closest business activity that is listed and that the requirements of one business activity should not be used if there is another listed activity that is closer, but the proposed use can not have greater impacts. What are the similar impacts that Aquaponics would have to the business activity that requires industrial zoning, that you think the Mayor could have possibly thought made it fit our laws? I was respectful in asking what was required and when asking for justification of the requirement, this was almost two and a half years ago, before I ever started talking about corruption. If the Mayor would have provided his justification, maybe we would all know how they interpreted it.
|
|
|
Post by Kyle Mitchell on Apr 3, 2014 10:37:36 GMT -6
Kyle, would you explain to the class how the Tort Immunity Act prevents you from filing a law suit alleging that your First Amendment rights have been violated? Kyle, Where are you? Please answer job's question. g You are funny. Do you think that I have some type of commitment to answer his question? He has not provided answers to my questions. Wouldn't it be more appropriate for him to tell us about Illinois Municipal Tort Immunity Law allowing our leaders to say whatever they want about citizens without any fear of incurring damages? Like I've said, I don't need to file a law suit, I'm happy using my First Amendment rights that allow me to talk about how our leaders treat people and ask voters to hire new ones.
|
|