Just wanted to keep you all in the loop on a couple of recent developments:
Per my expectations, the driver responsible for my latest bootleg cab experience has been found liable of violating the municipal code of Chicago.
I bet you he won't ask another person to prepay if they happen to live on the south side.
When will people learn that one way or the other, that they'll pay the price for their ignorance.
My Developer, Carlton Knight, goes back to court on the 12th of this month. He wil appear before the Hon. William Pileggi in regards to the buidling violations in the Marquette Road condo development.
Naturally, I'm sure there will be yet another loophole for him to slip through to not comply with the building codes.
Go figure.
Rumor has it that he was granted more time by Judge Pileggi due to the fact that he was making an effort to move forward on the work.
I wonder if the good judge would be as understanding with Mr. Knight if he knew the intersting circumstances surrounding the single family townhome at 32nd & Rhodes.
Now I will say that my time has been spent the past year or so scratching around, looking for and keeping multiple jobs.
So my Inch High Private Eye game may be off a bit.
But the last time I checked, Mr. Knight did not have a valid City of Chicago real estate developer's license.
Furthermore, the property at 32nd & Rhodes was supposed to continue to be a hole in the ground until Mr. Knight got his seemingly questionable permits approved by way of a legitimate developer's license.
Clearly that wasn't the case.
Per this listing the single family townhome is nearing completion and delivery.
Now Mr. Knight could have applied for and received his real estate developer's license.
He could have sold the property and another limited liability company (or corporation) may have scooped it up.
This project may be totally on the up and up.
Yet if Mr. Knight is still heavily involved---and I tend to think he is---I would consider his past real estate efforts and total up the wins for the owners in the won/loss column.
You tell me who comes out wanting.
So let's play hypothetical.
If I'm a "real estate developer" who dosen't have a City of Chicago real estate developer's license and yet I still get permits and the like pushed through one of two things springs to mind---I either said that the development was for myself and turn around and put it on the commercial market
OR
Things are not as squeeky clean and monitored as the city would like us to believe.
Hypothetically speaking of course.
Lastly, you've never seen a happier woman than me watching the salt trucks go down our humble little street last night.
What was previously a two block ice rink prior to a drastic turn around in snow removal and salting policy has now become a passable throughfare.
Which is good considering I'm all gimpy from my recent tumble.
Showing posts with label DCAP. Show all posts
Showing posts with label DCAP. Show all posts
Thursday, January 08, 2009
Wednesday, June 11, 2008
It's Not Just Me
A few weeks ago one of my neighbors texted me near the end of my waitressing shift.
Since it was late, I was rather taken aback that I received a message that didn’t involve a dire emergency.
I pulled up the message, it read:
“Carlton was on Ch 7 hiding face coming out of court! Funny!”
I peed on myself a little ‘cause I got excited.
Hiding? Coming out of court? WTF is going on?
Despite my aching feet and crabby disposition, I rushed home in enough time to catch the rebroadcast of the Channel 7 news.
And just as I locked the door and turned on the TV what story should appear but the big splashy corruption investigation probe named Operation Crooked Code.
This time I about popped a boner.
As I watched the news report, a few of the indicted individuals were named but a complete list wasn’t made available.
That was a head scratcher.
I didn’t want to shout the joyous news from the rooftops until I saw my developer’s name in a federal indictment.
In short I needed to make sure that the T’s were crossed and the I’s were dotted.
The more I looked, I just couldn’t find any evidence that Carlton had been rounded up in the sting.
No peeing. No boner.
I’m glad I listened to my inner voice.
It turned out that the person who was covering his face coming out of the Dirksen Federal building was not Mr. Knight.
When I broke the news to my neighbor she was deeply disappointed.
And when I say deeply disappointed I mean buzz kill disappointed.
As much as I’ve chronicled Mr. Knight’s dealings with our association, I’m simply the smoke---the rest of my neighbors are the fire.
There's more than one owner who would like to see him get his comeuppance.
I’m just the one who happens to write about it.
While he wasn’t indicted, the city did file two new civil lawsuits against him. I also have to find out what’s going on with the Dixie Highway foolishness in Harvey.
Unfortunately my 12 part time jobs mean I don’t have the same amount of time to go sleuthing like I used to but I’ll eek out some time next week to go to the Clerk of the Circuit Court’s office.
Because as you should know by now, the saga is never ending.
Developing...
Since it was late, I was rather taken aback that I received a message that didn’t involve a dire emergency.
I pulled up the message, it read:
“Carlton was on Ch 7 hiding face coming out of court! Funny!”
I peed on myself a little ‘cause I got excited.
Hiding? Coming out of court? WTF is going on?
Despite my aching feet and crabby disposition, I rushed home in enough time to catch the rebroadcast of the Channel 7 news.
And just as I locked the door and turned on the TV what story should appear but the big splashy corruption investigation probe named Operation Crooked Code.
This time I about popped a boner.
As I watched the news report, a few of the indicted individuals were named but a complete list wasn’t made available.
That was a head scratcher.
I didn’t want to shout the joyous news from the rooftops until I saw my developer’s name in a federal indictment.
In short I needed to make sure that the T’s were crossed and the I’s were dotted.
The more I looked, I just couldn’t find any evidence that Carlton had been rounded up in the sting.
No peeing. No boner.
I’m glad I listened to my inner voice.
It turned out that the person who was covering his face coming out of the Dirksen Federal building was not Mr. Knight.
When I broke the news to my neighbor she was deeply disappointed.
And when I say deeply disappointed I mean buzz kill disappointed.
As much as I’ve chronicled Mr. Knight’s dealings with our association, I’m simply the smoke---the rest of my neighbors are the fire.
There's more than one owner who would like to see him get his comeuppance.
I’m just the one who happens to write about it.
While he wasn’t indicted, the city did file two new civil lawsuits against him. I also have to find out what’s going on with the Dixie Highway foolishness in Harvey.
Unfortunately my 12 part time jobs mean I don’t have the same amount of time to go sleuthing like I used to but I’ll eek out some time next week to go to the Clerk of the Circuit Court’s office.
Because as you should know by now, the saga is never ending.
Developing...
Saturday, January 05, 2008
Curious Woody
Maybe it’s just me.
Perhaps I’ve missed the point.
I might not be firing on all cylinders.
Back in October of 2006 I asked the Lord High Executioner how was it possible that real estate developers were securing permits from DCAP without actually being a member of the real estate developer’s registry.
After all, the ordinance was to ensure “that only licensed developers could apply for building permits, this ordinance helps improve the quality of building construction.”
At least that’s what the February 11, 2004 press release said.
When the LHE started digging for an answer to my simple little question, he was told that it’s difficult to hold developer’s feet to the fire as there is no way the city can prove an individual’s intent to sell when they're applying for their permits.
In short, the ordinance can’t even begin to protect the average home buying consumer because all a shady developer has to do is not declare their intent to sell.
Then you have cut rate, half assed work and possible code violations. Once you sign your name on the dotted line, the jokes on you---it’s your entire problem.
You join the society of “God I wish I knew that back then.”
Luckily you have me to help you along the way.
Interestingly enough---and if I’ve connected all of the dot correctly---Carlton Knight is developing a single family home on the 3200 block on south Rhodes Avenue.
Naturally he flew through the DCAP permit process aided by his expediter.
And to the best of my knowledge, Mr. Knight still has not taken the step to be included on the developer’s registry for the City of Chicago.
I may be wrong---I need to go fill out Freedom of Information Act request forms anyway. It’s not like I have a job or anything. Perhaps since the last time I checked he went ahead and complied with the ordinance.
Hope springs eternal, no?
Unemployment is murder on the finances but does leave me copious amounts of time to dig through city and federal records.
The larger question is now that his intent to sell the property is in the public domain; will the city void his permits and throw a cease & desist order on the construction?
Just curious.
Perhaps I’ve missed the point.
I might not be firing on all cylinders.
Back in October of 2006 I asked the Lord High Executioner how was it possible that real estate developers were securing permits from DCAP without actually being a member of the real estate developer’s registry.
After all, the ordinance was to ensure “that only licensed developers could apply for building permits, this ordinance helps improve the quality of building construction.”
At least that’s what the February 11, 2004 press release said.
When the LHE started digging for an answer to my simple little question, he was told that it’s difficult to hold developer’s feet to the fire as there is no way the city can prove an individual’s intent to sell when they're applying for their permits.
In short, the ordinance can’t even begin to protect the average home buying consumer because all a shady developer has to do is not declare their intent to sell.
Then you have cut rate, half assed work and possible code violations. Once you sign your name on the dotted line, the jokes on you---it’s your entire problem.
You join the society of “God I wish I knew that back then.”
Luckily you have me to help you along the way.
Interestingly enough---and if I’ve connected all of the dot correctly---Carlton Knight is developing a single family home on the 3200 block on south Rhodes Avenue.
Naturally he flew through the DCAP permit process aided by his expediter.
And to the best of my knowledge, Mr. Knight still has not taken the step to be included on the developer’s registry for the City of Chicago.
I may be wrong---I need to go fill out Freedom of Information Act request forms anyway. It’s not like I have a job or anything. Perhaps since the last time I checked he went ahead and complied with the ordinance.
Hope springs eternal, no?
Unemployment is murder on the finances but does leave me copious amounts of time to dig through city and federal records.
The larger question is now that his intent to sell the property is in the public domain; will the city void his permits and throw a cease & desist order on the construction?
Just curious.
Thursday, September 20, 2007
Shocking
Well Ladies and Gentlemen it was bound to happen sometime.
A building that’s being converted by Carlton Knight has to have major corrective work performed after it’s already been on the market.
That isn’t that unusual believe it or not.
Many times individuals purchase into a “phase” of a condo development prior to all of the work being completed.
Then of course these associations usually tend to be larger than a six flat.
From what I understand three of the six units of the building have sold.
It does give one pause to wonder if the people who plunked down their hard earned cash knew that the permit to replace and/or repair the plumbing, the hot water fixtures, flooring and kitchen cabinets had the final data review on the 8th of this month?
I have to ask my friends who know this type of stuff if the data review is supposed to be completed prior to any sales.
Moreover, if the data review on a permit is completed after some people have already closed, what guarantees will they have to ever get a certificate of occupancy?
Just a few questions whirling about my little brain---don’t mind me.
Anyhoo…
The major corrective work on this building concerns the porches.
Apparently that bad boy isn’t up to current city code.
Hell, standing on my back porch and looking across the way I could of told them that.
Per the DCAP website it seems that an application has been submitted to replace an existing back porch.
Boy oh boy I bet that won’t come cheap.
Getting the new porch plans through DCAP, demolishing the existing porch and building a new porch is costly. I’m gonna ball park it at about $30,000-$40,000.
Of course you could do it on the cheap but this bad boy must pass a city inspection. A real city inspection---not the ones that happened with a wink and a nod back in the day.
See how the bad things that you do come back to bite you in the ass?
Karma is a mother, eh?
We’re getting a new sidewalk, Carlton has to come out of pocket for big money and the Cubs won another nail biter.
This is a good day.
A building that’s being converted by Carlton Knight has to have major corrective work performed after it’s already been on the market.
That isn’t that unusual believe it or not.
Many times individuals purchase into a “phase” of a condo development prior to all of the work being completed.
Then of course these associations usually tend to be larger than a six flat.
From what I understand three of the six units of the building have sold.
It does give one pause to wonder if the people who plunked down their hard earned cash knew that the permit to replace and/or repair the plumbing, the hot water fixtures, flooring and kitchen cabinets had the final data review on the 8th of this month?
I have to ask my friends who know this type of stuff if the data review is supposed to be completed prior to any sales.
Moreover, if the data review on a permit is completed after some people have already closed, what guarantees will they have to ever get a certificate of occupancy?
Just a few questions whirling about my little brain---don’t mind me.
Anyhoo…
The major corrective work on this building concerns the porches.
Apparently that bad boy isn’t up to current city code.
Hell, standing on my back porch and looking across the way I could of told them that.
Per the DCAP website it seems that an application has been submitted to replace an existing back porch.
Boy oh boy I bet that won’t come cheap.
Getting the new porch plans through DCAP, demolishing the existing porch and building a new porch is costly. I’m gonna ball park it at about $30,000-$40,000.
Of course you could do it on the cheap but this bad boy must pass a city inspection. A real city inspection---not the ones that happened with a wink and a nod back in the day.
See how the bad things that you do come back to bite you in the ass?
Karma is a mother, eh?
We’re getting a new sidewalk, Carlton has to come out of pocket for big money and the Cubs won another nail biter.
This is a good day.
Thursday, August 02, 2007
The City Hates Him Too
Ladies and Gentlemen seeking justice for our beleaguered condo association has been a driving force in my life for the past two years.
It’s why I started this blog.
Well that and I thought I’d go bat shit crazy from all of the association drama.
It’s been a long road.
I’ve discovered that if you pursue it long enough, things may start to change for the better.
I think that’s about to happen with respect to bootleg developers.
After countless months of waiting the City of Chicago is starting (or has started) a joint task force between The Mayor’s Office, The Department of Consumer Services and The Department of Construction & Permits to rout out bad developers and general contractors.
We have been delivered from the wilderness.
Hopefully the process will be smoothed out and properly publicized by the end of the calendar year so the general public will know how to put a shady developer or general contractor on “blast.”
The difference between these proceedings and a regular civil city lawsuit is that the city would be seeking remedies that bar the developer from doing business in the city---EVER AGAIN and to put the property or properties that he or she is developing into receivership.
Nice, huh? I call it the developer death penalty.
Now obviously there will be ways for someone to get around the death penalty, but that means you as the smart informed consumer that you are (after reading this blog) will actually have to perform due diligence.
Better yet, if you see your bootleg developer is doing another project, you have to blow the whistle on him or her.
Find the real estate agents that they list with and follow the paper trail from there. It’s incredibly easy and now that everything’s online all the information you ever wanted to know is at your fingertips.
Literally.
The minute I get word of how you’ll be able to report your ghetto ass developer, I’ll put it on the blog ASAP.
It’s about time the city brings the pain.
It’s why I started this blog.
Well that and I thought I’d go bat shit crazy from all of the association drama.
It’s been a long road.
I’ve discovered that if you pursue it long enough, things may start to change for the better.
I think that’s about to happen with respect to bootleg developers.
After countless months of waiting the City of Chicago is starting (or has started) a joint task force between The Mayor’s Office, The Department of Consumer Services and The Department of Construction & Permits to rout out bad developers and general contractors.
We have been delivered from the wilderness.
Hopefully the process will be smoothed out and properly publicized by the end of the calendar year so the general public will know how to put a shady developer or general contractor on “blast.”
The difference between these proceedings and a regular civil city lawsuit is that the city would be seeking remedies that bar the developer from doing business in the city---EVER AGAIN and to put the property or properties that he or she is developing into receivership.
Nice, huh? I call it the developer death penalty.
Now obviously there will be ways for someone to get around the death penalty, but that means you as the smart informed consumer that you are (after reading this blog) will actually have to perform due diligence.
Better yet, if you see your bootleg developer is doing another project, you have to blow the whistle on him or her.
Find the real estate agents that they list with and follow the paper trail from there. It’s incredibly easy and now that everything’s online all the information you ever wanted to know is at your fingertips.
Literally.
The minute I get word of how you’ll be able to report your ghetto ass developer, I’ll put it on the blog ASAP.
It’s about time the city brings the pain.
Tuesday, October 17, 2006
Rules of Order
If you remember my “Dropping The Ball” post, it seems that the DCAP, The Revenue Department & The Department of Buildings didn’t quite know their head from their ass.
My questions and concerns prompted a flurry of e-mails. I also learned a few things in the process.
In fact those departments, do know their heads from their ass. Moreover, now that the oversight(s) has been uncovered, steps are being taken to correct the issue.
The e-mail below is the initial one sent by the Lord High Executioner (LHE):
It has come to my attention that developer's who fail to get licenses are still being allowed to get permits. As I understand the code requirements, developers must get licenses in order to receive permits.
I have a couple of questions.
First, is there any process that prevents permits from being issued to developer's who fail to get licenses? (DCAP?)
Second, if the City becomes aware that a developer lacks a license, is there a mechanism to revoke/suspend the permit that has been issued? (DCAP/DBAL?)
If we have a requirement that developer's must get licenses and they fail to do so, there should be some way to keep them from getting permits or, at least, punish them once we find that the permit has been issued.
I have a specific example where the developer has received a permit (after three previous stop work orders for not having the proper permit) has sold units and is selling more, and never received the required developer's license.
Should he have been prevented from getting this permit? Now that he's received it, can we take measures to revoke it?
(I) Would appreciate your thoughts on this.
And the response…
Currently, we have a process in place that prevents a non-licensed General Contractor from obtaining a permit. We cannot do the same with a Developer because the definition of a Developer is someone who will buy, fix & SELL the property. I can ask someone if they plan on "selling" when they apply for a permit, but if they say no, there is nothing I can ask for to prove otherwise.
I can though revoke a permit or void a pending application if DBAL tells me that the property owner was required to obtain a Developer's license. DBAL would only be able to prove that a property owner should have been a developer when the property owner, in fact, attempts to SELL. We spoke of this briefly yesterday during our meeting.
Just last month, DBAL sent me a list of property owners who had obtained permits, not obtained their developers license, and are now in the process of "selling". I've since voided all of their permits and sent them, & XXXX correspondence indicating such. DBAL has also issued "cease & desist" orders against them.
So, in summary . . . is there a process to prevent a Developer from obtaining a Permit if he/she has not obtained their license? No. Is there a process that allows us to revoke a permit once the "intent" to sell is proven? I believe we've just created one as of last month. Can we fine them for allegedly lying? We could probably pursue a "false statement" action, but I would ask if reference to such is made on the developer's license application.
Methinks a major announcement from the city about residential development may be on the horizon.
My questions and concerns prompted a flurry of e-mails. I also learned a few things in the process.
In fact those departments, do know their heads from their ass. Moreover, now that the oversight(s) has been uncovered, steps are being taken to correct the issue.
The e-mail below is the initial one sent by the Lord High Executioner (LHE):
It has come to my attention that developer's who fail to get licenses are still being allowed to get permits. As I understand the code requirements, developers must get licenses in order to receive permits.
I have a couple of questions.
First, is there any process that prevents permits from being issued to developer's who fail to get licenses? (DCAP?)
Second, if the City becomes aware that a developer lacks a license, is there a mechanism to revoke/suspend the permit that has been issued? (DCAP/DBAL?)
If we have a requirement that developer's must get licenses and they fail to do so, there should be some way to keep them from getting permits or, at least, punish them once we find that the permit has been issued.
I have a specific example where the developer has received a permit (after three previous stop work orders for not having the proper permit) has sold units and is selling more, and never received the required developer's license.
Should he have been prevented from getting this permit? Now that he's received it, can we take measures to revoke it?
(I) Would appreciate your thoughts on this.
And the response…
Currently, we have a process in place that prevents a non-licensed General Contractor from obtaining a permit. We cannot do the same with a Developer because the definition of a Developer is someone who will buy, fix & SELL the property. I can ask someone if they plan on "selling" when they apply for a permit, but if they say no, there is nothing I can ask for to prove otherwise.
I can though revoke a permit or void a pending application if DBAL tells me that the property owner was required to obtain a Developer's license. DBAL would only be able to prove that a property owner should have been a developer when the property owner, in fact, attempts to SELL. We spoke of this briefly yesterday during our meeting.
Just last month, DBAL sent me a list of property owners who had obtained permits, not obtained their developers license, and are now in the process of "selling". I've since voided all of their permits and sent them, & XXXX correspondence indicating such. DBAL has also issued "cease & desist" orders against them.
So, in summary . . . is there a process to prevent a Developer from obtaining a Permit if he/she has not obtained their license? No. Is there a process that allows us to revoke a permit once the "intent" to sell is proven? I believe we've just created one as of last month. Can we fine them for allegedly lying? We could probably pursue a "false statement" action, but I would ask if reference to such is made on the developer's license application.
Methinks a major announcement from the city about residential development may be on the horizon.
Wednesday, September 13, 2006
Dropping The Ball
So let me see if I’m getting this right.
In a February 11, 2004 press release the Honorable Richard M. Daley stated the following:
"By ensuring that only licensed developers can apply for building permits, this ordinance helps improve the quality of building construction,"
And the Residential Developer’s Fact Sheet dated March 15, 2006 also states:
“The Residential Real Estate Developer license must be obtained before owning, operating, conducting, managing, engaging in, maintaining, or carrying on the business of residential real estate developer. The Department of Planning and Development requires that licenses be obtained before residential development projects are submitted for approval to the Plan Commission or Community Development Commission.”
In short a developer is supposed to have their developer’s license in hand prior to applying for any type of permit from the Department of Construction and Permits (DCAP).
Yet somehow my developer doesn’t have this all important license but has still managed to secure construction permits for the 1512-1514 East Marquette development.
So from where I’m sitting DCAP seems to be grossly ignorant of the developer license process.
There’s no other way Mr. Knight could have secured the necessary building permits if DCAP dotted their I’s and crossed their T’s.
Then of course Mr. Knight may have his developer’s license. Though the last time I checked that wasn’t the case but he may have filed all of the paperwork and is on the straight and narrow.
If he’s not and DCAP issued a construction permit anyway, methinks that department just left the City of Chicago wide open for potential liability lawsuits.
I hope all of the work being done in the development is top quality and up to code. ‘Cause if someone is injured from non code compliant or shoddy work, the ensuing legal battle may make the city look really bad.
A big fat payout to grieving relatives may make them look even worse.
I’d hate to have to be the one to explain that to the Honorable Richard M. in the middle of his campaigning for yet another term.
In a February 11, 2004 press release the Honorable Richard M. Daley stated the following:
"By ensuring that only licensed developers can apply for building permits, this ordinance helps improve the quality of building construction,"
And the Residential Developer’s Fact Sheet dated March 15, 2006 also states:
“The Residential Real Estate Developer license must be obtained before owning, operating, conducting, managing, engaging in, maintaining, or carrying on the business of residential real estate developer. The Department of Planning and Development requires that licenses be obtained before residential development projects are submitted for approval to the Plan Commission or Community Development Commission.”
In short a developer is supposed to have their developer’s license in hand prior to applying for any type of permit from the Department of Construction and Permits (DCAP).
Yet somehow my developer doesn’t have this all important license but has still managed to secure construction permits for the 1512-1514 East Marquette development.
So from where I’m sitting DCAP seems to be grossly ignorant of the developer license process.
There’s no other way Mr. Knight could have secured the necessary building permits if DCAP dotted their I’s and crossed their T’s.
Then of course Mr. Knight may have his developer’s license. Though the last time I checked that wasn’t the case but he may have filed all of the paperwork and is on the straight and narrow.
If he’s not and DCAP issued a construction permit anyway, methinks that department just left the City of Chicago wide open for potential liability lawsuits.
I hope all of the work being done in the development is top quality and up to code. ‘Cause if someone is injured from non code compliant or shoddy work, the ensuing legal battle may make the city look really bad.
A big fat payout to grieving relatives may make them look even worse.
I’d hate to have to be the one to explain that to the Honorable Richard M. in the middle of his campaigning for yet another term.
Wednesday, September 06, 2006
Brevity or I Wouldn't Do That If I Were You
If you purchase a condo at 1512-1514 East Marquette you may find yourself in the same situation I’ve been chronicling for the past year.
Despite the fact I’d love to have a loyal reader as a neighbor, I wouldn’t want to put anyone else through the drama.
As of August 31st the building at the above address was granted a construction permit.
From what I understand the permit is supposed to be for “Replacing existing drywall partitions with new.”
The on-line description may have been edited for brevity because that’s the only way to explain way it didn’t mention anything about electrical work for the new central air conditioning units on the roof.
You doubt me? Please look at the realtor’s listing that describes all of the sparkling new amenities that the lucky buyers will be getting once they sign on the dotted line.
The permit’s brevity may have also stopped me from reading about the plumbing and how it’s being brought up to code.
I’m curious to know how the plumbing in a building built before low flow toilets, washers & dishwashers will be able to handle the increased water demands of six residents and their families.
My developer (and the developer of the 1512-1514 Marquette condos) surely will have listed all of this important infrastructure work in the complete permit application, right?
I was also under the impression that when one replaces drywall, that the electrical and plumbing would have to be reviewed as well. ‘Cause how can you tear down drywall and not affect the electrical and plumbing?
I’ll make sure the I’s are dotted and the T’s are crossed when I file my freedom of information act request to see the full application.
I don’t want to accuse Mr. Knight of actions that he may have already taken.
Moreover, I’m sure he’s also going to replace that woeful back porch.
The big give away ladies and gentlemen on an old and more than likely non-code compliant porch would be the big X’s that form support crosses along the stairways and landings.
If you stand facing the porch and see those big “X’s” where a person can stand on the landing, you might want to ask if the porch will be replaced or if it will be brought up to code?
Now I can’t emphasize this enough so kindly pay attention: If you don’t get a satisfactory answer to the porch question move onto the next condo development.
You can name your first born after me as a small gesture of thanks.
Then of course if you want to come out of pocket for big money for a new code compliant porch some time in the future or face a possible lawsuit from an injury, please be my guest.
Speaking as someone who hasn’t quite paid off her own special assessment for our brand new porches---trust me you want to opt for the former option instead of the later.
Right now I will have to acquaint myself with how the Department of Construction and Permits approves permits for rehabbed condo developments.
Or is it possible that they weren’t given the true scope of the project?
Stay tuned.
Despite the fact I’d love to have a loyal reader as a neighbor, I wouldn’t want to put anyone else through the drama.
As of August 31st the building at the above address was granted a construction permit.
From what I understand the permit is supposed to be for “Replacing existing drywall partitions with new.”
The on-line description may have been edited for brevity because that’s the only way to explain way it didn’t mention anything about electrical work for the new central air conditioning units on the roof.
You doubt me? Please look at the realtor’s listing that describes all of the sparkling new amenities that the lucky buyers will be getting once they sign on the dotted line.
The permit’s brevity may have also stopped me from reading about the plumbing and how it’s being brought up to code.
I’m curious to know how the plumbing in a building built before low flow toilets, washers & dishwashers will be able to handle the increased water demands of six residents and their families.
My developer (and the developer of the 1512-1514 Marquette condos) surely will have listed all of this important infrastructure work in the complete permit application, right?
I was also under the impression that when one replaces drywall, that the electrical and plumbing would have to be reviewed as well. ‘Cause how can you tear down drywall and not affect the electrical and plumbing?
I’ll make sure the I’s are dotted and the T’s are crossed when I file my freedom of information act request to see the full application.
I don’t want to accuse Mr. Knight of actions that he may have already taken.
Moreover, I’m sure he’s also going to replace that woeful back porch.
The big give away ladies and gentlemen on an old and more than likely non-code compliant porch would be the big X’s that form support crosses along the stairways and landings.
If you stand facing the porch and see those big “X’s” where a person can stand on the landing, you might want to ask if the porch will be replaced or if it will be brought up to code?
Now I can’t emphasize this enough so kindly pay attention: If you don’t get a satisfactory answer to the porch question move onto the next condo development.
You can name your first born after me as a small gesture of thanks.
Then of course if you want to come out of pocket for big money for a new code compliant porch some time in the future or face a possible lawsuit from an injury, please be my guest.
Speaking as someone who hasn’t quite paid off her own special assessment for our brand new porches---trust me you want to opt for the former option instead of the later.
Right now I will have to acquaint myself with how the Department of Construction and Permits approves permits for rehabbed condo developments.
Or is it possible that they weren’t given the true scope of the project?
Stay tuned.
Friday, August 25, 2006
Spotty
Well the cat was out of the bag.
My developer was rehabbing a building a mere stone’s throw from our development.
As I was later to discover, it was not the only condo project he had done since he finished our conversion a few years ago.
But that’s neither here nor there.
There he was gutting and rehabbing literally in the shadow of my building---and without permits might I add.
I went and checked the city’s permit database for the address and found nothing.
If my memory serves me correctly my developer conceded in the informal hearing last year that this was his first development and therefore he wasn’t aware of all of the details and ordinances that went into the process.
I would suspect that his excuses would wear thin right about now.
Plus I got a copy of the tape-recorded proceedings just so I could make sure that my memory wouldn’t completely fail me.
How in the world could you either not know or “forget” to apply for construction permits on a building rehab?
Lord forbid that the roof above your head, the electricity within your walls and the plumbing that runs through the building would be safe, up to code and given the official stamp of approval by city inspectors.
Having an occupancy permit to ensure that the whole pile of bricks isn’t gonna cave in anytime soon is also helpful.
While I have my theories, I can’t comment on my developer’s state of mind or actions.
The only thing I could do is alert the Lord High Executioner to these latest developments and wait to hear back.
My developer was rehabbing a building a mere stone’s throw from our development.
As I was later to discover, it was not the only condo project he had done since he finished our conversion a few years ago.
But that’s neither here nor there.
There he was gutting and rehabbing literally in the shadow of my building---and without permits might I add.
I went and checked the city’s permit database for the address and found nothing.
If my memory serves me correctly my developer conceded in the informal hearing last year that this was his first development and therefore he wasn’t aware of all of the details and ordinances that went into the process.
I would suspect that his excuses would wear thin right about now.
Plus I got a copy of the tape-recorded proceedings just so I could make sure that my memory wouldn’t completely fail me.
How in the world could you either not know or “forget” to apply for construction permits on a building rehab?
Lord forbid that the roof above your head, the electricity within your walls and the plumbing that runs through the building would be safe, up to code and given the official stamp of approval by city inspectors.
Having an occupancy permit to ensure that the whole pile of bricks isn’t gonna cave in anytime soon is also helpful.
While I have my theories, I can’t comment on my developer’s state of mind or actions.
The only thing I could do is alert the Lord High Executioner to these latest developments and wait to hear back.
Friday, July 07, 2006
An Ill Wind
Our meeting started 20 minutes late.
The meeting that was confirmed mere minutes before I walked over to the office, the meeting that had been on the books for one month started 20 minutes late.
Oh yeah---The Lord High Executioner wasn’t even in attendance.
Lady Deathstrike, Bufford and I met.
It was, to say the least, not as productive as I had imagined.
I was hoping for a report on the city’s efforts to stop my bootleg developer’s real estate follies. Instead I was greeted with “there is no such thing as a developer’s license.”
Speaking verbatim, they were right---there is no such thing as a developer’s license.
There is such a thing as a real estate developer’s registry and an ordinance that any real estate developer must put his business license number on any and all advertisements, sales literature and contracts.
Six of one, half dozen of the other---I try not to get bogged down in semantics.
I even went so far to locate the press release from over two years ago on the city’s website to illustrate my point.
I was also told keeping track of my developer’s progress through the DCAP process might be difficult. Now I may be vague on the direct quote but it went something like “We have trouble getting answers in our own cases.”
I mentioned that financial relief from our developer seemed like a long shot as attorneys that would represent us on a contingency basis are still not within our budget. My main goals were to stop our developer from unsafe and safety riddled real estate development and to deal with the third party fine we now have in our association’s name.
While there wasn’t too long of a silence in the room, I had a feeling I was losing my audience.
Again I explained why what my developer was doing in the current context of his real estate development in my neighborhood broke several city ordinances concerning development and construction in the city.
Again, I got two sets of eyes that seemed to not fully comprehending why this was a problem.
I was told that perhaps it would be a good idea to put down these concerns in writing. So I did:
Folks,
I wanted to be clear why DCAP should not grant XXXX current request for a building permit for the XXXX project.
Referencing the e-mail I sent yesterday, XXXX falls short on several key issues:
According to my FOIA research at the Department of Business Affairs & Licensing, XXXX does not have a business license.
Without a business license XXXX should not be able to apply for building permits as a real estate developer with DCAP. Quoting the Mayor from the press release, "ensuring that only licensed developers can apply for building permits, this helps improve the quality of building construction."
Furthermore, according the Business Affairs & Licensing's website, XXXX is not registered as a D/B/A (doing business as) for the XXXX, LLC corporation. A name that he has registered with the Secretary of State's office.
Unless I grossly misunderstood the intent of the ordinance, XXXX has not satisfied any of the perfunctory requirements of the ordinance. Moreover, he or individuals under his direction have done significant illegal and unlicensed construction to the building at XXXX. This obviously is in flagrant violation of construction and permit practices. Lastly, according to the County Clerk of the Circuit Court's Website, XXXX still has outstanding monies owed to the city. How can a license for anything be granted to someone who owes significant revenue to the city?
The research that I've done provides a credible and traceable pattern of real estate management and development by XXXX. That along with his lack of familiarity of the procedures central to his livelihood I find it incredulous that he is still allowed to operate.
XXXX has left a paper trail of questionable business dealings and practices that is difficult to ignore. If he is allowed to continue in this manner I fear for the safety of the condo owners of his future projects.
In my opinion he is as much a menace as a common criminal with a gun. Shouldn't future tax paying home owners be afforded every protection the city's legal system can given them?
Respectfully,
The Woodlawn Wonder
How many more ways can I say that my developer’s practices are dangerous? How many more ways can I urge those who can act to do so before it’s too late?
Methinks I feel a definite change in the air and it ain’t for the good.
The meeting that was confirmed mere minutes before I walked over to the office, the meeting that had been on the books for one month started 20 minutes late.
Oh yeah---The Lord High Executioner wasn’t even in attendance.
Lady Deathstrike, Bufford and I met.
It was, to say the least, not as productive as I had imagined.
I was hoping for a report on the city’s efforts to stop my bootleg developer’s real estate follies. Instead I was greeted with “there is no such thing as a developer’s license.”
Speaking verbatim, they were right---there is no such thing as a developer’s license.
There is such a thing as a real estate developer’s registry and an ordinance that any real estate developer must put his business license number on any and all advertisements, sales literature and contracts.
Six of one, half dozen of the other---I try not to get bogged down in semantics.
I even went so far to locate the press release from over two years ago on the city’s website to illustrate my point.
I was also told keeping track of my developer’s progress through the DCAP process might be difficult. Now I may be vague on the direct quote but it went something like “We have trouble getting answers in our own cases.”
I mentioned that financial relief from our developer seemed like a long shot as attorneys that would represent us on a contingency basis are still not within our budget. My main goals were to stop our developer from unsafe and safety riddled real estate development and to deal with the third party fine we now have in our association’s name.
While there wasn’t too long of a silence in the room, I had a feeling I was losing my audience.
Again I explained why what my developer was doing in the current context of his real estate development in my neighborhood broke several city ordinances concerning development and construction in the city.
Again, I got two sets of eyes that seemed to not fully comprehending why this was a problem.
I was told that perhaps it would be a good idea to put down these concerns in writing. So I did:
Folks,
I wanted to be clear why DCAP should not grant XXXX current request for a building permit for the XXXX project.
Referencing the e-mail I sent yesterday, XXXX falls short on several key issues:
According to my FOIA research at the Department of Business Affairs & Licensing, XXXX does not have a business license.
Without a business license XXXX should not be able to apply for building permits as a real estate developer with DCAP. Quoting the Mayor from the press release, "ensuring that only licensed developers can apply for building permits, this helps improve the quality of building construction."
Furthermore, according the Business Affairs & Licensing's website, XXXX is not registered as a D/B/A (doing business as) for the XXXX, LLC corporation. A name that he has registered with the Secretary of State's office.
Unless I grossly misunderstood the intent of the ordinance, XXXX has not satisfied any of the perfunctory requirements of the ordinance. Moreover, he or individuals under his direction have done significant illegal and unlicensed construction to the building at XXXX. This obviously is in flagrant violation of construction and permit practices. Lastly, according to the County Clerk of the Circuit Court's Website, XXXX still has outstanding monies owed to the city. How can a license for anything be granted to someone who owes significant revenue to the city?
The research that I've done provides a credible and traceable pattern of real estate management and development by XXXX. That along with his lack of familiarity of the procedures central to his livelihood I find it incredulous that he is still allowed to operate.
XXXX has left a paper trail of questionable business dealings and practices that is difficult to ignore. If he is allowed to continue in this manner I fear for the safety of the condo owners of his future projects.
In my opinion he is as much a menace as a common criminal with a gun. Shouldn't future tax paying home owners be afforded every protection the city's legal system can given them?
Respectfully,
The Woodlawn Wonder
How many more ways can I say that my developer’s practices are dangerous? How many more ways can I urge those who can act to do so before it’s too late?
Methinks I feel a definite change in the air and it ain’t for the good.
Wednesday, June 07, 2006
Tea & Crumpets
You see my good and faithful readers, the laws and ordinances regulating real estate development in Chicago are pretty clear cut.
Per the real estate developer registry of the City of Chicago, a developer of residential projects must have the following:
Valid articles of incorporation from the Secretary of State’s office.
A valid certificate of good standing from the Secretary of State’s office.
A valid City of Chicago Business License.
Once all of that paper work is in order or perhaps in conjunction with applying for a City of Chicago business license; the applicant can register as a residential developer. Afterwards, a developer’s license number is issued by the city.
Upon receipt of the license number, the developer can now apply for his or her building permits. They must also have the license number displayed not only the permit application but also on contracts, estimates and advertisements associated with their residential development(s).
That’s the way the game is supposed to be played.
One step leads to the other which in turn leads to the next.
I simply mentioned the above process to the Lord High Executioner.
I also asked if an individual owed the city money for fines, lawsuits, traffic tickets and the like if they would be issued a license before it was paid in full.
I also questioned how could a building permit for a residential building be issued to a developer who hadn’t cleared the registry process for the city?
The frightening thing is how many mid sized or smaller developers have already been issued permits by DCAP despite the fact a developer’s license number was not a part of their application?
Is it possible that DCAP is not checking the applications or are ignorant of the statutes?
These requirements were enacted by the city over a year ago.
As I laid all of this out for the Lord High Executioner---who will now simply be referred to by the initials LHE---he looked at me in amazement.
“You’ve put a lot of time into this.”
Indeed.
Per the real estate developer registry of the City of Chicago, a developer of residential projects must have the following:
Valid articles of incorporation from the Secretary of State’s office.
A valid certificate of good standing from the Secretary of State’s office.
A valid City of Chicago Business License.
Once all of that paper work is in order or perhaps in conjunction with applying for a City of Chicago business license; the applicant can register as a residential developer. Afterwards, a developer’s license number is issued by the city.
Upon receipt of the license number, the developer can now apply for his or her building permits. They must also have the license number displayed not only the permit application but also on contracts, estimates and advertisements associated with their residential development(s).
That’s the way the game is supposed to be played.
One step leads to the other which in turn leads to the next.
I simply mentioned the above process to the Lord High Executioner.
I also asked if an individual owed the city money for fines, lawsuits, traffic tickets and the like if they would be issued a license before it was paid in full.
I also questioned how could a building permit for a residential building be issued to a developer who hadn’t cleared the registry process for the city?
The frightening thing is how many mid sized or smaller developers have already been issued permits by DCAP despite the fact a developer’s license number was not a part of their application?
Is it possible that DCAP is not checking the applications or are ignorant of the statutes?
These requirements were enacted by the city over a year ago.
As I laid all of this out for the Lord High Executioner---who will now simply be referred to by the initials LHE---he looked at me in amazement.
“You’ve put a lot of time into this.”
Indeed.
Friday, June 02, 2006
Courtesy Calls
Courtesy of yours truly CHAC is now well informed about the glaring loopholes regarding foreclosures in their system.
I have talked with several high level people regarding why government money is being sent to people whose properties are either going into or are deep in the foreclosure process.
My remedies and suggestions are getting the once over by the top brass. Time will tell if I’ve made a difference on this one.
The wheels of justice grind slowly.
Courtesy of yours truly my developer now has a stop work order placed on the building he’s “developing” literally around the corner from me.
In fact, when the leaves are off the trees, I can look across the vacant fields and see where the work was happening.
That's was as in past tense.
That’s all been stopped now.
True to form, Mr. Knight was basically doing a gut rehab with no plans on file with the Department of Construction and Permits, commonly known as DCAP. He also did not apply for any permits until recently.
Not a one.
I can only imagine the next groups of buyer’s faces when they find out that their homes are not quite what they imagined them to be. Then of course both the Attorney General’s Office and the Consumer Affairs Department of the City of Chicago basically told me I don’t have a right to expect that my electricity be done correctly.
So what do I know?
Nonetheless a stop work order was issued May 10th.
Now hold on to your hats kids ‘cause this is where it gets tricky.
Per the Real Estate Registry ordinance that was created by the city every front page of an estimate, contract, subcontract and advertisements for residential real estate development must have the developer’s business license number.
More importantly every application for a building permit is supposed to carry that business license number as well.
Mr. Knight has no business license number that I can find registered with the city.
Now I’m sure my search hasn’t been as detailed as it should be. It’s kind of difficult to know the name of every business registered in the Illinois Secretary of State’s system. It would be nice to be able to pull up a list using a registered agent query but that animal doesn’t exist for that office yet.
I did have the city do a search on several known business names that Mr. Knight has used in the past or is the registered agent for according to the Secretary of State’s office and nothing turned up.
That’s not to say that he doesn’t have a business license, it just may be under a name of a company I have yet to discover.
If he wants to continue to develop residential property legally (note the key word legally), he’ll have to beat a path to the Department of Revenue’s door.
Now here’s the linchpin---the internet listings for Mr. Knight’s developments that are currently in circulation should, according to the registry, be taken down.
Nowhere in the internet listings did I see any business license number.
What happens if some person falls for that pre-construction pricing bit, and actually plunks down some hard earned case as earnest money on a development that has no architecture plans or legal permits?
Then they have to wait for a development that may or may not happen.
That individual then may or may not throw any plans about breaking leases and a moving date out the window.
Roof over your head? Highly overrated.
What happens if this person loses out on another potential unit because he or she put down a contract on a building that is for all intensive purposes sitting on the back burner?
Moreover the earnest money might give my developer capital to keep his ruse(s) going.
You see the Lord High Executioner has been very helpful with this whole Knight business.
When the report hit his desk about Mr. Knight’s development activities in my hoody ho, I could hear the amazement in his voice.
Lord High Executioner:
“He essentially did a gut rehab with no permits. He didn’t even file any type of plan with the city.”
Me:
“I told you so. This does not come as a surprise to me.”
Lord High Executioner:
“How can you just do that?”
Me:
“Because he can---trust me this is an established pattern.”
Lord High Executioner:
“Well it doesn’t matter as everything will have to be ripped out reinstalled and inspected properly.”
Me:
**grinning into the phone**
Wait till the Lord High Executioner gets a copy of the tape from the informal hearing with Consumer Affairs from last fall, he’s gonna plotz all over himself.
I have talked with several high level people regarding why government money is being sent to people whose properties are either going into or are deep in the foreclosure process.
My remedies and suggestions are getting the once over by the top brass. Time will tell if I’ve made a difference on this one.
The wheels of justice grind slowly.
Courtesy of yours truly my developer now has a stop work order placed on the building he’s “developing” literally around the corner from me.
In fact, when the leaves are off the trees, I can look across the vacant fields and see where the work was happening.
That's was as in past tense.
That’s all been stopped now.
True to form, Mr. Knight was basically doing a gut rehab with no plans on file with the Department of Construction and Permits, commonly known as DCAP. He also did not apply for any permits until recently.
Not a one.
I can only imagine the next groups of buyer’s faces when they find out that their homes are not quite what they imagined them to be. Then of course both the Attorney General’s Office and the Consumer Affairs Department of the City of Chicago basically told me I don’t have a right to expect that my electricity be done correctly.
So what do I know?
Nonetheless a stop work order was issued May 10th.
Now hold on to your hats kids ‘cause this is where it gets tricky.
Per the Real Estate Registry ordinance that was created by the city every front page of an estimate, contract, subcontract and advertisements for residential real estate development must have the developer’s business license number.
More importantly every application for a building permit is supposed to carry that business license number as well.
Mr. Knight has no business license number that I can find registered with the city.
Now I’m sure my search hasn’t been as detailed as it should be. It’s kind of difficult to know the name of every business registered in the Illinois Secretary of State’s system. It would be nice to be able to pull up a list using a registered agent query but that animal doesn’t exist for that office yet.
I did have the city do a search on several known business names that Mr. Knight has used in the past or is the registered agent for according to the Secretary of State’s office and nothing turned up.
That’s not to say that he doesn’t have a business license, it just may be under a name of a company I have yet to discover.
If he wants to continue to develop residential property legally (note the key word legally), he’ll have to beat a path to the Department of Revenue’s door.
Now here’s the linchpin---the internet listings for Mr. Knight’s developments that are currently in circulation should, according to the registry, be taken down.
Nowhere in the internet listings did I see any business license number.
What happens if some person falls for that pre-construction pricing bit, and actually plunks down some hard earned case as earnest money on a development that has no architecture plans or legal permits?
Then they have to wait for a development that may or may not happen.
That individual then may or may not throw any plans about breaking leases and a moving date out the window.
Roof over your head? Highly overrated.
What happens if this person loses out on another potential unit because he or she put down a contract on a building that is for all intensive purposes sitting on the back burner?
Moreover the earnest money might give my developer capital to keep his ruse(s) going.
You see the Lord High Executioner has been very helpful with this whole Knight business.
When the report hit his desk about Mr. Knight’s development activities in my hoody ho, I could hear the amazement in his voice.
Lord High Executioner:
“He essentially did a gut rehab with no permits. He didn’t even file any type of plan with the city.”
Me:
“I told you so. This does not come as a surprise to me.”
Lord High Executioner:
“How can you just do that?”
Me:
“Because he can---trust me this is an established pattern.”
Lord High Executioner:
“Well it doesn’t matter as everything will have to be ripped out reinstalled and inspected properly.”
Me:
**grinning into the phone**
Wait till the Lord High Executioner gets a copy of the tape from the informal hearing with Consumer Affairs from last fall, he’s gonna plotz all over himself.
Wednesday, December 14, 2005
Results
Our condo association has received the building permit for the porches. I literally had to be picked up off the floor when I found out the news. The permit was issued yesterday. It took approximately 33 days from our application date.
If you remember correctly I thought the permit process would take at least three months.
This has to be a record for the City of Chicago's Department of Construction and Permits.
Additionally, the field service manager from Commonwealth Edison (the electric company) placed an order to get the metal housings for our tape wrapped electrical wires.
I'm not used to this much co-operation. Perhaps it's the association's early Christmas present.
If you remember correctly I thought the permit process would take at least three months.
This has to be a record for the City of Chicago's Department of Construction and Permits.
Additionally, the field service manager from Commonwealth Edison (the electric company) placed an order to get the metal housings for our tape wrapped electrical wires.
I'm not used to this much co-operation. Perhaps it's the association's early Christmas present.
Monday, November 28, 2005
Itinerary
Below is today's follow up to-do list concerning condominium business:
1. Confirm that the plats of survey for our construction permit application will be completed today with 2 copies mailed to our porch vendor and 6 copies mailed to my attention.
2. Continue to attempt to setup an appointment with ComEd about the deteriorating condition of the electrical wires coming into our buildings.
3. Check on the status of our third foreclosure to see if the sale actually went through.
Mind you, I generally do all of this during my lunch hour as I have to make these calls during business hours. Is it any question on why I'm going to run away for a few days later on this week?
1. Confirm that the plats of survey for our construction permit application will be completed today with 2 copies mailed to our porch vendor and 6 copies mailed to my attention.
2. Continue to attempt to setup an appointment with ComEd about the deteriorating condition of the electrical wires coming into our buildings.
3. Check on the status of our third foreclosure to see if the sale actually went through.
Mind you, I generally do all of this during my lunch hour as I have to make these calls during business hours. Is it any question on why I'm going to run away for a few days later on this week?
Thursday, November 24, 2005
A Ray Of Sunshine
Our application for the porch construction permit seems to be gathering steam. The Porch People called to say that our application has progressed so quickly that they're almost afraid that something might be wrong.
Normally, construction permit applications don't make it through to the zoning department for another four weeks. Ours has already landed there and has been pushed through to the next department. If it sails through the rest of the process this seemlessly (knock on wood), we could actually have permits before Valentine's Day 2006.
Here's to hoping.
Normally, construction permit applications don't make it through to the zoning department for another four weeks. Ours has already landed there and has been pushed through to the next department. If it sails through the rest of the process this seemlessly (knock on wood), we could actually have permits before Valentine's Day 2006.
Here's to hoping.
Sunday, October 30, 2005
Updates
The lawn is showing signs of coming back from my fertilizer debacle. Sprigs of green are showing through the burned part. Never underestimate the restorative power of water.
No we don't have the permits for the porch yet. Our intake meeting with DCAP is on November 10th.
Our third foreclosure happens on Wednesday.
Whoopee.
No we don't have the permits for the porch yet. Our intake meeting with DCAP is on November 10th.
Our third foreclosure happens on Wednesday.
Whoopee.
Wednesday, October 19, 2005
From Bad To Worse
Per my request, this letter was sent to me to foward on to our Alderman about the condition of our Porches by our vendor The Porch People:
Re: Imminently hazardous Porch conditions
Dear Ms. XXXXXX, and members of the Board:
During our recent return to the building in preparation for the temporary stabilization of the porches, our Senior Field Superintendent accompanied by our Master Carpenter determined that the association’s three (3) porches are extremely dangerous, should not be used, and may not survive this upcoming winter.
Given the above, we will plead with the City of Chicago Department of Permits (DCAP) to consider “fast-tracking” this Permit Application. We can not, however, guarantee that they will be sympathetic, given the volume of applications they process. At the same time, we urge you to perhaps contact your Alderman for assistance.
If you have not done so already, we advise that the Board post notices that strongly suggest the porches be used only as an Emergency Exit.
I will advise you of our permit application intake take, as soon as it is assigned to us by DCAP.
Sincerely,
XXXXXXXXX
Project Administrator
Who, in God's name, is taking me out for drinkies? I hope those permits come in soon.
Re: Imminently hazardous Porch conditions
Dear Ms. XXXXXX, and members of the Board:
During our recent return to the building in preparation for the temporary stabilization of the porches, our Senior Field Superintendent accompanied by our Master Carpenter determined that the association’s three (3) porches are extremely dangerous, should not be used, and may not survive this upcoming winter.
Given the above, we will plead with the City of Chicago Department of Permits (DCAP) to consider “fast-tracking” this Permit Application. We can not, however, guarantee that they will be sympathetic, given the volume of applications they process. At the same time, we urge you to perhaps contact your Alderman for assistance.
If you have not done so already, we advise that the Board post notices that strongly suggest the porches be used only as an Emergency Exit.
I will advise you of our permit application intake take, as soon as it is assigned to us by DCAP.
Sincerely,
XXXXXXXXX
Project Administrator
Who, in God's name, is taking me out for drinkies? I hope those permits come in soon.
Monday, September 12, 2005
How the City that works---works. A Chicago Primer
As of this writing, the city of broad shoulders is awash in political scandal after political scandal. Water department employees selling drugs on city time, patronage hiring outside of the Shakman Decree (legislating political hiring and firing in Chicago) and a hired truck program that allegedly steered city business to influentially connected firms. In return, among other things, those businesses gave kick backs to those who got the firm’s foot in the door. This wave of scandals have led to an uprising among Chicagoans and cast doubt on Mayor Daley’s future.
We here in Chicago don’t so much mind the everyday corruption but when both the city and the county keep on talking about budget shortfalls and our property taxes triple, well my friends---people look a tad harder at scandals that waste taxpayer money.
Plus it also goes to the fairness issue. I don’t want to sound like Pollyanna here but folks seem to get pissed about a handful of connected people getting fat off of the public trough while the rest of us can’t even get a seat at the table. Not only can’t we get a seat, but we also have to pay---through our outrageous tax bills might I add---for the privilege of NOT being connected. Nutty, huh?
The best exchange to describe how the city that works---works is this oft recited ditty:
Political Boss: “Who are you? Who sent you?”
Applicant: “No one sent me.”
Political Boss: “I don’t want to talk to somebody that nobody sent.”
Why is this important?
Perhaps that can start to explain why it’s so painfully slow to get permits from the Department of Construction and Permits for the City of Chicago (DCAP). Frankly it’s getting even slower as the department is awash in it’s own little scandal.
Apparently someone in the department didn’t think it was a problem that some real estate developers take a few DCAP staffers on all expense paid trips to exotic locales. This individual also didn’t think that a conflict of interest would occur between the people trying to get permits pushed through paying for vacations that a city paycheck couldn’t provide for the people doing the approving. Go figure.
More’s the pity---that person lost his job and as a result the construction permit process for everybody in the City of Chicago has practically ground to a halt.
Smooth move ex-lax.
We here in Chicago don’t so much mind the everyday corruption but when both the city and the county keep on talking about budget shortfalls and our property taxes triple, well my friends---people look a tad harder at scandals that waste taxpayer money.
Plus it also goes to the fairness issue. I don’t want to sound like Pollyanna here but folks seem to get pissed about a handful of connected people getting fat off of the public trough while the rest of us can’t even get a seat at the table. Not only can’t we get a seat, but we also have to pay---through our outrageous tax bills might I add---for the privilege of NOT being connected. Nutty, huh?
The best exchange to describe how the city that works---works is this oft recited ditty:
Political Boss: “Who are you? Who sent you?”
Applicant: “No one sent me.”
Political Boss: “I don’t want to talk to somebody that nobody sent.”
Why is this important?
Perhaps that can start to explain why it’s so painfully slow to get permits from the Department of Construction and Permits for the City of Chicago (DCAP). Frankly it’s getting even slower as the department is awash in it’s own little scandal.
Apparently someone in the department didn’t think it was a problem that some real estate developers take a few DCAP staffers on all expense paid trips to exotic locales. This individual also didn’t think that a conflict of interest would occur between the people trying to get permits pushed through paying for vacations that a city paycheck couldn’t provide for the people doing the approving. Go figure.
More’s the pity---that person lost his job and as a result the construction permit process for everybody in the City of Chicago has practically ground to a halt.
Smooth move ex-lax.
Wednesday, September 07, 2005
Timeline
Assuming my condo association gets the loan; our back porch construction timeline should look a little something like this:
Mid September to October 1st, 2005
The loan is approved and the final bank paperwork gets signed off. We also sign the contract with our porch vendor and put down a 20% deposit.
October 1st, 2005
The porch vendor starts the multi-step demolition and construction permit process with DCAP (The Department of Construction and Permits for the City of Chicago). They would also come out and reinforce our current porches (for free might I add) so their condition does not further deteriorate while waiting for the permits to be granted.
February 14th, 2006
Assuming everything went smoothly---all of the drawings, blueprints and plans have been accepted from the porch vendor. The permits to demolish our old porches and construct new ones may be granted.
March 17th, 2006
Once again---assuming all goes well; construction on the porches may start and hopefully be completed before Easter.
What’s with the gaps of time? Why does it take so long? Well friends, let me give you a basic primer (as I understand it) for dealing with the bureaucracy that surrounds getting anything built in the City of Chicago.
Mid September to October 1st, 2005
The loan is approved and the final bank paperwork gets signed off. We also sign the contract with our porch vendor and put down a 20% deposit.
October 1st, 2005
The porch vendor starts the multi-step demolition and construction permit process with DCAP (The Department of Construction and Permits for the City of Chicago). They would also come out and reinforce our current porches (for free might I add) so their condition does not further deteriorate while waiting for the permits to be granted.
February 14th, 2006
Assuming everything went smoothly---all of the drawings, blueprints and plans have been accepted from the porch vendor. The permits to demolish our old porches and construct new ones may be granted.
March 17th, 2006
Once again---assuming all goes well; construction on the porches may start and hopefully be completed before Easter.
What’s with the gaps of time? Why does it take so long? Well friends, let me give you a basic primer (as I understand it) for dealing with the bureaucracy that surrounds getting anything built in the City of Chicago.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
