Home » Events/Meetings »History/Preservation »Politics/Policy »South City » Currently Reading:

Sunshine Law & St. Aloysius

Today I made a formal written request to the City Counselor’s office for two documents related to St. Aloysius:

  • Official letter of denial following the December 19, 2005 meeting.
  • Written appeal from the developer, appealing the board’s preliminary denial of the demolition request.
  • I had requested communications via fax or email because otherwise they send out letters in the snail mail. I received a reply back via fax indicating they’d get back to me by the 13th of the month.

    I had requested any fees be waived as this was in the public interest. They denied my request to waive any costs. Yes, I’ll be getting an estimate of costs to produre two documents. By law they are allowed to charge up to 10¢ per page along with time to research the request. I’ll be curious to see how much time it takes them to research a current file.

    I fully expect St. Aloysius to be on the agenda for the February 27, 2006 meeting of the Preservation Board, however, the items are not yet posted.

    – Steve

     

    Currently there are "4 comments" on this Article:

    1. neighbor says:

      There was a detailed story in the latest Suburban Journal updating the St. Al’s situation.

      The developer was quoted saying that the alderman and the archdiocese support the project.

      And that opposition all comes from outside of the neighborhood.

      There was also a quote from the SWG neighborhood association stating that they support the project.

       
    2. Charles Crew says:

      Why dont you buy St. Als then and do something with the broken down building? If your dont have the money or the insight to bring new homes to a historical area in need of some sprucing up, find another cause. So in short, put your money on the line, or go find another cause!

      [REPLY – Oh the classic retort. Never get tired of this one. Yes citizens, you are not allowed to participate in the democratic process of upholding your city’s laws unless you are willing to resolve the issue with your own resources.

      Sorry Charlie, democratic government just doesn’t work that way. – SLP]

       
    3. Dustin says:

      As Steve has pointed out numerous times, that was not an option. It is obvious since Rothschild’s higher bid was not accepted that Wollert was hand picked by the alderman and diocese. I know other developers that would gladly pay more than the $600,000 that Wollert did and reuse these spectacular buildings but they already knew the outcome so why bother to even try?

       
    4. cs says:

      The city in which I live has taken several older turn of the century schools and turned them into apartments. I wonder if something along the same lines could be done for this church…

       

    Comment on this Article:

    Advertisement



    [custom-facebook-feed]

    Archives

    Categories

    Advertisement


    Subscribe