jordanb said:
Well, I'd like to specifiy that I was talking about working in the City of Chicago, not the suburbs really. So jobs are available with the city but they're just heavily politicized?
I'm very familiar with planning in the City of Chicago. Jobs are available with the City, and they are heavily politicized. The budget crunch has led to a hiring freeze for now, but if you know an alderman maybe something could be worked out. More about aldermen in a minute.
Michael and Prudence are dead on about community competition and the political environment of planning in the Chicago area. But it was the City of Chicago itself that established the politcal culture.
Imagine Chicago's 50 wards being independent municipalities like the suburbs. In the city itself, all 50 aldermen compete with each other in the same way to bring new development to their wards, and all are
very involved in the details of the ward's development. In that respect they are all like "little mayors." I think the Mayor, to some extent, encourages the competition, thinking the city benefits overall. The biggest problem is that the knowledge and capacity of the aldermen varies GREATLY, so that some know exactly how to pursue redevelopment and others really lack the understanding. In all respects, aldermen in Chicago control neighborhood redevelopment. If they understand redevelopment, great things happen. If they don't, the ward may languish. And frankly, some aldermen have a political interest in not having their wards redevelop.
As for planners...
There is no comprehensive plan that serves as a framework for development, and there hasn't been a citywide plan since 1957 (there have been plans in the form of neighborhood TIF and redevelopment area plans and plans for the central area, but they are never prepared in any larger context). Zoning is more of a placeholder than an actual tool to control or direct development. Aldermen regularly introduce zoning changes in their ward to City Council, and are never --
never -- turned down. It's call "aldermanic prerogative" -- aldermen will always support another aldermen's changes in his/her ward, and staff is expected to support the changes as well. Some changes make sense, many don't. But there is no plan by which planners can objectively agree with or challenge such changes. In fact, the changes proposed by the Zoning Reform Commission are being held up by City Council because the aldermen would lose some control in zoning matters.
Projects move forward because an alderman will call you and say something like, "This developer has a great idea to build a senior citizen complex next to the intermodal facility. Make it happen." Planners are judged (by the Mayor's Office and the aldermen) by their ability to serve and please the aldermen. So if you can get that industrial zoning changed to residential (with the alderman's support, of course), get the Dept. of Environment to handle any cleanup at the city's expense, corral as many of the city's incentives as you can and recommend plan approval despite the fact there are misgivings about the design and layout, you'll do just fine.
Over one hundred years ago, a colorful alderman once said, "Chicago ain't ready for no reform." Politically, there's a whole lot of truth to that.