The whole thing has been carefully worded to intentionally allow arbitrary denials of permits, while having an argument to raise when it is challenged as unconstitutionally arbitrary. I suspect they used the word "substantial" too many times, and eliminated too much of the city, to withstand a constitutional challenge, but somebody will have to pay to find out. Essentially the whole regulations says that "if you can find any spot in Chicago that would comply with these regs, then we can give you a permit, if we want to
The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing … more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature [with] no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men …. John Stuart Mill
Last edited by Bren; 07-11-2011 at 06:11..