CHICAGO | Lincoln Yards

[PKDickman]

From their traffic study.

[lakeshoredrive]

i really dislike this project! i'd rather have it converted to useful parkland/nature area like northerly island for residents and tourists to use. i'd like to see it still maintain the 606 extension and increase riverfront recreational activities.

[Vlajos]

Originally Posted by lakeshoredrive

i really dislike this project! i'd rather have it converted to useful parkland/nature area like northerly island for residents and tourists to use. i'd like to see it still maintain the 606 extension and increase riverfront recreational activities.

That's a big f'n park. Where do we get the funds for that? The land acquisition alone would be extremely high.

[r18tdi]

Originally Posted by PKDickman

From their traffic study.

Glad to see the water taxi rank so highly [pause] not!

[IrishIllini]

I'd like to see SB target 40-50% for CTA bus and train. That'd obviously require some significant transit infrastructure improvements. Even an "express" bus with limited stops on Clybourn and/or Elston could be a game changer. Accommodating parking for 40% of the workforce in the most cohesively urban part of the region isn't very forward-thinking.

How is it projected that more people would rideshare to work than work from home? What are these projections based on? Ridesharing for your daily commute even one-way is going to run about $200 per month.

[LouisVanDerWright]

Originally Posted by Vlajos

That's a big f'n park. Where do we get the funds for that? The land acquisition alone would be extremely high.

Yeah and the land the city did own was just sold the fleet management parcel to Sterling Bay for $105 million and they will be converting the entirety of it (and then some!) to parkland anyhow. That part of the project is a huge win.

The issue with this plan is poor transit connectivity. There should be a CTA rail link for this kind of density.

[Mr Downtown]

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

they will be converting the entirety of it (and then some!) to parkland

Where do you see any parkland dedication in the PD?

[PKDickman]

Originally Posted by Mr Downtown

Where do you see any parkland dedication in the PD?

As far as I know, there still isn't one. Although they hinted at the promise of one at the Plan Commission meeting.

Combined statement #16 in which the owners may transfer FAR, Height, density etc between subareas without constituting a minor change, I don't hold a lot of faith in the south (fleet yard) park portion even winding up as open space, let alone a park. At last reading large venue spectator sports is still specifically allowed in the PD.

The Park N of Cortland, however, will at least remain mostly open space. The vacation of Southport leaves a lot of utility ROW under that stretch.

[Barrelfish]

Originally Posted by IrishIllini

Accommodating parking for 40% of the workforce in the most cohesively urban part of the region isn't very forward-thinking.

To be fair, there is a portion of the latest plan that talks about how the parking garages could be converted to future residential or commercial uses. There is also a mention of stacked parking, which could help reduce the footprint.

Still quite vague at this stage, but I'll be an optimist and say that lip service is better than nothing.

[the urban politician]

You've gotta imagine that SB doesn't want to build more parking than it has to. Parking is costly dead weight that doesn't generate revenue other than just being an "amenity", sort of like a exercise room or a pool.

[Mr Downtown]

Reviewing, then: Sterling Bay buys a bunch of land at protected manufacturing district prices, then gets whirlwind approval for 6000 residential units, 1.3 million sf of office, and another 100,000 sf of retail—with absolutely no dedication for parkland and no commitment to improve transit access.

Who says we don't have legalized gambling in Chicago?

[PKDickman]

Originally Posted by Mr Downtown

Who says we don't have legalized gambling in Chicago?

Who's gambling?

[BonoboZill4]

Originally Posted by Mr Downtown

Reviewing, then: Sterling Bay buys a bunch of land at protected manufacturing district prices, then gets whirlwind approval for 6000 residential units, 1.3 million sf of office, and another 100,000 sf of retail—with absolutely no dedication for parkland and no commitment to improve transit access.

Who says we don't have legalized gambling in Chicago?

Am I missing something? The masterplan covers all your grievances.

[BonoboZill4]

Originally Posted by PKDickman

Who's gambling?

No one, he thinks he's being clever by using a quip based off a topical political talking point.

[Mr Downtown]

Originally Posted by BonoboZill4

The masterplan covers all your grievances.

And has absolutely no legal meaning. It's not an empty promise—it's not even a promise.

SB is the gambler, having placed a bet on the value of some North Side acreage. It paid off bigly.

[Natoma]

I don't know how you can possibly think Sterling Bay is the villain here. This whole thing was set up by the city, and it's going exactly to plan.

Manufacturing hasn't made sense in this location for decades. The city could have let property owners sell when they wanted to, and have the area develop piecemeal. Instead, they kept the whole area intact and 'undeveloped' by protecting it as a manufacturing zone. And they waited until 2018, when all the surrounding neighborhoods were bursting at the seams, to free it up.

They basically guaranteed that it would a) be developed as one big project by a big developer under a big plan, and b) that it would be huge and dense and transformative.

[west-town-brad]

Originally Posted by Mr Downtown

And has absolutely no legal meaning. It's not an empty promise—it's not even a promise.

SB is the gambler, having placed a bet on the value of some North Side acreage. It paid off bigly.

Gambing in a game that has a huge minimum bet and pretty amazing odds of winning.

I'd love to see the line item for campaign contributions at SB.

[PKDickman]

Originally Posted by Mr Downtown

SB is the gambler, having placed a bet on the value of some North Side acreage. It paid off bigly.

Since when is buying hundred dollar bills for forty five bucks called gambling.

The last parcel SB gambled on was the Guttman Tanning lot and the City cut that out of the PMD lickety-split.
The Dept of Planning has been taking dictation ever since.

I have lived here all my life and it doesn't surprise me that City Hall is full of whores.
I'm just disappointed that they're such cheap whores.

[Khantilever]

Originally Posted by Mr Downtown

Reviewing, then: Sterling Bay buys a bunch of land at protected manufacturing district prices, then gets whirlwind approval for 6000 residential units, 1.3 million sf of office, and another 100,000 sf of retail—with absolutely no dedication for parkland and no commitment to improve transit access.

Who says we don't have legalized gambling in Chicago?

There is no way they paid manufacturing district prices for the land. Everyone knew it was getting re-zoned.

[the urban politician]

Mr. D just doesn't like when developers make money. He needs to complain about something, after all...