|
CHICAGO | One Central
I wanted to create a thread for anything 'One Central'. This may or may not be something, but it'll be fascinating nonetheless.
Help contribute thoughts and ideas..... https://s3-prod.chicagobusiness.com/...ral-main_0.jpg https://www.chicagobusiness.com/greg...op-megaproject GREG HINZ ON POLITICS May 31, 2019 06:48 PM UPDATED 10 HOURS AGO State makes multibillion-dollar commitment to South Loop megaproject Illinois could be on the hook for billions if a provision aimed at speeding up construction of a megaproject near Soldier Field is approved this weekend by lawmakers. GREG HINZ On Politics Quote:
|
https://www.chicagobusiness.com/greg...ront-lawmakers
GREG HINZ ON POLITICS June 04, 2019 11:39 AM UPDATED 14 HOURS AGO One Central megaproject draws fire from south lakefront lawmakers Officials cite local concerns about the real estate development west of Soldier Field that's in line to receive up to $5.1 billion in state funds—and demand a voice. But the developer insists locals will be fully involved. https://s3-prod.chicagobusiness.com/...0c7f73_o_0.jpg GREG HINZ On Politics Quote:
https://s3-prod.chicagobusiness.com/...48.35%20AM.png |
Based on the little I know about this project, the fact that the state is willing to throw $5 billion at it is terrifying..
|
What is terrifying is how the developer wanted Legislative approval to be fast tracked for this Spring Session.
So much happened this weekend but language associated with this project was tucked into the BIMP: https://capitolfax.com/2019/05/31/me...into-the-bimp/ Quote:
The bill gives the current administration the ability to negotiate with Landmark: https://therealdeal.com/chicago/2019...ate-lawmakers/ Quote:
|
Anyone going to the meeting tonight? It's unclear if there's going to be new info presented or if it's just a resident "workshop" where everyone sits in circles and puts concerns on notecards...
|
It's interesting how quickly this developer is moving to get the pols pushing their agenda. I actually don't have an issue with the state throwing money at this if it's going to upgrade transit in the area. Honestly this would be the perfect opportunity to "Gray Line" the Metra Electric...
|
Quote:
|
I think if we have $5 billions for transit an actual Circle line would be alot more useful. Or a transit tunnel from the west loop to Millennium park. Or extending the brown line to Jefferson Park. ect.
|
Quote:
|
I’d rather see that $5b spent on the Connector or Clinton-Larrabee subway.
|
This will be a fun argument starter for years to come... if the innocuous Lucas Museum could have such virulent and vociferous opponents, something that could be even more beneficial to the city will get even more rich white people complaining about losing their views! Because let's be honest, the majority of the complainers will be those losing their lake views, not people concerned about finances. They'd be quiet if the it was a few blocks behind them....
|
Went to the meeting, as as expected, total NIMBY shit fest.
There was nothing new at all. The developers wanted to have some brainstorming/charrette and ideas from the neighborhood, but they were so bitchy, out never got that far. The developer said he's had meetings with RTA, Metra and a chat with CTA. Nothing solid, just conversation. There was one funny thing tonight, the alderman mentioned that there are already entitlements in place, so the developer could do something now. She told the crowd that saying no, is not an option with this... She's telling people they have an opportunity to help craft things, but with said entitlements, something gonna happen... They weren't pleased one bit. They were hoping she was just gonna shut the whole thing down.. |
I was at the meeting too. It was worthless.
Alderman Dowell didn't tell the whole story. The current entitlements are not currently economically viable. Fogelson knew they wouldn't become so in his lifetime, which is the only reason Landmark/Dunn is now the developer. Dowell also mentioned old PDs. If that's true, then they have to go through the PD amendment process to build the transit hub unless it's already in there. Somehow I doubt that very much. 'No' may not be an option, but 'not in the next 15 years' is, and if Dunn isn't careful that's what he's going to get. This is the community that drags out lawsuits until you give up (winning is unimportant). That's what they did to X/O at 18th and Prairie, that's what they did to Lucas, that's what they did to the high school at NTA... Connecting Metra BNSF to the site requires work outside Dowell's ward and outside the site that Landmark controls. Connecting CTA Orange Line to the site requires work outside Dowell's ward and outside the site that Landmark controls. Dunn has never mentioned anything about the South Shore railroad, which uses the tracks and is significantly impacted by the project. You've got 3 or 4 congressional districts outside of Illinois that have an interest here. I would really like to see this site developed, but dear lord are they screwing it up. |
I'm proud of my prediction being correct already :haha:
|
Glad that Lightfoot seems to get it. If Illinois was left to be on the hook for this underperforming transit center it could derail PT in the city and region for decades. We can't waste valuable resources on this hot mess of an idea.
Quote:
|
Also attended the meeting. It was painful how non-committal everyone was trying to be.
I spoke to one of the planners from Perkins+Will, and he was unaware that Amtrak had plans to re-route all trains away from their site, nor that the Grand Crossing project which would build that new route was just funded in the very same bill that also promised funding for One Central. I don't fault Dunn for going to the state first; as brian_b mentioned, building the platform with private funding just isn't viable given the expected rents from South Loop development. Given the rancor around Lincoln Yards, it's just too much of a risk these days to spend millions performing design work and due diligence if there is no guaranteed funding for the public infrastructure. Sterling Bay at least had Rahm in their corner, but Dunn cannot count on the unwavering support of Mayor Lightfoot to ram anything through. The only thing I did take away is that the project team is open to ideas concerning the infrastructural piece of the development, so long as they can hit their target FAR. The problem is, this site really could be a great transit hub but that would require changes to our transit network on a regional level and its governance. The arrival of a private partner and up to $5B in funding doesn't change the fact that Metra hates the idea of running Metra Electric like rapid transit, CN owns the only line connecting Metra Electric to the rest of the rail network and doesn't want to share, and CTA is too narrowly focused on state-of-good-repair projects or social-justice based projects like Red Line extension. That's sad, because $5B is more than enough to establish a CrossRail service that would link One Central directly to O'Hare, Union Station and Hyde Park. |
Mayor Lori Lightfoot says ‘jury’s out’ on whether One Central megadevelopment will proceed
https://www.chicagotribune.com/polit...613-story.html Quote:
|
From my 3D model:
https://images2.imgbox.com/86/c5/f7pFQdOj_o.jpg https://images2.imgbox.com/f9/57/XgRpcmZ6_o.jpg https://images2.imgbox.com/90/21/2aZKtXPQ_o.jpg https://images2.imgbox.com/9b/78/afpjLbyF_o.jpg https://images2.imgbox.com/92/ce/ofcfXXDT_o.jpg https://images2.imgbox.com/f6/96/XIve52Rf_o.jpg https://images2.imgbox.com/4b/9f/iAlUXiXy_o.jpg https://images2.imgbox.com/10/38/qqN4Hcp1_o.jpg |
While I'm 99% sure this all will never happen, that is breathtaking. I wonder how long our skyline would be compared to Manhattan's...
|
^ agree, and I would hate to see it happen in its current plan. This kind of project should promote connectivity to the lakefront but the giant base it sits on seems like a giant wall to the rest of the south loop.
|
That's a mic drop if I've ever seen one
|
Yea, just gross. Montgomery Ward just rolled over.
|
Tonight (July 15) at 6 pm at McCormick Place W184:
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Cool concept I guess? |
^It's comical that the rendering illustrates such tall towers as if people are going to move here in droves. Chicago is slowly filling its other luxury towers in more interesting and connected areas of the city. What is the appeal of living here beyond being close to the park and lake?
To be clear, I would love to see continued quality skyscraper development and our skyline extend south, this just seems ludicrous. |
Things I learned at tonight's meeting:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
All but 2 of the highrises in the One Central renders are in subarea B, but subarea B has a FAR of 1.7. Subarea C has a FAR of 7.59, but it is long and thin and much smaller than the other subareas. Additionally (not mentioned tonight) is that the view corridors cover at least half to two-thirds of subarea C - it's pretty worthless unless the "rights" can be transferred to subarea B. I did some internet detective work and found that the PD331 subarea 4E that was mentioned only allows "unenclosed" parking, which I assume means a surface lot. One Central (and also the Lucas museum before it) showed a parking structure here. And my detective work also found the IL compiled statutes that authorized McPier to acquire the property/air rights but I see nothing about them being allowed to transfer it to a private party. Hmm. I left the meeting with the sense that this thing is dead in the water unless they can throw the existing PDs out and get a new one through the city council. Anyone want to lay odds? I certainly don't have much faith. |
^ this thing will have a chance if in exchange for the deal they got from Springfield (~$5 billion) they provide a significant amount of affordable housing (>35%). Otherwise good luck getting approval from any resident or alderfolk
|
I just went back and looked at my photos from the event and compared them to the slides on page 1 of this thread. The southernmost high rise is in PD 331, so it's a no-go.
It also looks like they are siting 4 high rises in subarea C, not 2. PD 499 https://gisapps.cityofchicago.org/gi..._pds/PD499.pdf PD 883 https://gisapps.cityofchicago.org/gi..._pds/PD883.pdf PD 331 https://gisapps.cityofchicago.org/gi..._pds/PD331.pdf |
Last night's presentation, and all the underlying PD documents and master plans, available here.
|
I haven't had a chance to attend the meetings yet but I live in one of the buildings at 18th St and the tracks and the people in my building have been getting their torches ready for this thing for a while now. Given that for the most part I'm in favor of it, I've learned to just stay silent in my building just to maintain some peace.
|
Quote:
(And I'm not saying that's the case - it's possible that the majority of your building is against One Central. But if no one stands for it because it means getting involved in the noise, then nothing gets done. It's why I appreciate when people at community meetings stand up just to voice their approval, without a question or a complaint.) |
Exactly. One of my frustrations with the way we do "public meetings" in this country is that the only people ever heard from are the whiners who already know they hate it. Even if an alderman wants to responsibly represent his constituents, the torchbearers who came to oppose any change will always outshout or even intimidate the folks with open minds. (And—my god, the level of ignorance and misunderstanding always on display.)
I think this particular scheme is utterly bizarre, fiscally irresponsible as a state investment, and makes no sense as a "civic asset"—but I get so frustrated by some of the idiocy I hear at these meetings (my window will be cast into darkness, there might be construction noise, it will kick up carcinogenic dust, strangers might come within sight of my townhouse, waaaaahhhhh) that I sometimes want to go to the microphone and let loose with both barrels. |
Quote:
Aaron (Glowrock) |
Quote:
|
Chicago DPD announced a community meeting on Jan 25th for ONE Central
Quote:
|
Thanks, Randomguy34, for this update. I had been wondering about this development for a while. I'm sure DPD would love to see this happen.
|
Why?
It doesn't advance any aspect of the Central Area Plan, Central Area Action Plan, or Near South Community Plan. In fact, it goes directly against various recommendations contained in those. It certainly doesn't advance Commissioner Cox's agenda of equity for poor neighborhoods. It's literally a guy saying "make me some new land and I'll put buildings on top." |
This development is stupid. I'd rather see the orange or a different line be extended towards the lakefront/soldier field. I think it's ridiculous that soldier field is not serviced by a CTA rail line.
|
I agree, it looks a bit out of place, although it would be cool to have another mini skyline like HY in NYC. 12.5 MSF is insane for one development in Chicago.
I'm still under the impression it's a pipe dream but good to know there's a meeting, maybe Landmark is serious about it. The buildings likely wouldn't be as high as the renderings though I'm assuming, isn't this site limited, or is that the 78? They look nearly as high as the Sears. |
Quote:
But I agree, I’d be shocked to see this come to fruition at the proposed scale. |
I agree that this development is ridiculous and a worthless pipe dream.
We can't even get huge swaths of dirt redeveloped literally RIGHT NEXT DOOR to this, and we're supposed to expect this to happen? Not only do I expect this to not get off the ground, I don't want it to. That's not how things work. First you develop out the vacant land that's already there. Then, as land gets scarce and property values rise, you start doing projects like this. A project like this is a minimum of 50 years away from being viable. We'll all be dead |
Quote:
Also, I plan on being alive in 50 years and hope some of you will be as well. Do I think this is a fantastic, must-build plan? No. Do I want an Orange Line stop that can be connected to Metra and create momentum for better integrating the Metra electric lines into the rest of the CTA network? Yes. |
thank god for zero percent interest rates
|
Quote:
Besides, we already have some big plans in the works, and much more viable ones to boot. The 78, that stuff planned at the Moody Bible site, Southbank, all of the big stuff planned for the Tribune complex, Lincoln Yards, the Morton Salt district, and so much else. What these have in common is that they are all planned on existing land and are far more viable. |
Hopefully they took the time to actually talk with planners at CMAP, DPD, etc about the transit needs at this site. A new 18th St station (or 16th) that is modernized and ADA accessible would be great. Some new infrastructure to move CTA buses onto the McCormick busway would be great.
Even CTA rail could be helpful, but it won't be Orange Line... probably either Brown or Purple, which could (finally) provide a proper connection between Metra Electric and CTA rail that allows for North-South trips. Realistically though, there is no way they will be able to build such a spur cost-effectively. They'd either need to double-deck the St Charles Air Line, which would never fly with the condo owners along the tracks, or purchase the SCAL from the various freight railroads that own it (equally unlikely). |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 8:21 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Prev