SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/index.php)
-   General Development (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=86)
-   -   CHICAGO | Lincoln Yards (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=229869)

Randomguy34 Sep 15, 2017 4:35 PM

CHICAGO | Lincoln Yards
 
Chicago developer aims at Amazon with $10B vision for former steel plant site
Quote:

By Ryan Ori
Sterling Bay's massive development planned for the former A. Finkl & Sons steel plant site has a name, a high-powered planning team and one big target: Amazon's second headquarters.

About two years after it struck a deal to buy the North Side parcel along the Chicago River, the Chicago developer is disclosing new details, including the name: Lincoln Yards.

The mixed-use development could take up as much as 100 acres of land along Lincoln Park and Bucktown, cost as much as $10 billion and take a decade to complete, said Sterling Bay managing principal Andy Gloor.

Sterling Bay is sharing its first detailed description of Lincoln Yards at an ideal time to be in possession of a sprawling, well-located development site. Seattle-based Amazon last week announced it will search North America for a city where it can create a second headquarters for up to 50,000 new employees.

Mayor Rahm Emanuel is pushing for that city to be Chicago, and Gloor said Sterling Bay plans to court Amazon. A few prominent Chicago developers have sites that could potentially accomodate Amazon, but Sterling Bay is the first to publicly describe plans to land the deal.

"Chicago is a strong tech market," Gloor said. "Chicago as a city has a lot to offer someone like Amazon. If you're looking at Chicago and trying to build a second headquarters, 100 acres of riverside land between Lincoln Park and Bucktown feels like a good place to start.

"We think it's the best infill site in the U.S. today."

Lincoln Yards is expected to include a new Metra train station, an extension of The 606 elevated trail, a water taxi stop, office and residential towers, a riverside brewery, shops and restaurants. The project also could include other uses, including a school or a theater, Gloor said.
http://www.trbimg.com/img-59b9cc74/t...1200/1200x1200

Randomguy34 Sep 16, 2017 2:00 AM

Website for the project is now up:
http://www.lincolnyards.com/

Randomguy34 Sep 20, 2017 8:21 AM

More and more word this week, from various sources, says that transit is an important factor for Amazon's headquarters. That might be a problem for this site if it only relies on Metra

Chicago a 'top prospect' for Amazon headquarters
Quote:

As a delegation from City Hall and Gov. Bruce Rauner's office tours Amazon's headquarters in Seattle today, the head of the state's economic development arm is lifting the veil a bit on the odds of Chicago winning Amazon's huge 50,000-job HQ2.

The bottom line from Intersect Illinois' Mark Peterson: The Windy City really is in the hunt, aided by its public transportation infrastructure, an asset that's gone largely unappreciated until now in the headquarters sweepstakes. And the governor and Mayor Rahm Emanuel really are working together for a change on this one, Peterson notes. But success by no means is guaranteed.
...
St. Louis also is bidding for the second headquarters, something Rauner mentioned yesterday, and it "may meet the criteria" Amazon has set forth. But Chicago clearly offers two other things Amazon has on its list: proximity to young talent at top universities, and a good public transit system that is more than a nominal factor for commuters.

"They want very much for public transit to be part of this," Peterson said. That could give Chicago a leg up on other cities in the running, such as Dallas and Atlanta, which have certain attributes on Amazon's wish list but are not known for reliable public transit.
http://www.chicagobusiness.com/artic...rs-sweepstakes

Transit becomes Amazon bid focus
http://www.crainsdetroit.com/article...azon-bid-focus

moorhosj Sep 20, 2017 2:23 PM

On the flip side, is there a more transportation-friendly site in the country than the Old Post Office? 10 minute or less walk to LaSalle, Union and Ogilvie stations; 15 minute or less walk to Orange, Blue, Red, Brown and Pink lines (Green would be a little farther); water taxi stop 5 minutes away; and a highway that literally runs through the building.

O'Hare, however, is a bit of a trip (about an hour via Blue line), Midway is about 40 minutes.

emathias Sep 20, 2017 2:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Randomguy34 (Post 7927757)
More and more word this week, from various sources, says that transit is an important factor for Amazon's headquarters. That might be a problem for this site if it only relies on Metra

Chicago a 'top prospect' for Amazon headquarters

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/artic...rs-sweepstakes

Transit becomes Amazon bid focus
http://www.crainsdetroit.com/article...azon-bid-focus

That definitely tips it toward the Chicago/Philly/Boston/Brooklyn crowd, unless coming from Seattle means they'd accept the sort of lightrail system Dallas has. Which they might. Dallas light rail is fairly extensive, although the relative lack of density means that truly living car-free as an option probably isn't a choice made by upper-middle-class people in Dallas they way it can be for upper-middle-class people in Chicago/Philly/Boston/Brooklyn. Individual lines in Dallas usually only have trains every 15 minutes at most, but where 2-3 lines share track, you end up with decent frequency during prime times. Looks like their rail service hours are comparable to the Brown Line.

mrnyc Sep 20, 2017 2:52 PM

not sure that brooklyn/philly/boston are in the hunt so much, but chicago/dallas make sense. i think i heard denver is the lead choice, but that seems too far west. i wish they would consider somewhere less heralded than the usual suspect cities mentioned, like in the midwest or south though. somewhere they could help makeover and almost own the town, so to speak. seriously doubt those wealthy and upper middle class west coasters could bring themselves to do something like that, but it would be nice. anyway, its all just speculation -- we will see.

Vlajos Sep 20, 2017 4:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrnyc (Post 7927924)
not sure that brooklyn/philly/boston are in the hunt so much, but chicago/dallas make sense. i think i heard denver is the lead choice, but that seems too far west. i wish they would consider somewhere less heralded than the usual suspect cities mentioned, like in the midwest or south though. somewhere they could help makeover and almost own the town, so to speak. seriously doubt those wealthy and upper middle class west coasters could bring themselves to do something like that, but it would be nice. anyway, its all just speculation -- we will see.

Denver seems like a very strange choice. Why bother with a second HQ? It barely hits any of the criteria. It's small, expensive, not particularly good transit, far from NYC and DC, etc.

JK47 Sep 20, 2017 4:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vlajos (Post 7928017)
Denver seems like a very strange choice. Why bother with a second HQ? It barely hits any of the criteria. It's small, expensive, not particularly good transit, far from NYC and DC, etc.


Denver is the most remote MSA in the US. Locating there won't help them recruit anymore than their location in Seattle (which, besides proximity to Portland, is fairly isolated from the other major MSA's).

Also saw one publication saying that senior members at Amazon were advocating on behalf of Boston.

Khantilever Sep 20, 2017 4:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JK47 (Post 7928025)
Denver is the most remote MSA in the US. Locating there won't help them recruit anymore than their location in Seattle (which, besides proximity to Portland, is fairly isolated from the other major MSA's).

Also saw one publication saying that senior members at Amazon were advocating on behalf of Boston.

Boston seems highly unlikely. The reasoning given for preferring Boston was proximity to Harvard and MIT, but that's a bit silly. Those aren't regional schools, and the overwhelming majority of their graduates leave the Boston area. My guess is these "reports" about preference for Boston were leaked in order to nudge Boston to take the race more seriously, since Boston's mayor came right out and said they would offer no subsidies.

Denver was chosen by the NYTimes for Amazon by taking the RFP far too literally and applying really arbitrary criteria where the RFP is vague (which is almost everywhere). It's not a sensible choice.

aaron38 Sep 20, 2017 4:42 PM

I think maybe we should decouple this proposal from the Amazon search. What has been proposed so far is only the one site north of Chicago Ave, and that for only 6000 employees. That isn't going to blow up traffic for the site, and can be served by the existing Metra / L stations without too much trouble.

jc5680 Sep 20, 2017 5:42 PM

^ Agreed, not sure a lincoln yards thread is even needed. Especially if it is just further segmenting the amazon/chicago discussion across more threads.

Handro Sep 20, 2017 6:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by moorhosj (Post 7927885)
On the flip side, is there a more transportation-friendly site in the country than the Old Post Office? 10 minute or less walk to LaSalle, Union and Ogilvie stations; 15 minute or less walk to Orange, Blue, Red, Brown and Pink lines (Green would be a little farther); water taxi stop 5 minutes away; and a highway that literally runs through the building.

O'Hare, however, is a bit of a trip (about an hour via Blue line), Midway is about 40 minutes.

O'Hare won't be an hour if Rahm gets his way... and I have a feeling Amazon bringing 50,000 well paying jobs to town could go a long way towards the powers that be bringing the express o'hare-to-downtown train to fruition.

MakeChicagoGreatAgai Sep 25, 2017 3:30 PM

Is Bezos going to make his decision soon or does he intend to go on a nationwide tour to get his ass kissed by as many politicians as possible?

IrishIllini Sep 25, 2017 3:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Handro (Post 7928201)
O'Hare won't be an hour if Rahm gets his way... and I have a feeling Amazon bringing 50,000 well paying jobs to town could go a long way towards the powers that be bringing the express o'hare-to-downtown train to fruition.

I don't see the need for the express train to and from O'Hare. I think the blue line does the job well enough. I'd rather see the brown line extended to O'Hare as well. That would certainly help decrease reliance on the blue line. It would even open up job opportunities in River North/Streeterville for people living on the NW side. They wouldn't have to go down to the loop or take a bus east on Division, Chicago, or Grand.

chicubs111 Sep 26, 2017 2:01 AM

Not sure if someone should open a chicago amazon thread...but to continue it really seems Chicago is the perfect fit compared to all the competition...there is literally only about 4 cities on the list that are in my opinion considered "world class cities" and they are NY, Boston, Philly, DC... the rest are second tier..very nice cities but not really on a global scale... of those cities I dont see any that can compete with Chicago for what amazon is looking for... we have the central location so strategically its the best choice... .the affordability (relative to east coast cities and even seattle) ...transit (second best in country).. multiple sites that meet there requirement (like 3 or 4 solid contenders they can choose from), the population that far exceeds all there needs, the vibrancy and vitality that really only NYC really has

sentinel Sep 26, 2017 4:04 AM

I think this Lincoln Yards (bleghhh, that name) article from Curbed a few months ago provides a good idea of what the original conceptual massing was supposed to look like... And perhaps the render at the beginning of this thread still reflects some of that:

https://chicago.curbed.com/2017/7/26...-606-extension

(The master plan diagram within the link is very reminiscent of Studio Gang's other typical diagram illustrations..did they design this?)

Regardless, I think a lot of this is serendipitous for Sterling Bay since they created something that magically fits a big part of Amazon's needs...or maybe it's not serendipitous...

HomrQT Sep 26, 2017 2:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IrishIllini (Post 7932559)
I don't see the need for the express train to and from O'Hare. I think the blue line does the job well enough. I'd rather see the brown line extended to O'Hare as well. That would certainly help decrease reliance on the blue line. It would even open up job opportunities in River North/Streeterville for people living on the NW side. They wouldn't have to go down to the loop or take a bus east on Division, Chicago, or Grand.

The O'hare express line is something Rahm got in his head that would be a huge benefit to the city. I think he is exaggerating the impact it would have. Too bad we can't have a dedicated express rail like NYC so we can have regular express trains. I would also prefer to see line extensions instead of this O'hare express line..

IrishIllini Sep 26, 2017 3:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HomrQT (Post 7933613)
The O'hare express line is something Rahm got in his head that would be a huge benefit to the city. I think he is exaggerating the impact it would have. Too bad we can't have a dedicated express rail like NYC so we can have regular express trains. I would also prefer to see line extensions instead of this O'hare express line..

The purple line is a dedicated express line from Howard to Sheridan (Wilson?). I don't think Chicago has any real demand for another dedicated express line anywhere else at the present. If Amazon does end up in Chicago I can see there being demand for additional express lines. Maybe along the green line should the gentry continue to push west?

emathias Sep 26, 2017 4:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IrishIllini (Post 7933633)
The purple line is a dedicated express line from Howard to Sheridan (Wilson?). I don't think Chicago has any real demand for another dedicated express line anywhere else at the present. If Amazon does end up in Chicago I can see there being demand for additional express lines. Maybe along the green line should the gentry continue to push west?

I do think the O'Hare branch could support an express line, although it's almost already an express line north of Belmont.

There are basically 16 stations on the O'Hare branch. Making an express south of Damen would be difficult and expensive, although if the west-pointed portals west of Clark/Lake were utilized you could create zero-station tunnels in parallel for probably a reasonable price since stations are a huge part of any subway cost. I think that if you had parallel tunnels from about Lake/Clinton and re-joined just south of Logan Square with stops at Logan and Belmont, then built overhead express tracks with a stop at Jefferson Park and Cumberland, and used rolling stock and tracks that supported 60mph service, you'd probably be able to get from Clark/Lake to O'Hare in 25 minutes, which would be plenty fast given that a dedicated heavy rail solution would probably only do it in 20 minutes and drop passengers in the West Loop instead of the Central Loop.

If those ran every 10 minutes all day, or maybe dropping to 20 minute headways before 7am and after 8pm, and the rolling stock was compatible with the 'L' tracks but had upgraded seating, loggage shelves, and cost $10 from the departing Loop station under Block 37, and $10 from O'Hare it'd be among the best airport connections in the world. At the intermediate stops it might be difficult to levy a higher fare, but if you could find an operationally efficient way to do it, you could charge $5 at the intermediate stations. Otherwise intermediate people would just get a great discount. It'd probably be best to figure out a way to charge efficiently if for no other reason than to prevent rush hour commuters from crushing the higher-fare customers at those four stations, although relieving some pressure from rush hour trails on the Blue Line from Belmont and Logan Square would be good.

What would it cost? That's the billion dollar question. But let's take a stab at it. Extending from the already-existing west-facing portals near Clinton/Lake to Logan Square is about 5.5 miles of tunnel. That portion seems like $200 million per mile would be feasible. Maybe even as low as $150 million per mile. Portal to attach to Logan Square probably $250 million. Elevated structure either over existing Blue Line, or running next to the UP-NW tracks perhaps $150 million per mile. Station with connections at Jefferson Park, $150 million, station with connections at Cumberland, $150 million, trackwork to rejoin mail Blue Line tracks west of Rosemont, $250 million, station enhancements at O'Hare to create dedicated part of station exclusively for express, $100 million. Station work in Block 37 to complete that, $150 million.

Total: $1.8 - $2.6 billion range. That seems comparable to estimates for the solution incompatible with existing 'L'. Using compatible 'L' means that, if it seemed worthy, you could through-run trains south of Block 37 just skipping stations but no dedicated express tracks to Cermak for connectivity to McCormick area for whatever it would cost to build a dedicated station at Cermak ($150 million?). Since that would back up against existing service on the Red Line, but would jump to the Green Line after Roosevelt, that portion of the run would vary from 5 minutes to 10 minutes depending on track traffic at the time. If you made a split station just north of Cermak, with trains moving off the line to standing tracks, and a 5-minute pause at Block 37 for loading, you'd be serving the McCormick area and Chinatown with 35-40 minute single-seat ride to O'Hare covering you convention area, the Central Loop, with a few extra stops along the NW side (you could even maybe skip Cumberland to save a couple minutes), for $10-15. That'd probably be pretty well-used by travelers, and maybe even some well-heeled commuters. If you sold a monthly "express" pass targeted at commuters in Logan Square/Avondale or Jefferson Park who wanted a nice ride downtown, you could probably price that at $150 alone or $200 to include an all-CTA monthly pass. If I lived in Jefferson Park and worked in the Central Loop, I'd probably be willing to pay $150-200 per month for an express ride in nice cars to the Loop to/from Jefferson Park.

k1052 Sep 26, 2017 6:17 PM

Ald. Hopkins holding up the sale of city property to Sterling Bay in North Branch:

Quote:

As Mayor Rahm Emanuel salivates over the chance to lure Amazon's second headquarters to the city, an alderman has thrown a wrench into a deal that would create one of the city's best potential landing spots for the online retail giant.

On hold is the $105 million sale of the city's 18-acre Fleet & Facility Management site along the North Branch of the Chicago River to developer Sterling Bay. Ald. Brian Hopkins, 2nd, yesterday helped block an ordinance that would have sent the deal to the City Council for final approval next month.

Hopkins cited a lack of transparency in the sale process and highlighted a bid that was higher than Sterling Bay's for the highly sought-after parcel. He convinced the Committee on Housing & Real Estate to table the ordinance until he and city residents have a chance to review details of all bids to buy the site.

"We're going to have to vet this sale with all the appropriate scrutiny that a $100 million-plus transaction deserves," said Hopkins, whose ward includes the North Branch site and who has been a vocal critic of certain aspects of the city's plan to open the North Branch Industrial Corridor to residential, office and other commercial uses.
http://www.chicagobusiness.com/reale...anch-land-deal

Skyguy_7 Sep 26, 2017 7:43 PM

^ DO NOT F THIS UP, Alderwhores. We citizens cannot afford even the slightest hiccup.

Vlajos Sep 26, 2017 7:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skyguy_7 (Post 7933998)
^ DO NOT F THIS UP, Alderwhores. We citizens cannot afford even the slightest hiccup.

Zoning should be kept far out of aldermanic hands. Get rid of 40 of these chumps and then I might be ok with them having a say.

the urban politician Sep 26, 2017 8:06 PM

Read the article. The hang up isn't over zoning

west-town-brad Sep 26, 2017 8:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skyguy_7 (Post 7933998)
^ DO NOT F THIS UP, Alderwhores. We citizens cannot afford even the slightest hiccup.

Like the rush to sell the parking meters... I think we left $1 Billion or more on the table? No need to rush the sale of city assets.... unless an insider is getting some sort of benefit.

Via Chicago Sep 26, 2017 8:18 PM

Quote:

highlighted a bid that was higher than Sterling Bay's
this is a legitimate concern

chicago dosent exactly have a great track record with its sales of assets.

the urban politician Sep 26, 2017 8:57 PM

Maybe this is a ploy to get Sterling Bay to cough up more money?

SammisAran Sep 26, 2017 10:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bcp (Post 7933813)
not sure what they are thinking - it will forever be called "Goose Island"

Maybe mash it up... Gooseland Yards


regarding express - didn't know it but we already have one (albeit no quite from the loop). I have been on the blue once (and seen one fly by Division Station once) when it went from Cali to O'hare - zero stops. Was awesome, took 12 minutes. Seems rare, but even the signage on the train switched to "Express" - anybody know about this or if they are scheduled?

I'd imagine they'd run into some legal issues with the brewesry if they tried to brand the development "Goose Island". They might be able to get away with Lincoln Yard at/on Goose Island, but that's a mouthful.

BVictor1 Sep 26, 2017 11:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bcp (Post 7933813)
not sure what they are thinking - it will forever be called "Goose Island"

Maybe mash it up... Gooseland Yards


regarding express - didn't know it but we already have one (albeit no quite from the loop). I have been on the blue once (and seen one fly by Division Station once) when it went from Cali to O'hare - zero stops. Was awesome, took 12 minutes. Seems rare, but even the signage on the train switched to "Express" - anybody know about this or if they are scheduled?

This is north of Goose Island.

Randomguy34 Sep 26, 2017 11:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Via Chicago (Post 7934038)
this is a legitimate concern

chicago dosent exactly have a great track record with its sales of assets.

Onni Group's bud was $10 million higher, but they said they'd close the deal in 12-17 months. Sterling Bay said they'd close it within 120 days. While $10 million less, Sterling Bay's offer was a much safer play

left of center Sep 26, 2017 11:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Randomguy34 (Post 7934261)
Onni Group's bud was $10 million higher, but they said they'd close the deal in 12-17 months. Sterling Bay said they'd close it within 120 days. While $10 million less, Sterling Bay's offer was a much safer play

Considering Amazon's time frame for HQ2, this is definitely the safer play. I'm pretty sure even the aldermorons can figure that out, considering what is possibly at stake here. It would be pretty tough to win reelection if you are the reason Amazon skipped Chicago for another city. Then again, I might be putting too much faith in the electorate of our fair city :)

the urban politician Sep 27, 2017 2:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by left of center (Post 7934279)
Considering Amazon's time frame for HQ2, this is definitely the safer play. I'm pretty sure even the aldermorons can figure that out, considering what is possibly at stake here. It would be pretty tough to win reelection if you are the reason Amazon skipped Chicago for another city. Then again, I might be putting too much faith in the electorate of our fair city :)

I just don't see this as the prime contender for HQ2 for reasons we have discussed before at length. But if we insist on this being such, then Rahm can pull a Daley and steamroll the Alderman in order to get the votes he needs to push this through.

How badly he pushes for this would be a good indicator of whether he sees this as a fitting site for Amazon and whether Amazon takes interest in it.

left of center Sep 27, 2017 2:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the urban politician (Post 7934438)
I just don't see this as the prime contender for HQ2 for reasons we have discussed before at length. But if we insist on this being such, then Rahm can pull a Daley and steamroll the Alderman in order to get the votes he needs to push this through.

How badly he pushes for this would be a good indicator of whether he sees this as a fitting site for Amazon and whether Amazon takes interest in it.

Personally I think that the OPO is the best option for HQ2, but its not going to be what Rahm, you or I think is the best site. Bezos is going to choose in the end. Its much better to offer him multiple excellent sites in the city, instead of putting all our eggs in one basket.

Get the property into the hands of a seasoned developer that knows whats at stake and knows how not to fumble a development of this scale. The rest is then up to forces outside our control.

west-town-brad Sep 27, 2017 2:32 PM

wouldn't selling to an adjacent property owner demand a higher price tag, not lower? I've always heard that continuous property control has a higher value, not less.

Khantilever Sep 27, 2017 2:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by west-town-brad (Post 7934749)
wouldn't selling to an adjacent property owner demand a higher price tag, not lower? I've always heard that continuous property control has a higher value, not less.

It's important to keep in mind that any sealed-bid process is going to have some randomness and strategic behavior (this wasn't a strategy-proof sealed-bid second-price auction, after all), so we cannot necessarily infer bidders' private values from their bids.

ardecila Sep 27, 2017 8:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the urban politician (Post 7934020)
Read the article. The hang up isn't over zoning

As much as I like competitive bidding, I think the public wins here when the city is able to coordinate planning with a single master developer.

City planners are expecting Sterling Bay to take the lead in funding and building new infrastructure for the area. Currently it seems like SB's plan includes a new north/south bridge linking Southport to Throop, and another pedestrian bridge at Wisconsin. If the 2FM site goes to another developer and not to Sterling Bay, what incentive does Sterling Bay have to pay for infrastructure that enriches their rival?

The end result would be two isolated pods of development on opposite sides of the river, with no new infrastructure linking them or easing traffic on the choked streets in this area.

Randomguy34 Nov 21, 2017 9:29 PM

Well this is encouraging news

United Soccer League expansion team coming to North Side site proposed for Amazon's HQ2
Quote:

By Ryan Ori
A new professional soccer team plans to begin playing on Chicago’s North Side within three years, at one of the sites proposed for Amazon’s second headquarters.

Developer Sterling Bay has bought a United Soccer League expansion team to play in its planned sports and entertainment stadium along the Chicago River, with the goal of beginning play in the 2020 season, Sterling Bay Managing Principal Andy Gloor said. Sterling Bay and other investors will own and operate the USL team, Gloor said.

It remains to be seen how the USL, a professional league one level below Major League Soccer, will fare in Chicago. But there is a passionate soccer fan base within the city, and many supporters of the sport have lamented the MLS Chicago Fire’s location in southwest suburban Bridgeview, as well as the team’s struggle to stay relevant in a market that includes teams in each of the major sports.

“There are a lot of cities that have two soccer teams,” Gloor said. “New York and Los Angeles have two MLS teams. They can co-exist in a city the size of Chicago.”

Specific details of the Skidmore, Owings & Merrill-designed stadium are still being fine-tuned, but the venue is expected to have a retractable roof and about 20,000 seats. Gloor said. A retractable roof will allow the stadium to be used for events year-round, potentially including international soccer matches, college football and basketball games, concerts and other events, Gloor said.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/busine...121-story.html

http://www.trbimg.com/img-5a147e08/t...ge/750/750x422

left of center Nov 21, 2017 9:59 PM

This new soccer team looks primed to eat the Fire's lunch. Hopefully its successful and kick jumps the Fire to move back into the city from the industrial suburb they play in now.

Domer2019 Nov 21, 2017 10:46 PM

The Fire's contract with Bridgeview/Toyota Park is so jaw-droppingly bad that I can't see any upside to this development or the prospect of finding a separate, closer site for that organization. I'm honestly just rooting for the USL team to suck up the Fire's attendance so much that they fold, leaving the MLS to invite the USL club in. I don't think it's likely we see anything other than A) an extremely financially troubled Bridgeview Fire, B) a Fire that sustains popularity under a mountain of debt after relocation, or C) they gone.

ithakas Nov 21, 2017 10:48 PM

I'm assuming this is being privately financed? Sterling Bay must be feeling pretty confident about the area if they're buying a franchise and building them a stadium...

left of center Nov 21, 2017 10:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Domer2019 (Post 7993873)
The Fire's contract with Bridgeview/Toyota Park is so jaw-droppingly bad that I can't see any upside to this development or the prospect of finding a separate, closer site for that organization. I'm honestly just rooting for the USL team to suck up the Fire's attendance so much that they fold, leaving the MLS to invite the USL club in. I don't think it's likely we see anything other than A) an extremely financially troubled Bridgeview Fire, B) a Fire that sustains popularity under a mountain of debt after relocation, or C) they gone.

I thought that the Fire had a sweetheart deal with the village of Bridgeview. The town is on the hook for the entire cost of the stadium (construction and maintenance), which has caused the municipal portion of the local property taxes to more than double over the last decade since its construction.

Domer2019 Nov 21, 2017 11:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by left of center (Post 7993879)
I thought that the Fire had a sweetheart deal with the village of Bridgeview. The town is on the hook for the entire cost of the stadium (construction and maintenance), which has caused the municipal portion of the local property taxes to more than double over the last decade since its construction.

As I understand it, it hasn't been an ideal contract for either party. While Bridgeview had to finance the stadium, and also has seen meager/non-existent growth to cover the expenses, the Fire is also stuck in the lease until the 2037 season, and still have to pay usage fees regardless of their location, and compensation for games in Chicago not played at Toyota. Tons of debt on one side, and quite the buyout both upfront and over time on the other end. The polarization of the terms seemingly hasn't done any favors.

left of center Nov 21, 2017 11:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Domer2019 (Post 7993905)
As I understand it, it hasn't been an ideal contract for either party. While Bridgeview had to finance the stadium, and also has seen meager/non-existent growth to cover the expenses, the Fire is also stuck in the lease until the 2037 season, and still have to pay usage fees regardless of their location, and compensation for games in Chicago not played at Toyota. Tons of debt on one side, and quite the buyout both upfront and over time on the other end. The polarization of the terms seemingly hasn't done any favors.

Wow, looks like both sides had some terrible lawyers in retainer. I guess the Fire isn't going anywhere anytime soon. It seems that our best bet is getting that USL team to become popular enough to join the MLS. Chicago is certainly large enough to support two MLS teams.

OhioGuy Nov 21, 2017 11:54 PM

Wouldn't construction of a sports stadium necessitate traffic studies, environmental reviews, community/neighborhood input, various levels of city approvals, etc? Though maybe this land is already zoned appropriately that Sterling Bay can construct whatever it wants? Not that I want a potential new sports team/stadium to get hung up by NIMBYs, just surprised by the announcement.

Randomguy34 Nov 22, 2017 12:27 AM

^ I'm actually don't think much community input will be needed since there aren't that many 2nd ward residents surrounding the development. The 43rd ward NIMBYs are going to give a helluva fuss about it, but ultimately most of the North Branch is in the 2nd and 27th ward. We already know that Brian Hopkins can be pro-development if there's not much NIMBYism, and Walter Burnett already said a couple months ago that he doesn't care about the concerns of residents from other wards about development in the North Branch. There still is a helluva lot of approvals needed from the city, but having to worry less about NIMBYs certainly makes it easier. Here's a reminder of how screwed up the wards are for this area:

http://www.centersquarejournal.com/w...w_2nd_ward.jpg
Source: Chicago Map

bnk Nov 22, 2017 1:29 AM

Quote:

but the venue is expected to have a retractable roof and about 20,000 seats. Gloor said. A retractable roof will allow the stadium to be used for events year-round, potentially including international soccer matches, college football and basketball games, concerts and other events
Retractable roof? Un heard of in this city. If Solder field was retractable we would have had the Olympics and super bowls and winter convention space.

No one is smart enough to put a retractable dome in Chicago, it makes too much since. Even though Milwaukee figured out how to do it years ago.

Too bad it will still be too small for any real sport though.

ardecila Nov 22, 2017 4:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bnk (Post 7994054)
Retractable roof? Un heard of in this city. If Solder field was retractable we would have had the Olympics and super bowls and winter convention space.

No one is smart enough to put a retractable dome in Chicago, it makes too much since. Even though Milwaukee figured out how to do it years ago.

Too bad it will still be too small for any real sport though.

Most retractable roof stadiums in the US (and Europe, Japan, etc) are oversized, taxpayer-funded albatrosses. For all the money spent on a retractable roof at Miller Park, it has exactly ONE public event scheduled this winter, which is a 5K in the parking lot. They do host concerts (next one is April) but Wrigley also host concerts without a roof.

Seriously, these roofs run into the hundreds of millions. I don't see how they make business sense unless you have a bunch of free money to burn.

This whole stadium idea seems pie-in-the-sky unless and until Sterling Bay lands a major Amazon-esque tenant, and the retractable roof is just a sweet nothing that Gloor mentioned to build hype.

I could see demand in Chicago for a small outdoor stadium, for a minor-league soccer team, high school sporting events, and other community uses (tennis tournament?)

Rocket49 Nov 22, 2017 4:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bnk (Post 7994054)
Too bad it will still be too small for any real sport though.

The stadium will seat around 20,000. Which is about the White Sox's average attendance

Domer2019 Nov 22, 2017 5:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila (Post 7994264)
Most retractable roof stadiums in the US (and Europe, Japan, etc) are oversized, taxpayer-funded albatrosses. For all the money spent on a retractable roof at Miller Park, it has exactly ONE public event scheduled this winter, which is a 5K in the parking lot. They do host concerts (next one is April) but Wrigley also host concerts without a roof.

I could see demand in Chicago for a small outdoor stadium, for a minor-league soccer team, high school sporting events, and other community uses (tennis tournament?)

I think it has the potential to serve as a stadium analogue to Wintrust Arena in the multi-use sense. Especially being empty in the winter/USL off-season.

10023 Nov 22, 2017 9:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Randomguy34 (Post 7994002)
^ I'm actually don't think much community input will be needed since there aren't that many 2nd ward residents surrounding the development. The 43rd ward NIMBYs are going to give a helluva fuss about it, but ultimately most of the North Branch is in the 2nd and 27th ward. We already know that Brian Hopkins can be pro-development if there's not much NIMBYism, and Walter Burnett already said a couple months ago that he doesn't care about the concerns of residents from other wards about development in the North Branch. There still is a helluva lot of approvals needed from the city, but having to worry less about NIMBYs certainly makes it easier. Here's a reminder of how screwed up the wards are for this area:

http://www.centersquarejournal.com/w...w_2nd_ward.jpg
Source: Chicago Map

What the fuck?!

skyscraper Nov 22, 2017 12:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila (Post 7994264)
Seriously, these roofs run into the hundreds of millions. I don't see how they make business sense unless you have a bunch of free money to burn.

Not to be too picayune, but it's not really the roofs that are the biggest cost in a dome stadium project. It's that once you enclose a stadium, you need massive amounts air conditioning. It's all the HVAC equipment, ducts, etc., that are the biggest cost. But your point is well taken.


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:45 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.