My assumption was that one of the components of this project would be to connect the Metra Electric line to Union Station. I’m now looking closer at the proposal and it’s a lot more convoluted than I realized.
Here’s what I thought their intention was/was hoping to see. Move the 18th street a little further north. Use the current CN tracks or build a second level to add service connecting to Union Station. Add a transfer stop at the new 16th street red line station when that is built. What do you all think? |
^That sounds like a great idea, but no that's not what they were even remotely thinking of.
|
^^ I like that idea. Tunnel it right under Clinton @Union Station & build the 2nd loop. Call it the Gray Line. Convert Metra along the south shore later. Tie three solid proposals all into one. $$$
|
Quote:
|
Yeah I tried explaining the CrossRail idea to the lead urban planner (direct O'Hare access!) at a public meeting a few years ago, his eyes just glazed over and I knew the whole transit thing was window dressing. They were neither interested in building useful transit nor qualified to plan/propose it.
|
Quote:
What you're stating re the project having to be massive/dense enough to justify the huge upfront infrastructure costs makes sense. However, my point (which I didn't articulate nearly well enough earlier) is that there is legitimate reason to be skeptical that the private market will be there to support the unit numbers and price points that will be required to make this thing pencil out. Now, perhaps I'm not thinking long-term enough here - as in a 25-30 year buildout? If the time horizon is long enough, I suppose, the demand should inevitably be there. Something else to consider in terms of the feasibility of something this ambitious - and I think I've brought up before - what has Dunn/Landmark verifiably developed in terms of truly large scale stuff? It's nearly impossible for me to tell, as they've been involved in lots of projects in various capacities - but to my eyes a lot of that at least appears to be providing a variety of development related services - what have they been the actual operating developer on? Moreover, who are their actual operating developer partners on this project (not to mention equity partners)? And, completely agree on your take re transit hub. That's a fever dream. |
Don't make no sense.
If a developer can buy all the dirt he wants in the South Loop for around $40m per highrise . . . why would he pay $300m per building to get a platform he can build on? The views aren't going to be that much better. |
Lol Streetsblog covered the full meeting and apparently it was an even bigger mess than what I saw in the first 30 minutes
With new details emerging, state funding for One Central makes even less sense https://chi.streetsblog.org/2021/07/...en-less-sense/ - Illinois is legally required to follow through with state funding and cannot back out unless a new bill undoes it - The bus system they're building is going to be an "autonomous vehicle" network - One Central is partnering with a Chicago Bears to allow them to run several establishments. So the Bears are probably bluffing about moving to Arlington Heights - They're looking into brining manufacturing back to the U.S. Steel site - The ignored questions about why they new state funding if the project is already financed |
"...partnering with the Bears to allow them to run several restaurants and memorabilia and gift shop for attendees and tourists"
I wouldnt read too much into that. The CBs will undoubtedly be in discussions with many people about future agreements. A retail shop and a few branded restaurants mean zippo in terms of possible relo. You will always want a presence in the city especially close to McCormick and the convention/expo crowds. These "agreements" are probably easy outs for the CBs anyway even if this thing moves forward. Just like breaking their lease at SF. Chump change in the grander scheme. OC people prob offered them a sweetheart proposal just so they could promote it at these meetings IMO |
|
|
Quote:
This thing is silly. |
Quote:
Indeed. Beyond laughable. I'd vote to immediately and permanently close this thread. This thing is, and always has been, a joke. About as "serious" a proposal as Bill Davies' Post Office towers. This guy is claiming that his firm has spent tens of millions already on this. Good God. Would love to see those receipts. And if they exist - Good God. Also, one of the tentative equity partners is listed as Johnson Controls. Huh? |
Not to go too OT - Promoting a connection to Soldier Field makes me hate this even more. Now is not the time to sink more $$ in that mess on the lakefront. While the Bears may not be successful in their attempt to locate to Arlington Hts it is a reality that could come to pass. Either way SF is the smallest NFL stadium and Chicago needs different location for its' NFL team. Preferably around Sox Park or UC.
|
Things that make you go hmm...
|
I'll step out as the lone voice crying, "I like it," and hope it continues to gain momentum and land endorsements.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
If a Related was behind this, you'd think "they know what they are doing on super complex developments like this - if they are putting their money into it, it probably has legs". A quick perusal of the websites for the 3 private funders (Ullico, Loop Capital, and Johnson Controls) does not give the same feeling. Instead, my interpretation is "these guys probably got taken in by a good story and are in over their head". Reminds me a bit of Theranos. Supposedly a super innovative biotech company, but none of the big biotech investors would touch them. Instead, their whole board was former generals and secretaries of state who didn't know anything about biotech, but bought the story. Not saying that this project will turn out to be a pure fraud and vaporware like Theranos. But if it was, Johnson Controls won't be able to sniff it out the way that a Related could. |
Quote:
Johnson Controls is also huge and does much more revenue per year than Related. They're profitable too with at least a few billion in cash on hand. As far as someone putting up money goes, they're totally a viable company. |
All times are GMT. The time now is 1:19 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.