SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum//index.php)
-   General Development (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum//forumdisplay.php?f=86)
-   -   CHICAGO | The 78 Site (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum//showthread.php?t=233449)

Vlajos Feb 8, 2019 4:24 PM

I doubt anyone will use the name once it's built out. It'll just be part of downtown.

marothisu Feb 9, 2019 12:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vlajos (Post 8466232)
I doubt anyone will use the name once it's built out. It'll just be part of downtown.

For an official neighborhood name, it's a pretty dumb name regardless.

LouisVanDerWright Feb 9, 2019 12:20 AM

Let's call it "Hinkey-Dink Village"!

BonoboZill4 Feb 9, 2019 12:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by marothisu (Post 8467101)
For an official neighborhood name, it's a pretty dumb name regardless.

Yeah... if the general area had been named Southbank like the northern portion of the former Riverline project, then maybe it could have worked... the 78 is just stupid. The plan though is a solid A-

Vlajos Feb 9, 2019 1:29 AM

To be clear, I agree the name is stupid. But it will never be called that in real life.

bullsfan7210 Mar 21, 2019 3:28 PM

This seems like pretty bad news:

https://www.chicagobusiness.com/greg...esearch-center

If I’m not mistaken, DPI is the anchor tenant and the Red Line station is supposed to be housed inside one of their buildings. How much of a setback could this be?

Stockerzzz Mar 22, 2019 12:22 PM

^^ Very bad news.

Quote:

However, now comes word that Pritzker not only wants the university to match the $500 million in state cash dollar-for-dollar, but he wants the entire $500 million in private funding in hand before any state money is released. That means that a public school with lots of financial challenges will have to raise $500 million on its own first, a huge and perhaps insurmountable challenge.

The budget reappropriates the $500 million that was budgeted last year, but it describes it not as a grant but a state match for private donations from individuals, corporations or other entities. The budget language adds that "state matching funds will only be released if the corresponding private donations are secured."
I'm surprised Pritzker isn't helping this more. This may kill the project.

I thought this would be an area that we would be excited about considering his work with 1871.

ardecila Mar 22, 2019 3:33 PM

It's a tough bar for the project to clear, but the promise all along from Rauner and UIUC was that state funding would be matched with private investment and taxpayers wouldn't be footing the bill for a largely private research facility. Now that Pritzker is actually holding UIUC to their promise, everyone is calling it unreasonable. Lol.

If this project is such a slam dunk, then it should absolutely be possible to raise this private investment. If not, then it's a bad deal for the state and should be scrapped. Remember that Pritzker started 1871 with private capital, so he understands the tech world probably better than Rauner did. But our state is very broke, the last thing we need to do is shovel a half billion dollars into the pockets of tech companies (indirectly) with no guarantee of any spillover benefits to the state's economy. We could build this thing and it will sit empty, if there is no real interest from the private sector... need to make sure that private partners have a lot of skin in the game as well.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bullsfan7210 (Post 8513652)
This seems like pretty bad news:

https://www.chicagobusiness.com/greg...esearch-center

If I’m not mistaken, DPI is the anchor tenant and the Red Line station is supposed to be housed inside one of their buildings. How much of a setback could this be?

No, the DPI site is west of the (re-aligned) Metra tracks and north of the St Charles Air Line tracks. The Red Line entrance is in a different building east of the Metra tracks, which is just vanilla office with some retail. The two buildings do look similar in renderings, but I'm sure those are just placeholder designs.

Mr Downtown Mar 22, 2019 4:48 PM

And it seems like we've tried several times now to create a Stanford-Palo Alto style ecosystem, without much to show for it: Northwestern Tech Park, UIC Innovation Center, whatever that was at Damen and Harrison, IIT.

BonoboZill4 Mar 24, 2019 5:58 PM

https://i.imgur.com/8zE9MjP.jpg

Soon?

Zapatan Mar 24, 2019 7:41 PM

That's a shame about the research center, but there's much more to this development as a whole, correct? Isn't that only part of it?

Randomguy34 Mar 24, 2019 10:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila (Post 8515086)
It's a tough bar for the project to clear, but the promise all along from Rauner and UIUC was that state funding would be matched with private investment and taxpayers wouldn't be footing the bill for a largely private research facility. Now that Pritzker is actually holding UIUC to their promise, everyone is calling it unreasonable. Lol.

If this project is such a slam dunk, then it should absolutely be possible to raise this private investment. If not, then it's a bad deal for the state and should be scrapped. Remember that Pritzker started 1871 with private capital, so he understands the tech world probably better than Rauner did. But our state is very broke, the last thing we need to do is shovel a half billion dollars into the pockets of tech companies (indirectly) with no guarantee of any spillover benefits to the state's economy. We could build this thing and it will sit empty, if there is no real interest from the private sector... need to make sure that private partners have a lot of skin in the game as well.

Exactly! Also, the DPI has already raised $300 million from companies on other universities. They'll be fine for now

r18tdi Mar 24, 2019 10:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila (Post 8515086)
If this project is such a slam dunk, then it should absolutely be possible to raise this private investment. If not, then it's a bad deal for the state and should be scrapped. Remember that Pritzker started 1871 with private capital, so he understands the tech world probably better than Rauner did.

Or maybe JB sees DPI as nothing more than competition for his personal interests? I hope that's not the case.

moorhosj Mar 25, 2019 9:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by r18tdi (Post 8517051)
Or maybe JB sees DPI as nothing more than competition for his personal interests? I hope that's not the case.

Not sure Techstars and DPI really play in the same field. DPI is a research institute and Techstars is just a startup accelerator. That said, his sister is an advisor of DPI, so I assume whatever decision JB is making relies on his knowledge of the funding status. If anything, she has enough money to help fill the gap if needed.

Suiram Apr 2, 2019 2:44 PM

People should be happy with this. Its just good governance. Letting DPI and essentially, Related, draw on $500 million (so much of the first few hundred million will likely go into site works and infrastructure) in State funds with only a promise of eventually matching makes no sense. Its like the most broken TIFs. All this is doing is requiring proof that DPI will be able to match the funding. Its not like they actually need to show the State of BofA account with $500 million. Most likely they need firm commitments from donors, university partners, corporate sponsors.

Then just like any major project, any subsidy from the state will be paid on milestones to ensure the funds are being use appropriately

Letting the State bear all the risk is completely irresponsible. And people questioning Pritzker's choice come off as being far to used to the Chicago Way.

Via Chicago Apr 2, 2019 4:41 PM

yup. people want reform, but not when its their own sacred cow.

LouisVanDerWright Apr 2, 2019 5:14 PM

I honestly see no reason why you wouldn't require them to do what they said they are going to do. I don't like Pritzker, but it's stupid to think that we should just hand out half a billion dollars when they said they'd raise matching funds. Raise the matching funds and fair's fair.

ardecila Apr 3, 2019 11:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Suiram (Post 8527181)
People should be happy with this. Its just good governance. Letting DPI and essentially, Related, draw on $500 million (so much of the first few hundred million will likely go into site works and infrastructure) in State funds with only a promise of eventually matching makes no sense. Its like the most broken TIFs. All this is doing is requiring proof that DPI will be able to match the funding. Its not like they actually need to show the State of BofA account with $500 million. Most likely they need firm commitments from donors, university partners, corporate sponsors.

Then just like any major project, any subsidy from the state will be paid on milestones to ensure the funds are being use appropriately

Letting the State bear all the risk is completely irresponsible. And people questioning Pritzker's choice come off as being far to used to the Chicago Way.

I don't think any of that pot of money would go into site works or infrastructure. That's what the TIF is for. Related would be idiots if they couldn't develop their site if the DPI deal fell through.

Cornell's Roosevelt Island tech campus in NYC cost $2B not including any infrastructure (except what is directly needed for the project like utility lines) so it seems realistic for Chicago's tech campus to cost half of that. These are flashy, expensive buildings full of flashy, expensive technology.

maru2501 Apr 8, 2019 2:53 PM

Rahm delaying final vote on this in deference to Lightfoot

k1052 Apr 8, 2019 3:13 PM

I expect Related will shelve this until the next cycle. They've got other interesting/profitable stuff going in town. Another decade as an empty lot.


All times are GMT. The time now is 4:36 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.