Kinda like Hudson Yards in NY

This is NOT Hudson Yards. Ridiculous comparison.

Dunn doesn't have a site. He only has air rights. If the state doesn't build him a platform, he's got no place to put a casino.

How is it different exactly? Projects built over active tracks with a transit component only possible through taxpayer funding.

Let's not conflate Hudson Yards, the Related development over the MTA railyards, with Hudson Yards, the neighborhood on the West Side of Manhattan. Most of NYC's taxpayer investments in this area (like the 7 train extension, Bella Abzug Park, High Line, etc) benefit the neighborhood at large. Many developers are taking advantage of the city's investments in that area, not just Related. That won't happen in the South Loop, because the area around One Central is already built-up with townhouses and condos that will be there long after I'm dead and buried.

Also, Hudson Yards is 2 blocks away from the busiest train station in the Western Hemisphere. It's simply good planning for the city to build out further infrastructure that allows a big, dense office district there within walking distance of the city's biggest commuter and intercity train station. The Chicago equivalent would be something like the Old Post Office or the deck plaza at River Point.

Lastly, the city investment in Hudson Yards (the Related development, benefiting only Related) is $2.2 billion. Dunn is asking for almost four times that amount at One Central.

[QUOTE=ardecila;9451028]Let's not conflate Hudson Yards, the Related development over the MTA railyards, with Hudson Yards, the neighborhood on the West Side of Manhattan. Most of NYC's taxpayer investments in this area (like the 7 train extension, Bella Abzug Park, High Line, etc) benefit the neighborhood at large. Many developers are taking advantage of the city's investments in that area, not just Related. That won't happen in the South Loop, because the area around One Central is already built-up with townhouses and condos that will be there long after I'm dead and buried.

Also, Hudson Yards is 2 blocks away from the busiest train station in the Western Hemisphere. It's simply good planning for the city to build out further infrastructure that allows a big, dense office district there within walking distance of the city's biggest commuter and intercity train station. The Chicago equivalent would be something like the Old Post Office or the deck plaza at River Point.

Lastly, the city investment in Hudson Yards (the Related development, benefiting only Related) is $2.2 billion. Dunn is asking for almost four times that amount at One Central.[/QUOTE

You beat me to the punch. Excellent answer.

[QUOTE=The Pimp;9451135]And the public pork for One Central is linked to appeasing Another corporate welfare entity in The Bears. And we haven't seen the estimate on the cta rail extensions required for this project. The public welfare being sought is mainly for the decking and roads and utilities. And as if any more nails are needed for this coffin.... It is going to be a Casino and we now have many superior options for that project.

That's crazy, at the end of the day it would be nice to see a project like this come to fruition but just at a much smaller, more realistic scale. Instead of a handful of massive skyscrapers maybe just one or two then a few high-rises to accompany them, a budget of a billion or so may suffice.

On Hard Rock Chicago's website, they said there will also be housing and job investments on the South Side. Looks like some of the locations for investments would be on 71st St, US Steel, and Pullman

This is the kind of thing their SouthSideWorks Economic Opportunity project presentation describes.

https://www.onecentralchicago.com/

But am not clear how this is supposed to work:

"Leverage investment at ONE Central to create a gateway to a
broader Illinois growth corridor to the South of Chicago’s Central Area"

The figure I've seen quotes is $6.5 billion over 20 years. Not sure the terms but discounted to present value dollars it's probably less but still massive and some of it unnecessary. There will definitely be some serious economic impact over that 20 years as well including taxes on property and entertainment/hospitality/vendors, so there's certainly some public price tag that makes 'sense' and could theoretically be net positive tax dollar wise. It's a deal that I think can be done with multiple parties co-operating, but a massive ask in a city and state not exactly known for it's prowess for honesty and deal-making.

I like to think the success of the Riverwalk and it's financing can serve as a good example although it was one on a smaller scale. The Riverwalk took a loooong time to coordinate and has been a huge success. My understanding is that the bonds that were sold to fund some of it are being paid off by a fraction of revenue from the vendors there - and it's coming in higher than expected. I would think/hope that that a combination of retail/hospitality/vendor/dining/bars with a special surcharge for the 'entertainment district' modeled after the Riverwalk could be a way to get some of the financing done. Does anyone know about if some surcharge like this on entertainment district revenue has been discussed,?

I think an entertainment district like 1Central is a megaproject that could garner the city national/international attention if done right on par with the success of Millenium Park.

So if the upfront construction will surely be paid off by the rents . . . then just go talk to a REIT or pension fund or Saudi prince. In an era of near-zero borrowing cost, why is any public financing needed?

Somehow, this project still lives. Bob Dunn is holding another meeting, this time hosted by state rep Lamont J. Robinson, at 1474 S. Michigan Ave. Doors open at 6p, with the meeting going from 6:30-8pm.

https://scontent-ort2-2.xx.fbcdn.net...HA&oe=62D52D8B
https://www.facebook.com/PDNAChicago...n__=%2CO%2CP-R

Yes we've been working on some presentation stuff for them on and off for quite a while now... I can't say much except that if this is what we've been working on it involves the sports and entertainment division.

^July 19 meeting has been canceled. "Scheduling conflict."

A history lesson 50 years in the making.

https://twitter.com/Dennis_Rodkin/st...818433/photo/1
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FYhA5zJX...pg&name=medium

https://twitter.com/Dennis_Rodkin/st...020675/photo/1
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FYhBkGDX...name=4096x4096

That Illinois Central project included lots of terra firma as well as the air rights. The terra firma part did get built by Gerald Fogelson (Central Station/Museum Park) and Mayor Daley the younger even moved there personally.

The air rights part was always going to be vastly more expensive, which is the reason Fogelson didn't end up building it. If the South Loop rents don't support costly air rights construction in 2022 without billions in taxpayer subsidy, they surely would not have supported the expense back in 1972 when the area was fully industrial.

https://www.chicagobusiness.com/gove...st-megaproject

July 27, 2022 01:51 PM 19 HOURS AGO
One Central megaproject takes a new twist
Is the proposed $6.5 billion subsidy a good deal for taxpayers? A study commissioned by the state of Illinois will try to find out.

GREG HINZ

Just in time for Halloween, this project is still not dead. The CTA asked APTA to commission a study on the 'L' extension to the cite, and the study seemed pretty favorable to the proposal

Dunn renews One Central pitch, with an assist from Metra

Report: https://www.scribd.com/document/6031...oad&from_embed

^Did you actually read the study? On what page does anyone say it would actually meet any kind of transport objective? From the executive summary: "The peers were not asked to assess the merits of the project per se, but rather to advise CTA regarding how best to protect CTA’s interests as the project advances." I particularly like this passage, from p. 11: "Little work has been done by the ONE Central team to date, to allow CTA to understand how an extension would impact the existing rail network or who would be utilizing the new line."