Quote:
Originally Posted by JK47
I feel like you are missing my point and misrepresenting what I was addressing. The issue here isn't funding infrastructure improvements like streets and sewers. The thing I was trying to point out which I think you missed is the distinction the Bears draw between declining to seek "direct" funding for structural stadium construction (again...an odd turn of phrase) and wanting to seek public subsidies for the remaining development. The implication there isn't that they want support for streets & sewers but for actually building and developing properties for the Bears.
In any event your point about public subsidizing any part of this development is just wasteful. Arlington Heights isn't a struggling community in need of a boost and the entity in question isn't a developer with optionality. The Bears have put themselves at a disadvantage tactically and the town, county, and state have too many other pressing needs on an already weak balance sheet.
The Bears are owned by millionaires and billionaires (Ryan) in a monopolistic cartel with other billionaires. They can pay full freight.
|
I'm not arguing that this development *should* receive a subsidy (regardless of what it pays for).
What I am saying is that this style of mixed-use development can't happen without public subsidy. The Bears claim that they need subsidy to make the mixed-use part happen, and we can take that claim at face value because similar developments like Lincoln Yards, The 78, etc have also requested a subsidy.
The amount matters, though. You're right to suspect that the subsidy for the mixed-use development could be a backdoor way of paying for the stadium.
If the Bears deleted the mixed-use section of the plans and just built a stadium, could they build it using their own resources? That's a question they probably won't answer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by twister244
Also - There's no way they don't put that stadium there without a major overhaul of the NW/53 interchange. My grandmother lived right by there, and I remember getting off 53 to visit here. It's a relatively small interchange that will choke up hardcore during any game. And surely, most gameday traffic will be coming from the South as 53 terminates shortly to the North. There's just no way you can build that stadium there without a major overhaul of the interchange. Who's gonna foot the money for that bill? I doubt the Bears are going to pony up money for that if they are financing the stadium themselves. I really hope the state doesn't cave on that end and have to fork over funds for an interchange rebuild, but I fear that will eventually happen.
|
I don't think this is the case. Lambeau Field has a tremendous seating capacity; one of the largest in the NFL - this is the main highway interchange for Lambeau:
https://goo.gl/maps/g5cKn1zgxt96JTt36
Based on the site plan, it looks like they expect most traffic to go from the parking lots down Rohlwing to the Euclid interchange. Also, the entertainment district is a traffic management strategy. Game arrivals are spread out over several hours as people trickle in, but the exodus is usually when the worst traffic happens. If you can keep a good chunk of the fans on site getting a meal or drinking after the game, it will spread out the peak.