CHICAGO | Obama Presidential Library

[glowrock]

Originally Posted by thegoatman

So we're just gonna ignore that they're adding another lane of traffic on LSD? I thought this project was taking roads out of parks

Yes. In one succinct word, yes.

[The Pimp]

Originally Posted by glowrock

Yes. In one succinct word, yes.

Finally!!! Great news. LSD has needed this improvement for years.

[r18tdi]

As others have said, I'd happily accept one to two lanes of additional perimeter roadways in exchange for eliminating a six-lane arterial road that cuts through the middle of JP.

[ardecila]

Yes - not to mention that Stony will be improved with a landscaped median and better crosswalks. Also, the intersection of Hayes/Cornell will be rebuilt like LSD/55th, with 2 pedestrian underpasses to allow easy access on foot or bike from Woodlawn into the park.. A 3rd underpass will be built under Hayes just west of LSD.

This kind of design is appropriate for Jackson Park - Olmsted never anticipated LSD or heavy commuter traffic through Jackson Park, but in NYC where he did expect traffic through Central Park, he provided fully grade-separated transverse roads. This is not much different.


https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/c...g?format=2500w

[west-town-brad]

looks like the obama foundation may not have enough cash to complete construction.... or meet the terms of it's deal with city hall.

from WSJ today:

We have been fighting the construction of the Obama Presidential Center in Chicago’s historic Jackson Park for the past four years. The center, which is scheduled to open in February 2025, is being built in a dangerous place. The water table is high enough to require constant drainage—a peril that will be compounded by major storms off Lake Michigan. An award-winning alternative design on private land west of nearby Washington Park would be less costly and safer to build and would provide far better access to the South Side community that is the center’s target audience.

The Obama Foundation just released its annual report and 990 tax forms for 2021. Together they show that the Obama Presidential Center’s financial foundations are as rickety as its physical ones. The Foundation’s 2020 annual report exhibited some financial candor, estimating that $300 million in annual donations for four straight years would be necessary to meet all future construction and operating costs. The 2021 return revealed that the foundation had raised only $159 million, about 8% less than it raised in 2020. Those dollars must pay for all foundation activities, including payroll, fundraising, public relations, and scholarship and grant programs.

The foundation also reported that last year it spent about $115 million on construction costs, without indicating either the total project construction costs or the estimated timeline to completion. It is crystal clear that no sudden reversal of fortune will allow the foundation to meet its 2020 targets (adjusted for inflation) of raising more than $1 billion.

Last year the foundation needed to do some fancy accounting footwork to close on the Jackson Park property. A May 2019 master agreement with the city contained two strict “condition precedents.” Under the first condition, the foundation had to certify that it had “received” more money than the anticipated cost of the building as of March 2021. The foundation barely appeared to meet that target, but then insisted that it wasn’t required to retain those dollars for constructing the building. What, then, was the point of the condition? As its own cost estimates ballooned from $350 million in 2018 to about $700 million in 2021, the foundation ignored its contractual obligation to update its financial projections before closing.

Under the second condition set by the city, the foundation promised to establish an endowment to cover the center’s operating, maintenance and improvements. In 2020 the foundation claimed the first year of operations alone would cost $40 million, and that it needed to raise $470 million for such endowment. In June 2021 the foundation contributed a mere $1 million to the endowment, thereby ignoring the universal accounting convention that bare promises to raise money never constitute an endowment: Cash and firm pledges are always required.

The foundation’s failure to meet these two conditions meant that the 2021 property transfer should never have happened.

The nonprofit Protect Our Parks, which we represent, has challenged these actions in pending litigation. In January U.S. District Judge John Robert Blakey rebuffed our challenge by holding, incorrectly, that Protect Our Parks sued as if it were a party with rights under the master agreement. In fact, our submissions made clear that we sought to block the transfer solely in our capacity as Chicagoans. Procedural obstacles have prevented an immediate appeal of this ruling without the district court’s approval, which was requested and denied.

Working through cumbersome legal channels to untangle these issues will take months or years. Yet construction on the Obama Presidential Center goes forward, evidently without the funding to back it. Does the Obama Foundation have the financial wherewithal to complete its project? Any private developer would have to prove this, especially for a project affecting such a substantial piece of publicly owned park land in the center of a major U.S. city. Construction should be paused until the foundation proves it is complying with the key terms of the master agreement. If we are correct, it should never have broken ground.

Messrs. Epstein and Rachlis represent Protect our Parks and a group of the individual plaintiffs.

[Busy Bee]

You've gotta love how they paint this picture of the entire project almost in a biblical manner being "built on sinking sand", and not in fact an extremely common geological challenge with simple engineering solutions, and then use that as a metaphor for purported financial doom, gloom and doubt. Thanks for the hit piece Rupert.

[BuildThemTaller]

Can't say that the authors of that opinion piece are dispassionate enough to understand how all of this works. The construction continues, as they note. That's the only takeaway.

[nomarandlee]

Yes, the Washington Park location was the superior location and more practical in many respects. The Obama's didn't want it there. End of story.

[BrinChi]

I thought we determined that the land west of Washington Park is owned by UofC (and they plan to use it) so that's not really a viable alternative. That's how I came to peace with the Jackson Park location.

[west-town-brad]

its being built where its being built. end of story.

my concern is they don't have the funds to finish, or to operate.

[F1 Tommy]

I really don't expect anything from a NY based newspaper to have positive articles on Chicago.

[r18tdi]

So wait, are you guys saying it's too late for them to move the Center to Washington Park?

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by Busy Bee

You've gotta love how they paint this picture of the entire project almost in a biblical manner being "built on sinking sand", and not in fact an extremely common geological challenge with simple engineering solutions, and then use that as a metaphor for purported financial doom, gloom and doubt. Thanks for the hit piece Rupert.

There is nothing, engineering-wise, with OPC that wasn't successfully solved 20 years ago when MSI built their colossal underground garage and U-505 gallery. This is a solvable problem.

In the case of OPC, I think all the archives and artifacts will be stored above-grade (hence the big windowless tower) and the basement levels are just parking and meeting rooms/classroom spaces. It will be costly if they flood, but not the end of the world.

I have no idea about the Obama Foundation's fundraising, but you gotta consider the source here. Epstein and Rachlis have been fighting the project for years on behalf of NIMBYs and they are publishing in a right-wing paper with no love for Obama or Chicago. You can't separate out the bias here. I will believe the Obama Foundation has a financial problem when I see a neutral/independent 3rd party raise a red flag.

[pilsenarch]

west-town-brad, didn't you have a signature that read "Let's Go Brandon"? if so, what happened to it?

[bhawk66]

What an intelligent and knowledgeable crew here. Appreciation. Cheers.

[galleyfox]

Anyway, here’s video of the current progress. They expect the aboveground structure to become visible at the end of this year, and completed 2024

https://www.cbsnews.com/chicago/news...rative-effort/

[west-town-brad]

Originally Posted by pilsenarch

west-town-brad, didn't you have a signature that read "Let's Go Brandon"? if so, what happened to it?

No I don’t know what that means

I posted the article (an opinion piece actually) because of the funding of the Obama center. Do they have the billion they need to finish? Seems maybe not.

[The Lurker]

Billion with a B? This is gonna be a fortress huh?

[LouisVanDerWright]

Originally Posted by Busy Bee

You've gotta love how they paint this picture of the entire project almost in a biblical manner being "built on sinking sand", and not in fact an extremely common geological challenge with simple engineering solutions, and then use that as a metaphor for purported financial doom, gloom and doubt. Thanks for the hit piece Rupert.

This is literally a problem we've been dealing with since they built Jackson Park for the 1893 World's Fair. They were running into these exact same soil conditions back then and it nearly made the Fair an impossibility...

There's a reason Jackson Park is where it is, this was a sandy wasteland before Chicago was built. Graded sand dunes isn't exactly a fantastic base for building on.

[glowrock]

Originally Posted by west-town-brad

looks like the obama foundation may not have enough cash to complete construction.... or meet the terms of it's deal with city hall.

from WSJ today:

This is one of the worst hit pieces I've ever read, coming from the most extremely biased of authors. Good lord, what a bunch of baloney!

Aaron (Glowrock)