HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > General Development


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #321  
Old Posted Oct 27, 2022, 8:48 PM
thegoatman thegoatman is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2021
Posts: 646
With the bears leaving to AH, I dont see how this is going to work.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #322  
Old Posted Oct 27, 2022, 9:20 PM
twister244 twister244 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,521
Quote:
Originally Posted by thegoatman View Post
With the bears leaving to AH, I dont see how this is going to work.
Agreed, especially with so much oxygen now/future being taken up by the North Branch corridor and the West Loop.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #323  
Old Posted Oct 27, 2022, 10:13 PM
Randomguy34's Avatar
Randomguy34 Randomguy34 is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Chicago & Philly
Posts: 1,984
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Downtown View Post
^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."
Calm down. I didn't say the report thought this was a good transit project. I said that the study "seemed favorable" to the project, cause they discuss "potential" for the project to do well and think it has a chance to be successful if they address concerns they have. Compared to every other bit of news this project has received the past 3.5 years, this study "seemed favorable".
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #324  
Old Posted Oct 28, 2022, 2:43 PM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is offline
TL;DR
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: the city o'wind
Posts: 16,036
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Downtown View Post
^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."
This is a good point. It can't really be Green Line service, because then you have three South Side branches feeding into one West Side branch. The headways on the two existing branches are bad enough. Ideally you would have another North Side or West Side service running across the Loop and ending at One Central - either Pink, Brown or Purple.

Purple is my favorite - run express from Howard to Fullerton (with stops at Loyola, Wilson, Sheridan, Belmont) then into the State St subway, up the 13th St Incline and over to One Central. CTA is slowly putting in the infrastructure to make Purple into a real express train on the North Side, but eventually it will require CTA to run that service full-time and not just at rush hours.

Brown or Pink are possible, but that means running 3 services from Tower 12 to 16th on only 2 tracks. The last option is a shuttle train, but that requires a tail track at the other end somewhere to hold and turn the train. Not sure where you could put that, especially near downtown. No room at Roosevelt, Clark/Lake, etc. Maybe you could add a new service that goes One Central to Belmont via the State St Subway? I think there may be room to build a tail track at Belmont after the RPM work is completed.

Regardless of my weird crayoning, this is not a simple problem and it's not a pressing need. It should not be the CTA's highest priority for their limited dollars and planning resources, compared to other big needs like improving service to Fulton Market, downtown circulators, etc.
__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #325  
Old Posted Oct 29, 2022, 12:29 PM
SamInTheLoop SamInTheLoop is offline
you know where I'll be
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,423
Can this "project" just go away already? What a ridiculous waste of time spent thinking about/discussing it.
__________________
It's simple, really - try not to design or build trash.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #326  
Old Posted Oct 29, 2022, 1:50 PM
MAC123 MAC123 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2021
Location: Deadend town, Flyover State.
Posts: 900
Quote:
Originally Posted by SamInTheLoop View Post
Can this "project" just go away already? What a ridiculous waste of time spent thinking about/discussing it.
No
__________________
NYC - 20 Supertalls (including UC)
NYC - Future 2035 supertalls - 45 + not including anything that gets newly proposed between now and then (which will likely put it over 50)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #327  
Old Posted Oct 29, 2022, 7:41 PM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is offline
TL;DR
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: the city o'wind
Posts: 16,036
Quote:
Originally Posted by thegoatman View Post
With the bears leaving to AH, I dont see how this is going to work.
That's a good question, but I'm not sure it's the right question to ask. What is the actual impact of 9 home games a year? Is that enough to make or break the big entertainment district that Dunn is proposing?

Keep in mind that the Chicago Fire and numerous concerts/events will remain at Soldier Field, plus concerts at Northerly Island and conventions at McCormick Place, no matter what the Bears decide. Large groups of people will continue to converge in this part of the city for decades to come, and the South Loop entertainment options right now don't really cater to them.

Personally I think Bears traffic is probably just the icing on the cake, and a big entertainment district would be feasible even without the Bears. Similar stadium developments like Patriot Place are mostly shopping malls that draw people on non-game days; they are a way for sports teams to get extra mileage out of all the parking lots and infrastructure they have to put in.
__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #328  
Old Posted Dec 30, 2022, 12:41 AM
Randomguy34's Avatar
Randomguy34 Randomguy34 is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Chicago & Philly
Posts: 1,984
This study will pretty much decide if the state will fund One Central or not.

Quote:
The state is soliciting a feasibility study from a qualified consultant assessing a proposed project to be supported under the Public-Private Partnership for Civic and Transit Infrastructure Project Act (30 ILCS 558/) and P.A. 102-0698. The proposed investment is known as the public-private “One Central” project in Chicago. This proposal is an ambitious economic development project with transportation, commercial, and residential elements. This project, as envisioned, could receive significant state incentives per the terms of the Public-Private Partnership for Civic and Transit Infrastructure Project Act, which may impact the state’s ability to fund other projects and programs. This feasibility study is intended to assist the state in assessing the quantitative net fiscal impact of the One Central project, determining whether participation in this project represents a worthwhile use of state resources, and recommend best practices to ensure that the project benefits and risks are properly balanced between public and private sector participants.
https://www.bidbuy.illinois.gov/bso/...arentUrl=close
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #329  
Old Posted Jan 8, 2023, 1:42 PM
CaptainJilliams CaptainJilliams is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2020
Posts: 105
Well, it looks like the city released a video promoting the proposed dome renovations at Soldier Field, and One Central is prominently featured as a complementary project.

They did a good job on the renderings, but this feels like another desperate attempt to save the sinking ship that is SF:

New Soldier Field dome video revealed in effort to woo the Bears and their fans

https://www.chicagobusiness.com/spor...pictures-video
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #330  
Old Posted Jan 8, 2023, 3:53 PM
bhawk66 bhawk66 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Posts: 459
^ The Bears may be a sinking ship in Chicago, but Soldier Field isn't going anywhere. Question is, is it viable to carry through with these plans without the Bears 6 games a year (plus maybe a couple more)? I'd have to think with a dome and all that transit the answer could still be a resounding YES. With year round events including major concerts, NCAA events, major conventions, etc., etc., it's conceivable the Park District would reap in more without a dome and the Bears still playing there than with a dome and the Bears not playing there.

Not only that, once built, it'd be way more tempting for the NFL to grant a new franchise to Chicago. If NY and LA can have two teams and Florida (3), California (3), and Texas (2) all having multiple teams, why shouldn't third largest city in the US (for now, says Houston) have two teams.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #331  
Old Posted Jan 8, 2023, 4:30 PM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is offline
TL;DR
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: the city o'wind
Posts: 16,036
Look at how long LA waited to get their two teams, after having none for decades. I wouldn't bet on a "build it and they will come" strategy.

There's no reason to spend a whopping $2.2B putting a dome on Soldier Field if the Bears are leaving anyway. That money could totally revamp Grant Park for events, put LSD in a tunnel, pay for building out Northerly Island per Studio Gang's master plan. It could pay for a busway from Michigan Ave and Navy Pier to the Museum Campus. It could rebuild all the L stops in the Loop that haven't been renovated yet. Etc etc. As big as Millennium Park was for the City of Chicago, $2.2B could have the same impact 20 years later. Instead we are supposed to just chase the same handful of sporting events that every other city also wants?

If the stadium events can pay for the dome on their own with no taxpayer money, that's great... but it's a fantasy. Literally every piece of real world evidence is screaming that it can't be privately funded. It's just too costly. The Bears are not even asking for a dome in Arlington Heights. MetLife Stadium in NJ could not afford a dome even with the support of two NFL franchises.
__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #332  
Old Posted Jan 8, 2023, 7:48 PM
jpIllInoIs's Avatar
jpIllInoIs jpIllInoIs is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,183
Put a lid on the IC tracks, build out Northerly Island, Tear the soldier field ridiculous renos down and restore the stadium with for festivals (since Northerly will be more eco restoration.

Chicago is NOT getting a 2nd football team. NFL has sites on London, Mexico City, Toronto.

Metra/CTA/Amtrak are not going to suddenly collaborate on One Central when they can barely get Union Station redevelopment on track. And a much better transit project like West Loop transit is far more important to city/regional connectivity.

Nothing in this proposal is ever going to be built without massive subsidy and it competes with some realistic plans like Michael Reese/McMck yards.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #333  
Old Posted Jan 8, 2023, 11:31 PM
Rizzo Rizzo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 7,204
Definitely some beautiful renderings in that video. And I would consider it a correction to the retrofit from the 2000’s.

I’m also skeptical the bears will get a great product in AH, so this video will only leave a taste of what fans could have had, even if nothing in the presentation is realistic. However, I’d argue that government has an interest to improve its investments. You’d hate to see SF become lakeside ctr 2.0.

The transit component is kind of ridiculous. Maybe 20 years ago I would’ve believed it possible with so much development energy in the south loop.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #334  
Old Posted Jan 9, 2023, 2:39 PM
Chi-Sky21 Chi-Sky21 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,231
Another team would never succeed here. Everyone is Bears fans and are not going to change to another team all of a sudden. I think the east side of the stadium is rather nice. They just need to redo the west side. Bring in college football more and MLS. Its 8 games we are missing is all. Not worth chasing that billions of dollars we do not have.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #335  
Old Posted Jan 9, 2023, 4:15 PM
DCReid DCReid is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 897
Quote:
Originally Posted by ardecila View Post
Look at how long LA waited to get their two teams, after having none for decades. I wouldn't bet on a "build it and they will come" strategy.

There's no reason to spend a whopping $2.2B putting a dome on Soldier Field if the Bears are leaving anyway. That money could totally revamp Grant Park for events, put LSD in a tunnel, pay for building out Northerly Island per Studio Gang's master plan. It could pay for a busway from Michigan Ave and Navy Pier to the Museum Campus. It could rebuild all the L stops in the Loop that haven't been renovated yet. Etc etc. As big as Millennium Park was for the City of Chicago, $2.2B could have the same impact 20 years later. Instead we are supposed to just chase the same handful of sporting events that every other city also wants?

If the stadium events can pay for the dome on their own with no taxpayer money, that's great... but it's a fantasy. Literally every piece of real world evidence is screaming that it can't be privately funded. It's just too costly. The Bears are not even asking for a dome in Arlington Heights. MetLife Stadium in NJ could not afford a dome even with the support of two NFL franchises.
LA only got them by taking teams from its neighbor 3 hours south, San Diego. I believe that the CSA of LA is 17-18 million, much bigger than Chicago's 10 million. It's probably too late for a dome on Soldier Field as I think the Bears are near certain to leave. They should have done it with the last renovation as they would have likely gotten at least one Superbowl, some Big Ten football championship games, and maybe some Final Four games.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #336  
Old Posted Jan 9, 2023, 6:50 PM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is offline
TL;DR
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: the city o'wind
Posts: 16,036
The Rams came from St Louis, although they were in LA originally.

I doubt the NFL will add any expansion teams anytime soon, since the existing 32 owners don't want to dilute their TV revenues. We're probably stuck in this pattern where small-market teams move to bigger or faster-growing markets (Jaguars? Bengals? Ravens?) Texas seems ripe for a 3rd NFL team in the Austin/San Antonio area.

Overseas expansion seems farfetched to me, at most we might get Toronto. London is too far away to make the TV coverage profitable with the time change, and Mexico City isn't wealthy enough to bring in the same revenue as a US city.
__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #337  
Old Posted Jan 9, 2023, 10:36 PM
Zapatan's Avatar
Zapatan Zapatan is offline
DENNAB
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: NA - Europe
Posts: 5,431
Quote:
Originally Posted by Randomguy34 View Post
This study will pretty much decide if the state will fund One Central or not.
I wonder what "other projects and programs" the article mentions would lose funding in place of this one.

It seems this isn't even a real project so billions of dollars from the state seems about as realistic as traveling to the Andromeda Galaxy by next year.

It is cool in theory, maybe scale it back several times over for phase I?
__________________
Dump Trump 2020
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #338  
Old Posted Jan 10, 2023, 2:05 AM
Flaccer05 Flaccer05 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Posts: 107
I wouldn't completely discount the potential for two NFL teams in Chicago...which would keep One Central as a possibility, even if a long shot imo.

Don't count out Jacksonville Jaguars....their owner, Shahid Khan, already has deep roots in Chicago. He also owns a penthouse at Park Tower and is a UIUC grad. The Jags have long been rumored to leave Jacksonville...though NFL's dream of a London franchise is likely the leading contender
Reply With Quote
     
     
End
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > General Development
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 7:51 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2023, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.