HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

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


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #821  
Old Posted Aug 6, 2018, 1:19 PM
r18tdi's Avatar
r18tdi r18tdi is offline
Team Alinghi
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,339
Quote:
Originally Posted by SIGSEGV View Post
As someone who passes by the Washington Park site at least several times a week... I really wish that location was chosen. It's a perfect site for an anchor institution.
Agreed, but WP is still a park though. The site would face many of the same issues facing the JP location.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #822  
Old Posted Aug 6, 2018, 5:38 PM
Halsted & Villagio Halsted & Villagio is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Hyde Park
Posts: 165
There is really no need to get worked up about any of this. The library is going to happen... at the site currently chosen. Too many people with clout (including the Mayor himself) are behind this. And yes, the Mayor was behind Lucas as well. But Lucas vs Obama clout is really no comparison at all. An Ex.President wins that one every time. And in the end, clout wins -- its the Chicago way.

As far as someone from the Northshore or wherever (besides the Southside) speaking out against this... think about it for a second. If you do not use the Jackson Park on a regular basis and/or are not directly affected it or its environs on a regular, ongoing basis... then surely that person's opinion should not be given more weight and credibility than the people directly affected by park.

Just to give one example (there are many)... were Southsiders able to impair or impede ANYTHING that was done with respect to the 606 Trail? Have Southsiders property values gone up because of the 606? Did Southsiders directly benefit from the 606? The answer to each of those questions is a resounding "no" and yet their tax dollars were certainly spent on that project. Did you see a hue and cry and lawsuits filed by Southsiders to prevent the 606? Again, that would be a "no". And will the 606 bring in as much money as the Obama Center will for ALL Chicagoans? Surely not.

As for the park itself, Jackson Park has been changed and modified so much through the years that that argument holds little water. In fact, with the latest modifications, that park will arguably become more relevant that it has ever been in its entire history.... and it be will manicured and well taken care of -- something that is somewhat lacking in its today's incarnation.

Regarding race - I don't see this as an issue about race but an issue about location. As I just said above, those areas in and around the Obama Center location should be given more deference than those not affected by it. But I do understand the frustrations of some Southsiders who feel that their areas have been long overlooked and neglected. And to now have people (well intended or not) who likely have no affiliation to the area in question, come in and try to change this project/derail it/or even kill it... is like telling a man dying of thirst that he cannot have water while you chug away on a 2 liter.

This ^ is what leads to heightened emotions that can even spill into racial frustrations. It does not make it right. I am just explaining what some may be feeling.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #823  
Old Posted Aug 16, 2018, 3:54 PM
chrisvfr800i chrisvfr800i is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 308
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/l...814-story.html


I know how desperate many on this forum are to see this project move forward, and to that I say "whatever", but a city with big crime and fiscal problems shouldn't be giving any land away. If Obama and Emmanuel want the library there so bad then make them pay for it!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #824  
Old Posted Aug 16, 2018, 11:45 PM
BonoboZill4's Avatar
BonoboZill4 BonoboZill4 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: PingPong
Posts: 1,588
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisvfr800i View Post
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/l...814-story.html


I know how desperate many on this forum are to see this project move forward, and to that I say "whatever", but a city with big crime and fiscal problems shouldn't be giving any land away. If Obama and Emmanuel want the library there so bad then make them pay for it!

I'm not really sure how those two things are relevant to one another...
__________________
I'm here for a long time, not a good time
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #825  
Old Posted Aug 17, 2018, 1:24 AM
marothisu marothisu is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Manhattan
Posts: 4,992
Quote:
Originally Posted by BonoboZill4 View Post
I'm not really sure how those two things are relevant to one another...
Me neither. Maybe it was some jab at how much attention Rahm pays to this. However, IMO it shows a lack of understanding of how the management portion of a city actually works (or large corporation) down to the reality of departmental allocation of monies.

Perhaps the poster (who is in the NYC area) believes that this land would somehow sell to investors for some $$, but it wouldn't. It's park district owned and at the end of the day, giving the land away for the library will come back to the city indirectly money wise in the future.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #826  
Old Posted Aug 17, 2018, 3:00 AM
BonoboZill4's Avatar
BonoboZill4 BonoboZill4 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: PingPong
Posts: 1,588
Exactly what I was thinking. It's underutilized parkland going to something that will have far reaching benefits beyond just Hyde Park's borders. It's not perfect, but I think long term we will be happy to have such an addition to a world class park.

It'll basically make each Lincoln, Grant, and Jackson Park museum campuses in their own right. Can't think of many city's with three different places in three different parts of their city with so much civic participation.
__________________
I'm here for a long time, not a good time
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #827  
Old Posted Aug 17, 2018, 2:41 PM
chrisvfr800i chrisvfr800i is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by BonoboZill4 View Post
I'm not really sure how those two things are relevant to one another...
I thought the relationship would be obvious. The land has value because somebody wants it. SELL the land and use the proceeds to fund more police, or teachers, or whatever. Giving it away is so incredibly stupid only a government could think of it.


Oh, and BTW, I am a Chicago native and Chicago-area resident.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #828  
Old Posted Aug 17, 2018, 2:59 PM
marothisu marothisu is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Manhattan
Posts: 4,992
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisvfr800i View Post
I thought the relationship would be obvious. The land has value because somebody wants it. SELL the land and use the proceeds to fund more police, or teachers, or whatever. Giving it away is so incredibly stupid only a government could think of it.


Oh, and BTW, I am a Chicago native and Chicago-area resident.
The land is park district owned. The selling of the land would almost never happen. There's a reason the only organizations that have structures in park district land are essentially cultural assets like museums (except Soldier Field but you could argue this in another way). Right nearby is the Museum of Science and Industry in park district land, not a bunch of bars and restaurants or housing units. There's a damn good reason for this. Do you think the city is really dumb enough to not realize that they have thousands of acres right next to a giant lake that looks like an ocean which people would clamor to live right next to with no roads?

I think you are not properly understanding the lakefront park land reality of when the city realizes it's a "good" I idea to give up a little land. The city is not about to give this away to a non cultural entity with enough national or international exposure, nor is there enough to make the sacred lakefront park land magically disappear. All of this type of thinking will set Chicago back. If you truly want Chicago to progress and be even more world class, then you'll stop protecting things like parking lots.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #829  
Old Posted Aug 17, 2018, 3:07 PM
chrisvfr800i chrisvfr800i is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by marothisu View Post
The land is park district owned. The selling of the land would almost never happen. There's a reason the only organizations that have structures in park district land are essentially cultural assets like museums (except Soldier Field but you could argue this in another way). Right nearby is the Museum of Science and Industry in park district land, not a bunch of bars and restaurants or housing units. There's a damn good reason for this. Do you think the city is really dumb enough to not realize that they have thousands of acres right next to a giant lake that looks like an ocean which people would clamor to live right next to with no roads?

I think you are not properly understanding the lakefront park land reality of when the city realizes it's a "good" I idea to give up a little land. The city is not about to give this away to a non cultural entity with enough national or international exposure, nor is there enough to make the sacred lakefront park land magically disappear. All of this type of thinking will set Chicago back. If you truly want Chicago to progress and be even more world class, then you'll stop protecting things like parking lots.
You're right, I guess I don't understand.

I also don't understand how the wealthy Obama Foundation, who's namesake has made more than a meal out of his "Chicago Roots" would have the gall to extort free land and infrastructure from it under threat of building his edifice somewhere else.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #830  
Old Posted Aug 17, 2018, 3:18 PM
marothisu marothisu is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Manhattan
Posts: 4,992
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisvfr800i View Post
You're right, I guess I don't understand.

I also don't understand how the wealthy Obama Foundation, who's namesake has made more than a meal out of his "Chicago Roots" would have the gall to extort free land and infrastructure from it under threat of building his edifice somewhere else.
I can understand your last comment, and that's another story. However, your first point makes no sense to how the lakefront park district land is handled. Think about it for a minute. What structures are on actual developable park land other than parks? Field Museum, Art Institute, Shedd Aquarium, Museum of Science and Industry, Lincoln Park Zoo, Pritzker Pavilion, Navy Pier, Huntington Bank Pavilion, Chicago History Museum, Lincoln Park Conservatory, Peggy Notebaert Nature Museum, Montrose Bird Sanctuary, Arie Crown Theater, etc. Other than the small golf courses at Jackson Park or near Irving Park Rd, what do all of these things have in common?

If the city really wanted a bunch of money, they could easily sell land to developers for Billions of dollars, but they won't because they understand the city. Sorry, but that specific point of yours really isn't valid. I can't tell if you like Obama or not, but I think a presidential museum is well within the range and theme of organizations of the exceedingly rare times the city is willing to give up a little of this land. They are not about to sell it to a bunch of private developers looking to build condos. Not going to happen. A museum is within the theme of when they do.

The lakefront Chicago has is amazing, and as I live in NYC now, I greatly miss it. These types of institutions make it better. I can't think of another city in the country that has their cultural institutions set up in such a good setting like this.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #831  
Old Posted Aug 17, 2018, 3:25 PM
SIGSEGV's Avatar
SIGSEGV SIGSEGV is offline
>~< , QED!
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: South Loop, Chicago
Posts: 1,508
I don't think giving the OPL parkland is a problem. It would be nice if they paid for some of the ancillary costs of doing so though.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #832  
Old Posted Aug 17, 2018, 3:40 PM
the urban politician the urban politician is offline
The City
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Chicago region
Posts: 17,635
Guys, I'm gonna come out of the closet.

On this one, I've come around to agreeing with Mr. Downtown.

The more I think about it, the more I am rubbed the wrong way about Obama just coming into town stealing parkland to build his little personal monument. That douche-bag will move to Manhattan just like the elitist Clintons (ever estranging themselves ideologically and physically from the working Americans that once formed their party's base), yet "throws Chicago a bone" with this so-called "Presidential Center", but only if he can have it on his own terms. He could have gotten his own private land (God knows there's plenty of it down there!) to do this.

Plus, I"m not even all that into this silly little Presidential Center. It sounds like a crock of shit.
__________________
Eat less
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #833  
Old Posted Aug 17, 2018, 3:48 PM
marothisu marothisu is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Manhattan
Posts: 4,992
Quote:
Originally Posted by SIGSEGV View Post
I don't think giving the OPL parkland is a problem. It would be nice if they paid for some of the ancillary costs of doing so though.
Agree. I can agree to the part about them not paying for some things, but I think a library and Museum is well within the range of what goes into land like this.


The city is not about to sell any of it to developers, and that reality has absolutely nothing to do with them and their understanding of money.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #834  
Old Posted Aug 17, 2018, 4:13 PM
pilsenarch pilsenarch is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 783
Quote:
Originally Posted by the urban politician View Post
Guys, I'm gonna come out of the closet.

On this one, I've come around to agreeing with Mr. Downtown.

The more I think about it, the more I am rubbed the wrong way about Obama just coming into town stealing parkland to build his little personal monument. That douche-bag will move to Manhattan just like the elitist Clintons (ever estranging themselves ideologically and physically from the working Americans that once formed their party's base), yet "throws Chicago a bone" with this so-called "Presidential Center", but only if he can have it on his own terms. He could have gotten his own private land (God knows there's plenty of it down there!) to do this.

Plus, I"m not even all that into this silly little Presidential Center. It sounds like a crock of shit.
Well, I'm glad your now out of the closet... But I'm not sure what the relevance is regarding the Obama's level of doucheness to the legitimacy of creating a center for America's first black president...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #835  
Old Posted Aug 17, 2018, 4:30 PM
the urban politician the urban politician is offline
The City
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Chicago region
Posts: 17,635
Quote:
Originally Posted by pilsenarch View Post
Well, I'm glad your now out of the closet... But I'm not sure what the relevance is regarding the Obama's level of doucheness to the legitimacy of creating a center for America's first black president...
I think he is using his "from Chicago" and "first black president" narrative to get away from stealing park land, is what bugs me.

We can use the same analogy for Lucas, but for George Lucas he at least 1) didn't pit cities against eachother, he just left, 2) he wasn't expecting hundreds of millions of dollars from the city to build his self-monument, and 3) the Lucas Museum was a hell of a lot cooler than the Obama Center, which as it slowly unravels just looks like it will be NOTHING of interest.
__________________
Eat less
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #836  
Old Posted Aug 17, 2018, 5:59 PM
Khantilever Khantilever is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Lincoln Square, Chicago
Posts: 314
Quote:
Originally Posted by the urban politician View Post

We can use the same analogy for Lucas, but for George Lucas he at least 1) didn't pit cities against eachother, he just left, 2) he wasn't expecting hundreds of millions of dollars from the city to build his self-monument, and 3) the Lucas Museum was a hell of a lot cooler than the Obama Center, which as it slowly unravels just looks like it will be NOTHING of interest.
Totally agree. Plus 4) Lucas was replacing a parking lot.

I bet I’ll visit the Obama center once and probably never be compelled to visit again. Forget about the lack of tons of original documents there. There won’t even be the gifts he’s received from foreign dignitaries.

I’m not philosophically opposed to giving up parkland. But for God’s sake it has to be for something.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #837  
Old Posted Aug 17, 2018, 6:44 PM
left of center's Avatar
left of center left of center is offline
1st Ward
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: The Big Onion
Posts: 1,909
While I am irked at the fact that this will be a presidential center and not a presidential library (whatever the actual difference may entail, prestige notwithstanding), I still believe this building will be a cultural icon that will attract tourists and investment dollars to the south side. Jackson Park is an underutilized and empty park that is partially in a state of disrepair. This will give people a reason to go there. No one is complaining that other museums (Field, Shedd, AIC, MSI, Adler) are all located on Park District property.

Yes, it sucks that the Obama's are going to be in NY/DC, but the center of gravity of politics and political fundraising is in those two cities, and they have clearly chosen to remain active post presidency, unlike Bush who has hidden himself in shame from the world, creating really weird and crude paintings. The nature of their occupation as a proactive former first family pretty much dictates their primary residence.

I'm fine with the placement of this structure, especially now that they have put the parking fully underground. The design sucks, and hopefully will be tweaked for the better. Otherwise, lets get this thing done already. All the petty lawsuits and stumbling blocks are starting to get really annoying.
__________________
"Eventually, I think Chicago will be the most beautiful great city left in the world." -Frank Lloyd Wright
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #838  
Old Posted Aug 17, 2018, 6:50 PM
nomarandlee's Avatar
nomarandlee nomarandlee is online now
My Mind Has Left My Body
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,009
Quote:
Originally Posted by pilsenarch View Post
Well, I'm glad your now out of the closet... But I'm not sure what the relevance is regarding the Obama's level of doucheness to the legitimacy of creating a center for America's first black president...
Doucheness factor or the idea that it is for the First black President should really carry little weight when teasing out the primary issues at play.

For the very little it's worth I think Obama was a definite above average President who I generally respect (unlike our current). Regardless of anyone's sentiments towards him though one should ask why a VERY expensive infrastructure project that cost upwards of over $200 million needs to be done to accommodate a location chosen seemingly on whims. That type of money could practically build a whole new park in some sections of our city. It could go towards covering the Grant Park train tracks. It could go towards building the last 4miles on the north lakefront. It could go towards expanding the south lakefront. Was there any BIG push to close Cornell Drive and build this alternative route before the OPL project? Nope. All for a few extra acres of "park" inside what was already a park.

It's simply a bad value proposition being advocated by those who are trembling at the idea of losing out on another major institution if we don't roll out the red carpet to the demands of the BHO foundation. There has been no real transparency, no real open dialogue about where it is best for the CITY (not the Obamas) to put this Library.

As far as the talk about hypotheticals in the future.....Yes, IF there was to be one of the very few exceptions in which to give up some public or parkland this would be it IMO. However, that presumes that ANY exception should be made. When precedent isn't set and when rules seem malleable and transparency an afterthought (as it has been in the OPL case) then it very well could open the doors to more ambiguous cases down the road. After the last few years watching the federal government I don't put it past a corrupt demagogue populist Mayor or council to hand over a public/park to developers or business in the future and for them to honor shifting sentiments instead of adhering to legal writing or precedent which while overly rigid at least sets the rules clear. We can't simply assume to trust the next 200 years of Majors and city councils to do what is right all of the time in the future and not to sell this city piecemeal either for their own benefit or due to shortsightedness.

Last edited by nomarandlee; Aug 17, 2018 at 7:08 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #839  
Old Posted Aug 17, 2018, 6:54 PM
LouisVanDerWright LouisVanDerWright is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 6,600
Guys Obama isn't even "from Chicago", he's from Hawaii (or maybe... dun dun dun, KENYA). He just used Chicago as a political stepping stone and is now ready to throw away the used husk of his early political career. You know the guy could be dedicating a few years of his very long post-public life to eradicating gang violence on Chicago's South and West side. I mean the man is such an icon, particularly for the African American community, that he could actually single handedly put a dent in that problem. What would that say to young gang members focused on petty struggles over territory or drug deals if the first black president of the USA showed up whenever and wherever there was a flare up in violence and told them to knock it off and focus on this or that positive activity instead. How many youths life path could he radically alter just by showing up and talking to them for a bit when their temper is flaring because their buddy got shot?

But no, he's off "working on his legacy" which Trump is currently shitting all over anyways. A real legacy would be to stick a fork in a couple real world issues like Carter has done.



Also, lol no, the Parks District can't and won't sell land to developers. Talk about asking for a lawsuit lolololol.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #840  
Old Posted Aug 17, 2018, 7:13 PM
rgolch's Avatar
rgolch rgolch is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 876
Obama and Chicago will always be connected, regardless of where he chooses to live from here forward. He launched his political career here, based his campaign here both for the 2008 and 2012 elections, and don’t forget his wife grew up on the south side.

As far as him being a douche? I think that’s really short sighted thinking that way. His presidential center will definitely be a tourist destination. He’s probably going to be the most famous and historically significant president of our generation. And having essentially a Obama “museum” of sorts will do far more for that park and that area of Chicago than if it didn’t happen.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
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 8:14 PM.

     

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