CHICAGO | Lincoln Yards

[bnk]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

^ Were there any final renderings at the meeting?

I don't care much about the buildings, since that will change over time, but I'm talking about street layout, transit, ?Metra station

I'm not sure if these were used at the meeting but here are some older versions. Other than the height decrease and no soccer field I do not expect it very different than below.


https://chicago.curbed.com/2018/3/22...gs-amazon-site


Many photos....







https://chicago.curbed.com/2019/3/7/...oning-approval


The controversial project was approved by a 9-4 margin

By Jay Koziarz Mar 7, 2019, 4:18pm CST





…


The recent increase in on-site affordable housing wasn’t the only last-minute tweak to the Lincoln Yards plan. The project’s overall density shrank slightly from 15 million square feet to 14.5 million, and the tallest tower was trimmed from 650 to 595 feet in height.

…

[Busy Bee]

Originally Posted by bnk

Looks like the future except for those 1950s Metra cars.

[Mr Downtown]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

street layout, transit, Metra station

They're dedicating a new Dominick/Throop Street, straightening Armitage east of the river, and dedicating Concord from Dominick to the river. They're building no new bridges and no transit facilities of any kind (except a new water taxi station if requested by CDOT).

Originally Posted by sammyg

This hearing was just for the TIF funding, which goes into effect regardless of the design. There will be a different set of hearings and approvals for the plan itself.

Yesterday's hearing was the Zoning Committee voting to approve the PD (the plan).

[LouisVanDerWright]

Well the good news is that owning a car on the Northside of Chicago will be an exercise in futility with this giant clog making Armitage, Webster, and North Ave totally impassible between the hours of 7 AM and 8 PM.

This project is an abject planning disaster, wayyyy too much density for a transit dessert directly adjacent to existing automobile clusterfucks.

[the urban politician]

Terrible.

Although I don't have a problem with the idea to use TIF funds to build substantial infrastructure, I agree that the city deserves a better deal if there will be zero transit.

Let's hope The 78 steals its thunder

[Handro]

i'm confused, does it cost $900 million to straighten a couple of streets? What infrastructure is the TIF paying for if it doesn't include transit?

[IrishIllini]

Originally Posted by Mr Downtown

They're dedicating a new Dominick/Throop Street, straightening Armitage east of the river, and dedicating Concord from Dominick to the river. They're building no new bridges and no transit facilities of any kind (except a new water taxi station if requested by CDOT).



Yesterday's hearing was the Zoning Committee voting to approve the PD (the plan).

Does this mean we’re losing PAWS and the four story structure just north of it? Of course the strip mall would be the development to survive. Only in Chicago

[west-town-brad]

"straightening Armitage east of the river"

what does this mean exactly?

[Mr Downtown]

City is vacating ROW in purple; applicant is dedicating ROW in gold:

[IrishIllini]

It’d be great to see Kingsbury re-dedicated entirely between Courtland and Larrabee. Could help ease congestion on Clybourn, although that could spell trouble for Division and Halsted.

[r18tdi]

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

This project is an abject planning disaster, wayyyy too much density for a transit dessert directly adjacent to existing automobile clusterfucks.

Not to mention "towers in the park" conundrum and fugly, fugly podiums galore.

[moorhosj]

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

This project is an abject planning disaster, wayyyy too much density for a transit dessert directly adjacent to existing automobile clusterfucks.

Good luck driving through the Fullerton/Clybourn/Ashland or Armitage/Elston/Ashland intersections.

[LouisVanDerWright]

Originally Posted by moorhosj

Good luck driving through the Fullerton/Clybourn/Ashland or Armitage/Elston/Ashland intersections.

I mean honestly this will probably trash land values further East in Lincoln Park which will basically become inaccessible from the Kennedy except late at night. I could see it easily taking 2 hours to get from the freeway to Halsted through Armitage when this is fully built out. I've already sat in 20-30 min of traffic on that route on multiple occasions. The only reliable way through right now is on Webster and that's about to get fucked by this development too.

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

I mean honestly this will probably trash land values further East in Lincoln Park which will basically become inaccessible from the Kennedy except late at night. I could see it easily taking 2 hours to get from the freeway to Halsted through Armitage when this is fully built out. I've already sat in 20-30 min of traffic on that route on multiple occasions. The only reliable way through right now is on Webster and that's about to get fucked by this development too.

I doubt that. Access to the expressway is really not the appeal of Lincoln Park

[k1052]

It will take six days to get from the Kennedy to the lake. People will die of dehydration and cholera. The oxen will perish stranding us in the mountain passes. Wolves will stalk our party taking the slower women and children to their slow painful demises.

Am I reaching the appropriate level of motorist hysteria yet?

[ChiTownWonder]

All these megadevelopments popping up are exciting and I was totally on board with them at first, but seeing how Hudson Yards turned out im hesitant. That whole area is filled with placeless and purely sculptural glass towers. Its become a fabricated playground for wealthy New Yorkers. Maybe it just needs time to settle into its skin and start to show age like the rest of the city, but I think having a diverse range of building styles and public spaces would integrate these Chicago developments into their respective surroundings, like an LSE situation.

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by ChiTownWonder

All these megadevelopments popping up are exciting and I was totally on board with them at first, but seeing how Hudson Yards turned out im hesitant. That whole area is filled with placeless and purely sculptural glass towers. Its become a fabricated playground for wealthy New Yorkers. Maybe it just needs time to settle into its skin and start to show age like the rest of the city, but I think having a diverse range of building styles and public spaces would integrate these Chicago developments into their respective surroundings, like an LSE situation.

I've been working at/near Hudson Yards since late 2015. It's not a playground right now for anybody, nor will it ever become one. Although there's a lot of construction going on, it is a boring area that not many people want to actually live in. Even when some of these things up open up, it won't matter too much. It'll serve us office workers, but not too much outside of that and the tourists who go to the High Line.

[skysoar]

Originally Posted by marothisu

I've been working at/near Hudson Yards since late 2015. It's not a playground right now for anybody, nor will it ever become one. Although there's a lot of construction going on, it is a boring area that not many people want to actually live in. Even when some of these things up open up, it won't matter too much. It'll serve us office workers, but not too much outside of that and the tourists who go to the High Line.

I fully understand what you are saying, but I would say one thing different about Chicago and New York is that in many ways Chicagoans, are more people- oriented or activities involved. At least that's been my experience. People in Chicago seem to gravitate toward developments that are lake-oriented, or river oriented, maybe because of its Midwest culture. So if megadevelopments like LY, 78, Michael Reese have good theme oriented and Riverwalk components, I believe they will be greatly attended, both by Chicagoans and the millions of tourist that visit this city each year. But we will see though, maybe the Hudson Yards effect is real.

[Mr Downtown]

The way you get lively (but sometimes messy) vitality is with multiple owners and small parcels. Lincoln Yards simply shouldn't be permitted much density at all, because it has no transit access. But the way to redevelop an area the size of Lincoln Yards is for the city to make it a true urban renewal project, use TIF to put in a street grid and pipes, then sell quarter-blocks to a variety of developers. Be open if a developer wants two adjacent parcels, but don't let any one developer have more than 20 of the parcels out of the 55 acres.

Does it have to be the city as master developer? No, it could be Sterling Bay, but only if they put in place a specific plan showing how they'll avoid superblock development, and that they're committed to a complete and permeable network of streets. Battery Park City is a good model for that.

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by skysoar

I fully understand what you are saying, but I would say one thing different about Chicago and New York is that in many ways Chicagoans, are more people- oriented or activities involved. At least that's been my experience. People in Chicago seem to gravitate toward developments that are lake-oriented, or river oriented, maybe because of its Midwest culture. So if megadevelopments like LY, 78, Michael Reese have good theme oriented and Riverwalk components, I believe they will be greatly attended, both by Chicagoans and the millions of tourist that visit this city each year. But we will see though, maybe the Hudson Yards effect is real.

I'm not saying Lincoln Yards won't be successful. I'm saying comparing to Hudson Yards for the reasons presented is false. Most people think that HY is boring as hell, because it is. Besides a handful of restaurants coming, and the event space in the middle, there's nothing but offices right now basically. Nobody sticks around after work because theres almost nothing to do. Plus its actually not right on the water. It's across the street.

Not really a good comparison besides the fact that the poster is wrong about how successful of an activity center it is right now..since it's really not besides the High Line.

When I lived in Chicago I felt more connected to the water than I do here just because a lot of the waterfront is nicer in Chicago. I agree on that part, though I think if we had that here in NYC, people would be more about it.

Anyway, the comparison to Hudson Yards is a pretty bad one, as someone who has been working there for over 3 years now and came before almost anything else was built.. The comment about it being a playground for the rich literally made me laugh out loud for how false it is. If you go south a few blocks, then there's expensive places but not much different from many other parts of Manhattan.

Lincoln Yards will be its own thing and that's a good thing