HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

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

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #701  
Old Posted Mar 13, 2019, 9:27 PM
Goose Island Guru Goose Island Guru is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Posts: 9
Quote:
Originally Posted by kolchak View Post
Fantastic!

This is great news also for Lincoln Yards, No? I imagine, as the article said, that Sterling Bay can now focus their resources on that mega development. What a boom we have going in Chicago.
City Council voted in favor of LY this afternoon 33-15.

Last step is City Council vote on the TIF district next month. Just in time before the new mayor takes over.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #702  
Old Posted Mar 13, 2019, 11:20 PM
TR Devlin TR Devlin is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: Chicago
Posts: 10
This makes me sick. The City Council is disgusting. The City's planning department is disgusting.

The best posts in this thread are LVDW's. Thank you Louie.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #703  
Old Posted Mar 14, 2019, 1:33 AM
Busy Bee's Avatar
Busy Bee Busy Bee is online now
Leftist Correctist
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: on the artistic spectrum
Posts: 5,785

_
__________________
There is no bigger a**hole than a MAGA a**hole.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #704  
Old Posted Mar 14, 2019, 2:51 AM
LouisVanDerWright LouisVanDerWright is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 5,198
Quote:
Originally Posted by TR Devlin View Post
This makes me sick. The City Council is disgusting. The City's planning department is disgusting.

The best posts in this thread are LVDW's. Thank you Louie.
Thanks, lol. All I have to say is the proposal today along the lake front is exposing just what a lame handout this plan was. If you can build over railyards and pay for a new transit spur and do it with zero subsidy in the South loop then why do we need a handout for Sterling bay with zero transit directly between two of the hottest neighborhoods in the city.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #705  
Old Posted Mar 14, 2019, 4:07 AM
VKChaz VKChaz is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 388
Quote:
Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright View Post
Thanks, lol. All I have to say is the proposal today along the lake front is exposing just what a lame handout this plan was. If you can build over railyards and pay for a new transit spur and do it with zero subsidy in the South loop then why do we need a handout for Sterling bay with zero transit directly between two of the hottest neighborhoods in the city.
That lakefront area is one where I hoped the city would throw more of its weight. Strategically, it makes more sense to me. Improving access to the lakefront, Soldier Field, museums.. The area could already use better transit so the thought of actually doing something (even with some public support) doesn't seem that far fetched and could benefit far more people. And anything that improves the area around McCormick and experience of event attendees can generate more business - that means more visitors, jobs and revenue for the city.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #706  
Old Posted Mar 14, 2019, 4:32 AM
BonoboZill4's Avatar
BonoboZill4 BonoboZill4 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: PingPong
Posts: 995
Quote:
Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright View Post
Thanks, lol. All I have to say is the proposal today along the lake front is exposing just what a lame handout this plan was. If you can build over railyards and pay for a new transit spur and do it with zero subsidy in the South loop then why do we need a handout for Sterling bay with zero transit directly between two of the hottest neighborhoods in the city.
Yep, I've been trashing this proposal from the start(not much on here though since the proposal is older than my account lol), and at least the push-back got them to make some changes, they are hardly enough to make me wish for this project's success. Seems like it's inevitable though, which bums me out because it'll cannibalize from other, much better and more transformative/needed projects. Sigh....

I think this might be the first time I've even commented in this thread since the summer. Meh
__________________
I'm here for a long time, not a good time
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #707  
Old Posted Mar 14, 2019, 1:56 PM
skysoar skysoar is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Posts: 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright View Post
Thanks, lol. All I have to say is the proposal today along the lake front is exposing just what a lame handout this plan was. If you can build over railyards and pay for a new transit spur and do it with zero subsidy in the South loop then why do we need a handout for Sterling bay with zero transit directly between two of the hottest neighborhoods in the city.
I see no comparison between LY and the lake front proposal. Its location , location, location. Anything built in the proximity of Chicagos lakefront is solid gold, and will stand on its own, as opposed to anything further west, especially when chemical removal is involved. The alderman probably believe with all the challenges the LY development area has, this is probably the best opportunity they will have to develop it, the TIF not withstanding. I believe that with the exception of New York, maybe, because after their Amazon experience I am not sure, few cities if any in this country would reject a development like Lincoln Yards.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #708  
Old Posted Mar 14, 2019, 4:06 PM
LaSalle.St.Station's Avatar
LaSalle.St.Station LaSalle.St.Station is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 330
Yes the lakefront proposal is all ready to go, the financing is in place, all the transit agencies and railroads too are all lined up to go with excess funds available to alter rail lines and build infrastructure.

Sterling Bay should never have been allowed to buy private property and develop it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #709  
Old Posted Mar 14, 2019, 4:18 PM
LouisVanDerWright LouisVanDerWright is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 5,198
Quote:
Originally Posted by LaSalle.St.Station View Post
Yes the lakefront proposal is all ready to go, the financing is in place, all the transit agencies and railroads too are all lined up to go with excess funds available to alter rail lines and build infrastructure.

Sterling Bay should never have been allowed to buy private property and develop it.
I can't tell if you are being sarcastic or not, but the challenges of literally building on top of active railroads are wayyyyy greater than tearing down a few industrial shacks, remediating the land, and hopping to it. Sterling Bay should never have expected to buy industrial land and just get to build whatever they want to on it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by skysoar View Post
I see no comparison between LY and the lake front proposal. Its location , location, location. Anything built in the proximity of Chicagos lakefront is solid gold, and will stand on its own, as opposed to anything further west, especially when chemical removal is involved. The alderman probably believe with all the challenges the LY development area has, this is probably the best opportunity they will have to develop it, the TIF not withstanding. I believe that with the exception of New York, maybe, because after their Amazon experience I am not sure, few cities if any in this country would reject a development like Lincoln Yards.
Lakefront is indeed solid gold (unless between I-55 and Hyde Park), but you really think it's more appealing to live in the South Loop than to live along the river literally in between Lincoln Park, Wicker Park, and downtown?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #710  
Old Posted Mar 14, 2019, 7:47 PM
Lakeviewguy Lakeviewguy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 26
Perhaps it already appears on the blog somewhere. Here is a piece from today's NYT about Hudson Yards in NY. Interesting that the reviewer points out many of the same problems that we see here with large developments.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...gtype=Homepage
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #711  
Old Posted Mar 14, 2019, 8:20 PM
skysoar skysoar is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Posts: 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright View Post
I can't tell if you are being sarcastic or not, but the challenges of literally building on top of active railroads are wayyyyy greater than tearing down a few industrial shacks, remediating the land, and hopping to it. Sterling Bay should never have expected to buy industrial land and just get to build whatever they want to on it.



Lakefront is indeed solid gold (unless between I-55 and Hyde Park), but you really think it's more appealing to live in the South Loop than to live along the river literally in between Lincoln Park, Wicker Park, and downtown?
I cannot refute your last statement comparing the appeal of the LY development area including Lincoln Park, and Wicker Park communities with the South Loop. I can only add that the South Loop is rapidly trending upward, and with developments like NEMA, and if the new Lakefront proposal becomes a reality, it brings them closer to LY area appeal.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #712  
Old Posted Mar 15, 2019, 4:10 AM
ChiTownWonder's Avatar
ChiTownWonder ChiTownWonder is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: New Orleans
Posts: 523
Completely agree with the NYT article. The style of these developments are highly suburan in the sence that program is seperated. The West Yards which havent started construction yet is proposed to be majority residential while the East Yards are prinarily office and retail. Its the high density version of the souless copy paste neighborhoods and office parks we hate about the suburbs. Maybe I’m radical, but I don’t support the majority of these projects, especially will all of the financial support the city is providing (to LY specifically). This kind of growth is not organic, its forced. I’m still on board with the 78 and Riverline, because those areas are closer to the Loop, where that huge dominating scale is prominant and celebrated. But LY does not belong between two prodominantly midrise, vibrant, human scaled, and integrated urban neighborhoods.

Last edited by ChiTownWonder; Mar 15, 2019 at 4:46 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #713  
Old Posted Mar 15, 2019, 2:35 PM
BuildThemTaller BuildThemTaller is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 318
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiTownWonder View Post
Completely agree with the NYT article. The style of these developments are highly suburan in the sence that program is seperated. The West Yards which havent started construction yet is proposed to be majority residential while the East Yards are prinarily office and retail. Its the high density version of the souless copy paste neighborhoods and office parks we hate about the suburbs. Maybe I’m radical, but I don’t support the majority of these projects, especially will all of the financial support the city is providing (to LY specifically). This kind of growth is not organic, its forced. I’m still on board with the 78 and Riverline, because those areas are closer to the Loop, where that huge dominating scale is prominant and celebrated. But LY does not belong between two prodominantly midrise, vibrant, human scaled, and integrated urban neighborhoods.
Are you suggesting that building over the air rights of a rail yard was going to eventually come about organically?

The fact of the matter is that Lincoln Yards was a large tract of land that was owned by a large corporation (Finkl Steel) and then bought by another large corporation. It was never going to be subdivided.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #714  
Old Posted Mar 15, 2019, 10:54 PM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is offline
TL;DR
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: the city o'wind
Posts: 13,532
^ Of course not. Whether decking over rail yards or subdividing large parcels, we have lost the apparatus in America for developing large pieces of land publicly and then letting growth happen organically.

The way Chicago's traditional neighborhoods were built, land owners hired surveyors to subdivide the land into lots, and dedicated a grid of streets and alleys, conforming to pretty strict standards concerning street width and lot size/block size. "Dedicating a street" was basically a free move for developers since streets were literally just open dirt paths, but dedicating them provided crucial access to all the other lots and raised their value. Eventually the city taxed everyone to improve these streets and install public utilities - everyone shared the cost.

Today, we expect so much more in the way of infrastructure from the outset - paved streets, two sewer systems, underground power, gas, and telephone lines, etc need to be installed before the city will even allow someone to move into a new community. The public vehemently refuses to pay for this infrastructure in new communities, forcing the cost onto developers. Plus, the cost of such things is much higher than it used to be, thanks to stricter design standards, unionized labor, etc.

I would also argue that part of growing a city organically is that someone has to be willing to live in an unfinished neighborhood with noise, dust, and inconvenience, sometimes for a few decades before everything is built out. In the old days, developers solved this problem by throwing up cheap wooden worker cottages (or brick, if the land was within city limits) and inviting Chicago's working poor to come live. They were happy to find a spacious home and didn't care about the pain points. Today new developments are based around catering to wealthy people, because undeveloped land in Chicago went from dirt cheap to uber expensive, and only the wealthy can pick up the tab... convincing wealthy people to put up with an unfinished neighborhood requires a slick sales job and flashy amenities. All the grittiness of traditional urbanism is carefully eliminated, because it has to be or the wealthy won't buy in.
__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #715  
Old Posted Mar 15, 2019, 11:02 PM
BVictor1's Avatar
BVictor1 BVictor1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 9,340
Quote:
Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright View Post
Thanks, lol. All I have to say is the proposal today along the lake front is exposing just what a lame handout this plan was. If you can build over railyards and pay for a new transit spur and do it with zero subsidy in the South loop then why do we need a handout for Sterling bay with zero transit directly between two of the hottest neighborhoods in the city.
Yeah well deal with it. The developer of the lakefront project said what he said, but whether it happens is a different story.
__________________
titanic1
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #716  
Old Posted Mar 15, 2019, 11:53 PM
PKDickman PKDickman is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 548
Quote:
Originally Posted by ardecila View Post
^
Eventually the city taxed everyone to improve these streets and install public utilities - everyone shared the cost.
That's not entirely true.
At least until the 1980's, street improvements and sewer improvements and the like, were billed by special assessment to the properties benefiting from those improvements.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #717  
Old Posted Mar 16, 2019, 12:37 PM
TR Devlin TR Devlin is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: Chicago
Posts: 10
According to an article in Forbes last month, the Kennedy is the second most congested highway in the country. Here’s the top five:

1. New York City: Cross Bronx Expressway from Bruckner Expressway to Trans Manhattan Expressway;
2. Chicago: I-94/I-90 from I-55 to I-294 (the Kennedy);
3. Chicago: I-290 from I-94 to I-294 (the Eisenhower);
4. Los Angeles: I-10 from I-405 to I-110;
5. Pittsburgh: I-376 from I-79 to Pennsylvania Turnpike;

Lincoln Yards will make the congestion significantly worse. Based on the 6,000 residential units and 23,000 jobs planned for Lincoln Yards, I’d expect it to add around 20,000 thousand cars on the Kennedy every day. With most of the increase during the morning and evening rush hours.

Will this make the Kennedy the most congested highway in the country? I don’t know. But the people who should be looking at this are the City Planning Dept and/or the City Dept of Transportation. And they don’t seem to want to. Because it’s been decided that this project needs to be approved before the Mayor leaves office in a month. And if you want to get it approved, you can’t look at the negatives.

So what we’ve got is a project where Sterling Bay will make hundreds of millions of dollars and people who drive on the Kennedy or in Lincoln Park are fucked.

God, this is disgusting.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #718  
Old Posted Mar 16, 2019, 2:09 PM
the urban politician the urban politician is online now
The City
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Libertyville, IL
Posts: 16,219
But with congestion comes more chances to make money
__________________
Government creates more problems than it solves.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #719  
Old Posted Mar 16, 2019, 2:17 PM
The Lurker The Lurker is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Great Lakes
Posts: 482
Quote:
Originally Posted by TR Devlin View Post
According to an article in Forbes last month, the Kennedy is the second most congested highway in the country. Here’s the top five:

1. New York City: Cross Bronx Expressway from Bruckner Expressway to Trans Manhattan Expressway;
2. Chicago: I-94/I-90 from I-55 to I-294 (the Kennedy);
3. Chicago: I-290 from I-94 to I-294 (the Eisenhower);
4. Los Angeles: I-10 from I-405 to I-110;
5. Pittsburgh: I-376 from I-79 to Pennsylvania Turnpike;

Lincoln Yards will make the congestion significantly worse. Based on the 6,000 residential units and 23,000 jobs planned for Lincoln Yards, I’d expect it to add around 20,000 thousand cars on the Kennedy every day. With most of the increase during the morning and evening rush hours.

Will this make the Kennedy the most congested highway in the country? I don’t know. But the people who should be looking at this are the City Planning Dept and/or the City Dept of Transportation. And they don’t seem to want to. Because it’s been decided that this project needs to be approved before the Mayor leaves office in a month. And if you want to get it approved, you can’t look at the negatives.

So what we’ve got is a project where Sterling Bay will make hundreds of millions of dollars and people who drive on the Kennedy or in Lincoln Park are fucked.

God, this is disgusting.
The TRAFFIC! How did we not think of that before!?
I've got a few solutions, tell me what you guys think. First we need a citywide moratorium on new development. We need more deconversions too. Like lots of em. Then we need to start clearcutting old neighborhoods and blazing new expressways through them. We could further slow truck deliveries into downtown by converting the marinas into seaports. That could work right?
__________________
I voted for Pedro
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #720  
Old Posted Mar 16, 2019, 2:36 PM
10023's Avatar
10023 10023 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: London
Posts: 17,302
Quote:
Originally Posted by TR Devlin View Post
According to an article in Forbes last month, the Kennedy is the second most congested highway in the country. Here’s the top five:

1. New York City: Cross Bronx Expressway from Bruckner Expressway to Trans Manhattan Expressway;
2. Chicago: I-94/I-90 from I-55 to I-294 (the Kennedy);
3. Chicago: I-290 from I-94 to I-294 (the Eisenhower);
4. Los Angeles: I-10 from I-405 to I-110;
5. Pittsburgh: I-376 from I-79 to Pennsylvania Turnpike;

Lincoln Yards will make the congestion significantly worse. Based on the 6,000 residential units and 23,000 jobs planned for Lincoln Yards, I’d expect it to add around 20,000 thousand cars on the Kennedy every day. With most of the increase during the morning and evening rush hours.

Will this make the Kennedy the most congested highway in the country? I don’t know. But the people who should be looking at this are the City Planning Dept and/or the City Dept of Transportation. And they don’t seem to want to. Because it’s been decided that this project needs to be approved before the Mayor leaves office in a month. And if you want to get it approved, you can’t look at the negatives.

So what we’ve got is a project where Sterling Bay will make hundreds of millions of dollars and people who drive on the Kennedy or in Lincoln Park are fucked.

God, this is disgusting.
Great, another clueless suburbanite with 10 posts.

Sounds like they need to get rid of parking in and around downtown in order to encourage people to take public transportation instead.

And if 23,000 jobs adds 20,000 cars on the Kennedy, then it sounds like those jobs are being filled by absolute fucking idiots.
__________________
There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there always has been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge." - Isaac Asimov
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 4:53 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.