CHICAGO | The 78 Site

[k1052]

Originally Posted by gandalf612

I have visited Hudson Yards and I would not hope for a replication in Chicago. Neighborhoods need soul and if this is going to claim to be the 78th, it should not be a soulless glass playhouse for the rich. At least stadiums bring in the masses and if not surrounded by a parking crater I find them far more likeable than HY, even though I personally don't care about sports. Just no public money, which it sounds like the Fire are fine with.

Been there quite a few times and I have to agree. Icing on the cake is that they plopped an expensive gaudy suicide machine inside their wealthy but dispiritingly bland enclave is almost a little too on the nose. Replicating this in the south loop, even if possible, would not be welcome.

I'd even be fine with a modest public subsidy to build the Sox a new park if Jerry can find someone new to bring in and kick up their own contribution. The Bears however can eat it.

[nomarandlee]

I read recent articles last week in which the Fire owner, Joe Mansueto, said he doesn't believe in public funding for sports stadiums. This is a welcome and needed change from professional sports owners.

Given such an attitude, why has there been any hold-up on the Fire not building a new stadium within the city? Hopefully, the prospect of the Fire at the 78 can gain quick momentum and it happens even if a new Sox stadium doesn't.

[sentinel]

Originally Posted by nomarandlee

I read recent articles last week in which the Fire owner, Joe Mansueto, said he doesn't believe in public funding for sports stadiums. This is a welcome and needed change from professional sports owners.

Given such an attitude, why has there been any hold-up on the Fire not building a new stadium within the city? Hopefully, the prospect of the Fire at the 78 can gain quick momentum and it happens even if a new Sox stadium doesn't.

I wish Joe would buy the White Sox.

[Randomguy34]

I think the best outcome in this stadium shuffle is the Fire gets a stadium at the 78, which the Red Stars can use, and Related Midwest now has the room to build all 10k proposed units. The Sox stay at 35th St and develop all the parking lots into a mixed-use development. The Bears get no public funding and actually have to privately finance for whatever plans they have.

[ardecila]

I've said before but I'm still in favor of the musical-chairs option: Sox go to The 78, Bears go to 35th/Shields, the Fire go into a downsized version of Soldier Field.

Really the Bears have the biggest needs and are the toughest team to accommodate. Their plan to build a new stadium on the lakefront is a square peg in a round hole, they have to pretend it is all parkland and spend billions (of taxpayer money) to put a green disguise over all the crap they want to build on Chicago's most precious land. Arlington Heights may actually be the right move for them! But assuming they stay in the city, it would be a lot simpler to build all that stuff somewhere inland, closer to expressways and CTA/Metra lines. Somewhere that a huge parking lot for tailgating won't add a big black eye to the neighborhood. Somewhere that private, mixed-use development is actually allowed, and not banned by 100 years of court cases and civic tradition. 35th/Shields is really the only such site near downtown.

After you deal with the Bears, it becomes a lot easier to fit the other teams in. The Sox and Fire don't have the same tailgating traditions the Bears do, so they can go in more walkable locations. Plus they have smaller stadiums with a smaller capacity, in a smaller footprint, and they play way more home games so they can provide a more sustained boost to neighborhood businesses while creating less overall traffic on game days.

[left of center]

Originally Posted by ardecila

I've said before but I'm still in favor of the musical-chairs option: Sox go to The 78, Bears go to 35th/Shields, the Fire go into a downsized version of Soldier Field.

This actually sounds pretty reasonable. Sad that the only team willing to pay for their own stadium is also the one team best suited to be in Soldier Field

The only con of that plan would be that the Bears would probably have to demo Comiskey in order to fit their stadium, without displacing the residents of Wentworth Gardens or paving over Armor Square Park.

[DCReid]

The Chicago Tribune is brazenly surmising the Sodfather Park (in the 78 site?) as a possible temporary home of the Tampa Bay Rays!

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/column-...110000614.html

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by left of center

This actually sounds pretty reasonable. Sad that the only team willing to pay for their own stadium is also the one team best suited to be in Soldier Field

The only con of that plan would be that the Bears would probably have to demo Comiskey in order to fit their stadium, without displacing the residents of Wentworth Gardens or paving over Armor Square Park.

It'll be plenty expensive to tear down the upper deck and redesign the Soldier Field bowl for soccer. Plenty of stuff for Mansueto to spend money on.

I definitely think an NFL stadium can fit at 35th/Shields. Air Force Academy HS might need to relocate, but there's plenty of vacant school buildings on the South Side... Wentworth Gardens should benefit honestly, the Sox play 81 home games and the Bears only play 8.

[aaron38]

U OF I ANNOUNCES CONSTRUCTION OF 'THE 78' ON SOUTH SIDE HALTED, DPI PULLS OUT OF SPACE

https://abc7chicago.com/amp/post/uni...space/15442678

In a phone interview, Killeen said because DPI has evolved into the rapid and evolving world of quantum computing, digital transform and artificial intelligence, it makes more sense to move its physical presence from the 78 to the planned Quantum and Microelectronics Park on the South Side along the lakefront.

[VKChaz]

Originally Posted by ardecila

It'll be plenty expensive to tear down the upper deck and redesign the Soldier Field bowl for soccer. Plenty of stuff for Mansueto to spend money on.

I definitely think an NFL stadium can fit at 35th/Shields. Air Force Academy HS might need to relocate, but there's plenty of vacant school buildings on the South Side... Wentworth Gardens should benefit honestly, the Sox play 81 home games and the Bears only play 8.

Would Manuseto want to wait the time it would take for two stadiums to be constructed sequentially before he could even begin?

[left of center]

^ I also have a feeling that while he is fine putting his money where his mouth is, it would be only for a stadium that he would own outright. Otherwise, he would still be a tenant in Soldier Field without full control over the usage of the site (such as creating an entertainment district), which is one of the main gripes the Bears currently have.

Messy business, these stadiums

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by left of center

^ I also have a feeling that while he is fine putting his money where his mouth is, it would be only for a stadium that he would own outright. Otherwise, he would still be a tenant in Soldier Field without full control over the usage of the site (such as creating an entertainment district), which is one of the main gripes the Bears currently have.

Messy business, these stadiums

Yeah I get it, but I also don't think the city can support this many stadium-anchored entertainment districts. Time to be realistic. We have Wrigleyville already and the 1901 Project at the UC will likely move forward before anything else (mainly bc they already have all the streets and infrastructure they need). That kinda sucks out the oxygen to do another such district around the Sox, Bears or Fire stadiums. These districts tend to have a certain vibe (bro-ish, formulaic/fake) and they're not for everyone.

Personally I don't have a problem with the Soldier Field idea of a stadium in a park. That's a perfectly fine way for a stadium to exist in a city, we don't need to cram mixed-use everywhere.

[Bonsai Tree]

100% agree. But the biggest problem with Soldier Field is still its location. It's just flat out hard to get to (by both transit and private vehicle). And walking there is kinda a pain too. Stadiums in parks work in different countries because they have good transit access. I'm most familiar with the German-speaking world, so I'll use two examples from there. Ernst-Happel Stadium in Vienna is only 800 feet from the nearest Ubahn stop. Berlin's Olympic Stadium is only 700 feet from its stop. Soldier Field is 1,100 feet from the MED, and that's obviously a suburban line. It's nearly a mile walk from Soldier Field to Roosevelt. I guess that's another argument to make the MED rapid transit but I digress

[Klippenstein]

Originally Posted by ardecila

It's also tied in with the CDOT-led project to extend 15th St from Clark St under the Metra tracks. There was $85M quietly appropriated for that project last year but no news since then.

So, what are the chances that the 15th Street extension and Metra track realignment are now delayed? My guess would be that there's pretty good chance, but you never know.

[k1052]

Originally Posted by ardecila

Yeah I get it, but I also don't think the city can support this many stadium-anchored entertainment districts. Time to be realistic. We have Wrigleyville already and the 1901 Project at the UC will likely move forward before anything else (mainly bc they already have all the streets and infrastructure they need). That kinda sucks out the oxygen to do another such district around the Sox, Bears or Fire stadiums. These districts tend to have a certain vibe (bro-ish, formulaic/fake) and they're not for everyone.

Personally I don't have a problem with the Soldier Field idea of a stadium in a park. That's a perfectly fine way for a stadium to exist in a city, we don't need to cram mixed-use everywhere.

Specifically I think this is a problem for an NFL stadium because they have so very few events per year. Easier to do with baseball and definitely doable with an NBA arena.

[VKChaz]

Originally Posted by ardecila

Yeah I get it, but I also don't think the city can support this many stadium-anchored entertainment districts. Time to be realistic. We have Wrigleyville already and the 1901 Project at the UC will likely move forward before anything else (mainly bc they already have all the streets and infrastructure they need). That kinda sucks out the oxygen to do another such district around the Sox, Bears or Fire stadiums. These districts tend to have a certain vibe (bro-ish, formulaic/fake) and they're not for everyone.

Personally I don't have a problem with the Soldier Field idea of a stadium in a park. That's a perfectly fine way for a stadium to exist in a city, we don't need to cram mixed-use everywhere.

Which could be another reason for a little-used, massive domed stadium to be better suited to an outlying location. A contrived entertainment district that needs to rely so heavily for traffic on non-event days might be appreciated in a suburban location with less competition than found in the city (and less cannibalization). Presumably some demand studies were completed for feasibility of an entertainment area in AH.

[VKChaz]

Originally Posted by k1052

Specifically I think this is a problem for an NFL stadium because they have so very few events per year. Easier to do with baseball and definitely doable with an NBA arena.

Those work much better. Around something like baseball, it is possible to have a more organic, urban entertainment area. Something around an NFL stadium must support much larger game day crowds on the few days there are games and then be strong enough to stand on its own the vast majority of the time. And if the only reason to do such a thing is to generate revenue for the team owner, not because a city is really in need of a particular entertainment area in a particular location, then it seems even more counter-productive.

[Cress3803]

back to the Bears needing a dome to make the finances work to attract Final Fours and super bowls and other major events ...

[BuildThemTaller]

Originally Posted by Cress3803

back to the Bears needing a dome to make the finances work to attract Final Fours and super bowls and other major events ...

I don't understand the economics of it. A Final Four would only come around once every decade or less. The Super Bowl, even less often.

[OrdoSeclorum]

Originally Posted by BuildThemTaller

I don't understand the economics of it. A Final Four would only come around once every decade or less. The Super Bowl, even less often.

There's also World Cups, Rolling Stones concerts in the winter, Convention-type events. NCAA football championships. Lucas Oil or SoFi Stadium will have something big every year. And even for the high school cheerleading championships, it's still being used during months where the weather isn't dependable. An extra $10M a year is an extra $100M a decade, which would make me pay attention.

I also think that due to the nature of the NFL and profit sharing--about 66% is shared equally--owners are more interested in getting money from stadia resources.