CHICAGO | Lincoln Yards

[ardecila]

At this point I honestly wouldn't be surprised if the south parcel ends up as a Topgolf or something similar. Drive Shack was set to open at Damen/Elston until Covid killed the deal, but surely there's still demand for this esp. on the North Side.

Without better infrastructure, the river corridor is only well-suited for industry, low density housing or recreational/entertainment uses. I was also reading about Cosm which is popping up in other cities esp as an anchor to this kind of mixed use development. LY seems like a possible location for them if Related doesn't snag them first for The 78.

[VKChaz]

Originally Posted by ardecila

By the time JDL gets done re-negotiating the RDA, hopefully the investment climate is better. Sterling Bay exhausted their patience with the investors, but JDL should probably enjoy a few years of goodwill. Even if the climate is still "bad", JDL could front-load some big SFH/McMansions or townhouses to show some forward progress, maybe on the north end of the site along Dickens/McLean where the streets already exist. Easier to finance, easier to sell. These could be paired with a small midrise elevator building for some affordable units as well.

I certainly think we'll see a lot less infrastructure than before, the Dominick bridge is probably dead unless they resurrect it as a pedestrian-only bridge which is much cheaper.

IIRC, I read something saying the bridge is out. Hopefully, the developments would at least be able to accommodate it at a later time. Lack of river crossings and inadequate bridges is a real choke point for Chicago traffic, particulary with these large old industrial tracts

[Randomguy34]

Foundry Park site plan, HPA is the architecture firm. Unfortunately instagram compresses the image quality, so we can't read the building heights

Highlights include:
• single family home lots
• luxury condos
• townhomes
• apartments
• a hotel
• restaurants
• shopping
• farmer’s markets
• outdoor ice rink in the winter
• gym

https://www.instagram.com/p/DM_TMplvQXI/


https://www.instagram.com/p/DNGuMRcvqCi/

[aaron38]

Originally Posted by ardecila

Without better infrastructure, the river corridor is only well-suited for industry, low density housing or recreational/entertainment uses.

Infrastructure? From the middle of the site it's a 10 minute walk to Metra, 10 minutes to the El. There's a bus on Clybourn. What does "better" mean?

[Briguy]

I think it says something like: 12 stories residential ~120 ft, 18 stories residential 190 ft, 19 stories hotel and residential, 210 ft

[twister244]

Originally Posted by aaron38

Infrastructure? From the middle of the site it's a 10 minute walk to Metra, 10 minutes to the El. There's a bus on Clybourn. What does "better" mean?

I just recently biked from Logan Square over to North Ave Beach via 606, and I will say.... It wasn't as bad as I thought it would be. If the city can just extend the 606 under the Kennedy, and whip up some protected bike lanes from the 606 to Cortland and across to Armitage - You're pretty set. Not saying it's the ideal setup, but it we have to plan on limited resources....... It could be worse.

[twister244]

In news that shows just how much of a failed vision the original plan was.... Sterling Bay is offloading the one building they managed to get off the ground.

https://www.chicagobusiness.com/commerci...sletter-breaking-news-20250818&utm_term=

There isn't anything crazy to cite from the article, except that this building is completely empty. Pretty depressing, but it makes me even more happy to see there are residential plans to get this thing filled in.

[dreamy-developer]

this building is completely empty.

I'm still amazed to this day that SB didn't get a single tenant signed in this building before it was built. I guess they were just that confident in the long-term outlook of the plan.

[r18tdi]

Originally Posted by dreamy-developer

I'm still amazed to this day that SB didn't get a single tenant signed in this building before it was built. I guess they were just that confident in the long-term outlook of the plan.

Life sciences was going to be "the next big thing" in Chicago real estate... until it wasn't.

[left of center]

Originally Posted by VKChaz

IIRC, I read something saying the bridge is out. Hopefully, the developments would at least be able to accommodate it at a later time. Lack of river crossings and inadequate bridges is a real choke point for Chicago traffic, particulary with these large old industrial tracts

My fear is once the development is up and people have moved in, no one will want a bridge and the traffic that comes with it to be right next to them, especially one that replaces a quiet dead end street/cul-de-sac that terminates at the riverwalk. Any transportation infrastructure like bridges or rail/BRT needs to go in before the NIMBYs move in. So if its not happening now, its likely not happening at all.

[Chicago Shawn]

The lack of at least a pedestrian bridge at Throop Street and/or at the 606 alignment makes this site plan absolutely abysmal. The city needs to demand better and encourage the density to support it. Honestly, it will be better to let this site sit for 1.5 more years until we have some better leadership that actually cares about promoting better business development and collaborates with developers to make a grander plan possible. Even little Portland would say that is a non-starter.

With a lack of city support, including Ald. Anti-density Waugespack now overseeing the entire swath of property, all we will get is a half-assed concept that wouldn't even fly in another global city of half of our size and stature.

Really? SFH on the goddamn riverfront totally unengaged from a riverwalk and directly beside a major office use? Come on.

Look at what is happening in the outer boroughs of London on canal frontages, or in the suburban areas of Toronto, or the waterfronts of Brooklyn and Queens, or in Singapore, or in suburban Sydney or Melbourne or the ambition within a slew of Chinese cities and then tell me this site plan is not a pathetic joke.

We should demand better. This is a generational long build out plan, we don't need the market to be preforming better to make it work now. Lake shore East has been going for 2.5 decades now, and this site is about the same size.

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by aaron38

Infrastructure? From the middle of the site it's a 10 minute walk to Metra, 10 minutes to the El. There's a bus on Clybourn. What does "better" mean?

There is NOT a bus on Clybourn, or Elston for that matter. There is a bus on Armitage and Ashland, but neither of those buses goes downtown and the area is gridlocked for most of the day. You can tell people to suck it up and take the bus, but they're still sitting in the same traffic jams.

Metra is acceptable transit service during rush hours, but you can't rely on it during other times (trains every 2 hours on the weekend??) which means all those new residents will still be driving heavily and making the traffic jams even worse. The L is about 1/2 mile away/15 minute walk, which is doable but it's on the extreme edge of what people will walk comfortably. So it's fine for low density housing, but not where you want to put a new, very dense neighborhood.

Originally Posted by Chicago Shawn

The lack of at least a pedestrian bridge at Throop Street and/or at the 606 alignment makes this site plan absolutely abysmal. The city needs to demand better and encourage the density to support. Honestly, it will be better to let this site sit for 3.5 more years until we have some better leadership that actually cares about promoting better business development and collaborates with developers to make a grander plan possible. Even little Portland would say that is a non-starter.

With a lack of city support, including Ald. Anti-density Waugespack now overseeing the entire swath of property, all we will get is a half-assed concept that wouldn't even fly in another global city of half of our size and stature.

Really? SFH on the goddamn riverfront totally unengaged from a riverwalk and directly beside a major office use? Come on.

Look at what is happening in the outer boroughs of London on canal frontages, or in the suburban areas of Toronto, or the waterfronts of Brooklyn and Queens, or in Singapore, or in suburban Sydney or Melbourne or the ambition within a slew of Chinese cities and then tell me this site plan is not a pathetic joke.

We should demand better. This is a generational long build out plan, we don't need the market to be preforming better to make it work now. Lake shore East has been going for 2.5 decades now, and this site is about the same size.

OK, I also want something better for the site but the city's growth rate is pretty anemic. I just don't think we have the consistent, sustained high demand that those other cities have, which means it's very difficult to finance a project of that magnitude especially in a B-minus location.

I think this plan is more realistic for the private sector to finance and build, if the city wants infrastructure they'll have to pony up (which they won't do of course). If they were wise they would keep the same TIF structure that LY had, but transfer the risk of designing and building infrastructure to CDOT. Maybe keep the bridges in the plan so new residents have plenty of warning, but they don't need to be built in the first 4-5 years of what will likely be a 10-15 year buildout. Foundry Park is downscaled so it will throw off less revenue, that means the infrastructure would need to be pared down as well but I would hope to still see some pedestrian bridges.

[Chicago Shawn]

Originally Posted by ardecila

There is NOT a bus on Clybourn, or Elston for that matter. There is a bus on Armitage and Ashland, but neither of those buses goes downtown and the area is gridlocked for most of the day. You can tell people to suck it up and take the bus, but they're still sitting in the same traffic jams.

Metra is acceptable transit service during rush hours, but you can't rely on it during other times (trains every 2 hours on the weekend??) which means all those new residents will still be driving heavily and making the traffic jams even worse. The L is about 1/2 mile away/15 minute walk, which is doable but it's on the extreme edge of what people will walk comfortably. So it's fine for low density housing, but not where you want to put a new, very dense neighborhood.


OK, I also want something better for the site but the city's growth rate is pretty anemic. I just don't think we have the consistent, sustained high demand that those other cities have, which means it's very difficult to finance a project of that magnitude especially in a B-minus location.

I think this plan is more realistic for the private sector to finance and build, if the city wants infrastructure they'll have to pony up (which they won't do of course). If they were wise they would keep the same TIF structure that LY had, but transfer the risk of designing and building infrastructure to CDOT. Maybe keep the bridges in the plan so new residents have plenty of warning, but they don't need to be built in the first 4-5 years of what will likely be a 10-15 year buildout. Foundry Park is downscaled so it will throw off less revenue, that means the infrastructure would need to be pared down as well but I would hope to still see some pedestrian bridges.

This is not a B minus location. While overall city growth is anemic, specific neighborhoods, including the two this site is sandwiched between, continue to get plenty of investment for small and midsize projects. There is no doubt had this started a couple years earlier, more buildings, at least residential, would have been realized. Rham was on the way out when this was approved with his administration's support, and as was widely reported, Lori's admin put the breaks on the infrastructure development, but the design work for it all was quite advanced and ready to go. I know a civil engineer personally who did a lot of that civil design work. The pandemic and the imposed delays caused them to miss the market, but the market will eventually return. This is not a singular market project, it will be delivered over many years to come, that is why we should be more ambitious in the overall site planning and then individual subareas within it can develop as the conditions permit to make them feasible. Perhaps additional TIF funding to provide gap financing could be made available, would certainly be a far more efficient use of city funds for creating say 20-30% onsite affordable housing than squandering $800-900K+ per unit that we are currently doing with the $1.5 billion we just borrowed at high interest rates and are handing it to inexperienced nonprofits acting as larger scale developers.

Metra's service can always get better. They are taking over dispatching on both of the UPN and UPNW. Funds can be made available to buy battery electrics to provide additional service for city and inner suburban stations as we are doing with the Rock Island. The state will eventually pass a transit bill that could make such funds available. This collaborative thinking is why Canada is producing so much more high-density development compared to what we are doing locally, it is a process that has full engagement of local, provincial and national support and that is what we are missing here. Thus, we get meager plans in a place we once boasted about making "no little plans"

[moorhosj1]

Originally Posted by Chicago Shawn

Thus, we get meager plans in a place we once boasted about making "no little plans"

There were big plans made for this site, that’s why we had a TIF. Unfortunately, sometimes big plans blow up, in this case the developer ran into financial problems. Big plans can leave big holes in ground, just look at the Spire site that was a big plan for an iconic skyscraper. Now it will be a good skyscraper.

[Chicago Shawn]

Originally Posted by moorhosj1

There were big plans made for this site, that’s why we had a TIF. Unfortunately, sometimes big plans blow up, in this case the developer ran into financial problems. Big plans can leave big holes in ground, just look at the Spire site that was a big plan for an iconic skyscraper. Now it will be a good skyscraper.

Yes of course plans change, but again, this is a generational project and can’t be compared to something like 400 N Lakeshore, a 2-phase project that will be likely be completed in ~10 years from design to occupancy of the second building. Whereas the extensive land holdings of Sterling Bay here is going to be a more than 30 year build out. Lincoln Yards alone was 53 acres, nearly double the size of Lakeshore East. At their peak, Sterling Bay owned 70 acres here. This isn’t a single project, it a whole new neighborhood that will take at least three to four economic cycles to complete and we probably can’t even contemplate what new dynamics the city will have driving new development a generation out from now. 20 years ago, I certainly didn’t expect Fulton Market to erupt like it did, but that is exactly what happened when we took the arbitrary height and land use lids off and let that demand channel into new large projects by developers being allowed to go big.

There is no reason to dramatically scale back a master plan of this caliber, other to appease an anti-density alderman who fought to get this entire swath of property into his ward because he despised Lincoln Yards from the start. The entitlements granted were so extensive that there is a lot of room for “scaling it down” while still leaving room for some of those infrastructure improvements. But this is our one shot, because given the wall of opposition LY had, no one is going to re-litigate this entire thing once a new approval is in place and we forever lose the ability to go grander with better public amenities. I really hope the subsidy allotment can be reconsidered to do better, but we won’t have buy in from Waugespack.

What’s also interesting is the large public green space which Lincoln Parkers wanted and fought for is completely absent from this new draft plan. Genuinely curious as to how that is going to go.

I’m just disappointed that we are on the cusp of locking ourselves into mundane development pattern for the next 30+ years on a riverfront assemblage of property that we will likely never see again of this size on the North Side and I’m a little tired of just seeing excuses for not doing better and throwing up our hands and saying ‘well it won’t work’ rather than planning for it to actually work. 6 years ago, this was a viable plan, even if it may have been a bit overly ambitious. Much of the rest of the world is figuring out a way to make grand plans happen, here it’s much more of just a legacy.

[twister244]

Originally Posted by Chicago Shawn

Yes of course plans change, but again, this is a generational project and can’t be compared to something like 400 N Lakeshore, a 2-phase project that will be likely be completed in ~10 years from design to occupancy of the second building. Whereas the extensive land holdings of Sterling Bay here is going to be a more than 30 year build out. Lincoln Yards alone was 53 acres, nearly double the size of Lakeshore East. At their peak, Sterling Bay owned 70 acres here. This isn’t a single project, it a whole new neighborhood that will take at least three to four economic cycles to complete and we probably can’t even contemplate what new dynamics the city will have driving new development a generation out from now. 20 years ago, I certainly didn’t expect Fulton Market to erupt like it did, but that is exactly what happened when we took the arbitrary height and land use lids off and let that demand channel into new large projects by developers being allowed to go big.

There is no reason to dramatically scale back a master plan of this caliber, other to appease an anti-density alderman who fought to get this entire swath of property into his ward because he despised Lincoln Yards from the start. The entitlements granted were so extensive that there is a lot of room for “scaling it down” while still leaving room for some of those infrastructure improvements. But this is our one shot, because given the wall of opposition LY had, no one is going to re-litigate this entire thing once a new approval is in place and we forever lose the ability to go grander with better public amenities. I really hope the subsidy allotment can be reconsidered to do better, but we won’t have buy in from Waugespack.

What’s also interesting is the large public green space which Lincoln Parkers wanted and fought for is completely absent from this new draft plan. Genuinely curious as to how that is going to go.

I’m just disappointed that we are on the cusp of locking ourselves into mundane development pattern for the next 30+ years on a riverfront assemblage of property that we will likely never see again of this size on the North Side and I’m a little tired of just seeing excuses for not doing better and throwing up our hands and saying ‘well it won’t work’ rather than planning for it to actually work. 6 years ago, this was a viable plan, even if it may have been a bit overly ambitious. Much of the rest of the world is figuring out a way to make grand plans happen, here it’s much more of just a legacy.

I think you're overplaying this project a bit here....

First of all, it's not as though LY ever really had a shot of being the next Fulton Market. Sterling Bay overplayed their hands and hedged on people magically flocking to this area to setup shop in Class A office space. If there wasn't any other large swaths of real estate in the city you could develop on with similar/better transit options, I might believe you. That's just not the reality we live in though.....

The momentum right now on that front continues to be in Fulton Market. Also, the 1901 project could easily draw that momentum further West. That area has much better transit connections given its proximity to Loop connections, Metra, etc. And if Quantum starts to become a thing, that momentum may even spur up in areas South of downtown. And frankly, that side of town needs it far more than the North side does.

I understand we all want every spare piece of land to become the next historic big thing, but market forces are at play, and the reality right now is LY is best fit for what is being proposed - Otherwise the original plan would already be much further along......

[left of center]

I agree that Lincoln Yards was never going to be a big office center, outside of some small boutique office development. But in terms of neighborhood planning, I agree with Chicago Shawn that LY had a chance for greatness when it came to developing an impressive riverfront with mid rise and high rise development and higher overall densities instead of SFH, and in connecting the street grids of two perennially popular Chicago neighborhoods (Lincoln Park and Bucktown/Wicker). "Make no small plans" doesn't mean we need to have Fulton 2.0 on the north branch. It means building an impressive, bonafide city neighborhood to rival what other great cities are able to produce.

The project was overall fumbled by SB for focusing too much on office space/life sciences, and by the city by throwing up too many road blocks to getting things off the ground while market conditions were favorable, and pulling the investment on roads/bridges, which the area sorely needs regardless of what ends up getting built here. Now its going to be developed piecemeal, which means we wont get the grand planning of something like LSE. And we are going to be getting SFH along the river, which honestly have no place anywhere near the central area.

If SB was in better financial shape, land banking for a few years until the real estate cycle geared up again would be a smart move. They could get all the zoning and PD changes done in the mean time as well. Unfortunately, this is not the position they are in, so selling off the land to other developers in order to stay solvent is the play being called.

[twister244]

Originally Posted by left of center

I agree that Lincoln Yards was never going to be a big office center, outside of some small boutique office development. But in terms of neighborhood planning, I agree with Chicago Shawn that LY had a chance for greatness when it came to developing an impressive riverfront with mid rise and high rise development and higher overall densities instead of SFH, and in connecting the street grids of two perennially popular Chicago neighborhoods (Lincoln Park and Bucktown/Wicker).

Again - I kinda feel like we're overplaying the potential of this particular site.

Yes, I completely agree that having it better connect Lincoln Park and Wicker Park is necessary. That's why I really want to see the 606 extended to Elston, and some biking infrastructure put in place on Cortland to tie into Armitage/Racine. Yes, It would be nice to see a pedestrian bridge in the middle to connect the two, and I think there should be a push for that.

But beyond that, The best you could possibly get is a set of highrises put on every parcel of the project. However, even then, you just get a small dense residential neighborhood. You won't get much of a tie-in to the river because there isn't much of a riverfront North or South of here. It's commercial and industrial along the River, and there's no indication that's changing anytime soon. It's not like this project is going to magically spur a set of mixed use developments up and down the river going all the way to the Casino.

I was excited for the original LY proposal as well, but let's be honest, it's the market driving the pivot here, not the city. Like I posted yesterday, the ONE office building they built onsite is completely EMPTY. I think what's being proposed isn't the best, but it's where we are at.

[Chicago Shawn]

Originally Posted by twister244

I think you're overplaying this project a bit here....

First of all, it's not as though LY ever really had a shot of being the next Fulton Market. Sterling Bay overplayed their hands and hedged on people magically flocking to this area to setup shop in Class A office space. If there wasn't any other large swaths of real estate in the city you could develop on with similar/better transit options, I might believe you. That's just not the reality we live in though.....

The momentum right now on that front continues to be in Fulton Market. Also, the 1901 project could easily draw that momentum further West. That area has much better transit connections given its proximity to Loop connections, Metra, etc. And if Quantum starts to become a thing, that momentum may even spur up in areas South of downtown. And frankly, that side of town needs it far more than the North side does.

I understand we all want every spare piece of land to become the next historic big thing, but market forces are at play, and the reality right now is LY is best fit for what is being proposed - Otherwise the original plan would already be much further along......

I never implied this was the next Fulton Market, I was merely referencing Fulton as an example of what is happening after the city removed limitations on height and land use. Compared to what other global cities are doing well outside of their respective cores, this is now very small potatoes and major missed opportunity to better stitch the urban fabric together.

And not to beat a dead horse, but, I straight up do not agree about the lack of transit connections. We just need to make better use of water taxi and Metra service. Even as is, it is better transit connectivity than booming sunbelt cities like Nashville or Austin who are throwing up far more high-rise buildings than we are presently. Toronto is literally building multiple 60-85 story buildings in auto centric suburbs right now and doing so in tandem with better transit service plans for the future. Chicago home resales are appreciating at 4x the national average (mostly a reflection of us building very little right now) and rents are steadily increasing too, the demand is there, hence we still have a lot of units being proposed here. But too many people are just stuck in the mindset that if it isn't downtown, it can't be that significant of a change to the context.

In the rest of the world, polycentric nodes are the norm, and beside a junction of two 50+ mile long commuter rail lines is certainly an appropriate place for one. In an other first world nation, we would see this level of aspirational panning, but sometimes I just need to lower my expectations for the cow town we live in, despite our great legacy.

I wont hammer this point any further, but again, I'd encourage anyone living in this ward to send a constituent inquiry to Waguespack for this to be better and bring back some elements of the old plan like the street grid, a 606 extension over the river, especially at minimum if the Throop Street bridge is permanently out, and perhaps the centralized open space. We can do better and plenty of examples exist elsewhere.

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by Chicago Shawn

And not to beat a dead horse, but, I straight up do not agree about the lack of transit connections. We just need to make better use of water taxi and Metra service.

Water taxi is simply not a realistic transit option given the funding structures available. It doesn't need much infrastructure to set up, but the operating costs are lavish and way exceed what CTA or Metra spends on a per rider basis. Wendella only makes it work by marketing it as a tourist attraction for which people pay a premium for "the experience".

Metra could (sorta) work if they introduce frequent MU service on the UP-N line up to Evanston or Winnetka with their new Stadler trains, but I don't think they've shared anything with the public about such a plan. And even more frequent Metra service suffers from poor integration with CTA (it's a single line, not a network) so if your destination is not on the UP-N line you're probably still gonna drive or Uber.

I'd encourage anyone living in this ward to send a constituent inquiry to Waguespack for this to be better and bring back some elements of the old plan like the street grid, a 606 extension over the river, especially at minimum if the Throop Street bridge is permanently out, and perhaps the centralized open space. We can do better and plenty of examples exist elsewhere.

Crain's is reporting that DPD officials are in fact pressing JDL to include provisions for some of the infrastructure from the original plan including the 606 extension and the Throop/Southport bridge, as well as unspecified provisions related to the Ashland/Elston intersection re-do (not clear what this means but I've heard of an Elston re-route via Mendell and a new river bridge at Armitage).