CHICAGO | The 78 Site

[left of center]

Originally Posted by nomarandlee

I think that Amtrak and BNSF would sell those air rights on the cheap as long as they didn't interfere with operations. If the Loop had expanded to the size of Midtown, the demand probably would have called for the tracks to be covered, similar to north of the OPO.

Before the Fire Stadium was announced, I thought it could make sense to at least put a large parking structure over the tracks to make room for parking of a casino or stadium complex. Truth be told, there may be enough parking nearby off Roosevelt as it is to not require much additional parking.

My thoughts were more about interference with their operations. There will need to be dozens if not hundreds of support beams that will have to be placed in between the tracks and that may be perceived as problematic by all the rail operators.

The land immediately north of the OPO is much more desirable due to its location in the heart of the West Loop, with immediate access to the largest employment center in the state as well as the two largest train terminals in the city. They are also much smaller in scale, and as such were probably a much easier sell to build over as a result. Even with all those benefits, it still took decades for them to be built on, with the final piece being 150 N Riverside completed fairly recently.

While development of the BNSF/Amtrak yard is in the realm of possibility, until we get all the conventionally available land in the immediate area developed and Chicago really does begin to resemble Midtown, no developer is going to see a need for that railyard to be built over, especially considering the astronomical costs.

Fun to dream about it though

[Jstange059]

Originally Posted by left of center

My thoughts were more about interference with their operations. There will need to be dozens if not hundreds of support beams that will have to be placed in between the tracks and that may be perceived as problematic by all the rail operators.

I mean, it happened in NYC with Hudson yards so it’s definitely possible, but seeing how difficult it is for so many of these megaprojects (that aren’t being built over an active train yard!) to get funding, I don’t foresee this any such project happening there anytime soon here, especially considering that the area west of the train yards isn’t exactly the hottest real estate market (I’d love to see them do some Fulton Market-style zoning changes to that area, though that area doesn’t really have the best transit connections)

[Toasty Joe]

could they string some wires and let some vines grow over?

[r18tdi]

Originally Posted by Jstange059

I’d love to see them do some Fulton Market-style zoning changes to that area, though that area doesn’t really have the best transit connections

Looks like the railyard land is already part of the city's Downtown Zoning Area, so I'm not sure what kind of additional proactive upzoning/zoning incentive could be adopted here.

[ardecila]

There's room to plant a row of trees along the riverbank and S Lumber Street. Amtrak replaced the seawall there and apparently looked into the idea of trees. Unclear if this is a real plan or not, but it looks like the city pushed for greenery/vegetation here and hired a landscape architect to do some concepts. This was 6 years ago and the seawall was replaced without any new landscaping, but at least it's on Amtrak's radar? ComEd planted trees like this a few blocks north in front of their substation (across from River City) and it does make a difference.


source: https://www.chicago.gov/content/dam/...esentation.pdf

[nomarandlee]

Originally Posted by ardecila

There's room to plant a row of trees along the riverbank and S Lumber Street. Amtrak replaced the seawall there and apparently looked into the idea of trees. Unclear if this is a real plan or not, but it looks like the city pushed for greenery/vegetation here and hired a landscape architect to do some concepts. This was 6 years ago and the seawall was replaced without any new landscaping, but at least it's on Amtrak's radar? ComEd planted trees like this a few blocks north in front of their substation (across from River City) and it does make a difference.


source: https://www.chicago.gov/content/dam/...esentation.pdf

Indeed, that would make a big difference. I wonder how much that would cost. It may have been in the pdf, but I didn't readily see it.

[left of center]

They should have planted trees along the river years ago. Great ROI for beautifying the space.

Originally Posted by Jstange059

I mean, it happened in NYC with Hudson yards so it’s definitely possible

With NYC real estate prices, sure nearly anything is possible!

[bhawk66]

Seeing as Amtrack is a business in need of exposure/advertisement, I could see how 'hiding' the brand to any perceived views might be frowned upon by top management, unfortunately. Should/could have been mandated.

[ardecila]

I doubt Amtrak is concerned about trees "harming their brand". The views over a dusty railyard are not doing anything to attract new riders, nor would the trees really block views anyway except from The 78 riverwalk at that specific angle, the railyard would still be extremely visible from Roosevelt Rd or Canal. If anything they're probably concerned about the usual stuff - cost to plant trees, maintenance/tree trimming, roots interfering with the tieback rods, etc. Railroad people usually hate vegetation, they just see it as a nuisance despite the obvious benefits in reducing erosion and moderating temperatures.

The seawall replacement project is still ongoing (Amtrak is starting work down by 18th St later this year) so I'm hopeful they will come back later to add the trees, it does seem like the city was pressuring them to do so.

[BVictor1]

Several boring rigs on site taking soil samples.

07.16.25

[Randomguy34]

I was waiting for this...updated zoning app is out for The 78: https://chicityclerkelms.chicago.gov...1-001DD80DE488

Max height and dwelling units is still 950 ft and 10k units. Same as the old plan, but again financing is what will determine how many get built

[sentinel]

Originally Posted by Randomguy34

I was waiting for this...updated zoning app is out for The 78: https://chicityclerkelms.chicago.gov...1-001DD80DE488

Max height and dwelling units is still 950 ft and 10k units. Same as the old plan, but again financing is what will determine how many get built

It’s a real shame that no major park space will be part of the site, compared to the crescent park that was part of the initial design. What a wasted opportunity.
And before anyone chimes in with “but there’s so much open with plazas everywhere,” yeah, not the same thing as an actual park.

[VKChaz]

Originally Posted by sentinel

It’s a real shame that no major park space will be part of the site, compared to the crescent park that was part of the initial design. What a wasted opportunity.
And before anyone chimes in with “but there’s so much open with plazas everywhere,” yeah, not the same thing as an actual park.

With the addition of so many residents, the core of the city is lacking in quality open space. Even the park specific to LSE is limited in its utility - dogs and playground with little else. And it matters for when people are choosing places to live

[Randomguy34]

Yeah, central Chicago is weirdly adverse to accessible, medium-sized parks. It's either grand, massive parks or tiny parklets. The few good ones I can think of are Washington Square, Arrigo, Bartelme, and Ping Tom.

[ithakas]

True, though there are parks adjacent in every direction—to the north you've got the rooftop Roosevelt Collection park, plus the park space around Southbank and Riverline. To the east is Cotton Tail Park, and to the south is Ping Tom Park. There is a new pedestrian connection to Ping Tom's western portion through the 78, but right now it's fenced off.

You'll have the riverwalk all along the western edge, which I think should function nicely for public space.

I think a really nice pedestrian-only north-south street with lower-scaled buildings next to the riverwalk would be a big hit. I guess I'm thinking of Rue Montorgueil as an example – the length of the street in Paris is about the same distance as the length of a street could be adjacent to the riverwalk.

[dreamy-developer]

Members of the Neighborhood coalition for Better Chinese/American Communities is hosting a town hall meeting today at 6p in Chinatown.

Some members it's said are opposing the development of the Fire stadium with the impact it'll have to the surrounding area.

CBS Chicago coverage link

[lakeshoredrive]

Originally Posted by dreamy-developer

Members of the Neighborhood coalition for Better Chinese/American Communities is hosting a town hall meeting today at 6p in Chinatown.

Some members it's said are opposing the development of the Fire stadium with the impact it'll have to the surrounding area.

CBS Chicago coverage link

Oh for Pete’s sake

[r18tdi]

Too bad. The site is zoned for a stadium and they're not seeking public funding. I don't see how they can stop it.

[dreamy-developer]

Originally Posted by r18tdi

Too bad. The site is zoned for a stadium and they're not seeking public funding. I don't see how they can stop it.

I could be incredibly wrong, but I'm surprised that we didn't hear from this neighborhood coalition say anything when the Sox stadium was pitched.

Maybe because there's way more of a chance of the Fire stadium happening because of the private funding? Not sure.

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by dreamy-developer

I could be incredibly wrong, but I'm surprised that we didn't hear from this neighborhood coalition say anything when the Sox stadium was pitched.

Maybe because there's way more of a chance of the Fire stadium happening because of the private funding? Not sure.

They protested the casino. They may have opposed the Sox stadium too in theory, but pretty much everybody knew it was vaporware without a firm commitment from the city/state for public funding bc Reinsdorf is a huge cheapskate. Related and the White Sox organization weren't trying to get a zoning change/PD amendment so there was nothing tangible to protest.

Anyway, their leader Grace Chan McKibben was careful to specify they haven't taken a position on the Fire stadium yet but sounded optimistic. I think they're looking for more details on traffic, parking, etc.

Unfortunately to pacify "the community", the Fire and Related are now proposing a huge parking lot on the south end of The 78 in addition to their 2-level underground garage and north surface lots, plus parking in the Roosevelt Collection. Larding this stadium up with parking will just make traffic even worse, and make it harder to redevelop mixed-use in the future. All public transit improvements have been deleted, including the new Red Line stop and/or a possible Metra stop.