HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

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


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #401  
Old Posted Feb 8, 2019, 4:24 PM
Vlajos Vlajos is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,485
I doubt anyone will use the name once it's built out. It'll just be part of downtown.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #402  
Old Posted Feb 9, 2019, 12:09 AM
marothisu marothisu is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Chicago
Posts: 6,883
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vlajos View Post
I doubt anyone will use the name once it's built out. It'll just be part of downtown.
For an official neighborhood name, it's a pretty dumb name regardless.
__________________
Chicago Maps:
* New Construction https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer...B0&usp=sharing
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #403  
Old Posted Feb 9, 2019, 12:20 AM
LouisVanDerWright LouisVanDerWright is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 7,443
Let's call it "Hinkey-Dink Village"!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #404  
Old Posted Feb 9, 2019, 12:53 AM
BonoboZill4's Avatar
BonoboZill4 BonoboZill4 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: PingPong
Posts: 1,588
Quote:
Originally Posted by marothisu View Post
For an official neighborhood name, it's a pretty dumb name regardless.
Yeah... if the general area had been named Southbank like the northern portion of the former Riverline project, then maybe it could have worked... the 78 is just stupid. The plan though is a solid A-
__________________
I'm here for a long time, not a good time
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #405  
Old Posted Feb 9, 2019, 1:29 AM
Vlajos Vlajos is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,485
To be clear, I agree the name is stupid. But it will never be called that in real life.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #406  
Old Posted Mar 21, 2019, 3:28 PM
bullsfan7210 bullsfan7210 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Posts: 3
This seems like pretty bad news:

https://www.chicagobusiness.com/greg...esearch-center

If I’m not mistaken, DPI is the anchor tenant and the Red Line station is supposed to be housed inside one of their buildings. How much of a setback could this be?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #407  
Old Posted Mar 22, 2019, 3:33 PM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is offline
TL;DR
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: the city o'wind
Posts: 16,356
It's a tough bar for the project to clear, but the promise all along from Rauner and UIUC was that state funding would be matched with private investment and taxpayers wouldn't be footing the bill for a largely private research facility. Now that Pritzker is actually holding UIUC to their promise, everyone is calling it unreasonable. Lol.

If this project is such a slam dunk, then it should absolutely be possible to raise this private investment. If not, then it's a bad deal for the state and should be scrapped. Remember that Pritzker started 1871 with private capital, so he understands the tech world probably better than Rauner did. But our state is very broke, the last thing we need to do is shovel a half billion dollars into the pockets of tech companies (indirectly) with no guarantee of any spillover benefits to the state's economy. We could build this thing and it will sit empty, if there is no real interest from the private sector... need to make sure that private partners have a lot of skin in the game as well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bullsfan7210 View Post
This seems like pretty bad news:

https://www.chicagobusiness.com/greg...esearch-center

If I’m not mistaken, DPI is the anchor tenant and the Red Line station is supposed to be housed inside one of their buildings. How much of a setback could this be?
No, the DPI site is west of the (re-aligned) Metra tracks and north of the St Charles Air Line tracks. The Red Line entrance is in a different building east of the Metra tracks, which is just vanilla office with some retail. The two buildings do look similar in renderings, but I'm sure those are just placeholder designs.
__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #408  
Old Posted Mar 22, 2019, 4:48 PM
Mr Downtown's Avatar
Mr Downtown Mr Downtown is offline
Urbane observer
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,385
And it seems like we've tried several times now to create a Stanford-Palo Alto style ecosystem, without much to show for it: Northwestern Tech Park, UIC Innovation Center, whatever that was at Damen and Harrison, IIT.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #409  
Old Posted Mar 24, 2019, 5:58 PM
BonoboZill4's Avatar
BonoboZill4 BonoboZill4 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: PingPong
Posts: 1,588


Soon?
__________________
I'm here for a long time, not a good time
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #410  
Old Posted Mar 24, 2019, 7:41 PM
Zapatan's Avatar
Zapatan Zapatan is offline
DENNAB
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: NA - Europe
Posts: 6,042
That's a shame about the research center, but there's much more to this development as a whole, correct? Isn't that only part of it?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #411  
Old Posted Mar 24, 2019, 10:13 PM
Randomguy34's Avatar
Randomguy34 Randomguy34 is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Chicago & Philly
Posts: 2,349
Quote:
Originally Posted by ardecila View Post
It's a tough bar for the project to clear, but the promise all along from Rauner and UIUC was that state funding would be matched with private investment and taxpayers wouldn't be footing the bill for a largely private research facility. Now that Pritzker is actually holding UIUC to their promise, everyone is calling it unreasonable. Lol.

If this project is such a slam dunk, then it should absolutely be possible to raise this private investment. If not, then it's a bad deal for the state and should be scrapped. Remember that Pritzker started 1871 with private capital, so he understands the tech world probably better than Rauner did. But our state is very broke, the last thing we need to do is shovel a half billion dollars into the pockets of tech companies (indirectly) with no guarantee of any spillover benefits to the state's economy. We could build this thing and it will sit empty, if there is no real interest from the private sector... need to make sure that private partners have a lot of skin in the game as well.
Exactly! Also, the DPI has already raised $300 million from companies on other universities. They'll be fine for now
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #412  
Old Posted Mar 24, 2019, 10:14 PM
r18tdi's Avatar
r18tdi r18tdi is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,421
Quote:
Originally Posted by ardecila View Post
If this project is such a slam dunk, then it should absolutely be possible to raise this private investment. If not, then it's a bad deal for the state and should be scrapped. Remember that Pritzker started 1871 with private capital, so he understands the tech world probably better than Rauner did.
Or maybe JB sees DPI as nothing more than competition for his personal interests? I hope that's not the case.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #413  
Old Posted Mar 25, 2019, 9:32 PM
moorhosj moorhosj is offline
Closed account
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 511
Quote:
Originally Posted by r18tdi View Post
Or maybe JB sees DPI as nothing more than competition for his personal interests? I hope that's not the case.
Not sure Techstars and DPI really play in the same field. DPI is a research institute and Techstars is just a startup accelerator. That said, his sister is an advisor of DPI, so I assume whatever decision JB is making relies on his knowledge of the funding status. If anything, she has enough money to help fill the gap if needed.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #414  
Old Posted Apr 2, 2019, 2:44 PM
Suiram Suiram is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 49
People should be happy with this. Its just good governance. Letting DPI and essentially, Related, draw on $500 million (so much of the first few hundred million will likely go into site works and infrastructure) in State funds with only a promise of eventually matching makes no sense. Its like the most broken TIFs. All this is doing is requiring proof that DPI will be able to match the funding. Its not like they actually need to show the State of BofA account with $500 million. Most likely they need firm commitments from donors, university partners, corporate sponsors.

Then just like any major project, any subsidy from the state will be paid on milestones to ensure the funds are being use appropriately

Letting the State bear all the risk is completely irresponsible. And people questioning Pritzker's choice come off as being far to used to the Chicago Way.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #415  
Old Posted Apr 2, 2019, 4:41 PM
Via Chicago Via Chicago is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 5,611
yup. people want reform, but not when its their own sacred cow.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #416  
Old Posted Apr 2, 2019, 5:14 PM
LouisVanDerWright LouisVanDerWright is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 7,443
I honestly see no reason why you wouldn't require them to do what they said they are going to do. I don't like Pritzker, but it's stupid to think that we should just hand out half a billion dollars when they said they'd raise matching funds. Raise the matching funds and fair's fair.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #417  
Old Posted Apr 3, 2019, 11:24 PM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is offline
TL;DR
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: the city o'wind
Posts: 16,356
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suiram View Post
People should be happy with this. Its just good governance. Letting DPI and essentially, Related, draw on $500 million (so much of the first few hundred million will likely go into site works and infrastructure) in State funds with only a promise of eventually matching makes no sense. Its like the most broken TIFs. All this is doing is requiring proof that DPI will be able to match the funding. Its not like they actually need to show the State of BofA account with $500 million. Most likely they need firm commitments from donors, university partners, corporate sponsors.

Then just like any major project, any subsidy from the state will be paid on milestones to ensure the funds are being use appropriately

Letting the State bear all the risk is completely irresponsible. And people questioning Pritzker's choice come off as being far to used to the Chicago Way.
I don't think any of that pot of money would go into site works or infrastructure. That's what the TIF is for. Related would be idiots if they couldn't develop their site if the DPI deal fell through.

Cornell's Roosevelt Island tech campus in NYC cost $2B not including any infrastructure (except what is directly needed for the project like utility lines) so it seems realistic for Chicago's tech campus to cost half of that. These are flashy, expensive buildings full of flashy, expensive technology.
__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #418  
Old Posted Apr 8, 2019, 2:53 PM
maru2501's Avatar
maru2501 maru2501 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: chicago
Posts: 1,668
Rahm delaying final vote on this in deference to Lightfoot
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #419  
Old Posted Apr 8, 2019, 3:13 PM
k1052 k1052 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,235
I expect Related will shelve this until the next cycle. They've got other interesting/profitable stuff going in town. Another decade as an empty lot.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #420  
Old Posted Apr 8, 2019, 3:42 PM
maru2501's Avatar
maru2501 maru2501 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: chicago
Posts: 1,668
cursed.. but someone may have to take a billion profit instead of a trillion
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 3:31 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.