Is “The 78” Dead? Or even more alive? Fire announce plans for SSS

[southsider2k5]

13 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

The public aspects of this are a lot less important if the park itself is self financed.  All you need from the state is potentially infrastructure and/or a property tax negotiation.  

I will also note one aspect that isn't talked about is if both the Bears and the Sox do something that doesn't involve the ISFA, that is a whole lot of tax money that all of the sudden can be redirected for something else.  We will see if they both happen, but I think Illinois becomes more open to negotiations on other things if they can redirect those ticket taxes to something else.

[Tnetennba]

4 hours ago, southsider2k5 said:

This is a good thing, despite the belief of some.

You say this now, but when the ground opens and swallows them whole … … … hahahahahah

[ThirdGen]

5 hours ago, southsider2k5 said:

I will also note one aspect that isn't talked about is if both the Bears and the Sox do something that doesn't involve the ISFA, that is a whole lot of tax money that all of the sudden can be redirected for something else.  We will see if they both happen, but I think Illinois becomes more open to negotiations on other things if they can redirect those ticket taxes to something else.

Based on the fact that the Bears stadium bonds haven't been paid down with that money since 2002, I think it is safe to say the state has already been misdirecting that money elsewhere already.

[ptatc]

Interesting discussion on Bears CHGO podcast. They essentially said that the hold up is the Chicago politicians holding up the vote on yhe Bears tax and infrastructure bill to force them to pay down the debt on soldier field. They said the chicago group may block the bill from coming to a vote because they makeup the majority of the people in the House.

[southsider2k5]

8 minutes ago, ThirdGen said:

Based on the fact that the Bears stadium bonds haven't been paid down with that money since 2002, I think it is safe to say the state has already been misdirecting that money elsewhere already.

They literally cannot by law.  The last renovation is why they still owe money, not because they weren't paying the payments.  The pandemic crushed expected revenues is the other problem.

[southsider2k5]

5 minutes ago, ptatc said:

Interesting discussion on Bears CHGO podcast. They essentially said that the hold up is the Chicago politicians holding up the vote on yhe Bears tax and infrastructure bill to force them to pay down the debt on soldier field. They said the chicago group may block the bill from coming to a vote because they makeup the majority of the people in the House.

If they stop it from happening, the Bears leave IL.  It is that simple.  It's probably a play to try to extract gains, but the Bears hold the cards here.

[77 Hitmen]

15 minutes ago, ThirdGen said:

Based on the fact that the Bears stadium bonds haven't been paid down with that money since 2002, I think it is safe to say the state has already been misdirecting that money elsewhere already.

 

6 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

They literally cannot by law.  The last renovation is why they still owe money, not because they weren't paying the payments.  The pandemic crushed expected revenues is the other problem.

The payments for the Soldier Field renovation were totally backloaded.  That's why the debt hasn't been paid down much after over 20 years.  The funds weren't misdirected, but the politicians in 2002 who set up this plan wanted to kick much of payments a couple of decades down the road.  I don't have any links for this, but I'm pretty sure that's what I read at some point.

Edited Wednesday at 10:38 PM by 77 Hitmen

[ptatc]

4 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

If they stop it from happening, the Bears leave IL.  It is that simple.  It's probably a play to try to extract gains, but the Bears hold the cards here.

I agree and I dont blame the Bears. This whole thing has dragged out far too long.

I see the advantage of AH with getting revenue from all the other properties. However the deal with Indiana where the Bears lease it for 40 years then they own it is a great deal.

[77 Hitmen]

34 minutes ago, ptatc said:

Interesting discussion on Bears CHGO podcast. They essentially said that the hold up is the Chicago politicians holding up the vote on yhe Bears tax and infrastructure bill to force them to pay down the debt on soldier field. They said the chicago group may block the bill from coming to a vote because they makeup the majority of the people in the House.

 

31 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

If they stop it from happening, the Bears leave IL.  It is that simple.  It's probably a play to try to extract gains, but the Bears hold the cards here.

Yep.  If they're holding out to get the Bears to pay off the $500M or so in debt for Soldier Field, the team will just build their stadium in Hammond and IL will still have to pay off all that debt.  Indiana has dump trucks full of money ready to throw at a Bears stadium.

Chicago reps are mad that the team is leaving the city limits would rather have the team leave the state altogether than help them remain in Cook County.   

Edited Wednesday at 11:04 PM by 77 Hitmen

[tray]

7 hours ago, 77 Hitmen said:

I suppose the narrative now will be that the north end of the site can support a structure like a stadium, but not the south end?   

No one ever said that that site cannot support a building, only that construction their would be costly (including environmental remediation....30 trucks in and out for a month and a half, then another several months to bring in stone and fill. lol) and then special underpinning requirements as Pepper has mentioned.  

Your own out-sized opinion is that Ishbia, as a new owner in 2030, will immediately seek to relocate the team from their historic location to what is left of the 78  by that time behind the soccer stadium.  Maybe you have ignored the plan the city approved that does not include another stadium there. OK, keep repeating your opinion ad nauseam on a sports talk forum (hundreds of posts promoting that), use Ishbia's picture as your avatar (to what, promote your opinion?) , and maybe you will feel better about yourself or something. 

Edited Wednesday at 11:50 PM by tray

[Sleepy Harold]

8 hours ago, 77 Hitmen said:

I wonder at what point it gets to the "put up or shut up" point for Jerry, Ishbia, and the White Sox if they indeed want to build a new stadium at the 78.  We haven't heard a word about their intentions other than Ishbia's offer to the Pope to throw out the first pitch at a new ballpark.

Once the Fire stadium gets underway, the south end of that property isn't going to sit undeveloped forever.  Plus, with each passing year, construction costs continue to skyrocket.   There's also the matter of the Sox lease at Rate Field expiring in 3 years and I highly doubt Ishbia wants to stay there long-term as he eventually assumes ownership of the team.

 

 

FWIW, I believe it was back in Octoberish that the Sox (Brooks maybe?) mentioned they should have the stadium plans figured out in the next 12-18 months. Of course I can't find that bit of news anywhere at the moment.

[77 Hitmen]

6 hours ago, Tnetennba said:

You say this now, but when the ground opens and swallows them whole … … … hahahahahah

The Science Channel should be on standby to make an Engineering Catastrophes episode for when work starts on this tract of land.

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

15 hours ago, 77 Hitmen said:

 

Yep.  If they're holding out to get the Bears to pay off the $500M or so in debt for Soldier Field, the team will just build their stadium in Hammond and IL will still have to pay off all that debt.  Indiana has dump trucks full of money ready to throw at a Bears stadium.

Chicago reps are mad that the team is leaving the city limits would rather have the team leave the state altogether than help them remain in Cook County.   

Now that the Bears sound like they're officially going to Hammond, while I never thought entertainment districts around a football stadium made much sense, it makes even less sense in Hammond.

[southsider2k5]

15 hours ago, tray said:

No one ever said that that site cannot support a building, only that construction their would be costly (including environmental remediation....30 trucks in and out for a month and a half, then another several months to bring in stone and fill. lol) and then special underpinning requirements as Pepper has mentioned.  

Your own out-sized opinion is that Ishbia, as a new owner in 2030, will immediately seek to relocate the team from their historic location to what is left of the 78  by that time behind the soccer stadium.  Maybe you have ignored the plan the city approved that does not include another stadium there. OK, keep repeating your opinion ad nauseam on a sports talk forum (hundreds of posts promoting that), use Ishbia's picture as your avatar (to what, promote your opinion?) , and maybe you will feel better about yourself or something. 

Which goes back to your original Kvetch about projects cancelling and why nothing has ever happened there.  For a site that requires additional expensive remediation, it drives up the needed economic and financial impact of what happens there.  For a site that is going to cost 8/9 figures to clean up, you aren't going to justify a 2500 square foot single family dwelling going there.  It's why they are looking for 9/10 figure projects to build there, so that the ends justify the means. There aren't that many huge projects to go around, and huge projects are notoriously difficult to get off the ground and finance.  Again, how many times have there been projects for the tallest, or 2nd tallest skyscraper in Chicago that have failed.  Hell, the hole from the Spire still sits on the northern end of downtown.  It isn't because the site required remediation, it was because the economics didn't make sense, and definitely not because of some conspiracy involving arms dealers.  Block 37 went through a ton of iterations over decades before finally seeing that mall get off the ground.

As I have said previous, this isn't nearly as complex as you want to make it out to be, and you could probably seek your own advice about repeating your own opinion ad naseum if you are sick of seeing the same responses to it.

[Sleepy Harold]

👀👀

[77 Hitmen]

1 hour ago, southsider2k5 said:

Which goes back to your original Kvetch about projects cancelling and why nothing has ever happened there.  For a site that requires additional expensive remediation, it drives up the needed economic and financial impact of what happens there.  For a site that is going to cost 8/9 figures to clean up, you aren't going to justify a 2500 square foot single family dwelling going there.  It's why they are looking for 9/10 figure projects to build there, so that the ends justify the means. There aren't that many huge projects to go around, and huge projects are notoriously difficult to get off the ground and finance.  Again, how many times have there been projects for the tallest, or 2nd tallest skyscraper in Chicago that have failed.  Hell, the hole from the Spire still sits on the northern end of downtown.  It isn't because the site required remediation, it was because the economics didn't make sense, and definitely not because of some conspiracy involving arms dealers.  Block 37 went through a ton of iterations over decades before finally seeing that mall get off the ground.

As I have said previous, this isn't nearly as complex as you want to make it out to be, and you could probably seek your own advice about repeating your own opinion ad naseum if you are sick of seeing the same responses to it.

Great explanation, but it doesn't matter because the same poster is going to continue to throw tantrums and stomp his feet over the 78 site just has he has since news broke about a possible stadium there more than 2 years ago.  

It's amazing that he's so angry that the 78 is being discussed on a thread about the 78.   Others have provided valid points against the Sox moving to the 78, but his comments sound unhinged and this thread would be many pages shorter without needing to respond to his nonsensical rants.     

Edited Thursday at 04:19 PM by 77 Hitmen

[77 Hitmen]

1 hour ago, Sleepy Harold said:

👀👀

Wow.  Maybe the Bears have finally had it with the Chicago reps trying to stop the package from moving forward.

https://www.cbsnews.com/chicago/news/illinois-hearing-bears-stadium-canceled-hammond-indiana/

This statement from the Bears reads to me like they're close to agreeing to the Hammond site.  IMO, this would be a huge black eye for the City of Chicago and the State of Illinois. 

"The passage of SB 27 would mark the most meaningful step forward in our stadium planning efforts to date. We are committed to finishing the remaining site-specific necessary due diligence to support our vision to build a world-class stadium near the Wolf Lake area in Hammond, Indiana. We appreciate the leadership shown by Governor [Mike] Braun, Speaker [Todd] Huston, Senator [Ryan] Mishler and members of the Indiana General Assembly in establishing this critical framework and path forward to deliver a premier venue for all of Chicagoland and a destination for Bears fans and visitors from across the globe. We value our partnership and look forward to continuing to build our working relationship together."

Edited Thursday at 04:27 PM by 77 Hitmen

[southsider2k5]

11 minutes ago, 77 Hitmen said:

Great explanation, but it doesn't matter because the same poster is going to continue to throw tantrums and stomp his feet over the 78 site just has he has since news broke about a possible stadium there more than 2 years ago.  

It's amazing that he's so angry that the 78 is being discussed on a thread about the 78.   Others have provided valid points against the Sox moving to the 78, but his comments sound unhinged and this thread would be many pages shorter without needing to respond to his nonsensical rants.     

And no amount of sad little laugh reacts to substitute for lack of substance changes that.

There are plenty of pros and cons to be discussed for all projects,  but some of this just wanders in the personal and bizarre. 

[southsider2k5]

4 minutes ago, 77 Hitmen said:

Wow.  Maybe the Bears have finally had it with the Chicago reps trying to stop the package from moving forward.

https://www.cbsnews.com/chicago/news/illinois-hearing-bears-stadium-canceled-hammond-indiana/

This statement from the Bears reads to me like they're close to agreeing to the Hammond site.  

"The passage of SB 27 would mark the most meaningful step forward in our stadium planning efforts to date. We are committed to finishing the remaining site-specific necessary due diligence to support our vision to build a world-class stadium near the Wolf Lake area in Hammond, Indiana. We appreciate the leadership shown by Governor [Mike] Braun, Speaker [Todd] Huston, Senator [Ryan] Mishler and members of the Indiana General Assembly in establishing this critical framework and path forward to deliver a premier venue for all of Chicagoland and a destination for Bears fans and visitors from across the globe. We value our partnership and look forward to continuing to build our working relationship together."

Like I said at the beginning,  Indiana will sacrifice pretty much anything to win this 

[ptatc]

15 minutes ago, 77 Hitmen said:

Wow.  Maybe the Bears have finally had it with the Chicago reps trying to stop the package from moving forward.

https://www.cbsnews.com/chicago/news/illinois-hearing-bears-stadium-canceled-hammond-indiana/

This statement from the Bears reads to me like they're close to agreeing to the Hammond site.  IMO, this would be a huge black eye for the City of Chicago and the State of Illinois. 

"The passage of SB 27 would mark the most meaningful step forward in our stadium planning efforts to date. We are committed to finishing the remaining site-specific necessary due diligence to support our vision to build a world-class stadium near the Wolf Lake area in Hammond, Indiana. We appreciate the leadership shown by Governor [Mike] Braun, Speaker [Todd] Huston, Senator [Ryan] Mishler and members of the Indiana General Assembly in establishing this critical framework and path forward to deliver a premier venue for all of Chicagoland and a destination for Bears fans and visitors from across the globe. We value our partnership and look forward to continuing to build our working relationship together."

Its still about leverage both ways. Until it's done no one really knows.

[tray]

1 hour ago, 77 Hitmen said:

Great explanation, but it doesn't matter because the same poster is going to continue to throw tantrums and stomp his feet over the 78 site just has he has since news broke about a possible stadium there more than 2 years ago.  

It's amazing that he's so angry that the 78 is being discussed on a thread about the 78.   Others have provided valid points against the Sox moving to the 78, but his comments sound unhinged and this thread would be many pages shorter without needing to respond to his nonsensical rants.     

Wait a second. You have driven this topic single-handedly and the amount of your posts dwarf all others.

You have cast your negative opinion about Rate field often, comparing it unfavorably to Wrigley Field, once complaining that fans cannot "make a day of it there"..when the fact is that most Wsox games are night games. WSox fans, like Bear fans, arrive prior to games and enjoy tailgating there . For some, there are bars within walking distance of Rate Field and there is a bar attached to the stadium. Fans who want to continue drinking or eating late night  can get in their cars and go downtown or wherever they want.

It is clear that you don't know much about Rate field and/or dislike it for whatever your reasons. I am among those who actually go to games and enjoy that experience. The 500 level view that you subjected yourself to standing up and leaning over a rail in order to watch a game was unfortunate. That is one of the worst places in the stadium to watch a game. Cheap seats are pretty bad at almost any stadium, including Wrigley. I plan on going to the Opener and have my tickets. I am meeting several friends on the CF outfield concourse which  is accessible to anyone who has a 100 level. One cool thing about Rate is that fans can walk all the way around the park and enjoy meeting fans, eating, drinking and talking baseball there. You cannot do that in Wrigley where you pretty much need to stay in your seat throughout the game. 

As far as the Fire stadium at the 78, I could care less. My prediction about extra costs associated with environmental remediation and special underpinning was right on the money. I I don't know how those costs will be absorbed and whether or not taxpayers will be on the hook for them but whatever, there is going to be a lot of risk to recover those costs. To start with, 30 dump trucks in and out with environmental waste every day for 4-6 weeks and then bringing in stone and solid fill is going to be a large number. And remember the 30 million that contractors lost when UIC pulled out of there for reasons that one can now imagine. 

The main issues with developing the 78 site, especially for a stadium or stadiums is not limited to environmental clean-up, underpinning foundations, and associated costs. Ingress/egress to that site for a large number of vehicles will be a challenge.  I looked at the proposed Fire site plan and wonder how that plan - funneling most vehicles into a large parking garage from a proposed ramp down from Roosevelt) will work. That said, I have the best wishes for Mansueto , the Fire, and Chicago soccer fans. As far as the rest of the site, it will be brownfield forever. Maybe Auchi would consider donating it to the City of Chicago in order to make it into a dedicated green space - a North extension to Ping Tom Park, but on second thought, no way he would. Not that guy. 

 

Edited Thursday at 05:30 PM by tray

[southsider2k5]

50 minutes ago, tray said:

Wait a second. You have driven this topic single-handedly and the amount of your posts dwarf all others.

You have cast your negative opinion about Rate field often, comparing it unfavorably to Wrigley Field, once complaining that fans cannot "make a day of it there"..when the fact is that most Wsox games are night games. WSox fans, like Bear fans, arrive prior to games and enjoy tailgating there . For some, there are bars within walking distance of Rate Field and there is a bar attached to the stadium. Fans who want to continue drinking or eating late night  can get in their cars and go downtown or wherever they want.

It is clear that you don't know much about Rate field and/or dislike it for whatever your reasons. I am among those who actually go to games and enjoy that experience. The 500 level view that you subjected yourself to standing up and leaning over a rail in order to watch a game was unfortunate. That is one of the worst places in the stadium to watch a game. Cheap seats are pretty bad at almost any stadium, including Wrigley. I plan on going to the Opener and have my tickets. I am meeting several friends on the CF outfield concourse which  is accessible to anyone who has a 100 level. One cool thing about Rate is that fans can walk all the way around the park and enjoy meeting fans, eating, drinking and talking baseball there. You cannot do that in Wrigley where you pretty much need to stay in your seat throughout the game. 

As far as the Fire stadium at the 78, I could care less. My prediction about extra costs associated with environmental remediation and special underpinning was right on the money. I I don't know how those costs will be absorbed and whether or not taxpayers will be on the hook for them but whatever, there is going to be a lot of risk to recover those costs. To start with, 30 dump trucks in and out with environmental waste every day for 4-6 weeks and then bringing in stone and solid fill is going to be a large number. And remember the 30 million that contractors lost when UIC pulled out of there for reasons that one can now imagine. 

The main issues with developing the 78 site, especially for a stadium or stadiums is not limited to environmental clean-up, underpinning foundations, and associated costs. Ingress/egress to that site for a large number of vehicles will be a challenge.  I looked at the proposed Fire site plan and wonder how that plan - funneling most vehicles into a large parking garage from a proposed ramp down from Roosevelt) will work. That said, I have the best wishes for Mansueto , the Fire, and Chicago soccer fans. As far as the rest of the site, it will be brownfield forever. Maybe Auchi would consider donating it to the City of Chicago in order to make it into a dedicated green space - a North extension to Ping Tom Park, but on second thought, no way he would. Not that guy. 

 

-The Chicago White Sox game day experience is documented as one of the worst in baseball.  That isn't just one rando's opinion on a message board, but the opinion of pretty much anyone who partakes baseball on a multi-team level, as the Sox routinely rank in the bottom 3 or 4 in MLB in these categories.

-If you have any kind of crowd at Sox Park, they do restrict access to the lower level, so no, you can't just "walk around" the whole park unless the circumstances are right, or you pay for a more expensive ticket.  Also I yearn for the day when the Sox game is important enough to stay in your seat for, versus paying that kind of money to wander around the ballpark.  

-The whole line about "fans who want to continue drinking... can just get in their car" is a wild statement in a day and age of OWI laws.  The whole idea is to NOT have to drive drunk.

-We have been over the remediation stuff a million times, so I am not sure why it keeps coming up, but all of this stuff has been known, literally since this site shutdown.  I have no idea why you treat it like some kind of earth shattering occurrence, but within a city like Chicago,  there are so many Superfund and Brownfield sites, it would make your head spin.  Remediation of these sites isn't an abnormal thing, and environmentally it is a really good thing that it is happening, as it keeps that crap from leaching into the water table, Chicago River, and everything else around the site.  Everyone knew it would be expensive and extensive, and STILL people have made plans to build there, so it obviously isn't a deal breaker to everyone.

-Its the same thing with traffic patterns.  We keep getting told how horrible it will be, but again, they know what they are up against on this site.  Plus there are more things that can be done with public transit to access the site, as many major transportation hubs are much closer to here than 35th and Shields.   There is no reason that public transit can take on the lions share of what is basically a local fan base.  They do this at Wrigley Field with zero parking literally 81 times a year.  The New York teams handle this as well.  Ever notice there isn't a single parking garage around Madison Square Garden?  There will be WAY more parking here than any NYC based stadium.  This has all been factored in.

 

[77 Hitmen]

1 hour ago, ptatc said:

Its still about leverage both ways. Until it's done no one really knows.

It looks to me that the time for playing the leverage game is coming to an end.  I agree that, until a deal is done, it could go either way, but I think the Bears are done making concessions and playing games with state reps.  If IL is going to continue to stall legislative action, the Bears will very soon agree to a deal with Indiana and that'll be the end of it.

My guess is that state reps from Chicago will be happy to sink any Bears deal to keep them in IL because they're leaving the city limits.  Sure, it'll give them great satisfaction to tell their constituents that they told the Bears to go to hell, but it's no way to attract and keep businesses who want to make a $2B investment in IL and Cook County and it'll be a PR embarrassment for the state.

My questions for IL officials:  Let's say the Bears do jump ship to Indiana.  Will that make the Soldier Field debt go away?  Also, how much property tax revenue will be generated from the Arlington Park property if the stadium deal collapses?

[Harry Chappas]

If we are looking at areas that need revenue generating activity in NE Illinois, the SE side of Chicago and SE suburbs could use an influx of development.

If I am only looking at Chicago proper, Hammond makes much better sense to me than AH.  Events in AH can be centered around AH, while events in Hammond can be driven through Chicago, if Chicago figured out how to properly work and improve the offerings.

Why the original McCormick place is still in existence is mind boggling until you realize it is Chicago.  Millennium and Grant Park  are wasted opportunities as well as the loop circles the drain.

[southsider2k5]

17 minutes ago, 77 Hitmen said:

It looks to me that the time for playing the leverage game is coming to an end.  I agree that, until a deal is done, it could go either way, but I think the Bears are done making concessions and playing games with state reps.  If IL is going to continue to stall legislative action, the Bears will very soon agree to a deal with Indiana and that'll be the end of it.

My guess is that state reps from Chicago will be happy to sink any Bears deal to keep them in IL because they're leaving the city limits.  Sure, it'll give them great satisfaction to tell their constituents that they told the Bears to go to hell, but it's no way to attract and keep businesses who want to make a $2B investment in IL and Cook County and it'll be a PR embarrassment for the state.

My questions for IL officials:  Let's say the Bears do jump ship to Indiana.  Will that make the Soldier Field debt go away?  Also, how much property tax revenue will be generated from the Arlington Park property if the stadium deal collapses?

The tax dollars being applied to debt payments are a tax on ticket and hotel sales right now.  No idea what happens if the team leaves.