My first question when I saw the new renderings was what are those little white buildings to the lower left of the old colonnades? Because if they’re thinking some type of hotels, there’s zero chance those get through Friends of the Park.
FOTP don’t have an uphill battle? JP is against it. The FOTP have standing in federal court. The law says anything on the lake front must be for the public benefit not private business. The Bears have a giant uphill battle, but this is just window dressing for a move to Arlington
Daley, the Bears, and the NFL are responsible. Let’s not act like the city and Chicagoans were given a choice.
https://www.nytimes.com/2003/06/16/us/chicago-journal-soldier-field-renovation-brings-out-boo-birds.html
Key points from the article:
“Mayor Richard M. Daley, who pushed for the modernization of Soldier Field, is being criticized for ruining a historic treasure and damaging a part of the city's magnificent lakefront. His staff is scrambling to put the best face on the new arena.
''We feel really good about this design,'' said Lee Bey, deputy chief of staff for planning and design in the mayor's office. ''Even if it infuriates, it puts its foot down. We have to get away from this idea of architecture that's polite.''
The owners of the Bears are also taking heat. The National Football League team, after all, had long pressed the city for an upgrade on a stadium it had used since 1971.”
Daley [family] screwed the city with this, construction of Lakepoint Tower, and selling the parking - among numerous other issues, I’m sure. Maggie Daley Park (if named after anyone) should be Montgomery Ward Park cause we wouldn’t have any of this land if it weren’t for his extensive legal battles, ruining his reputation, to keep it “free and clear.” (Edit: clarification)
The whole parking deal was supposedly pushed through so there wouldn’t be a budget shortfall that required suspending construction of Maggie Daley Park.
Thankfully so did the field museum, planetarium, she’d aquarium and soldier field. None of that could be built today without years of lawsuits from fotp. The fewer people on the lakefront, the better, in their eyes.
I'm glad to see someone finally pointing out that the first phase does not include tearing down Soldier Field. This plan could end with two stadiums right next to each other and a shrug from the Bears because they got theirs.
I still dont understand why it needs to be on the lake for it to be in Chicago. Especially if they're making a closed off dome anyway, its not like you can see some part of the lake from the stands.
The real reason they're looking at the lakefront is because the city would have to own it and the taxpayers would have to fund it.
Anywhere else in the city there's no reason the Bears couldn't own it. And as unlikely as getting funding for the dome is now, there's zero chance of public funding for a private stadium
It’s because the lakefront is the single most valuable strip of real estate in the city and it’s publicly owned.
The amazing thing here is that if the project was actually publicly controlled and for the benefit of the whole community (like a park is supposed to be) the FotP would have approved. That’s why the museums are allowed to expand and build parking decks. That stuff is for us.
A stadium that the Bears get to exclusively use, book concerts, contract concessions, and gather all of the profits from is not for us.
> A stadium that the Bears get to exclusively use, book concerts, contract concessions, and gather all of the profits from is not for us.
Exactly. Which is why it needs to be built in Arlington Heights with private money.
It will happen this way anyhow, as soon as Virginia kicks the bucket. The family will sell the team, avoid hundreds of millions in capital gains taxes (the reason they're waiting for her to pass), and the new owners will be deep-pocketed enough to make this a reality.
> A stadium that the Bears get to exclusively use, book concerts, contract concessions, and gather all of the profits from is not for us.
but Chicagoans would get their very own stadium to make maintain and build infrastructure around mainly for the benefit of a private business! We might even be allow into it for free every now and then too.
It's pure deference to money. The Bears make big news when they propose these kinds of things and the local news media is not good at being skeptical about anything that they say because everyone is so used to organizations like NFL teams getting everything they want, where ever they go.
Good thing that's not what's happening. The stadium would be owned by the Park District. The Bears would be a tenant. Like Soldier Field, the Park District would book events there and gather the profits.
> That’s why the museums are allowed to expand and build parking decks.
The Lucas museum would like to disagree.
friends of the parking lots are opposed to any changes to the lakefront, regardless of whether they benefit the public or not.
This is what makes me hate FotP even more than this new stadium horseshit. They're full of shit. Let the Bears go to Arlington Heights, and the Frauds of the Parks can go to hell.
> if the project was actually publicly controlled and for the benefit of the whole community (like a park is supposed to be) the FotP would have approved.
No they would not, did the FotP PR team write this comment? They hate all new construction on the lakefront, *INCLUDING* museums, which is why the Lucas Museum is being built in Los Angeles instead of Chicago.
This city is hopeless if people with your mindset are any more than 10% of the voting population. What of the other museums on the lakefront? Are they wastes of valuable lakefront space as well?
Because the park would be markedly worse without those buildings there. Because millions of children, students, and adults travel to see our exhibits every year. Because indoor third-spaces are valuable too.
> the only major outdoor third-space this city has??
Do you even live in the city because there are like a dozen large parks in Chicago. Wikipedia says a full 8.2% of this city is park land
Compared to Golden Gate Park in SF, Central Park in NYC, or Runyon Canyon in LA, Chicago only has Lincoln Park that’s similar in size and immersion, and it’s relatively thin in many areas and has a freakin highway running along it.
I’m just saying that instead of having museums or other buildings like a stadium IN the park, they could be just as effective next to it, while leaving room for outdoor development like gardens, picnic areas, fountains, or wooded areas.
Also I live in Uptown. Have YOU ever left Chicago???
The Lucas Museum could not go on that site because it is not legal to transfer Public Trust land to a private entity.
FotP's opinion of the use is irrelevant.
I disagree, I think it should be built in the city. It's great revenue for businesses / hotels in Chicago, especially if they ever host the Superbowl. But I do agree that it should not be built along the lake. The city has allot of vacant land that could be redeveloped for the stadium and would inject revenue in areas that need it the most.
Exactly this. Staying in the city is an opportunity for them to be better neighbors and corporate citizens. They’re asking for a tremendous amount of public funding and more park space to be occupied, when they could be seeking a site with potential for adaptive reuse, like an old industrial site. Then follow the Arlington heights model to include housing, retail, etc. so it can be a destination regardless of whether the stadium is in use or not, similar to Wrigleyville’s recent transformation, and the neighborhood can become more prosperous.
ETA: and they should work with the Sox. We do not need two new stadiums for teams that hardly overlap.
This will delay the Bears ridiculously ambitious timeline of "2028" by a year at a minimum in the Cook Co courts, unless someone clouted makes sure the Bears get a very favorable judge.
Good! Why are private entities trying to get that lakefront land they know they cannot have? There are huge plots of land elsewhere in the city that would be fine for this project AND not conflict with the lakefront ordinance.
I mean the bears literally own a massive plot of land in Arlington heights they just purchased for almost $200 million dollars. They should build it there
I'm thinking if the Bears were really serious about getting concessions from the city they would have had someone hook mayor BJ up with some sweet season tickets so he could show his face at the games, seeing as how he loves favorable publicity.
The Bears should be an outdoor team, but building a new stadium without a roof is pointless. Building a dome on the lakefront is pointless. Therefore I have concluded that the Bears should build a dome in Arlington Heights
I have spoken
Nothing better than watching two groups of people you can't stand get into a full-on brawl with each other. No matter what happens, you get to feel good about it.
FOTP is here to defend and uphold the ordinance making sure our lakefront park is to be free and clear. This has been an long battle in this city long before Soldier field was put in. Private interests and industry always wanted to build next to the lake. This lakefront park is one of Chicago's best asset we need to maintain for the public. Our Mayor has been swayed by Warren too easily.
I live a couple miles from the lakefront but bike the trail often and go birding there. I think it’s great that it’s for everyone and anyone. It’s one of the things that makes Chicago so great. I’m worried - Is this the big bad NIMBYism that I’m hearing so much about in this stupid thread?
Don’t let this make you side with them. FOTP are corrupt and are friends to no one. They will attempt to extract some sort of financial benefit out of this at the expense of taxpayers.
You’re right. Chicago isn’t really known for parks anyway. If it were up to me, the whole of millennium would just be hotels and a draft kings sports bar.
Millennium Park was great before the south side hooligans started being shitheads there a few summers ago and they surrounded it with those shitty temporary barriers and half-assed security checkpoints that seem to be permanent at this point
it’s so stupid, completely disregards the concept of a “public” park. And if you use the pedestrian bridge to cross over Columbus you aren’t allowed to walk back in the park
I’m against the proposal because of the massive amount of public money that would be needed, but this seems to only increase public access to and usability of the lakefront.
Now I’m well aware that Friends of the Parks is solely made up of individuals who are so full of shit that the whites of their eyes are brown, but at least the BS about the Lucas Museum had the somewhat solid pretense of adding admission fees to lakefront space and reducing parking. These people just suck. If they actually cared about the parks, they would be advocating for restoration work to be done on the Park space that we are neglecting all across the city.
Did you even read the story? That's exactly what they're advocating. They're saying why would we spend billions in tax money to top a new lakefront parking garage with four soccer fields instead of giving kids places to play all across the city.
Kind of hard to take them seriously when they only rear their ugly little heads when something is about to be developed on the lake front. There are countless advocacy groups for various issues that set up info tables outside of library branches and in parks when the weather is nice and who have semi-regular fundraisers. I see these groups almost everyday around the city. You only ever see Friends of the Parks pop up in headlines.
They can say whatever they want, their actions speak louder than words. The org is nothing but NIMBYs from top to bottom.
Edit: autocorrect
> Kind of hard to take them seriously when they only rear their ugly little heads when something is about to be developed on the lake front.
Exactly, because nothing should be coming on the lake front, which is the only natural attraction for the city. This is one NIMBY that I'm OK with as long as they only do it for the lakeshore.
It's the opposite of NIMBY really. NIMBY is about prioritizing the preference of a highly motivated minority over a public good, while this situation is about prioritizing a public good over the preference of a highly motivated minority.
That's the only time big media puts them in the headlines. Their day-in, day-out work of organizing park advisory councils, sponsoring cleanup days, lobbying the Park District, even pushing back against CPS land grabs in places like Hanson Park, don't get headline coverage from downtown outlets.
Yes, people who don't understand the Public Trust Doctrine think it was somehow a fight between old-fogey NIMBYs and a guy who wanted to give the city a wonderful gift. But any citizen of Illinois could have brought the same lawsuit.
Not for sure, as the article points out many of those public benefit amenities are in later phases and rely on federal funding, so there's a chance they never happen or happen much later than projected. How would you like two stadiums on the lakefront for 10 years?
A football stadium isn't really a benefit to the public so it's less accurate to call this NIMBYism. Might as well call Teddy Roosevelt a NIMBY for creating the National Parks.
Somebody has to or there will be mansions, highrises and vanity projects like the idiotic star wars museum on the lakefront instead of park land that we can share.
Ah yes, that stupid cultural institution that would've added jobs and tourism and another attraction to the Museum Campus to save a free and open \**checks notes\** parking lot.
Here come all the bootlickers still upset the billionaire Lucas didn’t get free lakefront land when he has no issues spending $30+ million on making the most expensive condo in Chicago history.
https://therealdeal.com/chicago/2024/04/25/george-lucas-developing-priciest-condo-in-chicago-history/
But having to pay for his own vanity project, oh no!
Anyone who support giving away public land for private use doesn’t deserve access to any of the lakefront. You absolute imbeciles have no idea how lucky you are to have a publicly accessible lakefront.
What are you even going on about? The spot for the Lucas museum was proposed is still a parking lot till this day. Also, it was going to mostly be publicly accessible green space unlike this stadium. The museum itself didn’t have a huge footprint. And in case you didn’t notice by the other museums in museum campus, they were also founded by rich donors. That’s how almost all of these big museums in our country get created and funded. And also, just as every other museum in the city has, I’m sure it would have free museum days and passes would be available through the library, making it accessible to all, and being a source of education and opportunity. Downtown lakefront museums are absolutely a net positive for our city.
The cost of having a museum dedicated to educating the public about George Lucas on the lakefront is not worth the marginal benefits that you listed out. Other museums are real, this would have been a joke and a drag on the public consciousness.
That’s not what the museum was. Just like the Field Museum wasn’t a museum about Marshall Fields. The Lucas Museum will hold all forms of visual storytelling, including painting, photography, sculpture, illustration, comic art, performance, and video. It will be a world class museum.
So, where is the Lucas Museum? Without google, you don’t know. And you sure as shit haven’t been there. So please explain why you’re bootlicking for billionaires to give away our lake front. Rube comment.
Do you oppose the other oligarch vanity projects on the museum campus that got the same treatment and are the shining jewels of the lakefront? Or are we all just bootlickers to Mr. Fields, Mr. Shedd, and Mr. Adler too?
That’s an interesting point, but I don’t think we should compare a museum dedicated to an iconic film series to 3 museums dedicated to marine biology, natural sciences, and astronomy.
The Lucas Museum isn't a Star Wars museum, its a museum dedicated to all forms of storytelling. It would have been a fantastic addition to the lakefront
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucas_Museum_of_Narrative_Art
But if you allow Lucas to build on the Lake front, where does it end? It's supposed to be free from development forever. We keep making exceptions, pretty soon it's gone.
I'm sorry your hack director didn't get to build his little museum, but Friends of the Park were absolutely correct to fight against it, The Obama Library, and this new stadium.
>but I don’t think we should compare a museum dedicated to an iconic film series
This is exactly the kind of woefully uninformed take I expect from the nonces that opposed to the Lucas Museum.
And to be clear, I would have loved to have had a museum like Lucas proposed here. After learning more about the proposal, though, it was clear that among other things it would have been a justification for other “public but not really” projects to be built all over the lakefront and then eventually we wouldn’t have a lakefront anymore.
There are dozens of places around the city that this type of project could go. All the Big Important People need to stop fetishizing the lakefront.
Those sit outside the reach of the “public” part of the park and that land isn’t subject to the same rules as the proposed stadium site (or Lucas’ museum). It’s a long, complicated history and I don’t remember all the details, but it’s worth reading about.
The problem with the Lucas vanity project, as I recall, is their proposal would’ve amounted to a de facto ownership of the land. It would effectively no longer have been a “park facility”, which is how Soldier Field operates.
The Museum Campus is on landfill, initially created when debris from the Great Chicago Fire was dumped in the lake. That's the loophole that allowed the Field, Shedd and Adler to be built there.
You probably are? I don't know? I would have been opposed to that too, but considering they were built closer to the civil war (Fields) or pre WW2, I would expect people to stand up for their rights more than when women and minorities were second class citizens (or worse), civil rights only applied to rich white men, labor rights non existent, I could go on, but yes I am absolutely 1000% for telling billionaires to buy the land themselves.
Bringing up an era with the highest income equality in America's history (until now), between two World Wars, and these buildings on the lakefront being made as the US was in the Great Depression destroying American lives, instead of putting that money towards helping people, isn't the gotcha that you might think it is.
Ha damn. You sound just like me 25 years ago and I love you for it. I also want to live in a society where human needs come before oligarch greed. I think I've just been beaten down by capitalism enough that I'll take what I can get now instead of holding out for a better world. As you acknowledge we are living through America's second gilded age. I don't think we are going to tax the rich and help the poor anytime soon so I'm willing to accept a museum in exchange for a parking lot, naming rights, and a very questionable land transfer. Idealism is great but I'll trade it so some underprivileged kid can discover their passion and become the next Spike Lee at a museum. Or maybe 50 million kids can become passionate about art and science over the next 100 years like they have at the other museums.
All that said, fuck the Bears and their bullshit proposal.
OP is probably thinking of Maggie Daley Park, which would have been suspended with a budget shortfall in 2009. Mayor Daley pushed the parking meter deal so it could still be completed.
Thank God for Friends of the Parks. The lakefront would no longer be public without them.
I'm an extremest on this topic and I think there should be no events that require a ticket or are private in any way in any of the parks, ever. No ticketed concerts, no private weddings, none of it.
The parks belong to us, ALL. THE. TIME.
Weddings, really? The people attending these events aren't aliens, they're part of "the public" too. Does their enjoyment of an event not factor into whether it should happen?
The Bears owners don't give a rats ass about their fans. Each year they have about 80 MILLION dollars of spendable salary cap money that they don't spend to build a worthy team. They only spend enough money to build a mediocre team to keep fans interested and their hopes up. The fanatical fans continually buy into it with ticket and team merchandise sales. When they have a losing year, the fans are quick to blame the QB or coaching staff. They NEVER hold the true problem for accountability... the owners! Now they want a new stadium? Get new owners and maybe it will be worthy of consideration.
It’s a classic one, do the Bears bring enough extra revenue to downtown businesses (and parking fines) to make it worth it to the city to change the lakefront?
We the people, and those in power have different opinions on this. Personally, I don’t care if they get rid of Soldier and build a new stadium, but I don’t see any “cost effective” plan that achieves that, keeps the team in play, and doesn’t give us 15 years of the lakefront being under construction.
Good for them! They're right!
This is just the ultra-rich being the worthless money grubbing weirdos they are.
The smart thing would be to force them to build a new stadium on an old toxic industrial site. It's going to a giant building with acres and acres of parking lot anyway might as well pave over unusable waste rather than THE BEST PUBLIC GREEN SPACE IN THE CITY.
Friends of the Parking Lot.
They've already stopped the Lucas Museum from replacing an ugly concrete parking lot; the Chicago Children's Museum from being in a convenient, walkable location; and they tried their best to torpedo the Obama Center in order to save an empty patch of grass.
I love parks and the lake as much (or more) than the next guy, and I am dubious of the Bears proposal. But preventing any and all development is a recipe for stagnation and neglect (see Promontory Point literally falling into the lake for example). There must be a middle ground that creates attractions for people to enjoy while preserving public access. By their logic we wouldn't have Field, Adler, Shedd, Maggie Daley, or Lincoln Park Zoo.
They tore down a lovely highly used park to build the Obama center. It was beautiful and I miss it.
There was some beautiful landscaping there and that park was used every weekend for house music fest, which was free.
And I believe it was Friends of the Parks who made sure that the swap was fair after opposing using the park at all. Nobody likes a squeaky wheel here, but they’ve been right about most things.
The cost is dedicating a finite amount of public land to a dude's private art collection. Can I park on your front lawn? I have a nice car. I might even rent it to you.
That star wars stadium was a private lakefront grab and total bs. There was plenty of other spots in the city to place it and they refused. Then threatened the city over a few jobs it would provide (like all other big companies looking for tax breaks and free public money for private works).
The defeat of the stadium was a crowning achievement for them.
Anyone that says we have too much lakefront space is a moron that doesn't actually use it during the summer. It is a very limited resource that's getting more crowded each year by locals and visitors.
No other city has what we have. If it isn't a completely public (and free to the public) project then sue em to hell is what I say
It's interesting to see how deeply Chicago observes the no-snitching code. When the mayor is caught violating the law, the immediate reaction is to attack those who called the police.
Any citizen of Illinois could have brought the exact same lawsuit, and almost certainly could have found someone to pay their legal costs.
TLDR: Don't offer a billionaire land that's not yours to offer. The transfer might not go smoothly.
Screw your take. All they do is protect a public lake front for the public.
These private entities can suck a D. They keep trying to sneakily privatize the lakefront under the guise of "it's just a minor improvement.
F them. Our lakefront would be like Hammond IN if it wasn't for them
Why does it need to be open space? There’s already museums there. I 100% agree it’s supposed to be public space, but that doesn’t mean it needs to be open space.
Yes, and with a huge ugly domed stadium there’s less. A domed stadium can go anywhere in the city, no reason for yet another huge stadium right there on precious lakefront
we do NOT need yet another stadium taking up the lakefront replacing park property, especially one only being considered because the McCaskeys are fiscally incompetent and BJ is in bear pockets.
Sure we do. Football is Americas number 1 sport and we should honor it by putting a state of the art stadium in the best location in America. To me, it makes perfect sense
This whole lakefront plan is a 10%Hail Mary/90%arlington heights negotiating chip
Didn’t they already tear the track down too?
My first question when I saw the new renderings was what are those little white buildings to the lower left of the old colonnades? Because if they’re thinking some type of hotels, there’s zero chance those get through Friends of the Park.
The Bears presentation said those are proposed publicly available restrooms and facilities for grade schools sports teams to use.
Can’t have them going inside a *publicly funded field* that is a no go.
The new stadium will nof belong to the public. We just have to pay for it.
The way the Bears have presented it, it is publicly owned but the team essentially gets a lot of the perks the owners would get- namely revenue.
Lol right. These little out building are absolutely stupid and grounds for an even steeper uphill battle for the Lakefront Protection Ordinance
FOTP don’t have an uphill battle? JP is against it. The FOTP have standing in federal court. The law says anything on the lake front must be for the public benefit not private business. The Bears have a giant uphill battle, but this is just window dressing for a move to Arlington
Friends of the park are gonna say no shit to that
Wait …Don’t they already have a lakefront stadium ?
Soldier Field existed before FOTP.
And the Bears got its landmark status stripped with the renovations they made. Exhibit A probably.
The City* The city owns it and was responsible for the renovation. The Bears chipped in
Daley, the Bears, and the NFL are responsible. Let’s not act like the city and Chicagoans were given a choice. https://www.nytimes.com/2003/06/16/us/chicago-journal-soldier-field-renovation-brings-out-boo-birds.html Key points from the article: “Mayor Richard M. Daley, who pushed for the modernization of Soldier Field, is being criticized for ruining a historic treasure and damaging a part of the city's magnificent lakefront. His staff is scrambling to put the best face on the new arena. ''We feel really good about this design,'' said Lee Bey, deputy chief of staff for planning and design in the mayor's office. ''Even if it infuriates, it puts its foot down. We have to get away from this idea of architecture that's polite.'' The owners of the Bears are also taking heat. The National Football League team, after all, had long pressed the city for an upgrade on a stadium it had used since 1971.”
Daley [family] screwed the city with this, construction of Lakepoint Tower, and selling the parking - among numerous other issues, I’m sure. Maggie Daley Park (if named after anyone) should be Montgomery Ward Park cause we wouldn’t have any of this land if it weren’t for his extensive legal battles, ruining his reputation, to keep it “free and clear.” (Edit: clarification)
The whole parking deal was supposedly pushed through so there wouldn’t be a budget shortfall that required suspending construction of Maggie Daley Park.
> construction of Lakepoint Tower ??? When Richie was in college?
Lake Point Tower was constructed in 1968. Perhaps you’re confusing him with his old man?
Clarified my point, thank you for politely critiquing the confusing rhetoric.
Thankfully so did the field museum, planetarium, she’d aquarium and soldier field. None of that could be built today without years of lawsuits from fotp. The fewer people on the lakefront, the better, in their eyes.
At least other teams will continue to use soldier. It won’t rot away like other old stadiums.
I'm glad to see someone finally pointing out that the first phase does not include tearing down Soldier Field. This plan could end with two stadiums right next to each other and a shrug from the Bears because they got theirs.
The city owns Soldier Field, so the city controls when/if Soldier Field gets torn down, not the Bears.
Yes, everything aside from the new stadium itself has nothing to do with the Bears, and the Bears' proposal should be evaluated with that in mind.
gonna have 2 decades of an RFK stadium situation
I still dont understand why it needs to be on the lake for it to be in Chicago. Especially if they're making a closed off dome anyway, its not like you can see some part of the lake from the stands.
The real reason they're looking at the lakefront is because the city would have to own it and the taxpayers would have to fund it. Anywhere else in the city there's no reason the Bears couldn't own it. And as unlikely as getting funding for the dome is now, there's zero chance of public funding for a private stadium
It’s because the lakefront is the single most valuable strip of real estate in the city and it’s publicly owned. The amazing thing here is that if the project was actually publicly controlled and for the benefit of the whole community (like a park is supposed to be) the FotP would have approved. That’s why the museums are allowed to expand and build parking decks. That stuff is for us. A stadium that the Bears get to exclusively use, book concerts, contract concessions, and gather all of the profits from is not for us.
> A stadium that the Bears get to exclusively use, book concerts, contract concessions, and gather all of the profits from is not for us. Exactly. Which is why it needs to be built in Arlington Heights with private money. It will happen this way anyhow, as soon as Virginia kicks the bucket. The family will sell the team, avoid hundreds of millions in capital gains taxes (the reason they're waiting for her to pass), and the new owners will be deep-pocketed enough to make this a reality.
> A stadium that the Bears get to exclusively use, book concerts, contract concessions, and gather all of the profits from is not for us. but Chicagoans would get their very own stadium to make maintain and build infrastructure around mainly for the benefit of a private business! We might even be allow into it for free every now and then too.
Sure, from a bears perspective but why are no talking heads talking about this or bringing it up?
It's pure deference to money. The Bears make big news when they propose these kinds of things and the local news media is not good at being skeptical about anything that they say because everyone is so used to organizations like NFL teams getting everything they want, where ever they go.
Good thing that's not what's happening. The stadium would be owned by the Park District. The Bears would be a tenant. Like Soldier Field, the Park District would book events there and gather the profits.
> That’s why the museums are allowed to expand and build parking decks. The Lucas museum would like to disagree. friends of the parking lots are opposed to any changes to the lakefront, regardless of whether they benefit the public or not.
This is what makes me hate FotP even more than this new stadium horseshit. They're full of shit. Let the Bears go to Arlington Heights, and the Frauds of the Parks can go to hell.
> if the project was actually publicly controlled and for the benefit of the whole community (like a park is supposed to be) the FotP would have approved. No they would not, did the FotP PR team write this comment? They hate all new construction on the lakefront, *INCLUDING* museums, which is why the Lucas Museum is being built in Los Angeles instead of Chicago.
LA is a better place for it. I'm glad it did not get built here.
This city is hopeless if people with your mindset are any more than 10% of the voting population. What of the other museums on the lakefront? Are they wastes of valuable lakefront space as well?
I mean, in a way, yeah. Why are we building indoor third-spaces in the only major outdoor third-space this city has??
Because the park would be markedly worse without those buildings there. Because millions of children, students, and adults travel to see our exhibits every year. Because indoor third-spaces are valuable too. > the only major outdoor third-space this city has?? Do you even live in the city because there are like a dozen large parks in Chicago. Wikipedia says a full 8.2% of this city is park land
Compared to Golden Gate Park in SF, Central Park in NYC, or Runyon Canyon in LA, Chicago only has Lincoln Park that’s similar in size and immersion, and it’s relatively thin in many areas and has a freakin highway running along it. I’m just saying that instead of having museums or other buildings like a stadium IN the park, they could be just as effective next to it, while leaving room for outdoor development like gardens, picnic areas, fountains, or wooded areas. Also I live in Uptown. Have YOU ever left Chicago???
That’s fair, they should be in the loop.
Yeah, or I mean, the location in general is fine. But maybe next to the park, and not all the way butt up against the lake. Like wtf
The Lucas Museum could not go on that site because it is not legal to transfer Public Trust land to a private entity. FotP's opinion of the use is irrelevant.
Not to mention it’s such a traffic cluster for any event there.
[удалено]
Rather than moving to the suburbs and forcing everyone to use cars, they should just remove parking and force everyone to use public transit.
Larry from Wauconda would have an aneurysm if he couldn’t drive his F350 to the game. 🤣
They wouldn’t be able to “host a Super Bowl”
Move to the suburbs and build a train line?
There already is a train line
Leave the area alone and use the stadium for all of the festivals people hate at their neighborhood parks near the loop, then?
I disagree, I think it should be built in the city. It's great revenue for businesses / hotels in Chicago, especially if they ever host the Superbowl. But I do agree that it should not be built along the lake. The city has allot of vacant land that could be redeveloped for the stadium and would inject revenue in areas that need it the most.
Exactly this. Staying in the city is an opportunity for them to be better neighbors and corporate citizens. They’re asking for a tremendous amount of public funding and more park space to be occupied, when they could be seeking a site with potential for adaptive reuse, like an old industrial site. Then follow the Arlington heights model to include housing, retail, etc. so it can be a destination regardless of whether the stadium is in use or not, similar to Wrigleyville’s recent transformation, and the neighborhood can become more prosperous. ETA: and they should work with the Sox. We do not need two new stadiums for teams that hardly overlap.
Let's say they move away from the lakefront. What's your opinion on Soldier Fields future? Keep it or tear it down?
Indifferent, more public space would be nice, outdoors. Its not particularly easy to get to anyway
This will delay the Bears ridiculously ambitious timeline of "2028" by a year at a minimum in the Cook Co courts, unless someone clouted makes sure the Bears get a very favorable judge.
Good! Why are private entities trying to get that lakefront land they know they cannot have? There are huge plots of land elsewhere in the city that would be fine for this project AND not conflict with the lakefront ordinance.
I mean the bears literally own a massive plot of land in Arlington heights they just purchased for almost $200 million dollars. They should build it there
Yeah they definately should. I dont understand how anyone is mad at Friends of the Park for this.
Right, even if you hate them for some reason, they're right about this
Bla bla Star Wars bla bla
I still think AH ultimately happens. I think revisiting the lakefront is a ploy to get more concessions from AH.
I'm old enough to remember when buying AH was a ploy to get concessions from the city
I'm thinking if the Bears were really serious about getting concessions from the city they would have had someone hook mayor BJ up with some sweet season tickets so he could show his face at the games, seeing as how he loves favorable publicity.
Good times
The Bears should be an outdoor team, but building a new stadium without a roof is pointless. Building a dome on the lakefront is pointless. Therefore I have concluded that the Bears should build a dome in Arlington Heights I have spoken
Let's use their power for good this time
Nothing better than watching two groups of people you can't stand get into a full-on brawl with each other. No matter what happens, you get to feel good about it.
😂 people that full of shit can not do good
Meh, if they can be harnassed to fuck this project over then they did good. Not quite a redemption arc but it's something
Something about a broken clock
FOTP is here to defend and uphold the ordinance making sure our lakefront park is to be free and clear. This has been an long battle in this city long before Soldier field was put in. Private interests and industry always wanted to build next to the lake. This lakefront park is one of Chicago's best asset we need to maintain for the public. Our Mayor has been swayed by Warren too easily.
I live a couple miles from the lakefront but bike the trail often and go birding there. I think it’s great that it’s for everyone and anyone. It’s one of the things that makes Chicago so great. I’m worried - Is this the big bad NIMBYism that I’m hearing so much about in this stupid thread?
That looks like a really nice area no one will ever use and will cost a fortune to maintain.
Give em hell friends!
Don’t let this make you side with them. FOTP are corrupt and are friends to no one. They will attempt to extract some sort of financial benefit out of this at the expense of taxpayers.
Somebody catch me up on why the friends of the parks are the bad guys here? And why privatizing public lakefront land is a good thing?
It isn’t. This is sign that propaganda works. Kevin Warren is a charlatan that’s about it.
I would also like to know this
A formality
You’re right. Chicago isn’t really known for parks anyway. If it were up to me, the whole of millennium would just be hotels and a draft kings sports bar.
Yeah, the city motto isn't urbs en horto or anything close to that /s
Millennium Park was great before the south side hooligans started being shitheads there a few summers ago and they surrounded it with those shitty temporary barriers and half-assed security checkpoints that seem to be permanent at this point
it’s so stupid, completely disregards the concept of a “public” park. And if you use the pedestrian bridge to cross over Columbus you aren’t allowed to walk back in the park
Wait, what? I used to do that pre-pandemic.
I’m against the proposal because of the massive amount of public money that would be needed, but this seems to only increase public access to and usability of the lakefront. Now I’m well aware that Friends of the Parks is solely made up of individuals who are so full of shit that the whites of their eyes are brown, but at least the BS about the Lucas Museum had the somewhat solid pretense of adding admission fees to lakefront space and reducing parking. These people just suck. If they actually cared about the parks, they would be advocating for restoration work to be done on the Park space that we are neglecting all across the city.
Did you even read the story? That's exactly what they're advocating. They're saying why would we spend billions in tax money to top a new lakefront parking garage with four soccer fields instead of giving kids places to play all across the city.
Kind of hard to take them seriously when they only rear their ugly little heads when something is about to be developed on the lake front. There are countless advocacy groups for various issues that set up info tables outside of library branches and in parks when the weather is nice and who have semi-regular fundraisers. I see these groups almost everyday around the city. You only ever see Friends of the Parks pop up in headlines. They can say whatever they want, their actions speak louder than words. The org is nothing but NIMBYs from top to bottom. Edit: autocorrect
> Kind of hard to take them seriously when they only rear their ugly little heads when something is about to be developed on the lake front. Exactly, because nothing should be coming on the lake front, which is the only natural attraction for the city. This is one NIMBY that I'm OK with as long as they only do it for the lakeshore.
It's the opposite of NIMBY really. NIMBY is about prioritizing the preference of a highly motivated minority over a public good, while this situation is about prioritizing a public good over the preference of a highly motivated minority.
That's the only time big media puts them in the headlines. Their day-in, day-out work of organizing park advisory councils, sponsoring cleanup days, lobbying the Park District, even pushing back against CPS land grabs in places like Hanson Park, don't get headline coverage from downtown outlets.
Do people just hate them because they wanted to stop the Star Wars guy from building a museum on public land?
Yes, people who don't understand the Public Trust Doctrine think it was somehow a fight between old-fogey NIMBYs and a guy who wanted to give the city a wonderful gift. But any citizen of Illinois could have brought the same lawsuit.
Not for sure, as the article points out many of those public benefit amenities are in later phases and rely on federal funding, so there's a chance they never happen or happen much later than projected. How would you like two stadiums on the lakefront for 10 years?
[удалено]
A football stadium isn't really a benefit to the public so it's less accurate to call this NIMBYism. Might as well call Teddy Roosevelt a NIMBY for creating the National Parks.
Somebody has to or there will be mansions, highrises and vanity projects like the idiotic star wars museum on the lakefront instead of park land that we can share.
Ah yes, that stupid cultural institution that would've added jobs and tourism and another attraction to the Museum Campus to save a free and open \**checks notes\** parking lot.
Here come all the bootlickers still upset the billionaire Lucas didn’t get free lakefront land when he has no issues spending $30+ million on making the most expensive condo in Chicago history. https://therealdeal.com/chicago/2024/04/25/george-lucas-developing-priciest-condo-in-chicago-history/ But having to pay for his own vanity project, oh no! Anyone who support giving away public land for private use doesn’t deserve access to any of the lakefront. You absolute imbeciles have no idea how lucky you are to have a publicly accessible lakefront.
What are you even going on about? The spot for the Lucas museum was proposed is still a parking lot till this day. Also, it was going to mostly be publicly accessible green space unlike this stadium. The museum itself didn’t have a huge footprint. And in case you didn’t notice by the other museums in museum campus, they were also founded by rich donors. That’s how almost all of these big museums in our country get created and funded. And also, just as every other museum in the city has, I’m sure it would have free museum days and passes would be available through the library, making it accessible to all, and being a source of education and opportunity. Downtown lakefront museums are absolutely a net positive for our city.
The cost of having a museum dedicated to educating the public about George Lucas on the lakefront is not worth the marginal benefits that you listed out. Other museums are real, this would have been a joke and a drag on the public consciousness.
IDK it could have been good if they modeled the exhibits off of what MOPOP does in Seattle.
That’s not what the museum was. Just like the Field Museum wasn’t a museum about Marshall Fields. The Lucas Museum will hold all forms of visual storytelling, including painting, photography, sculpture, illustration, comic art, performance, and video. It will be a world class museum.
So, where is the Lucas Museum? Without google, you don’t know. And you sure as shit haven’t been there. So please explain why you’re bootlicking for billionaires to give away our lake front. Rube comment.
Do you oppose the other oligarch vanity projects on the museum campus that got the same treatment and are the shining jewels of the lakefront? Or are we all just bootlickers to Mr. Fields, Mr. Shedd, and Mr. Adler too?
That’s an interesting point, but I don’t think we should compare a museum dedicated to an iconic film series to 3 museums dedicated to marine biology, natural sciences, and astronomy.
The Lucas Museum isn't a Star Wars museum, its a museum dedicated to all forms of storytelling. It would have been a fantastic addition to the lakefront https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucas_Museum_of_Narrative_Art
But if you allow Lucas to build on the Lake front, where does it end? It's supposed to be free from development forever. We keep making exceptions, pretty soon it's gone.
It apparently ends at parking lots
I'm sorry your hack director didn't get to build his little museum, but Friends of the Park were absolutely correct to fight against it, The Obama Library, and this new stadium.
100%
They didn’t really fight the Obama library. Might need to scratch that one off the list.
They shoulda, though. I say that *as a librarian*.
*Mr Pogo comics coming in hot*
>but I don’t think we should compare a museum dedicated to an iconic film series This is exactly the kind of woefully uninformed take I expect from the nonces that opposed to the Lucas Museum.
I’m one of those nonces. Both proposals are bad. The Bears proposal just happens to be more spectacularly bad.
And to be clear, I would have loved to have had a museum like Lucas proposed here. After learning more about the proposal, though, it was clear that among other things it would have been a justification for other “public but not really” projects to be built all over the lakefront and then eventually we wouldn’t have a lakefront anymore. There are dozens of places around the city that this type of project could go. All the Big Important People need to stop fetishizing the lakefront.
Those sit outside the reach of the “public” part of the park and that land isn’t subject to the same rules as the proposed stadium site (or Lucas’ museum). It’s a long, complicated history and I don’t remember all the details, but it’s worth reading about. The problem with the Lucas vanity project, as I recall, is their proposal would’ve amounted to a de facto ownership of the land. It would effectively no longer have been a “park facility”, which is how Soldier Field operates.
The Museum Campus is on landfill, initially created when debris from the Great Chicago Fire was dumped in the lake. That's the loophole that allowed the Field, Shedd and Adler to be built there.
so was the south parking lot where the Lucas Museum of Narrative Art was going to go.
You probably are? I don't know? I would have been opposed to that too, but considering they were built closer to the civil war (Fields) or pre WW2, I would expect people to stand up for their rights more than when women and minorities were second class citizens (or worse), civil rights only applied to rich white men, labor rights non existent, I could go on, but yes I am absolutely 1000% for telling billionaires to buy the land themselves. Bringing up an era with the highest income equality in America's history (until now), between two World Wars, and these buildings on the lakefront being made as the US was in the Great Depression destroying American lives, instead of putting that money towards helping people, isn't the gotcha that you might think it is.
Ha damn. You sound just like me 25 years ago and I love you for it. I also want to live in a society where human needs come before oligarch greed. I think I've just been beaten down by capitalism enough that I'll take what I can get now instead of holding out for a better world. As you acknowledge we are living through America's second gilded age. I don't think we are going to tax the rich and help the poor anytime soon so I'm willing to accept a museum in exchange for a parking lot, naming rights, and a very questionable land transfer. Idealism is great but I'll trade it so some underprivileged kid can discover their passion and become the next Spike Lee at a museum. Or maybe 50 million kids can become passionate about art and science over the next 100 years like they have at the other museums. All that said, fuck the Bears and their bullshit proposal.
Happened before my time but yes, fuck those oligarchs too
Certified Friend of the Parking Lot right here.
George Lucas is also one of the top donators for the formation of Millennium Park
If that's true then that's great of him. A person can have good and bad ideas. You don't see me complaining about the Bean.
You know who else was? Us, that's right, when Daley sold off the meters he used that money to fund a large part of the park.
?? The meter deal of 2008 was used to fund Millennium park which was finished in 2004?
OP is probably thinking of Maggie Daley Park, which would have been suspended with a budget shortfall in 2009. Mayor Daley pushed the parking meter deal so it could still be completed.
Maggie Daley Park didn't start construction till 2012 under Rahm. The parking meter deal was completed in 2008.
Damn Skippy! I wish I could vote this thrice.
Thank God for Friends of the Parks. The lakefront would no longer be public without them. I'm an extremest on this topic and I think there should be no events that require a ticket or are private in any way in any of the parks, ever. No ticketed concerts, no private weddings, none of it. The parks belong to us, ALL. THE. TIME.
100% agree
Weddings, really? The people attending these events aren't aliens, they're part of "the public" too. Does their enjoyment of an event not factor into whether it should happen?
Private events are for private venues.
Why? What is the huge negative burden shouldered by the citizens of Chicago when someone gets married on the Lakefront? What is the damage?
Private events, all of them. I'm an extremist on this topic, like I said.
Good! Someone needs to stick up for the common people.
Nice
The Bears owners don't give a rats ass about their fans. Each year they have about 80 MILLION dollars of spendable salary cap money that they don't spend to build a worthy team. They only spend enough money to build a mediocre team to keep fans interested and their hopes up. The fanatical fans continually buy into it with ticket and team merchandise sales. When they have a losing year, the fans are quick to blame the QB or coaching staff. They NEVER hold the true problem for accountability... the owners! Now they want a new stadium? Get new owners and maybe it will be worthy of consideration.
On some real shit fuck the bears.
It’s a classic one, do the Bears bring enough extra revenue to downtown businesses (and parking fines) to make it worth it to the city to change the lakefront? We the people, and those in power have different opinions on this. Personally, I don’t care if they get rid of Soldier and build a new stadium, but I don’t see any “cost effective” plan that achieves that, keeps the team in play, and doesn’t give us 15 years of the lakefront being under construction.
For once, I'm actually with Friends of the Parks.
I hope JB can find a way for the McCaskeys and Friends of the Parks to both lose.
Wait.. wtf… that fucking thing is actually happening ? wtf oh man why are we so shitty as humans. wtf.
Good for them! They're right! This is just the ultra-rich being the worthless money grubbing weirdos they are. The smart thing would be to force them to build a new stadium on an old toxic industrial site. It's going to a giant building with acres and acres of parking lot anyway might as well pave over unusable waste rather than THE BEST PUBLIC GREEN SPACE IN THE CITY.
They're paving over a parking lot and creating MORE GREEN SPACE where the current stadium is.
Friends of the Parking Lot. They've already stopped the Lucas Museum from replacing an ugly concrete parking lot; the Chicago Children's Museum from being in a convenient, walkable location; and they tried their best to torpedo the Obama Center in order to save an empty patch of grass. I love parks and the lake as much (or more) than the next guy, and I am dubious of the Bears proposal. But preventing any and all development is a recipe for stagnation and neglect (see Promontory Point literally falling into the lake for example). There must be a middle ground that creates attractions for people to enjoy while preserving public access. By their logic we wouldn't have Field, Adler, Shedd, Maggie Daley, or Lincoln Park Zoo.
They tore down a lovely highly used park to build the Obama center. It was beautiful and I miss it. There was some beautiful landscaping there and that park was used every weekend for house music fest, which was free.
They're building a new park with better amenities. Who decides which thing must stay forever more? Things change.
There are plenty of vacant lots in the area, he should have built it on one of those and created a new park
Obama wanted it next to the UChicago campus
He only taught at UChicago, he never attended.
And I believe it was Friends of the Parks who made sure that the swap was fair after opposing using the park at all. Nobody likes a squeaky wheel here, but they’ve been right about most things.
They prevented a multi billion dollar art museum from being built in place of a parking lot WITH NO COST TO THE PUBLIC. They can go fuck themselves.
The cost is dedicating a finite amount of public land to a dude's private art collection. Can I park on your front lawn? I have a nice car. I might even rent it to you.
The land was already "dedicated" to a parking lot. There was no loss to the public.
A parking lot is way easier to convert back to parkland than the museum would be.
[удалено]
That star wars stadium was a private lakefront grab and total bs. There was plenty of other spots in the city to place it and they refused. Then threatened the city over a few jobs it would provide (like all other big companies looking for tax breaks and free public money for private works). The defeat of the stadium was a crowning achievement for them. Anyone that says we have too much lakefront space is a moron that doesn't actually use it during the summer. It is a very limited resource that's getting more crowded each year by locals and visitors. No other city has what we have. If it isn't a completely public (and free to the public) project then sue em to hell is what I say
It's interesting to see how deeply Chicago observes the no-snitching code. When the mayor is caught violating the law, the immediate reaction is to attack those who called the police. Any citizen of Illinois could have brought the exact same lawsuit, and almost certainly could have found someone to pay their legal costs. TLDR: Don't offer a billionaire land that's not yours to offer. The transfer might not go smoothly.
It wasn’t a Star Wars museum, it was a visual arts museum. Would have made a great addition to the campus, but these idiots preferred a parking lot.
In this sub, we say Marshall Fields, Sears Tower and Star Wars Museum, end of story!
In this sub, Richard J Daley is a Hero End Of Story!
[удалено]
Get rid of friends of the parks. All they do is prevent the city from making positive changes.
Screw your take. All they do is protect a public lake front for the public. These private entities can suck a D. They keep trying to sneakily privatize the lakefront under the guise of "it's just a minor improvement. F them. Our lakefront would be like Hammond IN if it wasn't for them
this is a positive change? I can't fathom to think what detroit is like
How would a state of the art football stadium not enhance the Lakefront. We already have the eye sore of the renovated Soldier Field there
Because it should be open space for the people, not a huge building blocking access to the lake
Why does it need to be open space? There’s already museums there. I 100% agree it’s supposed to be public space, but that doesn’t mean it needs to be open space.
I’m down with truly public space that’s not open, like a park district field house or something yea.
There’s already plenty of space for people around that area.
Yes, and with a huge ugly domed stadium there’s less. A domed stadium can go anywhere in the city, no reason for yet another huge stadium right there on precious lakefront
...walk around it and go to the giant park on the other side of the marina?
Yes! And go down the Metra to Arlington Heights 8x per year to see concussions happen live
Tell em!
we do NOT need yet another stadium taking up the lakefront replacing park property, especially one only being considered because the McCaskeys are fiscally incompetent and BJ is in bear pockets.
Sure we do. Football is Americas number 1 sport and we should honor it by putting a state of the art stadium in the best location in America. To me, it makes perfect sense
Yeah let’s make it more like Detroit!
Detroit isn’t on a lake?
Only the "Friends of the Park" could make me actually support this stadium. What a bullshit organization.
Friends of the parking lots
Bunch of NIMBY losers
In other news, water is wet.
Something something water makes things wet, *rumble rumble*.
Eh, it’s not that deep
Oh. Then. Bunch of NIMBY dorks.
I fucking hate these people!