* David Roeder back in January…
Prolific stadium builder Bob Dunn, advising the Lightfoot administration on how to fix Soldier Field to keep the Bears in Chicago, released detailed plans Sunday for transforming the isolated stadium into a year-round commercial and entertainment hub, served by a transit station that would underpin his goal of residential expansion on the Near South Side.
Dunn estimated that his proposal to dome Soldier Field, working within its existing footprint, would save the Bears at least $1 billion over the cost of building from the ground up in Arlington Heights, where the team has a contract to purchase land.
Dunn, president of Landmark Development, said the proposed new Soldier Field and surrounding activity would fatten city tax coffers while giving the Bears and the team’s fans a facility that would be among the tops for NFL teams. […]
The other assumption is that he can change how fans get to Soldier Field. Most drive now, but Dunn said that, with a transit connection next to the stadium, 40% of the crowd could arrive by rail, comparing the game-day commuting patterns to Wrigley Field.
The transit hub is a clue to Dunn’s vested interest in helping Soldier Field. It’s a principal part of his plan for a megadevelopment of up to nine highrises built over Metra’s tracks west of the stadium. The plan is called One Central and, as previously sketched out, could cost $20 billion and include more than 9,000 residences.
One Central needs that transit station — seen as a junction for the CTA, Metra and Amtrak — to get people to the future buildings. But its cost is estimated at $6.5 billion. Dunn has promised to fund the construction, provided the state repays him from sales taxes resulting from the development.
* David Roeder the other day…
Here’s a bold prediction: The Bears are not going to Naperville, Waukegan, Rockford or any other johnny-come-latelies. This is strictly between Arlington Heights and Chicago, and the contest is closer than some people think.
Similarly and for the big city’s partisans, the Bears are not going to any other site within Chicago that planners may offer up. Sources who have been involved in the process say the Bears have never shown much interest in this option. […]
Developer Bob Dunn has been making that case [a redesigned Soldier Field should be the goal] for months. His vested interest in Soldier Field is that he wants to build a residential and commercial complex near it called One Central, and he needs a state-funded transit hub to make the project viable. […]
In a brief interview, [Dunn] stuck with his main point that reusing 70% of Soldier Field would save the Bears — and maybe taxpayers — $1 billion compared with setting up in Arlington Heights.
“That’s how you crack the economic code for building a stadium here,” he said.
* The state is now in the process of conducting a feasibility study on the One Central project. The Sun-Times editorial board wrote that the result should be “a resounding no”…
Landmark Development President Bob Dunn wants to build the transit center as part of One Central, a nine-tower, $20 billion mixed-use development proposed for the Metra Electric Line from 14th Street to near McCormick Place.
Under Dunn’s plan, the state would reimburse him $6.5 billion for building the transit center, and would take over ownership of the facility after 20 years. […]
But what good is a multibillion-dollar transit complex that’s five miles from Metra’s and Amtrak’s hub at Union Station, two-and-half miles from the nearest CTA Red Line stop at Cermak, and yet only four blocks from the McCormick Place stop on the Green Line?
The Metra Electric would stop there, presumably, but with no other direct rail connections, the center reads more like a jumped-up bus station to us, transitwise.
Dunn proposed a tram-like circulator connecting One Central with Navy Pier and the museum campus, but who will pay for building and operating that?
If the proposed center somehow survives the state’s examination, we’d then like to see a thorough, independent transit study that takes a critical look at the actual need for such a facility.
Because as we see it, Chicago has legitimate transportation infrastructure problems. The $6.5 billion transit station solves none of them.
Your thoughts?
- Donnie Elgin - Wednesday, Jun 21, 23 @ 11:38 am:
“40% of the crowd could arrive by rail”
Bears fans are a tailgating lot, hard to bring a Weber grill by rail.
- Dan Johnson - Wednesday, Jun 21, 23 @ 11:41 am:
I think the big benefit of a transit hub for One Central that has been under-discussed (or perhaps isn’t part of Mr Dunn’s current plans) is as a new airport for high speed trains to the East.
It sits over the Metra Electric. That is an amazing asset for getting trains into downtown Chicago that is really under-utilized.
If One Central built a rail bridge over the Chicago River to connect the Metra Electric (which runs along the lake, basically) to the Metra tracks on the West Loop that run through Union Station which also connect up to O’Hare Airport…..that would be valuable.
AND if we gave up on doubling or tripling the number of trains that use Union Station because that gorgeous building just doesn’t have the capacity and instead had 150 or 200 trains a day at the new 16th Street Station as part of One Central that connected Chicago via the South Shore — publicly-owned electrified tracks that travel to South Bend today — all the way to the rest of Indiana, Ohio, Michigan and East Coast.
Well, that might be worth it.
It isn’t likely worth it as a CTA-Metra connection station because the CTA tracks aren’t really there and running a shuttle bus or a new tram isn’t that compelling.
One Central would be a lot closer to worth it if it connected all of the south side and the south suburbs currently on the Metra Electric to O’Hare with a new rail bridge.
And if we had a lot more high speed trains coming in from Detroit and Ann Arbor and Lansing and South Bend (and even Columbus and then NYC/Philadelphia/DC).
We need a new high speed train station for all those trains. (If they are ever to be….we could just live with clogged up highways and airports for another 50 years). One Central could be the high speed train station Chicago needs.
- Roadrager - Wednesday, Jun 21, 23 @ 11:43 am:
“Boondoggle” is the only word I can think of that falls within the rules of your site’s commenting guidelines.
- regular democrat - Wednesday, Jun 21, 23 @ 11:48 am:
I still do not see how the Bears maximize thier full revenue and value if they are tied to Soldier Field. The numbers dont add up. Note to Bears-sit down hammer out a deal with the taxes get your funding together and build the stadium. Then sell the team for maximum value. Sell it an entity that knows how to run a professional footbal team.
- Lefty Lefty - Wednesday, Jun 21, 23 @ 11:48 am:
A neighbor here in the western exurbs went to the Grate last night, invited by a vendor of his. We discussed possibly taking the Metra to the L, but it just doesn’t work. It’s not unpleasant during nicer weather, but it still would take over 2 1/2 hours to get there. And extra innings means possibly missing the last Metra west.
Same goes for concerts for me. The lack of connected public transit and reliable later-night return options is a real deal-killer to get from Ogilvie to Metro or the Riviera. It’s not only the last-mile, it’s the last quarter of the trip.
So - sure build something that becomes a hub, but god is in the details. (I’ve been waiting my whole life for this too - not holding my breath.)
- Nick - Wednesday, Jun 21, 23 @ 11:49 am:
The suntimes is correct.
The location makes no sense as a ‘transit center.’
This would just be the Block 37 station on steroids.
- Transit - Wednesday, Jun 21, 23 @ 11:52 am:
Metra rail runs right by Arlington Park Property
- Pundent - Wednesday, Jun 21, 23 @ 11:52 am:
For the Bears this is all about maximizing the value of their franchise. Saving $1B is only of value if the value of the franchise is worth more in Chicago than Arlington Heights. And if the Bears are a tenant as opposed to an owner I don’t see that happening. And the McCaskey family has so much equity in their franchise that they will have no problem borrowing whatever they need so the cost differential of building in AH vs. renovating Soldier Field will be irrelevant. The City of Chicago already finds itself $600M in the hole on the Bears. My advice is to stop digging.
- will county - Wednesday, Jun 21, 23 @ 11:53 am:
This sounds like a developer trying to make money. On the Bears side none of that makes sense. This does not increase revenues/cash flow like Arlington Heights. There you control everything. The stadium, development around etc. and get the cash flow. The only problem is ownership’s wealth is the Bears. So Bears ownership sell to someone with deep pockets and move to Arlington Heights and without taking public funds like Soldier and U.S. Cellular do.
- lake county democrat - Wednesday, Jun 21, 23 @ 11:54 am:
Maybe I’m missing something but if the developer is willing to front the money for the new station AND limit payback to new property taxes from hi-rises not yet built AND Chicago gets to both keep the Bears and a domed stadium that might not be big enough to host a Super Bowl but would be attractive for NCAA basketball, a winter bowl game, winter/bad weather megaconcerts, maybe better attendance for the Chicago Fire during bad weather games, etc., what’s the down side?
- Madigan's Apple - Wednesday, Jun 21, 23 @ 11:57 am:
Simple… Bears need their own stadium that they own. It’s about revenue. If they don’t own the stadium, they can’t make revenue off of Taylor Swift. Nothing else matters to them. If the city gave the Bears Soldier Field, I bet they’d stay.
- Benjamin - Wednesday, Jun 21, 23 @ 11:57 am:
There’s no way a single transit station costs $6.5 billion, even if it were feasible and needed (it’s neither). This is just a ploy to get the state to pay for the foundations of his buildings.
- Lucky Pierre - Wednesday, Jun 21, 23 @ 11:58 am:
Have you ever heard of a developer taking huge risks to not make money?
- Boone's is Back - Wednesday, Jun 21, 23 @ 12:00 pm:
I’m still for the Bears relocating to Arlington Heights, but One Central is the best bet for the city. I think it’s a bold plan that takes many considerations into account other than just the dome. The transportation aspect as well as the mixed use part of the plan are really smart. I also think his funding strategy is way more creative than shaking down the city, state or Arlington Heights.
- Rich Miller - Wednesday, Jun 21, 23 @ 12:09 pm:
===Have you ever heard of a developer taking huge risks to not make money? ===
lolol
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZDOI0cq6GZM
- Cool Papa Bell - Wednesday, Jun 21, 23 @ 12:11 pm:
=I still do not see how the Bears maximize thier full revenue and value if they are tied to Soldier Field. The numbers dont add up.=
Yep. The selling the Bears with an AH stadium is both a NFL team revenue play along with a real estate deal. The team is far more valuable connected to a mega land site in the ‘burbs than renting the smallest NFL stadium.
I like the idea for One Central but it can happen without the Bears being on the lakefront. And maybe I missed his plans for a redesign of Solider Field, but unless its a dome and 80,000 or more seats then the redesign is useless and shouldn’t be pursued.
- Roadrager - Wednesday, Jun 21, 23 @ 12:13 pm:
==I think the big benefit of a transit hub for One Central that has been under-discussed (or perhaps isn’t part of Mr Dunn’s current plans) is as a new airport for high speed trains to the East.==
How long has it taken us to get not-quite-high-speed rail between Chicago and St. Louis? We have, allegedly, the most pro-commuter-rail president of my lifetime, and the only notable move he’s made on this nation’s dire rail system was acting as a strikebreaker on behalf of freight rail owners. How many decades after the One Central money gets committed would the Wolverine finally hit 100 mph on its way to and from Ann Arbor, to say nothing of any destination further away? And how many billions of dollars would be spent on fixing and widening I-94 across Michigan before a single railroad tie was laid?
- Just Me 2 - Wednesday, Jun 21, 23 @ 12:17 pm:
I’m indifferent to whether One Central is the right project, but we should definitely find a way to use the space above the Metra tracks for more housing and development.
Also - if we build something that brings in a ton more people, there will need to be a transportation system to accommodate them. At least Dunn has thought about that instead of just building his project and letting someone else worry about that.
- Thomas Paine - Wednesday, Jun 21, 23 @ 12:29 pm:
=== Under Dunn’s plan, the state would reimburse him $6.5 billion for building the transit center, and would take over ownership of the facility after 20 years. ===
So basically the state would get the facility after it became dated, the capital investment had completely depreciated and the developer had neglected to make any capital improvements or general maintenance for atleast the previous five years.
Why in the world would the state take on that much capital debt, after just unloading the JRTC?
Have we learned nothing? I hope not.
- Rich Miller - Wednesday, Jun 21, 23 @ 12:36 pm:
===if the developer is willing to front the money for the new station AND limit payback to new property taxes from hi-rises not yet built===
Um, no. He wants a complete refund of the money via state sales tax collections.
- Steve - Wednesday, Jun 21, 23 @ 12:38 pm:
The costs will be higher than estimated. That’s the way things work out on government style projects. I’m pretty sure the Bears want to own their own stadium anyway.
- JoanP - Wednesday, Jun 21, 23 @ 12:43 pm:
“No” to the Bears. “No” to One Central.
Get your hands out of my pocket.
- Jerry - Wednesday, Jun 21, 23 @ 12:48 pm:
Bob and/or the Bears can build whatever they want, with their own money. No “Free Stuff” from the taxpayers.
“tax breaks” are just a nice way of saying Welfare (or Entitlements, or whatever the Republicans call it these days).
- Pundent - Wednesday, Jun 21, 23 @ 12:50 pm:
=Have you ever heard of a developer taking huge risks to not make money?=
Yes. Sometimes they file for bankruptcy, and in some cases they end up in prison. You can find all the examples you need via Google.
- Neighborhood gal - Wednesday, Jun 21, 23 @ 12:54 pm:
One Central is horrible idea. There are numerous storefronts along State St., Michigan Ave, in the area that sit vacant. CTA/RTA/Metra/Amtrak has not asked for this transit hub. I’d rather see this taxpayer funding go to a high speed train to ORD, improvements to existing Metra and Amtrak lines to get to places like Madison, WI, Minneapolis, etc.
Aside from that, the neighborhood will already be experiencing an expansion and increased activity and traffic from the 78 development to the west. I haven’t see anyone do an analysis of the impact on residents who will basically be sandwiched between two huge developments.
Hoping Rep. Buckner continues to speak out and question the viability and enormous cost of this project.
- levivotedforjudy - Wednesday, Jun 21, 23 @ 12:54 pm:
Putting a dome on Soldier Field and using keeping the Bears in Chicago to save One Central is the equivalent of putting lipstick on 2 pigs.
- Chicagonk - Wednesday, Jun 21, 23 @ 1:04 pm:
I know that this would be unpopular, but what if the Park District sold Soldier Field to the Bears? If the state, county, and city really wanted to keep the Bears playing at Soldier Field, I’m sure that they could figure it out.
- CLJ - Wednesday, Jun 21, 23 @ 1:11 pm:
I love the One Central Plan. It’s new and shiny. The splashy video pitch even had me saying “if they build it, we’re moving back”. It looks so cool!
However, it’s not practical. The Sun-Times and other critics are correct. It is really hard to see how it would work. The tax refund is a terrible deal for taxpayers.
Is the Block 37 superstation big enough to host Bear’s games? The first subterranean football stadium. The future!
- Joe Bidenopolous - Wednesday, Jun 21, 23 @ 1:22 pm:
No to One Central. It’s just not practical in that location.
Re: the Bears. The other owners matter, and they will apply all of the necessary pressure to ensure the Bears move to AH or another location where they’ll own the stadium. When the value of the Bears franchise increases - as it will when they own their own stadium and and the associated revenue streams - the values of all of the other franchises increase too. I can’t imagine a scenario where the other owners settle for the Bears at Soldier.
- Nick Name - Wednesday, Jun 21, 23 @ 1:33 pm:
===Bears fans are a tailgating lot, hard to bring a Weber grill by rail.===
Hold my beer.
- Jerry - Wednesday, Jun 21, 23 @ 1:56 pm:
Free promotional idea for the Bears if they use the Block 37 idea:
Give out free fake snow for fans to throw in the air…
brought to you by ___________ heating and air conditioning.
- Rahm's Parking Meter - Wednesday, Jun 21, 23 @ 2:06 pm:
I almost couldn’t contain my laughter reading this column. They are not staying at Soldier Field.
- The Opinions Bureau - Wednesday, Jun 21, 23 @ 2:08 pm:
The genesis of One Central in state law is certainly an example of great lobbying but I’m skeptical of any long-term commitment of public dollars to fund a project that literally nobody asked for besides those who would make money.
- Frida's boss - Wednesday, Jun 21, 23 @ 2:44 pm:
Has the RTA chimed in about One Central? How about NTSB? I think these two will need to see the transportation plans and sign off on the scope and size Mr. Dune is proposing far before there is even a proposal to the Bears about staying.
You don’t have permission to do any of this yet? Does the city even want One Central? Does your alderman want it?
- Flapdoodle - Wednesday, Jun 21, 23 @ 3:51 pm:
There is only one certainty about One Central, and that’s that there are too many uncertainties. The only one pushing the concept is the developer, who sees a rosy future in which everything falls into place according to his best interests. If that doesn’t tell us something, we’d deserve what we’d get by falling for this sales pitch. Which smells of a boondoggle and eventual white elephant from miles away.
- Vote Quimby - Wednesday, Jun 21, 23 @ 4:37 pm:
I would love to see the Bears stay on the lake, but as many above state it only makes sense if they own the land.
Also appreciate the Lyle Langley reference… “it’s more of a Shelbyville idea”
- Chicago 20 - Wednesday, Jun 21, 23 @ 5:05 pm:
If its viable, why does Dunn need $6.5 billion from the State of Illinois?
The State of Illinois is now recently saddled with the MPEA $13 billion bond debt to avoid their default. These yearly MPEA bond debt payments will cost the taxpayers $240 million to $350 million a year as shows continue to flee McCormick Place’s exorbitant costs, more than double the costs at Rosemont.
How much will the sales tax rate need to increase to pay for Dunn’s and Reilly’s boondoggles?
- Fivegreenleaves - Wednesday, Jun 21, 23 @ 5:20 pm:
My thoughts? My thoughts are I hope the Bears stay in Chicago. I know a lot of NFL teams don’t play in their namesake cities, but that’s one thing I like about the Chicago Bears. They play in Chicago.
The Bears are my team, I’ll cheer for them if they’re in Arlington Heights, Naperville, Rockford, or wherever. But for me, Chicago and the Bears go together like mac n cheese. The Bears belong in Chicago. Period.