Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar » White Sox reveal plans, projections for a ballpark in the 78
SUBSCRIBE to Capitol Fax      Advertise Here      About     Exclusive Subscriber Content     Updated Posts    Contact Rich Miller
CapitolFax.com
To subscribe to Capitol Fax, click here.
White Sox reveal plans, projections for a ballpark in the 78

Thursday, Feb 8, 2024 - Posted by Isabel Miller

* Crain’s

New renderings of a White Sox stadium at Related Midwest’s The 78 megadevelopment in the South Loop have surfaced, showing the ballpark as part of a vision for a new Chicago neighborhood.

The development would include thousands of units of housing, a hotel, entertainment options and a 4,000-car parking garage, sources familiar with the proposal recently told Crain’s. […]

In addition, the renderings floated tonight contemplate the future of the area around the team’s existing home, Guaranteed Rate Field.

“While we do not own the land at 35th & Shields . . . we knew there would be questions about 35th Street use,” a Related spokeswoman tells Crain’s. “So we put together conceptual ideas, understanding there would a robust community process to determine the best use for this land.

* Here’s the renderings


* Tribune

The development would generate a $9 billion investment, $4 billion in annual stabilized economic impact, and $200 million in annual tax revenue, according to the developer’s projections, which were not publicly substantiated. Those projections include buildout of Discovery Partners Institute, a state proposal for a technology and research center.

The plans also include a housing complex and a soccer stadium in and around the site of the Sox’s current stadium, Guaranteed Rate Field.

The proposal so far is speculative, with no way identified to pay for the new park. Public financing would require action by lawmakers. Gov. J.B. Pritzker has expressed his general opposition to taxpayers funding private development, beyond typical infrastructure costs. […]

The new plans call for 5 million annual visitors — about triple what the Sox drew in attendance last year — plus 1,000 affordable residential units, and 1,300 new housing units at the current Sox home near Bridgeport, redeveloped in the drawings to a smaller size with a soccer field.

* Fair point



* On to the Bears. Sun-Times

NFL commissioner Roger Goodell avoided picking sides as the Bears weigh the options of building a new stadium in Arlington Heights or Chicago, but said Monday either option would present a “great opportunity” for the Chicago area to host other major events.

Based on the league’s history of awarding Super Bowls to markets that build a new stadium, it’s likely the Chicago area would be in consideration if it had a sparkling new indoor facility. Goodell did not directly address the question of whether that would be likely.

“It’s important to the Chicago Bears and their fans, [and] it’s also important to that community,” Goodell said. “As we’ve seen [in Las Vegas], a great stadium can host additional events. That’s true in Chicago.” […]

The Bears don’t appear to be ready move on that project anytime soon as they explore a site just south of Soldier Field and the 326-acre lot that used to hold Arlington International Racecourse.

* Chronicle-Tribune

A Northwest Indiana lawmaker isn’t giving up his dream of luring a professional sports team across the state line from Illinois, even though his enabling legislation failed to advance prior to a key deadline this year at the Indiana Statehouse.

House Bill 1174, sponsored by state Rep. Earl Harris Jr., D-East Chicago, did not move out of the House Ways and Means Committee during the first half of the Indiana legislative session. […]

“House Bill 1174 not moving forward yet is not an end to our push to get the Chicago Bears and other sports teams to move to Northwest Indiana. This sports development commission is a long-term goal — one started by my father while he was in the state legislature — and I look forward to continuing the work in coming sessions,” Harris said.

Harris’ legislation would have established a 19-member Northwest Indiana Professional Sports Development Commission tasked with studying the possibility of attracting a professional sports team to the Region, along with developing a master plan for doing so.

* More…

       

31 Comments
  1. - Roadrager - Thursday, Feb 8, 24 @ 10:49 am:

    “Actual development may vary, based on whether Jerry is asked to spend any of his own money for it.”


  2. - ChicagoBars - Thursday, Feb 8, 24 @ 10:58 am:

    By all means let the Sox and Related build it at the 78. Let’s just get to their ask of taxpayers so it can be laughed at and move this on to the Plan Commission stage.

    Then let ISFA sell the Sox parking lots off once the White Sox are gone. Nice little windfall for the State and property tax generating development for the City. Bulls (cough cough) and Blackhawks and Cubs own their own stadiums already. Great time for the White Sox to join that club too.


  3. - Gravitas - Thursday, Feb 8, 24 @ 11:01 am:

    Is it easier to promote a new stadium rather than putting a winning team on the field?

    In 2005 the White Sox won it all and did good business at the gate and enjoyed good home attendance for several years afterwards.

    It’s a mediocre team not the current park impacting attendance recently.


  4. - SteveM - Thursday, Feb 8, 24 @ 11:06 am:

    Attendance of 5,000,000 can’t just be for 81 baseball games, that’s more than 60,000 a game. Maybe it includes concerts or even the soccer site too


  5. - levivotedforjudy - Thursday, Feb 8, 24 @ 11:06 am:

    Discovery Partners anchoring the commercial part and the Sox anchoring the entertainment district. This just makes more sense as more comes out. Folks have to remember as was pointed out, what happens to Guaranteed Rate is not their responsibility. They rent. Now let the pre-indignancy about “no public money” begin. Or, just chill and wait.


  6. - DuPage Saint - Thursday, Feb 8, 24 @ 11:09 am:

    Absolutely outstanding and with all that revenue Sox will not need a dime of state money. Also outstanding that Sox will probably be up and running before Bears even settle on a site


  7. - TJ - Thursday, Feb 8, 24 @ 11:18 am:

    Build it yourself, Jerry. Heck, throw him a bone and the city/state can pay for infrastructure improvements/expansions in the immediate area. But you want it, you pay for it.


  8. - Rudy’s teeth - Thursday, Feb 8, 24 @ 11:28 am:

    Rep. Earl Harris Jr. (East Chicago) bill to bring a sports team to NW Indiana is not going anywhere. The region lacks infrastructure to support a professional sports team.

    There is no public transportation in the area. High levels of pollution over decades damaged the environment. There is a statewide shortage of teachers due to inadequate funding and support. Several schools in the region closed and more closures are planned.

    Why would legislators sit on a committee when the state has other pressing concerns?


  9. - low level - Thursday, Feb 8, 24 @ 11:35 am:

    We still have yet to see how they would handle the traffic from those who drive to Sox games.

    They keep talking about public transit and while that is good, they need to remember those for whom it is impractical and choose to drive in. Suburban fans are a big part of the team’s fan base.


  10. - Jerry - Thursday, Feb 8, 24 @ 11:42 am:

    The White Sox have already received billions in Socialist Welfare Entitlements. In the interest of Tax Fairness quit mooching off of taxpayers.

    Pass this message along to the new Bears president, along with Ginnie and George, as well.


  11. - The Truth - Thursday, Feb 8, 24 @ 11:46 am:

    5,000,000 visitors per year? That is a truly absurd number. They might as well have said “thirteen brazillion visitors per year.”


  12. - low level - Thursday, Feb 8, 24 @ 11:49 am:

    Furthermore, the attendance predictions fail to take into account past behavior of White Sox fans. If the team is winning, they will go to games. If they arent winning, they avoid the team.

    The White Sox and Related seem to be assuming this park would draw fans regardless of the team’s record akin to what happens at Wrigley. That seems to be a big assumption. If it doesnt pan out, how would low Sox attendance impact financing of the stadium?


  13. - Jocko - Thursday, Feb 8, 24 @ 11:50 am:

    I like how the renderings show five vehicles in total. Will each of these cars hold one million occupants annually?


  14. - James the Intolerant - Thursday, Feb 8, 24 @ 11:57 am:

    Besides the ChicagoBars question of who pays, is the site even wide enough to fit the ballpark? I know there are renderings, but Clark Street is 100 West, Wells St 200 West. One city block seems like a tight fit. Block 78 is approximately 650′ wide, just the Guaranteed Rate ballpark is 950′.


  15. - Grandson of Man - Thursday, Feb 8, 24 @ 12:03 pm:

    Gorgeous backdrop with the skyscrapers. The river is there too, where the area can be developed for the pleasure of fans, residents and tourists. Much more aesthetically pleasing than Bridgeport.


  16. - New Day - Thursday, Feb 8, 24 @ 12:08 pm:

    The current field has parking for 7,000 cars. Getting in and out is a total nightmare. The new venue, which is larger and more likely to attract people outside the park, has a garage for 4,000 cars. Talk about an ingress/egress nightmare. Conceptually I love this idea, but I don’t think they’ve thought it through.

    Oh, and to the comment about how the current facility and neighborhood is not their responsibility? Cmon. They may not own it but it is Sox Park and built for the Sox. Of course they have responsibility for destroying a community when they leave.


  17. - Friendly Bob Adams - Thursday, Feb 8, 24 @ 12:17 pm:

    This reminds us again that *all* economic impact estimates are baloney. Completely fictional.

    Especially in the case where a sports team would be moving within the same city.


  18. - JS Mill - Thursday, Feb 8, 24 @ 12:36 pm:

    “thirteen brazillion visitors per year.”=

    What do you know that I don’t (probably a lot), why would people from Brazil come to see the Sox and why 13?

    Tongue firmly planted in cheek. Thanks for the chuckle.


  19. - Proud Papa Bear - Thursday, Feb 8, 24 @ 1:08 pm:

    “It’s important to the Chicago Bears and their fans”

    Is it, Roger?

    Personally, the thought of hosting one Super Bowl, which I’d never be able to afford to attend, doesn’t really do anything for me.


  20. - Proud Papa Bear - Thursday, Feb 8, 24 @ 1:10 pm:

    “ that’s more than 60,000 a game.”

    Every game will be Disco Demolition Night.


  21. - Six Degrees of Separation - Thursday, Feb 8, 24 @ 1:21 pm:

    ===The new venue, which is larger and more likely to attract people outside the park, has a garage for 4,000 cars. Talk about an ingress/egress nightmare.===
    To be fair, that’s about 4,000 more spaces than that park to th e north. :-)


  22. - Jerry - Thursday, Feb 8, 24 @ 1:24 pm:

    Agree with Papa Bear. Thats why the good lord invented TV and I can go to the bathroom and fix food without any line to have to wait in.


  23. - Nick - Thursday, Feb 8, 24 @ 1:39 pm:

    Could be concerts like someone else noted.

    Or maybe they’re counting the whole neighborhood as some sort of premier entertainment space


  24. - DougChicago - Thursday, Feb 8, 24 @ 1:48 pm:

    I admit my bias — I am a Sox fan. It would be a beautiful setting for games. I hope somehow some sort of reasonable public-private partnership can be worked out.


  25. - Jibba - Thursday, Feb 8, 24 @ 2:04 pm:

    Does anyone who knows anything about stadium design know whether Guaranteed Rate field actually could be retrofitted for the Bears, or is that just a dorm room discussion?


  26. - Just Me 2 - Thursday, Feb 8, 24 @ 2:06 pm:

    Anyone else notice in the renderings they spell the name of the team “Chicacago White Sox”?

    Nice attention to detail.


  27. - Hank Sauer - Thursday, Feb 8, 24 @ 2:09 pm:

    No way should one dollar of taxpayer money be spent on the Mc pier is the last boondoggle and continuing drain on the city


  28. - ZC - Thursday, Feb 8, 24 @ 2:26 pm:

    I am not an expert, legal or on the politics, but I don’t understand yet, how the Bears can ever build in that lot. Four words: Friends of the Parks. I’ve seen glancing media references to, “Oh yeah, they said they might sue,” but this seems to understate just how serious a problem this will be. Ask George Lucas.


  29. - DuPage Saint - Thursday, Feb 8, 24 @ 2:53 pm:

    Call them the Chicago Swift Sox make Taylor Swift a partner and you will get a bazillion fans


  30. - Just Me 2 - Thursday, Feb 8, 24 @ 5:48 pm:

    re: Friends of the Parks and parking lot — it isn’t that development on public land prohibited, it is that private sector development on the public land is forbidden.

    I’ll also note what if we allowed other developers to build their monstrosities along the lakefront for the past century? We’d be Gary.


  31. - Proud Sucker - Thursday, Feb 8, 24 @ 6:02 pm:

    At least center field is to the northeast again.


Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.


* Reader comments closed for the holiday weekend
* Isabel’s afternoon roundup
* Jack Conaty
* New state law to be tested by Will County case
* Why did ACLU Illinois staffers picket the organization this week?
* Hopefully, IDHS will figure this out soon
* Pete Townshend he ain't /s
* Open thread
* Isabel’s morning briefing
* Live coverage
* Selected press releases (Live updates)
* Yesterday's stories

Support CapitolFax.com
Visit our advertisers...

...............

...............

...............

...............

...............


Loading


Main Menu
Home
Illinois
YouTube
Pundit rankings
Obama
Subscriber Content
Durbin
Burris
Blagojevich Trial
Advertising
Updated Posts
Polls

Archives
August 2024
July 2024
June 2024
May 2024
April 2024
March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004

Blog*Spot Archives
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005

Syndication

RSS Feed 2.0
Comments RSS 2.0




Hosted by MCS SUBSCRIBE to Capitol Fax Advertise Here Mobile Version Contact Rich Miller