News:

This discussion group is best enjoyed using Google Chrome, Firefox or Safari.


Jeff Schley

  • Karma: +0/-0
There are fundraising to be done to get the cash for the golf course.  Some $35 million and we have gone over some ideas for that previously.  The course isn't going into private ownership, it will still be a Chicago Park District asset and a much improved one at that.  So fixing up an almost salvage value set of courses (Jackson Park and South Shore) to a much appreciated one is a gain for the public.  It will also be cash flow positive, or should be, by charging out of city residents $200-300 or whatever to play. 

If they get a tour event that is part of the marketing plan to get the out of town $$$$$, thus I would like to see them host one every year. Chicago tragically doesn't have a yearly tourney anymore, but only gets the BMW every other year.  If you get a corporate sponsor for the course then how about the PGA Tour comes in with giving Chicago it's own event every year again with the naming rights to the corporate sponsor of the new course? This is another out of the box idea, but creativity is what I would like to see as opposed to taxpayer money get diverted to cover the very expected cost overruns and it ballooning to $150 in taxpayer money.

Love the idea and much needed, will still be a Chicago Park District asset, but want to maximize private dollars to do so.
"To give anything less than your best, is to sacrifice your gifts."
- Steve Prefontaine

Steve Lang

  • Karma: +0/-0
 8)  Lawsuit regarding O Center taking land from Jackson Park...  what's up with that Chicagoans??
Inverness (Toledo, OH) cathedral clock inscription: "God measures men by what they are. Not what they in wealth possess.  That vibrant message chimes afar.
The voice of Inverness"

Paul OConnor

  • Karma: +0/-0
Yes, but Danielle Kang and Toni Kukoc were hitting golf balls at a floating green in the Chicago River...so how 'bout that?

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/golf/ct-spt-womens-pga-danielle-kang-toni-kukoc-20180514-story.html

Paul OConnor

  • Karma: +0/-0
Here is the article from Lynn Sweet at the Suntimes.  Maybe someone with access can post the actual lawsuit.

   Lynn Sweet @lynnsweet | email
                          A federal lawsuit seeking to block construction of the Obama Presidential Center in Jackson Park was filed Monday by public parks activists against the city of Chicago and the Chicago Park District.
The suit comes as the Chicago Plan Commission on Thursday meets to consider applications for zoning and other approvals needed for the project submitted by the Obama Foundation, Chicago Park District and Chicago Department of Transportation.
The commission will also take up a resolution authorizing a long-term ground lease for 19.3 acres in Jackson Park from the city to the Barack Obama Foundation. Though the proposed lease as of Friday was not made public, it is likely only a token amount of rent will be charged.
The City Council in March 2015 approved an ordinance for Chicago Park District land in Jackson Park to be transferred to the City of Chicago to lease to the Obama Foundation.
But a rewrite of that ordinance is now necessary.
The Jackson Park boundaries for the center spelled out in that 2015 legislation have changed, with the project moved further north and east. For the project to go forward, the plan commission and City Council must approve those new boundaries.
All these matters dovetail into the federal lawsuit filed by Protect Our Parks, Inc., with parks activist Charlotte Adelman among the plaintiffs.
The lawsuit seeks a court order to “bar the Park District and the City from approving the building of the Presidential Center and from conveying any interest in or control of the Jackson Park site to the Foundation.”
Among the reasons cited in the lawsuit to support the request for a court order:
 
  • An “institutional bait and switch.” The original purpose of the transfer of public park land to the Foundation – a private non-government entity – was to house an official federal Obama Federal Library. However, that purpose no longer exists. Obama decided his center will not include his official presidential library. The federal National Records and Archives Administration will run it from someplace else.
  • Transfer of park land to a non-governmental private entity violates the park district code.
  • The park district and the city will receive only token rent for the land and the Park District Act law “does not authorize the Park District itself to transfer valuable public trust land for virtually no compensatory return.”
  • Public park land is “prohibited by law” from being turned over to a non-governmental private entity for private use.
The law firm for the plaintiff is Roth Fioretti. Partner Robert Fioretti is a former Chicago alderman who challenged Mayor Rahm Emanuel in 2015 before endorsing Emanuel in the runoff. More recently, Fioretti was defeated in a March Democratic primary bid for Cook County Board president.
In an emailed statement, mayoral spokesman Grant Klinzman said, “The Obama Presidential Center is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to invest hundreds of millions of dollars that will create good jobs on the South Side, bring our communities together and honor the legacy of Chicago’s favorite son and daughter. While some choose to stand in the way of progress for the South Side, we are focused on making progress in every community in Chicago.”
Juanita Irizarry, executive director Friends of the Parks, also released a statement, saying officials with the group welcome the Obama Center to the South Side “but disagree with the choice to locate it on public parkland rather than vacant land across the street from Washington Park.”
“While we are not involved with this lawsuit in any way, it is an indication of the fact the Friends of the Parks is not alone in our concern about Chicago’s parks being seen as sites for real estate development,” Irizarry said.


   Lynn Sweet Follow me on Twitter @lynnsweet Email: lsweet@suntimes.com
                   

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +1/-1
That's not actually the Obama Library?

Jim Nugent

  • Karma: +0/-0
That's not actually the Obama Library?

No.  Though it will probably hold a branch of the Chicago Public Library. 

Jeff Schley

  • Karma: +0/-0
While home in July drove by the proposed site by South Shore and Jackson Park after walking around Rainbow Beach, where my Dad was a lifeguard during his younger days.  Sadly much has changed since the 60's and it's glory days.

As many know the City Council has approved on May 23rd the Obama PC, however the Protect Our Parks group has filed a lawsuit, which has slowed down proceeding as well as Federal reviews for environment issues. No mention of the golf course.

Interesting to see the other side: http://jacksonparkwatch.org/updates/

The OPC will eventually get built without a doubt in my mind, although perhaps with changes to their plan.  There is no guarantee the golf course gets built IMO for funding reasons.  They need to raise money from private sources and we shall see what they come up with since so much will be donated to the OPC before much will towards the golf course, which is not a for sure project.  Love to see the golf course get into the same piggy bank together as I think the OPC will be such a bellcow aligning themselves as close as possible will be good for this project.

Thoughts? Predictions?
« Last Edit: August 02, 2018, 02:45:54 PM by Jeff Schley »
"To give anything less than your best, is to sacrifice your gifts."
- Steve Prefontaine

Jeff Schley

  • Karma: +0/-0
.
"To give anything less than your best, is to sacrifice your gifts."
- Steve Prefontaine

MCirba

  • Karma: +0/-0
Jeff Schley,

I agree with you completely, but it's a tough road, particularly given the political dynamics.

After finally getting city approval in June for our Cobb's Creek project that began in the fall of 2007, I think I'd paraphrase Hugh Wilson and say that if we knew half of what we didn't know when we started we would have never done it.   ;)
« Last Edit: August 03, 2018, 10:35:25 AM by MCirba »
"Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent" - Calvin Coolidge

https://cobbscreek.org/

Bill Shamleffer

  • Karma: +0/-0
That's not actually the Obama Library?

No.  Though it will probably hold a branch of the Chicago Public Library.


Yes, this will be his Presidential Library.
Part of the dispute that is tied in to the lawsuits is that the actual paper documents will not be physically housed at this facility, but will be housed elsewhere.  This library will have the complete digital record of the documents that are physically stored somewhere else.


Do not get pulled down this rabbit hole.
Anything of this size and scope built in any urban setting will result in upsetting some parties, and will result in lawsuits.
This whole matter is not worth my time to follow to decide who is right (or has a good point of contention or support of these plans).


Obama wants this to not just be a traditional Presidential Library but a "center" for some type of community involvement - what this full means, I am not sure?
This is not a criticism, but an honest appraisal, for I am not following this story in much detail.


I do agree - This Presidential Library will be built, and will be built at this location.  Anything further than that I do not know.
However, if I was a betting man, I would bet that the golf course renovation will happen, but could change from the initial proposed plans.


Also, quality GCA will be WAY down the list of having any significant impact.  On this aspect, one can only hope that the architect (Tiger & company) that finally works on this project will be able to do something of some significance, in spite of all of the other restrictions that will be inevitable on a project this complex.


But one just had to accept those limitations, and create what one can.


If one has an interest in the actual process of archiving records - This story is probably interesting.
If one has an interest in the complexities of injecting significant changes in to an urban community, and the good and bad of what can result, and who the winners and losers will be this will be very interesting.
I will be curious to see the final architecture of the library itself.
But I am too busy trying to get through Caro's The Power Broker this summer, to try to also follow this story.
“The race is not always to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, but that's the way to bet.”  Damon Runyon

Kalen Braley

  • Karma: +0/-0
My biggest criticism of this project has been the insane price tag.  What is the latest estimate up to? 75 million for infrastructure and course construction?

Paul OConnor

  • Karma: +0/-0
From Eric Zorn at The Chicago Tribune:

 Column: Give Jackson Park Golf Course a facelift — and forget Tiger Woods     Jackson Park Golf Course in Chicago on June 21, 2017. Groundbreaking on an ambitious plan to build a tournament championship-quality golf course on the South Side has been postponed until at least next spring. (Chris Walker / Chicago Tribune) Eric ZornEric ZornContact ReporterChange of Subject   Aw, go ahead, Chicago Park District, take a mulligan.
Like many of my tee shots, the notion of combining two scruffy municipal golf courses into one world-class course is magnificent in theory. The two Park District courses, the 18-hole Jackson Park layout and the South Shore nine-hole layout, wend intriguingly along urban streets and the Lake Michigan shoreline.
Connect them, with design assistance offered by Tiger Woods himself, and you’ve got room for a course long enough and luxe enough to attract professional tournaments and wealthy tourists, but still cheap for locals and free for kids.
But, also like many of my tee shots, the reality is disappointing.
 The cost, estimated at about $30 million when the project was announced in late 2016, is now estimated at around $60 million. Roughly half of that is supposed to come from private sources, but taxpayers will be on the hook for some $30 million in infrastructure improvements including pedestrian underpasses.
Jackson Park Watch, a community group that is opposed to the fancy combo-course, notes that construction will eliminate existing natural areas and non-golf recreational facilities. And Bill Daniels, founder of Golf Chicago magazine, is among those saying that replacing two beginner-friendly courses with a highly challenging course will discourage new players from taking up the game.
In golf lingo, a mulligan is a second chance at a bad shot with no penalty. It violates the rules, but many casual golfers allow their playing partners one per round in the sportsmanlike spirit of, “I’m sure you didn’t mean to mess up, so we’ll just pretend it never happened and try again.”
So how about a do-over?
  Groundbreaking on the project, which is conceptually linked to the nearby Barack Obama Presidential Center, was supposed to have been in May 2017 — 15 months ago — and has now been postponed until at least next spring. Representatives of the Chicago Parks Golf Alliance, a not-for-profit organization tasked with raising $30 million from private donors, would not tell me this week how that effort is going other than to say that they’re “more confident now than ever” that they’ll reach the goal.
I know where the dreamers are coming from. I’m a golf fantasizer myself. In 1978, when I visited the site of 19th century author Henry David Thoreau’s cabin in Concord, Mass., a friend and I spent most of our time trying to imagine how a nice little executive course might wrap neatly around Walden Pond. In 1996, I wrote a column proposing that 91-acre Northerly Island, then a controversial lakefront airport named Meigs Field, be bulldozed into nine spectacular holes with water hazards everywhere.
And the idea of the PGA’s best dueling against a postcard backdrop of Lake Michigan and the downtown skyline in the background is appealing.
But more appealing — as well as far cheaper and less disruptive — is the idea of simply giving the existing Jackson Park Golf Course a facelift, with or without advice from Tiger Woods. Transform it from the relatively basic track it’s been since 1899, when it opened as the first public course west of the Allegheny Mountains, into a cleverly sculpted, well-groomed layout similar to rival suburban park district courses.
The Jackson Park site has “good bones,” in the estimation of course architect Greg Martin of Sugar Grove. Martin recently played the course with Daniels and Mike Benkusky of Homewood, a fellow golf architect, and said he came away impressed by “the fun and unique green complexes” as well as the “range of yardages and challenges.”
He compared it to Wrigley Field — “a gem sitting within a neighborhood” — and suggested that it be “reimagined” rather than bulldozed.
Benkusky said that “for $3 (million) to $5 million, they could update the greens, traps and the irrigation system, plant new grasses and trees, and pull back some of the tee areas to get more yardage out of the existing footprint.”
Both architects said  championship-level courses, with their tricky, undulating greens and numerous sand traps, tend to frustrate the average player no matter how long the holes are from the closer tees. And they predicted that inevitably high maintenance costs will make it difficult to impossible for the course to be profitable if the Park District keeps to its pledge that greens fees on the new course will be under $50 for locals (fees at Jackson Park are now $35 on weekends) and free for those under 17.
Martin and Benkusky suggested it would be better for the future of golf on the South Side to turn the South Shore course into more of a training facility, with practice areas and a shorter course designed for beginners.
“Once the Tiger project is dead, which it will be, they should turn to making a well-restored, historic course accessible to all golfers,” Daniels said. “It will be a big value-add for the Obama center. For marketing purposes they could rename it ‘The Old Course at Jackson Park.’ ”
The Park District did not respond to my request for comment on the idea that officials take another swing at this one, but consider it teed up.
ericzorn@gmail.com
Twitter @EricZorn

PCCraig

  • Karma: +0/-0
The City of Chicago should hire Keith Rhebb & Riley Johns to build a Winter Park style 18 hole course on the Jackson Park grounds, and a short course/putting course where South Shore sits.
H.P.S.

V_Halyard

  • Karma: +0/-0
The City of Chicago should hire Keith Rhebb & Riley Johns to build a Winter Park style 18 hole course on the Jackson Park grounds, and a short course/putting course where South Shore sits.
I like that idea but am also still convinced the uniqueness of the lakefront, population density of golfers and high tourism OPC visitors and traffic could easily handle a fully realized, revenue positive championship golf/practice/community facility. Can it get past the protests and come in at a reasonable budget?  Current Chicagoans would need to weigh in on that one. I am of the opinion it could technically get done...
"It's a tiny little ball that doesn't even move... how hard could it be?"  I will walk and carry 'til I can't... or look (really) stupid.

MCirba

  • Karma: +0/-0
Just a hunch, but I suspect nothing this big could ever be done successfully on a small scale.

I say that as someone who has been through the process for over a decade here in Philly.
"Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent" - Calvin Coolidge

https://cobbscreek.org/

V_Halyard

  • Karma: +0/-0
Just a hunch, but I suspect nothing this big could ever be done successfully on a small scale.

I say that as someone who has been through the process for over a decade here in Philly.
Go big or go... ?
"It's a tiny little ball that doesn't even move... how hard could it be?"  I will walk and carry 'til I can't... or look (really) stupid.

Kalen Braley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Vhal,


I'm not sure if you've read the articles posted in this thread...


I know its a big city and all that comes with that, but I wouldn't say there is anything reasonable about the proposed cost of this project.

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +1/-1
But more appealing — as well as far cheaper and less disruptive — is the idea of simply giving the existing Jackson Park Golf Course a facelift, with or without advice from Tiger Woods. Transform it from the relatively basic track it’s been since 1899, when it opened as the first public course west of the Allegheny Mountains, into a cleverly sculpted, well-groomed layout similar to rival suburban park district courses.
The Jackson Park site has “good bones,” in the estimation of course architect Greg Martin of Sugar Grove. Martin recently played the course with Daniels and Mike Benkusky of Homewood, a fellow golf architect, and said he came away impressed by “the fun and unique green complexes” as well as the “range of yardages and challenges.”
He compared it to Wrigley Field — “a gem sitting within a neighborhood” — and suggested that it be “reimagined” rather than bulldozed.
Benkusky said that “for $3 (million) to $5 million, they could update the greens, traps and the irrigation system, plant new grasses and trees, and pull back some of the tee areas to get more yardage out of the existing footprint.”
Both architects said  championship-level courses, with their tricky, undulating greens and numerous sand traps, tend to frustrate the average player no matter how long the holes are from the closer tees. And they predicted that inevitably high maintenance costs will make it difficult to impossible for the course to be profitable if the Park District keeps to its pledge that greens fees on the new course will be under $50 for locals (fees at Jackson Park are now $35 on weekends) and free for those under 17.



In the investment world this is called "talking one's book".


Mike C is probably right that nothing small can be done, as long as politics are in play, and Chicago is a very political place.  Were it not, any public course operator and local golf course architect could have refurbished the course long ago, and kept it in better shape.  It's just that no one has ever made it in their interest to do so ...

SL_Solow

  • Karma: +0/-0
Actually Tom, Mike Keiser and Kemper Sports put that idea on the table several years ago and without going into detail, it didn't fly.

Jim Nugent

  • Karma: +0/-0
Actually Tom, Mike Keiser and Kemper Sports put that idea on the table several years ago and without going into detail, it didn't fly.
I'm guessing that's because the best interest of the golfers who play there now is a secondary consideration.  Otherwise, the idea you refer to would probably get more traction. 




Terry Lavin

  • Karma: +0/-0
I think that the decision makers are not interested in minimalism. They seem determined to make a statement golf course that might complement the adjacent Obama library.


The Waveland course would be a great spot for Dave Esler to do a minimalist redo.
Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people.  H.L. Mencken

Ian Mackenzie

  • Karma: +0/-0
Hilarious - just got my shoes shined on Wells and Madison.
In walks Rahm Emanuel who recognizes me as we live 2 blocks apart on north side and we walk past his house with our dog all the time.


"Mr. Mayor, how goes plans for the new golf course", I ask.
"Working on it. How's your dog?"


there you have it...;-)

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +1/-1
I don't often get my shoes shined, but if I ran into Rahm Emmanuel I would probably feel a need to get them professionally cleaned.

Joe Hancock

  • Karma: +0/-0
I don't often get my shoes shined, but if I ran into Rahm Emmanuel I would probably feel a need to get them professionally cleaned.


Be sure to include the disinfectant.


Funny, I was just thinking that if this project is attached to Obama’s Library project, i hope every contractor and consultant charges as if they were an insurance company after the passing of the Health Care Act.
" What the hell is the point of architecture and excellence in design if a "clever" set up trumps it all?" Peter Pallotta, June 21, 2016

"People aren't picking a side of the fairway off a tee because of a randomly internally contoured green ."  jeffwarne, February 24, 2017

V_Halyard

  • Karma: +0/-0

Vhal,
I'm not sure if you've read the articles posted in this thread...
I know its a big city and all that comes with that, but I wouldn't say there is anything reasonable about the proposed cost of this project.
Yes Kalen, I have read them and respect and agree with the logic of your position but to an extent, disagree based on the reality of the situation. Realistically the land will either be "made available" to a private developer for an astronomical sum or, those that want to keep it a golf course will figure out a way to either get it done. This is an outstanding piece of land that has already become too valuable to remain underdeveloped. IMO, there is a model that supports"golf-positive"development.
- I am claiming a Pat Riley style copyright to the term "golf-positive", but granting my GCA friends to use that as a politically correct term to refer to golf stuff we find GCA-worthy -
IMO, any and all "golf-positive" improvements will be a show-pony and receive bone-crushing levels of play so it might as well be architected/designed/built to the highest of architectural standards and in a manner that supports both economic and community-development.  Also, as a person with friends and family on the South Side, I will say that the area is long overdue benevolent economic support on-par with other parts of the city. One could argue that if architected properly, there is no reason it shouldn't mirror or even surpass TPC-Harding Park. I excluded Bethpage as there is only the one South Shore course in this plan. It should deliver best-in-breed defining, community-focused instruction and after-school programming. It should also be convertible to be able to generate significant revenue from a PGA caliber event. It will be a de-facto tourism magnet and generate $4-$10 per dollar spent akin to other Chicago venues. I would project that the actual golf costs led by a top architect would tally $4 Million-$10 Million with an event worthy clubhouse/space.  It won't be cheap but it will ROI. The wildcard $10-$20 Million Road/infrastructure costs admittedly push north of $30 Million. The Chicago effect pushes to $40-$50Million for a golf-positive project. I

Alternatively, the city could arguably sell a couple of parcels with air rights for $50 Million each, kill all golf and call it a day. So given that alternative, I am all-in for figuring out how to keep a golf-positive project in place. Doing the rudimentary math on a 7 Month climate-change-powered season mixing premium priced Non-Resident green fees and discounted Resident fee play, using Harding Park and NYC metro as cost a model, a course with and year round event center could gross $6-$16 Million depending on a mix of greens fees and the quality of the event center. A well architected event center goes to 100% utilization day one. Assume operations will eat 40-70% the net rounds out to $6-$8 Million/year. Reduce the note with a significant measure of private funding, major golf events, it becomes a worthwhile investment that can benefit the community. I vote for that in contrast to selling the land for development.

Lastly, I'm a teacher's kid who has lived through the de-funding of public education and activities. I have watched the negative effect of the evaporation of public activity funding for kids first hand. Assuming the proposed and significant after school and community programs are included as prerequisites, this would be an invaluable godsend for the community. So I fully support Terry Lavin’s position. There is a way to do this, and it should be done big in a way that benefits the community, and done to win.  This is a "Go Big or Get Sold" situation.     -Vaughn
« Last Edit: August 27, 2018, 05:30:00 PM by V_Halyard »
"It's a tiny little ball that doesn't even move... how hard could it be?"  I will walk and carry 'til I can't... or look (really) stupid.

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back