STOP THE 78
On September 18th, the Chicago Plan Commission approved the proposal by developer Related Midwest
to build a 22,000-seat soccer stadium for the Chicago Fire on "The 78"
https://www.chicagotribune.com/2025/09/18/plan-commission-the-78/
The Chicago Fire team must now get the go-ahead from the city’s zoning board before making it’s pitch
to the City Council for final approval for the stadium which will serve as the key attraction
for $8 billion "The 78" megadevelopment.
to build a 22,000-seat soccer stadium for the Chicago Fire on "The 78"
https://www.chicagotribune.com/2025/09/18/plan-commission-the-78/
The Chicago Fire team must now get the go-ahead from the city’s zoning board before making it’s pitch
to the City Council for final approval for the stadium which will serve as the key attraction
for $8 billion "The 78" megadevelopment.
Why the Proposed Chicago Fire Soccer Stadium
and Related Midwest High-Rise Development Should Not Be Built on “The 78” Site
and Related Midwest High-Rise Development Should Not Be Built on “The 78” Site
The proposed construction of a Chicago Fire soccer stadium on “The 78” site in the South Loop is a deeply flawed plan that prioritizes private commercial interests over the long-term public good, equity, and responsible urban development. There are multiple critical reasons why this project should not move forward:
Loss of promised public land. “The 78” site was originally designated to include a publicly accessible research and innovation district, with extensive parkland, riverfront access, and community-centered development. Replacing this vision with a private stadium & high-rise development betrays the original commitment made to Chicagoans, especially the residents of surrounding neighborhoods.
Displacement of community needs. South Loop and nearby neighborhoods like Chinatown, Pilsen, and Bronzeville have long advocated for resources such as affordable housing, cultural spaces, and public parks. A stadium & high-rise development does not serve these urgent community needs and may in fact divert resources and attention from them.
Environmental and traffic concerns. Stadiums & high-rise developments bring heavy traffic congestion, noise pollution, and increased carbon emissions, especially when located in dense urban areas with limited infrastructure to support large game-day crowds. “The 78” proposed development situated at a fragile riverfront ecosystem, could also see adverse environmental impacts from such high-intensity development.
Lack of public input. Despite the stadium’s far-reaching consequences, the decision-making process has lacked genuine public engagement. Community meetings have been limited, and many residents feel excluded from the planning process. Development of this magnitude should only proceed after a transparent, inclusive consultation with those most affected.
Privatization of public investment. Allowing a private sports franchise to occupy and profit from this land undermines the public’s return on investment and raises serious questions about corporate giveaways on public land.
Seasonal, limited use. A soccer stadium is a single-use, seasonal venue, one that sits empty most of the year. In contrast, parks and civic use would provide year-round benefits and vitality to the area.
Increased gentrification and inequity. Large-scale developments like stadiums often accelerate gentrification, raising property values and displacing lower-income residents in nearby neighborhoods. This stadium threatens to widen racial and economic disparities in an already unequal city.
Better sites exist. Chicago has numerous underutilized sites with existing transit and infrastructure much better suited to large-scale stadiums. The 78 is a unique opportunity to create a vibrant, mixed-use neighborhood, not a concrete fortress used a few dozen times per year.
“The 78” is one of the last major undeveloped parcels of land near downtown Chicago. To surrender it to a private soccer franchise and high-rise development would be a monumental failure of civic planning. Chicago has the opportunity to build something innovative, inclusive, and enduring on this site. A soccer stadium does not meet that standard and must be rejected.
Loss of promised public land. “The 78” site was originally designated to include a publicly accessible research and innovation district, with extensive parkland, riverfront access, and community-centered development. Replacing this vision with a private stadium & high-rise development betrays the original commitment made to Chicagoans, especially the residents of surrounding neighborhoods.
Displacement of community needs. South Loop and nearby neighborhoods like Chinatown, Pilsen, and Bronzeville have long advocated for resources such as affordable housing, cultural spaces, and public parks. A stadium & high-rise development does not serve these urgent community needs and may in fact divert resources and attention from them.
Environmental and traffic concerns. Stadiums & high-rise developments bring heavy traffic congestion, noise pollution, and increased carbon emissions, especially when located in dense urban areas with limited infrastructure to support large game-day crowds. “The 78” proposed development situated at a fragile riverfront ecosystem, could also see adverse environmental impacts from such high-intensity development.
Lack of public input. Despite the stadium’s far-reaching consequences, the decision-making process has lacked genuine public engagement. Community meetings have been limited, and many residents feel excluded from the planning process. Development of this magnitude should only proceed after a transparent, inclusive consultation with those most affected.
Privatization of public investment. Allowing a private sports franchise to occupy and profit from this land undermines the public’s return on investment and raises serious questions about corporate giveaways on public land.
Seasonal, limited use. A soccer stadium is a single-use, seasonal venue, one that sits empty most of the year. In contrast, parks and civic use would provide year-round benefits and vitality to the area.
Increased gentrification and inequity. Large-scale developments like stadiums often accelerate gentrification, raising property values and displacing lower-income residents in nearby neighborhoods. This stadium threatens to widen racial and economic disparities in an already unequal city.
Better sites exist. Chicago has numerous underutilized sites with existing transit and infrastructure much better suited to large-scale stadiums. The 78 is a unique opportunity to create a vibrant, mixed-use neighborhood, not a concrete fortress used a few dozen times per year.
“The 78” is one of the last major undeveloped parcels of land near downtown Chicago. To surrender it to a private soccer franchise and high-rise development would be a monumental failure of civic planning. Chicago has the opportunity to build something innovative, inclusive, and enduring on this site. A soccer stadium does not meet that standard and must be rejected.
Note that Third Ward Alderman Pat Dowell has stated "I have been proud to present numerous residential and commercial developments proposed for neighborhoods across the 3rd Ward… including The Chicago Fire Soccer Stadium at "The 78"
hinting at her support and approval of the Chicago Fire Stadium and development of high-rises this site in the South Loop.
hinting at her support and approval of the Chicago Fire Stadium and development of high-rises this site in the South Loop.
View the Third Ward Virtual Community Meeting on the proposed Chicago Fire Stadium held on Tuesday September 9th, 2025:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?si=JwoKf88q-lTRcwmO&v=KMYqNBSsO5A&feature=youtu.be&themeRefresh=1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?si=JwoKf88q-lTRcwmO&v=KMYqNBSsO5A&feature=youtu.be&themeRefresh=1
Chicago Fire’s luxury-first stadium plan at “The 78” leaves everyday fans priced out
Many South Loop residents and community advocates worry that the proposed stadium development at “The 78” would not truly serve the broader public, but instead prioritize affluent fans and corporate interests. The Chicago Fire have already indicated that their revenue model would rely heavily on premium subscriptions and high-priced skyboxes, which suggests that far fewer affordable seats would be available to everyday Chicagoans. For neighborhood residents, this raises concerns that the stadium could become an exclusive entertainment venue catering to wealthier audiences, while the costs of congestion, noise, and infrastructure strain are borne by the community at large.
Combined with the potential for higher rents, property taxes, and increased living costs in the South Loop, the project risks creating a situation where locals experience the downsides of living next to a major sports complex without the benefit of accessible, affordable events. In this light, the proposed development feels less like a community asset and more like a luxury destination built on the doorstep of residents who may be priced out of enjoying it.
Combined with the potential for higher rents, property taxes, and increased living costs in the South Loop, the project risks creating a situation where locals experience the downsides of living next to a major sports complex without the benefit of accessible, affordable events. In this light, the proposed development feels less like a community asset and more like a luxury destination built on the doorstep of residents who may be priced out of enjoying it.
"The 78" could be home to the Chicago Fire's new stadium and the White Sox new ball park
The Chicago White Sox continue to view "The 78" as a viable option for a new ballpark, even as the Chicago Fire advance their plans for a $650 million privately funded stadium on the site. With more than 62 acres along the riverfront, Related Midwest’s vision allows room for both teams, and the White Sox believe a two-stadium development remains a real possibility.
“We believe in Related Midwest’s vision for The 78 and remain confident the location could serve as a home to both teams,” the organization said. “Certainly, two stadiums can fit on that property. As long as the infrastructure supports it and fans can easily get in and out, the site can be a destination for both baseball and soccer.” Sports development experts note that while coordination will be needed for scheduling and access, the opportunity to create a rare two-team sports hub would be a win for the city, the fans, and the long-term growth of The 78.
A dual-stadium development at "The 78" could bring major challenges for South Loop residents. Traffic and congestion are among the biggest concerns, as baseball and soccer events, on top of those already happening at Soldier Field, Wintrust Arena, and McCormick Place, could overwhelm local streets and public transit. Parking pressures would likely spill into residential areas, with fans competing for spots and driving up rates. Beyond transportation, the quality of life in the neighborhood could be affected by increased noise, light pollution, and late-night crowds. Many residents also worry about safety and the loss of the South Loop’s residential character as the area shifts toward a year-round entertainment zone.
On the economic side, a large sports and entertainment hub could drive up housing costs, rents, and property taxes, putting pressure on current residents. Finally, if public money is used to support stadium infrastructure, neighbors may feel that taxpayer dollars are being diverted from schools, parks, and other community priorities to subsidize private teams. Together, these concerns reflect why many in the South Loop may view the prospect of two stadiums at "The 78" with fear.
“We believe in Related Midwest’s vision for The 78 and remain confident the location could serve as a home to both teams,” the organization said. “Certainly, two stadiums can fit on that property. As long as the infrastructure supports it and fans can easily get in and out, the site can be a destination for both baseball and soccer.” Sports development experts note that while coordination will be needed for scheduling and access, the opportunity to create a rare two-team sports hub would be a win for the city, the fans, and the long-term growth of The 78.
A dual-stadium development at "The 78" could bring major challenges for South Loop residents. Traffic and congestion are among the biggest concerns, as baseball and soccer events, on top of those already happening at Soldier Field, Wintrust Arena, and McCormick Place, could overwhelm local streets and public transit. Parking pressures would likely spill into residential areas, with fans competing for spots and driving up rates. Beyond transportation, the quality of life in the neighborhood could be affected by increased noise, light pollution, and late-night crowds. Many residents also worry about safety and the loss of the South Loop’s residential character as the area shifts toward a year-round entertainment zone.
On the economic side, a large sports and entertainment hub could drive up housing costs, rents, and property taxes, putting pressure on current residents. Finally, if public money is used to support stadium infrastructure, neighbors may feel that taxpayer dollars are being diverted from schools, parks, and other community priorities to subsidize private teams. Together, these concerns reflect why many in the South Loop may view the prospect of two stadiums at "The 78" with fear.
Chinatown residents oppose plans for Chicago Fire soccer stadium
and high-rise development at "The 78"
and high-rise development at "The 78"
Chicago’s Chinatown residents are opposing plans for a $650 million Chicago Fire soccer stadium at "The 78" development, warning it could drive gentrification and displacement.
At a July 30th town hall at the Pui Tak Center, speakers raised concerns about rising property values, loss of affordable housing, parking shortages, and potential environmental impacts to Ping Tom Memorial Park, a cultural anchor for the neighborhood. "One of the primary concerns is that property values will shoot up very fast and sudden, before you can make more money to afford your new rent and your new property tax," one woman said at the town hall meeting.
Critics say developer Related Midwest has not engaged with the community, and they want to protect and preserve Chinatown’s residents, small businesses, and cultural character from the $7 billion mega-project, and not price people out of the neighborhood.
At a July 30th town hall at the Pui Tak Center, speakers raised concerns about rising property values, loss of affordable housing, parking shortages, and potential environmental impacts to Ping Tom Memorial Park, a cultural anchor for the neighborhood. "One of the primary concerns is that property values will shoot up very fast and sudden, before you can make more money to afford your new rent and your new property tax," one woman said at the town hall meeting.
Critics say developer Related Midwest has not engaged with the community, and they want to protect and preserve Chinatown’s residents, small businesses, and cultural character from the $7 billion mega-project, and not price people out of the neighborhood.
The congestion challenge on Roosevelt Road in the South Loop will only get worse
Chicago drivers lost an average of 155 hours a year in traffic, the worst in the U.S. and second globally only to London.
- Chicago Business
Roosevelt Road serves as a major east-west corridor in the South Loop, connecting the Loop’s transit hubs with the Museum Campus, Soldier Field, and Lakefront Trail. It's role in handling both vehicular and pedestrian traffic makes it prone to chronic congestion and safety issues. This heavy demand has made it one of the most congested streets in the neighborhood. The road carries a constant stream of commuters, visitors, and ride-hailing vehicles, and is frequently strained by closures and rerouting during major events in Grant Park such as festivals, sports games, and the NASCAR street race. Roosevelt has become a chokepoint for both cars and buses, creating a frustrating experience for drivers and slowing access to key destinations.
Safety is also a major concern. Intersections such as Roosevelt and Wabash, or Roosevelt and Canal, are widely considered among the city’s most hazardous, with frequent traffic collisions, double-parking, and confusing crossing patterns. Cyclists describe stretches of Roosevelt as dangerous and unpredictable. Pedestrians face their own challenges, navigating narrow sidewalks, poorly timed crosswalks, and intersections that prioritize cars queuing for highway access rather than safe foot traffic. For residents and visitors alike, walking Roosevelt can be both unpleasant and unsafe.
What Locals Are Saying
“That Roosevelt/Wabash intersection is a literal death trap… Cars double-park in the bike lane on this stretch like crazy.”
- local Reddit user
"The crossings over the Dan Ryan at Taylor, 18th, and Cermak are all bad, but Roosevelt, in particular, is extremely hostile."
- frustrated pedestrian on Reddit
Many South Loop residents remain frustrated by the persistent congestion and the lack of consistent protection for people walking or biking. Local voices often point to the Roosevelt/Wabash intersection as a “literal death trap.”
- Chicago Business
Roosevelt Road serves as a major east-west corridor in the South Loop, connecting the Loop’s transit hubs with the Museum Campus, Soldier Field, and Lakefront Trail. It's role in handling both vehicular and pedestrian traffic makes it prone to chronic congestion and safety issues. This heavy demand has made it one of the most congested streets in the neighborhood. The road carries a constant stream of commuters, visitors, and ride-hailing vehicles, and is frequently strained by closures and rerouting during major events in Grant Park such as festivals, sports games, and the NASCAR street race. Roosevelt has become a chokepoint for both cars and buses, creating a frustrating experience for drivers and slowing access to key destinations.
Safety is also a major concern. Intersections such as Roosevelt and Wabash, or Roosevelt and Canal, are widely considered among the city’s most hazardous, with frequent traffic collisions, double-parking, and confusing crossing patterns. Cyclists describe stretches of Roosevelt as dangerous and unpredictable. Pedestrians face their own challenges, navigating narrow sidewalks, poorly timed crosswalks, and intersections that prioritize cars queuing for highway access rather than safe foot traffic. For residents and visitors alike, walking Roosevelt can be both unpleasant and unsafe.
What Locals Are Saying
“That Roosevelt/Wabash intersection is a literal death trap… Cars double-park in the bike lane on this stretch like crazy.”
- local Reddit user
"The crossings over the Dan Ryan at Taylor, 18th, and Cermak are all bad, but Roosevelt, in particular, is extremely hostile."
- frustrated pedestrian on Reddit
Many South Loop residents remain frustrated by the persistent congestion and the lack of consistent protection for people walking or biking. Local voices often point to the Roosevelt/Wabash intersection as a “literal death trap.”
A Chicago city park would be significantly better than a soccer stadium
and a high-rise development on “The 78” site for several compelling reasons.
and a high-rise development on “The 78” site for several compelling reasons.
A park offers public access and year-round use. A park is open to everyone, every day. Unlike high-rise developments and a stadium which is used only for scheduled events and often fenced off, a park provides consistent public value, serving families, residents, workers, students, and tourists alike.
A park offers environmental and health benefits. Urban parks improve air quality, reduce the urban heat island effect, and support mental and physical health by offering green space for exercise, play, and relaxation. The proximity to the river makes this a prime location for ecological restoration, native plantings, and biodiversity.
A park offers supports equitable development. A well-designed park promotes inclusive community use, especially in a diverse and historically underserved area like the Near South Side. Green space benefits all income levels and demographics.
A park offers economic and social value. Parks increase surrounding property values, attract businesses, and support tourism. They also reduce public health costs over time by promoting wellness.
A park offers opportunities for community gatherings and events. Unlike a stadium geared toward profit-driven events, a park can host free cultural events, farmers markets, performances, outdoor classes, and festivals, truly serving the public good.
A park offers climate resilience and riverfront restoration. With thoughtful planning, a park could include wetlands, storm-water retention, and native landscaping, enhancing the city’s climate resilience and restoring natural habitat along the river, turning “The 78” into a model for green urbanism.
Building a park at “The 78” would reflect a long-term investment in public health, social equity, environmental sustainability, and quality of life. It would benefit all Chicagoans, not just fans or team owners, and create a lasting legacy of open space and inclusion rather than limited-access commercial development.
A park offers environmental and health benefits. Urban parks improve air quality, reduce the urban heat island effect, and support mental and physical health by offering green space for exercise, play, and relaxation. The proximity to the river makes this a prime location for ecological restoration, native plantings, and biodiversity.
A park offers supports equitable development. A well-designed park promotes inclusive community use, especially in a diverse and historically underserved area like the Near South Side. Green space benefits all income levels and demographics.
A park offers economic and social value. Parks increase surrounding property values, attract businesses, and support tourism. They also reduce public health costs over time by promoting wellness.
A park offers opportunities for community gatherings and events. Unlike a stadium geared toward profit-driven events, a park can host free cultural events, farmers markets, performances, outdoor classes, and festivals, truly serving the public good.
A park offers climate resilience and riverfront restoration. With thoughtful planning, a park could include wetlands, storm-water retention, and native landscaping, enhancing the city’s climate resilience and restoring natural habitat along the river, turning “The 78” into a model for green urbanism.
Building a park at “The 78” would reflect a long-term investment in public health, social equity, environmental sustainability, and quality of life. It would benefit all Chicagoans, not just fans or team owners, and create a lasting legacy of open space and inclusion rather than limited-access commercial development.
The name “The 78” is purposely misleading
Related Midwest developers introduced the branding “The 78” as the name for the large development plot in Chicago’s South Loop when they announced the project in 2019 as a massive mixed-use development on a 62-acre site. Naming the proposed mega-development “The 78” by Related Midwest is a clever act of branding that functions as subtle propaganda, intended to reframe a controversial private project as a public good.
The name “The 78” rewrites history. Chicago is traditionally known to have 77 community areas, each with its own identity, history, and character. By calling this development “The 78,” Related Midwest is implying that this new tract of land deserves equal standing alongside historic neighborhoods like Pilsen, Bronzeville, and Hyde Park, and that the area was somehow missing from Chicago's identity and their development is the solution to complete the city.
This is a manufactured sense of inevitability. It suggests that the project isn’t just another real estate development, but a necessary civic evolution. It Masks Private Interest as Public Progress. Calling it “The 78” obscures the fact that it is a privately driven venture for profit. The name evokes a city planning milestone, like a new park or museum district, not a soccer stadium pushed through without community consensus, a high-rise complex of luxury towers and financial opportunity zone that benefits wealthy investors. The rebranding attempts to make something corporate feel civic.
The name “The 78” silences dissent. If you oppose “The 78,” it makes it sound like you’re against progress, against completing Chicago, or against your own city’s future. It becomes harder to criticize the project without being painted as anti-growth or anti-opportunity. The name leverages emotional resonance to frame opposition as regressive, not protective.
The name “The 78” glosses over scale and impact. A name like “The 78” sounds neutral, clean, modern, even innocuous. It downplays the reality of potential traffic and environmental impact, massive displacement risk, and further erosion of accessible public space. It’s branding designed to make people feel good before they ask tough questions.
It’s a Trojan horse of a name, inviting, sleek, and seemingly harmless, while concealing a much more complex, contentious, and impactful reality.
The name “The 78” rewrites history. Chicago is traditionally known to have 77 community areas, each with its own identity, history, and character. By calling this development “The 78,” Related Midwest is implying that this new tract of land deserves equal standing alongside historic neighborhoods like Pilsen, Bronzeville, and Hyde Park, and that the area was somehow missing from Chicago's identity and their development is the solution to complete the city.
This is a manufactured sense of inevitability. It suggests that the project isn’t just another real estate development, but a necessary civic evolution. It Masks Private Interest as Public Progress. Calling it “The 78” obscures the fact that it is a privately driven venture for profit. The name evokes a city planning milestone, like a new park or museum district, not a soccer stadium pushed through without community consensus, a high-rise complex of luxury towers and financial opportunity zone that benefits wealthy investors. The rebranding attempts to make something corporate feel civic.
The name “The 78” silences dissent. If you oppose “The 78,” it makes it sound like you’re against progress, against completing Chicago, or against your own city’s future. It becomes harder to criticize the project without being painted as anti-growth or anti-opportunity. The name leverages emotional resonance to frame opposition as regressive, not protective.
The name “The 78” glosses over scale and impact. A name like “The 78” sounds neutral, clean, modern, even innocuous. It downplays the reality of potential traffic and environmental impact, massive displacement risk, and further erosion of accessible public space. It’s branding designed to make people feel good before they ask tough questions.
It’s a Trojan horse of a name, inviting, sleek, and seemingly harmless, while concealing a much more complex, contentious, and impactful reality.
Voice opposition to “The 78” Related Midwest development
Despite the city's effort to put forward the idea of the plot of land along the Chicago River as a “new neighborhood,” “the 78" is not a new neighborhood, but part of an existing neighborhood, our neighborhood, the South Loop. Plopping a stadium & high-rise development down along the Chicago River and south of Roosevelt Road adjacent to our established mainly-residential neighborhood will do nothing but disturb our way of life.
Related Midwest developers have stated that the project of developing the "78" will take 15 to 20 years, which translates to 15 to 20 years of noise, traffic, and disruption to the South Loop. This huge project will have lasting effects on the social, environmental, and economic fabric of our community.
Construction noise and disruption: Prolonged construction will mean constant noise, dust, and street closures, directly affecting families, seniors, and workers in the area.
Increased traffic and crowding: Large events will bring significant congestion to local streets and strain public transit systems that are already at capacity during peak hours.
Noise pollution: Noise from games and concerts, especially during evenings and weekends, poses a real disturbance for nearby residents trying to enjoy their homes.
Rent hikes and displacement: The anticipation of increased tourism and property value is already fueling rent increases. Long-term residents and renters could be priced out of the neighborhood they’ve helped shape.
If you want to voice opposition to “The 78” Related Midwest development in Chicago’s South Loop neighborhood, here are the key city government officials and offices you can contact:
Chicago Mayor’s Office: Mayor Brandon Johnson - The mayor has a lot of influence over city planning and major developments.
email: [email protected]
Phone: (312) 744-3300
Chicago Plan Commission - The Plan Commission reviews major developments and zoning changes.
Noah Szafraniec / CPC staff: [email protected]
Omar Smailbegovic / CPC City Planner: [email protected]
Aldermen for the South Loop Area - The 78 development lies primarily within Chicago’s 3rd Ward and touches nearby wards, depending on exact boundaries. You can check the Chicago City Council ward map to confirm the exact ward for your address or the development location at: https://chicago.gov/city/en/depts/doit/supp_info/city_maps.html
Tips for Writing Your Email:
Related Midwest developers have stated that the project of developing the "78" will take 15 to 20 years, which translates to 15 to 20 years of noise, traffic, and disruption to the South Loop. This huge project will have lasting effects on the social, environmental, and economic fabric of our community.
Construction noise and disruption: Prolonged construction will mean constant noise, dust, and street closures, directly affecting families, seniors, and workers in the area.
Increased traffic and crowding: Large events will bring significant congestion to local streets and strain public transit systems that are already at capacity during peak hours.
Noise pollution: Noise from games and concerts, especially during evenings and weekends, poses a real disturbance for nearby residents trying to enjoy their homes.
Rent hikes and displacement: The anticipation of increased tourism and property value is already fueling rent increases. Long-term residents and renters could be priced out of the neighborhood they’ve helped shape.
If you want to voice opposition to “The 78” Related Midwest development in Chicago’s South Loop neighborhood, here are the key city government officials and offices you can contact:
Chicago Mayor’s Office: Mayor Brandon Johnson - The mayor has a lot of influence over city planning and major developments.
email: [email protected]
Phone: (312) 744-3300
Chicago Plan Commission - The Plan Commission reviews major developments and zoning changes.
Noah Szafraniec / CPC staff: [email protected]
Omar Smailbegovic / CPC City Planner: [email protected]
Aldermen for the South Loop Area - The 78 development lies primarily within Chicago’s 3rd Ward and touches nearby wards, depending on exact boundaries. You can check the Chicago City Council ward map to confirm the exact ward for your address or the development location at: https://chicago.gov/city/en/depts/doit/supp_info/city_maps.html
- Alderman Pat Dowell (3rd Ward) Email: [email protected]
Phone: (312) 744-4503 - Alderman Lamont J. Robinson (4th Ward) Email: [email protected]
Phone: (312) 744‑2690 - Alderman Nicole Lee (11th Ward) Email: [email protected]
Phone: (773) 254‑6677 - Alderman Byron Sigcho‑Lopez (25th Ward) Email: [email protected]
Phone: (773) 523‑4100 - Alderman Bill Conway (34th Ward) Email: [email protected]
Phone: (312) 744‑6820 - Alderman Brendan Reilly (42nd Ward) Email: [email protected]
Phone: (312) 744‑5000
Tips for Writing Your Email:
- Be clear and respectful.
- State your opposition and reasons (e.g., environmental concerns, community impact, traffic, loss of park space).
- Mention that you are a resident or stakeholder.
- Ask for a response or to be kept informed.
"I lived in San Diego’s Gaslamp neighborhood in the early 2000's during what ended up being a very disruptive period in my life due to construction. First, a baseball stadium went up just a block from my home. No sooner was that finished than construction began on a 22-story high-rise directly across the street from me, followed by another high-rise just half a block away. I worked from home, so I endured relentless construction noise day after day for five years straight. Beyond the constant racket, the projects brought traffic congestion, dust, and dirt-filled air. What should have been an exciting, vibrant neighborhood instead became a nonstop construction zone, which was stressful and nearly impossible to live in peacefully. I do not want to go through another such experience in my life, now in Chicago."
- Stephen C. Wagner, Chicago South Loop resident
- Stephen C. Wagner, Chicago South Loop resident
|
Write me to share your thoughts and feelings about "The 78" project and what we can do to stop the disruption to our neighborhood.
|
|
The Chicago Fire have officially unveiled plans to build a privately funded, 22,000-seat soccer stadium on about 9 acres of The 78 site. Construction is expected to begin in early 2026, with opening slated for the 2028 MLS season. The Guardian The Wall Street Journal
The Chicago Fire shared a proposal for a soccer stadium as part of The 78 development. But the new plan won’t achieve walk/bike/transit goal. - Streetsblog
Uber and Lyft have surged, with many trips funneling through Roosevelt Road toward the Loop, adding to congestion. Chicago Business
Closures and rerouting around Grant Park for events like NASCAR races, festivals, or sports games frequently strain Roosevelt’s capacity. Reddit+1.
Roosevelt & Canal is widely mentioned as one of Chicago’s worst intersections. Reddit
Chinatown residents air opposition to Chicago Fire FC stadium, The 78 development at town hall. cbsnews
Chinatown residents question benefits of planned Chicago Fire stadium. chicago.suntimes
This full control and private funding model enables them to bypass the political and financial hurdles that derailed the White Sox proposal. The Wall Street Journal On Tap Sports Net
The Sox organization still publicly acknowledges The 78 as an option, stating they “continue to consider the site as an option" and remain "in conversations with Related Midwest about the site’s possibilities.” NBC Chicago AudacySports Business Journal
Related and city leaders, including Mayor Brandon Johnson, have expressed openness to the idea of co-locating two stadiums at the site. The Real Deal ABC7 Chicago
Stop the "78" www.pr.com/press-release
|