Originally Posted by
onthesam
Lol landmarking is a classic Chicago political power grab
. But in this instance, that explanation makes little sense. I can't imagine any federal landmarking would apply and locally, if Dept. of Aviation was in favor, so too would the Landmarks Commission be (same monster, different tentacles). UA are probably getting shook down errr requested to do things in exchange for approvals.
100% a shake down by the unions that are going to do the work. Guarantee that working on such a "historically significant landmark" comes with a higher daily rate. Bureaucrats help push that because their political bosses need the union $upport. Welcome to the Chicago virtuous cycle.
Last I heard (and this was now about a year ago) they were looking at doing a second level for the C concourse club only to decide that would probably be too expensive. I don't see any other real option because its not like they're going to sacrifice a gate to expand the C club, especially in that section of C where they can board the wide bodies. I think EWR shows that the United Clubs at hubs aren't exactly a priority for UA. Their thinking is probably that the B lounge is sufficient even for those connecting at C, which I have to admit is my ORD club travel pattern (use B and walk to C concourse, may then pop in C lounge if the flight gets delayed after I depart B but more likely to just go to one of the small bars in C instead).