HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > General Development


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #30141  
Old Posted Aug 20, 2015, 8:10 PM
Via Chicago Via Chicago is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 4,658
Quote:
Originally Posted by the urban politician View Post
I think the best solution is to focus on walkability in the core, and increasingly allow more car-oriented development as you move outward. That kind of seems to be happening already. But I would like to see an outright ban on new strip malls within a certain radius of downtown or within a certain radius of L stops.
the fact that new strip malls are still going in on North Broadway is utterly maddening
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30142  
Old Posted Aug 20, 2015, 8:12 PM
the urban politician the urban politician is offline
The City
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Chicago region
Posts: 17,635
^ I've given up on N. Broadway.

Luckily, there are plenty of other strips that are doing well.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30143  
Old Posted Aug 20, 2015, 8:17 PM
moorhosj moorhosj is offline
Closed account
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 511
Quote:
I think this really is simply a case of cars=bad because cars are heavily associated with the suburbs. And anything associated with the suburbs on this forum is hastily cast aside and dismissed.
Cars are bad because their significant negative externalities. They are dangerous, produce lots of pollution, reduce exercise and are expensive (to purchase and maintain roads). I don't think infrastructure investments should encourage people to buy quickly depreciating assets that require pollutants to run when better alternatives exist.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30144  
Old Posted Aug 20, 2015, 8:20 PM
Tom Servo's Avatar
Tom Servo Tom Servo is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,647
Quote:
Originally Posted by Swicago Swi Sox View Post
This is definetly true, and it will be interesting to see how the new smaller Target in the old Fox and Obel space will turn out in Streeterville.

That said, I do not like the way the Target on Division turned out. The redevelopment in that area is going to make that neighborhood very walkable very soon. This Target put a huge parking area on the first floor of almost the entire footprint of the building, with only the glassy entrace at Larabee acting as street entrance to the second floor store. This created a very long stretch of Divion that is fronted by a blank facade of brick, fake windows, and louvers. It would have been better for the urban environment if they had put something on division other than the entrance. Maybe they could have placed their concessions area and a starbuck or something on division to create the apperance of a real storefront and draw in neighbors that way.
Can't win them all, I guess. In any event, that area should grow up well, and that Target, and its design flaws, will become lost in its surroundings. I think what's most important is that the concerted effort to deliver a decidedly more urban building doesn't go unnoticed.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30145  
Old Posted Aug 20, 2015, 8:35 PM
Tom Servo's Avatar
Tom Servo Tom Servo is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,647
Quote:
Originally Posted by moorhosj View Post
Cars are bad because their significant negative externalities. They are dangerous, produce lots of pollution, reduce exercise and are expensive (to purchase and maintain roads). I don't think infrastructure investments should encourage people to buy quickly depreciating assets that require pollutants to run when better alternatives exist.
Whatever. I totally disagree.

Cars are only as dangerous as the (potential) morons operating them. The only issues I've ever had driving involved complete idiots that had no business operating a moving vehicle. So, eliminate the idiocy factor, eliminate the danger factor. Pretty simple.

Pollution? Hardly. Cars these days aren't the egregious pollution machines they once were.

Reduce exercise? Because sitting on a bus is somehow exercise? Or do you mean the marginal amount of exercise one gets from walking a few blocks.

Look, there's nothing wrong with cars. They're hugely convenient and make life a whole lot easier. Despite the INSANE amount of bullshit this city throws at car owners, it's worth it in the end, especially not having to deal with the trains or busses. And that's the point, a lot people endure the costs for the convenience. After all, it's not like the CTA is free.

Anyway, I'm not gonna win this uphill battle against you guys. It is what it is, I guess. It's noble so many of you want to make the city a more pedestrian friendly environment.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30146  
Old Posted Aug 20, 2015, 8:51 PM
Jibba's Avatar
Jibba Jibba is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,665
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Servo View Post
I'm only saying, why desire a city that isn't what we already have. And to that extent, I'm only saying, why oppose parking lots when we already function just fine with them, many of them.
The problem with this is that it presumes that the mix of development we have now is at equilibrium. Chicago's mix seems to be in flux with cars being incorporated into new developments and retrofitted into older, pre-car-dominant fabric, and new dense developments replacing low-density areas. With the advent of off-street parking requirements, car storage is a given for any new development, and many older neighborhoods that have old stock that has been demolished are replacing that with Walgreen's, Bank of America, 7-11, McDonald's, etc. that all have large amounts of parking. This creates a culture and an expectancy of driving and parking. Add to that the fact that big box centers are within convenient driving distance of many (if not all) Chicago neighborhoods, and you have automotive hegemony. Housing requires it, the cars that come with it have places to drive. This also puts legacy retail stock at a disadvantage, because now they don't offer the convenience of the strip centers.

To me, we are not "function[ing] just fine with them" as the balance has been tipped in their favor, which will only foster that archetype even more (they definitely don't exist in a vacuum). The new TODs are a step in the right direction, but they are no match for the opposing force, and they are far outnumbered, IMO.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30147  
Old Posted Aug 20, 2015, 9:15 PM
PKDickman PKDickman is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 557
Quote:
Originally Posted by ardecila View Post
I love the concept of "Wicker Park Connection" but the branding is atrocious. It's a really interesting, unusual piece of urban design for Chicago. Obviously it has the usual security concerns with a blind corner and being far from auto traffic, but if they can activate it successfully 24/7 then it shouldn't attract criminals.

It should really be called a lane, alley, mews, market, or arcade... "Wicker Park Connection" sounds like the name of a wannabe urban boutique in Downtown Naperville. The existing little stub plaza on Milwaukee is called Mautene Court, but I can understand why that's not the catchiest name for marketing purposes.

PKDickman, can you lean on these guys for a better name?
It was gonna be Wicker Commons, but they sold that with the shopping center.
I think they like names with "C"s for "Centrum" branding.

This thing is still at the pipedream stage.

We listened to 25 minutes of what species of tree and what color of hammock (perhaps they could call it the hobo jungle) and about 3 minutes on bulk and density. The remaining 2 minutes were about progress on the Division street part of the project (already approved).

Remember, these guys are the same ones that brought us the Roosevelt and Lakeview Collections.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30148  
Old Posted Aug 20, 2015, 9:25 PM
DonMendigo DonMendigo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Chicago/Madrid
Posts: 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by moorhosj View Post
Cars are bad because their significant negative externalities. They are dangerous, produce lots of pollution, reduce exercise and are expensive (to purchase and maintain roads). I don't think infrastructure investments should encourage people to buy quickly depreciating assets that require pollutants to run when better alternatives exist.
Not to mention the trillions of dollars spent to support a military industrial complex in order to secure the supply of oil to fuel cars.

I lived in Chicago for 10 years without a car and easily obtained groceries either walking or taking the bags on transit.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30149  
Old Posted Aug 20, 2015, 9:35 PM
rlw777 rlw777 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 1,640
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Servo View Post
Whatever. I totally disagree.

Cars are only as dangerous as the (potential) morons operating them. The only issues I've ever had driving involved complete idiots that had no business operating a moving vehicle. So, eliminate the idiocy factor, eliminate the danger factor. Pretty simple.

Pollution? Hardly. Cars these days aren't the egregious pollution machines they once were.

Reduce exercise? Because sitting on a bus is somehow exercise? Or do you mean the marginal amount of exercise one gets from walking a few blocks.

Look, there's nothing wrong with cars. They're hugely convenient and make life a whole lot easier. Despite the INSANE amount of bullshit this city throws at car owners, it's worth it in the end, especially not having to deal with the trains or busses. And that's the point, a lot people endure the costs for the convenience. After all, it's not like the CTA is free.

Anyway, I'm not gonna win this uphill battle against you guys. It is what it is, I guess. It's noble so many of you want to make the city a more pedestrian friendly environment.
Cars aren't bad. It's just that the use of cars and the accommodations we make for them (parking lots etc.) make a hell of a lot less sense in a densely populated urban environment where goods and services are within walking distance than in the suburbs or in a rural town, places where people have no other option than to travel a long distance to a central location for goods and services.

That doesn't mean not having any cars it should mean less accommodating cars and more accommodating people in higher density locations preferably with decent access to public transit.

On a side note. In tech there's a bit of talk of self driving cars doing away with the majority of car ownership. The idea is that instead of buying a car you pay for a service that will have an electric self driving car for you anytime and anywhere you want. Cars would go and charge themselves at some location between being used. People will still own cars but what I read suggests that the majority of people would simply pay for the service. It got me thinking though if that becomes reality. What are we gonna do with all these parking podiums?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30150  
Old Posted Aug 20, 2015, 10:01 PM
Steely Dan's Avatar
Steely Dan Steely Dan is online now
devout Pizzatarian
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Lincoln Square, Chicago
Posts: 21,505
Quote:
Originally Posted by rlw777 View Post
What are we gonna do with all these parking podiums?
bitching indoor go-kart tracks.

CRAPLOADS of bitching indoor go-kart tracks.
__________________
He has to go.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30151  
Old Posted Aug 20, 2015, 10:41 PM
sentinel's Avatar
sentinel sentinel is offline
Plenary pleasures.
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,955
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Dan View Post
bitching indoor go-kart tracks.

CRAPLOADS of bitching indoor go-kart tracks.

Good GOD that sounds amazing!
__________________
Don't be shy. Step into the light.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30152  
Old Posted Aug 20, 2015, 10:46 PM
VKChaz VKChaz is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 392
Quote:
Originally Posted by wierdaaron View Post
I think people just prefer not to use garages because of the mental cost of navigating a vehicle up tight ramps and around blind corners in the dark with cars everywhere. It's an interesting bit of social science.
It is interesting. I have seen the same phenomenon in other cities - people seem to be gravitating to either surface lots or what is effectively the first level of parking.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30153  
Old Posted Aug 20, 2015, 10:53 PM
VKChaz VKChaz is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 392
Quote:
Originally Posted by the urban politician View Post
But I would like to see an outright ban on new strip malls within a certain radius of downtown or within a certain radius of L stops.
Hear, hear
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30154  
Old Posted Aug 21, 2015, 1:01 AM
BVictor1's Avatar
BVictor1 BVictor1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 9,490
Saw plans for the proposal for Pioneer Court in front of 401 N. Michigan Avenue.

I can't say too much, but I will say

No tenants have been signed just yet, although we all suspect Apple.

And one last hint on how things could go......
__________________
titanic1
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30155  
Old Posted Aug 21, 2015, 2:36 AM
XIII's Avatar
XIII XIII is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Chicago
Posts: 284
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVictor1 View Post
Saw plans for the proposal for Pioneer Court in front of 401 N. Michigan Avenue.

I can't say too much, but I will say

No tenants have been signed just yet, although we all suspect Apple.

And one last hint on how things could go......
So there could soon be Foster, Gang, Vinoly, Jahn and MAD works going up here.
All we need is some Hadid and I think we have a yahtzee
__________________
"Chicago would do big things. Any fool could see that." - Ernest Hemingway
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30156  
Old Posted Aug 21, 2015, 2:38 AM
Ryanrule Ryanrule is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 772
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Servo View Post
Exactly my questions. The Chicago forumers on this page seem to be living in some kind of hyper romanticized idea of a city. Unless you live within a few blocks of a grocery store, car-less shopping just is not practical. Public transportation + grocery shopping sucks. I fell bad for the less fortunate that can't afford a car and are forced onto our busses and trains. Oh, and please spare me all the anecdotal "I do my shopping one bag at a time throughout the week and take the train just fine" bullshit. No family shops like that, so don't even try.

It's really obnoxious how everyone on this forum has this bizarre attitude of car=bad or parking lot=bad
if you dont live within walking of a grocery store, you are NOT living in a CITY.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30157  
Old Posted Aug 21, 2015, 2:53 AM
BVictor1's Avatar
BVictor1 BVictor1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 9,490
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryanrule View Post
if you dont live within walking of a grocery store, you are NOT living in a CITY.
Some of us in certain areas of the city live in what's called a Food Desert. I don't consider Aldi's a real grocery store. The nearest grocery store to me is more than 1 1/2 miles away. There are no modern full service grocers in the Woodlawn Community.
__________________
titanic1
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30158  
Old Posted Aug 21, 2015, 3:05 AM
rlw777 rlw777 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 1,640
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVictor1 View Post
Saw plans for the proposal for Pioneer Court in front of 401 N. Michigan Avenue.

I can't say too much, but I will say

No tenants have been signed just yet, although we all suspect Apple.

And one last hint on how things could go......
I've been hoping for a Foster design in Chicago. I wish it were something more monolithic and thus more permanent but I will take what I can get.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30159  
Old Posted Aug 21, 2015, 3:06 AM
Mister Uptempo's Avatar
Mister Uptempo Mister Uptempo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Chicago
Posts: 189
Quote:
Originally Posted by sentinel View Post
I find this attitude a lot among Chicagoans, and it's also the strongest 'townie superiority complex/mild xenophobia' that I've ever encountered anywhere in the U.S. Perhaps it's a function of less education, geographic location, generational pride, hard-wired yokel intransigence or a magic mix of all of the preceding ingredients..who knows?

Maybe Chicago is just the city with the most whiners?
So, the best method to counter someone who paints with a very broad brush is to paint with an even broader one. Brilliant.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30160  
Old Posted Aug 21, 2015, 3:09 AM
Ryanrule Ryanrule is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 772
Quote:
Originally Posted by Near North Resident View Post
I always laugh about how people say america is a 'free market economy' I tell them, oh yea? Go try and sell something on the street and see how well that goes
its harder here, but go try to start an actual business elsewhere. here its a matter of days. elsewhere it can be months with much $$ in bribery/bureaucracy oil.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > General Development
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 2:16 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.