Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Zekas
|
So very shiny!
Quote:
Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright
^^^ Memories of what exactly??? O_o
|
Yeah, we might be learning a little TOO much about our fellow forumers ...
Quote:
Originally Posted by 10023
This photo shows two things:
1) This area is a perfect place for a new park.
2) Chicago city blocks are way too small. Look how much road surface there is compared to actual usable land!
|
I like the block size - nothing irritates me more than excessively long blocks. The roads are too wide, though. Even my grandmother, who was probably last in Chicago in the early 1960s, had a primary memory of Chicago of the roads being "so wide!" She lived in Idaho.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ardecila
Short blocks make for a great walking experience. Obviously the architecture in this area leaves a lot to be desired, but look at Portland.
|
Exactly. Personally, I believe that Ohio, Ontario, Lasalle, Clark and Dearborn should be the only roads of any real capacity. The others should be significantly narrowed. For State Street, remove the parking lane south of Division, extend the sidewalks, and install bollards to shield pedestrians from remaining traffic, making it feel more like a street in London.
Quote:
Originally Posted by left of center
River North blocks are definitely too small, but they aren't average when it comes to the city as a whole. Blocks in the loop are about 50% larger.
Following Michigan Ave, the mile between Madison and Roosevelt is roughly 11 blocks, while the mile between Madison and Chicago is 14 blocks. Three of those are the larger blocks south of the river. The roughly 1 mile stretch between the river (starting at Kinzie) and Division contains 18 blocks.
|
Small blocks with smaller streets is my preference. Activating alleys in certain blocks would also be helpful.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 10023
I disagree about the post office, for two reasons:
1) The surrounding blocks are already largely developed, so you lose the chance to design buildings to face the park. Buildings which, of course, would not have above ground parking garages with park views, or vehicle access on the side facing the park.
2) Block size. A decent sized park needs to cover at least two city blocks in River North. Using only the post office block, or only the McDonald's block, would create a pocket park at most, more of a small square than a real park. I think a block in the area is just over 2 acres - for comparison, Washington Square Park in NY is almost 10 acres. Even Chicago's Washington Square Park, which is tiny and underutilized as a result, is more than one River North block.
Eh, perhaps, but these are too small, and the roads are too wide. Road surface takes up an enormous proportion of the land area - much more than in many places which would be considered to offer excellent walking experiences.
There needs to at least be a long term movement toward reducing the number of lanes and widening sidewalks then. Perhaps a couple of through streets that are wider, but shrink the others down to two lanes.
|
I wonder if there would be a way to create a super-block park with surrounding buildings with traffic submerged, without creating awkward underground areas. Leave the sidwalks at surface level, but force the traffic down. Could put some parking lots below the multi-block park, similarly to how Paris submerges parking in the center of some streets. Maybe if I think of it I'll sketch something along the lines of what I'm thinking of and how it might work.
Prev
Linear Mode
