CHICAGO | General Developments

[the urban politician]

I hope I'm not speaking too soon, but I just drove through N/C today in choked traffic and got a glimpse of the Apple store. By this time (roughly 5:30pm) it was already dark.

I think this store is really having an impact on the area. First of all, it is very bright--thus lights up that whole portion of the district like a brightly lit sign. Secondly, it just seems to exude an energy that arguably may not have been there before, especially since the store is so transparent and thus a passing observer can see crowds of people in there. Surely developers must be taking cues from this--if any of you haven't, I recommend visiting the site in the evening.

With Structured building that massive shopping center just SE of the site in a couple of months, I think this part of town is going to become even more exciting. I really can't wait!

Now if only we could do something about all that surface parking in some of the earlier developments in the area. I know Spyguy was saying that some nasty big-box stuff is on the drawing boards, but I really hope the city works with developers to try to reshape their development patterns into forms more suitable for the urban environment that this particular district is ultimately destined to be.

[Rizzo]

I think the area still has a great amount of untapped potential, and it's only going to get better in the next decade. But I'm worried about the traffic situation. Too much compromising and trying to make parking work in that area. North Avenue isn't designed for this amount of traffic. It never was. What is the solution to this? It's a terrible area to walk, and absolute nightmare to bike. I named it my #1 location I'll probably die in a bike/car accident in the city. Obviously, I'll just stick to shopping on Michigan Ave where I find all the same stores.

[k1052]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

With Structured building that massive shopping center just SE of the site in a couple of months, I think this part of town is going to become even more exciting. I really can't wait!

I'll believe New City is happening when see them starting on the foundation and not a second sooner.

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by Hayward

North Avenue isn't designed for this amount of traffic. It never was. What is the solution to this? It's a terrible area to walk, and absolute nightmare to bike. I named it my #1 location I'll probably die in a bike/car accident in the city. Obviously, I'll just stick to shopping on Michigan Ave where I find all the same stores.

The bike path/riverwalk should improve the situation for through bike traffic, giving bikers a grade-separated alternative to Clybourn.

And I think consolidating private parking into larger garages, like the one that Structured is planning, would greatly improve the traffic situation... shoppers would just park once and then walk amongst various stores. It works for State and Michigan shoppers, and downtown traffic is manageable on streets no wider than the ones at North/Clybourn.

New City will also extend Eastman through to Clybourn, and Blackhawk will also be extended (albeit in the form of a lifestyle-center driveway complete with traffic circle).

[Rizzo]

Source: Me


Source: Me

[J_M_Tungsten]

Originally Posted by Hayward

Source: Me

And then there was one...

[Mr Downtown]

Originally Posted by ardecila

downtown traffic is manageable on streets no wider than the ones at North/Clybourn.

Downtown streets are 80 feet wide, have a one-way network for efficiency, have massive redundant paths, and are not used by very many shoppers or errand-runners. Michigan Avenue is 120 feet wide.

North/Clybourn is a six-way intersection of 66-foot ROWs with no alternate paths, two-way traffic with no turn storage, used by Trixies who are texting while driving to pick up their dry-cleaning and see what's new at World Market.

[VivaLFuego]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

The SW corner of Ashland and Addison used to be a gas station, now looks like a PNC bank is under construction.

It holds the corner well. In the big scheme of things, it's at least visually better for that corner than a gas station.

This is one of the corporate-owned Shell stations that was put up for sale a couple years back. I believe the one at Halsted/Wrightwood is getting the same treatment --- conversion to a 1-story PNC bank branch hugging the corner.

As with Ashland/Addison, it's a baby step, but progress nonetheless.

[VivaLFuego]

Originally Posted by Hayward

I think the area still has a great amount of untapped potential, and it's only going to get better in the next decade. But I'm worried about the traffic situation. Too much compromising and trying to make parking work in that area. North Avenue isn't designed for this amount of traffic. It never was. What is the solution to this? It's a terrible area to walk, and absolute nightmare to bike. I named it my #1 location I'll probably die in a bike/car accident in the city. Obviously, I'll just stick to shopping on Michigan Ave where I find all the same stores.

A very big part of the traffic problem (an inherent flaw in the strip mall model) is that each retailer has provided it's own free, but exclusive, parking --- meaning any shopper in the area using their car has to jump back in after each store and get back on the streets, clogging both through and turn lanes going every which way. All the while, the intra-district traffic competes with the crosstown through traffic. The area really needs a few centralized/shared parking facilities and then re-development of the existing surface parking lots: once you arrive in the area, you aren't back in your carseat until you're leaving.

But where could such a garage go, and who would own it? In theory, avoiding the current situation is the sort of thing that the planning profession exists for...

[Baronvonellis]

I don't really think that bank at ashland and addison is that much better than the gas station. It's still a drive though bank and auto oriented with a really barebones cheap and crappy design. And they try to call it a "green bank". Why are branch banks even needed today. You can do all your banking online or at atm's now. Branch banks are just a waste of space as far as I'm concerned. That site is less than a mile from Wrigley. They should be building hotels there.

You'll get your car towed in 5 minutes if you try to walk from one strip mall to the next at north and clybourn. So, you have to drive from each shop to the next instead of parking in one spot.

[VivaLFuego]

Originally Posted by Baronvonellis

Why are branch banks even needed today. You can do all your banking online or at atm's now. Branch banks are just a waste of space as far as I'm concerned. That site is less than a mile from Wrigley. They should be building hotels there.

Retail business operators handling large quantities of small-denomination cash currency on a daily/weekly basis, dealing with employee payroll issues on a weekly/monthly basis, and periodically dealing with revolving lines of credit and assorted small loans for large capital purchases/repairs might disagree that a physical bank branch with actual bank employees is totally unneeded.

That said, I think that at least the Halsted/Wrightwood branch will not have a drive-thru due to neighbors objections (NIMBYs accomplishing something good, for once). If the Ashland/Addison branch will be totally auto-oriented (parking lot plus drive-through) then that's a shame, but at least the intersection is partially restored with one more corner building.

You'll get your car towed in 5 minutes if you try to walk from one strip mall to the next at north and clybourn. So, you have to drive from each shop to the next instead of parking in one spot.

Right, and that's one of the largest (if not the single largest) contributor to the traffic nightmare.

[Baronvonellis]

Oh, I see that makes sense then. It's slightly better because it has a building on the corner now. But it still will have parking on the majority of the lot, and a separate shed for drive through customers.

[lawfin]

Originally Posted by VivaLFuego

Retail business operators handling large quantities of small-denomination cash currency on a daily/weekly basis, dealing with employee payroll issues on a weekly/monthly basis, and periodically dealing with revolving lines of credit and assorted small loans for large capital purchases/repairs might disagree that a physical bank branch with actual bank employees is totally unneeded.

That said, I think that at least the Halsted/Wrightwood branch will not have a drive-thru due to neighbors objections (NIMBYs accomplishing something good, for once). If the Ashland/Addison branch will be totally auto-oriented (parking lot plus drive-through) then that's a shame, but at least the intersection is partially restored with one more corner building.



Right, and that's one of the largest (if not the single largest) contributor to the traffic nightmare.

Viva, I was under the impression that there was some sort of zoning change back earlier 2000's that was to put a stop to autocentric style development at major intersections such as addison / ashland.....was I just imagining that / dreaming that or was there some sort of adjustment to at least attempt to encourage better site utilization on these parcels?

These corners really should be statment corners....corners are in my opinion the exclamation point of place...and the underlying site design should respect that

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by Mr Downtown

Downtown streets are 80 feet wide, have a one-way network for efficiency, have massive redundant paths, and are not used by very many shoppers or errand-runners. Michigan Avenue is 120 feet wide.

North/Clybourn is a six-way intersection of 66-foot ROWs with no alternate paths, two-way traffic with no turn storage, used by Trixies who are texting while driving to pick up their dry-cleaning and see what's new at World Market.

I'm not implying that North/Clybourn will magically turn into a perfect street grid.

But redundancy is being added into the street network, the bottlenecks at bridges are being eliminated, and at least one large, public parking garage will be built shortly. These things can only improve the traffic situation.

I didn't realize that North, Halsted, and Clybourn are narrower than the streets in the Loop.

[J_M_Tungsten]

Edit. Edit edit

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by lawfin

Viva, I was under the impression that there was some sort of zoning change back earlier 2000's that was to put a stop to autocentric style development at major intersections such as addison / ashland.....was I just imagining that / dreaming that or was there some sort of adjustment to at least attempt to encourage better site utilization on these parcels?

These corners really should be statment corners....corners are in my opinion the exclamation point of place...and the underlying site design should respect that

^ You may be talking about the "strip mall ordinance" which is pathetically weak in its language. It lays out all the guidelines, but then doesn't enforce any of them. It says the developer should follow these guidelines, instead of making it a requirement.

In other words, it's a joke.

[Chicagoguy]

So with all of the changes happening in the North and Clybourn area....are they still thinking of building SONO 2 in the future? I would love to see more big development like that in the area!

On a separate note....does anyone know what the construction work going on on the corner of Western and Irving Park is? Are they building another section of the previous development there?

[J_M_Tungsten]

So I was just looking at the new map section on here. Has there ever been a rendering for 85 East Wacker Drive Condominiums? Its such a prominent position in the city.

[emathias]

Originally Posted by ardecila

...
and at least one large, public parking garage will be built shortly. These things can only improve the traffic situation.
...

I thought it was pretty well established that adding a lot of parking only served to induce additional drivers?

[a chicago bearcat]

Originally Posted by emathias

I thought it was pretty well established that adding a lot of parking only served to induce additional drivers?

bingo, it reduces the percentage of traffic that is spent purely orbiting while searching for parking, while simultaneously encouraging more drivers to travel to the district.

Similar to an additional lane of traffic on a street increasing capacity, which attracts more drivers to congest the street further.

You can't build your way out of congestion, & this is about as far as we can go before having to move the discussion to the transit section, huh?