CHICAGO | General Developments

[untitledreality]

Originally Posted by J_M_Tungsten

^^^ ugh, that will now make it nearly impossible to get around the tourist on the lake shore path when running or biking.

Can't be any worse than those four wheel, four passenger road blocks that currently populate the path in the summer months.

[Rizzo]

Originally Posted by untitledreality

Can't be any worse than those four wheel, four passenger road blocks that currently populate the path in the summer months.

I have a pipe-dream solution for that, but it has the possibility of being unpopular with the majority of the public and it would also be very expensive.

I'd like to see a bicycle expressway constructed just West of the existing Lakeshore trail. There would be sufficient buffer space between LSD and the bicycle expressway. The route would be depressed about 3 feet to denote limited access, but maintain visibility of the lakefront. It would also allow shallower ramp approaches for tunnels / bridges where peds would cross over or under the trail.

Most of the routing would follow up alongside LSD. It would be coordinated with future reconstruction of aging LSD overpasses and pedestrian tunnels.

This would be a complete reconstruction of the lakefront trail, but again would be coordinated with LSD modernization and reconstruction in the future.

Access would be restricted to only bicycles on the new bicycle expressway. Bicycles would be prohibited on the existing lakefront trail except kids under a certain age applicable in current bicycle laws. Quadracycles would be prohibited on the new bicycle expressway but would be permitted on the existing lakefront trail.

It would be 4 lanes with a yellow dashed centerline...however solid white "express" thru lanes with occasional dashed sections. Some shoulder space would be provided.

The architecture would be similar to that of solidarity drive. Simple graffiti-resistant tan concrete surfaces...fine burnished texture with rounded corners. Not only is the appearance attractive but it's more forgiving to impact and collision in terms of safety than traditional retaining wall construction. This would be broken up by softscapes throughout.

I have no doubt in my mind that non-cyclists will enter this space. But the current trail does receive heavy policing and enforcement during the warmer months when conflict is the biggest issue.

Anyway, I've thought it out from time to time. Even considered constructing some design imagery. But it's unlikely I'd ever see something like this. I mean the Navy Pier flyover is costing tens of millions.

[Mr Downtown]

I've also long dreamed of a separate bike path, notably in the section from North to Fullerton. But where we already do have segregated paths, approaching Navy Pier, the pedestrians walk six abreast on the bike path instead of using the sidewalk.

[Nowhereman1280]

^^^ I just yell at them when they do it and fly through any gaps that open up.


I don't know if I've seen this particular rendering of the Lycee Francias school yet:


Via Curbed

This is the redevelopment of the old Ravenswood Hospital.

[Rizzo]

Originally Posted by Nowhereman1280

^^^ I just yell at them when they do it and fly through any gaps that open up.

Well I touched on the subject of people, cars, or bikes in places they aren't supposed to be in the "people walking fast" thread. I think people in this town....and I mean Chicago specifically....don't seem to be aware of their surroundings. They cross streets when they shouldn't, they don't pay attention to people or things coming toward, behind, or to the side of them. In multi-modal, congested places people need to be more considerate and aware of their surroundings since people are all moving at different speeds or vehicles.

Sorry to get O/T. The Francias School looks nice.

[brian_b]

Originally Posted by Hayward

I think people in this town....and I mean Chicago specifically....don't seem to be aware of their surroundings. They cross streets when they shouldn't, they don't pay attention to people or things coming toward, behind, or to the side of them.

Really? My experience in Manhattan is that people get about 1/3 of the way into the street before looking to see if a car is coming.

[ChiPhi]

^^^
I was going to say the same thing. I visited a friend from New York who said "you can always tell who is a tourist because only tourists cross the street legally."

[Swicago Swi Sox]

^^^I find that a mix of tourists and locals is the worst (like Mich Ave). Locals do cross against the lights, but generally seem to know whether they can make it or not. It gets bad when a local steps out into traffic against a light and the other 50 people standing at the same intersection all start to leisurely cross behind them.

[ChiPhi]

Originally Posted by Swicago Swi Sox

^^^I find that a mix of tourists and locals is the worst (like Mich Ave). Locals do cross against the lights, but generally seem to know whether they can make it or not. It gets bad when a local steps out into traffic against a light and the other 50 people standing at the same intersection all start to leisurely cross behind them.

especially considering a lot of Chicago tourists (as awful as it is) are from the Midwest... they tend to be extra leisurely, even as their skulls slam into a windshield.

[lawfin]

Originally Posted by Swicago Swi Sox

^^^I find that a mix of tourists and locals is the worst (like Mich Ave). Locals do cross against the lights, but generally seem to know whether they can make it or not. It gets bad when a local steps out into traffic against a light and the other 50 people standing at the same intersection all start to leisurely cross behind them.

So So true. I cannot tell you the number of times I've been walking down Michigan or State or Randoplh or whatever and as I approach the corner I know which the direction the traffic is coming from so I anticipate and cross against the light sometimes and almost without fail who appear to be tourist follow and nearly get creamed or have to jump back in fright as a cab zips by. I know its not right for me to chcukle but I do

Also toursits, out of towners, suburbanites almost never bother to watch for bikes.....I have seen it many times, and have been nearly victimized by it ( someone not looking out for a bike (ie overgazing) ) as they step into the street.

[lawfin]

Originally Posted by brian_b

Really? My experience in Manhattan is that people get about 1/3 of the way into the street before looking to see if a car is coming.

Couldn't agree more

[lawfin]

Originally Posted by Hayward

Well I touched on the subject of people, cars, or bikes in places they aren't supposed to be in the "people walking fast" thread. I think people in this town....and I mean Chicago specifically....don't seem to be aware of their surroundings. They cross streets when they shouldn't, they don't pay attention to people or things coming toward, behind, or to the side of them. In multi-modal, congested places people need to be more considerate and aware of their surroundings since people are all moving at different speeds or vehicles.

Sorry to get O/T. The Francias School looks nice.

I disagree with you. I think most locals are quite aware generally. They know there is intensity of movement in the area and expect and anticipate. What you may be confusing are tourists, out of towners, suburbanites on urban safari who generally have no conception of the intensity of movement on the streets of a large city and so don't know how to adjust their behavior

[untitledreality]

Originally Posted by lawfin

suburbanites almost never bother to watch for bikes...

Think about it... when does a suburban dweller ever see bikes? or pedestrians for that matter? Bikes are either on a sidewalk, in a subdivision or on a bike trail, whereas pedestrians only seem to exist in the Home Depot parking lot

Whenever I visit out in the burbs and go for a walk or bike ride to the store, bar, whatever... I have to be on top of my game because NO ONE expects or even looks for pedestrians out there. Now take those same people, remove them from their cars and stick them in the middle of River North or the Loop? Good grief.

[Rizzo]

Well I've lived and biked in Manhattan. People jaywalk all the time, but I've found them to be a bit more conscious of oncoming traffic. I commute by bike every day down Michigan Ave. It's the same disastrous story. I've seen waves of 20 people just step into oncoming traffic. All you can do is shake your head.

It's a matter of personal opinion here.

[spyguy]

Originally Posted by denizen467

Here's something that hopefully inches North-Clybourn a little more towards ped-friendliness.

http://www.suntimes.com/11882013-418...e-station.html
Starbucks to open store at Red Line station

Not bad, although I doubt Starbucks will close its strip mall location with parking two blocks away.

Planned changes to the former Borders on North Avenue


I read in Skyline that New City is in discussions with a sporting goods store, department store, and California-based cinema (possibly ArcLight?). Across the street, the city acquired Near North Career High School, most likely to redevelop it as housing.

And finally, the block long site at Chicago Avenue and Hudson is for sale. Rendering of what a potential developer could put up there (300+ units, retail):

[the urban politician]

^ I would love to finally see something substantial go up at Hudson and Chicago.

A nice, big development would help form a transition between the millionaire's row just south of the site and the CHA rowhouses a bit to the north of it. A tall building at this site would have INCREDIBLE views, too, since its sight lines are well preserved.

[jc5680]

Which corner on hudson and chicago?

There is a newish sign on the northwest corner advertising the construction of some sort of facility for the jesse white tumblers.

Wasn't there already a proposal for a pretty decent looking senior living tower on the southwest already?

[jc5680]

scratch that, i think the jesse white tumblers building actually has the sign at sedgwick, not hudson

[Chicagoguy]

I like the transformation of the old Borders location. Has there been any word on what retail may be going in there? Couldn't really tell what the signage in the rendering was?

Interesting to hear word of a department store for the New City site, my mind automatically thinks Lord and Taylor or possibly Kohl's? I have also heard JCPenney is trying to branch out into the city as well.

Also in looking at aerials of the area I can't help but wonder why they do not build out retail along North Avenue (specifically the parking lot for Crate and Barrel and The Container Store). I wouldn't mind the parking so much if it was hidden behind a thin two story retail building. Does a single developer own those properties? I can't imagine it not being a financially sound idea, especially since those parking lots are rarely ever near capacity. The parking lot could still be entered from the back side street, and it would cut down that ridiculous traffic jam that seems to always happen when people are entering and exiting the lots from their North Ave. entrances.

[denizen467]

^ I don't really see any of those names coming to that location. Btw Kohl's is already less than a mile away to the north. That said, it's hard to think of many department store names (other than 2 that you mentioned) that are gung ho for expansion these days. What would make sense is one of those standalone departments of the department stores -- like the Bloomingdale's furniture/home at the Medinah or a Macy's equivalent or something like that. Although by now Clybourn has more furniture stores than Western had automobile dealerships, sheesh.

-----------------------

Don't know if this link was ever posted before, but it does have a PDF datestamped just 3 days ago available for download.

http://www.esquireonoak.com/

One example of some info on the site:
http://www.esquireonoak.com/images/2...-Elevation.jpg