CHICAGO | Obama Presidential Library

[Chi-Sky21]

Why on earth does it say new metra station at 60th? Why the hell would you have 2 metra stations that close? Or is it one long station covering 59th and 60th?

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by Chi-Sky21

Why on earth does it say new metra station at 60th? Why the hell would you have 2 metra stations that close? Or is it one long station covering 59th and 60th?

The original IC station had two entrances at 59th and 60th. At some point, the entrance to 60th St was closed and bricked up, probably because most visitors to the station were UChicago students heading to the north campus. A second entrance posed security issues and required a second set of turnstiles (later removed).

South Campus, and Woodlawn generally, had safety issues for a very long time until it finally emptied out and the university took a greater role in controlling the development of the area.

It sounds like future plans either call for the re-opening of the 60th St entrance (and possibly the closure of the 59th St entrance), or for a whole new, accessible station to be constructed south of 60th and the existing station demolished.

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by maru2501

they might actually be insane.

they are going to wind up jeopardizing the entire thing in court

I doubt it. FOP has decided to grudgingly accept the Obama Library because of its strong support within the black community. Even if someone else took it to court, the Park District is perfectly within its rights to set aside some of its land for a garage or parking lot. Lincoln Park includes several large parking facilities.

This proposal for the Midway goes above and beyond by creating new recreational space on top of the garage. Whether that space will be well-designed and inviting, or remote and forbidding, remains to be seen. Putting a playground on the roof does not automatically make parents want to take their children there. The plan hints at some kind of bridge over to the Metra station, although that's probably years away.

[Kumdogmillionaire]

It's not going to court... they buried the parking structure so this thing is pretty much a sealed deal.

[10023]

If the parking structure is buried, fine. If it's 5 stories above ground then I hope FOP or someone else fights the project for as long as possible.

There are tons of blocks nearby that could be redeveloped to include parking.

[austin242]

I don't understand why y'all are so upset about the parking garage. It looks like it would be a great addition what looks like a muddy field with bad irrigation. The parking structure looks great to me.

[BVictor1]

Originally Posted by austin242

I don't understand why y'all are so upset about the parking garage. It looks like it would be a great addition what looks like a muddy field with bad irrigation. The parking structure looks great to me.

Because the garage should be somewhere else, that's why...

That, and the dumbfoundedness of not re-extending the green line back to Stony Island.

The parking should go whee Cornell Drive is today seeing as the roadway is going to get vacated.

[left of center]

Originally Posted by BVictor1

That, and the dumbfoundedness of not re-extending the green line back to Stony Island.

Never going to happen. Not after the neighborhood (led by a bunch of politically motivated, power hungry pastors) cried for the city to tear down newly reconstructed trackage which the city stupidly did, while at the same time having to pay the feds and forfeiting the transportation funds in the process.

Probably one of the most bone headed moves the city has done in the last quarter century.

[aaron38]

Originally Posted by Mister Uptempo

img src - curbed

This is ridiculous. This isn't underground parking, it isn't below grade. It's an above ground parking garage. It just has a bunch of dirt shoved up against it. That doesn't count.
They should be required to actually dig down those two levels and have the park be flat ground. Maybe a slight slope to account for landscaping needs, but that's it.

[left of center]

Originally Posted by Stockerzzz

^^
Wow, I never knew that happened.




It's a sunk cost though. They should rebuild it.

It always seemed insane to me that the University of Chicago was so hard to get to without a car.

Unlikely to ever happen. Even putting aside the whole regrettable nature of this issue, there's also the residential development that has occurred on 63rd since the L's demolition, in particular between Woodland and Kenwood, and on the corner of 63rd and Blackstone. These residents would probably not take too kindly to a giant piece of transportation infrastructure going up in their front yard (world's first case of NIMFY's?).

Rezoning 63rd for residential was the icing on the stupid cake.

[left of center]

Originally Posted by aaron38

This is ridiculous. This isn't underground parking, it isn't below grade. It's an above ground parking garage. It just has a bunch of dirt shoved up against it. That doesn't count.
They should be required to actually dig down those two levels and have the park be flat ground. Maybe a slight slope to account for landscaping needs, but that's it.

Its funny that they show 15-20' trees growing on maybe 3' of topsoil on the roof of the garage. Someone send these designers to a high school biology class.

[Arm&Kedzie]

Originally Posted by left of center

Its funny that they show 15-20' trees growing on maybe 3' of topsoil on the roof of the garage. Someone send these designers to a high school biology class.

You can grow 30' trees in 3' of soil... if you pick the correct trees (Birch, Carpinus, etc.) . I design/install them on residential rooftops all the time.

[Kumdogmillionaire]

Originally Posted by Arm&Kedzie

You can grow 30' trees in 3' of soil... if you pick the correct trees (Birch, Carpinus, etc.) . I design/install them on residential rooftops all the time.

Adding to that, I've seen 40 foot trees growing out of rocks on cliffs a million times. That dude is just looking for something to complain about when it comes to this project

[left of center]

Originally Posted by Arm&Kedzie

You can grow 30' trees in 3' of soil... if you pick the correct trees (Birch, Carpinus, etc.) . I design/install them on residential rooftops all the time.

That's pretty surprising, actually. How do trees with such shallow root systems hold themselves upright in adverse atmopheric conditions?
Typically trees of that size have 7 to 9' deep root systems, not just for stabilization but also for access to deep soil water. During dry spells, the top layers of soil dehydrate to the point where transpiration and capillary action cant really keep the tree adequately hydrated.

Originally Posted by Kumdogmillionaire

Adding to that, I've seen 40 foot trees growing out of rocks on cliffs a million times. That dude is just looking for something to complain about when it comes to this project

Trees that grow out of cliff side rocks typically have grown out of a crack where they can access soil in order to procure nutrients and water, which (adversely to your argument) necessitates a deep root system. The rock itself doesn't sustain the tree.

And yes, I do dislike the location of this garage, especially with existing empty lots in the immediate vicinity available.

[Arm&Kedzie]

Originally Posted by left of center

That's pretty surprising, actually. How do trees with such shallow root systems hold themselves upright in adverse atmopheric conditions?
Typically trees of that size have 7 to 9' deep root systems, not just for stabilization but also for access to deep soil water. During dry spells, the top layers of soil dehydrate to the point where transpiration and capillary action cant really keep the tree adequately hydrated.

At grade installations in shallow beds (<4') usually are fine without additional support. Most tree species have the vast majority of their roots within the top 1'-3' of the soil. Trees on rooftops of that size often require additional support after install with wire slings attached to anchors. Irrigation in shallow beds is a must for trees, double so if it's a on a rooftop.

[Kumdogmillionaire]

My point was that tree grow in ridiculous conditions everywhere, and manage to thrive almost everywhere. 3-4 feet of well watered and kept topsoil is plenty to have trees of that size

[left of center]

Originally Posted by Arm&Kedzie

At grade installations in shallow beds (<4') usually are fine without additional support. Most tree species have the vast majority of their roots within the top 1'-3' of the soil. Trees on rooftops of that size often require additional support after install with wire slings attached to anchors. Irrigation in shallow beds is a must for trees, double so if it's a on a rooftop.

That makes sense. I figured irrigation, as well as possible further support and anchoring might be requirement in that instance. Thanks for the insight!

Originally Posted by Kumdogmillionaire

My point was that tree grow in ridiculous conditions everywhere, and manage to thrive almost everywhere. 3-4 feet of well watered and kept topsoil is plenty to have trees of that size

I never argued that they didn't. Trees are very versatile and adaptable, but adverse conditions typically stunt growth or cause trees to grow atypical of their standard height and canopy coverage. My initial point was the rendering in question showed fully grown mature trees on 3' of topsoil, and that simply seemed somewhat incongruous to my knowledge on the subject.






In an effort to bring this thread back to topic, anyone know what the deal is with the planned ME 60th St station? Its only a block apart from the existing 59th St station. I assume this wont be a separate station, but rather an entrance/exit on 60th St for the existing station?

[VKChaz]

Originally Posted by left of center

...
In an effort to bring this thread back to topic, anyone know what the deal is with the planned ME 60th St station? Its only a block apart from the existing 59th St station. I assume this wont be a separate station, but rather an entrance/exit on 60th St for the existing station?

I believe this was addressed several comments up by ardecila. I'm guessing the 60th entrance will simply be reopened.

[Mr Downtown]

...and it turns out it won't be in any sense a presidential library. Instead, it'll have a Chicago Public Library branch. That can't fail to revive Woodlawn!

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by Mr Downtown

...and it turns out it won't be in any sense a presidential library. Instead, it'll have a Chicago Public Library branch. That can't fail to revive Woodlawn!

Yeah I read that as well. This thing is a steal! I'm glad we beat out New York on this one...