Quote:
|
Originally Posted by the urban politician
^ That's the second person whose words you put in their mouth. Please stop arguing in this fashion. BTW, I agree that RC does not detract from pedestrians just because it has parking. But this is what gets me, from 9th street all the way to 12th street, if you want to get into this development from Clark St as a pedestrian, how will you do it? Is there even 1 pedestrian entrance to this on its east side between those 2 roads? If not, then that's pretty damn sad, and shows us whom this development caters to (drivers!).
^ It's spelled 'ludicrous'. Also, Wells is just a garage entrance, right? So when it comes to through street traffic, RC has only one entrance and exit.
|
There are Metra tracks blocking entrance to this parcel of land, between Polk and Roosevelt. It has NOTHING to do with RC: no matter how the land is developed, people trying to get into this area on the east side will either have to enter at Polk or Roosevelt.
As for the ludicrous comment, I was poking fun of Left of Center's misspelling of the word, hence the quotation marks. I apologize if that went over your head.
I am in NO way trying to compare this development to Michigan or 5th avenue. All I am saying is for what the developer was given, he/she did a pretty good job. So many of you on here are going on and on about the area should be developed to have an open space with rows of restaurants, shops, and bars along all the streets....ala Manhattan or some parts of Chicago on the North Side. What all of you are either forgetting (or not even realizing) is that directly to the east, RC is bounded by Metra tracks....directly to the south, RC is bounded by the Roosevelt street bridge - which is greatly elevated over RC's parcel of land....directly to the west is Wells street, which currently is a dirt road heading south of Polk, and then ends even before it makes it to Roosevelt. Even once Wells is built up more, RC will still essentially be bounded/blocked off by the River on it's west side, as the river is just a half a block west of Wells. The most "pedestrian friendly" entrance/boundry of RC is Polk Street, which just happens to dead end at Wells due to the river.
I am huge fan myself of open space corridors full of shops, restaurants, bars, etc. I think that the South Loop will still get a lot of that - particularly at State, Wabash, and Michigan. But it ain't happening here. RC is bounded by train tracks mounted on a concrete wall, a bridge, a river, and a dead-end road on all 4 sides. I've seen many pieces of land in cities in the past along the lines of RC's parcel of land (including in NYC, which so many of you in here seem to strive for Chicago to become more like) and almost in all cases, the land was complete unused/abandoned. The developer should be lauded for still being able to put this land to pretty good use. The South Loop is the largest growing area of Chicago and it doesn't even have a movie theater or bowling alley, and is severely lacking in restaurants, shops, and health clubs. RC will deliver on the area's immediate needs for these things, and can almost serve as an anchor retail area in which smaller, streetside shops/restaurants/businesses will spout off from.
To everyone who is ripping on RC, I really have to ask: what would be your master plan for the area if you were the developer? I'm really not sure that anyone could come up with something that much better, given RC's geographical constraints.
The one thing that I will agree with most people on is that it probably would be to not allow free parking in the RC lots, as it might inspire a few lazy people to drive to RC, who could have otherwise walked. But I'm not even 100% sure if RC has even communicated yet if the parking will be free or not? If they are planning on offering free parking, that would be something that they should reconsider, as paid parking would result in only the people who need to drive actually doing so, and cutting down on veichle traffic.