Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Downtown
...(If you think the mere physical combination of density and ground-level retail spaces is sufficient, I invite you to stroll along 71st Street in South Shore).
|
South Shore isn't terrible, just less wealthy. If you wanted more wealthy people there, you'd start by improving transit access to the Loop, but until Metra Electric starts being run like the "L," I don't think that area's gonna be popular with the kids these days.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Downtown
Skyscraper streets do not generate retail; they seem to extinguish it. Exhibit 1: Sheridan Road in Edgewater. Or any street in East Streeterville. The streetscapes we admire and enjoy walking, around the world, are those with maximum six-story buildings.
|
Sheridan Road isn't vacant because it's surrounded by high-rises, it's vacant because it's less than a block from the Lake and therefore is freezing cold 8/12 months of the year. It's also become more or less a defacto extension of LSD, with speeding cars racing up or down it half the time. Those two factors MORE than negate any plus OR minus factor the high rises have. Plus, the hi-rises there aren't designed to be conducive to street-level retail.
The best retail districts in the world have been that way for decades, if not a century, so many of them were built before highrises. Many others are in cities that simply don't allow highrises. I think this particular argument of your is a little disingenuous. :-)
Both State Street and Michigan Avenue have quite a few 12+ story buildings along them and I'd argue once you're over 12 it doesn't make much difference. 5th Avenue in New York is also a helluva shopping street and it's nearly 100% highrise. There are also shopping streets in Boise, Seattle, Portland and San Francisco that are dominated by high rises. If most shopping districts don't have high-rises, it's because most cities and neighborhoods don't have highrises, not because highrises don't lend themselves to retail.