HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > General Development


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #81  
Old Posted May 15, 2018, 3:48 AM
Mr Downtown's Avatar
Mr Downtown Mr Downtown is offline
Urbane observer
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,095
Quote:
Originally Posted by left of center View Post
Hopefully the planning department sees this as well, and advises Related to allow for additional east-west streets
The Chicago Department of Planning and Development????? Where the "Planning" is silent?

Yes, I'd like to have 14th as well, but the elevation is a tricky matter because the Metra tracks are descending there, so they cross 14th at only about +3. You'd have to dig down to -15 or so to get 14th through. Now you've got 500 feet of 14th that's below ground level, so what kind of streetscape can it possibly have?

Last edited by Mr Downtown; May 15, 2018 at 4:24 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #82  
Old Posted May 15, 2018, 3:56 PM
Jim in Chicago Jim in Chicago is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 344
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kumdogmillionaire View Post
I don't know if I'm as concerned as you on this Left_of_Center. Spending time in the South Loop and Printer's Row has taught me that there is very little vehicular traffic in that part of the city. Sure, Well st. being connected will add some, but I doubt it's enough to earn the worries you have. I think because of the suburban hell to the east of the location and industrial wasteland just on the other side of the river it'll still be shielded from much traffic. Maybe years down the line when more people know about it, it'll become a shortcut, but I'm not worried. Most people will use public transit and their feet to get there
I'm not sure what you're talking about in terms of the general lack of traffic, but at the moment Clark, Harrison, Polk, etc. is hell on earth traffic-wise. I think much of this is, hopefully, temporary as all the traffic that hasn't been able to enter the loop off of the northbound Ryan for years now has found its way to the Chinatown feeder ramp and them up Clark. There are periods where it can take me 20-25 minutes to get from LSD to the corner of Clark and Harrison.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #83  
Old Posted May 15, 2018, 4:14 PM
Kumdogmillionaire's Avatar
Kumdogmillionaire Kumdogmillionaire is offline
Development Shill
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,015
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in Chicago View Post
I'm not sure what you're talking about in terms of the general lack of traffic, but at the moment Clark, Harrison, Polk, etc. is hell on earth traffic-wise. I think much of this is, hopefully, temporary as all the traffic that hasn't been able to enter the loop off of the northbound Ryan for years now has found its way to the Chinatown feeder ramp and them up Clark. There are periods where it can take me 20-25 minutes to get from LSD to the corner of Clark and Harrison.
Not the part of the South Loop(outside of Clark) I'm concerned about or that would affect this development really so... Also you are talking East West corridors, which don't feed into this development. Again, irrelevant, as well as talking about how bad rush hour traffic is, being that that's just a Chicago thing and not unique to those streets. Construction on the Jane Byrne is probably responsible for the Polk, Harrison issues anyway. Only Clark would be affected by this change, but for the best, since it wouldn't have to take Wells southbound traffic anymore
__________________
For you - Bane
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #84  
Old Posted May 15, 2018, 4:35 PM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is offline
TL;DR
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: the city o'wind
Posts: 13,886
Yeah even if you wanted additional East/west streets, I’m not sure there’s anything to connect to between Roosevelt and 15th. Within the site itself, the park allows for continuous connectivity from east to west, at least for pedestrians.

I think the traffic generated by this new development is entirely contingent on how auto-oriented Related chooses to go. The fact they are willing to spend a 9-digit sum on a new subway station suggests they are serious about transit orientation and low parking ratios.

Obviously there will still be Loop-bound cut-through traffic on Wells through the site, but I don’t see a lot of traffic on the other streets that would justify a full grid or wide collector streets. Compare to Lakeshore East, the internal roads are lightly used because the heavy traffic is routed around the perimeter on Wacker/LSD/Randolph/Columbus. The internal streets don’t form useful through routes, so they only serve vehicles with origins/destinations inside the site. There is a similar situation at the 78 with Clark, 18th, Roosevelt, and the new Wells.
__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #85  
Old Posted May 15, 2018, 8:15 PM
Jim in Chicago Jim in Chicago is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 344
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kumdogmillionaire View Post
Not the part of the South Loop(outside of Clark) I'm concerned about or that would affect this development really so... Also you are talking East West corridors, which don't feed into this development. Again, irrelevant, as well as talking about how bad rush hour traffic is, being that that's just a Chicago thing and not unique to those streets. Construction on the Jane Byrne is probably responsible for the Polk, Harrison issues anyway. Only Clark would be affected by this change, but for the best, since it wouldn't have to take Wells southbound traffic anymore
Not irrelevant since it is you who mentioned familiarity with Printer's Row which is dead center of the area I'm talking about. Traffic is horrendous, and not just at rush hour.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #86  
Old Posted May 15, 2018, 9:37 PM
Kumdogmillionaire's Avatar
Kumdogmillionaire Kumdogmillionaire is offline
Development Shill
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,015
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in Chicago View Post
Not irrelevant since it is you who mentioned familiarity with Printer's Row which is dead center of the area I'm talking about. Traffic is horrendous, and not just at rush hour.
I guess I've just never noticed this :/ It's always dead when I'm roaming there. I also don't drive almost ever, so that might be a major factor in my selective bias
__________________
For you - Bane
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #87  
Old Posted May 17, 2018, 2:15 AM
SolarWind's Avatar
SolarWind SolarWind is offline
Chicago
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 4,025
May 16, 2018

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #88  
Old Posted May 24, 2018, 2:19 AM
Randomguy34's Avatar
Randomguy34 Randomguy34 is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Chicago & Philly
Posts: 1,043
PD submitted on City Clerk: https://chicago.legistar.com/Legisla...vanced&Search=

Highlights
-Maximum 10,000 units (Assuming average 2.5 people per unit, max density is 258,064 ppl/sq mi)
-On average ~0.4 parking ratio
-FAR 5.6
-PD is for phase 1 of the project

Phase 1 consists of new roads, a river wall, and the relocation of the Metra tracks so that Lasalle St can be built on top at a later phase


Here's a general idea of the streets planned for the final phase:

Last edited by Randomguy34; May 24, 2018 at 2:37 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #89  
Old Posted May 24, 2018, 2:58 AM
left of center's Avatar
left of center left of center is offline
1st Ward
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: The Big Onion
Posts: 1,909
Interesting, looks like there will be another road connection between (upper) Clark St and LaSalle, aligned roughly with where you'd expect to find 12th Pl. The connections along 13th St and 14th St and LaSalle look to be pedestrian only.

I still think it would be prudent for the planners to put in another street that connects Wells and LaSalle other than just 15th.
__________________
"Eventually, I think Chicago will be the most beautiful great city left in the world." -Frank Lloyd Wright
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #90  
Old Posted May 24, 2018, 2:58 PM
Kumdogmillionaire's Avatar
Kumdogmillionaire Kumdogmillionaire is offline
Development Shill
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,015
Quote:
Originally Posted by left of center View Post
Interesting, looks like there will be another road connection between (upper) Clark St and LaSalle, aligned roughly with where you'd expect to find 12th Pl. The connections along 13th St and 14th St and LaSalle look to be pedestrian only.

I still think it would be prudent for the planners to put in another street that connects Wells and LaSalle other than just 15th.
That would cut the park in half... no thanks, I've had enough of that annoying shit at Grant Park
__________________
For you - Bane
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #91  
Old Posted May 24, 2018, 3:37 PM
the urban politician the urban politician is offline
The City
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Chicago region
Posts: 17,635
The street connections for this site plan are pretty good, all things considered. Certainly better than the shitshow that is Dearborn Park (demolish that place, already!). I'm quite pleased to see this.
__________________
Eat less
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #92  
Old Posted May 24, 2018, 4:00 PM
kemachs kemachs is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Boomtown
Posts: 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolarWind View Post
May 16, 2018


Once the 78 comes to life, that 2 story Target is going look like even more of an under-utilization of the intersection. Potential for redevelopment in 10 years, maybe? 20?

Of course the same is true of Dearborn Park, but that one would require the buyout of many property owners...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #93  
Old Posted May 24, 2018, 5:55 PM
left of center's Avatar
left of center left of center is offline
1st Ward
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: The Big Onion
Posts: 1,909
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kumdogmillionaire View Post
That would cut the park in half... no thanks, I've had enough of that annoying shit at Grant Park
It wouldn't be cutting the park in half. If the street oriented near 13th was extended eastward to meet Wells, it would only cut off the small northern tip of the park. I think its a fair compromise for accessibility and traffic flow.
__________________
"Eventually, I think Chicago will be the most beautiful great city left in the world." -Frank Lloyd Wright
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #94  
Old Posted May 24, 2018, 7:05 PM
Chi-Sky21 Chi-Sky21 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Chicago
Posts: 875
I dont think it can be at 13th because of the ramps to Roosevelt. I think you could only really do it at 14th, and if you do that i think you need to make 14th go all the way through to Wabash
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #95  
Old Posted May 24, 2018, 7:32 PM
left of center's Avatar
left of center left of center is offline
1st Ward
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: The Big Onion
Posts: 1,909
^ According to the plans posted by Randomguy, there appears to be an intersection planned for upper Clark a bit north of where 13th St would be on the grid (13th Pl perhaps?) that connects Clark to the to be constructed LaSalle St.
__________________
"Eventually, I think Chicago will be the most beautiful great city left in the world." -Frank Lloyd Wright
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #96  
Old Posted May 24, 2018, 8:27 PM
Kumdogmillionaire's Avatar
Kumdogmillionaire Kumdogmillionaire is offline
Development Shill
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,015
Quote:
Originally Posted by left of center View Post
^ According to the plans posted by Randomguy, there appears to be an intersection planned for upper Clark a bit north of where 13th St would be on the grid (13th Pl perhaps?) that connects Clark to the to be constructed LaSalle St.
Making an intersection right before a ramp is kind of an awful idea though...
__________________
For you - Bane
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #97  
Old Posted May 24, 2018, 9:33 PM
pilsenarch pilsenarch is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 779
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kumdogmillionaire View Post
Making an intersection right before a ramp is kind of an awful idea though...
The intersection, complete with installed traffic signals, already exists (you can even see it in the photo above with jersey barriers in the middle of it)... I would assume that once it is turned on, the signals would be coordinated with Roosevelt...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #98  
Old Posted May 24, 2018, 10:49 PM
Kumdogmillionaire's Avatar
Kumdogmillionaire Kumdogmillionaire is offline
Development Shill
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,015
Quote:
Originally Posted by pilsenarch View Post
The intersection, complete with installed traffic signals, already exists (you can even see it in the photo above with jersey barriers in the middle of it)... I would assume that once it is turned on, the signals would be coordinated with Roosevelt...
It being in place doesn't make it any less bad of an idea...
__________________
For you - Bane
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #99  
Old Posted May 25, 2018, 12:39 AM
pilsenarch pilsenarch is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 779
Well, the bottom line is that it was the only possibility of an intersection between Roosevelt and 15th with out some very serious compromises (i.e. tunnels)... it will work fine if the lights are coordinated...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #100  
Old Posted May 25, 2018, 1:35 AM
emathias's Avatar
emathias emathias is offline
Adoptive Chicagoan
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: River North, Chicago, Illinois
Posts: 4,954
Crain's reports the Related is proposing 10,000 units on-site. With 62 acres, using the downtown unit-to-occupant ratio that's a density of over 150,000 people per square mile. Of course it's only over about a tenth of a square mile, but still - pretty cool.
__________________
I like travel and photography - check out my Flickr page.
My current active camera gear: Nikon D750, Nikon 14-24mm f2.8 zoom, Nikon 85mm f1.8G, Nikon 50mm f1.4D, Nikon 70-300mm f4-5.6, Nikkor 135mm f3.5 manual focus, Nikkor 55mm f3.5 manual focus, Nikon PB-4 Bellows. Collectible gear: Nikon F4s, Nikon D1, Nikon N4004s (my very first SLR)
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > General Development
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 7:07 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.