HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

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


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #681  
Old Posted Mar 4, 2020, 3:09 AM
Bonsai Tree's Avatar
Bonsai Tree Bonsai Tree is online now
Small but Mighty
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 220
Quote:
Originally Posted by bhawk66 View Post
Actually, are not the buildings right on the infill? It appears that way from the most recent site plan.

If that north/south street in the picture nearest the old river route can be identified that would tell it.
^^ That's Clark street. Same street placement as today.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #682  
Old Posted Mar 4, 2020, 3:32 AM
SIGSEGV's Avatar
SIGSEGV SIGSEGV is online now
He/his/him. >~<, QED!
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Loop, Chicago
Posts: 2,898
Man that picture... I thought the Roosevelt Bridge was a big no-man's land now... it was way more so back then!
__________________
And here the air that I breathe isn't dead.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #683  
Old Posted Mar 4, 2020, 7:48 AM
aphedox aphedox is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 12
The new site plan is definitely a huge improvement over what was proposed before in that the buildings align to a grid and will allow future bridge connections etc. But, seriously, still no east-west connection to wells anywhere between 9th and 15th? Anyone stuck in the inevitable traffic jam on wells will undoubtedly feel hopelessly trapped. Why couldn't they put a connection on 13th? Sure there are probably some concerns about steep grade in this location, but I don't see why they couldn't be overcome by sinking the Lasalle/13th intersection slightly and by lengthening the new 13th connection by having it be curved as I've drawn.


Last edited by aphedox; Mar 4, 2020 at 8:07 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #684  
Old Posted Mar 4, 2020, 2:37 PM
SIGSEGV's Avatar
SIGSEGV SIGSEGV is online now
He/his/him. >~<, QED!
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Loop, Chicago
Posts: 2,898
I don't think demolishing parts of DP2 for EW traffic is in the cards, unfortunately. However there should really be a crossing of the RI line somewhere between Polk and Roosevelt even if just for pedestrians, which would help a little bit with connectivity.
__________________
And here the air that I breathe isn't dead.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #685  
Old Posted Mar 4, 2020, 6:02 PM
Chi-Sky21 Chi-Sky21 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Chicago
Posts: 991
Polk is the only spot i think you could add a bridge that would make sense. Tracks are just so wide west of this site i just do not see a crossing happening.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #686  
Old Posted Mar 5, 2020, 12:10 AM
the urban politician the urban politician is offline
The City
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Chicago region
Posts: 19,357
Shorter blocks have the effect of mitigating speeding cars.

Really don’t care for what Daley did to the Roosevelt/Canal intersection years ago. Did that guy ever think about anything other than the car?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #687  
Old Posted Mar 5, 2020, 3:44 AM
BVictor1's Avatar
BVictor1 BVictor1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 9,618
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chi-Sky21 View Post
Polk is the only spot i think you could add a bridge that would make sense. Tracks are just so wide west of this site i just do not see a crossing happening.
Taylor would work too.
__________________
titanic1
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #688  
Old Posted Mar 5, 2020, 2:52 PM
jtown,man jtown,man is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,537
Quote:
Originally Posted by sentinel View Post
Uhh, it's a park. Parks are good..or are they not anymore?
No. Too many parks create too many dead spaces.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #689  
Old Posted Mar 5, 2020, 3:08 PM
Randomguy34's Avatar
Randomguy34 Randomguy34 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Chicago & Philly
Posts: 1,117
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtown,man View Post
No. Too many parks create too many dead spaces.
Don't forget that the 78 will have 10,000 units and 24,000 jobs. That's not including the amount of people that will visit the site on a given day. The parks here will definitely get used
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #690  
Old Posted Mar 5, 2020, 3:45 PM
Chi-Sky21 Chi-Sky21 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Chicago
Posts: 991
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVictor1 View Post
Taylor would work too.
True, i did not say Taylor because i can not really tell how far east they can push it through. But Taylor does go west further than Polk so i guess it is whichever you would prefer.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #691  
Old Posted Mar 5, 2020, 6:06 PM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is offline
TL;DR
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: the city o'wind
Posts: 14,469
Supposedly the TIF spending for The 78 will include a new, operable river bridge at Taylor Street, but will not extend Taylor any further east under the Rock Island tracks.

I'm not sure why they didn't include a street connection to Wells at 13th... possibly because the grades would be too steep?
__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #692  
Old Posted Mar 5, 2020, 9:03 PM
Kumdogmillionaire's Avatar
Kumdogmillionaire Kumdogmillionaire is offline
Development Shill
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,097
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtown,man View Post
No. Too many parks create too many dead spaces.
U wot m8
__________________
For you - Bane
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #693  
Old Posted Mar 5, 2020, 10:47 PM
sentinel's Avatar
sentinel sentinel is offline
Plenary pleasures.
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,251
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtown,man View Post
No. Too many parks create too many dead spaces.
Nonsense.
__________________
Don't be shy. Step into the light.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #694  
Old Posted Mar 6, 2020, 5:02 PM
Handro Handro is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Chicago
Posts: 918
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gedung Tinngi View Post
Will there be a pedestrian connection to Ping Tom Park?

I can only imagine it being a fantastic feature to someday walk from the Loop to Chinatown along the River.
Yes, there will be an connection that allows (eventually) a continuous walk from the lake along the river to Ping Tom Park (once the Riverline river walk is complete).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #695  
Old Posted Mar 6, 2020, 11:14 PM
emathias's Avatar
emathias emathias is offline
Adoptive Chicagoan
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: River North, Chicago, Illinois
Posts: 5,105
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtown,man View Post
No. Too many parks create too many dead spaces.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sentinel View Post
Nonsense.
Anyone who's read any of Jane Jacob's works knows that the grandmother of new urbanism was no fan of parks. I don't think I can do her arguments about them justice, but anyone interested in urban design should probably read her works if for no other reason than so many other urbanists have read them and they inform a lot of contemporary opinions.

I like parks, but I also feel that it is absolutely possible to have too many parks, or parks that are too big for the area they serve. Cities exist for commerce, and while residents and visitors do need some open space to stretch their legs or have a break from the hustle of the city, a poorly planned and/or implemented park can do more harm than good. Ultimately, quality is far more important than quantity when it comes to parkland.
__________________
I like travel and photography - check out my Flickr page.
CURRENT GEAR: Nikon Z6, Nikon Z 14-30mm f4 S, Nikon Z 24-70mm f/4 S, Nikon 50mm f1.4G
STOLEN GEAR: (during riots of 5/30/2020) Nikon D750, Nikon 14-24mm F2.8G, Nikon 85mm f1.8G, Nikon 50mm f1.4D
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #696  
Old Posted Mar 6, 2020, 11:48 PM
Darude_Sandstorm Darude_Sandstorm is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2020
Location: Chicago
Posts: 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by emathias View Post
Anyone who's read any of Jane Jacob's works knows that the grandmother of new urbanism was no fan of parks. I don't think I can do her arguments about them justice, but anyone interested in urban design should probably read her works if for no other reason than so many other urbanists have read them and they inform a lot of contemporary opinions.

I like parks, but I also feel that it is absolutely possible to have too many parks, or parks that are too big for the area they serve. Cities exist for commerce, and while residents and visitors do need some open space to stretch their legs or have a break from the hustle of the city, a poorly planned and/or implemented park can do more harm than good. Ultimately, quality is far more important than quantity when it comes to parkland.
Interesting, I'll have to check that out. The one thing I know about her is that her antithetical take on "make no little plans" is a great counter to Burnham's position.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #697  
Old Posted Mar 7, 2020, 12:27 AM
bnk bnk is offline
SUSPENDED
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: chicagoland
Posts: 11,104
Quote:
Originally Posted by emathias View Post
Anyone who's read any of Jane Jacob's works knows that the grandmother of new urbanism was no fan of parks. I don't think I can do her arguments about them justice, but anyone interested in urban design should probably read her works if for no other reason than so many other urbanists have read them and they inform a lot of contemporary opinions.

I like parks, but I also feel that it is absolutely possible to have too many parks, or parks that are too big for the area they serve. Cities exist for commerce, and while residents and visitors do need some open space to stretch their legs or have a break from the hustle of the city, a poorly planned and/or implemented park can do more harm than good. Ultimately, quality is far more important than quantity when it comes to parkland.
Her view point might be different now than from the early 60's.

Her is her view point and explanation via pod cast.

https://www.thenatureofcities.com/20...erican-cities/
__________________
facebook
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #698  
Old Posted Mar 7, 2020, 2:03 AM
the urban politician the urban politician is offline
The City
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Chicago region
Posts: 19,357
This entire site is going to be developed into large towers, whether they be tall or horizontal with huge floorplates. The layout of the park within that context seems totally appropriate. I can get the complaints about the park if this development were going to be full of townhomes or 3 story buildings, but that is not the case.

Jane Jacobs was great for the context of where she lived—Greenwich Village. But her views are just not the final say on good planning. I agree that Burnham was better. Jane Jacobs was good at making cute places. But we don’t want cute places, we want great places where great ideas and commerce is happening. The 78 is supposed to be that kind of place.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #699  
Old Posted Mar 7, 2020, 1:04 PM
Handro Handro is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Chicago
Posts: 918
My problem is not with the park, it’s with the big plazas between all of the buildings. Walk around the blocks bounded by Wacker/Randolph/Michigan/Columbus—I used to live in Lakeshore East, that area was abandoned and windswept most of the time.

This will probably be built with a better pedestrian experience in mind (different era) but I think it’s a fair criticism that arcdedlia(?) made about too much open space. I’d prefer to see shorter buildings if it meant a more contiguous street wall.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #700  
Old Posted Mar 7, 2020, 1:32 PM
west-town-brad west-town-brad is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 396
Is this not just the evolution of corporate office park meets urban infill?
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 8:38 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.