CHICAGO | 700 W. Chicago (Halsted Landing) | 4 Towers | 650 - 500 FT | 57 - 44 FLOORS - Page 4

r18tdi · #61 Posted **Apr 10, 2024, 1:52 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by PittsburghPA

I love the developments and I hope it all comes to fruition. One thing I wish was part of the plans would be to widen Halsted along this stretch to accommodate more traffic. It is already a traffic mess.

Meh, maybe. Debatable if more lanes will help, but left turn arrows would be a good start and improve safety.

ardecila · #62 Posted **Apr 10, 2024, 6:09 PM**

Setting aside that widening roads is a bad idea, it's really not feasible. To really "solve" the congestion problem on Halsted you'd have to widen all the way from Van Buren up to Fullerton and tear down countless buildings. And the second you complete that project, it just fills up with traffic again as the road fills with Lincoln Parkers and Lakeview folks switching away from transit and driving to work.

The Halsted/Chicago rebuild could make the intersection work a bit more efficiently at moving cars thru. If they add bus priority you lose those efficiency gains for cars, but the total throughput gets larger when you include the bus riders both current and potential. Similar situation at Halsted/Division which will also be rebuilt. And I haven't even talked about bikes yet, Halsted is also the only direct bike corridor between the North Side and West Loop. There's simply not enough space to let everyone drive.

Really the casino project should have included a set of onramps to the Ohio Feeder, it would pull a *ton* of cars off of all the surface streets in the area.

Dasylirion · #63 Posted **Apr 10, 2024, 8:17 PM**

So unfortunate. I can't tell if it's more offensively boring or obscenely visually disorganized.

lakeshoredrive · #64 Posted **Apr 10, 2024, 9:26 PM**

I don’t have faith that this development and the other project down the street will happen. I’ve become so pessimistic with Chicago development lately. I know the high rates don’t help.

r18tdi · #65 Posted **Apr 10, 2024, 10:49 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila

Really the casino project should have included a set of onramps to the Ohio Feeder, it would pull a *ton* of cars off of all the surface streets in the area.

I've thought this since the start. An offramp would be too dangerous (with cars exiting at highway speeds), but an onramp would solve so much congestion.

Toasty Joe · #66 Posted **Apr 11, 2024, 4:32 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by r18tdi

I've thought this since the start. An offramp would be too dangerous (with cars exiting at highway speeds), but an onramp would solve so much congestion.

Part of me wants to see this, but part of me thinks the only way real change will happen in regards to transit expansion along the North Branch is for traffic & congestion to hit a critical point. It's still massively disappointing, though, because if we had our shit together, the city and developers could take advantage of TIF funds help build stations and other infrastructure while they're already digging and doing construction in the area. I bet Lincoln Yards would be in a different state today if the city was planning to bring more transit there.

BVictor1 · #67 Posted **Apr 16, 2024, 5:33 AM**

Deferred from the April plan commission.

Zapatan · #68 Posted **Apr 16, 2024, 3:55 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by BVictor1

Deferred from the April plan commission.

Damn, I guess that's not the worst news, hopefully it appears next month.

Toasty Joe · #69 Posted **Apr 16, 2024, 4:30 PM**

What are the chances the parking will be reduced? NIMBYs and YIMBYs alike were ripping into the amount of parking and the new plans for the Chicago/Halsted intersection. Could see them maybe taking that to heart but who knows.

r18tdi · #70 Posted **Apr 16, 2024, 5:38 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zapatan

Damn, I guess that's not the worst news, hopefully it appears next month.

Meh, no rush. They're not starting on this until 2030.

Zapatan · #71 Posted **Apr 16, 2024, 6:48 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by r18tdi

Meh, no rush. They're not starting on this until 2030.

Had no idea, unbelievable.

The other Halsted project should start sooner, correct?

iguy · #72 Posted **Apr 16, 2024, 10:12 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by r18tdi

Meh, no rush. They're not starting on this until 2030.

Is this sarcasm or actually the case?

The Lurker · #73 Posted **Apr 17, 2024, 4:01 AM**

Wasn't it mentioned they plan to build out Halsted Pointe before breaking ground here?

dreamy-developer · #74 Posted **Apr 17, 2024, 1:14 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Lurker

Wasn't it mentioned they plan to build out Halsted Pointe before breaking ground here?

Yes, that is what I heard Onni state in one of their meetings. Now I think it's up for interpretation on whether they intend to start 700 W while Halsted Pointe is under development, or the entire project is done

Toasty Joe · #75 Posted **Apr 17, 2024, 8:14 PM**

That seems ridiculous but I guess it's enough time to sway minds about the amount of parking and overall urbanism.

Zapatan · #76 Posted **Apr 17, 2024, 8:48 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Lurker

Wasn't it mentioned they plan to build out Halsted Pointe before breaking ground here?

I think they're starting the 500 footer soon IIRC.

Quote:

That seems ridiculous but I guess it's enough time to sway minds about the amount of parking and overall urbanism.

I'm not sure if it's actually the case or he was joking although if they're waiting for the other project to be completed then maybe he's right.