daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > World Development News Forums > General Urban Developments > DN Archives



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old November 18th, 2006, 08:16 AM   #21
geoff_diamond
Live from the Loop
 
geoff_diamond's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,578
Likes (Received): 2

Not entirely related - but, I noticed a soil-boring truck on Clark just north of Target tonight.
__________________
Straight from Michigan and Monroe in downtown Chicago!
geoff_diamond no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old December 13th, 2006, 04:55 AM   #22
spyguy
Expert
 
spyguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 6,916
Likes (Received): 97

Interesting video tour: http://www.rclofts.com/media/roosevelt_qt.mov

Definitely makes a difference, for better or worse



Of course you have to keep in mind that there will be more new towers nearby that aren't pictured
spyguy no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 13th, 2006, 06:48 AM   #23
Mr Downtown
Urbane observer
 
Mr Downtown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,547
Likes (Received): 10

I see the steps from the north end to the park have become more ordinary. I thought they would be more Spanish Steps in concept.
Mr Downtown no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 13th, 2006, 07:34 PM   #24
geoff_diamond
Live from the Loop
 
geoff_diamond's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,578
Likes (Received): 2

Well isn't that a lovely little suburban paradise?
__________________
Straight from Michigan and Monroe in downtown Chicago!
geoff_diamond no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 13th, 2006, 09:20 PM   #25
Chicagotom
Registered User
 
Chicagotom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 420
Likes (Received): 0

I don't understand why the city hasn't forced this huge area of land (everything east of Clark from Congress to Chinatown) to be developed under the same masterplan concept as Central Station. What a uninspiring project. This is the modern day version of Dearborn Park. YUCK.
Chicagotom no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 14th, 2006, 07:57 AM   #26
Mr Downtown
Urbane observer
 
Mr Downtown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,547
Likes (Received): 10

Central Station was all under single ownership. The "masterplan" was simply a planned development ordinance.

Chicago doesn't do California-style "specific plans," and has very little use for even "master plans" or "comprehensive plans." Can you name a single thing ever not built in Chicago because it didn't conform to a plan? If it seems like a good idea at the time, the plan is completely forgotten. Even the Old Post Office was built where it would block Burnham's Congress Street axis, so they had to compromise by leaving the hole that the Eisenhower goes through.
Mr Downtown no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 14th, 2006, 09:11 AM   #27
forumly_chgoman
BANNED
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 757
Likes (Received): 10

god I feel like I just watched logan's run

that is horrible, ickey, insular , banal...it is the neighborhood that is not a neighborhood....I mean was every non-person in that video white?? it looked like it

its is startling in its superficiallity]

why can't they just build a good oled fashioned neighnorhood.....not this elitist shit
forumly_chgoman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 14th, 2006, 12:50 PM   #28
edsg25
BANNED
 
edsg25's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 9,195
Likes (Received): 105

Quote:
Originally Posted by geoff_diamond View Post
Well isn't that a lovely little suburban paradise?
geoff, i would be more inclined to call this type of development something that would occur in a nation that has experienced suburbanization rather than suburbanization itself. What I'm saying is that suburban type of developments merely carried on the growth of the metro area when the city was built up and the growth had to continue outside city limits. If you track that growth over the half century since WWII, you can see it is plainly more urban and more dense than it once was.

Truth is, today in city or suburb, small piecemeal development will not occur on a large piece of land. Something large, unified, and probably under one developer will go up. I believe such action has far less to do with suburbia and more with the times in which we live.

Let me put this one though in your court: you are the developer of a piece of land like the Roosevelt Collection. You have riverfront property and you are adjacent to a major downtown (like ours) in a growing high rise community (like the South Loop). How would you develop that piece of land so that it was profitable and pragmatic, yet truly contributed to the rich urban tapestry??????????
edsg25 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 14th, 2006, 04:39 PM   #29
danthediscoman
Registered User
 
danthediscoman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 384
Likes (Received): 1

^Yeah but there are or were ways of making this blend with the downtown much better, I don't care if this gets built or not but the city planners better not bring this sterile shit anywhere else, ever again in the direct downtown area.

I also don't see this as being "adjacent" to downtown, four-five years from now this WILL be a major part of downtown as we grow!

Last edited by danthediscoman; December 14th, 2006 at 04:46 PM.
danthediscoman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 14th, 2006, 06:14 PM   #30
FreeRadical
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Chicago
Posts: 211
Likes (Received): 0

VOID

Last edited by FreeRadical; December 15th, 2007 at 06:17 AM.
FreeRadical no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 15th, 2006, 05:41 AM   #31
The Urban Politician
The City
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 5,935
Likes (Received): 21

Quote:
Originally Posted by FreeRadical View Post
The biggest downside I see is that the mini-downtown will probably end up being overrun with panhandlers from the new Pacific Garden Mission at 14th and Canal. Its going to be a challenge for all the area businesses, but if this place has public benches and parks, they will be drawn to it, since it is on the direct path to the Loop itself.
^ Actually, in a strange sort of way, I see that as a plus side. Anything to make this development seem less insular is a good thing, if you ask me. Bring buses to its doorstep, both on Roosevelt and on 9th St. Make this a part of the city, not apart from it.
The Urban Politician no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 15th, 2006, 06:19 AM   #32
24gotham
Formerly InTheLoop
 
24gotham's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Upper West Side, NYC
Posts: 485
Likes (Received): 0

^I also agree that having a bit of reality from the big bad city surrounding this place wouldn't be the worst thing. However, I am sure the developer has figured out how to make the entire place private property including the "street" (like a mall), and will not allow any reality to creep in and cause all the recent suburban transplants to be frightened and un-easy.
__________________
24gotham - "Architecture should reflect the time in which it is built, not a previous time that may or may not have existed."

Formerly "InTheLoop" of Chicago.
24gotham no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 15th, 2006, 06:26 AM   #33
PrintersRowBoiler
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 650
Likes (Received): 1

I like the development too. If you live in the South Loop (not talking about Central Station)... after 8-5 it is very quiet. It is very isolated from the city and many people like how quiet it is there compared to places like River North. Congress really cuts off the South Loop from the loop. I like how this project will not make a huge impact on Printers Row. Building a seperate central area for the large number of condos/apartments built west of Clark will be great.
I think this will really help the development of the eyesore old rail yards become a nice place to live. Most importantly, it will also increase the values of homes down there by bringing more affluent demographics and entice more developers to build there.
Let's be honest - with Dearborn Park 1 and 2, that section of town could not survive all the high rises that everyone wants to see. It would take decades to build out. Any development off of Roosevelt, in my opinion, will be car friendly and feel urban.
PrintersRowBoiler no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 15th, 2006, 06:40 AM   #34
The Urban Politician
The City
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 5,935
Likes (Received): 21

Quote:
Originally Posted by PrintersRowBoiler View Post
Any development off of Roosevelt, in my opinion, will be car friendly and feel urban.
^ A paradox? Do tell..
The Urban Politician no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 15th, 2006, 09:36 AM   #35
forumly_chgoman
BANNED
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 757
Likes (Received): 10

Quote:
Originally Posted by PrintersRowBoiler View Post
.....
.......
Let's be honest - with Dearborn Park 1 and 2, that section of town could not survive all the high rises that everyone wants to see. It would take decades to build out. Any development off of Roosevelt, in my opinion, will be car friendly and feel urban.
da.....crush them underfoot like the vermin they are
forumly_chgoman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 15th, 2006, 06:31 PM   #36
FreeRadical
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Chicago
Posts: 211
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by InTheLoop View Post
^I also agree that having a bit of reality from the big bad city surrounding this place wouldn't be the worst thing. However, I am sure the developer has figured out how to make the entire place private property including the "street" (like a mall), and will not allow any reality to creep in and cause all the recent suburban transplants to be frightened and un-easy.
VOID

Last edited by FreeRadical; December 15th, 2007 at 06:16 AM.
FreeRadical no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 15th, 2006, 06:39 PM   #37
danthediscoman
Registered User
 
danthediscoman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 384
Likes (Received): 1

I don't think he's saying panhandlers necassarily enhance the city but are more so the part of the fabric an urban environment; wealthy, middle class, poor, homeless, all form to create the unique urban environment and these arguably "self contained" places like Roosevelt and LSE are are going to have an eerie sense of sterileness to them, meaning they most likely will lack that wide ranging diversity that makes this city so great.
danthediscoman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 15th, 2006, 08:42 PM   #38
PrintersRowBoiler
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 650
Likes (Received): 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Urban Politician View Post
^ A paradox? Do tell..
Ooops... I mean suburban.
PrintersRowBoiler no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 16th, 2006, 02:57 AM   #39
24gotham
Formerly InTheLoop
 
24gotham's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Upper West Side, NYC
Posts: 485
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by FreeRadical View Post
Your reply is trash-talk. And not very good trash-talk, either.

Why don't you explain exactly how and why panhandlers enhance city life?
I think you are misunderstanding what I am saying. Danthediscoman clarified what I meant pretty well. The last thing I want in my neighborhood is a sterile suburban style shopping center. I am generally glad this project is going to be built, but I feel frustrated that the developer is taking absolutely no architectural risk what so ever. I also feel frustrated that this will essentially be nothing more than a mall, and not a city street with all of it's variety.
Because this will be on private property, the owners can dictate a lot of things including such limitations as to when you can walk down the "street" (it will close at night, you can be sure), or not allowing photography on the "street". You see, it won't really be a street at all, instead it will be a faux street filled with chain stores and will lack any real character. I would rather have a real street and all the good and bad that comes with it, and if that means a few homeless people, then fine.
__________________
24gotham - "Architecture should reflect the time in which it is built, not a previous time that may or may not have existed."

Formerly "InTheLoop" of Chicago.
24gotham no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 16th, 2006, 04:32 AM   #40
mohammed wong
Registered User
 
mohammed wong's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Chevanston, IL
Posts: 1,853
Likes (Received): 10

what you guys lack is perspective,
one thousand years from now, or maybe just a hundred this will be seen
in historical perspective as one of those early 2000 "planned communities" that probably half of it will be intact and some will have sros
and crack or (insert new drug here) BUILDINGS.....

perspective people......

I just mourn the loss what used to be there,
I wouldnt miss the past so much if I had lived there for a while....
mohammed wong no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 12:57 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

Hosted by Blacksun, dedicated to this site too!
Forum server management by DaiTengu