PDA

View Full Version : CHICAGO | General Developments


Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 [291] 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529

Skyguy_7
Jun 8, 2015, 12:56 PM
I might sneak onto the 606 late at night and stencil in several series of red, six-pointed stars along the center of the trail. Boom. Chicago Flag.

The whole thing really turned out nice. It's an absolute gem to the neighborhood. Disregard any opinions of children who are too spoiled by photos on the internet to appreciate what we have here in real life.

LouisVanDerWright
Jun 8, 2015, 1:58 PM
To all you guys getting all riled up about how great and wonderful this thing is, please get something straight. My comments shouldn't be misconstrued. The purpose it serves as an elevated bike trail is fine. My criticisms were solely directed at its appearance. And my comparison to the High Line was, again, only to illustrate how cheap and ugly the Bloomington Trail looks. I really cannot understand anyone who can defend its appearance. Anyone who does is either blind or delusional.



The galvanized steel fencing is a joke. Even from street level it makes this thing look unfinished. And you're right; it definitely has that cheap, CTA station look and feel.

Regarding plantings to come... I doubt it will make a big difference. Even if the trail were flush with plants flowers, it would only lessen the cheap look.

I also am not a fan of Maggie Daley Park, incidentally.



Exactly! But the thing is, there are hundreds of better paving design solutions than the aesthetic-less Quikrete concrete slab they went with. It is the most offensive part of the whole thing. It's absolutely hideous. And then, as if it weren't ugly enough, they had to paint in a traffic divide and a blue pedestrian designation. It looks like a shoddy CDOT project at best. I mean, literally endless better design solutions could have been introduced here... instead we got... idk, something very, very Midwest. :???:

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/f6/35/71/f6357165fdbb23c96e50865df162ed05.jpg
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/fe/33/e0/fe33e0878a11bbf94a1f820009b1e128.jpg
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/6d/79/75/6d797562e90c3651a2383dab2e304f8e.jpg
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/33/49/58/3349583d9576751dc132486e481d7376.jpg
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/93/d2/c9/93d2c9236749fd2d6ccdf6d481091eb2.jpg
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/46/3c/76/463c76a2ea917a367de9eaf9efeccef6.jpg
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/31/c7/0c/31c70c58a5ff492077b7e1408e140c4b.jpg
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/c0/f4/41/c0f44154a3600284c090fbd21c5184c5.jpg
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/b4/2f/9c/b42f9c07c7ee5c37ea2039a41d7d4620.jpg
Pinterest

Fuck. Just about any other kind of paving system with some semblance of design would have made this trail something other than an embarrassment.

Sorry to repost his rant here, but I just wanted to point out how absolutely miserable any of the surfaces he pictures above would be to run or bike on. I'm sorry, but I'm not biking on pavers separated by mossy grass. I'm also not going to run on a highly trip prone surface like that either.


I was up on the Bloomingdale first thing on Saturday morning and it's fantastic. They haven't really "finished" it yet as there were various temporary wood handrails and almost no sod or more sensitive perennials planted, but after seeing how choked the trail was on opening day I think that had more to do with a wise decision not to get the fresh plantings trampled like a herd of buffalo.

My girlfriend just moved right over by Parson's and is suddenly really into the idea of biking everywhere since she's realized she can use the trail to get just about anywhere in the neighborhood she wants without tangling with auto traffic. It's going to be a great route to actually get places unlike the high line as someone said above. I can only imagine how nice this is going to be when the plants are full grown, the rose wall and aspen grove in particular are going to be unreal.

I'm also a big fan of the fact that they painted the Milwaukee bridge "Chicago Bridge Brown", it looks a lot sharper now IMO and enforces the classic bridge motif we've got going on all over town. Now if we can just get an extension across the river as a part of whatever Finkl redevelopment happens, we'll be set. We are dangerously close to connecting the channel trail, the bloomingdale trail, and the riverwalk over the next decade or so especially with the demolition of Finkl and the amount of redevelopment planned for goose island. I can only dream of how nice it would be to have a commuter path like the Lakeshore trail serving the entire NW side.

msu2001la
Jun 8, 2015, 2:13 PM
I've been on the high line, recently, but haven't been on the 606 yet. My thoughts are that the High Line is interesting and serves its purpose. However, sometimes it gets so cramped you can't even move - that is not a joke.

The people who made the high line also never envisioned it would be that popular. It's nice walking along it but the entire time it was kind of like "eh whatever - I'm walking in a park. So what?" Whoever said they didn't feel like they were going anywhere, I had the same feeling. If I were trying to get anywhere, I wouldn't go out of my way to go on there. With the people strolling along, walking on the streets and even waiting at lights is sometimes faster than going on the High Line.

The high line is definitely more expensive than the 606 and there's no question about it. The key differentiating factor though is the use of bikes/skateboards. You just can't do it on the High Line. I don't mean that it's so crowded sometimes that you can't do it - you just can't. They're banned. The 606 does not ban them and IMO this is very important. It makes the 606 more versatile as an actual avenue of transportation other than someone taking a stroll through a park. If it's not too busy, you could really get to where you need to go on a bike a lot faster as long as it's not too busy and IMO this is a key differentiating factor. There's also nothing we can do about the fact that there was no vacant trail line in the downtown area, but this is still good and it cuts through and near areas where a lot of people live.

The big difference between the 606 and the High Line (aside from a huge difference in cost) is that the 606 is an elevated trail, whereas the High Line is an elevated park.

The 606 is designed more to get people from point-to-point, whereas the High Line is designed to be more of a destination in itself. Hence, bikes/dogs/skaters banned on the High Line and welcome on the 606.

Anyone judging the 606 entirely based on the trail aesthetics as seen today has missed the point.

msu2001la
Jun 8, 2015, 2:29 PM
Sorry to repost his rant here, but I just wanted to point out how absolutely miserable any of the surfaces he pictures above would be to run or bike on. I'm sorry, but I'm not biking on pavers separated by mossy grass. I'm also not going to run on a highly trip prone surface like that either.


I was up on the Bloomingdale first thing on Saturday morning and it's fantastic. They haven't really "finished" it yet as there were various temporary wood handrails and almost no sod or more sensitive perennials planted, but after seeing how choked the trail was on opening day I think that had more to do with a wise decision not to get the fresh plantings trampled like a herd of buffalo.

My girlfriend just moved right over by Parson's and is suddenly really into the idea of biking everywhere since she's realized she can use the trail to get just about anywhere in the neighborhood she wants without tangling with auto traffic. It's going to be a great route to actually get places unlike the high line as someone said above. I can only imagine how nice this is going to be when the plants are full grown, the rose wall and aspen grove in particular are going to be unreal.

I'm also a big fan of the fact that they painted the Milwaukee bridge "Chicago Bridge Brown", it looks a lot sharper now IMO and enforces the classic bridge motif we've got going on all over town. Now if we can just get an extension across the river as a part of whatever Finkl redevelopment happens, we'll be set. We are dangerously close to connecting the channel trail, the bloomingdale trail, and the riverwalk over the next decade or so especially with the demolition of Finkl and the amount of redevelopment planned for goose island. I can only dream of how nice it would be to have a commuter path like the Lakeshore trail serving the entire NW side.

As for the paving discussion, it's pretty simple.
Concrete = $7/SF
Decorative paving = $20/SF+

They could've designed with higher end paving in a way that would've been good for biking and running, but I don't think it's too difficult to figure out why they went with 2.7 miles of concrete vs. 2.7 blocks of stone paving.

I totally agree with your comments about connecting the east end of the 606. The experience of biking east to the lakefront from Courtland/Ashland is pretty miserable right now. It would be amazing to continue the off-street trail connection the additional 2 miles to the lakefront parks, or even just a few blocks to the Finkel Steel site and river.

OrdoSeclorum
Jun 8, 2015, 2:50 PM
It would be amazing to continue the off-street trail connection the additional 2 miles to the lakefront parks, or even just a few blocks to the Finkel Steel site and river.

From a utility perspective, getting to Elston would be big. It's so close now. Elston is a great biking street and the best way to get downtown from there.

george
Jun 8, 2015, 2:59 PM
Ok, that's it for 606...

http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/xq90/538/i8EFip.jpg (https://imageshack.com/i/eyi8EFipj)

http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/xq90/661/7xbK9c.jpg (https://imageshack.com/i/id7xbK9cj)

http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/xq90/905/j4jNNg.jpg (https://imageshack.com/i/p5j4jNNgj)

http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/xq90/673/jkEKQ4.jpg (https://imageshack.com/i/ipjkEKQ4j)

http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/xq90/909/OjdYL9.jpg (https://imageshack.com/i/p9OjdYL9j)

emathias
Jun 8, 2015, 3:05 PM
As for the paving discussion, it's pretty simple.
Concrete = $7/SF
Decorative paving = $20/SF+

They could've designed with higher end paving in a way that would've been good for biking and running, but I don't think it's too difficult to figure out why they went with 2.7 miles of concrete vs. 2.7 blocks of stone paving.
...

If pavers were $25 sq/ft vs. $7 sq/ft for concrete, and there was 100,000 square feet to pave, we're talking about less than a 2% increase in project cost. Ongoing maintenance might be harder to budget for, though. With concrete you just wait until it's unusable and then do a capital project (at least that's the way the Park District seems to handle it).

From a utility perspective, getting to Elston would be big. It's so close now. Elston is a great biking street and the best way to get downtown from there.

I would not call Elston north of North Ave "a great biking street." South of North, sure. And there are worse streets than Elston. But the part Cortland intersects isn't a great one.

That said, riding from the east end of the 606 to the Lakefront isn't too bad on Cortland and Armitage. It would only take some effort in a few areas (the underpasses of the expressway and Metra tracks, and signage once at Clark to direct cyclists to the Lakefront path once in Lincoln Park), and a little investment in keeping the bikes lanes defined/swept on the rest of Cortland and Armitage to make it a very inviting on-street route to the Lakefront Path. Nearly the entire way is relatively low traffic, it goes through the historic Armitage district, and even the part past Finkl can be a charming in an old industrial way. Crossing under the expressway/Metra tracks and crossing Clyborn are really the only distasteful parts of the trip (at least for me).

Via Chicago
Jun 8, 2015, 3:06 PM
The 606 is designed more to get people from point-to-point, whereas the High Line is designed to be more of a destination in itself. Hence, bikes/dogs/skaters banned on the High Line and welcome on the 606.


The one thing that would be nice to see (Im not sure if theyre going to be posted or not) are "rules of the road", esp for cyclists. but also advising joggers to check over their shoulder, etc. The path looks pretty narrow and Id hate to see the same collision issues arise that are commonplace at the lakefront.

It will be interesting to see what level of traffic/congestion becomes the norm after the opening day hype dies down.

PKDickman
Jun 8, 2015, 3:20 PM
The 606 is not the Highline.
And it is not there to turn Humboldt Park into Manhattan Island
Chelsea was already there before they built the Highline

The bottom line is that the B'dale trail is a long park. When the vegetation fills in it'll be lovely.

As a boon to transportation it is pretty limited, Right now it is the bicycle version of the Amstutz highway. It connects two points where no one is going.
Due to headroom limitations under the expressway, a simple straight bridge over the Metra tracks is not feasable. The cost to get one block, to the other side of the tracks, will be staggering and until there is a cohesive rivertrail on the other side, I doubt that funding will be found. But if you want to take your bike from the K streets to the Clybourn Station, it'll be great.

Will it be a boon to business? Frankly most of the commercial cross streets are in Wicker Pk/Bucktown, they probably would be fine on their own. But if it puts a little ginger into that strip of Milw between the trail and Western, I'll say "Amen".

It'll boost property values, any park would. On the immediate sides of the trail is is already Yuppified at least as far as Kedzie.
This predates the idea of the the trail, so a lot of that was inevitable. It's long term benefit will be from having more people look around and say, "Hey, this neighborhood ain't so bad!" That can spread it in a N/S direction. But I got caught up in the Mayor's entourage on the way back Sat morning, so I walked the sidestreets. All of it was a stable, well maintained, reasonably dense (mid 20s ppm) neighborhood.

Two criticisms, one pertaining specifically to the trail, the other on Chgo parks in general.

I wish they had put some stairs in. From the stand point of a generic pedestrian, those ramps are like the parking lots at North and Clybourn, you have to walk an aggravating distance just to get to the other side of the street.

The other is, what is the fascination with putting rolling hills and berms, in our parks. This is Chicago, we don't do hills.
When I see rolling hills, I think reclaimed landfill.

Chi-Sky21
Jun 8, 2015, 3:32 PM
The other aspect of the 606 that is so nice, and I suspect is one of its greatest features, indeed is the chain of dedicated parks being created along its path.

Bingo :cheers:....and may i add...getting the viaducts clear of supports in the middle of the roads these bridges crossed is a huge plus in my book too.

ardecila
Jun 8, 2015, 4:26 PM
One of my first big projects when I was getting my planning degree was gathering neighborhood input for the design elements in tandem with CDOT......

I think we got a lot for $100m. Completely reinforced foundation structure, multiple repaired bridges and access ramps, Bloomingdale Ave repaved, landscaping, a huge new bridge, multiple new access parks, electrical, new sidewalks, curbs, railings, an irrigation system, signage, and public art...plus labor...for something that's almost three miles long and 70% done...

Honestly, this was the single biggest letdown of the project for me. They had 2.7 miles of a great vintage alley with brick cobblestone paving, and they covered it over with asphalt. I know it's not part of the trail, but it would have been an AWESOME low-cost way to brand the area, since everyone who comes to the trail will see Bloomingdale Ave first. Just sweep some new sand into the paver joints and re-set some of the larger sunken areas, and you're good to go.

I agree with Tom on a lot of these points, I am sometimes frustrated by the Midwestern-ness of Chicago. Call me an elitist, whatever... The only time we get things that are truly world-class is when the private sector does it and pushes their designers for something bold. I can't believe they surveyed the neighborhood for these decisions. Have the government do something, and they try to make every little decision democratically. Recipe for mediocrity, most people will always choose what is most familiar to them, even if it's the same ubiquitous Home Depot crap in their own backyards.

I won't pass an overall judgment on the 606, which may have tremendous transportation value for those neighborhoods even if it fails as a work of landscape.

ardecila
Jun 8, 2015, 4:30 PM
Tom Servo in 1896:

Oh my God! These new office buildings in Chicago are so utilitarian and cheap! They are so mundane, nothing like the high quality towers going up in New York! What a joke, these buildings look so unfinished. So midwestern....

Frigging A, the guy wouldn't know the irony of his own histrionic whining if it slapped him in the face.

No, I think he has a valid point. The government always puts up mediocre things in Chicago. Chicago's 1900-era office buildings were largely built by people from the East Coast who hired the right designers. Those designers got hired in the first place because they found economical ways to be visionary.

During the same period, Chicago city government was putting up the same Classical-inspired stuff that every other city was*. A lot of those buildings were grand and impressive for sure, but they certainly weren't unique and wouldn't impress a visitor from Paris or Berlin the way our nascent skyscrapers did.

*I should note a historical exception - Jens Jensen did design many world-class landscapes in Chicago during this time, but he did so while working for the West Parks Commission, a quasi-governmental agency that was really a tool for a select group of progressive elites. They certainly didn't ask the Czechs in Lawndale or the Jews in Garfield Park what they wanted.

Via Chicago
Jun 8, 2015, 4:36 PM
Honestly, this was the single biggest letdown of the project for me. They had 2.7 miles of a great vintage alley with brick cobblestone paving, and they covered it over with asphalt. I know it's not part of the trail, but it would have been an AWESOME low-cost way to brand the area, since everyone who comes to the trail will see Bloomingdale Ave first. Just sweep some new sand into the paver joints and re-set some of the larger sunken areas, and you're good to go.


I find it surprising they did so, since permeable alleys were actually somewhat of an initiative under Daley. Not to mention a large component of this project in particular was honoring the industrial past. This is what I was getting at upthread when I said I wished they had kept things a little more raw (in a good way)

The preserved alleys in Lakewood/Balmoral neighborhood are magical because of this

http://www.pugslope.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/IMG_4904.jpg
http://www.pugslope.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/IMG_4904.jpg

Also, heres another fantastic photo essay of the trail pre-renovation by David Schlliol

http://davidschalliol.com/bloomingdale

Jim in Chicago
Jun 8, 2015, 4:37 PM
I'd like to think it will be lovely when the plantings go in. Given that the concrete coffins on Congress are still empty of anything other than weeds this long after construction, I'm not holding my breath.

msu2001la
Jun 8, 2015, 4:46 PM
From a utility perspective, getting to Elston would be big. It's so close now. Elston is a great biking street and the best way to get downtown from there.



Elston isn't the prettiest street, but not bad for biking. It just ends up connecting with Milwaukee just north of Chicago, so it seems like taking Milwaukee from the 606 would be more direct if the destination is downtown, although maybe a little less bike friendly?

I don't ride Milwaukee, but it is one of the more heavily biked corridors in Chicago.

msu2001la
Jun 8, 2015, 4:51 PM
No, I think he has a valid point. The government always puts up mediocre things in Chicago. Chicago's 1900-era office buildings were largely built by people from the East Coast who hired the right designers. Those designers got hired in the first place because they found economical ways to be visionary.

During the same period, Chicago city government was putting up the same Classical-inspired stuff that every other city was*. A lot of those buildings were grand and impressive for sure, but they certainly weren't unique and wouldn't impress a visitor from Paris or Berlin the way our nascent skyscrapers did.

*I should note a historical exception - Jens Jensen did design many world-class landscapes in Chicago during this time, but he did so while working for the West Parks Commission, a quasi-governmental agency that was really a tool for a select group of progressive elites. They certainly didn't ask the Czechs in Lawndale or the Jews in Garfield Park what they wanted.

Interesting take.
The 606 was designed by Michael Van Valkenburg Associates. They're the same East Coast firm that designed the High Line.

msu2001la
Jun 8, 2015, 5:08 PM
The one thing that would be nice to see (Im not sure if theyre going to be posted or not) are "rules of the road", esp for cyclists. but also advising joggers to check over their shoulder, etc. The path looks pretty narrow and Id hate to see the same collision issues arise that are commonplace at the lakefront.

It will be interesting to see what level of traffic/congestion becomes the norm after the opening day hype dies down.

I think it'll sort itself out pretty quickly. I did see some "rules" signage at both ends of the trail, but didn't read it.

I rode the length of the 606 yesterday afternoon, and had to ride at walking speed for most of the journey because it was so crowded. For the most part, other cyclists/joggers were paying attention and being respectful, but there were a few minor issues. I think once the hype dies down it'll be a useful rush hour commuter path, and a fun place to casually bike/jog on weekends.

If the level of traffic that we saw this weekend becomes the norm, cyclists trying to get from A to B will avoid it, at least during peak times. It took me nearly 45 minutes to ride round-trip from the East end and I don't think I ever exceeded 10mph.

the urban politician
Jun 8, 2015, 5:19 PM
No, I think he has a valid point. The government always puts up mediocre things in Chicago. Chicago's 1900-era office buildings were largely built by people from the East Coast who hired the right designers. Those designers got hired in the first place because they found economical ways to be visionary.

^ No.

First of all, the Government does NOT always put up mediocre things in Chicago. Look at the River walk being built right now. Look at the Chinatown Library. There are certainly examples of non-mediocre projects commissioned by the Government in this city, but of course what is mediocre and what isn't is sometimes subject to opinion.

And regarding the rest of your point: who cares if it's the Government or some east coast private developer. The fact remains the same, and it's a fact that HAS ALWAYS been the case: Chicago is a less wealthy city than New York, and thus anything built in Chicago has to be on a budget. That's why form=function was invented here. Chicago can't generally afford to be over the top.

Bloomington Line: function: to be a landscaped walking and bike bath that occupies a former rail ROW connecting several NW side Chicago neighborhoods. Form: it exactly does that job.

Hurray for Chicago, another example of a structure that is built to serve a function. If you want over the top, then stop bitching and move to New York already. But while you're at it, stop praising Burnham and Adler and Mies because you clearly don't like understated structures unless they were built generations ago.

ithakas
Jun 8, 2015, 5:23 PM
I had the chance to visit the 606 this weekend as well, and knowing that large parts of it were unfinished, my main problem with the design was the decision to paint the road surface marking as yellow dashes, which together with the blue rubber gave the main path a bit of a playground aesthetic. The renderings show a continuous white line, so I'm hoping that was also temporary.

Otherwise, I had a great time, and especially loved the feeling of it at night. I told friends it felt a little like an urban Jurassic Park, with the caged fences and lights on the sides of the trail structure illuminating trees on the bordering streets. The Luftwerk installation on Humboldt Boulevard was particularly amazing, though I know that was just for the opening.

It also felt completely different from The High Line in the pedestrian's interaction with surrounding buildings. Fewer expansive views and highrises towering above, much more continuous, 'enclosed' feeling with buildings right at or above the scale of the trail.

msu2001la
Jun 8, 2015, 6:02 PM
I had the chance to visit the 606 this weekend as well, and knowing that large parts of it were unfinished, my main problem with the design was the decision to paint the road surface marking as yellow dashes, which together with the blue rubber gave the main path a bit of a playground aesthetic. The renderings show a continuous white line, so I'm hoping that was also temporary.



The blue rubber color seemed a bit odd to me too. Not sure why they didn't just go with a grey color to blend in.

As for the yellow dash, I think it's permanent. MUTCD likely has some language somewhere about dashed yellow lines being the accepted safety standard for this environment, and if they don't follow that the government will just be inviting a lawsuit the first time there is a bike crash.

ChickeNES
Jun 8, 2015, 6:28 PM
The blue rubber color seemed a bit odd to me too. Not sure why they didn't just go with a grey color to blend in.

As for the yellow dash, I think it's permanent. MUTCD likely has some language somewhere about dashed yellow lines being the accepted safety standard for this environment, and if they don't follow that the government will just be inviting a lawsuit the first time there is a bike crash.

The blue rubber reminds me of the platform edges on the CTA.

emathias
Jun 8, 2015, 6:30 PM
Honestly, this was the single biggest letdown of the project for me. They had 2.7 miles of a great vintage alley with brick cobblestone paving, and they covered it over with asphalt. I know it's not part of the trail, but it would have been an AWESOME low-cost way to brand the area, since everyone who comes to the trail will see Bloomingdale Ave first. Just sweep some new sand into the paver joints and re-set some of the larger sunken areas, and you're good to go.
...

I find it surprising they did so, since permeable alleys were actually somewhat of an initiative under Daley. Not to mention a large component of this project in particular was honoring the industrial past. This is what I was getting at upthread when I said I wished they had kept things a little more raw (in a good way)

The preserved alleys in Lakewood/Balmoral neighborhood are magical because of this
...

That is disappointing. I love the visual look of brick roadways. I really wish some of the streets in River North had been kept as brick - it would add even more character as it fills in with modern buildings now.

When I moved into my vintage River North home, the alley behind us was paved in wood block, which was paved over about 18 months after I moved in. That was even cooler than brick.

That said, bikes are a big part of the plan, and biking on brick isn't really ideal unless it's fairly new and well-maintained.

msu2001la
Jun 8, 2015, 7:03 PM
That is disappointing. I love the visual look of brick roadways. I really wish some of the streets in River North had been kept as brick - it would add even more character as it fills in with modern buildings now.

When I moved into my vintage River North home, the alley behind us was paved in wood block, which was paved over about 18 months after I moved in. That was even cooler than brick.

That said, bikes are a big part of the plan, and biking on brick isn't really ideal unless it's fairly new and well-maintained.

There is still a wood block alley in Gold Coast that was restored just a few years ago.

http://arcchicago.blogspot.com/2011/10/how-bunch-of-blockheads-restored.html

While biking on brick isn't ideal, from a certain point of view a rougher paving pattern would go a long ways to slowing down cyclists and discouraging some of the more aggressive high-speed riding that conflicts with the recreational use of the space.

I'm surprised that the 606 designers don't have more things in the plan to slow down bikes. I would imagine bikes can haul ass down the 606 when activity is low, making it a little uncomfortable for joggers and peds.

Skyguy_7
Jun 8, 2015, 7:06 PM
^I was just going to say.. It's even labeled in Google Maps as "Wooden Alley." Pretty cool stuff.

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.910315,-87.628857,3a,75y,101.57h,68.6t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1spBZaoyUgEdx-zTNuzyBa3A!2e0!6m1!1e1

Baronvonellis
Jun 8, 2015, 7:56 PM
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-606-bloomingdale-trail-gentrification-met-20150605-story.html#page=1

Ald. Scott Waguespack, 32nd, said he has been monitoring new residential projects within a few blocks of The 606 route to make sure developers don't try to put up large buildings to take advantage of the proximity.

"The thing we're keeping an eye on is the density," he said. "We want to make sure through the community zoning process that we don't end up with a bunch of huge towers near the trail, and we've done a good job so far."

What is this guy on? He should be encouraging large development near this public asset.

ChickeNES
Jun 8, 2015, 8:01 PM
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-606-bloomingdale-trail-gentrification-met-20150605-story.html#page=1

Ald. Scott Waguespack, 32nd, said he has been monitoring new residential projects within a few blocks of The 606 route to make sure developers don't try to put up large buildings to take advantage of the proximity.

"The thing we're keeping an eye on is the density," he said. "We want to make sure through the community zoning process that we don't end up with a bunch of huge towers near the trail, and we've done a good job so far."

What is this guy on? He should be encouraging large development near this public asset.

But a giant suburban hellhole at Damen/Fullerton/Elston is A-OK! What a buffoon.

nomarandlee
Jun 8, 2015, 8:26 PM
shadowsonvonellis;7054948]http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-606-bloomingdale-trail-gentrification-met-20150605-story.html#page=1

Ald. Scott Waguespack, 32nd, said he has been monitoring new residential projects within a few blocks of The 606 route to make sure developers don't try to put up large buildings to take advantage of the proximity.

"The thing we're keeping an eye on is the density," he said. "We want to make sure through the community zoning process that we don't end up with a bunch of huge towers near the trail, and we've done a good job so far."

What is this guy on? He should be encouraging large development near this public asset.

I agree with you of course and not him in principle but this is one of the rare exceptions that I think it be wise to really be concerned about shadow effects. and to be careful not to allow buildings that will cast shadows e on the trail. But yeah otherwise there should be plenty of growth allowed so that as many people within reason can enjoy the trail as possible.

lu9
Jun 8, 2015, 8:26 PM
I commend you all for rationally and calmly responding to Tom's outrageous posts. If I didn't already know his style, I would say he's trolling.

Couple of thoughts:

1. I knew the High-Line comparisons were an absolute disaster from the very start. Apples and Oranges.
2. The trail is not even close to done. Congrats to all for getting it open on the 6th, but it has a Looooong way to go. Plenty of temporary fencing up, temporary signage (i.e. street signs at every bridge), and most importantly temporary wood rails.
3. Despite #2 above, my already incredibly high expectations were exceeded. This is a gem of a trail for Chicago. Well done. Kudos to the small group of individuals who have been working for this for over 13 years.

rlw777
Jun 8, 2015, 8:31 PM
Thoughts?
Adding on to Willis Tower (http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20150605/NEWS12/150609841/adding-on-to-the-willis-tower) - Crains

Among changes in the works are a likely low-rise extension of the building into the south plaza, according to the brokers who will take over leasing for Blackstone. Although exact plans for the plaza are unclear, it likely will include adding a new structure in the plaza that could include some combination of food, retail and entertainment, the brokers said.

emathias
Jun 8, 2015, 8:55 PM
Thoughts?
Adding on to Willis Tower (http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20150605/NEWS12/150609841/adding-on-to-the-willis-tower) - Crains

Ugh. Bring back that curvy side-tower design from a few years back. The LAST thing the Willis Tower needs is some tacky entertainment-only add-on. A hotel that includes some additional restaurants, sure. But the way Crains described what they want to do now just sounds way tacky.

Rizzo
Jun 8, 2015, 9:04 PM
Honestly, I don't think you read more than one or two replies on this because most people, including myself, were saying the same exact thing as you. So..just saying...you might want to re-read what people not named Tom Servo were saying.

I was not replying to you at all.

r18tdi
Jun 8, 2015, 9:20 PM
I agree with you of course and not him in principle but this is one of the rare exceptions that I think it be wise to really be concerned about shadow effects. and to be careful not to allow buildings that will cast shadows e on the trail. But yeah otherwise there should be plenty of growth allowed so that as many people within reason can enjoy the trail as possible. There are large towers in very close proximity to the lakefront trail. There are large towers literally above the High-Line. Both are very nice places to be during all hours of the day. I'm afraid I don't see your point when it comes to scary shadows.

ithakas
Jun 8, 2015, 9:36 PM
It's been exciting to see a lot of these large-scale developments unfold in the city in the past six months or so. We've had Maggie Daley, parts of the river walk, and now the 606, and Northerly Island coming up soon – the one I'm still curious about is the big 'lighting plan' the city issued an RFP for a year or so ago, meant to unify the major tourism corridors of the city's center.

Has anyone heard more about that?

ardecila
Jun 8, 2015, 9:46 PM
That said, bikes are a big part of the plan, and biking on brick isn't really ideal unless it's fairly new and well-maintained.

Yeah, but I'm talking about Bloomingdale Avenue, not the trail. It's basically an alley... Bloomingdale Avenue is discontinuous and switches sides from the north to the south of the viaduct, so it's not ideal for biking except for one or two blocks as a shortcut.

Even if biking was a concern (eg at access ramps), they could have poured a narrow ribbon of concrete for bike tires.

nomarandlee
Jun 9, 2015, 12:19 AM
There are large towers in very close proximity to the lakefront trail. There are large towers literally above the High-Line. Both are very nice places to be during all hours of the day. I'm afraid I don't see your point when it comes to scary shadows.

I don't really think its much worth arguing the point. Giving that it is an east/west trail the fact is that shadows really shouldn't be a problem anyway. I don't imagine a string of 10-12 floor buildings lining up right along the trail that would make it an issue no matter how popular the trail became.

UrbanLibertine
Jun 9, 2015, 12:39 AM
I think the Bloomingdale Trail/606 serves it's purpose. It's meant to be practical, not flashy. My only grip with it has to do with the amount of weeds already all over the trail.

Via Chicago
Jun 9, 2015, 2:29 AM
My only grip with it has to do with the amount of weeds already all over the trail.

People really seem to be missing the point that most of the vegetation hasnt been planted yet

UrbanLibertine
Jun 9, 2015, 12:09 PM
People really seem to be missing the point that most of the vegetation hasnt been planted yet

I got that the vegetation hasn't been planted yet, but they can't use some Weed-B-Gon in the interim?

the urban politician
Jun 9, 2015, 12:17 PM
I got that the vegetation hasn't been planted yet, but they can't use some Weed-B-Gon in the interim?

Killing weeds is pretty damn hard.

I've had TruGreen on my lawn twice already and there are still lots of weeds lingering around

pilsenarch
Jun 9, 2015, 12:37 PM
Honestly, this was the single biggest letdown of the project for me. They had 2.7 miles of a great vintage alley with brick cobblestone paving, and they covered it over with asphalt. I know it's not part of the trail, but it would have been an AWESOME low-cost way to brand the area, since everyone who comes to the trail will see Bloomingdale Ave first. Just sweep some new sand into the paver joints and re-set some of the larger sunken areas, and you're good to go.

I agree with Tom on a lot of these points, I am sometimes frustrated by the Midwestern-ness of Chicago. Call me an elitist, whatever... The only time we get things that are truly world-class is when the private sector does it and pushes their designers for something bold. I can't believe they surveyed the neighborhood for these decisions. Have the government do something, and they try to make every little decision democratically. Recipe for mediocrity, most people will always choose what is most familiar to them, even if it's the same ubiquitous Home Depot crap in their own backyards.

I won't pass an overall judgment on the 606, which may have tremendous transportation value for those neighborhoods even if it fails as a work of landscape.

In danger of continuing to abuse the horse carcass, it's not just recent government work: Daley Civic Center, and Mies' Federal Center are both master works of architecture (both with Chicago designers) and a bold attempt was made (even if it has arguably failed spectacularly, certainly form a maintenance perspective) with the Thompson Center...

SamInTheLoop
Jun 9, 2015, 2:24 PM
^ Agree.........but also acknowledge there certainly are instances of design dumbing-down due to public involvement/design-by-committee.....

Near North Resident
Jun 9, 2015, 3:09 PM
Lots of stuff this morning

Obama aka Near North Side High school, proposing 4 different locations now

http://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/20150609/old-town/four-sites-remain-for-near-north-selective-enrollment-high-school

Steely Dan
Jun 9, 2015, 3:18 PM
^ NNR, atrium village is highrise stuff, so i moved that part of your post to the highrise thread.

Near North Resident
Jun 9, 2015, 3:18 PM
^ near north, atrium village is highrise stuff, so i moved that part of your post to the highrise thread.

I just posted there, so uh, yeah was wondering if I was going crazy or not :haha:

msu2001la
Jun 9, 2015, 3:53 PM
I got that the vegetation hasn't been planted yet, but they can't use some Weed-B-Gon in the interim?


Actually, no... they can't. Chicago Park District has pledged to be pesticide free and has a policy of not using chemicals as a means of weed control.

Once the areas are planted and/or sodded/mulched, weeds shouldn't be an issue.

msu2001la
Jun 9, 2015, 4:02 PM
There are large towers in very close proximity to the lakefront trail. There are large towers literally above the High-Line. Both are very nice places to be during all hours of the day. I'm afraid I don't see your point when it comes to scary shadows.

It's a non issue and Waugaspack's "concerns" seem idiotic, but I'm not sure what you are talking about with regards to the lakefront trail.

Other than Lake Point Tower @ Navy Pier, none of the lakefront trail is in very close proximity to tall buildings. Even along the Gold Coast stretch (arguably the worst portion of the LFT) where the trail is right up against the LSD barrier, the towers to the West are still 200' away. The only time shadows from those buildings reach the LFT is at sunset.

Steely Dan
Jun 9, 2015, 4:37 PM
Actually, no... they can't. Chicago Park District has pledged to be pesticide free and has a policy of not using chemicals as a means of weed control.

Good.

The less glyphosate* in our city, the better.

I'll take weeds over cancer any day.



(*) The herbicide used in roundup and by trugreen. In March 2015 the World Health Organization's International Agency for Research on Cancer published a summary of its forthcoming monograph on glyphosate, and classified it as "probably carcinogenic in humans" (category 2A) based on epidemiological studies, animal studies, and in vitro studies.

Skyguy_7
Jun 9, 2015, 5:26 PM
^That's great.

I finally checked out the Riverwalk expansion. It is beautifully done. I love being able to get so close to the water, which was remarkably clean today. Once the restaurants and bars are opened (within a week or so I'm told) it's going to be a real treat.

The next section, River Theater, is supposed to open tomorrow at noon and apparently, work on the second phase is supposed to begin within a month or so!

https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-_c7E1trIaq8/VXchA_npQKI/AAAAAAAACeA/pEzFwiaT22g/w735-h551-no/15%2B-%2B2

OrdoSeclorum
Jun 9, 2015, 5:27 PM
Good.

The less glyphosate* in our city, the better.

I'll take weeds over cancer any day.

[/size]

Glyphosate (Roundup) is extremely unlikely to give anyone cancer. It's possible that a very small increase in cancer has seen in the people who apply it at industrial levels, but those people apply a lot of pesticides and herbicides, so I find the link a bit spurious to take seriously.

More importantly, 1) at the level you would be exposed to in a park or garden or home, it's implausible that you could ingest enough to be within 10,000x a concerning dose. 2) Glyphosate breaks down extremely rapidly after application, which is why it's the best herbicide to use, period. It doesn't accumulate at concentration in anything you're likely to eat, drink or touch.

It's fine to be worried about herbicide exposure, but pesticides are far, far more likely to be a problem to a mammal. And as far as herbicides go, it simply does not get better than glyphosate. Since it was originally developed by Monsanto, there's a lot of conspiracy hate on it that you might find on your uncle's Facebook. But if it's replaced with literally any other herbicide, the (exceedingly low) risk to human health has been increased. For example, I'm not worried about asphalt on our roads giving me cancer, and the number and quantity of toxic distillates we are exposed to from paved roads absolutely dwarfs anything we will ever be exposed to from herbicides. If we're not concerned about the cancer risk of biking or walking on pavement...

Kenmore
Jun 9, 2015, 5:39 PM
^That's great.

The next section, River Theater, is supposed to open tomorrow at noon and apparently, work on the second phase is supposed to begin within a month or so!




:cool:

rlw777
Jun 9, 2015, 6:13 PM
Glyphosate (Roundup) is extremely unlikely to give anyone cancer. It's possible that a very small increase in cancer has seen in the people who apply it at industrial levels, but those people apply a lot of pesticides and herbicides, so I find the link a bit spurious to take seriously.

More importantly, 1) at the level you would be exposed to in a park or garden or home, it's implausible that you could ingest enough to be within 10,000x a concerning dose. 2) Glyphosate breaks down extremely rapidly after application, which is why it's the best herbicide to use, period. It doesn't accumulate at concentration in anything you're likely to eat, drink or touch.

It's fine to be worried about herbicide exposure, but pesticides are far, far more likely to be a problem to a mammal. And as far as herbicides go, it simply does not get better than glyphosate. Since it was originally developed by Monsanto, there's a lot of conspiracy hate on it that you might find on your uncle's Facebook. But if it's replaced with literally any other herbicide, the (exceedingly low) risk to human health has been increased. For example, I'm not worried about asphalt on our roads giving me cancer, and the number and quantity of toxic distillates we are exposed to from paved roads absolutely dwarfs anything we will ever be exposed to from herbicides. If we're not concerned about the cancer risk of biking or walking on pavement...

Nonsense. The argument that if we're not concerned about x (thing that's worse) we can't be worried about y is nonsense. Especially when y has a simple easy and cost effective alternative. By that I mean either just not using any weed killer or using something just as effective, not carcinogenic, and all natural like vinegar.

OrdoSeclorum
Jun 9, 2015, 7:10 PM
Nonsense. The argument that if we're not concerned about x (thing that's worse) we can't be worried about y is nonsense. Especially when y has a simple easy and cost effective alternative. By that I mean either just not using any weed killer or using something just as effective, not carcinogenic, and all natural like vinegar.

I'm certainly not saying that you can't be concerned about two things at once, or even one big thing and another small thing. I'm pointing out that we rightly are not concerned about asphalt--because the risk is real but very low--and the risk from glyphosate is far lower than that.

If spraying vinegar worked as well as commercial herbicides then I would wholeheartedly endorse its widespread use.

Ch.G, Ch.G
Jun 9, 2015, 7:51 PM
I agree with Tom on a lot of these points, I am sometimes frustrated by the Midwestern-ness of Chicago. Call me an elitist, whatever... The only time we get things that are truly world-class is when the private sector does it and pushes their designers for something bold. I can't believe they surveyed the neighborhood for these decisions. Have the government do something, and they try to make every little decision democratically. Recipe for mediocrity, most people will always choose what is most familiar to them, even if it's the same ubiquitous Home Depot crap in their own backyards.


I mean...

In danger of continuing to abuse the horse carcass, it's not just recent government work: Daley Civic Center, and Mies' Federal Center are both master works of architecture (both with Chicago designers) and a bold attempt was made (even if it has arguably failed spectacularly, certainly form a maintenance perspective) with the Thompson Center...

...touché. And just off the top of my head: what about the SOM Chinatown library? Gang's boathouses? David Woodhouse's work along the lakefront? Millennium Park? The riverwalk?

How many of you who exalt the East and West Coasts have, you know, actually lived there? You hear about the flashiest projects; that's what grabs headlines. But there's a lot of garbage, too, except you're unlikely to encounter it unless you're a resident or actively participate in their architecture blogs and online forums (assuming those resources are as vibrant as the ones we have in Chicago).

East Coast is often shorthand for New York. (I sure as shit know you're not talking about the consistently underwhelming design of the parks and museums DC churns out or Boston's thoroughly average Big Dig landscaping.) It should go without saying, though, that New York is different. New York and New York alone can get away with wasting literally billions of dollars worth of taxpayer money on an overwrought subway station.

IMO, there's no evidence that the mediocrity of the Bloomingdale Trail is a function of a provincial Midwestern-ness. I'd argue that it has more to do with the nature of this particular city's system of government. As Sam or someone mentioned, design by committee never works. (Most prominent example? 1 WTC... in New York.) Inasmuch as Chicago enables that kind of decision-making, it reaps the bland consequences. I'd go on to argue that the willingness to place the blame on some inherent quality of the city's geography is what's truly provincial about this whole thing.

OrdoSeclorum
Jun 9, 2015, 8:08 PM
I mean...

East Coast is often shorthand for New York.

Oh my god, yes. It annoys the hell out of me. Literally 99% of the time when people talk about being "coastal" or imply that East Coast is synonymous with cosmopolitanism they are trying to inflate Philly or Baltimore or Providence or Hartford or Yonkers or Camden by association with Manhattan.

Basically, people from Manhattan say they're from Manhattan, people from the other boroughs or Jersey or Connecticut say they're from New York and everyone else says, "I'm an East Coast guy", hoping that I will associate them more with The Met than with that video I saw of their brother-in-law in soiled sweat pants and an Eagles jersey who threw a cheesesteak at a reporter's face and yelled a homophobic slur.

Of course, self-loathing Chicagoans like to use "midwestern" as a diminutive, in the perfect inverse of the way "east coast" is used.

the urban politician
Jun 9, 2015, 8:17 PM
I'd go on to argue that the willingness to place the blame on some inherent quality of the city's geography is what's truly provincial about this whole thing.

^ Very well put

ardecila
Jun 10, 2015, 4:58 AM
East Coast is often shorthand for New York. (I sure as shit know you're not talking about the consistently underwhelming design of the parks and museums DC churns out or Boston's thoroughly average Big Dig landscaping.) It should go without saying, though, that New York is different. New York and New York alone can get away with wasting literally billions of dollars worth of taxpayer money on an overwrought subway station.

I am consistently impressed by the quality of both large projects and smaller infill in Boston and Philly. I'd throw Toronto and Montreal in there as well as "East Coast". Not to say there aren't builders putting up crap in those cities, or New York for that matter.

DC is probably on a par with Chicago for sheer architecture (lots of mediocre traditional stuff there) but far ahead when it comes to urban planning. Several spectacular new parks there, lots of TOD, etc.

To bring it back to Chicago, the Midwest location is certainly relevant. In Boston or Philly, you get plenty of designers, developers, etc who are familiar with the world-class architecture in New York and look to bring some of it back home. For Chicago, there is no other architectural capital in the region. The scene here is a little bit of a lacuna.

XIII
Jun 10, 2015, 10:27 AM
I am consistently impressed by the quality of both large projects and smaller infill in Boston and Philly. I'd throw Toronto and Montreal in there as well as "East Coast". Not to say there aren't builders putting up crap in those cities, or New York for that matter.

DC is probably on a par with Chicago for sheer architecture (lots of mediocre traditional stuff there) but far ahead when it comes to urban planning. Several spectacular new parks there, lots of TOD, etc.

To bring it back to Chicago, the Midwest location is certainly relevant. In Boston or Philly, you get plenty of designers, developers, etc who are familiar with the world-class architecture in New York and look to bring some of it back home. For Chicago, there is no other architectural capital in the region. The scene here is a little bit of a lacuna.

Are you trying to suggest that architects and developers from Chicago never visit these cities and firms from those cities don't work on projects here?

Are you suggesting that Chicago be more like Philly in development? How so?

the urban politician
Jun 10, 2015, 12:28 PM
Are you trying to suggest that architects and developers from Chicago never visit these cities and firms from those cities don't work on projects here?

^ Yeah, really. Architects from Chicago are being commissioned for projects all over the world, and designers/architects elsewhere are doing projects here.

If you don't like the midwest then fine, don't like the midwest. A lot of Chicagoans incidentally look down their noses at the hinterlands. But that has nothing to do with this.

Sorry Ardecila, but you totally lost me on this one--perhaps you're just having a bad week?

LouisVanDerWright
Jun 10, 2015, 2:26 PM
DC is probably on a par with Chicago for sheer architecture (lots of mediocre traditional stuff there) but far ahead when it comes to urban planning. Several spectacular new parks there, lots of TOD, etc.

This confuses me as well. Chicago is not delivering "spectacular new parks"? In a 5 year span we are going to see the opening of nearly a mile of riverwalk, Maggie Daley Park, the 2.7 mile Bloomingdale Trail (which is awesome if you have actually gone there), two nearly 2 acre parks at the confluence, Northerly Island Park, 10+ acres of new parkland around the Lucas Museum, and, most importantly, the British School rooftop "park" in the South Loop. Name one park in DC that approaches the scale of the park building boom in Chicago?

Also, we might not have a ton of TOD under construction yet, but the amount of TOD in the pipeline now that we actually have legalized it is rather impressive. The only reason DC has such a thing for it is their stupid height restriction makes it impossible to build any real buildings and sop up demand in the central area. So all they get is hundreds of 10-14 story cubes while Chicago gets dozens of 30-50 story towers.

And the "mediocre traditional stuff" comment also confuses me. We have exactly one mediocre traditional building under construction right now, everything else is half decent modern designs. We are never going to build many buildings that "look like a bugs having sex" because that "progressive" style which is popular now simply isn't Chicago.

To bring it back to Chicago, the Midwest location is certainly relevant. In Boston or Philly, you get plenty of designers, developers, etc who are familiar with the world-class architecture in New York and look to bring some of it back home. For Chicago, there is no other architectural capital in the region. The scene here is a little bit of a lacuna.

This isn't really true either. Chicago is as plugged in to the global development and architecture scene as any other city of it's size, if not more. We just don't have billionaires clamoring over every square inch of the city they can park a million bucks on.

Someone made a comment about "design by committee" being a problem here, well at least we don't have a problem with "design by billionaire" like NYC apparently does as evidenced by the Murdoch fiasco at the WTC. 1 WTC is the ultimate example of what happens when you put too many people in a room and tell them to design a building. Apparently 2 WTC is going to be the ultimate example of what happens when you put a tasteless billionaire in a room and tell him to design a building. The BIG design surely is a joke, it is a creation even the throw-iest of UPS drivers couldn't be proud of. The Foster design was by far the best of the post-9/11 proposals and they threw it out the window because the CEO of Faux News "didn't like it". I'm a fan of BIG, but this design is just stupid and it reeks of design-by-tenant.

lu9
Jun 10, 2015, 3:11 PM
^^^ Can I get an AMEN!

Mr Downtown
Jun 10, 2015, 5:10 PM
most importantly, the British School rooftop "park" in the South Loop.

Wait, how does the loss of an actual park and its replacement with half the square footage of difficult-to-access private landscaping. . . how is that "most important?"

LouisVanDerWright
Jun 10, 2015, 5:22 PM
Wait, how does the loss of an actual park and its replacement with half the square footage of difficult-to-access private landscaping. . . how is that "most important?"

That was sarcasm, hence the "most importantly" part. Obviously the British School nonsense pales in comparison to everything else I mentioned.

rlw777
Jun 10, 2015, 5:38 PM
DC is probably on a par with Chicago for sheer architecture (lots of mediocre traditional stuff there) but far ahead when it comes to urban planning. Several spectacular new parks there, lots of TOD, etc.

I would take the Chicago Lakeshore over all of DC's parks combined.

ardecila
Jun 10, 2015, 5:43 PM
The Riverwalk expansion is awesome, full stop. Clever, well-executed, world class, all of that.

I'm not quite as impressed with Maggie Daley or the Bloomingdale Trail. Maybe I just don't like Van Valkenburgh. :shrug: A lot of his stuff is the equivalent of postmodern architecture, just one riff after another on traditional Olmsted designs.

I actually think the city is doing far better, design-wise, under Emanuel than under Daley. The building boom during the 90s and 00s gave us a cancer of cheesy infill throughout many neighborhoods. Now there are a lot more developers building contemporary with huge windows, hardipanel and stained wood, aluminum, etc. I will grant that the sales prices per/SF on a lot of new development limit the architectural possibilities compared to more expensive coastal cities.

Moving forward, we are poised for more good things with increased focus on TOD (large projects are somehow slipping past the goalie of NIMBY groups) major architectural contributions for the Lucas Museum, Obama Library, Wanda Vista, etc. Definitely moving in the right direction.

Mr Downtown
Jun 10, 2015, 5:59 PM
^What is the architectural contribution of the Obama Library?

OrdoSeclorum
Jun 10, 2015, 6:12 PM
T

I actually think the city is doing far better, design-wise, under Emanuel than under Daley. The building boom during the 90s and 00s gave us a cancer of cheesy infill throughout many neighborhoods. Now there are a lot more developers building contemporary with huge windows, hardipanel and stained wood, aluminum, etc. I will grant that the sales prices per/SF on a lot of new development limit the architectural possibilities compared to more expensive coastal cities.

A lot of this stuff looks different when you are looking at is as a resident or a visitor. We remember novel stuff about new places and forget the good things we're used to at home. A few examples: I was in Pittsburgh walking around recently and loving all of the fine-grained texture in the buildings and beautiful gothic architecture. "I wish we had a neighborhood like this in Chicago" I was thinking. Then I realized if it were in Chicago, I would be furious about all the parking lots. Every fourth lot was surface parking. I completely looked past it because I was hypnotized by novelty. Likewise, I see what's going up in Manhattan and I think, "man, I wish we had more buildings planned like this in Chicago." But when I'm taking a cab in from Newark or Laguardia, I think "Jesus, there are more ugly high rises in this one part of the city than there are in all of Chicago." And in my last trip to San Francisco, a resident was saying, "Isn't this a great street?" and I was thinking, "Look at all these sidewalk facing garages! Every house has a curb cut. That building has a curb cut and that building has a curb cut. What a nightmare."

sentinel
Jun 10, 2015, 6:15 PM
^What is the architectural contribution of the Obama Library?

I think they meant what the Obama Library 'will' contribute.

Mr Downtown
Jun 10, 2015, 6:22 PM
^I haven't seen those renderings.

sentinel
Jun 10, 2015, 6:26 PM
^I haven't seen those renderings.

You're being unnecessarily glib - everyone knows nothing has been designed yet(?) for the library - Ardecila's comment was merely to highlight the hope that the Obama Library will presumably be designed as a singular and ideally groundbreaking piece of architecture, that's all.

the urban politician
Jun 10, 2015, 7:10 PM
I would take the Chicago Lakeshore over all of DC's parks combined.

Statement of the day, right here.

i_am_hydrogen
Jun 10, 2015, 7:40 PM
Aerial Sphere - Millennium Park
This is pretty bad-ass: http://www.aerialsphere.com/spheres/illinois/chicago/millennium-park/

woodrow
Jun 10, 2015, 8:23 PM
^^holy shit! That is amazing!

wierdaaron
Jun 10, 2015, 8:48 PM
And recent, too. The images were captured 6/3.

marothisu
Jun 10, 2015, 9:01 PM
Fucking amazing. Here's one for the Mag Mile
http://www.aerialsphere.com/spheres/illinois/chicago/26/

george
Jun 10, 2015, 9:04 PM
That is good stuff!!

harryc
Jun 11, 2015, 3:09 AM
Clark st bridge had trouble closing because of heat expansion.

https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-qrfytutl96A/VXi8cUCfsUI/AAAAAAAEUGg/0tOSu6qEfSE/w958-h598-no/P1210003.JPG

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-Vrphv9Qcarg/VXi8d7rbnFI/AAAAAAAEUG0/9K3F0uMTWkc/w958-h719-no/P1210029.JPG

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-P84MlP1K6Pk/VXi8fmTLCtI/AAAAAAAEUHM/V3NCj_zJeAE/w958-h719-no/P1210075.JPG

Was stuck from 2-3pm - with filming nearby it was a good day to be on a bike.

george
Jun 11, 2015, 3:30 AM
A sight to see. ^ Looks like 360 Mich is nearly topped out.

ardecila
Jun 11, 2015, 4:27 AM
You're being unnecessarily glib - everyone knows nothing has been designed yet(?) for the library - Ardecila's comment was merely to highlight the hope that the Obama Library will presumably be designed as a singular and ideally groundbreaking piece of architecture, that's all.

Given the global connections of the Obama administration and the architectural ambitions of U of C, the Obama Library will not be designed by some local yokel but by a renowned firm (local or otherwise). That doesn't mean the end result will be a great building, of course, but it definitely helps.

Notyrview
Jun 11, 2015, 11:56 AM
Clark st bridge had trouble closing because of heat expansion.

Was stuck from 2-3pm - with filming nearby it was a good day to be on a bike.

Chicago infrastructure really takes a beating from the weather. Lends credence to the motto 'the city that works'.

Jim in Chicago
Jun 11, 2015, 3:47 PM
Was stuck from 2-3pm - with filming nearby it was a good day to be on a bike.

Yesterday afternoon was pretty much "carmageddon". It took me 45 minutes to get from LSD/Roosevelt to Clark/Harrison - just total gridlock.

The city used to do a better job of coordinating constructsion - I even remember the days when they'd repave and generally fix up alternate routes before construction on a nearby street began including retiming the lights to help traffic flow. Right now we have:

Circle closed Ryan/Congress - this forces much of the loop traffic onto the Chinatown feeder and/or Clark/State, blocking up Clark almost back to Cermack
The Harrison Bridge still not done
TAYLOR partially closed for construction over the Ryan
All the corners on Roosevelt between sort of State and Michigan torn up for what on the surface appears to be a routine repaving.
Roosevelt itself still under construction at the CTA station.
18th St. bridge only just opened.
Bike lanes everywhere narrowing arterial streets to one lane.
Harrison closed between Wabash and State.
Work on Canal north of Harrison
Probably 10 others I'm blocking

How are people supposed to move?

Ned.B
Jun 11, 2015, 3:53 PM
A sight to see. ^ Looks like 360 Mich is nearly topped out.

It is. They are currently framing floor 21. Just 22 and the penthouse roof remain. It will probably top out late next week or early the week after that.

Fireproofing currently going on at 13 and 14. From Michigan you can see that framing for the metal panel alley facade is also well underway.

jpdivola
Jun 11, 2015, 4:41 PM
I am consistently impressed by the quality of both large projects and smaller infill in Boston and Philly. I'd throw Toronto and Montreal in there as well as "East Coast". Not to say there aren't builders putting up crap in those cities, or New York for that matter.

DC is probably on a par with Chicago for sheer architecture (lots of mediocre traditional stuff there) but far ahead when it comes to urban planning. Several spectacular new parks there, lots of TOD, etc.

To bring it back to Chicago, the Midwest location is certainly relevant. In Boston or Philly, you get plenty of designers, developers, etc who are familiar with the world-class architecture in New York and look to bring some of it back home. For Chicago, there is no other architectural capital in the region. The scene here is a little bit of a lacuna.

As an east coast lerker, let me offer my two-cents. I wouldn't say the quality of architecture is better in Boston or Philly. They put up tons of duds (See Boston's "Innovation District" on the waterfront). But, they are tighter built cities. This encourages stylistically more urban architecture: smaller set backs and better integration into the existing fabric. The parking podiums aren't as noticeable in the east coast cities, which creates a better pedestrian experience. Boston and Philly have the old world charm, but that is more historical accident than superior planning. I think Chicago does are better job with modern parks. Millennium Park >>> Boston's Greenway.

With DC, Chicago has a vastly better downtown. DC's is (mostly) a sea of 10-story office buildings. DC has put up lots of 10-12 story apartment boxes on the fringes of downtown. These are pretty bland and have overly wide setbacks which kill the urban feel. From the "housing" perspective of urban planning they are a win. But, are missing the mark from a "creating a neighborhood" standpoint. The one strong point is no parking podiums.

One area (maybe the only area) where DC is clearly superior is in neighborhood infill. DC's 14th street has done a good job of integrating quality infill into the existing neighborhood. I would love to see Chicago redevelop it's strip malls and 1-story commercial buildings in a similar manner.

DC's parks are generally not very good (with a few exceptions). Many of it's parks are run by the national park service who sees it's principal mission as ensuring that parks are kept free of terrorism and commerce.

As to transit/urban planning, DC is probably doing a better job than Chicago in the sense that there seems to be more by in from the population. I think there are a number of reasons:
1) DC is a fast growing city. The city needs to figure out where to house people
2) DC is more conducive to car free commuting. DC is a small city with a disproportionate number of downtown office workers. This makes car-free living easier in DC than many other cities.
3) DC's central city is built out, this requires careful growth in the neighborhoods. Chicago has tons of land available in the greater downtown area. DC, by contrast, needs to figure out how to mange growth in its residential neighborhoods and out of the way TOD zones.
4) DC has a huge transient yuppie population- DC has lots of affluent people who move in without cars. This is pretty much to core audience for smart growth.


There are a few areas Chicago could learn from the non-NYC east coast cities (particularly with the parking podium issue and strip mall redevelopment). But, I wouldn't say Chicago is behind them overall and there are many areas in which they could learn from Chicago.

Via Chicago
Jun 11, 2015, 5:57 PM
Yesterday afternoon was pretty much "carmageddon". It took me 45 minutes to get from LSD/Roosevelt to Clark/Harrison - just total gridlock.

The city used to do a better job of coordinating constructsion - I even remember the days when they'd repave and generally fix up alternate routes before construction on a nearby street began including retiming the lights to help traffic flow. Right now we have:

Circle closed Ryan/Congress - this forces much of the loop traffic onto the Chinatown feeder and/or Clark/State, blocking up Clark almost back to Cermack
The Harrison Bridge still not done
TAYLOR partially closed for construction over the Ryan
All the corners on Roosevelt between sort of State and Michigan torn up for what on the surface appears to be a routine repaving.
Roosevelt itself still under construction at the CTA station.
18th St. bridge only just opened.
Bike lanes everywhere narrowing arterial streets to one lane.
Harrison closed between Wabash and State.
Work on Canal north of Harrison
Probably 10 others I'm blocking

How are people supposed to move?

driving in this city is a lost cause. as long as im able bodied ill do the bike, or CTA in adverse weather. took me only 30 minutes this morning to get to the Loop from Edgewater...passed most of the traffic standing in rush hour on LSD.

emathias
Jun 11, 2015, 6:47 PM
driving in this city is a lost cause. as long as im able bodied ill do the bike, or CTA in adverse weather. took me only 30 minutes this morning to get to the Loop from Edgewater...passed most of the traffic standing in rush hour on LSD.

I agree. I only live in River North, about 1.25 miles from my office, but taking a bus often takes me longer than walking does. Biking is almost always faster than any other mode. Cabs can be faster before 7:30am or late on a weeknight, but only by a few minutes. In downtown or most places that are relatively dense, biking is the far superior means of travel nearly any day. I can walk to work in 20 minutes, or bike in 10 most days - I've biked in as little as 5 minutes, but I show up sweaty if I do that. The bus, counting walking and waiting, takes 20-25 minutes most of the time. Cab around 10 unless I leave after 8:15.

When I was in high school growing up in rural Oregon, I biked everywhere and loved it. Then I went to college and just walked around campus and then lived in suburban Minneapolis for a couple years. When I moved back to Chicago all the traffic downtown was too intimidating to think about biking even though I bought a bike, but I got talked into biking by a friend and fell back in love with it to the point that I even enjoy riding in rush hour traffic because the cars aren't too fast and I just zip right by them on my fixie.

Steely Dan
Jun 11, 2015, 8:17 PM
even for non-downtown commutes, driving at rush hour is a joke in this town.

i live up in edgewater and work in downtown evanston, ~5 mile commute.

car: 25 minutes
bike: 25 minutes
el: 35 - 60 minutes (the red line to purple line transfer at howard is WILDLY unpredictable going northbound, enough to make me avoid the train as much as possible, it's my very last resort)

needless to say, with absolutely zero time penalty vs. driving (and a MASSIVE sanity bonus), i bike the vast majority of days (with the exception of these past 2 winters from hell, ugh....)

Via Chicago
Jun 11, 2015, 8:24 PM
On the other hand I was almost run over by a cab that didnt signal or check his blind spot while trying to make a right turn at Grand/McClurg, so I guess its not without tradeoff

wierdaaron
Jun 11, 2015, 8:37 PM
Solution to all transit problems:


JERRY: The only thing I can think of is I told her we should have those moving walkways all over the city.

GEORGE: Like at the airport? (getting excited)

JERRY: Yeah.

GEORGE: That's a great idea!!!

JERRY: Tell me about it!

GEORGE: We could be zipping all over the place.

JERRY: They could at least try it.

GEORGE: They never try anything.

JERRY: What's the harm?

GEORGE: No harm!

OrdoSeclorum
Jun 11, 2015, 8:39 PM
Yesterday afternoon was pretty much "carmageddon". It took me 45 minutes to get from LSD/Roosevelt to Clark/Harrison - just total gridlock.

How are people supposed to move?

People move great in Chicago. I couple years ago I saw a graphic showing that while Chicago had the most time spent in congestion, it also had the lowest average trip time of any city. If you want to get somewhere, it probably isn't very far and there are a lot of ways to get there. You can spend 40 minutes driving 20 miles in Nashville or you can spend 25 minutes driving 5 miles in Chicago. I know which one I prefer.

Ryanrule
Jun 11, 2015, 8:53 PM
Yesterday afternoon was pretty much "carmageddon". It took me 45 minutes to get from LSD/Roosevelt to Clark/Harrison - just total gridlock.

The city used to do a better job of coordinating constructsion - I even remember the days when they'd repave and generally fix up alternate routes before construction on a nearby street began including retiming the lights to help traffic flow. Right now we have:

Circle closed Ryan/Congress - this forces much of the loop traffic onto the Chinatown feeder and/or Clark/State, blocking up Clark almost back to Cermack
The Harrison Bridge still not done
TAYLOR partially closed for construction over the Ryan
All the corners on Roosevelt between sort of State and Michigan torn up for what on the surface appears to be a routine repaving.
Roosevelt itself still under construction at the CTA station.
18th St. bridge only just opened.
Bike lanes everywhere narrowing arterial streets to one lane.
Harrison closed between Wabash and State.
Work on Canal north of Harrison
Probably 10 others I'm blocking

How are people supposed to move?

hmm. i walk around the south loop. my speed has not been affected.
why drive downtown during the week at all?

the urban politician
Jun 11, 2015, 8:56 PM
^ I've spent a lot of time driving around Chicago, and one thing happens:

You become an exhausted, pissed off person very quickly. And if you do it long term (think daily commuter or cab driver) those acute symptoms become chronic and you turn into a fatigued son of a bitch.

Which is why I hate it, and I always prefer walking or taking the Metra into the city. The city is meant for walking, not for driving. And for anyone who bitches about driving in the city, just remember that you are not using the ideal mode of transportation to get around a big, urban city. It's a losing battle, so get out of your car if at all possible and preserve your sanity.

streetline
Jun 11, 2015, 9:00 PM
Solution to all transit problems:

You joke, but imagine a 3500ft series of moving walkways under Madison from west of Wacker near the west loop metra stations to Millennium Park/Station, with exits every couple of blocks and connections to the unpaid areas of red and blue line stations. That would give the Pedway a real backbone, and get people across the loop west to east more efficiently.

J_M_Tungsten
Jun 11, 2015, 10:25 PM
That's actually a pretty cool idea. 35, 90ft walkways, with a 10ft break in between each to let people on and off going east and west. A people highway and a highway for people.

sentinel
Jun 11, 2015, 10:25 PM
Yesterday afternoon was pretty much "carmageddon". It took me 45 minutes to get from LSD/Roosevelt to Clark/Harrison - just total gridlock.

The city used to do a better job of coordinating constructsion - I even remember the days when they'd repave and generally fix up alternate routes before construction on a nearby street began including retiming the lights to help traffic flow. Right now we have:

Circle closed Ryan/Congress - this forces much of the loop traffic onto the Chinatown feeder and/or Clark/State, blocking up Clark almost back to Cermack
The Harrison Bridge still not done
TAYLOR partially closed for construction over the Ryan
All the corners on Roosevelt between sort of State and Michigan torn up for what on the surface appears to be a routine repaving.
Roosevelt itself still under construction at the CTA station.
18th St. bridge only just opened.
Bike lanes everywhere narrowing arterial streets to one lane.
Harrison closed between Wabash and State.
Work on Canal north of Harrison
Probably 10 others I'm blocking

How are people supposed to move?

I wonder if these projects/bottlenecks are being rushed through for fear of losing state funding during the Rauner tenure? :shrug: to be honest, I'm somewhat ignorant on how these projects are funded, state vs federal sourcing, percentages, etc.

Jim in Chicago
Jun 12, 2015, 2:03 PM
hmm. i walk around the south loop. my speed has not been affected.
why drive downtown during the week at all?

Because I live downtown and have no convenient public transit between home and work.

msu2001la
Jun 12, 2015, 3:30 PM
Traffic complaints, eh?

Most of the time I bike or take CTA, but yesterday was a situation where I found myself getting into my parked car at 5pm in a garage near Madison and LaSalle.

After my meeting downtown ended at 5pm had to pick up my dog at Irving Park and Rockwell (the only reason I was driving, since I cannot bike or take pub trans with a dog).

LSD was jammed due to the Cubs game. The highway was jammed due to rush hour and everyone avoiding LSD. I ended up taking Milwaukee/Elston/Western.

The 7 mile one way drive took me an hour and fifteen minutes. This same trip would've taken about 40 minutes on the Brown Line + 80 bus, or maybe 30-35 minutes of biking at an easy non-sweaty pace. Hell, I could've jogged it in an hour.

I was so jealous of all the people cruising by me on bikes while I sat in traffic on Milwaukee and Elston.

J_M_Tungsten
Jun 12, 2015, 3:53 PM
This city is easy to navigate, so long as you know where the bottlenecks are, and know how to move through the side streets. I'd say the general population who drive in the city don't do so very well. Unless your destination is straight down the street from where you start, making rights or lefts before you need helps to avoid major road back ups, and unless it is a one way, gets you that much closer to your destination. More of a transit thread discussion though...

LouisVanDerWright
Jun 12, 2015, 4:02 PM
The most useful roads in Chicago are the secondary streets that are not quite an arterial, but still have signals at busy intersections and only a few stop signs. The biggest bottleneck problem in the city is crossing east-west over the river on the north side. The Cortland bridge is temporarily closed right now and traffic at all river crossings nearby is hell. The problem with the system is that too many secondary streets like Wrightwood and Wellington dead end at the river.

It's really a shame that Wrightwood in particular was never extended over the river. If Wrightwood went straight through to Logan Blvd then there would probably next to no traffic trying to get across the river on the North side. I can get around just about any traffic jam in the city by jumping over onto streets like Central Park or Roscoe or Southport, but all the river crossings have the same problem and there is no way around them.

george
Jun 12, 2015, 4:18 PM
6/11

A. Finkl & Sons Co. demolition

http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/xq90/661/QlwKTB.jpg (https://imageshack.com/i/idQlwKTBj)

http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/xq90/540/liLrMg.jpg (https://imageshack.com/i/f0liLrMgj)

http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/xq90/537/3S74mu.jpg (https://imageshack.com/i/ex3S74muj)

http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/xq90/540/VpgCof.jpg (https://imageshack.com/i/f0VpgCofj)

george
Jun 12, 2015, 4:33 PM
6/11

Finkl demo

http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/xq90/537/JgmKRg.jpg (https://imageshack.com/i/exJgmKRgj)

http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/xq90/537/wn7o7U.jpg (https://imageshack.com/i/exwn7o7Uj)

http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/xq90/537/DhN7YV.jpg (https://imageshack.com/i/exDhN7YVj)

http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/xq90/537/9QUtqx.jpg (https://imageshack.com/i/ex9QUtqxj)

PKDickman
Jun 12, 2015, 4:46 PM
I wonder if these projects/bottlenecks are being rushed through for fear of losing state funding during the Rauner tenure? :shrug: to be honest, I'm somewhat ignorant on how these projects are funded, state vs federal sourcing, percentages, etc.

You can bone up on it here:
http://www.cityofchicago.org/content/dam/city/depts/obm/supp_info/CIP_Archive/2014CapitalBook.pdf

But judging by its 2014 numbers, the state makes up about 25% of the total transportation infrastructure budget. But they are heavily funding certain subprograms like "bridge improvements" (nearly 50%) and "major streets" (33%)

A lot of it is sourced from something called the "State Only Chicago Commitment" which I think is a matching program for federal funds and could have bigger impacts than the state funding alone.

I am not sure how much discretion they have. Most of it is above my pay grade, I just like to read the budget to see what they are up to.

On a separate note, those Finkl shots make me weep.
I grew up in and industrial wasteland and when ever I got homesick, I would take a trip down to Finkltown and watch men bend the elements to their will.