CHICAGO | Highrise Projects & Construction, v7

[ithakas]

Originally Posted by Tom Servo

Yes. I don't understand why the parking podium has been such a horribly difficult to design aspect of building design for SO LONG now... so many buildings in the city are ruined by these massively awkward and clumsy attempts at integrating parking into a building. Shame.

Because there are still generations of Chicagoans like you, who think that car ownership is a necessity in this city.

[Tom Servo]

Originally Posted by ithakas

Because there are still generations of Chicagoans like you, who think that car ownership is a necessity in this city.

People own cars. In fact, the vast majority of Chicagoans own cars... especially in these nice buildings. But there are ways to design the parking podium so that it isn't a clunky mess.

Car ownership isn't the problem; lazy and weak design is. Just look at the buildings going up in Portland. Most have parking podiums, but nearly everything there is designed well and looks handsome... none of this building placed thoughtlessly atop a parking block — you see here in mass.

and incidentally, it IS 100% a necessity if you ask me. The CTA is god. awful. and a total pain in the —. I don't miss that aspect of my teenage years/early twenties at all. I take the stupid train from time to time in the rare event I go downtown or am getting picked up somewhere like Rosemont, and I can't stand it. It's unusably slow and inefficient. The bums are nasty and smell. It just —. I feel bad for people that are forced to rely on it.

[marothisu]

^ You also have to look at car ownership in each area, not the city as a whole. Comparing Montclare to something like Gold Coast is just a terrible comparison. The car ownership percentage in an area like Gold Coast is going to be less than an area like Montclare or Beverly or Mount Greenwood.

[Tom Servo]

Originally Posted by marothisu

^ You also have to look at car ownership in each area, not the city as a whole. Comparing Montclare to something like Gold Coast is just a terrible comparison. The car ownership percentage in an area like Gold Coast is going to be less than an area like Montclare or Beverly or Mount Greenwood.

Of course it is. But I'm specifically talking about buildings like this, these new apt/condo towers going up downtown that appeal, primarily, to people coming in from the suburbs. Generally, these people own cars. So if we just accept that car ownership is a thing that exists and that these buildings should, especially considering how expensive they are, accommodate car ownership, then maybe we can start looking at the real problem here: lack of quality design, not the car itself.

[marothisu]

I definitely don't disagree with you that the podium is — and I would love for any parking to be underground or masked in an actual good way. I don't think anybody on here will disagree with you on that one.

However, the need or want for a car is another story. Many people who live in these areas that own a car rarely use it if they aren't using it for work. I have a few friends living downtown who fall into this category. And a few others got rid of their cars because they almost never used them and were just collecting dust and parking fees. As someone who's lived downtown for the last 7 years, I know my neighbors and trust me - far less use it for anything but work commute (if they have it). I have a friend who moved downtown from Indianapolis - the guy loves cars. Works on them, custom built, blah blah blah - goes to all the shows big and small. Even he, after 6 months of living downtown told me that he didn't know why he still needed his truck as it was just a waste of space and money since he barely ever drove it. He lives out in University Village now and he's still considering getting rid of it, or at least storing it somewhere in Indianapolis instead.

[Tom Servo]

^^ this is something then that falls on developers for not recognizing the actual extent of car ownership and taking it into account when programming their buildings. And I'm also well aware of how under-used MANY of these parking garages actually are... again, this is a development problem, not a car problem.

I incidentally totally agree with you guys when you complain about these garages being designed to hold in excess of a spot per unit. I'd be curious to see the vacancy rate of parking spots amongst downtown garages. I imagine it's extremely high.

But then again I guess it's all in the demographic; every single spot in my dad's building is taken and used regularly, so idk.

[marothisu]

I wouldn't even say it's vacant - some of them are not vacant. The issue is the cars go underutilized majorly. I have been in a handful of garages downtown only belonging to the residential buildings to see it but it's the truth. I have friends in parts of town like Lakeview who own cars and the ONLY reason they still have their car is because they have family in states like Michigan which are driveable and visit their family once every other month. They've literally told me that. They sit out on the streets in Lakeview collecting dust and the only time they move it is that time every other month when they go to visit family or for street sweeping/snow removal.

I have friends downtown who aren't even like that. They just still have a car because either (a) they own it and don't want to get rid of it or (b) they semi recently had a change in their lives where they don't need the car anymore but still have it. I mean in all honesty, there's little reason to use a car in an area where you can walk for everything. I have a grocery store for example right near me - why would I need a car? When I need a car, it's for stuff like going on a road trip or reaching some far out area of Chicago and both of those are rare. And when I go on a road trip, I rent a car because it's a hell of a lot cheaper than having a car collect dust that I'm not using.

Most people choose to live downtown because of the convenience factor. Some of them may have a reverse commute out to somewhere like Naperville, sure, but at the end of the day there are other areas they could live in which make that commute more tolerable. They are living downtown because it is an area with high walkability. You would be surprised at how many people don't actually use their cars for anything other than going to work or visiting family every so often.


So in essence, it's not right just to put it on the developers. If someone believed they needed their car and a building didn't offer it, they would go elsewhere. Enough of them, sure it might make them realize they don't need it, but at the same time it's not excuse for someone not realizing they literally only use a car for less than 10 days a year. It shouldn't take a bunch of buildings with less parking to make people realize this if they belong to that situation.

[Mr Downtown]

Center for Neighborhood Technology recently did some research on parking utilization, visiting residential garages and surface lots between midnight and 4 am to count empty stalls. For buildings citywide within 0.5 miles of CTA rail, they found utilization of 0.25 stalls per unit.

In higher-income neighborhoods, however, I think utilization is much closer to 0.5 stalls per unit, just based on developers' experience in selling the spaces separately. I'm pretty sure it's been declining slowly but steadily over the last decade, though.

[Tom Servo]

^^^ okay so it's not really an issue of bad development, just bad design.

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by Tom Servo

^^^ okay so it's not really an issue of bad development, just bad design.

Actual design has nothing to do with convincing people that they need a car or not or making them realize that they're almost never using their car and it's a waste of space/money for them.

And listen, I don't oppose cars or anything. They're obviously useful, and I enjoy driving a lot actually. I don't do it though much because I have no need to and you will find many people in the city especially younger people in areas like a Lincoln Park, Lakeview, Wicker Park, downtown etc who own cars who don't use them anymore and the reasons they still have them is because they moved to Chicago from somewhere where the car was necessary and they haven't made the step to realize how much of a waste of money their underutilized car is to them.

[ithakas]

Originally Posted by Tom Servo

^^^ okay so it's not really an issue of bad development, just bad design.

The building that spurred this conversation has 50 units and 87 parking spaces. I think that Mr. Downtown's figures state that only 1 in 4 residents use their space, closer to 1 in 2 in high-income areas? I could be misunderstanding the statistic, but if not this is an example of building way too much parking for its context.

[VKChaz]

Originally Posted by Tom Servo

Most have parking podiums, but nearly everything there is designed well and looks handsome... none of this building placed thoughtlessly atop a parking block — you see here in mass.

Can someone explain the reason for the disparity? Is it related to building codes? defined standards? something else?

[Ryanrule]

Podiums should be required to be part of the tower structure. Want 200 spots? Then you are building 10 extra levels of garage.

[Notyrview]

Originally Posted by Ryanrule

Podiums should be required to be part of the tower structure. Want 200 spots? Then you are building 10 extra levels of garage.

Hear, hear

[SolarWind]

February 4, 2016

[SolarWind]

February 4, 2016

[J_M_Tungsten]

Yesterday
833 N Clark

[the urban politician]

^ Wow, love that pic. I love how the sunlight hits the buildings in the background, kind of like a cliff in the distance. The canyon is slowly growing.

[J_M_Tungsten]

Such exciting development times in Chicago. I never mind sitting in traffic in this city.

[LouisVanDerWright]

Originally Posted by Ryanrule

Podiums should be required to be part of the tower structure. Want 200 spots? Then you are building 10 extra levels of garage.

They should either have to do that OR build the parking in an adjacent, but totally structurally independent, garage. That way the podiums can be demolished easily in the future when/if demand for parking subsides and be replaced with new buildings.

The whole idea of building multiple floors of space that can't easily be adopted to another use and are structurally integral to huge skyscrapers above them seems totally boneheaded.