CHICAGO | General Developments

[Chicago3rd]

Originally Posted by budman

^Sounds like nobody here has kids, or responsibility for anyone but themselves. I dont mean that in a bad way, but when you have a family, you will need a car. Or at least really want one. I dont have kids, by the way, but I truly enjoy driving...I probably drive in the city, just to drive, several times a week, just like other people bike or run. And Mr. D is right on about convenience too. I dont want every errand I have to run to be a chore. In fact, I dont want any errand I run to be a chore, and if I have to take the bus (or two busses, or the bus then the train) to go to Best Buy to return the camera I just bought that doesnt work when I could be out on my friend's boat, well...you can probably finish that sentence yourself.

Oh the don't have kid thing gets a little old. I see lots of kids and families on the bus and el every day of my life. How did cities ever function without cars????

And the errand thing...is fine too...but I don't want in cities....the dense parts of the cities...to have car convience put ahead of pedestrian/public transit convenience. Pedestrians first.....cars second. Then I might be a little more tolerant of cars.

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by Chicago3rd

I am sorry but is this not the CHICAGO: general development threat?????

^ Bah, the General Development Thread long ago became Chicago's urban discussion backwater, so why not just carry on here?

I actually think the Transit Thread is far too interesting & productive to waste on this bickering...

[Nowhereman1280]

^^^

Car's aren't inherently evil you know. I do agree that they don't mix well with cities and should not be encouraged. For example our city shouldn't have a minimum parking requirement for new developments. That should be determined by market forces, not the city promoting car use!

Anyhow, move to Fargo? No, I grew up somewhere that was close enough! My lifestyle requires a car at least in the summer because I am all over the states of Illinois and Wisconsin frequently going places Transit doesn't touch, that's my point. There are no buses or trains in Waupaca, Rhienlander, or Iron Mountain Wisconsin, the only way to get to the places I like to visit (or to visit my extended family who are scattered across the remote forests of northern Wisconsin) is by car. So what if I want to live in Chicago and still see my family once in a while? Do you think that is an unreasonable thing? Again, I don't have a car down here because I have one in Milwaukee that I can take the train to when I need to go remote places...

[brian_b]

Originally Posted by VivaLFuego

Why would you spend an average of about $8K per year for a car that you only need about 50 times that year? (assuming $7K national average plus Chicago parking premium). That's over $150 per trip in the car. Makes an occasional cab ride seem like a good deal. For tax purposes, driving costs about $.50 per mile (and it's probably slightly higher than that now that gas has increased), and that's not including the acquisition cost of the car and assumes a relatively low insurance burden. That includes gas, depreciation, maintenance, and insurance.

That's exactly why I got rid of my car. I keep track of my expenses and my transportation costs have gone way down. A taxi ride seems like a large out-of-pocket expense only because the expenses related to owning a car are paid monthly from your checking account, and amortized over a number of years.

[Abner]

I'm surprised the transit advocates are suggesting cabs as an alternative.

A cab is far more polluting than a more reasonably-sized car (a Crown Vic gets, what, about 14 miles to the gallon), they're on the streets all day long, and the fare structure gives cab drivers an incentive to drive like absolute maniacs. Cabs are probably the worst thing you could put on the streets to promote walking and biking.

[VivaLFuego]

Originally Posted by Abner

I'm surprised the transit advocates are suggesting cabs as an alternative.

A cab is far more polluting than a more reasonably-sized car (a Crown Vic gets, what, about 14 miles to the gallon), they're on the streets all day long, and the fare structure gives cab drivers an incentive to drive like absolute maniacs. Cabs are probably the worst thing you could put on the streets to promote walking and biking.

I disagree. Cabs are a very integral part of a car-free lifestyle, because they offer you a fast travel time if needed (for a price premium, of course). Furthermore, the net environmental benefit of fewer people owning cars would far outweigh the detrimental effects of taxis (don't forget the amount of energy, resources, and pollution required to build the car in the first place, the amount to maintain it, and the land cost to provide storage/parking for it).
And re: gas mileage, of course that can be improved. Low-emissions Crown Vic Hybrid, anyone?

[GregBear24]

The day any government truly pushes hybrid taxis and public transit hybrids is the day I get more than half of what I put into social security back- never. Taxis will always be the cheapest cars out there, and will always be far behind current technology. I don't think cab companies would shell out the initial cost for them- too many short-term thinkers in the world today. But don't worry, there's hope. We can still figure out where to get the tens of billions needed for the state's dream plan (another mega highway going from se to nw) and the multi-billion dollar overhaul the cta needs to merely enter the discussion in the world's quality public transit systems.

[the urban politician]

I think to finally silence NIMBY's (as well as making Aldermen happy by not having to deal with this issue any longer) who simply demand unusually high parking ratios in every development because it makes their belly feel warm at night (but otherwise have no real factual basis behind their demand), the city should impose a 1:1 MAXIMUM parking ratio on all residential development that is above a certain density (ie lakefront neighborhoods level of density or higher) throughout Chicago. This includes eliminating the incredibly stupid provision for ample guest parking, which is panic-planning with the assumption that some sort of disaster is pending (your neighbor invites the entire state of Washington over for dinner).

I feel that's the best way to deal with the issue. Take the onus off the Aldermen so they don't have to sweat every time there's a new proposal, take some pressure off the developer, while still providing an off-street parking spot for every homeowner. Then, NIMBY's won't be able to push developers to raise their parking ratios to unreasonable levels (ie Hyde Park NIMBY's are pushing for all development on 53rd st to have 1.5 parking spots per unit, even though established car ownership is less than 1:1---eh?) because it will simply NOT BE possible.

They can blame the city if they want to, but we all know that Daley is untouchable, so the problem kind of solves itself..

[Marcu]

^ Great point. Dealing with this issue one development at a time is highly inefficient.

[emoney2]

Not sure where this is supposed to go, but I guess everyone here has opinions that they would like to share so I have a couple of questions about developments. About LSE. I go in at night and I see like maybe ten people and after it got dark it was really creepy because no one was out. Now do any plans exist for any sort of shops or restaurants or anything? Is this the same case in central station?? Are these marketed to old people?

This next question maybe kind of out of the blue, but what is on goose island and is that sort of off limits to developers?

[Marcu]

^ LSE is supposed to get a Treasure Island and a Bed Bath and Beyond. It's certainly not going to be the next Rush street. I think LSE is targetting families and Central Station is targeting empty nesters but there are so many units in each that you'll likely see a healthy mix.

[Mr Downtown]

Goose Island was manufacturing back in the 20th century, so the city has designated it a "Planned Manufacturing District," making it very difficult to get approval for anything other than "manufacturing." Given the economic realities of our time and that location, that has resulted in mostly warehouses with relatively low number of jobs.

What is now Kendall College was all set for conversion to condos in the late 90s, but the city actually revoked the approval and forced the developer to sell it to someone who would put in a "manufacturing" use. Sara Lee put in a research center, and eventually that became Kendall College.

[HowardL]

Speaking of that grim bit of town, does anyone suppose that Zell's purchase of Tribune could lead to a redevelopment of that obscenely large Freedom Center complex? It's all bloody presses and parking lots. Bit of data center thrown in as well, but it's smack on the river. Presses could be moved out 'elsewhere' and IT consolidated at the Tower. That rail spur could well be ripped out and you've got bang on acres awaiting towers and such. Just thinking aloud. It's real twat at the moment. Really expensive real estate it would seem though. There's plenty of room for thinking there. Plenty things that could replace that dreary pile of bricks.

[forumly_chgoman]

Originally Posted by Mr Downtown

Goose Island was manufacturing back in the 20th century, so the city has designated it a "Planned Manufacturing District," making it very difficult to get approval for anything other than "manufacturing." Given the economic realities of our time and that location, that has resulted in mostly warehouses with relatively low number of jobs.

What is now Kendall College was all set for conversion to condos in the late 90s, but the city actually revoked the approval and forced the developer to sell it to someone who would put in a "manufacturing" use. Sara Lee put in a research center, and eventually that became Kendall College.

Well Mr D...dancin' w/Mr D.....I did not know that....that is/ was plain dumb
You know I interviewed w/ SL right before the terrorist attacks......then they did not hire me

[Mr Downtown]

Originally Posted by HowardL

redevelopment of that obscenely large Freedom Center complex?

Not for a while, probably. Freedom Center just expanded year before last into an addition north of Chicago Ave. The kind of presses you have there aren't something you just load into the back of a U-Haul.

[Dr. Taco]

I love freedom. I like being able to choose car or cta. its pretty nice!
I take the el everyday to school, and its great. But there are times when a car is better. Like anytime after midnight. I mean, I love sitting in an el car at 2 in the morning that smells strongly of the pot people are smoking in the driver compartment, and being talked to by drunks, and thrown up on, and having my eyes assaulted by people making out, but sometimes a car is better. and a hell of a lot faster. If I'm unfortunate enough to be by the lake on the north side after the irving bus stops, it takes me an hour and half on a good night to get home, as opposed to 15 minutes in my car.

does a cab count as public transportation? just wondering

anyway, my two cents have been donated

p.s. I think the busyness of the car/pedestrian interactions in the city is a charming thing. I love driving in that situation, and I love walking in that situation

[Abner]

Originally Posted by GregBear24

The day any government truly pushes hybrid taxis and public transit hybrids is the day I get more than half of what I put into social security back- never. Taxis will always be the cheapest cars out there, and will always be far behind current technology.

Actually, New York is already pushing for this.

Since when were Crown Vics the cheapest cars out there?

[aaron38]

Originally Posted by jstush04

does a cab count as public transportation? just wondering

I count it, for the sole reason that a taxi doesn't take a parking spot after it drops you off. It enables high density urbanism.
And whereas car ownership is basically 1:1, there may only be 1 taxi for 100-200 people.

[Jaroslaw]

Do any of you guys know shorpy.com? Some great photography there. A few amazing color photos of Chicago from the 1940s, I just got a mod nod to post these links to some wonderful big color pics:

http://www.shorpy.com/files/images/1a34784u.jpg

http://www.shorpy.com/images/photos/1a34787u.jpg

Here are some rare, tantalizing hints of the buildings that lined the east side of MichAve before the Illinois Center misfortune.

http://www.shorpy.com/files/images/1a34786u.jpg

The old Crerar library is on the far right here, Smurfit Stone is there now.

http://www.shorpy.com/files/images/1a34780u.jpg

The Wabash El in 1907:

http://www.shorpy.com/node/499?size=_original

[harryc]

Originally Posted by Jaroslaw

Do any of you guys know shorpy.com? Some great photography there. A few amazing color photos of Chicago from the 1940s, I just got a mod nod to post these links to some wonderful big color pics:

Here are some rare, tantalizing hints of the buildings that lined the east side of MichAve before the Illinois Center misfortune.

The Wabash El in 1907:

Way cool