Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom In Chicago
You seem to have a gross misunderstanding of the difference between the natural rivers and harbors in Chicago, New York and San Francisco and the artificial decorative pond outside of Burj Dubai. . . the assumption that the use of these harbor/river systems is "waning" is absolutely false. . . and I still don't understand how you'd apply these features - as you suggest - to these other cities. . .
For perspective, a comparison of the Burj Dubai pond to the water features outside the Bellagio resort in Las Vegas would be more apt. . .
. . .
|
Woah. Okay, I think it is safe to say there is a
huge difference between saying "This style of architecture and landscaping looks nice and we can incorporate some ideas into other contexts like Chicago" and "these two settings are fundamentally identical!"
I never suggested anything remotely indicating that the Chicago River and Dubai's enormous wishing pool are the same kind of water feature. I said it looked nice the way the bridges and walkways were on the same level as the water, and that other cities ought to consider doing more to integrate the water features with the fabric of the city. Specifically, I mentioned putting walkways in other cities closer to the water. However you want to take it, the idea of putting walkways closer to rivers isn't a controversial statement and doesn't convey any conceptual misunderstanding. Rather than attacking what you perceive to be my core understanding of what a river is, explain to me why you think water features like the Chicago River are totally un-approachable by bridges and walkways. Do you think there's too high a risk of floods? Do you think the Chicago River is gross and foul-smelling and nobody would want to be near it?
Here's a question I'll ask: do they still send barges down the Chicago River? Everything I read says no, but if somebody who lives in Chicago would say "yeah it's still a major shipping channel," I'll cede to that knowledge. However, I think it's pretty safe to say that the Chicago River is anything
but "natural" at this point since not only has it been walled in by concrete, its flow has been completely reversed. It's a human-controlled waterway that may as well be an artificially-dug canal at this point, because it's natural function is gone. I don't see any good reason why it has to be walled off below 8 feet of concrete.
There are lots of other controlled or artificial waterways in other U.S. cities that could embrace the same principle. I know that in Denver, there are parks surrounding Cherry Creek and the Platte River with sidewalks that are on the level of the water. If the river floods, the sidewalk is submerged temporarily, later it dries, and there's no harm done.
Prev
Ahhh well...only time will tell.
Linear Mode
