A proposal this week would transform some streets in the city of Chicago into large community plazas or outdoor malls. These would mainly be side-street in order to beautify some of the neighborhoods.
Guess this blogger wants Michigan Ave closed to traffic, good luck on that :rolleyes:
http://chi.streetsblog.org/2014/02/14/mayors-office-nixes-car-free-mag-mile-but-may-embrace-other-ideas/#more-91110
They did the same thing with State Street in the late 70s (except for buses) only to restore it to normal vehicular traffic in the mid to late 90s! You'd think they'd have learned from that failed experiment... :pan:
These folks, the so-called Active Transportation Alliance, are a bunch of morons who don't seem to have learned a damn thing from the closure of State Street in the late 1970s. Instead of being the car-free mecca, the lack of cars drove businesses away in droves. And these assholes want to do the same to North Michigan Avenue!?! The "Little Bike People" (alternate name for the ATA whiners) can fuck off.
Maybe Chicago's different. It hasn't been a "failed experiment" in Minneapolis, which still has Nicollet Mall downtown. Though it might be something more appropriate for residential blocks....there's a couple of those in Minneapolis now as well.
That said, you don't always need car access for a successful business. People-access is just as (if not more) important.
Quote(Senior mayoral advisor David Spielfogel) acknowledged the success of New York City's car-free Times Square.
Those vehicle drivers on the Aves and Sts that crisscross Times Square must be unaware of this car-free Times Square. BROADWAY may be car free...but that's hardly all of Times Square.
Quote from: froggie on February 15, 2014, 08:16:55 AM
Maybe Chicago's different. It hasn't been a "failed experiment" in Minneapolis, which still has Nicollet Mall downtown. Though it might be something more appropriate for residential blocks....there's a couple of those in Minneapolis now as well.
That said, you don't always need car access for a successful business. People-access is just as (if not more) important.
Ask those businesses along State Street. Oh, wait, a good number of them left in the early eighties leaving vacancies that were not filled until State Street was reopened to all traffic.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on February 15, 2014, 09:38:28 AM
Quote(Senior mayoral advisor David Spielfogel) acknowledged the success of New York City's car-free Times Square.
Those vehicle drivers on the Aves and Sts that crisscross Times Square must be unaware of this car-free Times Square. BROADWAY may be car free...but that's hardly all of Times Square.
The Active Transportation Alliance sees only what they want to see. They're about as honest as a habitual liar.
I'm missing something here (as my wife will attest). In the downtown area of a large city like Chicago, your chances of being able to park in front of a business are nil. Generally, you have to use parking lots and walk. So, why would a closed-off street affect businesses? As Froggie pointed out, Minneapolis' Nicollet Mall has been around for 40 years or so, and Denver has the 16th Street Mall that seems similarly successful.
Probably closing State off to everything but buses was the problem in the 70s, the key being that it turned State into a busway. That tends to attract your less savory crowds (especially 40 years ago), which doesn't exactly drive business.
Close it off to all traffic and make it nice, a la 16th St Mall or Nicollett and it could work. The key is to make it nice- make it somewhere people want to not be in their cars. Turning a street into a road full of loud, diesel buses (back to the 70s) isn't a good way to do that.
Brandon, there are some of those ideas they had that I would favor or give an alternate. For example:
Milwaukee Ave inside of Logan Square IF (and it's a big if) they build an underpass for Milwaukee Ave.
I would also be in favor of having permanent posts that could scope down and up to close off Sheffield Ave between Addison and Waveland. Think of Yawkey Way in Boston.
Dearborn St only from Wacker Dr to Congress Pkwy. Make Clark St a 2 way street.
Simmonds Dr from Lawrence to Foster.
Webster Ave east of Larrabbee St to Lincoln Park.
Taylor St from Racine to Ashland.
I am absolutely against:
Michigan Ave along the Mag Mile.
Milwaukee Ave in Wicker Park.
Clark St in Andersonville.
To me, Michigan is a bigger name in terms of shopping and pop culture than State (sure, State has Marshall Field's Macy's, but Michigan has pretty much everything else), so I feel like closing Michigan off to traffic would see better results than they saw with State in the 70s. That being said, I think it's a terrible idea. There's too much traffic on Michigan for other streets to hold.
Quote from: pianocello on February 15, 2014, 04:42:33 PM
To me, Michigan is a bigger name in terms of shopping and pop culture than State (sure, State has Marshall Field's Macy's, but Michigan has pretty much everything else), so I feel like closing Michigan off to traffic would see better results than they saw with State in the 70s. That being said, I think it's a terrible idea. There's too much traffic on Michigan for other streets to hold.
It's a terrible idea to do it to Michigan Ave because 1) has one of the few direct exits/entrances to Lake Shore Dr and 2) it's the only street Downtown other than Congress Pkwy that has 6 lanes of traffic. Lake Shore Dr I don't count as Downtown.
QuoteProbably closing State off to everything but buses was the problem in the 70s, the key being that it turned State into a busway. That tends to attract your less savory crowds (especially 40 years ago), which doesn't exactly drive business.
It's gotta be something else. Nicollet puts the lie to your argument here as it's always remained open for buses and taxis.
Quote from: froggie on February 15, 2014, 06:59:06 PM
QuoteProbably closing State off to everything but buses was the problem in the 70s, the key being that it turned State into a busway. That tends to attract your less savory crowds (especially 40 years ago), which doesn't exactly drive business.
It's gotta be something else. Nicollet puts the lie to your argument here as it's always remained open for buses and taxis.
Minneapolis is a different city than Chicago.
Quote from: froggie on February 15, 2014, 06:59:06 PM
QuoteProbably closing State off to everything but buses was the problem in the 70s, the key being that it turned State into a busway. That tends to attract your less savory crowds (especially 40 years ago), which doesn't exactly drive business.
It's gotta be something else. Nicollet puts the lie to your argument here as it's always remained open for buses and taxis.
As is 16th Street Mall in Denver. In fact, a big draw for Denver is a free bus along the mall.
Quote from: Brandon on February 15, 2014, 07:45:30 AM
These folks, the so-called Active Transportation Alliance, are a bunch of morons who don't seem to have learned a damn thing from the closure of State Street in the late 1970s. Instead of being the car-free mecca, the lack of cars drove businesses away in droves. And these assholes want to do the same to North Michigan Avenue!?! The "Little Bike People" (alternate name for the ATA whiners) can fuck off.
If a lack of cars will drive businesses away, then I'm in favor of closing the 3600 blocks of Clark and Sheffield, and the 1000 blocks of Waveland and Addison.
Quote from: cabiness42 on February 17, 2014, 10:36:33 AM
Quote from: Brandon on February 15, 2014, 07:45:30 AM
These folks, the so-called Active Transportation Alliance, are a bunch of morons who don't seem to have learned a damn thing from the closure of State Street in the late 1970s. Instead of being the car-free mecca, the lack of cars drove businesses away in droves. And these assholes want to do the same to North Michigan Avenue!?! The "Little Bike People" (alternate name for the ATA whiners) can fuck off.
If a lack of cars will drive businesses away, then I'm in favor of closing the 3600 blocks of Clark and Sheffield, and the 1000 blocks of Waveland and Addison.
That might... actually that will... piss off some Cub fans.
The contractors that put in pedestrian malls, and then take them out again, make their living doing that.
Why are we coming down on them ?
:eyebrow:
Quote from: SSOWorld on February 17, 2014, 12:43:56 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on February 17, 2014, 10:36:33 AM
Quote from: Brandon on February 15, 2014, 07:45:30 AM
These folks, the so-called Active Transportation Alliance, are a bunch of morons who don't seem to have learned a damn thing from the closure of State Street in the late 1970s. Instead of being the car-free mecca, the lack of cars drove businesses away in droves. And these assholes want to do the same to North Michigan Avenue!?! The "Little Bike People" (alternate name for the ATA whiners) can fuck off.
If a lack of cars will drive businesses away, then I'm in favor of closing the 3600 blocks of Clark and Sheffield, and the 1000 blocks of Waveland and Addison.
That might... actually that will... piss off some Cub fans.
I think the idea is that closing the streets will allow more room for people to walk to and from the stadium on event days, but left open during the offseason.
Some small streets around the DC and Baltimore stadiums are also closed off to traffic on game days.
With regards to the Loop, I think that one narrow N-S street and one narrow E-W street can be largely closed successfully. As someone mentioned, Dearborn would be a good candidate, if Clark were two way.
I would also consider closing Monroe, if Madison were two-way. Monroe would be an ideal street to take some of the pedestrian traffic between the Loop and the two commuter rail stations in the West Loop. Of all the Loop E-W streets, it has the smallest traffic volume West of Halsted, so fewer people use it as a cross-town route to/from the West Side. I would keep the section east of Michigan open, though.
Quote from: mrsman on February 21, 2014, 12:31:07 PM
With regards to the Loop, I think that one narrow N-S street and one narrow E-W street can be largely closed successfully. As someone mentioned, Dearborn would be a good candidate, if Clark were two way.
I would also consider closing Monroe, if Madison were two-way. Monroe would be an ideal street to take some of the pedestrian traffic between the Loop and the two commuter rail stations in the West Loop. Of all the Loop E-W streets, it has the smallest traffic volume West of Halsted, so fewer people use it as a cross-town route to/from the West Side. I would keep the section east of Michigan open, though.
Except that Chicago can have up to three months where no one will want to walk any long distances so what have you accomplished by closing streets? Created congestion?
Quote from: mrsman on February 21, 2014, 12:31:07 PM
Quote from: SSOWorld on February 17, 2014, 12:43:56 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on February 17, 2014, 10:36:33 AM
Quote from: Brandon on February 15, 2014, 07:45:30 AM
These folks, the so-called Active Transportation Alliance, are a bunch of morons who don't seem to have learned a damn thing from the closure of State Street in the late 1970s. Instead of being the car-free mecca, the lack of cars drove businesses away in droves. And these assholes want to do the same to North Michigan Avenue!?! The "Little Bike People" (alternate name for the ATA whiners) can fuck off.
If a lack of cars will drive businesses away, then I'm in favor of closing the 3600 blocks of Clark and Sheffield, and the 1000 blocks of Waveland and Addison.
That might... actually that will... piss off some Cub fans.
I think the idea is that closing the streets will allow more room for people to walk to and from the stadium on event days, but left open during the offseason.
Just to clarify, I was suggesting that if closing streets makes businesses go away, then hopefully closing the 3600 blocks of Clark and Sheffield and the 1000 blocks of Addison and Waveland would make the business contained within go away.
Quote from: mukade on February 21, 2014, 06:57:12 PM
Quote from: mrsman on February 21, 2014, 12:31:07 PM
With regards to the Loop, I think that one narrow N-S street and one narrow E-W street can be largely closed successfully. As someone mentioned, Dearborn would be a good candidate, if Clark were two way.
I would also consider closing Monroe, if Madison were two-way. Monroe would be an ideal street to take some of the pedestrian traffic between the Loop and the two commuter rail stations in the West Loop. Of all the Loop E-W streets, it has the smallest traffic volume West of Halsted, so fewer people use it as a cross-town route to/from the West Side. I would keep the section east of Michigan open, though.
Except that Chicago can have up to three months where no one will want to walk any long distances so what have you accomplished by closing streets? Created congestion?
Mukade, are you aware of the underground ped tunnel connecting the red and blue lines in the Loop along Washington? If not, a ton of peds that are not using the L use that in the winter.
Quote from: hobsini2 on February 22, 2014, 03:44:56 PM
Quote from: mukade on February 21, 2014, 06:57:12 PM
Quote from: mrsman on February 21, 2014, 12:31:07 PM
With regards to the Loop, I think that one narrow N-S street and one narrow E-W street can be largely closed successfully. As someone mentioned, Dearborn would be a good candidate, if Clark were two way.
I would also consider closing Monroe, if Madison were two-way. Monroe would be an ideal street to take some of the pedestrian traffic between the Loop and the two commuter rail stations in the West Loop. Of all the Loop E-W streets, it has the smallest traffic volume West of Halsted, so fewer people use it as a cross-town route to/from the West Side. I would keep the section east of Michigan open, though.
Except that Chicago can have up to three months where no one will want to walk any long distances so what have you accomplished by closing streets? Created congestion?
Mukade, are you aware of the underground ped tunnel connecting the red and blue lines in the Loop along Washington? If not, a ton of peds that are not using the L use that in the winter.
Sure, that is great, but the point is you will have more traffic congestion if you close off streets. If pedestrian capacity through tunnels and sidewalks on the surface is adequate, what is the reason for closing off streets? Just the beautification of the Loop "neighborhood"? I've only been on commuter trains to Aurora, Deerfield, and the South Shore so I have only been in a one or two pedestrian tunnels, but I have been all around the Loop, lakefront, and Michigan Avenue on the surface by car and on foot.
These groups ultimate goal is for all cars to disappear permanently.
I'm all in favor of this concept, although I don't see it being as successful as the Minneapolis and Denver examples. And I wouldn't want the streets that border Wrigley Field closed at all, because then, how would Cubs fans who don't live in the neighborhood get to the games?
Quote from: Henry on February 25, 2014, 03:42:18 PM
I'm all in favor of this concept, although I don't see it being as successful as the Minneapolis and Denver examples. And I wouldn't want the streets that border Wrigley Field closed at all, because then, how would Cubs fans who don't live in the neighborhood get to the games?
Henry, I am not saying to close Clark or Addison around Wrigley. Besides, if you are wise when driving to the game, you go to DeVry by Addison and Western, park for $6 and take the free shuttle to the ballpark. I've found that is the best way to do it if not taking the Red Line.
Quote from: hobsini2 on March 01, 2014, 03:10:08 PM
Quote from: Henry on February 25, 2014, 03:42:18 PM
I'm all in favor of this concept, although I don't see it being as successful as the Minneapolis and Denver examples. And I wouldn't want the streets that border Wrigley Field closed at all, because then, how would Cubs fans who don't live in the neighborhood get to the games?
Henry, I am not saying to close Clark or Addison around Wrigley. Besides, if you are wise when driving to the game, you go to DeVry by Addison and Western, park for $6 and take the free shuttle to the ballpark. I've found that is the best way to do it if not taking the Red Line.
Waveland is used to access some private parking lots, but it appears that the block of Sheffield between Addison and Waveland doesn't access any private driveways and only provides a small handful of on-street parking spaces. A perfect candidate for a pedestrianized street.
As an avid car and driving enthusiast, I staunchly oppose conversion to a "car-free area" of any area that cars presently roam. As a truck driver, I staunchly oppose roads being converted to pedestrian traffic if I could otherwise take that road. I, like most drivers for larger companies, am paid on a mileage model, not the odometer, so any driving I have to do above and beyond what the mileage model says is done for free. (I oppose trucks being banned from certain roads for absolutely no reason other than whiny residents for the same reason. Glendale-Milford Road between Plainfield Road and Reading road in Evendale and Blue Ash in the Cincinnati metro is a perfect example of this.) Thus, any detour I have to do over an ultimately bullshit reason that adds more than a handful of miles pisses me off.
Quoteover an ultimately bullshit reason
This is highly debatable, depending on the specific situation. But popular pedestrian malls certainly contribute much to city life, not to mention tax coffers. Much more on a per-acre basis than a sprawling WalMart Supercenter (this was documented a few years ago).
Quote from: froggie on May 14, 2014, 06:49:25 PM
Quoteover an ultimately bullshit reason
This is highly debatable, depending on the specific situation. But popular pedestrian malls certainly contribute much to city life, not to mention tax coffers. Much more on a per-acre basis than a sprawling WalMart Supercenter (this was documented a few years ago).
Froggie, you really needed to see State Street as it was in the 1980s. It was dead.
Brandon, as you well know, city vibe is a lot different now than it was 30 years ago.
Quote from: froggie on May 15, 2014, 08:38:41 AM
Brandon, as you well know, city vibe is a lot different now than it was 30 years ago.
Yes, with fewer people than it had 30 years ago. And it isn't all that different. It's just as violent, just as troubled, and just as problematic outside of "Daleyland". Welcome to the South and West Sides. Not all of Chicago is River North and Wrigleyville.
Quote from: Brandon on May 15, 2014, 09:59:07 AM
Quote from: froggie on May 15, 2014, 08:38:41 AM
Brandon, as you well know, city vibe is a lot different now than it was 30 years ago.
Yes, with fewer people than it had 30 years ago. And it isn't all that different. It's just as violent, just as troubled, and just as problematic outside of "Daleyland". Welcome to the South and West Sides. Not all of Chicago is River North and Wrigleyville.
Yes, but they aren't proposing to do any of the pedestrian plazas on the South and West Sides. They're looking at the Loop and surrounding yuppifying neighborhoods like the Loop, River North, and Wrigleyville.
Quote from: Crazy Volvo Guy on May 14, 2014, 03:19:33 PM
As an avid car and driving enthusiast, I staunchly oppose conversion to a "car-free area" of any area that cars presently roam. As a truck driver, I staunchly oppose roads being converted to pedestrian traffic if I could otherwise take that road. I, like most drivers for larger companies, am paid on a mileage model, not the odometer, so any driving I have to do above and beyond what the mileage model says is done for free. (I oppose trucks being banned from certain roads for absolutely no reason other than whiny residents for the same reason. Glendale-Milford Road between Plainfield Road and Reading road in Evendale and Blue Ash in the Cincinnati metro is a perfect example of this.) Thus, any detour I have to do over an ultimately bullshit reason that adds more than a handful of miles pisses me off.
In most cases the streets that are becoming car-free don't have much traffic anyway and many already prohibit trucks.
I'd also say, let's look at each project on a case by case basis. If a conversion would cause traffic tie-ups then it shouldn't be done. But there are a lot of streets that don't get too much traffic and can be either narrowed or converted into a plaza without significant adverse consequences
Quote from: mrsman on May 25, 2014, 12:58:51 PM
Quote from: Brandon on May 15, 2014, 09:59:07 AM
Quote from: froggie on May 15, 2014, 08:38:41 AM
Brandon, as you well know, city vibe is a lot different now than it was 30 years ago.
Yes, with fewer people than it had 30 years ago. And it isn't all that different. It's just as violent, just as troubled, and just as problematic outside of "Daleyland". Welcome to the South and West Sides. Not all of Chicago is River North and Wrigleyville.
Yes, but they aren't proposing to do any of the pedestrian plazas on the South and West Sides. They're looking at the Loop and surrounding yuppifying neighborhoods like the Loop, River North, and Wrigleyville.
Basically, "Daleyland", not the real Chicago.