Relocating to Akron from Chicago, IL this summer

[SquareBetterThanAll]

Originally Posted by yanni_gogolak

I guess I'm confused on two things:
1. What would you propose for retail? (or, are you saying there shouldn't be retail?)
2. You think Highland Square is the "middle of a city neighborhood"?

Something more aesthetically appropriate, matching what's already there. Perhaps fronting the sidewalk, with parking behind instead. Similar to what they did in HS, as a matter of fact.

And yes, HS is a city neighborhood. It was built as a dense city neighborhood with nearly all of the development taking place prior to 1930. Almost all of the houses are on small, densely packed city lots. I know, I live in one, and can easily see inside my neighbors houses from my own (not that I do it intentionally, it's a matter of proximity). It wasn't built for strip plazas, like Wallhaven or Fairlawn were.

Is it the same as, say, Williamsburg? No. Akron is a much smaller place than Brooklyn. But central Akron was designed with the same tight-knit premise (well, with more of a focus on single family homes, that is).

[yanni_gogolak]

Originally Posted by SquareBetterThanAll

Something more aesthetically appropriate, matching what's already there. Perhaps fronting the sidewalk, with parking behind instead. Similar to what they did in HS, as a matter of fact.

And yes, HS is a city neighborhood. It was built as a dense city neighborhood with nearly all of the development taking place prior to 1930. Almost all of the houses are on small, densely packed city lots. I know, I live in one, and can easily see inside my neighbors houses from my own (not that I do it intentionally, it's a matter of proximity). It wasn't built for strip plazas, like Wallhaven or Fairlawn were.

Is it the same as, say, Williamsburg? No. Akron is a much smaller place than Brooklyn. But central Akron was designed with the same tight-knit premise (well, with more of a focus on single family homes, that is).

I agree, with everything you said there. I was thinking you were a little less informed.

The new development in Highland Square is designed fairly well, although I don't understand why they have a street sidewalk, planter, and then another sidewalk to access the retail. Also, the parking layout is good, for now. The city is letting the developer use it for now, and I have heard some say they need more parking. (Those that don't understand how the area is supposed to work obviously.)

I love Highland Sq., and have been thinking of moving there. I still wouldn't call it a "city neighborhood" though. Personally, I think of townhomes in reference to that. Less private greenspace, more public.

[SquareBetterThanAll]

Originally Posted by yanni_gogolak

I agree, with everything you said there. I was thinking you were a little less informed.

The new development in Highland Square is designed fairly well, although I don't understand why they have a street sidewalk, planter, and then another sidewalk to access the retail. Also, the parking layout is good, for now. The city is letting the developer use it for now, and I have heard some say they need more parking. (Those that don't understand how the area is supposed to work obviously.)

I love Highland Sq., and have been thinking of moving there. I still wouldn't call it a "city neighborhood" though. Personally, I think of townhomes in reference to that. Less private greenspace, more public.

I think it was intended to be a way to include people on the street side while still maintaining proximity to the storefronts. Which is fine by me, if it were truly sidewalk->storefront people couldn't hang out or eat food. Seems to be encouraging that neighborhood-y people interaction. And when its busy people use it, so that's good.

Yeah I don't really see a need for additional parking. The lots are usually around 3/4 full - seems sufficient.

But yeah, going back to the "city" idea, I think most Midwestern cities were built with more of a focus on single families and duplexes, and I think that may have to do with the time periods in which most of their development took place (teens, 20s). East coast cities, particularly in neighborhoods with conjoined brownstones (etc.) were developed a few decades earlier. But many teens and 20s era neighborhoods - like many in Queens, for instance - look very similar to neighborhoods in Akron and Cleveland.

And you've also got other considerations - factory neighborhoods for families (single houses, like here) vs. higher land costs (NY) driving things.

But I see what you're saying.

And as for the argument that what works in places like Chicago should work in Akron... adapted, maybe, but Akron isn't consistently dense enough (over miles and miles) to necessitate people using public transportation, so most don't, and people are auto-centric. So even if the neighborhood is pedestrian friendly cars are still going to be a factor.