Does Chicago need its own Manhattan? (Winnetka, Columbia: how much, townhouses, luxury)

[Nafster]

Originally Posted by Chicagoland60426

What Chicago need to do is dense its Southside a little more. The Loop, Near Northside, West Loop, and South Loop is the core. Its not a Manhattan core, but it should add up to around 200,000 or more residents.

I agree. The South Loop is already being densed up a bit but the west loop can use some work.

I agree the southside could use some densing up, but I want to make it clear that Chicago does NOT need it's own Manhattan.

We don't want to be like New York. We can have similar density but have different culture, people and buildings. We're Chicago for crying out loud!

[Chicagoland60426]

Originally Posted by Nafster

I agree. The South Loop is already being densed up a bit but the west loop can use some work.

I agree the southside could use some densing up, but I want to make it clear that Chicago does NOT need it's own Manhattan.

We don't want to be like New York. We can have similar density but have different culture, people and buildings. We're Chicago for crying out loud!

Yeah the West Loop is the least dense of the downtown area. Chicago can't be NYC or Manhattan anyway, because the Chicago street density is different from NYC.

The southside can at least densing up down to Hyde Park.

[coldwine]

There are two very important words I'd like to introduce to this thread:

1. Densifying-- the ongoing process of an increasing population in an area. The alternative to "make more dense" or the simple but incorrect "dense"

2. Densification-- the process of increasing the population by a given metric.

See how fantastically well that works?

[Irishtom29]

I'm pretty dense myself.

[edsg25]

as the original poster here, i certainly wasn't trying to transport manhattan to the shores of lake michigan. i merely was wondering if chicago, with its own impressive size, needed to have the zone of the city that served a manhattan like function.

if it were, i absolutely would not like to see it have manhattan like density. but what i would like to see is a more extensive CTA rail presence that encouraged rapid transit use over the denser parts of the city and that neighborhoods arguably from Edgewater or the north to Hyde Park on the south and out to the UC on the west would have a quickened urban pace (not that it isn't quick in many parts today).

it's not just a new york thing here, at least in my mind. It's about more clearly defined zones heading from core to periphery that larger cities often have. In that respect, LA shares with NY that type of progression (even though its downtown is in the shaddow of NY's and Chgo's) as it goes from core to far flung areas in the valley, the coast, and the harbor.

When I suggest a "Manhattan like zone", I'm really not suggesting Manhattan, but a core component that includes more than the CBD...as Manhattan does for NYC.

[scarletneon]

Originally Posted by edsg25

as the original poster here, i certainly wasn't trying to transport manhattan to the shores of lake michigan. i merely was wondering if chicago, with its own impressive size, needed to have the zone of the city that served a manhattan like function.

if it were, i absolutely would not like to see it have manhattan like density. but what i would like to see is a more extensive CTA rail presence that encouraged rapid transit use over the denser parts of the city and that neighborhoods arguably from Edgewater or the north to Hyde Park on the south and out to the UC on the west would have a quickened urban pace (not that it isn't quick in many parts today).

it's not just a new york thing here, at least in my mind. It's about more clearly defined zones heading from core to periphery that larger cities often have. In that respect, LA shares with NY that type of progression (even though its downtown is in the shaddow of NY's and Chgo's) as it goes from core to far flung areas in the valley, the coast, and the harbor.

When I suggest a "Manhattan like zone", I'm really not suggesting Manhattan, but a core component that includes more than the CBD...as Manhattan does for NYC.

I like that my neighborhood isn't terribly fast paced.

About Goose Island, I read somewhere that they purposely zoned it for manufacturing in order to keep some industry close to the core of the city.

[edsg25]

Originally Posted by supernerdgirl

I like that my neighborhood isn't terribly fast paced.

About Goose Island, I read somewhere that they purposely zoned it for manufacturing in order to keep some industry close to the core of the city.

that was a designation for the entire clybourn corridor. the problem was the city didn't realize how thoroughly hot that area would get. It was definitely bucking market trends and the power of real estate (let alone the need for industry in such a highly urban location).

interestingly, i think, there is nothing special about goose island in the industrial sense that differentiates it from the other riverbank communities around it. only by looking at it in terms of residential/parkland/retail could the waterfront be made noticeable by development. Currently, the only thing island like about Goose Island is bridges, bridges, I might add, that nobody is looking below when they cross.

[hsw]

Manhattan is a fairly decentralized/centralized little, congested island

Most of economy is based in Midtown (~48-62 St and 3rd to 7th Ave), not unlike Loop; Goldman is the only relevant employer left in Downtown

Most of means live in UES (S of ~85th St along 5th or Park) or 15 CPW or up in suburban Greenwich

And most of means are driven around (or drive selves) around Manhattan via Mercedes S550 (or 600 or 65) to office/schools/dinner, etc

Not unlike what many Citadel or Goldman guys in Chic do w/the Loop/GoldCoast/LincPk/Winnetka axis; where are their offices vs homes vs Alinea/Tru vs pvt schools of their kids; how do they travel around town, etc?...

[edsg25]

Originally Posted by hsw

Manhattan is a fairly decentralized/centralized little, congested island

Most of economy is based in Midtown (~48-62 St and 3rd to 7th Ave), not unlike Loop; Goldman is the only relevant employer left in Downtown

Most of means live in UES (S of ~85th St along 5th or Park) or 15 CPW or up in suburban Greenwich

And most of means are driven around (or drive selves) around Manhattan via Mercedes S550 (or 600 or 65) to office/schools/dinner, etc

Not unlike what many Citadel or Goldman guys in Chic do w/the Loop/GoldCoast/LincPk/Winnetka axis; where are their offices vs homes vs Alinea/Tru vs pvt schools of their kids; how do they travel around town, etc?...

agreed. but virtually all of Manhattan (with the possible exception of the far end of the heights uptown) has a special status based on density, extensive public rapid transit,lifestyle, attractions even without the CBDs in Midtown and Downtown.

Thus, I'm talking about could the Near North Side be more like the Upper West Side in that respect? Bucktown/Wicker Park like The Village? Hyde Park more like the Upper West Side around Columbia? Not necessarily with steroid induced density...just that transporation and connectiveness.

Thus I'm wondering if

[TennisDD]

Chicago is nothing like New York and thank God! Don't get me wrong, it is a great place to visit, but New York(especially Manhatten) is just way to congested and crowded. Heck, Chicago's population is basically a little larger than Brooklyn.

Chicago the way it is now is the best it has ever been. It is clean, unbelievable architecure, every restaraunt you can think of, and the best part are the people. You can't take the midwestern friendly attitude out of Chicagoans. We reek it!
Everyone who visits always talks about how friendly of people we are.