Agenda - Planning Commission - 06/04/2009

Home

the large-scale residential building shown here replaced numerous one-story buildings and parking lots. The city has too much business and com- mercial zoning. In most of the city you can never be more than one-half mile away from a neighborhood commercial corridor. Most of these strips cannot compete with the !iuburban shopping malls, big box stores, and discount outlets. The conve'rsion ofthese properties to residential is particularly popular in neighbor- hoods close to downtown on the near north, near west, and near south sides. The conversion of retail and commercial properties to residential often benefited the struggling neighborhood retail areas. As the executive director of the Greater Southwest De' velopment Corporation, Jim Capraro fought for new residential,development along commercial streets in orderto bring shoppers directly to the street Capraro argued that residential develop- ment helped to reduce the oversupply of com- mercial and retail zoned property and thereby increased the value of the remaining retail sites. Finally, m9ny affordable housing proj- ects were buiit on the city's older retail strips. Low-income housing groups, churches, and other nonprofits found strip properties to be more affordable-,which made projects for low- income households feasible. BUILDINGS AT CORNERS The corners of commercial and residential blocks in Chicago have traditionally been re- 86 served for taller or bulkier buildings. Corners offered more visibility, and thus it was natural forthe more competitive businesses to 'want to , locate there and capitalize on the free advertis- ing. Apartment buildings took advantage of corner sites because they had access to light on at least three of four facades. Corner buildings were often more elabOrately detailed because alongwith the site's prominerice went an unspoken, but well-understood, respon- sibility to contribute something more beautiful. Even on residential streets, the setback on one of the main facades (usually the longer one) was, often minimal, allowing more sguare footage. What was a good idea in the 1890S was also a good idea in the 1990s. Corner sites continue to be. opportune for higher den- sity residential construction, mainly because of the access to light on three sides. However, in today's more contentious building environment, neighbors do. not generally welcome the concept of allowing larger buildings on residential street corners. It is possible, though, to design the site plan, massing, and elevations so that people don't easily perceive the increase in density. First and fpremost, parking must be hid- den, and multiple garage entrances should face alleys or interior.drives. Nothing says "who cares aboutthe neighbors?" more loudly than a developer who lines a street with a row of , garage doors. The ubiquitous curb cuts and parked cars mean pedestrians travel at their own risk If residents do choose to walk in such environments, they are not likely to see their neighbors, because there are no front win- dows, no front porches, and no front lawns. The massing ofthe structure's parts should be consistent with other buildings in the vicinity. Setbacks in plan, stepbacks in elevation, and variations in height and roof- line are all tried and true means of breaking down a large corner building's size. It should be a hard and fast rule: no blank walls and no materials that are lower quality than the context. ZONINGPRACTICE 5.09 AMERICAN PIJINNING ASSOCIATION Ipage 4