Rylee's Hardware

[jbr12]

Heaven forbid we should do ANYTHING that restricts and slows down traffic while promoting people walking on two legs!

[DJL3CDP]

So the question I have is: Are we urbanizing the city, or are we NOT urbanizing (sub-urbanizing) the city or are we creating a mixed-up middle???

In the site plan as presented in this thread, it would appear that we are doing the mixed-up middle thing, which is exactly what we should not be doing!! The site plan is not urban, nor is it suburban. The front strip engages the street, but not quite - notice that it is about five feet from the property line - probably with some junipers and fancy landscaping in the zone between the sidewalk and the building, while the Rylees building is suburbanized in its site planning, set back just like it would be on 28th street. Neither of the buildings are urban and neither will ever succeed in making a better urban realm. But atleast the Rylees is consistent and not trying to pretend it is something it is not.

In this case we are not urban, nor are we suburban.

It would appear that there are doors fronting the street on the front strip building...but are these doors the real front door or are they abstractions, with the real front doors on the rear, by the parking field?

This is not appropriate if we are trying to build a city. In a city or even in the country (on the the rare occasion that it occurs) retail faces the street, with no setbacks, clear storefronts, front doors. The back is relegated to trash, parking, services, etc.

I would point to the subway building on the corner of Michigan and Fuller as an example of this mixed-up middle concept. (And something that this Rylees development is earily moving toward). Something that we can not afford to allow to permeate our city.

This subway building is neither suburban nor urban and as a result it is a failure. If this is the best we can hope for in the city, then we are doomed. Quit now.

The proper way to deal with this (at the subway building and probably at Rylees) is to take back Michigan Street and place on-street parking on both sides of the street. Then place the buildings - with a real front door and FULL storefronts - at the public sidewalk. Not punched hole openings that show the back corridor to the bathrooms. Not having a door on this pretend front is an insult to our intelligence. This building is essentially backing up to he sidewalk with the front facing inwards towards the parking lot. Yes it is brick and the planning commission probably made the developer jump through some hoops by putting in a required percentage of glass...and hey don't forget it is brick, so it must be OK.

For diagramatic purposes, it has no front and no back, but instead two half-assed backs.

In the event that you can not humanize the street with parking, then simply make it conventional suburban with a parking lot in front of it and save us the obligatory BS.

[Raildudes dad]

How that Subway abortion EVER got approved is beyond belief. It might be one of the ugliest buildings I have ever seen for exactly the reasons you point out. And the phony landscaping along Michigan street is a total joke.

[grcitydog]

This post brought me to tears! I totally agree that we need to figure out what it is we want to be over there.

How that Subway abortion EVER got approved is beyond belief. It might be one of the ugliest buildings I have ever seen for exactly the reasons you point out. And the phony landscaping along Michigan street is a total joke. So, the question is this...is the Urban design appropriate for this side of Michigan Street or not? Will this area ever be like a downtown area (with mostly pedestrian traffic)? Probably not. So do we accept it for what it is (buffer between downtown and 28th street) or are we trying to shoe horn a downtown feeling into the wrong location? Clearly the Rylee's plans we've seen so far are "mixed up" and that is not a compliment. Maybe this will change if the proposed D&W ever gets built. Maybe it well pull so much to the street that the area will get a more urban core feel.

[GR Jackson]

Was it perhaps designed "by committee" aka the Planning Commission?

[mejane]

How that Subway abortion EVER got approved is beyond belief.

[Nitro]

Was it perhaps designed "by committee" aka the Planning Commission?

[joeDowntown]

Oh stop. Nothing wrong with the term abortion. Thanks for the definition though, it's good to edumacate us simple folk.

Personally, I don't think the building on the corner of Michigan is a total abomination (is that better?). I guess to stay positive, at least they used nice materials. It could have looked like el Supermacado AND been placed right next to the road. That would have been a really good "gateway" from the expressway.

Joe

While Merriam-Webster confirms this to be a correct usage of the word, may I suggest choosing another word

in the future, lest someone with less curiosity simply comes to believe that the casual use of controversial terms

is acceptable on this forum? Many thanks.

Main Entry: abor

[Eridony]

Oh stop. Nothing wrong with the term abortion. Thanks for the definition though, it's good to edumacate us simple folk.

Personally, I don't think the building on the corner of Michigan is a total abomination (is that better?). I guess to stay positive, at least they used nice materials. It could have looked like el Supermacado AND been placed right next to the road. That would have been a really good "gateway" from the expressway.

Joe

[mejane]

Also, I need to use the term abortion more often.

[GR Jackson]

I put this usage in the same category as the use of the word rape as in

"I was raped by the price" or some such thing when the term 'ripped-off'

would be the better choice.

It is often so very clear to me that this forum is in it's own way a boys club.

Surely you must see that many of the women who used to be here are gone.

Not over this small thing, but for so many little pinches and nudges that all

add up, I am so over it. I don't contribute often enough to be missed, so,

I'm out. Now the adolescents can go all wingnut with their snarky boy comments...

and no, I won't let the door hit me in the ass on the way out.

[GRDadof3]

I agree abortion is a bad word to throw around as an adjective, especially about something so trivial as a Subway building.

But as far as the Rylee's development goes, I don't think it's great and I don't think it's bad. The world is also not going to come to an end because of it.

[CK1]

But as far as the Rylee's development goes, I don't think it's great and I don't think it's bad. The world is also not going to come to an end because of it.

[jas49503]

While Merriam-Webster confirms this to be a correct usage of the word, may I suggest choosing another word

in the future, lest someone with less curiosity simply comes to believe that the casual use of controversial terms

is acceptable on this forum? Many thanks.

Main Entry: abor

[Mark Miller]

So, the question is this...is the Urban design appropriate for this side of Michigan Street or not? Will this area ever be like a downtown area (with mostly pedestrian traffic)? Probably not. So do we accept it for what it is (buffer between downtown and 28th street) or are we trying to shoe horn a downtown feeling into the wrong location? Clearly the Rylee's plans we've seen so far are "mixed up" and that is not a compliment. Maybe this will change if the proposed D&W ever gets built. Maybe it well pull so much to the street that the area will get a more urban core feel.

[AlexPKeaton]

I'm sure we all agree with you about the need to change our building patterns in this country. Otherwise I'm not sure why we'd be on UrbanPlanet. But specifically regarding this project, I'm not sure what you'd have them do. Michigan Street and Fuller is NOT a pedestrian friendly as it is. I agree that simply building out to the street but facing the door inward towards the parking lot is a half-hearted attempt at urbanism at best, but without a walkable street there's not much choice. What are the chances of getting the city to cut the number of lanes, add on-street parking, trees, and wide sidewalks to Michigan in the next 6 months? As a resident of that neighborhood I'd absolutely love it if that happened. But it doesn't seem likely by the time Rylee's plans to build.

[GR Jackson]

The use of the building might need a door to the parking lot. It is a hardware store, so it requires some heavy stuff to be carried out. I know I have gone there for play sand and concrete in decent quantity. I don't know if it would be all that great to load it on Michigan or Fuller.

[Mark Miller]

If we indeed all agree that we should change our building patterns, then we need to change them now and not just say oh well, since this isn't right and that isn't right, then let's just continue on with the same unsustainable miserable pattern. If we wait for optimal conditions, we will never achieve what we appear to all want.

Yes the road is garbage. Yes the sidewalks leave much to be desired. Yes, most of the architecture is mediocre at best.

Yes, at this location the street and public realm is not pedestrian friendly - right now - and if we build a building that will be with us for 50+ years (hopefully) and this building only reinforces this auto-centric domain, then without a doubt we have failed. And the public realm will have little chance to be humanized.

If instead we say that from now on we will build buildings and spaces that are consistent with the human-scaled environment (with the auto relegated as a secondary design element) then we can begin to pave the road to recovery.

If the buildings along this stretch were to be patterned in a pedestrian scaled way, then the street will eventually change, it will have no choice but to do so.

Our current patterns happened incrementally and the change we seek will need to also happen incrementally.

What would I have them do? Well, since this is indeed a hardware store (essentially a big box) and it does require that it have direct access to parking, then I would propose the urban vestibule model.

This is not rocket science, it is simply taking a pedestrian model and tweaking it to adhere to the current systems of auto dependence. The urban vestibule model was developed by Bob Gibbs. It can either be a single big box store or the single big box with liner retail. Both serve the same purpose, having a retail street edge.

The key to both is that they can have the storefronts on the street and that they have this entry vestibule shared as an entry to the store from both the street and from the parking. This is essentially the model employed at the Gaslight D&W, although the vestibule only connects parking lots, but hopefully it is understood in the attached diagrams - courtesy of Bob Gibbs.

[GRDadof3]

That section of Michigan St has only slightly more traffic than the section to the West (between Diamond and College), which is only two lanes with on-street parking. I don't see why Michigan can't be cut down to 2 lanes in that area and made more urban-oriented.

[MAU]

That section of Michigan St has only slightly more traffic than the section to the West (between Diamond and College), which is only two lanes with on-street parking. I don't see why Michigan can't be cut down to 2 lanes in that area and made more urban-oriented.

[AlexPKeaton]

If we indeed all agree that we should change our building patterns, then we need to change them now and not just say oh well, since this isn't right and that isn't right, then let's just continue on with the same unsustainable miserable pattern. If we wait for optimal conditions, we will never achieve what we appear to all want.

[GR Jackson]

Also there is semi traffic going in and out of Rylee's right now. They would have to accommodate for that as well. I don't disagree with fronting to the street, but there will still need to be a decent amount space in back.

[Ted]

I haven't read the rest of your post yet, but I thought I'd respond to this.

That'd be great...if we were in control. We live in a democracy, more or less, so we can't always get what we want as fast as we want. The democratic process works slowly by design. For all of us touting light rail and mass transit, there are a number of others calling it a big government waste. We have to change people's ideas before we can meaningfully change our physical infrastructure. I think we're moving that direction, but it will always be slower than we desire.

[AlexPKeaton]

Dude...I don't know what democracy you live in but we are in control. Michigan could very easily be changed to GRTP's vision.

[GRDadof3]

I meant "we" as in our particular interest group, not as in "we the people." And I agree with you we can change things, but it doesn't happen overnight.