I just started a thread on the US subforum where are asked what NYC would have been like without its Manhattan island location. I'd like to ask a similiar, albeit less dramatic, question about Chicago.
WHAT WOULD HAVE BEEN THE IMPLICATIONS FOR CHICAGO IF THE CHICAGO RIVER HAD NOT WORKED WITH LAKE MICHIGAN TO CREATE A PHYSICALLY DEFINED CITY CORE?
In other words, what would Chicago been like without the peninsula-like Loop? No, I'm not suggesting the Chicago River would have gone away; I'm only saying it would not have set off the downtown area the way it does.
Without a "set apart" Loop, would Chicago have needed to reach for the sky the way it did, developing the first skyscraper...and many more afterwards? Would our Loop streets be the canyons they are today? Would streets from Wacker to Congress and from Michigan to Wacker have the importance they do today if the downtown region was allowed to spread out?
How much did georgraphy and topography contribute to Chicago's incredible centralization?> |
0 comments:
Post a Comment