Originally Posted by doublem23
This notion that just because the Cell happens to be in Bridgeport/Armour Square/wherever, THUS it has to be a neighborhood park is just silly. So, the only requirement is that the park be on a piece of land inside an arbitarily named neighborhood? What park doesn't qualify as a neighborhood park under this guide, unless, you think there's a bunch of MLB teams playing their home games in the middle of unihabitable desert...
I'd rather look at the actual features of the park and how it interacts with its supposed "neighborhood" to determine its value to that area. There is absolutely nothing about the Cell that says it is the product of sound urban design. It's a car-centric giant that dwarfs the neighborhood (what little is left that hasn't been destroyed for it's empty parking lots) and has absolutely stunted the growth of any sort of nearby urban growth. The Cell is located 10 minutes from 2 CTA stops, 1 Metra stop, and downtown via a 16-land superhighway, it should be the center of a dense, vibrant city neighborhood, instead it sits all alone on a quite stretch of road 6 months of the year because it's simply not a facility that has any intention of coexisting in any sort of urban environment.
I don't know, you guys both make good points. But to me, the fact that there are residential homes right on the other side of the tracks, down 36th St., 37th St., etc within a 100 yards of the actual stadium makes it a neighborhood park. I've been to a bunch of different stadiums that were basically surrounded by nothing for about a mile or more (Anaheim, LA, KC, etc...) I always walk through the Bridgeport neighborhood, from lot F down 37th St. to Wallace, walk over to Grandstand, and all around are people wearing Sox gear heading to the game or milling around. Sure the stadium would be more integrated into the hood if there were no tracks to the west, but it doesn't make it isolated, IMO.