CHICAGO | General Developments

[LouisVanDerWright]

Heard through the grapevine that Quigley has earmarked the required funds to complete the first phase of the Weber Spur trail in North Mayfair. This will create a bike path from the North Branch trail in LaBagh Woods as far as the viaduct over Elston behind the Mayfair Target.

Ultimately this project will have a phase II that extends the trail all the way to Wilson and Cicero providing grade separated bike and pedestrian access over the Edens. Supposedly the reason that it has been phased is that UP is a bitch to work with and totally ignores projects like this. I guess the only reason they've gotten this far is that the local politicians were pissed after that kids dog fell off the Foster viaduct and died last year. Apparently they were fed up with UP to the point that they basically said "we are going to jam all your projects in the city until you address this one".

[ithakas]

My building's property managers use an app called Rise to manage all sorts of things – everything from rent payments to QR codes for package room entry to notices and reminders to residents from them.

I imagine a fair number of the big rental buildings are using these now, and it could be a nice way to solicit community feedback on proposals/issues—property managers could share info on a proposal and get consent that resident feedback is shared with the local alder—rather than relying on the community group-dominated meetings. It feels like a tool that isn't being used to get more representative feedback.

[Urbannizer]

https://chicago.urbanize.city/post/9...groundbreaking

[Via Chicago]

Art Institute of Chicago receives $75 million gift to fund new modern art building

https://chicago.suntimes.com/art/202...n-art-building

The Art Institute of Chicago has received a $75 million donation for a new building to showcase modern art from the 19th and 20th centuries.

The funds — which amount to the single largest naming gift the museum has ever received — come from longtime art collectors Aaron I. Fleischman and Lin Lougheed. The new building, which will bear their names, will be constructed within the museum’s existing downtown campus, although the exact location and project timeline have not been announced.

“We have a hard stop on five sides: Columbus, Monroe, Michigan and Jackson, as well as a height restriction. So we really are a profoundly finite site,” Art Institute President James Rondeau said. “There are, I think, some opportunities to repurpose underused spaces and then also relocate certain aspects of the collections to create the potential for this construction.”

Fleischman and Lougheed live in Miami but both have Midwest roots, according to the museum. Fleischman is a native of suburban Highland Park and has been an Art Institute trustee for about 15 years. He has made other major contributions to art museums, including endowing a curatorship at The Met in New York.

“Lin and I are excited about naming a new building that will create additional space for visitors to see more of the collection than they have ever been able to see before, and for the museum to tell a more complete story of modern and contemporary art,” Fleischman said in a statement. “Touring the collections on view and in storage, I came to believe that more of the museum‘s extraordinary collection needed to be available to visitors and presented in world-class architecture.”

The current Modern Wing of the Art Institute, designed by the architect Renzo Piano, opened in 2009 to house modern and contemporary art and sculpture, photography and architecture and design. That was the largest expansion of the museum in history.

Rondeau said 19th and 20th century modern art is a key part of the museum’s DNA.

“And there are really significant swaths of the modern collection not on view,” Rondeau said. “So we aim to create both more space for modern — and then there’ll be a kind of collateral lift to create more space for contemporary, we hope, in the existing buildings.”

In recent years, the museum has been working with the Barcelona architecture firm Barozzi Veiga to reimagine its downtown campus, improve facilities and provide more access to its collection, Rondeau said.

“I know the word transformative is overused, but we’ve been working for many years on this vision, and thanks to Aaron and Lin, I think we can say that we’ll be in a position where that vision will become a reality.”

The new building’s design will incorporate views of Millennium Park, downtown and the lake, the museum said in a release.

“It’s exciting to be part of Barozzi Veiga’s long-term plan for the Art Institute,” Lougheed said in a statement. “The future building plans will add to Chicago’s reputation as the center of innovative architecture.”

Earlier this year, the Art Institute announced two $25 million donations from Chicago-area based groups to support campus improvements. The John D. and Alexandra C. Nichols Family Foundation gave in support of the Nichols Family Skyline Garden and other visitor-centered spaces. The Bucksbaum family gifted funds for a namesake photography center.

[ardecila]

Great to see the Art Institute get that gift, but I'm disappointed they are trying to cram even more floor area onto their limited site. The existing buildings and the open spaces/courtyards are all highly significant - what are they going to take away in order to expand their gargantuan complex?

Really they should invest in an off-site museum like MOMA PS1 in NYC. Spread the love to a different part of the city, maybe Fulton Market, River West, Pilsen or Chinatown. It could kickstart the adaptive reuse of a historic building like Blommer Chocolate, Fisk Powerplant, or the Union Station powerhouse. Historically the Art Institute played a big role in bringing great art to the neighborhoods via the Ferguson Monument Fund, but that fund is almost run dry after 100 years and the Art Institute has abandoned this mission. Big shame...

[Via Chicago]

i feel like decking over the tracks to the west of the modern wing would make the most sense and allow for an opportunity to tie them together somehow. otherwise i dont really see where this could go.

[dropdeaded209]

I am curious to see where they will find space for a new wing as well, however to the east of the original building there is space above the Metro tracks--that seems to me the only option.

As the gift was for an expansion of gallery space for the 19th and 20th century modern art collections it makes sense to keep everything on one site.

Moving offsite is not without risks--look at the Met's disastrous decision to set up shop in the old Whitney building... however the Frick took glorious advantage of the Met's fumble and had the divine temporary exhibition of its greatest masterpieces there...

Either way, it will be exciting to see what Barozzi Veiga comes up with.

[Klippenstein]

From a 2019 article

To the extent that Barozzi and Veiga are ready to talk specifics, this building, originally called Gunsaulus Hall, is one of their focuses. They see it becoming a new “center of gravity” for the museum, in Veiga’s words, a “new public centrality,” in Barozzi’s.

Working on that building over the tracks would allow them “to establish a new relationship with this industrial atmosphere that could be very powerful and could intensify the specificity of this museum,” Barozzi said.

And thinking about “The Bridge” building, they said, has started a flow of ideas for “a logical re-arrangement of the collection,” Barozzi said.

They’re not ready to detail that re-arrangement yet, but they are taking on one of the museum’s most daunting challenges, helping visitors simply get around. “One of the big things of this proposal is to clarify the way-finding, the access to the galleries, the access to the different programs, et cetera, in a logical and very clear way,” said Veiga.

The other AIC building they have immediately identified as a focal point for transformation is the 1958 Ferguson Building, a slender wing that houses executive offices and looks the part. It abuts the original building parallel to Michigan Avenue, overlooking a lovely park on the campus’ northwest corner that is currently hidden from the avenue by a dense row of shrubbery.

“It is the worst building in the most beautiful and public location,” said Barozzi, and the architects described almost being shocked to see such a space being so closed off and ill-used.“

We deeply believe that building is to be a building where the public can circulate, where the public can see art,” Veiga said.

Among the other notions they mentioned: That people in Grant Park should be able to look west and immediately know the big complex they see is the Art Institute; that they originally didn’t see much room on the campus to think about new buildings, but that has changed with familiarity; and that more building over the tracks is not likely.

[nomarandlee]

Originally Posted by ardecila

Great to see the Art Institute get that gift, but I'm disappointed they are trying to cram even more floor area onto their limited site. The existing buildings and the open spaces/courtyards are all highly significant - what are they going to take away in order to expand their gargantuan complex?

Really they should invest in an off-site museum like MOMA PS1 in NYC. Spread the love to a different part of the city, maybe Fulton Market, River West, Pilsen or Chinatown. It could kickstart the adaptive reuse of a historic building like Blommer Chocolate, Fisk Powerplant, or the Union Station powerhouse. Historically the Art Institute played a big role in bringing great art to the neighborhoods via the Ferguson Monument Fund, but that fund is almost run dry after 100 years and the Art Institute has abandoned this mission. Big shame...

Similar concerns. Two primary thoughts

Does that AIC have, as right, to build on both the north and south gardens fronting Michigan? If they don't have the right I hope they forgo it.

Unfortunately, I don't imagine that the AIC would want to build over the IC tracks as part of the new wing. I imagine doing so would include added expense compared to other options for the addition.
That said, any reconfiguring or addition would likely involve more than just building on an empty lot (unless it's in the gardens), so maybe the AIC would consider building over the IC tracks as not prohibitively expensive compared to the alternatives.

1958 Ferguson Building, a slender wing that houses executive offices and looks the part. It abuts the original building parallel to Michigan Avenue, overlooking a lovely park on the campus’ northwest corner that is currently hidden from the avenue by a dense row of shrubbery.

“It is the worst building in the most beautiful and public location,” said Barozzi, and the architects described almost being shocked to see such a space being so closed off and ill-used.“

We deeply believe that building is to be a building where the public can circulate, where the public can see art,” Veiga said.

Among the other notions they mentioned: That people in Grant Park should be able to look west and immediately know the big complex they see is the Art Institute; that they originally didn’t see much room on the campus to think about new buildings, but that has changed with familiarity; and that more building over the tracks is not likely.

Interesting. If they effectively rebuild the Ferguson building I hope they build and orient the new development as if the tracks are expected to be covered one day in the future, because they ideally should. Be it at city expense or AIC expense, it could provide another garden or great public space as part of the campus if the tracks were covered.