CHICAGO | Obama Presidential Library

[the urban politician]

Let's not forget that the Lucas Museum is not about Lucas but about his art collection.

[i_am_kyry]

Originally Posted by marothisu

I hope it ends up in Washington Park too. Ultimately, I think the fact that the Green AND Red lines go to or near there will play a major role in this. These things are a lot easier for tourists to figure out than the Metra and Bus, but even besides that - it runs more frequent (and later) than Metra/Bus. Also more pick up points than the Metra for sure.

Definitely. I work for Choose Chicago so I interact with tourists daily. They are so confused on why their Ventra cards don't work for the Metra system. There is a real genuine interest in visiting the neighborhoods, Hyde Park specifically because of MSI, UofC, and Obama. It kinda blows my mind how many ask about the Smart Museum, Robie House, Oriental Institute, etc. The Southside is an absolute gem, it's time we shine it up and return it to it's former glory.

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by i_am_kyry

Definitely. I work for Choose Chicago so I interact with tourists daily. They are so confused on why their Ventra cards don't work for the Metra system. There is a real genuine interest in visiting the neighborhoods, Hyde Park specifically because of MSI, UofC, and Obama. It kinda blows my mind how many ask about the Smart Museum, Robie House, Oriental Institute, etc. The Southside is an absolute gem, it's time we shine it up and return it to it's former glory.

This is great to hear, and yeah tourists are often confused by the Metra. They're even confused by the bus (but IMO bus systems are confusing in any city you don't know compared to trains). I'm actually surprised they are asking about the Oriental Institute. That place is a gem, but I feel like enough people don't know about it. I write for a European travel company for their Chicago section and wrote about that place. When I tell people who live HERE about it, they're clueless that it even exists for the most part. In any case, Hyde Park has some great cultural institutions. It's about time something else comes there - and this time it's something that will have pretty much instant national recognition.

Whether it's in Jackson Park or Washington Park - it's a great thing. However, I think it'll go to WP and there's some positive buzz going on in WP lately between the Currency Exchange Cafe, Arts Incubator, and what Theaster Gates is going to do. Now it looks like that building will become a data center. And while it could be better, it's still something positive IMO.

With some stuff going on in Bronzeville, the area getting new construction homes again, some new business, getting safer, etc I think the continuity of what's happening on the South Side would only be natural for the Obama Library to be placed in Washington Park. Putting it there gets me a LOT more excited than putting it in Jackson Park to be honest. I think it would be positive for Hyde Park's development too.


By the way, are there any volunteer opportunities with Choose Chicago? I'd love to do some stuff with you guys.

[Mr Downtown]

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

Please tell me how Marshall Field is allowed to build a museum in the park and George Lucas is not?

Marshall Field wasn't allowed to build a museum. The South Park Commission was. Field had been dead for five years when new parkland was created for a building owned and controlled by the Commission—not by a private entity.

The new law isn't about the current navigability of land in Burnham Park. It's about whether the Park District is allowed to give parkland to a private entity.

As for slippery slopes, we need only look at what we've already traded parkland for: a monster convention center, a dozen different public schools (nothing remains of Hanson Park), a private school, and a private school sports field.

[BVictor1]

Originally Posted by Mr Downtown

Marshall Field wasn't allowed to build a museum. The South Park Commission was. Field had been dead for five years when new parkland was created for a building owned and controlled by the Commission—not by a private entity.

The new law isn't about the current navigability of land in Burnham Park. It's about whether the Park District is allowed to give parkland to a private entity.

As for slippery slopes, we need only look at what we've already traded parkland for: a monster convention center, a dozen different public schools (nothing remains of Hanson Park), a private school, and a private school sports field.

The Field Museum was built 1' outside of Grant Park in Burnham Park. Yes, McCormick Place is built in the park, but it wasn't built on a 'parking lot', which is where the Lucas Museum would go. Land, that 20 years ago was still parking and squished in between northbound and southbound lanes.



This private entity would be used for public benefit. The Field Museum may be owned and controlled by the Commission, but it was built with private monies. There's nothing that says the same deal couldn't be made with the Lucas Museum.

[the urban politician]

^ BVictor, you are making arguments that are too sensible, cut it out please!

We need to stick to the "parkland is being given to a private entity" mantra so that we can keep up the outrage

[Mr Downtown]

Originally Posted by BVictor1

There's nothing that says the same deal couldn't be made with the Lucas Museum.

There's a signed Memorandum of Understanding. You can't now just imagine a totally different arrangement and wish it into existence, the way you like to imagine a better building than the one the developer actually got approval to build.

[BVictor1]

Originally Posted by Mr Downtown

There's a signed Memorandum of Understanding. You can't now just imagine a totally different arrangement and wish it into existence, the way you like to imagine a better building than the one the developer actually got approval to build.

And yet being vocal and repetitive about better buildings and design at public meetings is paying off. Aldermen are encouraging lesser and lesser parking in towers downtown. Developers are being encouraged to shield parking with active space like what'll be happening with the new tower in Streeterville. We are getting more and better ground floor retail that's engaging and inviting

It's not about 'wishing into existence' my friend, it's about being vocal and active and the ability to change opinions through fact and argument. Of course we're not always going to get what we want.

Memorandum or not, there's now signed legislation...

http://my.chicagotribune.com/#sectio.../p2p-83435306/

No wishing, just plain fact

[Steely Dan]

i moved all of the off-topic general tourism discussion to the chicago general discussion thread:

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/show...=208431&page=6

[nomarandlee]

http://chicago.suntimes.com/lynn-swe...library-may-12

Sun-Times exclusive: Obama foundation to name Chicago home of presidential library on May 12
Posted: 05/04/2015,

WASHINGTON — The Sun-Times has learned that the Barack Obama Foundation will announce on May 12 that the Obama library, museum and presidential center will be in Chicago.

Multiple sources confirmed on Monday that the Chicago-based Obama Foundation, led by Obama friend Marty Nesbitt, is planning an announcement event a week from Tuesday.

The announcement will be made on the South Side, the home of the winning bidder, the University of Chicago, and will cap a process that started on Jan. 31, 2014, when the foundation was created........

An influential South Side voice, the Rev. Leon Finney, president of The Woodlawn Development Corporation, told the Sun-Times on Monday that the “better place” for the Obama complex is Jackson Park, along Stony Island Avenue.

Finney said the Jackson Park location “makes more sense” because it is closer to the Museum of Science and Industry, already one of Chicago’s main tourist attractions. Jackson Park is much closer to Lake Michigan and would be more convenient for tourists visiting the museum campus on the near South Side: the Field Museum, the Adler Planetarium and the Shedd Aquarium.........

With a strong tourism base, the economic impact would eventually work its way west, to Washington Park, he said. Finney, who also is the pastor of the Metropolitan Apostolic Community Church, 4100 S. King Dr., served on the Chicago Plan Commission for 32 years........

...

So does anyone here on board with Leon Finney in thinking that Jackson Park makes the better choice? If so I would like hear it. My view......

Not to say that Jackson Park isn't also a good site and doesn't have its own advantages. The views of the park and the lake would be excellent in particular. And it would make a nice museum campus sitting across from the MS&I. However I am really not seeing his thinking that somehow the library will somehow piggyback off visits from the museum campus much further north. The MSI and Roosevelt Rd. Museum Campus are more then 6 miles away from one another. The Washington Park would be approximately the same distance. Plus I kind of doubt that spill over would reach Washington Park if the Library were placed in Jackson Park. Whereas I think the having library in Washington Park could consolidate and spur development like a vice between Wash Park and the South Loop and ideally drive development due west to almost the Dan Ryan. This may the best last chance for the dilapidated areas west of Hyde Park to the Dan Ryan. Jackson Park and South Shore has the Lake which should eventually help the neighborhood get back on its feet eventually anyhow plus the ME embankment serves a a bit of a barrier to any positive development that would want to flow its way west from the library.

To me at least the Washington Park site just makes a good deal more sense logistically, economically, socially, and symbolically. Both would have good to excellent accessibility both for cars and train but from a transit perspective the Washington Park wins rather hands down. It could the catalyst of a true TOD that has direct climate controlled walkways into the library if so chosen. Catching the Green Line down would be easier for more visitors and residents alike then the ME. It would also provide plenty more space for a revenue making parking garage. Washington Park is in arguably more dire straits and has all that more room to rejuvenate. It has more empty lots around the site and fronting the park which could will be prime retail/residential once the library is settled. 55th has the potential to be a beautiful humming commercial corridor with MLK Drive having enough lots to welcome some new residential infill. The library would have a beautiful view itself looking over Washington Park and sitting aside a spruced up boulevard. There would be the great symbolism of sitting on MLK Drive overlooking Washington Park sitting right across the park from the Dusable Museum of African American history. If anything maybe the Dusable Museum could attract some foot traffic from the Library. And the location is still close enough to the MSI that many visitors would choose to do both in a day. Then there is the obvious advantage is that one wouldn't need to necessarily have the 100% of the footprint in the park unlike Jackson Park.
And most important Washington Park provides a good deal more acres to do all the things you would want the library to do from a design and aesthetic POV.

[LouisVanDerWright]

Jackson Park is probably only in the hat as an option to begin with to placate South Side community leaders, like Leon Finnley, who are concerned about U of C breaking the confines of Hyde Park and improving "their" neighborhood. The Jackson Park location makes virtually zero sense compared to the Washington Park location. Washington Park itself is far more under utilized than Jackson Park and has huge lawns that serve virtually no purpose, this is also true for the privately held lands around both parks. Jackson is also nowhere near the L which is a huge advantage to the WP site.

And of course, the WP site will lead to far more economic benefits for the surrounding area than the already stable area surrounding Jackson Park.

[i_am_kyry]

Doesn't hurt that the Washington Park site will increase the property values in the neighborhood where he'll most likely sell his house here...

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

Jackson Park is probably only in the hat as an option to begin with to placate South Side community leaders, like Leon Finnley, who are concerned about U of C breaking the confines of Hyde Park and improving "their" neighborhood. The Jackson Park location makes virtually zero sense compared to the Washington Park location. Washington Park itself is far more under utilized than Jackson Park and has huge lawns that serve virtually no purpose, this is also true for the privately held lands around both parks. Jackson is also nowhere near the L which is a huge advantage to the WP site.

The irony is, if not for those same community leaders, the L would stretch right to the edge of Jackson Park.

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

Jackson Park is probably only in the hat as an option to begin with to placate South Side community leaders, like Leon Finnley, who are concerned about U of C breaking the confines of Hyde Park and improving "their" neighborhood. The Jackson Park location makes virtually zero sense compared to the Washington Park location. Washington Park itself is far more under utilized than Jackson Park and has huge lawns that serve virtually no purpose, this is also true for the privately held lands around both parks. Jackson is also nowhere near the L which is a huge advantage to the WP site.

And of course, the WP site will lead to far more economic benefits for the surrounding area than the already stable area surrounding Jackson Park.

Yep. This Finnley guy is full of shit. Easier for tourists to visit? The Green Line goes right there from downtown and has a handful of stops in the Loop. The Metra has what, one stop in the Loop, and is more confusing for tourists to use. Most tourists have no idea why their Ventra cards can't work on the Metra.

This guy is most certainly doing this for a personal gain - otherwise he's a completely clueless sack of shit. The Washington Park site is far better.

[wrab]

Originally Posted by ardecila

The irony is, if not for those same community leaders, the L would stretch right to the edge of Jackson Park.

A shortsighted & boneheaded move, to tear down that last mile of the Green Line.

[i_am_kyry]

Regardless of site, it's gonna have an architect...any guesses? My money is on David Adjaye. Obama has already seen (literally out of the White House windows lol) what he could do, a la National African American History Museum on the Mall in DC. Perhaps with Jeanne Gang on landscape?

[LouisVanDerWright]

Originally Posted by i_am_kyry

Regardless of site, it's gonna have an architect...any guesses? My money is on David Adjaye. Obama has already seen (literally out of the White House windows lol) what he could do, a la National African American History Museum on the Mall in DC. Perhaps with Jeanne Gang on landscape?

Adjaye is exactly who I was thinking myself. Any progressive, high profile, African American architects out there? Race really isn't something you think of much in architecture. I'm sure there are quite a few unknowns doing fantastic work and the foundation may very well come up with a total surprise, but it seems like a big risk to give a high profile project like this to anyone who has not completed something on this scale before.

[sentinel]

Sorry, I had to repost this image - Good God what a joke this was, back then - so glad this was fixed to make the entire museum campus into an actual, cohesive an uninterrupted campus.

[woodrow]

^^Absolutely one of the best things the city did. In the past it was RIDICULOUS going from the Field to the Shedd and Adler - creepy, dirty, smelly, tiny little tunnel under LSD. Grotty, unpleasant, cars whizzing past at the edges of the "plazas" fronting Field and Shedd

What is the exact number of acres of park that were added? 17 acres? Fabulous - nicely landscaped, heavily used by visitors and residents alike.

I cant wait for the next museum and the added greenscape it will bring.

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

Adjaye is exactly who I was thinking myself. Any progressive, high profile, African American architects out there? Race really isn't something you think of much in architecture. I'm sure there are quite a few unknowns doing fantastic work and the foundation may very well come up with a total surprise, but it seems like a big risk to give a high profile project like this to anyone who has not completed something on this scale before.

Nobody really comes to mind. There are some commercially successful black architects, but nobody who I'd really consider a world-class designer. Eg Moody Nolan is a larger firm designing the new Malcolm X College on Damen, they are black-owned. I'm not sure whether the design for the college came from them or Cannon, though.

Adjaye is one of the few renowned black architects out there, but he's of course British and has no ties to the experience of black Americans, which makes it strange for him to be designing the African-American History Museum.

I don't think it is essential that the architect for Obama library be black. I'm sure some will demand this, but ultimately it's up to the Obama Foundation and the president himself. Far more important for the project to create employment opportunities within the neighborhood.