Election over/Rahm wins/Obama library?

[chet everett]

The true wishes of poltiicians are rarely expressed through "official channels".

It would be very easy for some "presidential library commission member" that no one has ever before heard of to make the announcement, for the President to sort of express his 'disappointment' that this is not going to Chicago but simulataneously saying he "feels confident" that the Friends of the Parks position is the best for the people of "the city I truly love".


The donors who helped to build Clinton's library in Little Rock certainly would have been happy to see Bill have his "foundation" offices in Arkansas vs Harlem. The situation with George W. Bush having both his library and offices in Texas is different than that, but I beleive more similar to what Reagan did as well George HW Bush, and also Carter, and even Nixon, all the way back to LBJ...

[Vlajos]

Originally Posted by marothisu

Thanks. That's awesome. I have a feeling it will come to Chicago now, especially with Rahm winning. I hope it goes in the Washington Park site.

I agree. Obama said he hopes it's in Chicago. Unless the City really screws up, it sounds like it will be here.

[Vlajos]

Chicago on track for Obama library; foundation consults with McKinsey guru | Chicago

Looks like Chicago is getting close to getting it.

[Lookout Kid]

I hate that people call anyone who works at McKinsey a "guru". They are better at marketing themselves than anything else.

[OyCrumbler]

I don't understand why the Obama library and museum should take up a portion of designated parkland. It's a wonderful institution that's going to be built, but Chicago isn't exactly rich in parks compared to many other major US cities (it's great in terms of quality of parks, but quantity-wise, it's at 9.1% parkland in the city compared to 20% or more for SF, DC, or NYC). Meanwhile, the south side location of it, which is a great decision for many reasons, has a lot of fairly currently empty plots near the parks where it's to be located. This location is where is currently a part of where it's targeted. It includes a lot adjacent to Washington Park (one of the proposed sites) and is sandwiched right between the Green Line Garfield station and the west side of Washington Park which is one of the potential sites. Evidently, the only entity on that block is this gas station which would be difficult to argue as a huge loss to the city compared to designated park space and 54th Place becoming a part of the complex wouldn't be a loss at all since there are no longer even any buildings that the street goes through now.

But additional space, if needed, can be attained by building a bridge across Garfield into this other almost completely empty lot and possibly make this a connected but bifurcated complex between museum and library (regardless, as this is Chicago, birthplace of the skyscraper, the emphasis on verticality instead of larger lots for low-slung buildings seems more appropriate and the transit station nearby is already two stories while some of the closest still existing buildings are three to seven stories, so it makes sense for this piece of architecture that's supposed to be a lasting legacy rise higher than its surroundings) and/or if really necessary to jump across the Green Line tracks on to the other side where there's only a parking lot. In this sense, you'd get people coming in and attracted to both the library/museum and the park without taking away space from the park. It seems to makes no sense to bulldoze over actual parkspace that's manicured and maintained by the city when there is this available, and the site would be so close to the station that it can be very easily and truthfully signed as the Obama Presidential Library and Museum station without any confusion. To me, it seems best to build a bit more densely and build it in within 54th St, Calumet, MLK, and Garfield more densely and have the parking lot for the Garfield station along Calumet to be an open public ground opening and to try to concentrate urban development driven by the establishment of this library (retail and eateries, etc.) in the plentiful amount of lands around this that would be so well-served in having a transit station, an institution AND a park so immediately close by. Also, building it dense and so close to the Green Line Garfield station also means keeping the core of it just that much closer to Garfield Red line station as well which itself offers plenty of open space and parking lots to build around for a museum site and now accessible to both the red and green line stations on Garfield.

It seems like this would be perfect as an addition to Washington Park rather than a replacement of a portion of a park. Is there any kind of mechanism to give feedback on this at all? Any points of contact?

[chet everett]

Originally Posted by OyCrumbler

I don't understand why the Obama library and museum should take up a portion of designated parkland. It's a wonderful institution that's going to be built, but Chicago isn't exactly rich in parks compared to many other major US cities (it's great in terms of quality of parks, but quantity-wise, it's at 9.1% parkland in the city compared to 20% or more for SF, DC, or NYC). Meanwhile, the south side location of it, which is a great decision for many reasons, has a lot of fairly currently empty plots near the parks where it's to be located. This location is where is currently a part of where it's targeted. It includes a lot adjacent to Washington Park (one of the proposed sites) and is sandwiched right between the Green Line Garfield station and the west side of Washington Park which is one of the potential sites. Evidently, the only entity on that block is this gas station which would be difficult to argue as a huge loss to the city compared to designated park space and 54th Place becoming a part of the complex wouldn't be a loss at all since there are no longer even any buildings that the street goes through now.

But additional space, if needed, can be attained by building a bridge across Garfield into this other almost completely empty lot and possibly make this a connected but bifurcated complex between museum and library (regardless, as this is Chicago, birthplace of the skyscraper, the emphasis on verticality instead of larger lots for low-slung buildings seems more appropriate and the transit station nearby is already two stories while some of the closest still existing buildings are three to seven stories, so it makes sense for this piece of architecture that's supposed to be a lasting legacy rise higher than its surroundings) and/or if really necessary to jump across the Green Line tracks on to the other side where there's only a parking lot. In this sense, you'd get people coming in and attracted to both the library/museum and the park without taking away space from the park. It seems to makes no sense to bulldoze over actual parkspace that's manicured and maintained by the city when there is this available, and the site would be so close to the station that it can be very easily and truthfully signed as the Obama Presidential Library and Museum station without any confusion. To me, it seems best to build a bit more densely and build it in within 54th St, Calumet, MLK, and Garfield more densely and have the parking lot for the Garfield station along Calumet to be an open public ground opening and to try to concentrate urban development driven by the establishment of this library (retail and eateries, etc.) in the plentiful amount of lands around this that would be so well-served in having a transit station, an institution AND a park so immediately close by. Also, building it dense and so close to the Green Line Garfield station also means keeping the core of it just that much closer to Garfield Red line station as well which itself offers plenty of open space and parking lots to build around for a museum site and now accessible to both the red and green line stations on Garfield.

It seems like this would be perfect as an addition to Washington Park rather than a replacement of a portion of a park. Is there any kind of mechanism to give feedback on this at all? Any points of contact?

The fact is this the city that "don't want nobody that nobody sent" and unless you have George Lucas size piles of cash and connections you have no voice -- Meeting were almost a year ago. It is a done deal. Rushed Obama library meetings didn't have to be this way | Chicago Sun-Times

[PerseusVeil]

The Washington Park location is currently the preferred location for the library.
https://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/2016...y-advisor-says

[chet everett]

Interesting reporting -- A Very, Very Brief History of the Obama Library Site Selection | Chicago magazine | Politics & City Life July 2016

Had the Library been something that replaced burned out / unused buildings adjacent to Washington Park that likely would have had the biggest impact it terms of "urban renewal" but a site that is in Jackson Park, nearer to the lakefront and accessible to tourists familiar with thinks like the Museum of Science of Industry is more "stately"...

[beaniemac]

I think Washington park would be more convenient for tourists simply because its adjacent to the green line stop.

[Manigault]

The other thought is that by placing the facility in Jackson Park, now alonq with MSI and the Oriental Institute, there is a museum campus - south. That's a nice assemblage for the tourists.

Jackson Park is not a heavily used facility. It has an abandoned law bowling pitch and abandoned tennis courts. Those folks who want the museum across the street, knocking down some old houses (or new development) are not that familiar with the area. Woodlawn is being gentrified and , compared to Washington Park, has far fewer vacant lots.