Agenda - Planning Commission - 06/04/2009

Home

_ BUILDING ALONG BOULEVARDS, PARKS, AND OTHER OPEN SPACES Chicago's unique 28-mile boulevard system was conceived in 1869 and 1870, and built out over several decades as a continuous series of green spaces lined with dwellings connecting the city's parks and lakefront. The green ~paces are large. The average width of the right-of-way is about 250 feet. On many ofthe streets, faster through traffic is channeled in a center drive, while quieter local traffic runs along parallel one-way service roads separated by median strips. Originally the dornain of mansions, significant stretches of the boulevards began to be framed by large and fashionable apart- ment buildings starting in the 1920S. After a long period of decline, particularly on the city's south and west sides where many dilapidated structures were torn down, the boulevards have recently seen some new residential develop- ment. With the infrastructure already in place, Chicago's boulevards are a. resource waiting to be tapped for higher density development. One of the reasons for encouraging higher density construction along parks and boule- vards is somewhat similar to the rationale for doing so on corners; public open spaces afford permanent access to abundant light, air, and views. The adjacent outdoor space of a park or boulevard can absorb some ofthe recreational needs ofthe new residents. Also, the preexist- ing streets IJpon which these open spaces are located are often designed to carry the higher volumes of traffic that the new residential devel- opment may incur. Relegating larger buildings next to open space either buffers or eliminates the impact on any existing smaller buildings. Possible com- plaints from neighbors across the street about shadows or imposing bulk should be eliminated by the distance separating the facing buildings. Facing a larger structure on the other side of a park or boulevard can actua lly be seen as an advantage, since more substantial buildings will frame the open space while smaller buildings get lost in the distance. Grand spaces are appro- priately framed by grand and significant build- ings. They create memorable vistas and places that people want to return to. cago prepared for the pressure to tear down its significant structures by conducting and pub- lishing the Chicago Historic Resources Survey (1983-1996), an inventory of propertiesidenti- fied as having architectural or historical signifi- . cance. This work ranks 17,000 buildings deemed worthy of inclusion (out of an estimated half-mil- lion in the entire city) by color code. Buildings With the infrastructure already in place, Chicago's boulevards are a resource waiting to be tapped for higher density devetopment. CONVERSION OFEXISTING BUILDINGS A changing (and challenging) economy has rendered obsolete many older commercial and industrial buildings in Chicago. Seven-story factories on tight urban sites no longer provide what manufacturers need. Yesterday's grahd old movie palaces are out of sync with to day's multi- plex theater industry. Former department stores, banks, and office buildings lie vacant Dr nearly so. Mom-and-pop businesses can't compete with big box chains. Empty, these structures drag down a neighborhood. Convertedto residential use, they can anchor a district and stimulate further investment in a community's future. , Often in a redeveloping neighborhood, white-elephant 100-year-old buildings on prime sites are targets for demolition. The City of Chi- rated red, the highest, were most likely already landmarked or would become eligible for land- mark status after having been "discovered" by the surveyors. Orange, the second highest ranking, indicated a building that by itself might not be worthy of landmark designation butthat would certainly be contributing were it in a land- mark district. The "oranges" provided planners with strong backup for arguing for their pres- ervation when developers had other designs. In some cases the city provided incentives and financial assistance fortheir adaptive reuse. Many developers and architects simply avoid historic rehabilitation.because it involves too many uncertainties and demands a great deal of specific expertise. In the right hands, however, large-scale residential conversion ZONING PRACTICE 5.09 AMERICAN PlANNING ASSOCIATION Ipage 5 87