Urban Design, Waterfront & Open Space

Chapter 3 Urban Design, Waterfront & Open Space

Chicago Central Area ACTION Plan Page 3-2 Chapter 3: Urban Design, Waterfront & Open Space August 2009

Project Status UPDATE nvestments in parks, waterfront Chicago River Museum: The McCor- Iamenities and streetscape and cor- mick Tribune Bridgehouse & Chicago ridor enhancements are essential if a River Museum is open in the south- high quality-of-life is to be maintained west bridge tower of the Michigan in Chicago’s Central Area. The Cen- Avenue Bridge. tral Area contains the most densely developed and expensive land in Chi- Ping Tom Park Phase 1: The first cago, presenting a challenge to the phase of Ping Tom Park along the Chi- provision of open space and recre- cago River in Chinatown is complete. ational amenities for its growing num- bers of residents, workers, students Walter Payton Campus Park: A cam- and visitors. pus park at Walter Payton College Preparatory School at Oak and Wells Completed projects is complete. (2001-2006) Image 3-1: New park space has been added Neighborhood Parks: A number of in the center of the Lake Shore East devel- Millennium Park: Millennium Park is opment. community parks to serve adjacent complete and serves as Chicago’s sig- residential and mixed-use neighbor- nature downtown park around which hoods are complete: high levels of private sector investment are occurring. • Park #546 at Lakeshore East • Park #513 at 15th & Indiana Grant Park Framework Plan: This • Heritage Green Park (At Adams plan defines a series of enhancements & DesPlaines across from Old St. to improve the function and appear- Patrick’s Church) ance of Grant Park over a multi-year timeline.

Wacker Pier/Renovated Coast Guard Station: Following a complete reno- Work Process vation, the Chicago Marine Safety At four meetings and several small Station now houses the Coast Guard, group work sessions over six the Illinois Conservation Police and months, the Urban Design, Wa- the Chicago Police Marine Unit. terfront & Open Space Task Force Image 3-2: The completion of Millennium followed a three-step process to Park and its open space and recreational amenities creates a signature attraction. River Access through Montgomery review and refine strategies and Ward Site: The residential and com- projects. mercial redevelopment of the former Montgomery Ward headquarters 1. Confirmed status of 2003 campus now includes a public walk- Central Area Plan projects way along the riverfront. and identified additional projects Veteran’s Memorial: The Vietnam 2. Conducted a goals and needs Veteran’s Memorial located along the analysis Chicago River at Wacker and State is 3. Identified costs, implementa- complete, providing a high-quality, tion factors, and project rec- open space anchor for the Riverwalk ommendations system. The Task Force also assessed the design issues related to five district focus areas and five signature streets through charrettes and mobile workshops. Image 3-3: The first phase of Ping Tom Park has been completed along the South Branch.

Chicago Central Area ACTION Plan Chapter 3: Urban Design, Waterfront & Open Space Page 3-3 August 2009

Project Status UPDATE • Park #547 at 18th & Calumet Projects Underway or • Franklin School Campus Park at Nearing Completion 225 W. Evergreen (2007-2008) • Park #511 at 630 North Kingsbury East Wacker Drive Riverwalk: River- (Erie Park) walk features and vendor space along South Loop Annex School/Teachers the southern edge of the Chicago Academy: The campus park at the River are in place between Michigan South Loop Annex School/Teachers and Franklin. Academy, located at 55 W. Cermak Road, is complete. Northerly Island: The Northerly Is- land Framework Plan is underway to Soccer Fields at Moody Bible Insti- develop improvements that will make tute: New play fields are in place this a key waterfront park amenity between LaSalle and Wells at Moody area. Image 3-4: The campus park at the Teach- Bible Institute. er’s Academy has added functional open Streetscape Projects: A series of space in the Near South. Plaza at Chicago and State: A new streetscape improvements are in the public plaza at Chicago and State, ad- design stage, scheduled for imple- jacent to McDonalds, is complete. mentation, or under construction:

Chicago Lakefront Harbor Frame- • Congress Streetscape – Michigan work Plan: Completed plans to ex- Avenue to Wells Street pand the Chicago harbor system • Michigan Avenue Streetscape include a new transient boat facility – Roosevelt to 24th Street adjacent to Navy Pier and new har- • Wabash Phase 1 – Wacker to bors at 31st and 87th Streets. Harrison • Wabash Phase 2 – Harrison to Couch Place: A “Green Alley” dem- Roosevelt onstration project. Park Projects: Six public parks are in the design phase: • Library Tower Park – Harrison & State • 24th & Federal Image 3-5: Improvements continue along • Pritzker Park Reconfiguration the existing Lakefront Trail. – State & Van Buren • Park at Roosevelt Collection • Kinzie Park – Kinzie & Des- Plaines • Printers Row Park • Park at Adams & Sangamon • Park behind 16th & Wabash

Image 3-6: New harbor space will be added along the Lakefront, including Gateway Harbor at Navy Pier

Chicago Central Area ACTION Plan Page 3-4 Chapter 3: Urban Design, Waterfront & Open Space August 2009

Goals and Needs he 2003 Central Area Plan estab- of a healthy urban environment. Tlished a major theme of expanded Maintaining and improving upon and connected waterfronts and open Chicago’s urban design to opti- spaces to create great public places. mize its environmental benefits It also set goals for urban design by preserving, expanding and im- within the Central Area. The Urban proving the quality and function Design Task Force took these goals of vegetated areas; capturing, as a starting point for the action plan- cleaning and using precipitation; ning process, establishing key needs encouraging water conserva- for each goal and using them to help tion; and contributing towards prioritize the proposed urban design improved air quality will ensure a projects. cleaner environment for current and future generations. • Sustainable open spaces: Sustain- Image 3-7: The green roof atop City Hall ably designed and maintained, serves as an example for other buildings in the Central Area. Strengthen Chicago as an publicly-accessible parks, wa- Environmentally Sustainable City terfronts and open spaces will • High performance green build- improve the quality of life in Chi- ings: The design and construction cago and engage people in the of new buildings will continue to outdoors environment. be improved by meeting exist- • Green streets and public right-of- ing and new sustainable build- ways: Discouraging the use of ing standards. The renovation of personal vehicles by encouraging existing buildings and a commit- alternative modes of transporta- ment to historic preservation will tion such as walking, biking and save resources and reduce waste public transit will help lower our while preserving the character of City’s carbon emissions and help the Central Area. Increasing the mitigate global climate change. energy efficiency of buildings by These objectives can be reached upgrading energy and building through the implementation of the codes and using density bonuses City’s Green Streets/Alleys program, and expedited approval process- the Green Urban Design (GUD) and Image 3-8: Erie Park along the North es as incentives will help Chicago Branch has become a focal point for resi- Chicago Climate Change recommen- dential development. reduce its contribution to global dations, and revisions to the Open climate change. Space Impact Fee. • Environmental regulations, poli- cies and incentives promoting green building: Building Green/ Green Roof Policy; 2001 Energy Strengthen the Lakefront as Plan; Energy Code; Stormwater Chicago’s Great Public Space Ordinance; Landscape Ordi- • Improved connections to the Lake- nance; Green Permitting Pro- front: Identify strategies to better gram; Green Roof Improvement connect the Lakefront to all neigh- Fund; Green Roof Density Bonus; borhoods and business districts Green Roof Website (www.chi- within the Central Area. cagogreenroofs.org); Green Roof • Improved Lakefront Trail system: Grant Program; and the Chicago Define projects that will improve Green Homes Program. problematic conditions along the • Clean air, land and water: Clean air Lakefront Trail in the Central Area. and water, resource conservation A high priority is the configuration Image 3-9: The second Phase of Ping Tom and biodiversity are key elements Park will continue this award-winning public space north of 18th Street.

Chicago Central Area ACTION Plan Chapter 3: Urban Design, Waterfront & Open Space Page 3-5 August 2009

Goals and Needs of the Lakefront Trail between Grant Park, Northerly Island and Navy Pier and North Avenue, in- Ping Tom Park. cluding a dedicated pedestrian •Partnerships with developers and access over the Chicago River. other private donors: Capitalize • Improved Lakefront connections on opportunities to add new pub- to Central Area attractions: Identi- lic open space integrated with or fy projects or initiatives to link the alongside new development proj- Lakefront to the river, coordinat- ects in the Central Area, and iden- ing access between Central Area tify other private partners willing destinations. to fund major new public investments, as in Millennium Park.

Develop the Riverfront as a Premier Complete the Central Area’s Frame- Public Space and Continuous work of Richly Landscaped Streets System and Boulevards Image 3-10: Riverwalk Plaza will provide ac- • Formation of a riverfront manage- cess to the riverfront and become part of a continuous pedestrian connection. ment entity: Support formation of • Enhanced east/west streets and an entity to oversee operations of corridors: Balance Chicago’s rich a riverwalk system. heritage of signature north/south • Improved access to and circula- streets and corridors by improv- tion along the riverfront: Invest in ing a series of east/west streets public infrastructure to improve and corridors. vertical access from street level • Innovative green streets and alleys: to the riverwalk as well as under- Utilize state-of-the-art techniques bridge connections for pedestrian such as permeable pavement, rain access. gardens, and light-emitting diode • Established mix of uses along the (LED) lighting standards for green riverfront: Encourage the inclu- street and alley improvements. sion of commercial space in new • Beautifully illuminated buildings construction or renovation proj- and civic features: Partner with ects to accommodate active uses the private sector to incorpo- oriented to and accessible from rate architectural lighting into the riverwalk. streetscape enhancement proj- Image 3-11: Major street corridors, such as ects, unifying character districts Michigan Avenue, will be maintained as richly landscaped street environments. within the Central Area and re- Create the Next Generation of ducing light pollution. Parks • Integrated parks and open space with new development: Plan and develop public parks alongside new development of scale. • Integrated parks and open space in underserved areas: Integrate parks into densely developed areas of the Central Area with the greatest imbalances of open space to resi- dent/workforce populations. • Improved park amenities: Integrate a wide range of recreational amenities into existing and planned major public parks, including Image 3-12: The City will capitalize on opportunities to improve existing parks, such as the railscape improvements through Grant Park.

Chicago Central Area ACTION Plan Page 3-6 Chapter 3: Urban Design, Waterfront & Open Space August 2009

Urban Design Recommendations hicago’s Central Area is one of The Urban Design Task Force pro- considered “Focus Areas” in which Cthe most dynamic urban areas in vided urban design guidance for five particular attention is needed to con- the world. As the result of consistent district focus areas and five signature tinue to ensure a high quality of life growth over the past decade and at streets within the Central Area. As the and livability of these areas. present, the urban form of the Cen- Central Area has grown and develop- tral Area is evolving to meet demand. ment has expanded out of the Loop, “Signature Streets” are defined as It is important to guide the physical adjacent communities, such as the streets with distinguishable character characteristics of this growth in order Near West and Near South, have real- that anchor neighborhood, shopping to assure that each subdistrict within ized significant changes. The amount and/or employment districts. Chica- the Central Area functions well and of residential and commercial growth go has a well defined series of north- reinforces the character of Chicago’s has greatly changed the built environ- south signature streets that have seen great public spaces, corridors and ment in those communities. These public and private investment over neighborhoods. areas of growth and expansion are the past decade. Near future investments should enhance the function Figure 3-1: Urban Design Focus Areas and Signature Streets and character of key east-west streets around which high levels of private investment are occurring. Clybourn South As the Central Area continues to Division Street evolve into a world-class area to live, work, and play, it is critical to balance development and redevelopment with public open spaces and waterfront amenities. Investments in urban design projects are needed not only to support new private sector investments, but also to balance the provision of open space and public amenities to elevate the quality of life. Wolf Point Randolph Street The Central Area is renowned for its world-famous collection of signature Kennedy buildings. As opportunities arise for a Corridor new generation of signature buildings to be built in the Central Area, it is Congress Parkway important to encourage and accom- Franklin modate these developments. In con- Point junction, opportunities to incorporate open space, plazas, pedestrian ame-

Roosevelt Rd nities, and access to waterfront and transit should be considered.

Detailed findings, illustrations, and recommendations for the Signature McCormick Place Streets and Focus Areas are provided in Chapter 4, which addresses the 12 planning subdistricts in detail.

Cermak Rd Details of the Urban Design, Water- front and Open Space projects are provided on the following pages.

Chicago Central Area ACTION Plan Chapter 3: Urban Design, Waterfront & Open Space Page 3-7 August 2009

Urban Design Recommendations Conceptual Principles for The Downtown Core (zoned DC) are areas in which tall and mid-rise Building Heights functions as the region’s economic buildings are appropriate. The Near core. Very tall buildings are appropri- South and Near West communities in As the Central Area continues to grow ate in the Downtown Core, along the particular have benefitted from high and redevelop, allowable building Chicago River, and surrounding Grant levels of new development in recent heights and appropriate densities are Conceptual PrinciplesPark to take for advantage Height of existing in- years, and, as a result, present new op- changing, and new opportunities for frastructure, create a dense, dynamic, portunities to create dynamic, pedes- signature buildings should be encour- urban area and enhance the beautiful trian-oriented communities focused aged. In general, the existing zoning Chicago skyline. around high-quality streets and public classifications are appropriate and amenities. The Near North Side is an should be used to guide placement, The areas around the “Downtown established mixed-use/residential area density, mass, bulk, and height in the Division Streetwall District Core” are mixed-use areas that are and new developments should be of Central Area. becoming highly residential in use. appropriate height to reinforce exist- These “Transition Zones” (zoned DX) ing development.

ConceptualFigure 3-2: Principles Conceptual Principles for Heightfor Building Heights Chicago Streetwall District Beyond the Transition Zones and Downtown Core are areas where existing zoning should be used to guide

River development. These “Neighborhood Streetwall District Appropriate” height areas reflect the Division Streetwall District District LaSalle Streetwall more residential character of these communities, which include neighborhoods such as Chinatown, West Loop, parts of Near North and Near South. Madison Streetwall District Chicago Streetwall District It is important to guide development along key corridors including Division Grant Park Streetwall District River Congress/Eisenhower Streetwall District Street, Chicago Avenue, Madison Streetwall District Street, Congress Parkway/Eisenhow- LaSalle Streetwall District LaSalle Streetwall er Expressway, Roosevelt Road, Cer- mak Avenue, Michigan Avenue, and the Chicago River, and to encourage Madison Streetwall District Roosevelt Streetwall District appropriate development in all places in between. Buildings along these streets should be oriented to face the Grant Park Streetwall District Congress/Eisenhower Streetwall District streets and enhance the ground-level experience for pedestrians.

In all cases, clear public benefits, such Michigan Streetwall District Streetwall Michigan as public open space, increased side- Roosevelt Streetwall District walk widths, and decreased shadows Cermak/McCormick Streetwall District on public parks must be obtained for buildings exceeding the recommend- ed maximum building heights.

Michigan Streetwall District Streetwall Michigan Downtown Core Density, Unrestricted Height Similar to Downtown Core with Restrictions on Placement and Density Cermak/McCormick Streetwall District Transition Zone, Tall and Mid-rise Buildings Neighborhood Appropriate Height Streetwall District, Height and Mass of Buildings Should Be Oriented to Highlighted Streets

Downtown Core Density, Unrestricted Height Similar to Downtown Core with Restrictions on Placement and Density Chicago CentralTransition Area Zone, ACTION Tall and Mid-rise Plan Buildings Neighborhood Appropriate Height Streetwall District, Height and Mass of Buildings Should Be Oriented to Highlighted Streets Page 3-8 Chapter 3: Urban Design, Waterfront & Open Space August 2009

Urban Design, Waterfront and Open Space projects

Figure 3-3: Urban Design, Waterfront, and Open Space

Central Area Project Key 1. Division Streetscape 2. North Branch Riverfront Improvements 3. Lakefront Trail Expansion 4. Fort Dearborn Park 5. Illinois and Grand Streetscape 6. Lakefront Trail Bridge 7. Gateway Harbor 8. DuSable Park 9. Main Branch Riverfront Improvements 10. East Randolph Streetscape 11. Randolph Lighting Enhancements 12. Grant Park Improvements North 13. Michigan Lighting Enhancements 14. LaSalle Lighting Enhancements 15. Wacker Lighting Enhancements 16. West Loop/Union Station Area Streetscape 17. Kennedy Corridor Enhancements 18. Kennedy Cap 19. Congress Lighting Enhancements 20. Congress Streetscape 21. Grant Park Railscape 22. Pedestrian Connection at Queen’s Landing 23. South Branch Riverfront Improvements 24. Northerly Island Park Improvements 25. Ping Tom Park Phase II

Chicago Central Area ACTION Plan Chapter 3: Urban Design, Waterfront & Open Space Page 3-9 August 2009

Urban Design, Waterfront and Open Space PROJECTS Urban Design Streetscape Improvements Project Description: Chicago has a series • East Randolph: Michigan to Lake of prominent north/south streets within Shore Drive (2,500 lf) = $8,750,000 the Central Area that have recently ben- • Congress Pkwy: Michigan Ave. to efited from streetscape upgrades. To Wells St. (2,545 lf) = $19,000,000 complement these, improvements are • Grand & Illinois: Michigan Ave. to Lake proposed for east/west streets to enhance Shore Drive (5,500 lf) = $19,000,000 motorist and pedestrian mobility and to • Division: Lake Shore Drive to Goose anchor investment in surrounding areas. Island (6,000 lf) = $21,000,000 Improvements should incorporate envi- • West Loop/Union Station Area: ronmentally-friendly design elements and between Jackson and Washington materials from the City’s “Green Alleys (3,300lf) =$33,000,000 and Streets” initiative and from the Green Implementation Goal: 2008-2016 Urban Design Task Force. Implementation Responsibility: CDOT Cost Estimate: Varies, see above Image 3-13: Central Area streetscape investments will focus on signature east- west corridors.

Lighting Enhancements Project Description: A program of struc- Implementation Goal: 2008-2016 tural lighting improvements along Michi- gan Avenue has been developed by Schul- Implementation Responsibility: CDOT, er Shook. DZP, DOE Michigan should serve as the pilot loca- Cost Estimate: $ 1,000,000 tion, followed by Congress, Wacker, La- Salle and Randolph. A grant or loan program should be established to facilitate private sector implementation. Lighting improvement guidelines should include recommendations from the “Lights Out Chicago” program, which saves migratory birds, saves energy, and decreases mainte- nance costs.

Image 3-14: The lighting plan for Michi- gan Avenue should be emulated in other key corridors such as LaSalle and Ran- dolph. Kennedy Corridor Enhancements & Cap Project Description: Two complementary a signature amenity around which new improvements that will improve connec- office and residential development may tions between the Central Loop and the be focused. This urban greenway would West Loop. improve air quality and reduce noise pollution. The short-term improvements include traffic calming elements, landscaping, Implementation Goal: and screening of the embankments to en- • Enhancements =2008-2012 hance pedestrian mobility. This improve- • Kennedy Cap = 2016-2020 ment should supplement IDOT’s standard Implementation Responsibility: CDOT highway improvements. Cost Estimates: The long-term option involves creating new parkland over the Kennedy Express- • Enhancements = $10,000,000 way between Monroe and Washington • Kennedy Cap = $500,000,000 Streets. This improvement would provide Image 3-15: A cap over the Kennedy Ex- pressway is a long-term option for con- necting the West Loop and the Near West.

Chicago Central Area ACTION Plan Page 3-10 Chapter 3: Urban Design, Waterfront & Open Space August 2009

Urban Design, Waterfront and Open Space PROJECTS Waterfront Lakefront Trail Expansion Project Description: The Lakefront Trail linois Department of Transportation at the between North Ave. and Navy Pier will be Oak St. curve and Chicago Ave. expanded by up to 200 ft. Introduce land- • Navy Pier to Oak St. Beach scaping to create parkland and expanded (3,300 lf) = $85,800,000 pedestrian and bicycle paths between the • Oak St. Beach to North Ave. Beach city and the Lakefront. (3,500 lf) = $91,000,000 A feasibility study should be conducted. Implementation Goal: 2012-2016 This study would address a range of is- Implementation Responsibility: CDOT, sues including environmental, regulatory DZP, CPD processes, design and construction alter- natives and public support of the project. Cost Estimate: $177,000,000 This project should be undertaken in con- junction with the North Lake Shore Drive improvements planned by the Chicago Image 3-16: Additional open space will Department of Transportation and the Il- improve this currently uninviting seg- ment of the Lakefront.

Gateway Harbor Project Description: This signature boat Implementation Goal: 2008-2012 dock facility will be created downtown Implementation Responsibility: CPD, along the southern edge of Navy Pier at City the inlet of the Chicago River. Utilize the existing “Dime Pier” area for a new facility Cost Estimate: $30,000,000 to accommodate boats of various sizes.

Image 3-17: Gateway Harbor will expand opportunities for boating in the Central Area.

Chicago River Management Entity Project Description: In order to imple- • Monitoring public access to the river ment the riverfront projects a manage- • Promoting events and activities that ment entity must be identified, funded celebrate use of the river and empowered to develop and manage Implementation Goal: 2008-2012 the improvements. Such an entity should evolve from the private sector with public Implementation Responsibility: Private & sector support. Key activities include: Non-Profit • Raising funds for land and easement Cost Estimate: $250,000 acquisitions in the river corridor • Raising capital for public use and access improvements to the river • Working with government agencies, land owners, non-profits and private corporations to promote and ensure the quality of the river corridor Image 3-18: A management entity will coordinate improvements and mainte- nance.

Chicago Central Area ACTION Plan Chapter 3: Urban Design, Waterfront & Open Space Page 3-11 August 2009

Urban Design, Waterfront and Open Space PROJECTS

Main Branch Riverfront– Lake Shore Drive to Franklin Project Description: A continuous multi- The City has identified $1million in its Cap- level, but mostly street level, riverwalk at ital Improvement Plan for design at the the north side of the Chicago River with Wacker Drive Riverwalk, and $200,000 under-bridge connections at Michigan for gateway canopy and repairs (Lake Avenue and Lake Shore Drive to DuSable Shore Drive and the river) Park. Establish clearly identified on-street Implementation Goal: Phase 1 2008- connections west of Michigan Avenue 2012; Phase 2 2012-2016 and east of Wells Street ($12,000,000). Implementation Responsibility: MWRD, Develop a dock level riverwalk at the CDOT, DZP south side of the Chicago River with under bridge and vertical connections for con- Cost Estimate: $92,000,000 tinuous water access. Develop “market,” “civic” and “arcade” zones per recent City plans to activate all levels of riverwalk ($80,000,000). Image 3-19: The Main Branch will include underbridge connections for pedestrians.

North Branch Riverfront – Lake to Halsted Project Description: This part of the Riv- • East bank, establish a riverwalk from erwalk has several components, which River Village to the North Ave. Turn- include: ing Basin ($15,000,000) • ADA Accessible Boatyard • Improve access to east bank between ($3,5000,000) North and Division ($12,000,000) • Off-river connection from Kinzie Park • Landscape/Screen the west side river- to Fulton House riverwalk ($500,000) bank from Grand Ave. to North Ave. • Under-bridge connection on east bank Turning Basin ($10,000,000) at Kinzie St. to connect to future Wolf Implementation Goal: 2012-2016 Point development.($5,000,000) Implementation Responsibility: CDWM, • West bank, establish a riverwalk, In- CDOT, DZP corporate a park at street level with future development ($20,000,000) Cost Estimate: $75,000,000 • On-river path to connect lower level walks south of Grand Ave. to meet Erie Park ($15,000,000) Image 3-20: The North Branch will become accessible for River North residents.

South Branch Riverfront– Lake to Harrison Project Description: This part of the Riv- Implementation Goal: 2012-2016 erwalk has several components, which Implementation Responsibility: CDWM, include: CDOT, DZP • Create a contiguous street level riverwalk with improved connections and Cost Estimate: $15,000,000 access to larger plazas ($5,000,000) • Create a dock level riverwalk on the east side of the River at Van Buren Street south to Harrison Street. Im- prove adjacent green space and introduce a vertical connection near Van Buren Street ($10,000,000)

Image 3-21: The South Branch Down- town will primarily maintain street-level plazas and pedestrian paths.

Chicago Central Area ACTION Plan Page 3-12 Chapter 3: Urban Design, Waterfront & Open Space August 2009

Urban Design, Waterfront and Open Space PROJECTS

Waterfront (continued) South Branch Riverfront – Harrison to Stewart Components in this section include: Stearns Quarry and to future river- • Mid-level riverwalk at Harrison St. walk development at East Canal Ori- south ($15,000,000) gins Park ($500,000) • Vertical connection at Harrison St. • Enhance west side of riverbank, Harri- ($2,000,000) son St. to Cullerton St., with landscape • Pedestrian and vehicular crossing at buffer ($10,000,000) Taylor St. ($25,000,000) Implementation Goal: 2016-2020 • Polk St. Pedestrian crossing Implementation Responsibility: CDWM, ($12,000,000) CDOT, DZP • Underbridge connections Roosevelt and 18th St. ($500,000) Cost Estimate: $75,000,000 • Public park as part of Franklin Point development ($10,000,000) • At south end of Ping Tom Park, des- ignate/identify on-street connections Image 3-22: Investments along this section of the Riverfront will connect nu- via Princeton and Archer Avenues to merous open space improvements. Open Space Northerly Island Park Improvements Project Description: Create a state-of-the- Implementation Goal: 2008-2012 art park designed around environmental Implementation Responsibility: CPD conservation/sustainable design principles to serve as an outdoor museum for Cost Estimate: $75,000,000 conservation. Northerly Island is partially complete, but there are several aspects of this project that are unfinished. The following principles/projects should be in- corporated as the island is developed: • Reuse of existing structures • Integration of sustainable design principles • Creation of a wildlife/nature preserve Promotion of environmental technologies to create a self-sufficient site to be used as Image 3-23: Northerly Island will be an educational tool transformed into a park built around conservation and sustainability principles.

Grant Park Improvements North Project Description: While the exact Implementation Goal: 2008-2012 scope of this project has not yet been Implementation Responsibility: CPD determined, the project will generally include reconstruction of the obsolete Mon- Cost Estimate: $35,000,000 roe Street Garage and other public amenities associated with the garage structure. Open spaces and park facilities potentially affected by this project include Daley Bi- centennial Plaza/Fieldhouse, Cancer Sur- vivors Garden and “Peanut Park.”

Image 3-24: Existing Gardens in North Grant Park.

Chicago Central Area ACTION Plan Chapter 3: Urban Design, Waterfront & Open Space Page 3-13 August 2009

Urban Design, Waterfront and Open Space PROJECTS

Ping Tom Phase II Project Description: Develop Phase 2 of • A: Site development - $15,000,000 Ping Tom Park. Expand the existing 12-acre • B: Railway underpass - $5,000,000 public urban park located at 19th Street • C: Multi-purpose center - $15,000,000 and the South Branch of the Chicago Riv- • D: Boathouse - $3,000,000 er. In 2002, the Chicago Park District ac- Implementation Goal: A-B 2008-2012, C- quired 5 additional acres on the northeast D 2012-2016 side of the park. A former industrial site, or brownfield, the land will be cleaned up Implementation Responsibility: CPD, and redeveloped into a spacious commu- DZP, CDOT, Canadian National RR nity park with ball and soccer fields, a field Cost Estimate: $38,000,000 house, and a swimming pool. When completed, Ping Tom Memorial Park will be one of the largest neighborhood parks in Chicago. Phase 2 focuses on development of active recreational Image 3-25: The project will expand upon the latest addition to the Central uses. Improvements include: Area’s great public spaces.

DuSable Park Project Description: A park at the inlet tive settler and founding father of Chica- of the Chicago River at Lake Michigan to go. The site currently contains 3.5 acres commemorate Chicago’s founding pio- of undeveloped land. The Park was origi- neer. The public-private agreement with nally announced in 1987 by then Mayor the developer of The Spire will assist with Harold Washington. The City of Chicago the development of this park and can has pledged $3 million and the Park Dis- serve as a model for new park develop- trict has also budgeted $3 million for park ments adjacent to major new residential development. projects. A pedestrian/bicycle flyover Implementation Goal: 2008-2012 bridge is planned to improve pedestrian access to this park but has not been in- Implementation Responsibility: CPD, cluded in this cost estimate. CDOT, DZP The preliminary park design is partially Cost Estimate: $17,000,000 the result of a robust community planning process. DuSable Park is named for Jean Baptiste Pointe DuSable, the first non-na- Image 3-26: This park at the inlet of the Chicago River will be dedicated to the first non-native settler of Chicago.

Lakefront Trail Bridge Project Description: Currently the Lake- Implementation Goal: 2012-2016 front Trail uses the same bridge over the Implementation Responsibility: DZP Chicago River as Lake Shore Drive. A new pedestrian/bicycle bridge is proposed to Cost Estimate: $25,000,000 improve this part of the Trail. This is often referred to as a flyover. The new bridge will reduce conflicts between autos, pedestrians and bicyclists. Potential exists for combining creation of this bridge with the Spire and DuSable Park.

Image 3-27: The new bridge will separate bicycle and pedestrian traffic from the existing street crossing.

Chicago Central Area ACTION Plan Page 3-14 Chapter 3: Urban Design, Waterfront & Open Space August 2009

Urban Design, Waterfront and Open Space projects

Open Space (continued) Fort Dearborn Park Project Description: The City is will part- Implementation Goal: 2016-2020 ner with a private developer to redevelop Implementation Responsibility: DZP the square block site currently occupied by the Fort Dearborn Post Office. Part of Cost Estimate: $10,000,000 (expected the redevelopment will include the con- public contribution) struction of a new public open space. This open space will serve the growing residential population of River North.

Image 3-28: A “pocket park” integrated into this redevelopment site will create public open space in River North, where park space is limited.

Railscape Improvements Project Description: Screen the railroad Implementation Goal: 2012-2016 throughout Grant Park and south to Mu- Implementation Responsibility: RTA, seum Place. The open railroad trench Metra, DZP, CPD could be improved by utilizing a “green A screen” over the tracks. Explore potential Cost Estimate: $32,6000,000 to reduce the former rail service yard area (as depicted in red) generally known as B the pennant lot. C There are three major sections to be improved: • Area A: Grant Park Central (316,000 sf) = $7,900,000 • Area B: Grant Park South Image 3-29: The rail right-of-way that cuts (688,000 sf) = $17,200,000 through Grant Park will be improved • Area C: Central Station Area with “green screening.” (300,000 sf) = $7,500,000

Pedestrian Connection at Queen’s Landing Project Description: The improvement of Implementation Goal: 2008-2012 a pedestrian connection between Grant Implementation Responsibility: CDOT Park at Buckingham Fountain and the Lakefront across Lake Shore Drive is a key Cost Estimate: $500,000 component of the Grant Park Framework Plan. Includes improvements to cross- walks and signage. Queen’s Landing was named after the 1959 visit by Queen Elizabeth II when she came ashore at that spot.

Image 3-30: The natural pedestrian connection from the Lakefront to Bucking- ham Fountain through Grant Park will be restored.

Chicago Central Area ACTION Plan 2008-2011

Chapter 3: Urban Design, Waterfront & Open Space Page 3-15 August 2009

Phasing Plan Based upon a combination of the Task Force ratings and the current status of projects, the draft implementation timeline that follows is provided for consideration:

UrbanTable 3-1: Design 2008-2012 & Open Projects Space Project/Initiative Figure 3-4: 2008-2012 Urban Design, Northerly Island Park Improvements $75,000,000 Waterfront, and Open Space Projects Main Branch Riverfront (Phase I) $46,000,000 Grant Park Improvements North 2012-2015 $35,000,000 GatewayTransportation Harbor Project/Initiative Cos$30,000,000t Ping Tom Phase II (Site Dev./Railway Underpass) $20,000,000 Congress Parkway Streetscape $19,000,000 Grand & Illinois Streetscape $19,000,000 DuSable Park $17,000,000 Kennedy Corridor Enhancements $10,000,000 East Randolph Streetscape $8,750,000 Lighting Enhancements (Michigan, Congress & Wacker) $600,000 Pedestrian Connection at Queen’s Landing $500,000 Chicago River Management Entity $250,000

Subtotal (2008-2012)Total $281,100,000 1. Grand & Illinois Streetscape 2. Gateway Harbor 3. DuSable Park All figures based on 2007 $ amounts. 4. Main Branch Riverfront * totals and averages based on highest estimate 5. Lighting Enhancements Wacker 6. East Randolph Streetscape 7. Kennedy Corridor Enhancements 8.Grant Park North 9. Lighting Enhancements Michigan 10. Lighting Enhancements Congress 11. Congress Streetscape 12. Queens Landing Subtotal* $7.83B 13. Ping Tom Phase II 14. Northerly Island Park TableUrban 3-2: Design 2012-2016 & Open Projects Space Project/Initiative Figure 3-5: 2012-2016 Urban Design, Lakefront Trail Expansion $177,000,000 Waterfront, and Open Space Projects North Branch Riverfront (River North) $75,000,000 Main Branch Riverfront (Phase II) $46,000,000 West Loop/Union Station Area Streetscape $33,000,000 Lakefront Trail Bridge $25,000,000 Division Streetscape $21,000,000 Ping Tom Phase II (Multi-Purpose Center/Boathouse) $18,000,000 Grant Park South Railscape $17,200,000 South Branch Riverfront (Downtown) $15,000,000 Grant Park Central Railscape $7,900,000 Central Station Area Railscape $7,500,000 Lighting Enhancements (LaSalle & Randolph) $400,000 Subtotal (2012-2016)Total $443,000,000

All figures based on 2007 $ amounts. Total* $443M 14. Division Streetscape TOTAL $8.27B 15. Lakefront Trail 16. North Branch Riverfront * totals and averages based on highest estimate 17. Lakefront Trail Bridge 18. Main Branch Riverfront 19. Lighting Enhancements Randolph 20. Lighting Enhancements LaSalle 21. West Loop Streetscape 22. South Branch Riverfront 23. Station Area Railscape 24. Central Railscape 25. South Railscape 26. Ping Tom

Chicago Central Area ACTION Plan Phase 3 2016-2019 Page 3-16 Chapter 3: Urban Design, Waterfront & Open Space August 2009

Phasing Plan

Table 3-3: 2016-2020 Projects Figure 3-6: 2016-2020 Urban Design, Urban Design & Open Space Project/Initiative Waterfront, and Open Space Projects Kennedy Cap $500,000,000 South Branch Riverfront (River South) $75,000,000 Fort Dearborn Park $10,000,000 Subtotal (‑-2020)Total $585,000,000

All figures based on 2007 $ amounts.

* totals and averages based on highest estimate

Year Totals Average Annual TOTAL COST 2008-2011 $1,309,100,000 $5.579B $1.4B 2012-2015 $8.268B $2.1B 2016-2019 $6.14B $1.5B GRAND TOTAL $19.99 B

27. Ft. Dearborn Park 28. Kennedy Cap 29. South Branch Riverfront

Chicago Central Area ACTION Plan