2

This project was completed under a grant to the Delta Institute from the U.S. Environ- mental Protection Agency’s Great Lakes National Program Office.

Project Team

The Delta Institute 312 554 0900 (p) 53 West Jackson Boulevard 312 554 0193 (f) Suite 230 www.delta-institute.org Chicago, IL 60604

Grand Calumet Task Force 219 938 1400 (p) 6060 Miller Avenue www.grandcalriver.org Gary, IN 46403

Great Cities Urban Data Visualization 312 413 5779 (p) Laboratory www.uic.edu/cuppa/udv University of Illinois–Chicago 412 South Peoria Street M/C 350 Chicago, IL 60607

Acknowledgments

The Illinois-Indiana Sea Grant, through Martin Jaffe at the University of Illinois–Chicago, provided helpful technical assistance on this project. The Gary Sanitary District gener- ously provided GIS data; any errors or omissions are strictly those of the authors. Dan Repay and others at the Lake County Auditor’s Office were likewise very generous in processing a special data request and providing other assistance. Officials at U.S. Steel were gracious in offering their perspectives and allowing access to portions of the Gary Works property. Alex da Silva and Malini Goel at the Indiana Department of Environ- mental Management provided support, answered many questions, and organized a ca- noe trip on the Grand Calumet. Nancy Kelly of the Grand Cal Task Force deserves many thanks for organizing meetings with Horace Mann neighborhood residents. Dor- reen Carey and David Wright with the City of Gary, finally, provided helpful advice and steering throughout the process.

Prepared by Jesse Elam (DI) • T.J. Holsen (DI) • Kevin Lawler (DI) Brinda Kannan (UDV) • Xin Li (UDV) December 2004

the delta institute /GARY RIVERFRONT REVIVAL PLAN/ 3

Table of Contents Section Page

Introduction ...... 1 ...... 4

Principles and objectives of the Gary Riverfront Revival Plan...... 2 ...... 7

Boat launch at Bridge Street ...... 3 ...... 9

Ambridge Park enhancement...... 4 ...... 15

Conversion of C-lot to park...... 5 ...... 20

The Grand Calumet River itself ...... 6 ...... 28

Redeveloping the Horace Mann community...... 7 ...... 33

Conclusion ...... 8 ...... 41

References...... 9 ...... 42

Summary of next steps...... 10 ...... 45

Figures ...... 47

the delta institute /GARY RIVERFRONT REVIVAL PLAN/ 4

1.0 Introduction tial communities in Gary to ensure the degradation of the past is not repeated. 1.1 Origins. The Gary Riverfront Re- Seeking the best ways to open Gary vival emerged in Fall 2002 as a partner- to the river, and to maximize the eco- ship between the Delta Institute, the City nomic and social benefits of the clean-up, of Gary, and the Grand Cal Task Force. this planning process sought to incorpo- At that time, the U.S. Steel Corporation rate the input of residents, government was removing contaminated sediments officials, and the business community. from a five-mile stretch of the Grand The Delta Institute and the Grand Cal Calumet River through Gary as part of a Task Force organized four meetings with consent decree and corrective action residents in the Horace Mann neighbor- agreement with the U.S. Environmental hood and met several times with U.S. Protection Agency (EPA). The Delta In- Steel officials and the Gary Chamber of stitute—a non-profit organization whose Commerce. The City of Gary Depart- work promotes community and economic ments of Planning, Environmental Affairs, development and environmental quality in Community Development, and Economic the Great Lakes region—and the Grand Development were instrumental in devel- Cal Task Force—a non-profit group that oping this plan, as was the Planning and works to enhance environmental and Development Council. State and federal economic vitality in communities along agencies, including the Indiana Depart- the river—approached the City of Gary to ments of Environmental Management and discuss future plans for the river. The op- Natural Resources, the U.S. Fish and portunities arising from the clean-up of Wildlife Service, and the U.S. Environ- the East Branch were apparent, and a mental Protection Agency, also provided partnership was born. Through a grant valuable input. from the EPA, the partners embarked on a participatory process to create a plan 1.3 Economic value of clean-up on for redevelopment along the cleaned-up the East Branch. Early in the planning stretch of the river in Gary (Figure A). process, the Delta Institute retained an economist from the University of Illi- 1.2 Input and collaboration. The nois–Chicago to estimate the economic partners designed the Gary Riverfront benefits of cleaning up the East Branch. Revival as a two-step process, first to The analysis, available on the internet at highlight the benefits that could arise from www.delta-institute.org, showed that the rehabilitating the river and, second, to polluted river lowered the value of nearby create a conceptual plan for redevelop- residential property by a significant mar- ment along the river corridor, looking gin. Cleaning-up the river, the study con- carefully for opportunities to reestablish a cluded, could increase home values by relationship between the river and those almost 30 percent (McMillen 2003). This living and working in Gary. For genera- estimate is conservative, since it consid- tions the Grand Calumet has been dan- ers only the removal of the river’s nega- gerously contaminated, a detriment to tive economic impact. They do not take avoid rather than treasure. Newly into account the possibility that the river cleaned-up, the Grand Cal needs the will be transformed into a community as- stewardship of the business and residen- set over time, so that property near the river trades at a premium relative to other

the delta institute /GARY RIVERFRONT REVIVAL PLAN/ 5 locations. The study also suggests that ally deteriorating boat launch. The such benefits could extend to the entire planned Gary Green Link trail would run city if redevelopment efforts are under- near to the launch. The plan recommends taken that protect the river ecosystem, grabbing the opportunity, suggesting meet community needs, and foster a measures to stabilize and improve the healthy economy. launch, as well as a management strat- egy to ensure its continuing value and 1.4 Project setting. Sediments were recreational connection its surroundings removed from the East Branch between (Section 3). The boat launch is aimed at the Conrail trestle (not shown in Figure A) serving all residents of Gary and the re- and the eastern end of open water on gion. U.S. Steel property, from which point the Enhancements to Ambridge Park river runs underground to join the (Section 4) are geared more toward the Marquette Lagoons (not shown in Figure Horace Mann neighborhood. Erosion is A). This stretch lies wholly within the City severe along the river here, and the river of Gary and determines the east-west bank area is scruffy. The park is underu- extent of the project area. To the south, tilized, partly because its recreational fa- the boundary of the immediate project cilities have not changed with the popula- area was taken to be Fifth Avenue, fol- tion. This plan proposes improvements lowing the Delta Institute’s economic aimed at preserving the park’s centrality study (McMillen 2003), as a reasonable in the neighborhood and tying it with the area of influence from the river. proposed South Shore redevelopment to The land on the north side of the the east as well as, again, the Gary Grand Calumet through the project area Green Link (Figure A). is a mix of industrial property, right of way Converting the C-lot, a former U.S. for I-90, and holdings by the Indiana De- Steel parking lot, to a park and cultural partment of Natural Resources (Figure site is meant to connect the river and D). To the south, the pattern is somewhat Gary’s most famous industry to downtown different. The primary use is residential (Section 5). This project, too, would join over about half the stretch (the Horace with downtown reinvestment (such as the Mann or Ambridge Mann neighborhood), Steel Yard stadium and streetscape im- although the river is buffered through provements) and the trailhead of the Gary much of that by a strip of undeveloped Green Link. Establishing the park entails land owned by the City of Gary. Industrial drawing a connection through the set of uses take up essentially the rest of the train and highway overpasses at the property immediately adjoining the river northern edge of downtown. on the south. These sites are connected by the water flowing past them, but they are not 1.5 Project overview. This plan deals conceptualized as related. Joining them with three main sites along the river (Fig- in perception into sites along a trail can ure A), chosen because of specific op- be readily accomplished by the use of a portunities they present. On the far west, minimum number of intrinsically mean- there is a low area at the end of Bridge ingful and repeated design elements. This Street that U.S. Steel cleared and used plan proposes one simple device: the re- as a staging area for its dredging opera- curring use of a seawall — to stop ero- tion. It includes a rough-hewn and gradu- sion along the bank — that mimics the

the delta institute /GARY RIVERFRONT REVIVAL PLAN/ 6 existing rubble wall built several decades ago along U.S. Steel property. The con- cept of sites linked by a water trail is ex- panded in Section 6. The eastern and western portions of the Horace Mann neighborhood are in decline. While the eastern end has a re- development planned, the western end does not. This plan seeks to elaborate an employer assisted housing strategy that can cover the western part of Horace Mann and be generalizable to other parts of the city (Section 7).

the delta institute /GARY RIVERFRONT REVIVAL PLAN/ 7

2.0 Principles and covered. Moreover, it should seek to tie in with other plans’ recom- objectives of the Gary mendations and offer support to Riverfront Revival Plan them.

2.1 Contamination has long had a dark 2.6 This plan should be strategic in fo- hold on the Grand Calumet River. cus, concentrate in detail on par- U.S. Steel’s clean-up of the river is ticular sites and projects, and offer an opportunity to unmask and specific recommendations for im- celebrate its value. plementation. More general or larger issues will be dealt with 2.2 The landscape along the east-west where they intersect with the geo- river axis should be cultivated as a graphic area under consideration. mosaic of uses within a unity of The study area is, by necessity, design. At the same time, con- defined by proximity to the remedi- ceptual connections should be ated stretch of the Grand Calumet established north to the U.S. Steel River. Gary Works and Lake Michigan and south through the city. 2.7 The costs of investing in the pro- jects recommended in this plan 2.3 In residential and recreational set- should not be borne by the City of tings, the river can be made more Gary alone. Outside sources of valuable both in active use and as funding should be identified, as a backdrop. The river should be well as contributions by parties rendered more visible to the com- with a stake in the recommenda- munity, with recreational facilities tions. Overall cost is to be mini- enhanced or built from scratch, mized by judicious selection of and specific access points to the projects. river established. 2.8 Residential redevelopment is a 2.4 Underutilized land along the river high priority in the Horace Mann should, where sensible, be made community, the northern part of publicly accessible and given a which adjoins the river. Compre- recreational use. This need not hensive revitalization plans have necessarily impair the land’s ability been completed for Horace Mann to accommodate other uses. In the in the recent past, and this plan industrial section on the east end strives to avoid duplication. The of the planning area, especially, recommendation to rebuild is obvi- the recreational worth of the river ous, but this plan does not extend and the adjoining land must be in- into predevelopment activities. tegrated with its value to industry. What this plan can do, however, is offer suggestions for taking ad- 2.5 Many related planning efforts have vantage of policy and community been undertaken in Gary; others assets to increase homeowner- are ongoing. This plan should ship. avoid retreading ground already

the delta institute /GARY RIVERFRONT REVIVAL PLAN/ 8

2.9 This plan eagerly seeks the part- nership of the business commu- nity. Its creation of value for Gary through employment opportunities and landholdings is a powerful strength to draw upon, and the benefits of the plan accrue to busi- ness as well.

the delta institute /GARY RIVERFRONT REVIVAL PLAN/ 9

3.1 Boat launch at Bridge wall of the same material proposed for the Ambridge Park enhancement (Section Street 4 below), which itself mimics the existing revetment of hot-poured slag along the This semi-improved facility sits in the U.S. Steel property, would bring a meas- bottomland below road grade immediately ure of visual unity to the three sites off Bridge Street at the river. Used as a whether seen from the river or from land. staging area during U.S. Steel’s dredging operation, the launch area is a no-frills, 3.2.2 The gravel boat ramp should be gravel-surfaced space, but it has a func- replaced with a concrete slab for longer tional boat launch. A combined sewer wear, better traction, and protection outfall lies immediately west of the boat against erosion. Thereafter the shoreline ramp and Gary Sanitary District has a would need little maintenance. An en- small, fenced-off outbuilding on the site. trance ramp of packed dirt surfaced with Next to the outbuilding there is a steel gravel presently leads from Bridge Street tower, with a small footprint, of unknown down to the launch area. The short-term use and ownership. The existing launch stability of the entrance ramp probably sits on about 2.8 acres of land in public needs to be examined and the ramp, if ownership (see below, Section 3.5.2). necessary, shored up. We recommend proceeding with the improvement of the boat launch in two major phases: initial stabilization and later Figure 1: River bank at Boat Launch site enhancement to support additional rec- reational use. Please refer to Section 6 for a discussion of the safety of river use.

3.2 Initial stabilization

The launch should be turned over to public use and advertised as such. Doing so would provide the direct, unambiguous access to the river absent in Gary. Two or possibly three improvements will still be needed to transform a temporary facility into a permanent amenity:

3.2.1 The gravel river bank will need to be protected from erosion (Figure 1). Four ancillary actions should be taken This could be accomplished either by to “launch the launch” effectively: grading down and revegetating the bank or by building a retaining wall. Because 3.2.3 The remaining signs posting the subsurface material is layered with rules for workers onsite and warning liners that would be exposed during against trespassing should be removed. grading, a retaining wall is the better ap- A sign proclaiming the boat launch a pub- proach. Building a retaining wall also pro- lic access point, and giving it a name vides an opportunity to clinch design con- (e.g., “Grand Calumet River — Bridge tinuity along the river. Constructing the Street Boat Launch”), should be installed.

the delta institute /GARY RIVERFRONT REVIVAL PLAN/ 10

3.2.4 Directional signs will be needed to advertise the launch. Obvious locations 3.3 Enhancement and support facili- are the intersections of Bridge Street and ties Fourth and Fifth Avenues, Clark Street and Fifth Avenue, and Buchanan Street Improving upon the initial stabilization and Fourth Avenue. of the launch area, a boat dock could be built and the launch area expanded into 3.2.5 Information about fish consump- the adjoining bottomland to include sup- tion and the safety of water contact must porting uses like a picnic pavilion and be posted at the launch area. walking trails. The sketch site plan in Fig- ure B gives an indication of how the area 3.2.6 Currently existing signs along might appear. The setting is pleasant and the river should be reconsidered. They fairly bucolic in spite of the expressway give the impression, as one observer put across the river, while the eastern view it, that the Grand Cal is the River Styx, off the bridge is a fine, accessible vista of treating the water as if it were a direct the wide Grand Calumet flood plain. passage to the underworld (Figure 2). To The sketch site plan shows one-way meet the community-serving goals of the internal traffic circulation and a two-way river clean-up, the message of the signs entrance–exit. Five parking spaces are needs to balance frankness and opti- provided for passenger cars, which is in mism, caution and anxiety. The Grand line with the Department of Natural Re- Cal Task Force and the Indiana Depart- sources’ normal practice at stream ac- ment of Environmental Management col- cess points, as well as three spaces for laborated in putting up one set of signs; vehicles with trailers. The space nearest the Gary Sanitary District put up another the path perpendicular to the ramp would set. A very good suggestion from one be used for handicap parking. An infor- closely involved with the Task Force was mation kiosk is placed directly beside the to hold a sign-removal ceremony to cele- ramp to post the necessary warnings. brate the clean-up. Besides boating, users can enjoy the river at this park through several outlets. The platform juts slightly into and over the river so that one can gaze into the water from directly above. The grass steps are an arrangement of terraces, scaled to a human stride, leading down to the river. The viewing plaza uses a small amount of special paving, interlocking with sectors of turf, to create a secondary focus away from the launch and entrance area. The plaza is set in a semi-hidden grove and rewards the short walk to reach it. We should note that the site is laid out with thinly spaced trees and low shrubs to ease fears (and reduce the chances) that the park, in its cut-off corner of the neigh- Figure 2: Current signage on the East Branch. the delta institute /GARY RIVERFRONT REVIVAL PLAN/ 11 borhood, is unsafe. The trees themselves 3.4.2 Types of boat. The intention of should be mature specimens left from this plan is to provide access not just for land clearing for the park. Lights will need canoes, but for trailerable boats with to be installed, most likely, requiring utility small motors. We expect there are john line extension. boats in Gary that fit the description, but The site plan is, again, an initial we were not able to get data for this plan sketch. The final design may need to be from the Indiana Department of Motor refined to be sure no structures are built Vehicles on the number and type of reg- over the combined sewer line or other- istered boats in Gary. The depth of the wise interfere with the functionality of the water, the low trestles crisscrossing the site. river, the attractiveness of the resource, and local demographics will place a natu- 3.4 Rationale ral limit on the size of the craft and motor found on the Grand Cal. From profiles 3.4.1 Survey data. There are cur- taken following the clean-up, it appears rently no official public access points to that the dredged portion of the river, al- the Grand Calumet within the cleaned-up though considerably deeper in some stretch of the river. The recommendation places, averages 5 to 7 feet in depth (es- to provide the boating access seems ob- timated from Earth Tech 2004: Appendix vious enough, but what supports it? A C), which is sufficient to float small mo- Grand Cal Task Force survey to deter- torized craft. mine preferences for in-water recreation On the other hand, outboard engines for the river showed that about a quarter discharge their exhaust underwater and of respondents in the Gary region would thus leave behind some of the same resi- most prefer to use the Grand Calumet for dues that U.S. Steel spent $50 million to canoeing (GCTF 2000: Appendix D). Al- clean out of the river. With this fact in though fishing and swimming were more mind, it could be appropriate to limit boat- popular — 44 percent and 32 percent, re- ers to electric trolling motors. Residents spectively — fishing for consumption and have repeatedly expressed concern swimming have to be discouraged for the about noise from boats on the river. While time being because of contamination. The it the occasional outboard motor may not survey gives grist for guesswork, though, be more disruptive than the constant because the wider category of “boating” noise of the Toll Road, restricting boaters would have been more appropriate than to trolling motors could also address con- “canoeing,” and secondly because, for cern among residents. some, fishing may entail boating. Neither did the survey measure demand for a 3.5 Management, restoration, and given type of recreation — i.e., whether ownership the respondent currently engages in the activity or would do so given river clean- 3.5.1 Management. Who should up, facility improvements, etc. Nonethe- manage the launch? The most logical less, a public-use launch would support candidate is the Indiana Department of both boating, which probably would be Natural Resources. It already runs a Pub- more popular than the survey seems to lic Access program for rivers and lakes suggest, as well as fishing from the bank. across the state, and so would have the administrative capacity to manage the

the delta institute /GARY RIVERFRONT REVIVAL PLAN/ 12

Bridge Street launch. The Department of hancement phase of this plan, is a jigsaw Natural Resources (DNR) has also been intimately involved in the clean-up of this section of the river. Finally, DNR owns a large swath of property northwest of the boat launch site — the Clark and Pine Nature Preserve and the “Bongi prop- erty,” or Clark and Pine East (Figure D) — and there is the possibility that the de- partment will take ownership of the oxbow land just across the river some years after U.S. Steel restores it (see discussion in Section 3.6.1). Having the launch area under the same ownership or administra- tion as the nature preserve tract would aid in comprehensive management of the area. And if the oxbow is converted to a recreational use, a point of access with parking facilities, information displays, etc. will be needed nearby. Otherwise the oxbow would be isolated, surrounded by water and industrial property. In short, Figure 3. Plat showing property lines in recreational use of the oxbow makes boat launch area much more sense in tandem with the Bridge Street launch area. puzzle of parcels owned by the City of 3.5.2 Restoration. Under the terms of Gary and the Indiana Transportation Fi- its consent decree, U.S. Steel is obligated nance Authority, the successor agency to to restore the launch area to its condition the Indiana Toll Road Commission (Fig- prior to the dredging operation. To re- ure 3). The Department of Natural Re- move the launch facility now is akin to sources need not necessarily take own- digging a hole and filling it in again. This ership of the launch area to manage it, plan’s recommendations clearly would but if it does we recommend that the par- suffer as a result, and Gary residents cels be joined. Either way, agreements would needlessly lose an opportunity. will have to be reached with the Indiana Ecological analysis suggests the launch Transportation Finance Authority and the area is not a high priority restoration site City of Gary. (WCA 2004); the better use for the site is to deliver recreational benefits such as 3.6 Linkages those suggested here. The City of Gary should attempt to intercede immediately 3.6.1 Gary Green Link trail system. with the trustee agencies to retain the end As several route segments in the Gary of Bridge Street as a launch. Green Link trail system depend on a stem running over the span at Bridge Street, 3.5.3 Current ownership. The launch turning the launch facility over to public area, as geographically defined in the en- use and adding a picnic area would also be a point of connection with the Green the delta institute /GARY RIVERFRONT REVIVAL PLAN/ 13

Link plan (Figure C). The Green Link plan cal significance and has acted to oppose also recommended establishment of a its replacement. The bridge provides an canoe launch at the site (WCA 2004: Ap- opportunity for an interpretive site and/or pendix F). All proposed route alternatives landmark designation, although the re- branch off of Bridge Street, coming within placement of the floor system in the a few blocks of the launch site. Although bridge a few years back suggests it will it would be best to have contiguity be- continue in service for some time, dimin- tween the boat launch and the Green ishing the urgency of establishing land- Link, the connection is not highly de- mark status. The bridge is owned by Indi- pendent upon a specific choice of route ana Industrial Investments, a firm that for the trail. leases out the property formerly owned The ground is contested here anyway. by American Bridge Corporation to in- U.S. Steel owns the oxbow land (Figure dustrial tenants. D), intends at present to retain ownership, As the Department of Natural Re- and will soon be carrying out site restora- sources includes the Division of Historic tion according to a workplan approved by Preservation and Archeology, the pres- the trustee agencies.1 Two other actors ence of the bridge may well be another have different visions for the land. The nexus in the agency’s involvement. City of Gary Department of Environmental Affairs is advocating for routing part of the 3.6.3 Rerouting truck traffic. Bridge Green Link through the oxbow, whereas Street sees heavy truck traffic from the the Indiana Department of Natural Re- industrial operations on the old American sources is less than keen about traffic Bridge Company land. While some may through a site it hopes to restore to its like the vitality of recreation intermixed native ecology. This plan does not see with the industrial to-and-fro, most will the two positions as necessarily mutually see the trucks as a problem. The 1995 exclusive. The trail would occupy only a Ambridge Mann Redevelopment Plan re- narrow strip; especially sensitive areas ported that the truck traffic also hampered could be fenced off. residential circulation, especially at the intersection of Bridge Street and Second 3.6.2 Historic bridge. Finally, the Avenue. One solution might be to close bridge beside the launch is apparently Bridge Street to truck traffic and reroute it one of only two remaining spans of the either along the north side of the Toll double cantilever design in America (per- Road, around the exchange cloverleaf, sonal communication from John New- and back into the neighborhood at the gent, retired engineer for American Buchanan Street bridge; or reroute it west Bridge Corporation; June 10, 2004). It along the access road to Clark Road. The has a constituency that values its histori- Bridge Street span would then most logi- cally become a pedestrian (or multi-use) 1 The trustee agencies are authorized by Con- bridge leading over to the oxbow prop- gress to act on behalf of the public by bringing erty. damage claims against parties responsible for pollution. In the Grand Calumet/Indiana Harbor 3.6.4 Stakeholder recommendations. Canal system, they include the U.S. Environ- The Gary Department of Environmental mental Protection Agency, U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Department of Commerce, and the Affairs has raised the idea of an interpre- State of Indiana (Departments of Natural Re- tive trail on a raised walkway through the sources and Environmental Management).

the delta institute /GARY RIVERFRONT REVIVAL PLAN/ 14 wetlands to the east of the launch area (Figure C) for which the launch area can serve as a trailhead and provide parking as well. Should recreational access to the oxbow land via the existing bridge turn out to be problematic, it has been sug- gested that the viewing plaza in the site plan could be a likely location to build a pedestrian bridge across the river.

the delta institute /GARY RIVERFRONT REVIVAL PLAN/ 15

4.0 Ambridge Park tramping around (Figure E). The same construction technique should be used enhancement here as for the wall at the boat launch site. A steel sheet will almost certainly be Ambridge Park is a main community needed to retain the bank, but the wall focal point in the Horace Mann neighbor- should be faced with stone that, again, hood. The park directly abuts the river, mimics the existing hot-poured slag re- but two rows of chainlink fence and a vetment along U.S. Steel property. At the patch of vegetation separate them. Be- eastern and western edges of the park, cause dredging undercut the riverbank, the seawall would slope down gradually the edge of the park is caving into the to the natural bank. The fences that bar river (Figure 3), taking the first fence with access to the river should be removed, as it. Except for a small playground area, the well as the trees dangling over the water park is designed mainly with baseball and with roots half-exposed. basketball in mind. We prefer the seawall alternative to We propose taking action to control restoration of the natural riverbank be- erosion of the riverbank, tie the park more cause it not only indicates the continuity closely to the river, update park facilities, of sites along the river, but also clearly and connect the park to the planned new designs the park with the river in mind. South Shore redevelopment, as well as to The stretch of river along which the wall support lower-intensity leisure like stroll- would run is short enough (about 300 ing, meeting neighbors, picnicking, and feet) that adverse environmental effects so forth. The site plan is shown in Figure from the armoring of the riverbank are E. expected to be minimal. Please see the discussion of river restoration and permit- Figure 4: Bank erosion at Ambridge Park. ting requirements in Section 6. The playground is directly adjacent to the river’s edge. For that reason the wall should have a handrail at or higher than standard residential code height, and the balusters must be placed closely enough to prevent children from wriggling through. Alternatively the stone wall itself could extend above ground level to serve as the handrail.

4.1.2 Visibility of the Toll Road. Di- rectly across the river from the park is a ramp for the Toll Road (Figure 4). It is not an especially pleasing sight. Planting 4.1 Site plan elements trees to screen the ramp would be diffi- cult, though probably not impossible, be- 4.1.1 Seawall. Constructing a seawall cause the concrete runs close to the edge along the river is a logical way to stop of the river and the bank is steep. The In- erosion on a steeply sloping bank at a diana Department of Transportation may recreation site where the public will be also be loath to allow trees so close to the

the delta institute /GARY RIVERFRONT REVIVAL PLAN/ 16 roadway. On a typical urban highway, the does not continue east to join Second first ten feet out from the outer travel lane Avenue, so that the park and playground makes up the “clear zone,” where, for have no planned pedestrian access from safety reasons, obstructions are generally the northeast corner. This plan calls for prohibited. It is not entirely clear whether the path to extend along the north edge of the same is true for on- and off-ramps. the park from end to end with entrance An expansion is planned for the Toll plazas on either side, to be constructed of Road that will add another lane in each permeable pavers. direction. It is not known whether the plans call for reengineering the ramp. 4.1.4 Gary Green Link The path is Under the right conditions, the expansion intended to coincide with the route of the could be an opportunity: if Indiana adopts Gary Green Link, and thus to continue to a mode of design becoming more and the east and west of Ambridge Park. To more widespread among state Depart- the west, there is the choice of routing the ments of Transportation, a context sensi- path on the bank or on the existing alley. tive approach might be employed that Using the alley would probably be could involve affected citizens to minimize cheaper and easier, mainly because it is adverse impacts and develop a design already graded and surfaced. How is the peculiarly suitable to the locale (see e.g. alley used now? Garbage is collected TRB 2002). Relative to this plan, the off- from the street side of the houses, so this ramp across from Ambridge Park might arrangement would not be altered. On the be masked by a treatment for the guard- other hand, numerous houses have ga- rail — a low rubble wall like the proposed rages on the alleys. Not all residents ac- seawall, for example, or some other de- tually park their cars in the garages, but vice. they may need to be compensated for any loss of function caused by restricting Figure 5: Toll road viewed from the river. the use of the alley. Since the alley is quite narrow, turning a car around in it would be very difficult. To keep car ac- cess to the garages, then, the alley needs to remain open on either end. This would also permit a small amount of through- traffic, of course, but it could be mini- mized by adding “No Thoroughfare” signs and continuing the entrance plaza paving motif into the alley entrance. Considering that several other segments of the Green Link will be on-street routes, the trade-off is small for this interesting, low-traffic route.

4.1.3 Path along river. The seawall 4.1.5 Overgrowth. Thinning the over- provides an obvious contour along which growth along the river is an important part a path could lead. Presently a gravel path of the path’s design. Neighborhood resi- runs in a circuit around the children’s play dents have remarked that the area be- area, but the segment beside the river tween the alley and the river is over-

the delta institute /GARY RIVERFRONT REVIVAL PLAN/ 17

grown, that it blocks the river from sight, presumably include a certain linearity that and that it attracts dumping. Thinning the makes evident a path across the wide high shrubs and weeds would probably expanse of asphalt so that the Green Link be sufficient to take care of these prob- physically continues across Buchanan. lems, and it would also encourage infor- The design would also serve to advertise mal access to the river. A program to trim the existence and use of the Green Link. overgrowth does, though, represent an It would symbolically connect two parts of ongoing maintenance expense. the neighborhood, which would be espe- cially important when the new South 4.1.6 Conversion of Second Avenue Shore neighborhood goes up, for the re- to one-way flow. To the east of the park, development, as drawn, would be split by the trail would again continue either on Buchanan. But because the right design the bank or on the street (Second Ave- will only emerge when the character of nue). And, again, using the street would the new neighborhood becomes appar- be most cost-effective and avoids dis- ent, we have not contributed a sketch. turbing the riverbank. The best option might be to convert Second Avenue to 4.1.8 Recreation area east of Am- one-way (westbound) and use a portion bridge Park. On the east side of Am- of the street for the trail. The existing grid bridge Park, this plan creates a pavilion, street pattern allows several other car ac- seating area, and grass steps of the cess and parking options for residences same designs as those planned for the along the street, so changing Second boat launch site. The grass steps, in their Avenue to one-way should not pose openness to the river, are a way of problems for them. Blocking east bound structuring interaction between the water traffic also addresses the hazard of the and the land that complements the barrier Buchanan Street–Second Avenue inter- of the seawall. Sculpting the bank into section. Cars turning from Second onto steps repeats the sheer drop of the sea- Buchanan now go blindly into a fusillade wall by making the elevation change of traffic exiting the Toll Road at high down to the water into a series of small speed. sheer drops, scaled to the human step, and softened by vegetation. 4.1.7 Intersection of Second and Clearly the final design of the pavilion Buchanan. A similar difficulty will con- and furniture should harmonize with the front bicyclists and pedestrians using the rustic quality that the seawall will bring. It Green Link as they try to cross Bu- would be unfortunate to emplace catalog chanan. The hump in the bridge con- buildings here. Of course, design at a ceals cars from pedestrians and bicyclists higher intensity costs somewhat more. and conceals pedestrians and bicyclists The pavilion and grass steps are from cars. Early warning lights on the Toll meant to support basic leisure. Strolling, Road side of the bridge could be effective picnicking, and hanging around are best in slowing traffic. The lights could be done in pleasant settings. We are pro- manually actuated by pedestrians, just as posing updates to the park that partly re- crosswalk signs are in some locales. flect the changing age demographic of For a number of reasons, a design Horace Mann (see TCB 2003 for a dis- treatment at the Second–Buchanan inter- cussion). As the community gets older, section would be appropriate. It would

the delta institute /GARY RIVERFRONT REVIVAL PLAN/ 18 low-intensity outdoor recreation gets 4.1.10 Vandalism. Considering that more important. the Ambridge Park enhancement calls for new investment in the physical environ- 4.1.9 Stakeholder recommenda- ment, vandalism is potentially ruinous. tions. This plan does not propose redes- This summer the seats of the new metal igning the entire existing park, only add- bleachers at Ambridge Park were thor- ing elements to it. Currently the Gary De- oughly, almost methodically, banged up. partment of Parks and Recreation has no The restroom doors beneath the an- other plans for the park that would conflict nouncer’s booth were smashed in with with our recommendations. According to the concrete anchor of a fencepost. Some its 2003–2007 Master Plan, the Park ongoing vandalism can be expected, so Board envisions no improvements to Am- the pavilion and seating planned for the bridge Park during its current planning east side of the site need to be durable. cycle. Horace Mann residents have sug- This can partly be taken care of in the de- gested that another use should replace sign phase, when the designer will bal- one of the baseball diamonds. As Little ance looks and function with indestructi- League games at the park have been bility. Residents have suggested bolting moved elsewhere, there is little use of the everything down to concrete pads and in- fields, and because of budget cuts at the stalling security lighting. Parks Department, maintenance has lagged. Replacing one of the diamonds 4.2 Funding seems sensible, although we think the best new use would be more apparent 4.2.1 Recreation. An ideal source of with the construction of the South Shore funding for the recreational components neighborhood. of the Ambridge Park enhancement — for An earlier proposal for reconfiguring example, the pavilion — would be Reha- Ambridge Park recommended installing a bilitation Grants through the federal Ur- canoe launch. This still seems a viable ban Park and Recreation Recovery idea, mainly because canoeists on the (UPARR) program. Under this program, river could then tie up and come ashore physical project costs are shared by the at Ambridge Park. The proposed launch federal government and the locality at 70 at Bridge Street would make the better and 30 percent, respectively; localities starting point for a canoe trip, since there can put up Community Development would be parking facilities available Block Grant funds as part of their match, nearby, while launching at Ambridge Park but no other federal funding. Gary re- would require parking on the street or ceived $0.25 million from UPARR in hauling a canoe from the lot near the 2001. No funding was authorized for the basketball court. Stakeholders have also national program in FY 2004 (NPS 2004), suggested, in the context of scarce re- but money may be available in upcoming sources, moving the viewing platform years. proposed for Bridge Street to Ambridge Similarly, the Hometown Indiana grant Park, where there might be a higher den- program would provide $10,000 to sity of users. If circumstances allow, $200,000 (on a 1:1 local match) for the platforms could be installed at both sites. development of recreational sites, in- cluding facility construction (IDNR 2003). The Indiana Department of Natural Re-

the delta institute /GARY RIVERFRONT REVIVAL PLAN/ 19

sources administers the program. Eligibil- Grants are also available through ity requires an approved five-year master Section 319 of the Clean Water Act, ad- plan, which the Park Board has written ministrated by the Indiana Department of and submitted (CGBPR 2003) but which Environmental Management, Watershed will require filing an amendment since it Management Section (IDEM 2004). The does not include the projects proposed funding is meant for projects that improve here. Unfortunately the Legislature did water quality impairment caused by non- not authorize funding for Hometown Indi- point source pollution, as erosion and ana for 2003 and 2004, but funding may sedimentation are. The deadline is in be made available in the next two-year October of each year. Applications are cycle. typically more competitive if discrete pro- jects are wrapped into a broader ap- 4.2.2 Trail. The new trail through Am- proach to solving water quality prob- bridge Park is a possible route for the lems—and this is needed anyway. The Gary Green Link. Transportation En- Watershed Management Section also has hancement funds could be used for this a stated preference for bioengineering purpose, and perhaps for the pedestrian methods of streambank stabilization as plazas. The City of Gary was recently opposed to hard techniques such as the awarded part of the Transportation En- seawall proposed here. A full complement hancement funding necessary to build the of application guidance is available Gary Green Link, but the first sum will go through the cited reference. to construct a western portion of the trail system.

4.2.3 Seawall construction. The seawall is meant to be a good-looking, place-making erosion control device. As such, U.S. Steel and the agency trustees should be approached on the matter be- fore they pursue any alternate restoration plans they have for the area. See Section 6.4.1 for a discussion. Other state and federal erosion- control and watershed funding could also be available. The Indiana Coastal Grants Program, available by way of the Coastal Zone Management Act, is one possibility. Grants can be awarded for low cost con- struction for resource improvement and are limited to $100,000 with a 1:1 match (IDNR Nov. 2004). “Large scale, hard structure erosion control projects” are in- eligible, but “large scale” means greater than $100,000. See cited reference for more details.

the delta institute /GARY RIVERFRONT REVIVAL PLAN/ 20

5.0 Conversion of C-lot to 5.1 Existing conditions park The entire site is about 33 acres. It is flat and overgrown with pioneer vegeta- No section of the Grand Calumet tion, including trees with years of growth within the planning area is connected to a on them. The surface is gravel or crushed public center of activity in Gary. In its re- slag, with strips of hard surfacing that lationship to the river, Ambridge Park is give the C-lot its striped pattern from the an exception more in its potential than in air (Figure G). When the parking lot was actuality. In taking this plan’s approach of retired, it was mothballed. Concrete tying the river more closely to the com- wheel stops and wire rope barriers along munity, therefore, public spaces have to the river were left in place, as well as a be created. In addition, this plan seeks to battery of light poles, infrastructure from a tie in with recent public investments and different era that now has a strong and ongoing planning efforts. When merging likeable sculptural quality. A substation these goals, a nexus appears where the owned by Northern Indiana Public Serv- river winds close to downtown. The Gary ice Company (NIPSCO) formerly sat in Green link, running between the Norfolk the southwest-central part of the site; Southern and CSX rail lines, will cross when it was demolished, debris from the Broadway at Union Station, which is building was largely left scattered there. slated for redevelopment. The Steel Yard Numerous site features have a current baseball stadium attracts a swarm of function for the plant. On the far west side summertime visitors, and Gary has in- of the site, three lagoons treat process vested in streetscape improvements for water from the plant, mainly removing oil the Broadway corridor through downtown. and allowing some heavy metal settling, Gateway Park has also been refurbished and discharge it into the Grand Calumet. in the recent past. Rusty chainlink fences surround the la- Near downtown the river is wholly goons. An access road to the lagoons bounded by U.S. Steel property (Figure takes an awkward path through the mid- D). On the south side of the river, though, dle of the site. Several pipes run catwalk- the land is less intensively used, gener- like from bank to bank near the lagoons. ally speaking, and east of Broadway it is Several transmission line towers are underutilized. Behind the Gary Works found on-site, primarily along the south Visitor Center fronting on Broadway there edge. There is also an outbuilding just off is a defunct parking lot, formerly Parking the access road that was originally con- Lot C or the “C-lot,” tucked between the structed by NIPSCO to hold gas for a Grand Calumet and the collection of via- defunct coke oven. From conversations ducts to the south. Transforming this land with U.S. Steel officials, it appears that into a public space would not only estab- this outbuilding’s ownership is in question lish a connection between downtown and (Figures D, G). Finally, the Visitor Center the river, but also recover a place that and a bus drop-off for the Gary Public has languished invisibly behind the via- Transportation Corporation are located on ducts. We propose converting the C-lot the eastern edge of the site and are in into a park whose design reflects its adja- current use. cency to what historically was the largest In contrast to the parking lot gone to integrated steel mill in the world. seed, the landscaping along the river

the delta institute /GARY RIVERFRONT REVIVAL PLAN/ 21 near the Visitor Center and Administration possible contamination on the site. Fur- buildings is well-kept, with a pleasant, ther planning, i.e., beyond this plan’s rec- settled-in quality. The south riverbank is ommendations, awaits the results of the vegetated and quite steep. The north riv- assessment, due in the third quarter of erbank is a rubble wall made of hot- 2005. There is the known possibility of poured slag that, especially against the contamination from a former coke oven backdrop of the Administration building gas holder on the NIPSCO parcel. The and Hospital, built in period style, dates ownership and future use of that parcel the setting in the charming past (Figure needs to be resolved as well in order to 5). Treatments for the other sites in this move forward. plan call for using the rubble wall as a de- sign element: retaining walls used to 5.2 Site plan shore up the bank against erosion else- where along the river would use a facing 5.2.1 Overall design. We propose material mimicking the look of the hot- establishing a steel sculpture park on the poured slag construction. U.S. Steel offi- C-lot site (Figure F) surrounded by infor- cials report that they have concerns about mally arranged paths through the existing the stability of the rubble wall north of C- pioneer vegetation. In form and, of lot. It lacks a proper footing, and bank course, materials the sculptures would undercutting from the dredging has im- bear a strong relationship to the site and periled it. In several places portions of the the plant. The sculptures would be wall have dropped into the river. U.S. grouped into a strongly geometric form, a Steel would do well to rehabilitate the 3 × 3 square, on a base pad of permeable rubble wall rather than tear it out and re- paving of about two acres (drawn as a place it with, say, sheet piling or some placeholder). A signature sculpture on the other characterless form of armoring. western end of the site serves as a sec- ondary focal point, only dimly visible from Figure 6: U.S. Steel administration building. the eastern end of the site so that taking one of the meandering paths is an antici- patory trip. A second major element in the plan is the development of a museum to be de- voted to the industrial, ecological, and so- cial history of Gary. The museum build- ing, which is drawn as a placeholder at about 16,000 square feet (gross floor area), is set where the Visitor Center parking lot is now located, the main siting criteria being proximity to Broadway and avoidance of the transmission lines. A new parking lot would be constructed U.S. Steel has no plans to put the C- south of the museum and east of the bus lot site to a new use. As with the rest of drop-off. The site plan is a sketch: meant the Gary Works property, though, U.S. to be illustrative only, it leaves details like Steel must perform an assessment to the floor area of the museum and the determine the nature and extent of any number of parking spaces to phase two

the delta institute /GARY RIVERFRONT REVIVAL PLAN/ 22 planning. As discussed shortly, a mu- scaping the next. However, all decisions seum may not be the best option for the about landscaping, such as leaving ex- space. In fact, it would be much prefer- isting vegetation or planting anew, are able — and, we expect, attract many contingent on the results of the environ- more visitors to a park at C-lot — for U.S. mental assessment, since a finding of Steel once again to offer tours of the Gary widespread contamination might mean Works. some amount of soil would have to be A path down to the river would be cut removed. to enable park visitors to approach the water. Given the steepness of the bank, 5.2.3 Sculptures. The site has been the path has to run diagonally downward planned so that a range of different or employ switchbacks. It has been sug- sculptures could be plugged into the base gested that a debarkation point for water pad and signature site. Particular sculp- taxis could, at some point in the future, be tures can be acquired on a flow basis, as located here. Final decisions about how resources become available, so that the to run a path to the water’s edge may site is completed over a span of time. need to wait until the water taxi concept What sort of sculptures should they be? can be firmed up. Stakeholders should choose, but the past history of the site and its transformation 5.2.2 Functionality. An overriding de- should be a guide. Having an enormous sign criterion for the C-lot is the preserva- steel mill adjacent to a park provides im- tion of its functionality. The Visitor Center mediate design suggestions. The out-of- and bus drop-off for the Gary Public scale base pad tries to reproduce the gi- Transportation Company are located on antism of the plant. The sculptures can the eastern edge of the site. These ele- carry forward the same theme in the ver- ments remain in the site plan. The la- tical dimension. Across the river the plant goons would remain, of course, and a looms starkly; it is an open question new access road would be built along the whether that set of forms could be con- southern edge of the site to allow service sidered beautiful. Over the years a large vehicles to reach them. Existing fencing portion of Gary residents have come around the lagoons would probably need through the plant gate to go to work. The to be replaced with a stronger barrier, plant carries for them an innumerable ar- with a row of evergreens to screen the ray of associations; the sculptures should, fence and the lagoons. What will become, in a general way, capture and transfigure finally, of the NIPSCO outbuilding? The them all. site plan assumes it can be removed, but only minor adjustments to the route of the 5.2.3.1 Sculpture acquisition. The southern path would be necessary if it sculptures should be superb but inexpen- has to remain. sive, yet commissioning ten sculptures, Selected elements of the site’s history, depending on the market, may not be as well as its current functionality, should cheap. One solution is to develop a part- also be retained. The light poles, again, nership with one or more of the colleges have a strong sculptural quality. The and schools in Gary to have students, striped pattern can be preserved by under faculty guidance, design and build leaving the existing gravel and pioneer the sculptures as an advanced studio vegetation on one row and newly land- class. Then the cost should only be fac-

the delta institute /GARY RIVERFRONT REVIVAL PLAN/ 23 ulty time, overhead, and materials if they list of grantmaking agencies is a second cannot be donated. Independent of cost stage of planning. considerations, a partnership between the city and its artistic students is a stimula- 5.2.3.3 Materials and design. If the tive investment, giving students creative, sculptures are to fit the site, they should community-serving work that can pay off make use of the sorts of materials pro- in long-run dedication to the city’s arts duced or found in a steel mill. No doubt community. U.S. Steel has equipment on site past its The City should identify the best de- useful life suitable to be donated for reuse partment, or perhaps external organiza- as a sculptural component; reject prod- tion, to oversee the project. U.S. Steel ucts could also be captured. The sorts of would need to be represented as well. A materials needed and available could be university partnership could be estab- established through U.S. Steel involve- lished formally by mailing Requests for ment with contracting and design review, Proposals (RFPs) to art department although coordination might be difficult. heads, with the work to be done on a For example, would U.S. Steel have to contract basis with a given budget. As put together an inventory of available nine sculptures are planned for the C-lot materials to provide with the RFP? Or site, several could be designed at once to hold a bidder’s conference prior to sub- hasten completion, i.e., the choice among mission to negotiate the availability of proposals need not be a one-winner materials? Time and expense for U.S. competition. Sending RFPs to other Steel must be minimized. Details such as schools in Indiana or in Chicago could be these can be hammered out in second worthwhile. phase planning. If multiple sculptors are employed to 5.2.3.2 Funding for acquisition. design parts of the sculpture plaza, a set Several sources of funding may be avail- of design criteria will have to be estab- able for the project. The Indiana Arts lished to ensure a certain level of unity Commission is a good first choice. For across the works in the plaza. This is not the last three years it has made annual an ideal way to achieve a unitary aes- grants in the neighborhood of $300,000, thetic effect, but a tradeoff is unavoidable split between Lake, Porter, and LaPorte in farming out the work to nine design Counties, to organizations seeking grants teams. The design criteria should be for the arts (QLC 2004: 88). The National written into the RFP and will require some Endowment for the Arts is another possi- thought. In addition, the RFP should bility. It offers grants between $5,000 and contain a full photographic and verbal de- $500,000, though awards over $100,000 scription of the site. It should describe the are rare and more than half are less than available budget, but the scoring system $25,000 (GSA 2004). NEA grants to units should award points for cost minimization. of local government require a 1:1 match There are some obvious, low-level condi- (using non-federal funds), as well as a tions on the design that are more practi- three-year record of programming. The cal than aesthetic. (1) The sculptures latter consideration could factor into the should be durable and weather-resistant, choice of an agency to handle acquiring and (2) safe for children to play with and sculpture. Establishing a comprehensive around. They must (3) fit into the final di- mensions of the square space on the pad

the delta institute /GARY RIVERFRONT REVIVAL PLAN/ 24

and (4) should not extend out of their dance also declines considerably with in- spaces to impede walking on the pad. come. Clearly a market study would need Again, such details of the program are a to be performed to determine the feasibil- next step. ity of building the museum. A well-attended, exciting, and well- 5.2.4 Museum. A park and sculpture appointed museum would probably need garden alone probably will not be suffi- to be sized and marketed to a regional cient to draw a steady stream of visitors audience. In that case, the museum might to the C-lot, especially considering its lo- see further competition for visitors from cation, so a destination use is in order. the Ford Calumet Environmental Center One recommendation for a destination near Hegewisch in Chicago, about 15 use, especially considering the back- miles away, which is slated to open in ground values of this plan, is an industrial 2006. Creating a museum with a regional and environmental history museum. The perspective, i.e., the industrial shoreline history of industrialization in northwest In- zone of northwest Indiana, could also be diana, Gary in particular, is a fascinating made somewhat difficult by a location on story that richly illustrates the movement U.S. Steel property. of national economic life over a century, Numerous organizations could be its changing relationship with the natural potential partners in curating the mu- world, and its driving influence over social seum, which would itself probably be change. chartered as a non-profit corporation. In- Several questions immediately arise. diana University Northwest hosts the For one, a proposal for a museum with a Calumet Archives, which contain a large similar theme has come out recently. It storehouse of historical documents and would to be located at Buffington Harbor photographs that could be a source of and called the Discovery Center. (Anon. exhibit materials. The Gary Historical So- 2004). The Discovery Center would ciety would also be a partner. Museums showcase the industrial history of north- in Chicago, furthermore, could hold off- west Indiana and the social history of the site programs to seed the C-lot museum. immigrants who settled in the region, but The Field Museum has been quite active seems to lack a focus on the environ- in the Calumet area on the Illinois side. ment. While the near-simultaneous emer- gence of this proposal is further ratifica- 5.2.5 Gary Works tours. It is a safe tion that some sort of museum is a good bet that visitor interest would be piqued idea, either one or the other could be more by offering tours of the Gary Works built, but probably not both. Museum at- than by a museum. As one stakeholder tendance in America is relatively low: put it, signs boasting tours of the mill about 23 percent of the adult population could “get people off the interstate” and can be expected to visit a science or his- into Gary. So there is the potential that tory museum at least once in a year (Di- tours could draw visitors, and retail Maggio and Ostrower 1990). The portion spending as a byproduct, from outside of the population that visits frequently is the region. probably much lower. About 13 percent of There is interest at a high level within African-Americans visit at least once per the City of Gary for offering tours of the year, and African-Americans represent 85 Gary Works. There is also precedent: percent of the population of Gary. Atten-

the delta institute /GARY RIVERFRONT REVIVAL PLAN/ 25

U.S. Steel formerly ran a tour program, the rail is meant to function also as a pe- but discontinued it in the mid-1970s. destrian confidence measure. The rail, Restarting tours is this plan’s pre- about three feet high at crest, would help ferred alternative. Further discussion of to organize the pedestrian environment the issues involved, however, would need and provide a psychological buffer to take place in conversations between against car traffic. The rhythm of hori- the concerned parties. U.S. Steel officials zontal curves is suggested by the existing have numerous concerns regarding secu- pattern of sidewalks and crosswalks un- rity and current federal anti-terrorism pol- der the South Shore line and Toll Road: icy. the sidewalk hooks around the South Shore embankment, then jogs across a 5.3 Connection to downtown traffic island, then repeats the same pat- tern. In a similar vein, continuing the mu- The C-lot is concealed behind an as- ral on the interior walls of the South semblage of elevated viaducts for the Shore embankment serves a preexisting South Shore line, the Toll Road, and two need, for the asphalt and concrete envi- freight rail lines. The site catches no ronment under the viaducts is a bit op- through-traffic. Unless one had business pressive. The material of choice for the at the Gary Works, the ground-level trav- railing would probably be tube steel, eler would never notice C-lot. Thus, a which U.S. Steel might be willing to do- visual link needs to be established that nate.2 connects C-lot to downtown. Such a con- nection would also integrate the Gary 5.3.1.1 No other changes to park. Green Link trailhead at Union Station into Besides installing sculptural flourishes at the fabric of the city. the ends of the wave rail, we do not pro- A design for the downtown to C-lot pose any changes to Gateway Park. It connection is shown in Figure H. It has has already been redesigned in the past two major components. First, a sight line few years and is a well-organized space. would be established by installing a curving wall or railing between the side- 5.3.2 Mural. One purpose of the mural walk and road that leads from Gateway is to extend in visual imagination the Park to the C-lot. The railing would un- northern border of downtown, now awk- dulate horizontally and vertically, wave- wardly defined by the South Shore rail- like, to match the second component, a road embankment. Another is to give the very large-scale mural of the Lake Michi- bland, utilitarian wall a makeover. The gan shoreline painted on the embank- formality of Gateway Park and the char- ment of the South Shore line viaduct. At acter of the wall as a backdrop combine the corners of the embankment where to give, in sum, the criteria that the mural Broadway extends through, the mural design should be serene and somewhat would wrap around as waves, as if the neutral, not busy, and should suggest traveler were passing through the lake. depth and expansiveness. Lake Michigan

5.3.1 Railing. In Gateway Park the 2 “wave rail” would terminate in a flourish The amount needed is somewhere around 4,500 feet, given that the railing would run a straight as shown in the bottom right of Figure H. distance of about 1,100 feet on both sides of In the segment through the overpasses, Broadway and estimating the length needed to accommodate curvature and balusters.

the delta institute /GARY RIVERFRONT REVIVAL PLAN/ 26 fits the bill. The design is also meant to if managed properly, does not necessarily be playful: the South Shore line becomes present an unacceptable security envi- a shoreline. There is some irony, as well, ronment. A fine example is A. Finkl & considering the long-run efforts of the Sons’ mill on Goose Island in Chicago, communities in northwest Indiana to es- where doors to the plant open directly tablish connections to the lake by con- onto Cortland Avenue and passersby on verting industrial uses to recreational, the sidewalk can peer in as if it were a car residential, and commercial uses. The wash. For that matter, Finkl and its sur- mural depicts a view of the lake were it roundings complete with extensive land- possible to see through the Gary Works. scaping and pedestrian pockets are a It would, moreover, portray a shoreline model final step in the integrated steel closer to the pre-industrial original — the mill: integration with public use. existing shore beyond the Gary Works is fill: mainly slag and no beach. 5.4.2 Ownership and funding. Under There is now a small mural, painted the proposals outlined here, U.S. Steel on plywood, hanging on the embankment could either transfer ownership of C-lot to near where Broadway passes under. It is, the City of Gary or retain ownership and unfortunately, weathered and peeling seal an agreement that establishes a right badly. The Lake Michigan mural would to public access and to make specified replace this one, but it would have to be improvements. It is expected that U.S. removed soon anyway. Steel will prefer the latter choice, to keep control of the property and an ongoing 5.4 Context and concerns say in security measures around the park. In any event, liability for various hazards 5.4.1 Security. U.S. Steel’s central will have to be anticipated, assigned, and concern about this proposal is security. agreed. From that perspective the company views One possibility is to structure the C-lot as a buffer against trespassing on agreement like a land trust, where U.S. the more important sections of the Gary Steel leases a portion of the C-lot to the Works. What actually prevents illegal ac- City at a nominal rate and allows the City, cess to the Gary Works via the C-lot is or another party, to build a park and pos- the river and the sheer rubble wall on the sibly a museum. This approach, though, other side. On the other hand, access to does not suggest a mechanism for fund- the C-lot itself is not, at present, tightly ing construction. controlled. A row of highway dividers at the western edge of the Visitor Center 5.4.2.1 LWCF. The Land and Water parking lot is the only physical barrier. Conservation Fund (LWCF), distributed It stands to reason that U.S. Steel through the Indiana Department of Natu- could achieve the same level of security ral Resources, would be a natural choice by giving up the use of C-lot as a buffer to pay for park development. It offers while strengthening other barriers. A grants between $10,000 and $200,000, chain-link fence with razor wire, tastefully requiring a 1:1 local match with no recy- hidden behind vegetation, could be built cling of federal funds, for land acquisition along the north side of the river. This and construction of recreational facilities. plan’s aim is to persuade U.S. Steel that Donation or bargain sale of the C-lot having a public use near plant operations, would count toward the 50 percent local

the delta institute /GARY RIVERFRONT REVIVAL PLAN/ 27 match. But the LWCF option is diffi- Creation of a park out of the C-lot is cult—although not out of the ques- probably an acceptable conservation pur- tion—because the presence of “environ- pose, which determines whether, under mental intrusions” like overhead wires is IRS rules, the easement is a qualified restricted on sites receiving LWCF as- easement (Hoover 2002: 4). Extensive sistance (IDNR Jan. 2004: A–10). The C- building construction may not be strictly lot is, of course, crossed by high tension compatible with the spirit of the rules, so wires along two axes (Figure G). The the effect of plans to site a museum at the area proposed for redevelopment into a park has to be examined further. The or- park is not, in the main, beneath the ganization receiving what is, in effect, a power lines, but the program restrictions donation must also be qualified. A local are forthrightly based on power lines’ pre- government may need to have adopted a sumed aesthetic detraction rather than conservation plan. Details of this sort will health and safety. Nonetheless, applica- need further investigation, and an ap- tions for projects on sites crossed by high praisal will of course be necessary. voltage wires are not automatically ruled out but judged on an individual basis.

5.4.2.2 Conservation easement. Another possibility is for U.S. Steel to re- cord a conservation easement on a por- tion of the C-lot and donate it to the City of Gary or an affiliated organization. For this U.S. Steel would receive a charitable deduction on its federal corporate income tax filing. If the firm would then agree to make a transfer payment to the City equal to the tax savings, the monies could be used to pay for park improvements. In this way U.S. Steel would retain owner- ship of the parcel and the City would gain a source of revenue for the project. The amount of this revenue depends on the appraised value of the easement. A precedent exists in the preservation of historic building façades under the Federal Historic Preservation Tax Incen- tive Program (Public Law 96-541), al- though in that case a façade easement is donated to a non-profit organization that then maintains the façade using a tax- deductible contribution from the donor (LPCI n.d.). Fiscally this arrangement may be better for U.S. Steel, since a con- tribution to developing or maintaining the park would also be tax-deductible.

the delta institute /GARY RIVERFRONT REVIVAL PLAN/ 28

6.1 The Grand Calumet communication from Daniel Sparks, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; May 3, 2004). River itself The only chemical performance criterion set in the consent decree from the 6.1.1 Public health. The balance Environmental Protection Agency was between promoting public health and en- that the river bottom contain couraging use of the river — rehabilitating polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) at no the river in the public mind — is a delicate more than 50 parts per million (ppm) after one. Unlimited swimming and fishing for dredging. While the remaining river consumption are the gold standard bottom could contain less than 50 ppm, recreational uses that define a clean river. the standard itself is far too high to safely Against this, the Indiana Department of wiggle one’s toes in the mud. Lastly, the Health has placed the Grand Calumet success of the clean-up will not be known under a “Group 5 Advisory” for 2004, until post-dredging monitoring begins. which declares that no fish of any species Monitoring studies are scheduled at or size should be eaten, while the Indiana intervals of three, five, and seven years Department of Environmental after the Environmental Protection Management and the Gary Sanitary Agency certifies that the dredging is District have posted signs along the river complete, which at the time of this writing warning against contact with the water. has not yet happened. The river is not entirely clean. Only 5.1 miles of the Grand Calumet were 6.1.3 Rehabilitation. Despite these dredged, with eight or so miles still dismaying conditions, it is time to take downstream left to go. Fish can travel specific steps to rehabilitate the Grand freely between the dredged and Calumet in the public eye. The pall of undredged areas of the river. And were danger that hangs over the Grand the entire river, sediments and water, Calumet, its reputation as a stream of suddenly rendered sparkling clean, toxins poison, is notorious. As an objective would persist for some years in the indicator, the Delta Institute’s economic tissues of fish and in other aquatic study showed the negative effects of animals and plants. Discharge from these perceptions on the value of combined sewer outfalls also remains a residential properties near the river (see hazard that restricts contact with the Section 1.3). Although a clean-up of the water following rainfall. And air deposition river is good in itself, its meaning for the may remain a significant contributor to community — beyond the expected uptick contamination well into the future. in property values — is opaque and somewhat dubious if it is not made 6.1.2 Clean-up standards. The apparent that the clean-up is for the standards governing the clean-up, community, for its eventual use and moreover, do not necessarily ensure that benefit. If no such provision is made, an the river bottom and water in the dredged opportunity would be lost. area are safe for extended human The projects proposed in this plan, in contact. U.S. Steel was required to the locations shown in Figure A, are remove contaminated sediments that had meant to rejoin the river with the accumulated in the river over the years, community. Among other benefits, they and to dredge down six to twelve inches variously provide public boating access into the native river bottom (Personal the delta institute /GARY RIVERFRONT REVIVAL PLAN/ 29

on the Grand Calumet, recover former agement — to ensure the project would industrial land along the river for the uphold the state’s water quality stan- residents of Gary, and restore the dards. Seawall construction specifically relationship between the river and an requires a Section 401 Certification urban park. (IDEM 2003). Besides the seawalls at the Bridge 6.2 Public use and navigability Street boat launch and at Ambridge Park, three other elements may require permits. The Grand Calumet is a navigable Removing vegetation along a river corri- river from the Illinois state line to dor, as suggested for the residential area Marquette Park in east Gary, or 15.4 river west of Ambridge Park, requires regula- miles (INRC 2004). This should mean tory review. This proposal would not, that the State of Indiana owns the bed of however, leave the riverbank naked. the river up to the ordinary high water Trees and ground cover would remain; mark and that the public has unrestricted only thick mid-story vegetation would be use within the channel, so that owners of removed. Under the authority of the Riv- property along the river would have no ers and Harbors Act of 1899, the Corps of authority to prevent passage of boats by Engineers also regulates the “the con- physically obstructing the river. On the struction of any structure in or over any other hand, it does not appear that there navigable water....” (Goldfarb 1988: 94) is an affirmative duty on the part of land- Building the dock and viewing platform owners to provide overland access to the into the river at Bridge Street would, river so that canoeists, for example, could therefore, apparently require a permit. launch their craft from private land. The object of the law is to keep water- Therefore, for the public to access the ways clear for commercial navigation, so river within the cleaned-up stretch, there the Corps will presumably make its deci- must be defined access points, preferably sion on those grounds, although in- on public land. channel construction activities may also trigger environmental review under the 6.3 Permits Clean Water Act. It seems unlikely that the dock and viewing platform will impede Several elements of this plan will re- commercial navigation, for there essen- quire permitting by the Indiana Depart- tially is none, and the dock, at least, can ment of Environmental Management and only promote recreational “navigation.” the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Under Finally, the construction of grass steps at Section 404 of the federal Clean Water Bridge Street and Ambridge Park will, of Act, the Army Corps of Engineers is course, involve land clearing and bank authorized to regulate projects that in- modification, so permitting will be re- volve discharging dredge or fill material quired for that aspect of the project as into United States waters. This generally well. includes streambank stabilization. For projects where a federal permit is re- 6.4 River restoration quired, Section 401 of the Clean Water Act also calls for Water Quality Certifica- 6.4.1 Possible inconsistency with tion from the state — that is, from the In- U.S. Steel’s efforts. Under one of its diana Department of Environmental Man- consent decrees, U.S. Steel’s obligations

the delta institute /GARY RIVERFRONT REVIVAL PLAN/ 30

following clean-up include ecological could be dealt with by bioengineering so- restoration of the Grand Cal through the lutions. dredged stretch of the river and on certain Adopting a landscape or total ecology pieces of adjacent land. The Ecological approach, the aquatic restoration work- Restoration Work Plans for the oxbow plan could include the two seawalls, and Bongi tracts (Figure D) were finalized which U.S. Steel could pay for in lieu of a by the trustees at the end of July 2004, naturalizing alternative. Considering that but aquatic community restoration has there has been no formal process for been put on hold pending resolution of third-party stakeholder involvement in the question whether all non-native mate- forming the work plans, it seems unlikely rial has been removed and remediation is that suggestions like seawalls and ter- complete. For that reason a finalized racing could be incorporated into the work aquatic restoration plan, with site loca- plan even if the restoration were thor- tions specified, has not yet been re- oughgoing and, for example, all sites of leased, and we were not able to obtain a bank erosion were addressed. draft version to compare for conflicts with A watershed plan that could approach the proposals put forward in this plan. Our these issues simultaneously would be an main concern over consistency is important part of restoration. whether, and where, extensive bioengi- neered bank stabilization would be part of 6.4.3 Further clean up. There are the proposed restoration. positive signs that contaminant removal will continue: while expensive, the U.S. 6.4.2 Broader concept of landscape Fish and Wildlife Service suggested this restoration. Any restoration may be good year that the best course of action among restoration, but at the same time we have the alternatives was further dredging taken as a goal establishing the building downstream from the stretch covered by blocks of a landscape mosaic along the the consent decree with U.S. Steel. The Grand Cal corridor that includes urban agency put the chances for resource re- and human ecology. To that end we pro- covery thereafter at good to very good posed, at the C-lot, preserving the im- (IEI 2004: 29). press of the land’s former use rather than naturalizing the site; at Ambridge Park 6.5 Future use of the Grand Calumet and Bridge Street we suggested building seawalls and a terraced bank that con- 6.5.1 A manipulated river. Opinion tinue a design theme and present them- survey information and public comments selves as an investment in the neighbor- collected by the Grand Cal Task Force for hood in addition to nature. We hasten to its 2000 Corridor Vision show that resi- add that the river frontage of these sites dents in the region overwhelmingly want is a small fraction of the riparian area the Grand Calumet/Indiana Harbor Canal along the remediated stretch. In conjunc- system to be a green corridor. On the tion with restoration of, for instance, the East Branch it already is to some extent, Bongi and Oxbow tracts to conditions ap- for there the river was never completely proximating native conditions, the corridor transformed into an industrial channel, would have the beginnings of a balanced with construction of wharves and slips, mosaic. Other areas of bank erosion etc. as the river on the Illinois side has been. This is not to say that the ecology

the delta institute /GARY RIVERFRONT REVIVAL PLAN/ 31

of the river is anything close to undis- capture the Grand Calumet bet- turbed. For example, the East Branch ter—Recovery River, or maybe Revived was been relocated twice in the last cen- River. tury, once by U.S. Steel and once to per- mit construction of the Indiana Toll Road. 6.5.3 Further planning for water In fact the perennial flow of the river, as trail. Those few who canoe the East we know it today, is mainly effluent: in- Branch are surprised and thrilled at the cluding outfall from municipal wastewater prettiness of it. The water in the dredged treatment plants, around 90 percent of stretch is as clear as Lake Michigan and flow in the river is discharge (IDEM 1997). fairly deep, and most of the riparian area Prior to industrialization the river was is in a natural — but not undisturbed — closer to a marsh or wetland, periodically condition. Noise intrusion from the Toll drying into a mudflat. Road is relatively limited, and the indus- trial sites on the river come off as integral 6.5.2 Water trail and a Revived to the landscape. But nowhere have River. In keeping with the Corridor Vision plans been made for boaters to disem- and comments received from bark and go onto land, which is a bit like stakeholders in the present planning having no local-access roads for cars. A process, this plan retains a concentration further process of identifying sites along on establishing, enhancing, and con- the river in public ownership, or that are necting open space. It does so with the otherwise available, and establishing a understanding that the functionality of the river-related design for them would be a selected sites needs to be pre- requisite part of making the Grand Calu- served—that additional, public uses have met a water trail. to jive with existing uses—and that the Developing the river as a water trail sites need to be conceptually interlinked. would entail a fair amount of further plan- How could the approach extend further ning for site acquisition, drawing up pro- up and down the river? Envisioning the totype designs, and examining the ca- Grand Calumet as a recreational water pacity of the channel to take various trail is one way. After a century or more of types of boats various places. Connec- industrial and public works projects, the tivity is essential. Would a long-haul ca- river is connected to a web of canals and noeist be able to get from, say, Bridge original rivers branching densely through Street to Wolf Lake? Is a given connect- northeast Illinois and northwest Indiana. ing link deep enough, public, and non- Many of these, too, are receiving the re- seasonal? Disused railroad trestles cur- newed attention of planners, this time for rently cross the river in several spots, and recreation. The Indiana Department of many are low enough that high water Natural Resources has compiled an Out- could make them a bottleneck for boats standing Rivers List with federal and state passing down the river. river designations and the rivers in Indi- ana to which they apply (INRC 2003). 6.5.4 Culvert to Marquette Lagoons. There are Wild and Scenic Rivers, State One of the more interesting areas would Study Rivers, Blue Ribbon Trout Streams. be to the east: the culvert carrying flow There are also designated Canoe Trails, through U.S. Steel property from the which the Grand Calumet could become, Marquette Lagoons. If feasible, digging but an entirely new designation may out the river so that boats could pass

the delta institute /GARY RIVERFRONT REVIVAL PLAN/ 32 freely to Marquette Park would be a prime goal. U.S. Steel officials were doubtful about the proposal: they felt the engi- neering demands were impossibilities. Several roads and a coal yard overlie the culvert. Because a major source of flow at that point is effluent from the Gary Works coke plant, and accessories to the coke plant lie atop the culvert, one official sug- gested that daylighting the river would kill it, for the coke plant would have to cease operation and flow would drop to a trickle. There are also problems related to flow and water level control structures for the river and lagoons. Nevertheless, a will- ingness to continue discussion on U.S. Steel’s part would aid in visualizing the possible future of the river as a fully con- nected water trail.

the delta institute /GARY RIVERFRONT REVIVAL PLAN/ 33

7.1 Redeveloping the geted to the neighborhood. From this the employer would save on turnover costs, Horace Mann enhance recruitment, and improve its op- community erating environment by paying into the demand pull that gets homes built on va- Dividing the Horace Mann neighbor- cant lots. In some cases described below, hood into West, Central, and East Plan- the benefit is paid for by the state or fed- ning Areas,3 as in Figure A, there is a eral government. By tying homeowner- clearly visible decline in quality outward ship assistance to employment, we help from the stable Central Planning Area. ensure that creditworthy, stably-employed There are far more vacant lots in the East persons move to homes in neighbor- and West Planning Areas, and many hoods in need of revitalization. Employ- more buildings are abandoned or sub- ees acquire a double stake in the neigh- standard. One way to combat the decline borhood — work and residence — and of the neighborhood is to promote home- employers become even more substantial ownership, which gives the owner a long- assets to the community. term stake in the neighborhood and an interest in building the value of the sur- 7.1.1 Other efforts. Plans are already rounding property — through vigilance in afoot to redevelop Horace Mann; the reporting crime, joining or starting block neighborhood has had two comprehen- clubs, or scores of other ways. Benefits sive revitalization plans in the past ten would accrue to existing residents, own- years. What we offer in this section, ers and renters alike. Homeownership therefore, are mainly strategic recom- also helps build household net worth, mendations that fit in the gaps and focus which is significant in a neighborhood narrowly on EAH. In what follows, we where 27 percent of households are be- suggest strategies for EAH in the West low the federal poverty line (TCB 2003). and East Horace Mann Planning Areas. In the U.S. in 1995, the average home- Approaches available to the non-profit, owner had a net wealth of at least for-profit, and public sectors are outlined. $102,000, compared to $4,750 for an av- In essence, we are discussing ways to erage renter (Stegman 1999: 1). An influx stimulate demand for — that is, lower the of additional wealth would help level off price of — new owner-occupied housing. deterioration in the neighborhood. On the supply side, there are a fair num- One substantial barrier to promoting ber of new housing developments in homeownership is the level of financial Horace Mann in various stages of com- commitment to the home (and neighbor- pletion. Gary Citywide Development Cor- hood) required. This plan proposes poration is now building ten houses on meeting the barrier with employer- the 600–700 block of Pierce Street. Plans assisted housing (EAH). Employers in or are in for review on a development near near Horace Mann can offer housing Borman Square. Preparations are being benefits to their employees that are tar- made to develop the new South Shore neighborhood on the east end of Horace

3 Mann. Nevertheless, no specific strategic These divisions do not correspond to the sub- plans have been made to redevelop the neighborhoods identified in earlier planning ef- forts. They are only a way of highlighting areas of west end of Horace Mann specifically. We relative distress and stability, not a reinterpretation of sub-neighborhood boundaries.

the delta institute /GARY RIVERFRONT REVIVAL PLAN/ 34 will briefly discuss the shape redevelop- less employees per year is typical. At ment might take there. Bethany, the loans are forgivable at a rate of 20 percent per year. The employee 7.2 Financial benefit and eligibility contributes a $1,000 match, must qualify in EAH – Examples in the Chi- for a mortgage, and must attend home- cago Area ownership counseling (operated by Neighborhood Housing Services). In There are numerous examples of EAH other words, creditworthiness and some programs in the region. Several efforts capacity to save are required of the em- being coordinated by the Metropolitan ployee. Planning Council’s Regional Employer Assisted Collaboration for Housing 7.2.2 Income and occupation eligi- (REACH) for northeastern Illinois are bility. The matching funds from the Illi- available to draw from (see MPC 2004). nois Housing Development Authority that The most common forms of financial sweeten EAH in Illinois are made avail- benefit among REACH partners are down able only to employees in families earning payment and closing cost assistance. less than 80 percent of the area median This is also true nationally (Hoffman income. Otherwise employers are free to 1999). An employer contributes $2,000 to market their programs to a workforce $7,500 (most often $5,000) in no-interest, segment of their choosing. Advocate forgivable loans and obtains an agree- Bethany and Illinois Institute of Technol- ment that the employee will continue to ogy make their programs available to any work at his or her job for a specified pe- full-time employee. Sinai Health Systems riod of time, generally three to five years. in Lawndale, Illinois, restricts its program The arrangement typically requires a to registered nurses. matching contribution from the employee The object of these programs is com- and is enforced through a lien on the em- munity redevelopment. To that end, the ployee’s new property that expires at the Metropolitan Planning Council suggests end of the period. As an unfamiliar bene- that an employer restricting its assistance fit, down payment assistance serves a to a distressed neighborhood should not clear, readily understandable need. The shy from marketing the program to rela- highest perceived barrier to homeowner- tively higher-income employees. Not only ship, according to a Fannie Mae survey, are they more likely to qualify for a mort- is the cost of down payment (Fannie Mae gage, but they would be expected to in- 2003). ject stability into the neighborhood. For employees with other options, 7.2.1 Down payment assistance. though, down payment assistance of Down payment assistance programs in $5,000 over five years may not figure the region have started fairly small. For high enough to outweigh moving into instance, Advocate Bethany Hospital in certain neighborhoods. Supportive rede- Garfield Park, Illinois, has committed to velopment, such as the projects proposed provide EAH benefits of $3,000 to $5,000 in this plan, can aid in attracting moder- (for three or five years on the job) to 25 ate-to-middle income employees and people over five years, which amounts, at their families. a maximum, to a direct cost of $125,000. Setting aside funds sufficient for five or

the delta institute /GARY RIVERFRONT REVIVAL PLAN/ 35

7.2.3 Geographic eligibility. Advo- sistance as a no-interest, forgivable sec- cate Bethany’s program is restricted to ond mortgage. It offers more lenient credit employees who buy a home within a ten- requirements and takes a reduced down mile radius of the hospital. Sinai confines payment contribution from the employee, its assistance to purchasers of rehabbed among other benefits. Furthermore, the homes made available through Neighbor- program is not funded through allocations hood Housing Service’s “Livin’ in from the state, but through the sale of Lawndale” program. mortgage revenue bonds, so it is not hostage to waxing and waning commit- 7.3 Employer assisted housing with ment from the Legislature. the public sector 7.3.2 Geographic targeting. Again, Public sector employers have strong the primary objects of EAH in community potential to be leaders in employer- revitalization are targeting benefits to dis- assisted housing and could develop a tressed neighborhoods and retaining sta- program that targets the west side of ble employees there for some period of Horace Mann. The public sector shares time. Conditions imposed by the U.S. De- with hospitals a stewardship mission, partment of Housing and Urban Devel- giving it a strong, clear purpose for en- opment mean that buyers must live in gaging in direct revitalization through homes financed through the My Commu- EAH. Exercising a stabilizing influence al- nity program for at least five years or the ready, the Public Safety Building, fairly second mortgage loan will not be com- nearby at Fifth Avenue and Polk Street, pletely forgiven. The federal recapture tax houses a large number of law enforce- may also induce homebuyers to remain in ment and emergency service personnel. the home for at least nine years, although To the west, relatively nearby, is the Gary the Indiana Housing Finance Authority Sanitary District treatment plant. Teach- suggests that, for most buyers, the tax ers and other staff from Horace Mann would fall lightly if at all (IHFA n.d.). High School would be natural partici- The My Community program, how- pants, but the school has been closed. ever, is not targeted as narrowly to a spe- While not well compensated, most public cific neighborhood as an employer- sector jobs are fairly stable, despite the defined program might be, and employ- property value reassessment that has led ees could not, at present, be required by to staff cuts as budgets adjust. local officials to choose homes on the west side of Horace Mann. Two options, 7.3.1 My Community program. One therefore, are: powerful advantage of pursuing EAH in the public sector is that certain public • for participating public sector em- employees — teachers, fire fighters, law ployers to market the west side enforcement, and state, county, and mu- heavily, most effectively in close nicipal employees — are eligible for the partnership with the developer My Community program from the Indiana building or rehabbing the homes; Housing Finance Authority and Fannie or Mae. My Community gives a below- • for participating public sector em- market interest rate on the first mortgage ployers to offer a place-based and up to $7,000 in down payment as-

the delta institute /GARY RIVERFRONT REVIVAL PLAN/ 36

benefit on top of the My Commu- as a pilot, then offer closing cost assis- nity benefit. tance if the marketing-only program proves anemic.

7.3.2.1 Under the first option, the as- 7.3.3 Leadership. Because the City of sistance offered would be matchmaking Gary employs numerous police officers, and advertising. For instance, the em- firefighters, and court officials at the Pub- ployer could maintain a list of available lic Safety Building, the City is the entity homes in targeted neighborhoods, pro- best suited to take a leading role in EAH mote the My Community program with in west Horace Mann. The City employs posters and email announcements, assist about 2,000 workers overall. Other public employees in filling out the requisite sector participants, perhaps targeting forms, and give employees a certain other neighborhoods, could eventually in- number of hours off for touring homes clude Gary Public Schools, Lake County, and closing. Except for expenses associ- Gary Sanitary District, and others. ated with marketing, under this approach EAH would be costless for local govern- 7.4 The private sector and the ment. Indiana Housing Finance Authority Empowerment, Enterprise, and and Fannie Mae would assist in setting Airport Development Zones up the program and arrange homebuyer counseling. My Community has not been Private sector employers have busi- well utilized in Lake County, for which one ness-based reasons for EAH that are well explanation may be that not enough eligi- elaborated in REACH and Fannie Mae ble participants have been steered toward literature (see Fannie Mae 2003; MPC it. Indiana Housing Finance Authority and 2004). The Metropolitan Planning Council Fannie Mae would be willing partners in uses the figure that the cost of replacing developing an individualized program for an employee is about equal to the public sector employers in Gary. worker’s yearly salary; if EAH reduces turnover, then the cost of the housing 7.3.2.2 The second option seems to benefit may be small in comparison. The have more economic bite. Adding a sec- administrative costs of actually running ond benefit would work most logically as the program are minimized by closing cost assistance to complement outsourcing it; MPC 2004 describes how the down payment benefit from My Com- this works. Additionally, though, busi- munity; and there is precedent in Indiana nesses may be able to avail themselves for doing so (personal communication of the Empowerment, Enterprise, or Air- from Regina Potora, Indiana Housing Fi- port Development Zone tax credits not nance Authority; September 3, 2004). But offered to public and non-profit sector it is not clear that local government could, employers. It is very possible that the given fiscal constraints, provide an addi- credits could repay the cost of housing tional benefit on a continuous basis, or assistance over and above the savings that the added effect would be especially from reduced employee turnover and en- strong. Adverse politics may develop over hanced recruitment. the neighborhoods selected for the bene- fit. For these reasons, we suggest that 7.4.1 Empowerment Zone. The public sector employers try the first option Empowerment Zone is a community and

the delta institute /GARY RIVERFRONT REVIVAL PLAN/ 37 economic development program headed a credit of $15,000 per year × 20 percent at the national level by the Department of × 5 years less a $5,000 down payment Housing and Urban Development and benefit. Discounted at 5 percent, the net managed locally by the Gary, East Chi- present value to employers is about cago, Hammond Empowerment Zone of- $6,900; at 7 percent, it is about $4,900. fice. The boundaries of the Empowerment The enterprising and socially committed Zone in Gary are shown in Figure I. Only business, however, would look on the the portion of the Horace Mann neighbor- credits solely as a pass-through and pro- hood east of Grant Street is within the vide a housing benefit up to the break- Empowerment Zone, so the strategy out- even point, or about $11,900 and $9,900, lined below is applicable only there. Use respectively, at the discount rates above. of the Employment Credits could prove These are much more significant offer- quite beneficial to the South Shore rede- ings, while the indirect employer benefits velopment. of EAH would still repay the employer’s Among other tax benefits, a business efforts. located within the zone could claim an Employment Credit for a worker who lives 7.4.3 Income eligibility. We should within the zone and performs substan- also note that the Employment Credit car- tially all services for the business within ries no restrictions on the income of the the zone. The business could claim a employees. Using the Empowerment federal tax credit good for 20 percent of Zone Employment Credit is compatible the wages paid for the employee’s serv- with the attempt to attract moderate-to- ices per year (IRS 2004). The credit is middle income residents to distressed figured from the first $15,000 of the em- neighborhoods. However, the actual ployee’s yearly wages, so the maximum down payment assistance will be more credit is $3,000 per employee per year for useful and attractive to potential home- each year of Empowerment Zone desig- buyers on the lower end of that range. nation. Businesses in the zone will be eli- gible for the Employment Credit until De- 7.4.4 Enterprise and Airport Devel- cember 31, 2009 (HUD 2003). opment Zones. The Enterprise Zone of- fers tax credits that could also dovetail 7.4.2 Program benefit. Private em- with EAH, especially in areas where the ployers could offer housing assistance to Empowerment and Enterprise Zones their employees to induce them to move overlap, but no portion of Horace Mann is into the Empowerment Zone. The typical included within the latter. However, the down payment benefit of $5,000 that we Airport Development Zone, which offers are recommending is a one-time expen- the same benefits, includes a small sliver diture. In contrast, an employee who of Horace Mann west of Bridge Street. moves into the zone to take advantage of The Enterprise and Airport Development an employer's assistance in buying a Zones are programs authorized by the house will return tax benefits over the life State of Indiana and managed locally by of the Empowerment Zone designation, the Gary Urban Enterprise Association. more than offsetting the cost of the Parts of the zones are shown in Figure I. housing benefit. For a business offering Employment Expense Credits are down payment assistance in calendar available to businesses within the zones year 2005, the maximum return would be that employ residents of the zones. The

the delta institute /GARY RIVERFRONT REVIVAL PLAN/ 38 credit is worth about half of the prise and Empowerment Zones. The da- Empowerment Zone Employment Credit. tabase contains contact information, It is computed as either 10 percent of ex- Standard Industrial Classifications, as penditures on qualified employees, or as well as other data; it can be made avail- $1,500 × the number of qualified employ- able from the Delta Institute on request. ees, whichever is less (IDOR 2003). To maximize efficiency, as there are Tax deductions are also available for many businesses within Gary that poten- zone employees/residents themselves. tially could be contacted, the list should Qualified employees are able to deduct be sorted by likelihood of positive re- up to $7,500 per year from their state- sponse. For example, it appears from taxable income (IDOC n.d.). As the ad- survey research that, within the private justed gross income tax rate on individu- sector, utilities and finance, insurance, als in Indiana is 3.4 percent, the maxi- and real estate (FIRE) firms stand out as mum tax benefit from moving to the En- willing partners in EAH, and that larger terprise Zone would be only $255 per employers are more likely to participate year. Taken as an annuity, however, the (Hoffman 2000). Business contacts net present value of the benefit is about should be accompanied by information on $8,500 at 3 percent and $5,100 at 5 per- what types of homes are available and cent. Since this benefit—as with the where. Second stage planning would re- Empowerment Zone Employment view the literature more comprehensively Credit—inheres partly in the person, not to design a marketing strategy. solely in the property, it is unlikely to be lost through capitalization into home pur- 7.5 Employer-assisted housing with chase price. Methodist Northlake There is some uncertainty about the continued availability of the credits, for 7.5.1 Hospitals and other institu- the Enterprise Zones have a programmed tional employers. Institutional employers lifespan. The Gary Urban Enterprise As- have been shown to be somewhat more sociation was founded in 1985, but the likely to engage in EAH than other types zone designation lasts for 10 years with of employers (Hoffman 2000). Among in- two 5-year extensions (IDOR 2003). stitutions, hospitals seem to be leaders across the U.S., which also appears true 7.4.5 Next steps. The Gary Depart- of REACH partners, although municipali- ment of Community Development should ties and universities in the Chicago area coordinate a campaign of contacting also make up a large fraction of the insti- businesses within the Zones to sell the tutional REACH partners. There are good EAH concept to them. This could be reasons for hospitals to be especially in- funded and carried out by the City, terested in EAH. One is based on the funded by the City and carried out by a bottom line. There is a generalized short- contractor, or carried out by another party age of qualified healthcare personnel, so in collaboration with the Department. We a benefit that roots employees where they have done some preliminary work by are for several years is valuable for help- mapping Gary businesses in a Geo- ing retain them in the face of competing graphic Information System, using a da- offers. Nurses are typically offered sign- tabase obtained from Dun and Brad- ing bonuses on hiring; housing benefits street, to locate those within the Enter- could be wrapped into the bonus. And

the delta institute /GARY RIVERFRONT REVIVAL PLAN/ 39 turnover costs can be quite high, even Shore line, is clearly distressed and ap- among lower-paid staff. parently has no reinvestment on the hori- Another reason is the mission of zon. For a future redevelopment effort to healthcare. Many hospitals, especially be successful, data collection would first those that are organized as non-profits or be necessary to support decision-making. based in faith, take a holistic approach to First, assess whether the west side of health. If patients from the community Horace Mann can be rebuilt through infill surrounding the hospital arrive in a state development or whether larger scale re- of ill health that is really a function of construction has a higher probability of neighborhood disintegration, it makes success. The Community Builders, Inc. sense to approach the problem on that did such a survey — a windshield survey level, and EAH can become a community — of the east side in its 2003 Horace stabilization and redevelopment strategy. Mann Community Comprehensive Revi- Unsafe housing conditions, such as lead- talization Plan, concluding implicitly that based paint, can lead to very specific ill- condemning and rebuilding several nesses. In the Englewood community of blocks was the preferred option. The Chicago, St. Bernard Hospital hired staff same should be done for the west side, to concentrate on redevelopment and, in although more detailed data should be partnership with the City of Chicago, built gathered about the physical condition of new housing in the neighborhoods sur- the buildings. Although its feasibility can- rounding the hospital. Although St. Ber- not be known without further study, infill nard offered housing benefits to its per- development would be much cheaper and sonnel, the new homes were made avail- easier than razing and rebuilding. able to eligible non-employees too. 7.6.2 Parcels. Much of the land is al- 7.5.2 Methodist Hospital Northlake. ready in public ownership (which is a par- Methodist Northlake is another strong as- tial indicator of neighborhood quality), so set in the Horace Mann neighborhood. it could be assembled readily. Further in- The recommendations set forth for the formation about pending tax sale avail- City also apply to Methodist, since its ability has been gathered and is mapped health care workers, too, can take ad- in Figure J.4 The City could later assist an vantage of the down payment assistance interested developer by acquiring Treas- offered through the My Community pro- urer’s tax sale properties and properties gram. It would perhaps have more free- owned by Lake County, then transferring dom to target additional benefits to the them to the developer, along with city- geography it chooses. Were the City to owned parcels, for a nominal charge. The develop the marketing infrastructure for a west side is, unfortunately, not a favor- program targeted to its employees, it able location: isolated, invisible, and cut would appear easy to translocate it to off by the South Shore tracks. Admittedly Methodist. there are priority areas, along Fourth and Fifth Avenues and Broadway, for exam- 7.6 Redevelopment on the west side ple, where redevelopment would have a of Horace Mann stronger psychological advantage. And

7.6.1 Data needed. West Horace 4 These data are current as of August 2004. Al- Mann, especially north of the South though there was a Commissioner’s sale in No- vember, it is unlikely that these properties sold.

the delta institute /GARY RIVERFRONT REVIVAL PLAN/ 40 there are signs that the City is looking to liquidate its vacant property holdings by selling them cheaply to adjoining owners.

the delta institute /GARY RIVERFRONT REVIVAL PLAN/ 41

8.0 Conclusion Riverfront Revival planning process voiced the concern that this plan—that The Grand Calumet River, one of the any plan—may present attractive ideas, nation’s most highly polluted waterways, but will in the end be another disappoint- has not been able to live up to its name ment if the ideas are not implemented. for as long as anyone living can remem- Sound and well-supported ideas for rede- ber. A threat to living things that might velopment along the river in Gary must come into contact with its waters, the river spark action and should not remain on was sometimes an assault on the senses shelves or in computer hard drives. and often an economic hindrance to nearby property owners. It was not un- It is up to each of us then, to take the reasonable for the cities through which next steps toward reviving the riverfront. the river runs to ignore and avoid it, whether consciously or through habit. As the last century drew to a close, people began to recognize and work for the Grand Cal’s potential as a natural re- source. With the recent removal of con- taminated sediments from the East Branch, the promise of a river in Gary which brings enjoyment to the community and contributes to the city’s economic vi- tality is renewed, revived. This conceptual plan titled the Gary Riverfront Revival tries to open the river to the city and its residents, to draw peo- ple to the Grand Cal. The plan also points to opportunities to stabilize and revitalize the nearby residential community. Each element is critical to the long-term protec- tion and stewardship of the river, and to maximizing its potential as an asset and amenity to Gary. Equally important, the ideas presented herein have been identi- fied as important by stakeholders in the river’s future. The concepts put forth here are not grandiose—the plan veers away from the biggest dreams for the time being, and instead points toward opportunities for smaller, manageable, realistic, and af- fordable first steps. This plan also com- plements several other plans currently being implemented in Gary. Nearly every one of the many people involved in providing input for the Gary

the delta institute /GARY RIVERFRONT REVIVAL PLAN/ 42

9.0 References

Anonymous (Opinion). November 22, 2004. “Discover the Region’s History, Diversity.” Northwest Indiana Times. Accessed at http://nwitimes.com (November 30, 2004) Available at internet address above or at public libraries The Community Builders, Inc. [TCB]. June 2003. Horace Mann Community Compre- hensive Revitalization Plan. Report for the City of Gary, Department of Community Development. Available from Gary Department of Community Development DiMaggio, Paul and Ostrower, Francie. 1990. “Participation in the Arts by Black and White Americans.” Social Forces 68(3): 753-778. Available at academic libraries or through Interlibrary Loan Earth Tech, Inc. March 26, 2004. Dredging Completion Report: Grand Calumet River Sediment Remediation Project. Report for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5: Chicago, IL. Available from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5 (Chi- cago, 800.621.8431) Federal National Mortgage Association [Fannie Mae]. 2003. Employer-Assisted Hous- ing: Improving the Bottom Line and Unlocking Doors to Homeownership for Your Employees. Accessed at http://www.fanniemae.com/housingcommdev/ solu- tions/eah.jhtml (August 30, 2004). Available at internet address above City of Gary Board of Parks and Recreation [CGBPR]. 2003. Master Plan, 2003–2007. Gary, IN: Author. Available from Gary Department of Parks and Recreation General Services Administration [GSA]. 2004. “45.024 Promotion of the Arts_Grants to Organizations and Individuals.” In Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance. Ac- cessed at http://12.46.245.173/cfda/cfda.html (November 21, 2004). Available at internet address above Goldfarb, William. 1988. Water Law, Second Edition. Chelsea, MI: Lewis. Available at academic libraries or through Interlibrary Loan Grand Cal Task Force [GCTF]. 2000. The Grand Calumet River/Indiana Harbor Ship Canal Corridor Vision. Whiting, IN: Author. Available from Gary Department of Environmental Affairs Hoffman, Daniel. 2000. “Another Look at Employer-Assisted Housing.” Accessed at http://policy.rutgers.edu/eah/eah.html (September 1, 2004). Available at internet address above Hoffman, Daniel. 1999. “How Employers View Employer-Assisted Housing.” Accessed at http://policy.rutgers.edu/eah/employers.html (September 1, 2004). Available at internet address above Hoover, William. 2002. Tax Treatment of Conservation Easements. Publication ID-275. West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University Cooperative Extension Service. Accessed at http://www.ces.purdue.edu/extmedia/ID/ID-275.pdf (December 4, 2004). Available at internet address above or through Purdue Extension, 888.EXT.INFO

the delta institute /GARY RIVERFRONT REVIVAL PLAN/ 43

Indiana Department of Commerce [IDOC]. No date. “Tax Incentives.” Accessed at http://www.in.gov/doc/ communities/exTax.html (September 5, 2004). Available at internet address above Indiana Department of Environmental Management [IDEM]. 2004. “Project Management Guidance Documents.” Accessed at http://www.in.gov/idem/water/ planbr/wsm/319grantmgmt.html (December 6, 2004). Indiana Department of Environmental Management [IDEM]. 2003. “Project Planning Tips.” Accessed at http://www.in.gov/idem/water/planbr/401/ppt.html (November 18, 2004). Available at internet address above Indiana Department of Environmental Management [IDEM]. December 1997. Remedial Action Plan Stage II. Indianapolis, IN: Author. Available from the Indiana Department of Environmental Management, Northwest Regional Office, 219.881.2446 Indiana Department of Natural Resources [IDNR]. November 2004. Indiana Coastal Grants Program Application Guidance: 2005 Funding Cycle. Accessed at http://www.in.gov/dnr/lakemich/grants/2005%20Guidance.pdf (December 6, 2004). Available at internet address above Indiana Department of Natural Resources [IDNR]. January 2004. LCWF Manual. Ac- cessed at http://www.in.gov/dnr/ outdoor/grants/lwcf.pdf (December 5, 2004). Available at internet address above or by calling 317.232.4070 Indiana Department of Natural Resources [IDNR]. 2003. “Hometown Indiana Grant Pro- gram.” Accessed at http://www.in.gov/dnr/outdoor/grants/hometown.html (December 4, 2004). Available at internet address above Indiana Department of Revenue [IDOR]. January 2003. Information Bulletin #66. Ac- cessed at http://www.in.gov/dor/reference/bulletins/income/pdf/ib66.pdf (December 6, 2004) Available at internet address above Indiana Housing Finance Authority [IHFA]. No date. The Reality of the Recapture Tax. Accessed at http://www.in.gov/ihfa/home/newsfaq/faq/recapture.pdf (September 2, 2004). Available at internet address above Indiana Natural Resources Commission [INRC]. 2004. “Roster of Indiana waters de- clared navigable or nonnavigable (listed by waterway name).” Accessed at http://www.in.gov/nrc/ policy/III.html (November 14, 2004). Available at internet address above Indiana Natural Resources Commission [INRC]. 2003. “Outstanding Rivers List for Indi- ana.” Accessed at http://www.in.gov/nrc/policy/outstand.html (December 6, 2004). Available at internet address above Industrial Economics, Inc. [IEI]. May 2004. Restoration and Compensation Determina- tion Plan: Grand Calumet River/Indiana Harbor Canal natural Resource Damage Assessment. Report for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Indiana Depart- ment of Environmental Management. Accessed at http://midwest.fws.gov/ Grand- CalumetRiver/ (December 5, 2004).

the delta institute /GARY RIVERFRONT REVIVAL PLAN/ 44

Available at internet address above or by calling U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service at 812.334.4261 Internal Revenue Service [IRS]. January 2004. Tax Incentives for Distressed Communi- ties. Publication 954. Accessed at http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p954.pdf (Septem- ber 5, 2004). Available at internet address above Landmarks Preservation Council of Illinois [LPCI]. n.d. “How do I get started?” Accessed at http://www.landmarks.org/easement_how.htm (December 6,2004). Available at internet address above McMillen, Dan. 2003. Economic Benefits of the Grand Calumet River Remediation Pro- ject: Evidence from the Gary Housing Market. Report for the Delta Institute; Chicago, Illinois. Available from the Delta Institute or online at http://www.delta-institute.org/ publications/Grand%20Cal%20Econ%20Study.pdf Metropolitan Planning Council. 2004. “Employer Assisted Housing Resources.” Ac- cessed at http://www.metroplanning.org/ourwork/housing.asp (November 21, 2004). Available at internet address above Northwest Indiana Quality of Life Council [QLC]. 2004. Quality of Life Indicators Report Gary, IN: Author. Available by calling 219.981.5629 or online at www.lcisdb.com/pubs/ 2004%20QLC%20Indicators%20Report.pdf National Park Service [NPS]. 2004. “Urban Park and Recreation Recovery.” Accessed at http://www.nps.gov/ ncrc/programs/ uprr/index.html (June 21, 2004). Available at internet address above Stegman, Michael. 1999. State and Local Affordable Housing Programs: a Rich Tapes- try. Washington, D.C.: Urban Land Institute. Available at academic libraries or through Interlibrary Loan Transportation Research Board [TRB]. 2002. A Guide to Best Practices for Achieving Context Sensitive Solutions. NCHRP Report 480. Available at academic libraries or purchasable at www.nationalacademies.org/trb U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development [HUD]. 2003. Tax Incentive Guide for Businesses in the Renewal Communities, Empowerment Zones, and Enterprise Communities. Accessed at http://www.hud.gov/ offices/cpd/ economicdevelop- ment/library/taxguide2003.pdf (September 5, 2004). Available at internet address above Wolff Clements and Associates (WCA). February 27, 2004. Gary Green Link Master Plan (Draft). Report for City of Gary, Department of Environmental Affairs. Available from Gary Department of Environmental Affairs

the delta institute /GARY RIVERFRONT REVIVAL PLAN/ 45

10.0 Summary of next steps

The following table shows the first few immediate steps toward accomplishing the pro- jects described in this plan. Details can be found in the text. The actions (in gray) are in rough order of priority. Parties to be involved, as well as suggested leadership roles, are shown in the left column. Issues to be addressed are in the right-hand column; contin- gent relationships are indicated where appropriate.

Proposed project or site Action(s) Leadership Central issues and requirements Parties involved • Contacts (where not obvious)

Bridge Street boat launch City of Gary (CoG) discussion with DNR CoG Dept. Environ. Affairs Lifting USS obligation to remove launch facility DNR Functional stabilization of site • Nick Heinzelman Second phase facilities to be provided • Bill James, F&W Division Chief Timeline and cost IDEM Expectations for eventual disposition of oxbow land Concordance with recomms. here or other humanistic design Engineering and detailed design studies for launch area CoG discussion with Sanitary District (GSD) and State CoG Dept. Environ. Affairs Avoiding disturbance to, and keeping continued access to, infra- structure on the site GSD Board Attorney Requirements for combined sewer outfall on site CoG Law Department Resolution of parcel ownership IN Department of Administration • Jim Lewis, State Land Office Devise safety message and health promotion strategy consistent with recreational use CoG Dept. Environ. Affairs IDEM Indiana Dept. of Health/Fish Advi- sory program DNR

Ambridge Park enhancements Determination of alignment for Gary Green Link trail CoG Dept. Environ. Affairs Continuing Green Link along river on north edge of park Wolff-Clements Associates CoG Parks Grant application for seawall construction CoG Dept. Environ. Affairs Requires: Consulting engineer Feasibility and demonstration of purpose CoG Parks Cost estimation Evaluation of reproduction techniques for seawall Application for grant to fund recreation facility construction CoG Dept. Parks/Park Board Contingent upon authorization of funding Consulting architect/engineer Requires: Detailed design drawings

the delta institute /GARY RIVERFRONT REVIVAL PLAN/ 46

Cost estimation Amendment of Master Plan

Conversion of C-lot to park Open discussions with U.S. Steel CoG Mayor Restarting tours of mill Gary Works general manager Contingent upon positive news from environmental assess.: Transfer of tax benefits as funding mechanism for C-lot Appraisal, determination of annual tax benefit Management arrangements Maintaining security Providing materials for wave rail/sculpture park Take preliminary steps for C-lot/downtown connection completion CoG Dept. Planning Construction drawings for wave rail/terminus sculpture Consulting planner/architect Detailed work-up of mural Cost estimates Stage 2 planning for C-lot park CoG Dept. Planning Contingent upon positive news from U.S. Steel discussions Consulting landscape architect Requires: Detailed site development drawings Museum market study if negative news on plant tours

Employer assisted housing strategy Outreach to businesses within the Empowerment and Enterprise Zones CoG Dept. Community Develop. Preparing package of tax forms and instructions Contractor Marketing strategy Non-/For-profit developers Partnerships with developers Identifying and contacting businesses Development of CoG employer assisted housing program CoG Dept. Community Develop. Partnerships with developers CoG Mayor’s Office Compiling information on available homes Indiana Housing Finance Authority Designing marketing tools • Regina Potora Fannie Mae • Curt Wiley (Indiana Partner ship Office Predevelopment work for West Horace Mann rebuild CoG Dept. Community Develop. Detailed housing condition survey Consulting planner

the delta institute /GARY RIVERFRONT REVIVAL PLAN/ 47

Figure A the delta institute /GARY RIVERFRONT REVIVAL PLAN/ Bridge Street boat launch enhancement Conversion of C-lot to park Ambridge Park and museum site enhancement

Planned South Shore neighborhood redevelopment Union Station trailhead

Proposed route of Gary Green Link multi-use trail

Connection: C-lot to Gateway Park downtown

West Horace Mann Central Horace Mann East Horace Mann planning area planning area planning area

PROJECTS PROPOSED IN THIS PLAN

the delta institute | great cities urban data visualization laboratory /GARY RIVERFRONT REVIVAL PLAN/ CONCEPTUAL OVERVIEW MAP Figure B the delta institute /GARY RIVERFRONT REVIVAL PLAN/ Dock

Boat ramp

Viewing platform Information kiosk

Stairs and wheelchair ramp to platform

Grass steps (terrace) Parking

Gatehouse Pavilion

Viewing plaza B T r a i d n g e e y

S S t t r r e e e e t t

Second Avenue

the delta institute | great cities urban data visualization laboratory /GARY RIVERFRONT REVIVAL PLAN/ BRIDGE STREET BOAT LAUNCH ENHANCEMENT (phase II) Figure C the delta institute /GARY RIVERFRONT REVIVAL PLAN/ ALTERNATIVE ROUTES FOR GARY GREEN LINK PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE INTERPRETIVE WALKWAY TRAIL OXBOW AS PARK the delta institute | great cities urban data visualization laboratory /GARY RIVERFRONT REVIVAL PLAN/ ADDITIONAL POSSIBILITIES AT BRIDGE STREET Figure D the delta institute /GARY RIVERFRONT REVIVAL PLAN/ 1

3 2

CITY OF GARY CITY OF GARY DEPT. OF PARKS INDIANA TRANSPORTATION FINANCE AUTHORITY STATE OF INDIANA NATIONAL PARK SERVICE 1 BONGI PROPERTY 3 BRIDGE STREET LAUNCH INDIANA DEPT. OF NATURAL RESOURCES CENTERPOINT NIPSCO U.S. STEEL INDIANA INDUSTRIAL INVESTMENTS SCA TISSUE 2 OXBOW PROPERTY the delta institute | great cities urban data visualization laboratory /GARY RIVERFRONT REVIVAL PLAN/OWNERSHIP OF SELECTED PARCELS NEAR THE GRAND CALUMET RIVER Figure E the delta institute /GARY RIVERFRONT REVIVAL PLAN/ Toll Road ramp

Rock retaining wall designed to mimic existing rubble wall on U.S. Steel property

Pavilion Grass steps to water's edge Path joins redevelopment area to park

Existing playground Entrance plaza Second Avenue AMBRIDGE PARK (drawn as existing) B u c h a n a n

S t .

South Shore line

ELEVATION

Consolidated stone wall Path along river

CROSSWALK/SIGNALIZATION GREEN LINK ROUTE ALTS. PROPOSED SOUTH SHORE REDEVELOPMENT ALT. USE FOR BASEBALL DIAMOND the delta institute | great cities urban data visualization laboratory /GARY RIVERFRONT REVIVAL PLAN/ AMBRIDGE PARK ENHANCEMENT (site plan + possibilities and connections) Figure F the delta institute /GARY RIVERFRONT REVIVAL PLAN/

Figure G the delta institute /GARY RIVERFRONT REVIVAL PLAN/

Figure H the delta institute /GARY RIVERFRONT REVIVAL PLAN/ C-lot and Sidewalk U.S. Steel Gary Works Section view

Road Perspective view

Overhead view

"Wave rail" of tube steel running between road and sidewalk

Freight rail viaduct Union Station

Proposed Gary Green Link trail

Toll Road

Mural of Lake Michigan on wall of South Shore line overpass; waves continue around corner under viaduct as if passing through the lake.

South Shore viaduct

GATEWAY PARK

Downtown Gary Perspective view of wave rail terminus in Gateway Park downtown the delta institute | great cities urban data visualization laboratory /GARY RIVERFRONT REVIVAL PLAN/DESIGN TREATMENT FOR CONNECTING GARY WORKS C-LOT TO DOWNTOWN GARY Figure I the delta institute /GARY RIVERFRONT REVIVAL PLAN/

Figure J the delta institute /GARY RIVERFRONT REVIVAL PLAN/