Thursday, May 15, 2008

Public Land, Private Gain

Millennium Park in downtown Chicago has always provoked mixed feelings.

Carved out of the northern end of the much larger Grant Park, Millennium Park is undeniably one of the most spectacular locations in the whole city: It has memorable sculptures (including the ultra-shiny Cloud Gate, better known locally as "The Bean"); a fountain visitors are encouraged to walk in that has building-high video screens at either end that spit water out of the faces projected there; a relaxing cafe; a wintertime iceskating rink; a bridge and music pavilion designed by world-renowned architect Frank Gehry; and a panoramic view of one of the greatest skylines on the planet.

The park also, unfortunately, represents much civic blundering: It ran well over budget; numerous deadlines for completion were blown (as the name implies, it was supposed to open in 2000--it didn't open until 2004); and that relaxing cafe is run by a group that just happens to have connections to the city's longtime mayor, Richard M. Daley and just happens to have gotten a great deal on the lease. (Daley has long denied that he had anything to do with what, to all appearances, was a sweetheart deal. However, given the numerous investigations and subsequent convictions for corruption throughout Daley's administration, doubts continue to linger.)

Now, the city is trying to add more to the area, already ten pounds in a five-pound bag, by moving the Chicago Children's Museum from its cramped quarters at Navy Pier to a a spot in Grant Park adjacent to Millennium Park currently occupied by a plaza named for Daley's father, Richard J. Daley (also a long-serving mayor of the city).

Numerous objections have been raised to this plan by groups concerned about protecting the intergity of the parks (and point to decades of legal precedents prohibiting buildings in public parks), by condo owners concerned about the increase in traffic in what is already a congested area, and by average citizens who worry that such a deal opens the door further for giving public land over to private institutions (even a not-for-profit one like the Children's Museum).

The mayor has no such concerns. He has been a vocal--even vehement--supporter of the move, sometimes literally and hysterically shouting down detractors of the plan as anti-child or racist.

I think it's a bad idea as well, but mostly because of the age-old realtor's mantra: location, location, location. It's a lousy spot for a hot dog stand, much less a museum. It's an awkward, out-of-character attachment to either park, a square peg being rammed into a round hole with excessive force. Other sites have been proposed, especially by the Chicago Tribune which has run a series of editorials suggesting alternate sites where the museum might be a better fit, like the "museum campus" immediately south of the downtown area (a campus that already attracts millions of visitors, including many children, every year) or areas that could use the attention the museum would attract, like Garfield Park on the city's West Side, a long-ignored jewel that could bask in the light shined on it by the presence of such a world-class institution.

The museum's choice of location--and the objections to it--have caused the board to attempt to please everyone with changes to the design of the structure, which now would reside mostly underground. That would be great if the children were moles or earthworms. That would also be great if citizens who, funny enough, would like to use the park land as park land could actually do so; the footprint of the new museum, even after it's been shovel as far into the ground as possible, still makes the land above it virtually useless.

It does not seem, however, that either the museum board or the mayor have any interest in entertaining suggestions for other, more suitable locations. The proposal for the move goes before the city's Plan Commission today, and it's expected to pass with little oppostition from the Commission board, which is entirely appointed by (guess who?) Mayor Daley. While civic groups and individual protestors will likely make noise at the Commission meeting today, I would not be the least surprised to see each commissioner take turns curling up in the mayor's lap and getting a tummy rub from His Honor. That would be far more likely than even one of the commissioners standing up and saying, in a clear and firm voice, "This is wrong, sir."

It does not matter whether this move is what's best for the parks, the city, the museum or, most importantly, the children. It's what the mayor wants. And what this mayor wants--from the midnight demolition to the lakefront airport, Meigs Field, to the hideous "renovation" of Soldier Field, the Bears' football stadium that now looks like the mothership from Close Encounters of the Third Kind has crashed within its classically columned walls--this mayor gets.

1 comment:

JB said...

Great post, Ed.

As usual, I'm just disgusted by the lack of common sense exhibited by our City Council members. Let's not even discuss their lack of courage to face down Daley. Only a few members dare to challenge the man, usually about matters much less significant than the new location of the Chicago Children's Museum.

Relocating the museum to Grant Park is such a monumentally bad idea-- for all the reasons you've stated-- that I'm shocked it ever flew from someone's lame brain and landed on the negotiation table. My guess is that Grant Park will be the sticking place, no matter what the opposing sides do . What Daley wants, he gets. Dammit.