Below is an article in the Hyde Park Herald about our involvement with the potential redevelopment of Harper Court. We are very encouraged by the support our plans have received. We look forward to continuing the ongoing dialogue.

Front Page

Second Page

http://www.hpherald.com/index.html

Romero Cook Design Studio has been working with Hyde Park / Kenwood Community Council, as well as members of the community, to develop a alternative for what could happen in Harper Court. which is currently a under-utilized and ineffective space. Through a process of community input, including the 53rd Street Visioning Workshop, a design concept has been developed that is viable, innovative, and responsive to the needs of the greater community without sacrificing the character the context of surrounding area.

The incorporated principles of the plan are derived from a rigorous evaluation of successful places in the United States and abroad. In doing this, we extracted the qualities of these places and incorporated them into the plan. At the same time, we studied the qualities of the local architecture of Hyde Park and Chicago that are based on our climate, culture, and history. We are not trying to reinvent the wheel or create a folly as other approaches might try to do. We are using the principles of good urban design and building design to create a real place that will be timeless as well serve as a destination for people within the community to live, work, and shop.

We hope you enjoy what you see. Please feel free to comment below.

Existing Aerial:

Existing View, from south.

Existing View, from northwest

Proposed Site Plan:

Section through new plaza, looking south:

Section through new plaza, looking east:

Section through new plaza, looking north:

Neighborhoods can be planned to make it possible to walk to any everyday destination within a fifteen-minute walk. This proximity of amenities is achieved by incorporating zoning that requires a certain density with mixed uses. The availability of public transportation is key to creating cities with great pedestrian-based neighborhoods. If public transportation is available, people will then be able to utilize public transportation to go to work in the larger commercial center or to another destination in the city.

In general, pedestrian-based neighborhoods are able to provide a full range of services in a relatively small area, thus creating more space for more-defined green areas of nature. Large cities can be made up of several neighborhoods, or “nodes”, that are all comprehensively planned out.

Chicago is a great example of this: a large city with many pedestrian-based neighborhoods with large reliance on public transportation. You can go to most everywhere in Chicago via public transportation. Today’s continued success of the original Chicago urban plan is a testament to the logic of pedestrian-based planning.

Automobile-based city planning is based on the principle that since we have cars, and people enjoy having cars, we should create cities that utilize them. In area with this sort of planning, there are strict single-use zoning requirements, which stemmed from an overreaction from wanting residential uses separated from industrial uses. While this is a worthy goal, we are not in the Industrial Revolution anymore.

This creates distance from residential areas of the city to the commercial areas of the city. Distance mandates the use of a car, and with more cars comes more congestion. The solution to this problem, unfortunately, is to add more highways. Many cities, including Boston and Milwaukee, are bucking this false solution to traffic congestion by actually tearing down highways.

Along with the single-use zoning requirements, there are also strict parking requirements for commercial uses. This stems from the planning put forth is designed for the car, not the human. Because of these requirements, land gets eaten up with no reasonable means to control it. Because this type of planning is not “node-based”, with no defined edge, nature is disregarded.

What this planning says is that everyone has a right to a car, which is the prevailing thought of everyone who HAS a car. Everyone is affected by city planning, but not everyone can afford to buy a car. This creates a situation where the “have-nots” are given a further disadvantage. We were given feet at birth, but not everyone is given a car on their sixteenth birthday.

In the long history of the Olympic Games, cities have transformed themselves to put on the world’s largest sporting event. While the Games last two weeks, these transformations last for decades. Often times, specifically in the 20th century, what is left of the built environment designed and constructed for the Olympics does not maintain its luster. It is a vexing problem: how do you create something that is to thrill for two weeks and then be adapted for a hundred years?

Chicago has an opportunity to host the 2016 Summer Olympic Games. Many observers in the city have seen as a chance for Chicago to become a true “world city”. How can the urban planning and architecture that serves for the Games be adapted to what Chicagoans will live with for a hundred years?

First, the planning must be in keeping with what has been successful thus far. Time-tested traditions of pedestrian-based neighborhoods with solid density will not just serve as infrastructure for the Olympics, but for the city for decades. Chicago’s numerous neighborhoods, planned in the 19th century, continue to provide everything its residents need day-to-day. Also, the Olympics are a great opportunity to solve the ever-present problem of a lack of variety in housing. Chicago has a great opportunity in having an extraordinary amount of open space / vacant land in the city limits. Creating a more suburban environment, (car based), with this land would be a disservice to the history of the city. Just because we have more the space does not mean we should not build dense, pedestrian based neighborhoods in which its habitants can enjoy streets, gardens, and parks.

Second, the architecture of the Olympic Village must have a sense of permanence and sustainability. For every successful Olympic Village, there is one that after a few short years looks outdated and irrelevant. The architecture should reflect the great tradition of building we have in Chicago. To turn our backs to over a hundred years of tradition by designing trendy architecture would be a disservice to our strong tradition of architecture.

In the planning, we must take into consideration all income types in designing the Olympic Village. The Games are about amateurs, and to create something that is only for the wealthy would be against the basic philosophy of the Games. Creating accessible architecture would create a sense of community that the Games are all about.

In the 20th century, Chicago’s urban planning was defined by the failed experiment of large-scale public housing projects. Now is the time to learn from our mistakes, not be taken by trendy planning ideas, and create sustainable development that will both inspire for the Olympics and last for a hundred years.