What the City Wants and Doesn't Want in a Burnham Memorial

The competition to design a new memorial to Daniel Burnham marking the 100th anniversary of his plan for Chicago has been described as difficult.

A field of 20 architecture and design firms has been whittled down to three finalists and the winner will be announced June 19th.

The Burnham Park Memorial Committee had some very specific requirements of the firms that were invited to the competition, and we're told that each came up with a very different solution.

For the purposes of giving the firms some design constraints to work with, they were told that the memorial would be located on the north side of the Field Museum, and that the budget for the project was five million dollars.

That's the same amount that was spent on the peristyle at the northwest corner of Millennium Park, which is officially known as the Millennium Monument.

Though official fundraising hasn't begun, several entities are already doing what they can to support the effort.  Among them, the Talbott Hotel, the Graham Foundation, and American Airlines.

Richard Driehaus, the man who recently turned a Near North mansion into a museum, has pledged $250,000 for the effort.  That's a personal pledge from him -- not from a company, foundation, or organization.  Not many people are that generous these days.

The 20 firms in the competition were encouraged, but not required, to include the following:

• A sculpture of Daniel Burnham.
  
• Narrative elements to make it a teaching facility and not just another statue out standing in its field.
  
• A donor wall to permanently thank those who made it possible
  
• A water feature
• Dramatic lighting elements
• A seating area within the memorial.
• A viewing area outside the memorial.

For inspiration, the entrants were pointed to the Franklin Delano Roosevelt National Memorial in Washingotn, DC.  Some of its elements:

In addition to the requirements from the Memorial Committee, the contestants are up against Mayor Daley's order not to mess with the view of the Chicago skyline from the Museum Campus.  Unlike everything else from the committee, the Mayor's orders are orders, not suggestions.  It's for that reason that we hear that of the three finalists currently being considered, none of them have much in the way of verticality.  All are pretty low and integrated into the terrain.

We'll keep you updated on what happens, and keep an eye on our Twitter feed on June 19th for the announcement of the winner.

Finding a Home for Daniel Burnham

Any large project undertaken in a major metropolitan area is going to be fraught with controversy.  It's just the nature of the game.

The current game being played is "Where's Burnham" -- an exercise is finding the perfect, or rather least imperfect, location for the new Daniel Brunham Memorial.

A number of locations have been proposed and rejected for one reason or another, but officially at least, none has been chosen.


View Larger Map

One location under consideration by the organizers of the Burnham competition is in a field in Grant Park south of the sitting Lincoln statue (see map above).  Officially, the name of this area is President's Court.  It has the advantages of being somewhat centrally located in Grant Park, and in an area with a fairly low density of other monuments.

But the Chicago Park District doesn't like that location for a Burnham Monument.  Can you guess why? 

Don't tell anyone, but it's being "held" in reserve for a future Barack Obama monument.  Barack Obama's statue would stare north across Congress Parkway at the existing Abraham Lincoln monument. Get the symbolism?  At this point, unless Barack Obama sets off a nuke in the White House, he's pretty much socially guaranteed a place in Grant Park.

View Larger Map

Another area being looked at is the northern part of Grant Park (see map above).  There are already plans underway to rehab the entire area, providing better links to the lakefront, rehabbing the leaking parking garages underneath all of the pretty gardens, and to make the entire area a little more cohesive.

But organizers feel the zone has been tainted by the Children's Museum controversy and won't touch it with a ten foot pole for fear of being sucked into that mess.

View Larger Map

Also on the list -- the Congress Parkway median between Michigan Avenue and Buckingham Fountain (again, see the map). This location has great promise because it features some of Burnham's greatest design work and is at the epicenter of his vision for the city.

But some feel the space is too constricted and hard for visitors to get to.  Congress Parkway is still a very busy thoroughfare in this area, especially during rush hours.  It might necessitate a bridge to get people there, like the one now linking the Lurie Garden with the Art Institute of Chicago's Modern Wing.  That won't work.  Vertical elements are very heavily frowned upon by those judging the competition.

View Larger Map

That leaves one other place under consideration:  The forecourt of the Field Museum (map).   

Until the recent realignment of Lake Shore Drive, this area was tiered surface parking lots.  The Chicago Park District has since transformed it into a grassy oasis giving people driving down the Drive a dramatic view of the Field Museum, and giving people on the north side of the Field Museum a dramatic view of the Chicago skyline.

That's one reason the Park District likes this location -- it has a goal of drawing more visitors into the area immediately north of the museum.  It's seen as an underutilized area.  The hope is that the Burnham Monument would help organize the area and people would use the additional walkways instead of blazing their own goat paths across the grass.

Also backing this location are officials with the Museum Campus who see a Burnham monument in their backyard as part of the campus' continuing mission as an educational institution.

The area just north of the Field Museum is officially known as Burnham Park, and a statue in the proposed zone could conceivably gaze out over its namesake park, across the city Burnham designed, with the Field Museum (another Burnham design) at his back.

How firm is this location for the Burnham Memorial?  It depends who you ask.

While it is true that this location was given to the 20 firms that entered the Burnham contest as a location, the official word from contest organizers is that it's not set in stone.  It was given to the contestants as an example of an ideal location, so that they would have something to design against.

Others don't see it that way.  People who live nearby believe the North Field location is a fait accompli, and is being shoved down Chicago's throat with no input from the public.

Organizers have promised that the public will have a chance to give its input on the location at meetings to be held after June 19th.  But that's not soon enough for some.

They criticize the location as being impractical in winter.  They claim that it would only be used seasonally because of its proximity to the lake.  But others who actually live nearby say winter is no obstacle for thousands of people who use the area year-round right now.

And then there are those who believe any location in grant Park is a bad one.  They feel that there is already enough "furniture" in Grant Park, and that spaces that were once natural oases are being overrun by man-made accoutrements.  There is something to be said for this view.  Though many look to Millennium Park as a great success in terms of urban park planning, others see it a similar application elsewhere in Grant Park as the worst possible outcome -- turning green spaces into low maintenance pseudo amusement parks.

• Coming up tomorrow: What the city does and doesn't want in a Burnham memorial.

Picking an Homage to Daniel Burnham

As you read this, a distinguished panel of architects, urban planners, and other city insiders is deciding what is the appropriate way to honor the only man in history to have more impact on the shape of Chicago than either Mayors Daley.

His name is Daniel Burnham, and whether you see the city today as the fruit of his loom, or as a botched attempt at half-greatness, it is undeniable that he, quite literally, laid the blueprints for today's Chicago -- and for many other cities, including Washington, DC; Cleveland; San Francisco; and Manila in the Philippines.

Last Friday a field of 20 local and international architecture firms narrowed down to three finalists presented their ideas for a grand monument honoring Burnham to a committee at a very closed-door meeting deep inside the Chicago Cultural Center.

The three finalists are:

• David Woodhouse Architects of Chicago
  
• Hoerr Schaudt Landscape Architects of Chicago
  
• Sasaki Associates of Boston
  

The original field of 20 architecture firms invited to enter the Burnham Memorial competition was heavily criticized for including only 15 Chicago firms.  But two-thirds of the finalists are locals.  Also interesting is that local starchitecture firm SOM didn't make the grade.

The process has also come under fire for not yet including the public.  That is to come, organizers note.  They defend the process thus far by saying that contest rules laid out by the American Institute of Architects are being followed.  But that wasn't enough for people at an informational meeting in Grant Park last week.

Members of the audience felt like they were being asked to approve a plan and a location that they haven't yet seen.  The presenters promised that everything will become clear as soon as a winning design is chosen.

That decision will be announced June 19, 2009.  Until then, everything is very hush-hush.

The organizers of the competition feel that the firms competing can do their best work if left to their own devices and not subject to public scrutiny at such an early stage.  There were particularly harsh words for Chicago Tribune architecture critic Blair Kamin, who has been an early critic of locating the Burnham Monument at the southern end of Grant Park near the Field Museum and of the process, itself.  Organizers think Kamin's criticism is premature and he should wait to see the actual results before he lobs stones from the Trubine's bully pulpit.

So, what do the firms who enter this contest get?  The winner gets $25,000.  The runner up gets $10,000, and third place $5,000.

In an ideal world, public meetings to gather input on the finalist's design will be held this summer, after the June 19th unveiling.  Fundraising for the monument would happen shortly after that, and the organizers hope to be able to start moving dirt in 2010.

All we know so far about the designs comes from Ed Uhlir -- the same guy who honchoed Millennium Park -- who said, "Each one is extremely different."  Feedback from the 20 firms that were invited to the competition ran along the lines of this being a very challenging project.  Put bluntly, "this was very hard."

Once the final design is chosen, there will be public exhibitions showcasing all of the entries.  The first one will be held at the Field Museum, then the show will go on the road, possibly to various schools and community centers across the city.

• Coming up tomorrow:  The controversy surrounding the location of the Burnham Memorial.
  
• Wednesday: What the city does and doesn't want in a Burnham Memorial.