greater philadelphia regional review, winter 2006

G R E AT E R P H I L A D E L P H I A R E G I O N A L

REVIEWIssues and Ideas for Greater Philadelphia’s Leaders

Winter 2006

Think Big and Work Together:Lessons from Chicago

Table of Contents

Up-Front . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Philadelphia & Chicago By the Numbers . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

How Does Chicago Work? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Richard M. Daley: Profile of a Regional Mayor. . . . . . . 8

The Power of Big Ideas: Make No Little Plans . . . . . . 10

Mobilizing Regional Change . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

The Millennium Park Effect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

The Green Development. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

Bringing It All Back Home . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

Chic

ago

Off

ice

of T

ouri

sm

The Greater Philadelphia Regional Review is a publication of the Pennsylvania Economy League – Southeastern PA. Editor-in-Chief: David B. Thornburgh; Editor: Allison Kelsey; Design: Shari Sikora, Valley Press, Inc. Printed by Valley Press, Inc.

The Greater Philadelphia Regional Review is generously underwritten by a grant from the William Penn Foundation.

GREATER PH ILADELPH IA REG IONAL REV IE W WINTER 2006

UP-FRONTInspired by Ben: The Greater Philadelphia Leadership Exchange

What describes the unique blend of visionary energy and tactical smarts so often found in people who get things done? The phrase we think fits is “strategic impatience.” Good leaders are impatient to spark action but understand that good strategycan make sure the action yields the result they want. Last September, when the Pennsylvania Economy League sponsored theLeadership Exchange visit to Chicago, we wanted to see what happens when enough people get both strategic and impatient.

Over the course of three days, our group of 72 civic leaders — drawn from government, business, and the nonprofit sector —learned about a wide range of concrete achievements now helping metropolitan Chicago position itself for the 21st century. Weheard about new regional approaches to economic development, transportation, housing and environmental policy. We heardabout new projects, like Millennium Park, a $500 million downtown development that now draws millions of visitors annually.We learned about the impact of new civic organizations, like the Metropolitan Mayors Caucus, that now pave the way for regionalcollaboration. And we learned about public agencies like the Regional Planning Board, freshly empowered to guide land use andtransportation decisions for the whole area. We asked hard questions and received direct answers.

The overall impression is that the six-county region often called “Chicagoland” is anything but bogged down. How is this possible?Metropolitan Chicago faces all the same issues as Greater Philadelphia. It has the same economic and social challenges, the sameproblems with schools and taxes, the same vital but struggling urban core, and the same advantaged but increasingly stressed andcongested suburbs.

Chicago also has a similar abundance of competing political interests. Regions are inevitably rife with divisions. Regional leaders will always be pressured to put their constituents first; they aren’t often rewarded for cooperating with the neighbors. Like Greater Philadelphia, metropolitan Chicago is a giant that often finds itself tied down by the ropes of a thousand local interests.

What allows the giant to get up and move, even haltingly, is civic leadership. Many point to Chicago’s Richard M. Daley, one of America’s most powerful mayors, as Chicago’s moving force. But his successes haveoften depended in a large part on collaborations with business leaders, civic groups, and fellow regional mayors.The stories we heard in our dialogs at the Leadership Exchange graphically illustrated a basic, modern truth:when no one governs an entire region, everyone must work together.

The good news is that the spirit of collaboration and coordination is on the rise in Greater Philadelphia. As we returned from the Exchange, we were delighted to find our participants were applying the lessons they’d learned. Exchange alumni quickly threwtheir weight behind Philadelphia’s important ethics bill, raising $36,000 in just 3 days to promote it and make sure it won big for the good of the community. Others joined efforts to improve regional policies for parks, transit, taxes and minority businessdevelopment. To create a place to meet and share ideas, PEL has formed what we’re calling the Franklin Caucus, named for theman who set the template for creative civic engagement. We are committed to sustaining the momentum the Leadership Exchangelaunched.

It’s encouraging that this momentum exists at all. Two years ago, PEL’s Regional Review featured a cover asking, “Is RegionalismDead?” Our conclusion at the time was that regional collaborators would always face an uphill fight, but that the idea made toomuch sense to die. Our meetings in Chicago proved that useful regional cooperation is possible, but it takes a combination ofstrong political leadership, active civic engagement, and perhaps a healthy dose of fear.

Our collective impatience is perhaps inevitable; the smart strategies used to address it are not. But neither are they impossible tocreate. In the pages that follow, a host of encouraging examples shows how metropolitan Chicago is finding success.

What’s our simple takeaway? Think big and work together. Now.

Sincerely,

Tim Cost, Executive Vice PresidentARAMARK CorporationPEL – Southeastern PA BoardCo-Chair, Leadership Exchange

Daniel K. Fitzpatrick, PresidentBank of America, PAPEL – Southeastern PA BoardCo-Chair, Leadership Exchange

David B. Thornburgh, Executive DirectorPennsylvania Economy League –Southeastern PA 1

2

Philadelphia

POPULATION

Philadelphia Chicago% Change % Change

2000 1990 – 2000 2000 1990 – 2000

1,517,550 -4% City 2,896,016 4%3,583,381 7% Suburbs 5,376,752 16%5,100,931 4% Metropolitan Area 8,272,768 12%

Source: U.S. Census

JOB GROWTH


2000 1990 – 2004 2000 1990 – 2004

1,861,700 0.4% Jobs in Metro Area 3,864,100 -3.0%

Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics

MEDIAN FAMILY INCOME


2000 1990 – 2000 2000 1990 – 2000

$37,036 23% City $42,724 39%$58,935 40% Metropolitan Area $61,182 47%

Source: U.S. Census

UNEMPLOYMENT RATE

Philadelphia Chicago1990 2000 2004 1990 2000 2004

6.3% 5.6% 7.5% City 9.0% 5.5% 7.2%5.0% 3.9% 5.5% Metropolitan Area 6.3% 4.3% 6.2%

Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics

BY THE NUMBERS

3

G R E AT E R P H I L A D E L P H I A R E G I O N A L R E V I E W W I N T E R 2 0 0 6

Chic

ago

Off

ice

of T

ouri

sm

NON-FARM EMPLOYMENT BY SECTOR

Philadelphia Chicago

Educational & Health Services 20% 13%Trade, Transportation, & Utilities 19% 21%Professional & Business Services 15% 16%Government 12% 13%Manufacturing 9% 11%Other 26% 27%

Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics

METRO AREA MEDIAN HOME PRICES & ANNUAL RENT

Philadelphia Chicago% of % of

Price Median Income Price Median Income

Home Price $186,400 299% $246,300 391%Annual Rent $7,890 13% $8,090 13%

Source: National Association of Realtors, 2005

COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE MARKET

Philadelphia Chicago(sf. 1000s) (sf. 1000s)

Central Central Business District Suburbs Business District Suburbs

Total Rentable Office 37,893 54,160 93,879 87,899Vacant Office Space 4,551 12,286 14,567 21,140Vacancy Rate 12% 22.7% 15.5% 23.3%Rental Rate Class A $25.62 $26.50 $34.65 $24.63

Source: Grubb & Ellis Real Estate Forecast, 2004

& Chicago

T

4

How Does Chicago Work?THE CRITICAL QUESTIONS

Alliance for Regional Stewardship

As described by John W. Gardner, “boundary crossers” are those leaders who come together to cross currenteconomic, social, environmental and governmental boundaries to resolve agreed upon problems, and in doingso, influence others and change the way regional opportunities and problems are approached.

During the summer of 2005, the Alliance for Regional Stewardship (ARS) assessed the strength of boundarycrossing in Chicago. Based on personal interviews with 20+ regional leaders and a review of key indicators, ARS reports on how Chicagoland addresses critical challenges.

he Chicago metropolitan region is a great laborato-ry for regional decision-making. It shares many charac-teristics with similar areas in the U.S. — a strong central city, rapidly growing suburban communities, aleadership elite, and strong civic infrastructure. It alsofaces many of the same challenges: antiquated taxstructures to finance education and transportation,jobs-housing imbalances among communities, racialand ethnic disparities, and growth management.

Metropolitan Chicago has determined that it cannotsolve many of its challenges without using regionalapproaches. In the last five years in particular, therehas been a strong push to examine issues from aregional perspective. Acceptance that the area is oneregion with a shared future is growing.

As much progress as the region has made, metroChicago’s regional decision-making approach remainsfragmented. In the absence of a strong institutional

mechanism that can implement decisions, regionaldecision-making depends on coalitions formed aroundspecific topics. The process is networked rather thaninstitutional — dependent on a “lattice of relation-ships” among key leaders. This fragmented approachcan result in only incremental benefits.

Like many major metropolitan areas, metro Chicagostruggles with how to institutionalize regional deci-sion-making without creating a new layer of govern-ment. There is a strong sense among the region’s lead-ers that it needs to use its existing institutions moreeffectively and broaden the base of collaborative prob-lem solving to be more inclusive rather than relying onthe same players.

The following questions were asked of Chicago’s lead-ers to get a sense of how regional issues are beingaddressed, how decisions are being made, and wherecollaboration is taking place.

Chic

ago

Off

ice

of T

ouri

sm/J

avet

M. K

imbl

e

How are major decisions made in the region?

The Chicago metropolitan region is comprised of 272municipalities and nearly 1000 other taxing authori-ties, spread across a 100-mile corridor from northwestIndiana to southeast Wisconsin. The ad-hoc systemrelies heavily on people who have known each otherfor a long time; it is surprisingly bi-partisan, with lead-ers coming together depending on the particular issueon the table. As one observer noted, “What marks theregion . . . is its level of involvement and the power ofits players.”

It may be tempting to view the City of Chicago asbeing the “500 pound gorilla” that calls the shots onregional issues. However, this city v. suburbs view istoo simplistic. Metro Chicago’s suburbs have evolvedinto economic engines in their own right. Clusteredin corporate corridors in Lake and DuPage countiesand around O’Hare International Airport, they sup-port two-thirds of the region’s jobs. Fluid alliances areformed around common issues.

But ultimately, decisions tend to be made by localgovernments or in Springfield, the state capital. Noregional government mechanism in metro Chicagocan pass laws. On regional issues, decisions are usuallymade through consensus, achieved locally and thentaken to the legislature where the implementationmechanisms — usually funding — are realized.

However, of late there are more vehicles for regionaldecision-making, including business and civic organi-zations such as the Metropolitan Mayors Caucus,Metropolis 2020 and the Metropolitan PlanningCouncil (MPC). But there’s a sense that they tend topush their own agendas on regional issues rather thantaking a consensus approach. They engage in consen-sus building only when their agendas break down.

By many accounts, the perception is that metroChicago hasn’t been able to escape the top-down decision-making model from its legacy of the strongmayor and long history in industrial manufacturing.It’s widely viewed that Mayor Daley “has liberalizedand democratized the back room, but it’s still a backroom approach to decision-making.” This may beperception more than reality. As one leader noted,“any significant advance in public policy and publicunderstanding is the result of many players andactors. You can’t accomplish big things unless thereare many participants and a lot of buy in.”

If there is the perception — in Chicago and othermajor metropolitan areas — that only a few have a role in the process, it may discourage broader participation in the process. One Chicago businessleader noted that

“efforts that begin by trying to forge a consensususually fail because they are reduced to the low-est common denominator. It works for trivialissues, but not much else. For big, importantissues, like spending money or changing law, itnever starts out as a consensus building process.It starts out as a political process where someoneor a group takes a position that if acted on willdisturb the status quo. That brings the opposi-tion out. Then the coalition building begins and the struggle for support forms ‘groups thatmatter.’ ”

What are the best examples of regional institutions and successful collaboration?

While metro Chicago has no one institutional collaborative problem solving mechanism, many organizations — government, business and civic —recognize the value of regional thinking and action.Metro Chicago leaders don’t want unified regionalgovernment, nor do they want additional regionalinstitutions. However, there is a growing recognitionthat the region needs to use its existing institutionsmore effectively.

New regional institutions include the RegionalPlanning Board, which resulted from the merger ofthe Northeast Illinois Planning Commission (NIPC)— the comprehensive planning agency for the sixcounty region — and the Chicago Area TransportationStudy (CATS), which serves as the region’s officialMetropolitan Planning Organization (MPO). Thisnew agency goes a long way to creating an institution-al structure for regional planning and decision-makingfor transportation and land use issues. It remains to beseen how effective the new organization will be.

The Metropolitan Mayors Caucus, founded in 1997to forge cooperation among the region’s 272 munici-palities, addresses issues related to economic develop-ment, affordable housing, infrastructure, transporta-tion and education funding. By most accounts, it hasmade real progress on policy issues over the past fiveyears. The Caucus is not necessarily the initiator ofpublic policy, tending instead to respond to issuesbrought to it from civic organizations, supportingthose on which it can achieve consensus. This consen-sus approach causes the Caucus to stay away fromsuch controversial issues as locating a new airport orfinancing transportation, but it has been effective onissues such as air quality and railroad crossing safety.Mayor Daley is widely given credit for founding theCaucus; his continued support and active participationis viewed as going a long way to its viability as a col-laborative policy body. 5


“any

significant

advance in

public policy

and public

understanding

is the result of

many players

and actors.

You can’t

accomplish

big things

unless there

are many

participants

and a lot

of buy in.”

6

Less formally, there is a high level of cooperationamong the business/civic organizations, with the“Usual Suspects Group” — the executive directors ofthese organizations — meeting for quarterly dinners.While there is some competition for funding amongthese groups, they’ve embraced the motto of “no per-manent friends, no permanent enemies”; cooperationamong them is issue-based.

One leader noted, “the real progress in the last fiveyears has been, first, to legitimatize the idea of theregion. There is growing recognition and acceptance of the fact that we are one region with one future. The second success is that more organizations andindividuals are taking up the cause and are willing tofight for what they believe in. This has led to progresson a number of fronts.” Success stories include:

• The Regional Planning Board;

• The Metropolitan Mayors Caucus AffordableHousing Plan, which developed policy strategies thathave been adopted by councils of government andNIPC in response to a state law that stipulates thatten percent of local communities’ housing stock beaffordable;

• Regional transit revenue sharing to aid the ChicagoTransit Authority;

• Storm water management legislation in whichnortheastern Illinois counties must have the sameregulations in order to prevent developers from playing one county off another;

• The Coalition on Educational Funding Reform,while not yet achieving specifics, has acknowledgedthat there needs to be a change from dependence onproperty tax to other revenue streams to remove thefunding disparities.

As one regional leader stated, “collaboration is but old fashioned coalition building and lobbying amongleadership. Without leadership, these things don’t goanywhere.”

Has the region faced up to issues of race and diversity?

Metro Chicago has been tagged as one of the mostracially segregated regions in the country, and racialissues tend to be “one of the dominant, persistentissues” in the region. As one leader noted, “segregationis the shadow side of strong ethnic neighborhoods.The problem now is that they’re pockets of povertyrather than strong communities.”

Also, great demographic shifts are underway in thethird ring of older suburbs. “The more difficult urban problems are on more plates than in the past.”Southern and western suburbs are seeing the influx of

African-American and Latino populations with littleinteraction among races and ethnicities. Moreover,these suburbs lack the capacity to work effectivelywith diversity. There are no regional institutions andvirtually no sharing of resources among communitiesto deal with these issues.

Metro Chicago’s racial segregation poses serious challenges for the region — especially the challenge of having minorities benefit as the region’s economygrows. Jobs tend to be growing in the northwest portion of the metro area, while the ethnic minoritiesconcentrate in the southern and western portions.While leaders bemoaned the segregation and its asso-ciated gentrification, they had no answers as how toaddress these issues.

What are the main problems/challengesfacing the region?

Many of the remaining critical challenges facing metroChicago are similar to those facing other major metro-politan regions. Fragmented institutions preclude serious action by agencies and organizations. Heavyreliance on sales and property taxes and developmentfees drive competition among local entities. The frag-mentation works against collaboration. Municipalitiescompete for the same things in terms of development,leading to over-saturation of certain kinds of develop-ment. Moreover, scandals at the city and state levels inhiring and contracting result in a loss of confidence ingovernment ethics and a cynical public. “Public cyni-cism and lack of engagement is more of a problemthan corruption.”

One of the major issues in metro Chicago is educationfinance. According to one interviewee, there are “enormous funding disparities between wealthy andpoor school districts. The reliance on property taxes tofund education is universally viewed as a contributorto these disparities.”

In transportation finance, the old funding mecha-nisms are falling apart. A sales tax supports all threetransit systems in metro Chicago — CTA, Metra andPace. However, it is widely believed to be inadequate.

Growth management also poses a problem for theregion. There are no natural barriers to impedegrowth. Even the lakefront hasn’t stopped growth;land has been filled in for development. A criticalchallenge is how to put in place tools for the outersuburbs to control sprawl. A related issue is economicdevelopment and job growth: “we need to channeljobs to where people already live.”

Another economic development challenge is more attitudinal — what one leader mentioned as “the

“collaboration

is but old

fashioned

coalition

building and

lobbying

among

leadership.

Without

leadership,

these things

don’t go

anywhere.”


Midwestern tendency toward caution and social con-servatism, which drags on the region’s rapid responseto change. What made Chicago a great American cityis causing it to fall behind.”

What are the biggest obstacles to regional collaboration?

While there is a positive sense that metro Chicago isthinking — and acting — more regionally, there issome concern that the ad hoc nature of addressingregional issues will continue. One leader noted theneed for a “cultural transformation in Chicago. Thequestion is whether incremental positive changes cancreate a tipping point for the region.” This ad hocapproach was also cited as a zero sum method toregional decision-making — an “I win; you losegamesmanship that occurs among local governments,”especially as it applies to decisions regarding develop-ment.

Many interviewed felt that metro Chicago needs toinstitutionalize its growing commitment to regional-ism. The fact that collaboration is based more on personalities and relationships than on institutionalprocesses is seen as a hindrance of progress. “At theend of the day, there are too few institutions that areregional in character.” However, no one had a work-able solution.

Finally, new revenue sources and methods of sharingwere required for metro Chicago to effectively addressits toughest challenges. “It’s easier to collaborate whentimes are good. Tough times make communities hun-ker down.”

Ancillary Issues: Universities and Foundations in Civic Life

With some exceptions, metro Chicago’s universitiesappear to be “largely AWOL on civic issues.” There islittle involvement of the key institutions in the region.The universities tend to be more research than actionoriented. One exception raised was the Great CitiesInstitute (GCI) at the University of Illinois, Chicago.GCI takes a more interdisciplinary approach to urbanissues and problems facing metro Chicago. Its agendaappears to focus on “applied urban research;” however,it has the “connections to place students in key posi-tions and do important work” in communitiesthroughout the region.

Chicago’s foundation community is “moving the ball”relative to regional issues. The John D. and CatherineT. MacArthur Foundation, headquartered in Chicago,is a leader in the intellectual understanding of howregions work. However, as one civic leader noted,MacArthur’s presence in Chicago is both a “blessing

and a curse.” While it provides some support to pro-grams in metro Chicago, especially in the area ofaffordable housing, its presence discourages roles byother national foundations.

Other significant, locally active foundations in theChicago area include The Joyce Foundation, theChicago Community Trust, and the McCormickTribune Foundation.

One last issue raised was how the region’s leaders handled bad news. Were problems that emergedviewed as opportunities to address or just “sweptunder the rug”? Follow-up interviews noted that metroChicago leaders have a “very strong ‘can do’ spirit;they don’t take defeat well.” They recognize that policyinitiatives take time, and often, more than one effortto resolve. However, if there is initial failure, “the handwringing doesn’t last long. We pick ourselves up andget back to it.”

Editors’ Note: Abridged from a report commissioned by PEL-Southeastern PA, September 2005.

1. The “table” gets larger — and rounder.

2. The only thing more challenging than a crisis may be its absence.

3. The agenda gets tougher.

4. There is no magical leadership structure— just people and relationships.

5. No one’s excused.

6. Sometimes the old ways still work.

7. Collaboration is messy, frustrating, and indispensable.

8. Government always needs reforming,but all the reforms need government.

9. Place matters.

10. It’s never over.

Source: Boundary Crossers: Case Studies of How Ten of American’s Metropolitan Regions Work, 1997

10 LESSONS for BOUNDARY CROSSERS

8

Richard M. DaleyPROFILE OF A REGIONAL MAYOR

Throughout the Leadership Exchange, Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley’s name was ever-present. A lover of bicycles andwrought-iron fences, he brought a muscular style and an expansive agenda to City Hall, fighting local battles over schools,parks, and zoning while keeping an eye on the global competition for jobs and development. In recent months, a stream ofcorruption scandals and indictments has fed speculation about the future of both his administration and his agenda, but hehas faced criticism before in his 16 years in office. He remains the central figure of Chicago politics and has revived his city’simage as a place where big things can happen.

From a series of press reports and comments fromthe Exchange, we’ve collected quotes by and aboutMayor Richard M. Daley that offer some insight onhis impact on Chicago.

“Flowers calm people down.”

— Mayor Richard M. Daley, in Newsweek, August 2003, explaining the need for

median plantings and urban landscaping

“At the risk of speaking for the mayor, he doesn’tlike the word planning. He’s not a planner. He likes action, he likes implementation. He’s comevery slowly around to the idea of neighborhoodplanning. Chicago never adopted its comprehensiveplan of 1957. City Hall’s fine with that.”

— Scott Goldstein, Vice President for Policy and Planning, Metropolitan Planning Council,

Leadership Exchange session “RegionalDevelopment and Sensible Growth,” Sept. 22, 2005

“The dominant figure since his election in 1989has been Mayor Richard M. Daley. Like his father,he seems to know the city block by block, and hasworked to beautify it — planting thousands of treesand encouraging handsome wrought-iron fences.The old political machine which his father so ablyled is no more, but Daley has used the powers ofoffice to propitiate the black politicians who at firstseemed to be obdurate opponents; he has beenreelected by overwhelming majorities. He has kept on good terms with presidents of bothparties.”

— National Journal, June 2005

“He is without a doubt one of the benchmarktrendsetter mayors in the country. Just walkingdown the street with him is sort of like beingwith a rock star.”

— Julia Stasch, former Daley chief-of-staff, Chicago Sun-Times, April 2004

Jeff

Hay

nes/

AFP

/Get

ty Im

ages

9


“Mayor Daley cringes when you call him a boss, but that, in fact, is what he’s become.”

— U.S. Rep. Luis Gutierrez, April 2001, Crain’s Chicago Business

“In Chicago, we were lucky to have a mayor whohad a vision for the Chicago Housing Authority,and was willing to go out there and put his reputa-tion and the city’s money on the line. We had to put in a tremendous amount of infrastructure as weredevelop these communities. . . . That money’sgoing to come from your local taxpayers. Whichmeans you need a mayor and a Council that are notgoing to rise up in righteous wrath and say, why aremy people paying property taxes to service the debton these bonds to service all of the infrastructure in neighborhoods outside of our own? You needpoliticians who can stand up to that kind of questioning.”

— Sharon Gist Gilliam, Commissioner andChairperson, Chicago Housing Authority,

Leadership Exchange session “The Transformation of Public Housing,” Sept. 22, 2005

“Even crusty conservatives admit that Chicago has been transformed by Richard M. Daley. . . . [He] wins kudos from corporate titans andgreen advocates alike for his vision, commit-ment and enthusiasm for everything fromplanting trees to luring Boeing. . . . But as the original Daley would surely point out, passion, vision and the rest of it don’t matter a jot without power. The current mayor, knownas King Richard in some circles, has never beenafraid to crack the whip. City workers scurry intotheir graffiti-buster vans whenever the mayor finds a defaced building. Aldermen on the citycouncil have long been under the thumb of the Democrat-in-chief for fear of their political lives.”

— The Economist, November 2002

“The mayor’s taken real leadership [in the region].He was the convener and instigator of theMetropolitan Mayor’s Caucus. The city has taken an active role in communicating and dialoguing.”

— Ronald L. Thomas, AICP, Executive Director,Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission,

Leadership Exchange session “Regional Development and Sensible Growth,”

Sept. 22, 2005

“One event in August 1995 in particular seemed to catalyze [the] growing regional awareness: MayorRichard Daley was invited to a meeting of the suburban Northwest Municipal Conference.Scheduled to speak for an hour, the conversationbetween Daley and forty suburban mayors stretchedto three hours. ‘The environment was charged, notwith disagreement but the opposite. As [Daley]talked about his problems the heads of the othermayors nodded — over and over again. We foundwe had much more in common than we had everthought. Also the mayor had come out to visitus — this might seem like a small thing but it wasn’t lost on us either,’ said one person whoattended the meeting.

“A bit over a year later, Mayor Daley established a new position in the executive office with liaisonresponsibilities with the suburbs. . . .”

— CEOs for Cities, “Case Study I: The ChicagoMetropolitan Mayors Caucus,” Spring 2002

“Daley’s luster has extended to his party. His example as the state’s leading Democratundoubtedly helped ease the way for suburbanites to move toward Democrats over the last 15 years. What has resulted is aturnover of state government from Republicans to Democrats. . . .”

— National Journal, June 2005

“Mayor Daley’s name is on everything. And I adore what he’s done here in Chicago, it’s anamazing city. And they sell the city so well. But youopen up the brochure and the first thing is always:‘Mayor Daley.’ And a picture of Mayor Daley, and a message from Mayor Daley. And it’s good, becauseit indicates the value he puts on these things . . .

“What really brought this home to me was a fewweeks ago, the firehouse across the street decided to stage a block party. They said, at 11 o’clock themoonwalk is showing up, you know, the thing that blows up and the kids go in. And at 10:45, this thing rolls up, and they blow it up and, sureenough: ‘Mayor Richard Daley.’ I’m thinking, okay, he’s got it all covered.”

— Carol Colletta, CEO, CEOs for Cities, Leadership Exchange session

“Unfinished Agendas,” Sept. 23, 2005

M

10

ake no little plans,” said Chicago’s famedarchitect and planner, Daniel Burnham. “They haveno magic to stir men’s blood.”

Leadership Exchange attendees can testify to the stay-ing power of both Burnham’s words and his ideals.No matter what the topic, attendees were as likely asnot to hear a reference to the Burnham Plan, nowalmost 100 years old. As the grand old man ofChicago’s grand plans, the Burnham Plan (also knownas the Plan for Chicago) established an ambitioustemplate combining infrastructure blueprints with avivid vision of civic life. It also established a process inwhich civic leaders used these larger-than-life visionsto prod elected officials and fellow citizens into action.

But beyond this, the Burnham Plan represented anattempt to promote economic growth while simulta-neously solving the problems caused by growth, andtoday this mission is carried on by two moderndescendants: Chicago Metropolis 2020, a plan (andnow a civic organization) which lays out a coordinat-ed development policy for the six-county Chicagoregion, and the Central Area Plan (CAP), whichreimagines downtown Chicago as an expanded,enlivened regional hub.

All three plans start with the premise that uncon-trolled development carries potentially heavy costs,arguing that well-managed growth will result in ahealthier, happier population and a more productiveand stable regional economy.

Today, Chicagoans can point to any number of plansguiding current development, from public sectorproducts like the Chicago Area Transportation Study’s(CATS) Regional Transportation Plan, to civic effortslike the Open Lands Project’s Regional GreenwaysPlan. But none have the breadth of vision shared bythe Burnham Plan, Metropolis 2020, and the CentralArea Plan. All three were cited repeatedly during theLeadership Exchange, and together they provide awindow on Chicago’s particular vision of itself and itscontinuing success.

THE BURNHAM PLAN

Considered by many to be the harbinger of the mod-ern urban plan, the Burnham Plan, unveiled in 1909,laid out a comprehensive program of physical andcivic improvements. New roads, bridges, highways,and tunnels would allow for increased trade and traf-fic, while new museums, plazas, and parks would pro-vide healthy, pleasant public spaces for the city’sbooming population.

Daniel Burnham’s Chicago was a teeming industrialhive, sprawling unchecked across the flat plainsaround Lake Michigan. First incorporated in 1833

The Power of Big Ideas

MAKE NO LITTLE PLANS

Bill Hangley, Jr.

Nor

thea

ster

n Ill

inoi

s Pl

anni

ng C

omm

issi

on


11

as a town of 350 people, Chicago got its name from aPottawatomie Indian phrase describing the smell ofrotting marsh leeks. Just 75 years later, it was the hubof North American trade, with a population of overtwo million. Earlier plans had shaped Chicago’sdowntown street grid, stockyards, and railroads, butmuch of its development was haphazard. As in otherAmerican cities of the day, traffic was a chaotic mess,the river and lakefront were grimy dumping-grounds,smog choked the air, and slums dominated the landscape.

Burnham, who designed early skyscrapers and createdthe layout of the 1893 Chicago World’s Fair, becameconvinced that a new plan was needed to put the cityin order and allow it to continue growing withoutdestroying itself. “The constant struggle of civilizationis to know and to attain the highest good,” theBurnham Plan would state, “and the city which bringsabout the best conditions of life becomes the mostprosperous.”

He was also convinced that government, happy toreap the rewards of the city’s boomtown success,would never get around to the task. In 1904, in aspeech to the city’s Commercial Club, Burnham toldthe assembled businessmen that “the public authori-ties do not do their duty and they must be made to.”

Sold on the need for change and the potential bene-fits, the Commercial Club would use its money tosponsor the Plan, and its power to make implementa-tion possible. With the help of tireless promotion bythe Chicago Plan Commission (a mayorally-appoint-ed board of private sector leaders), voters wouldapprove 86 Plan-related bond issues worth $234 million between 1912 and 1931. Guided by theBurnham Plan, Chicago built or expanded major newparks, roads, and bridges (establishing landmarks likeMichigan Avenue, Wacker Drive, and the MagnificentMile); straightened the Chicago River; reroutedfreight lines; and built Union Station and other publicbuildings.

Perhaps most famously, the Plan helped civic leaderswrest control of the lakefront from shippers and man-ufacturers and turn it into a public space that, asBurnham put it, “by rights belongs to the people.”

The Burnham Plan’s position as the city’s guidingforce didn’t end until 1939, when the Chicago PlanCommission was reduced and absorbed into city government. But during its three-decade heyday, theBurnham Plan helped establish both Chicago’s physi-cal bones and its national reputation as a forward-thinking, cosmopolitan city — an identity muchgreater than just “hog butcher to the world.”

CHICAGO METROPOLIS 2020

A number of significant plans for Chicago werereleased during the 20th century, mostly dealing withdowntown and lakefront development. But in 1999,the Commercial Club reasserted a big-picture visionwith “Chicago Metropolis 2020: PreparingMetropolitan Chicago for the 21st Century.”

Produced with the assistance of the AmericanAcademy of Arts and Sciences, Metropolis 2020 is less about physical changes than policy changes, but it shares with the Burnham Plan a conviction thatcurrent growth patterns, left unchecked, could havemore cost than benefit.

Metropolis 2020 takes as its starting point the notionthat metropolitan Chicago, a six-county region, mustimprove its ability to compete with other regions forjobs and commerce. Like the Burnham Plan, it callsfor improvements to transportation infrastructure,adding a heavy emphasis of education reform toimprove the region’s workforce. It calls for changes inhousing and transit policy to keep the poor and work-ing class from clustering in unsustainable concentra-tions; changes in zoning policies to eliminate the “per-verse incentives” that drive suburbs to restrict them-selves to low-density, high-cost housing; and changesin tax policies to, among other things, reduce theregion’s reliance on cars and improve public transit.

Also like the Burnham Plan, Metropolis 2020 calls for improvements to civic life. “We are more thaneconomic ants working on an ever-growing ant hill,”2020’s authors write, before making their case forimproved environmental, medical, and social welfarepolicies.

What sets Metropolis 2020 apart is its attempt tograpple with a modern problem: how can plannersand advocates solve problems at a regional scale, whenthe region is comprised of hundreds of overlappingand competing governing districts?

“For example,” the report’s authors write, “if onemunicipality declares its desire to remain exclusively aplace for large-lot single-family residences except for anew industrial park intended to improve its tax base,little harm is done.” But if every municipality choosesthis outwardly attractive option, Metropolis 2020continues, the overall effect is to weaken the region:open space is devoured, traffic problems increase, low-and middle-income workers are pushed farther awayfrom jobs, and high-value taxpayers (the residents ofthese new large-lot homes) are drawn away from oldersuburbs and the city.

“The frequent result is a vicious downward spiral,”the report concludes. When communities lose high-

How can

planners and

advocates solve

problems at a

regional scale,

when the

region is

comprised of

hundreds of

overlapping

and competing

governing

districts?

value residents, their tax base shrinks, forcing them toraise taxes, cut services, and grapple with new prob-lems caused by concentrated poverty. “This, then,encourages even more businesses and residents to consider relocating.”

Problems like these, states Metropolis 2020, call forregional mechanisms that can coordinate state, subur-ban and exurban governments, encouraging, forexample, high-density zoning around public transit

routes. The plan rejects the notion of a full-bore“metropolitan government,” calling instead for thecreation of a Regional Coordinating Council whichcould use bond issues and incentives to encouragebetter transit, sewage, housing, and land use policies.

To implement its ideas, the Commercial Club found-ed a new organization, also called Chicago Metropolis2020, charged with doing the legwork: organizingtask forces, publicizing ideas, pushing for legislation,and advocating for change. Its executive council isheavy with CEOs and businesspeople, along with representatives of the public and nonprofit sectors,and it draws support from a wide range of private andcorporate foundations. It was a driving force behindthe merger of two regional planning agencies (seepages 14–19), and in recent years it has released asteady string of reports on regional issues such as traf-fic, freight, housing, and universal preschool.

THE CENTRAL AREA PLAN

If Metropolis 2020 deals with sprawl and the prob-lems caused by the depopulation of the urban core,the Central Area Plan (CAP) serves as a vision of how to draw people back to that core. At its mostbasic, CAP is about expanding downtown Chicago’spopulation of workers and residents. But in the context of regionalism, CAP wants to reestablishdowntown as a hub for all of what is often referred to as “Chicagoland.”

Unlike Metropolis 2020, CAP is a product of munic-ipal government, in this case the city’s Department of Planning and Development (DPD). But likeMetropolis 2020, CAP can draw a direct lineage to the Burnham Plan, as the DPD evolved from the original Chicago Plan Commission. And it conspicuously echoes Burnham in its introduction:“This is no little plan. This is a plan for urban greatness.”

Once again, Burnham’s vision is recalled in the shapeof major renovations to roads, bridges, tunnels, andtransit centers, along with parks, open spaces, andcivic gathering places. CAP envisions a grid of green-ways that includes riverside walks, landscaped boule-vards, new squares over highways, and expanded lakefront parks. It calls for infrastructure and transitimprovements that will allow the city’s office districtto expand into the West Loop, and it works in tan-dem with a municipal zoning reform effort thatwould help create a series of new residential andmixed-use districts while preserving older “character”neighborhoods.

Local elected officials and planners have an important

new set of tools to aid land-use decisions in NIPC’s 2040

Regional Framework Plan. The comprehensive Plan is

the culmination of an extensive public-involvement

process that included 200 workshops where 4,000

participants expressed their vision of how the region

should address growth through the year 2040.

NIPC is the official comprehensive planning agency for

Cook, DuPage, Kane, Lake, McHenry, and Will counties

which form the greater Chicago metropolitan area. Its

official forecasts of population, employment and other

socio-economic indicators are key inputs to the

region's transportation agencies.

The 2040 Plan defines three basic elements — Centers,

Corridors and Green Areas — to establish a framework

for the region's communities to plan more effectively

to deal with growth that NIPC forecasts will exceed 10

million residents and 5.5 million jobs by 2030.

The 2040 Plan was published on September 28, 2005

with a public celebration at Sears Tower. To request a

print copy of the 2040 Plan, email [email protected] or

phone 312-454-0400.

Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission’s 2040 Plan

12


Burnham’s vision is also recalled in CAP’s colorful and inspiring graphics that present detailed visions of parks, multi-leveled transit centers, dramaticallyexpanded office districts, and pedestrian-friendlyboulevards.

But CAP also brings a specific set of economic targetsto the table. All of its developments are designed toeffectively increase downtown’s population. Its goalsinclude:

• Add 180,000 jobs, the equivalent of eight SearsTowers;

• Add 140,000 residents — a 69 percent increase —in 36,000 new dwellings;

• Add 3 million square feet of education space (classrooms, dormitories, etc.), enough for 95,000students;

• Attract 35 million tourists and visitors annually;and,

• Add 7 million square feet of retail space.

Hitting these targets requires improvements not onlyto downtown itself, but also to the entire regionaltransit network. CAP calls for development alongexisting transit corridors, improving regional rail ser-vice, and developing a high-speed train network thatwould tie the region’s cities together. A central CAPstrategy is to reduce car traffic, so it focuses heavily on strategies for luring residents, workers, and visitorsonto public transportation.

The entire project is laid out over a timeframe stretch-ing to 2021, calling for billions in investments andpromising billions in returns. It seeks to guide thecity’s priorities in many areas, including zoning, tran-sit investments, bond issues, parks, and environmentalpolicies.

OTHER PLANS

Metropolis 2020 and the Central Area Plan think bigin the tradition of the Burnham Plan, but they arehardly the only plans and agendas on the table. CAPis inextricably linked with Mayor Richard M. Daley’szoning reform and “green Chicago” plan. It alsoclaims to work in harmony with the Open LandsProject’s Regional Greenways Plan (developed in partnership with the Northeastern Illinois PlanningCommission, or NIPC), Metropolis 2020 itself, and a dozen existing or developing district-level plans forspecific areas like the East Loop, Cabrini North,Michigan Avenue, and the Chicago River.

Furthermore, at the public level major plans includeNIPC’s 2040 Regional Framework Plan, the CATSRegional Transportation Plan, the Illinois Departmentof Transportation’s State Transportation Plan, theRegional Transit Authority’s strategic plan, and anumber of other plans from regional municipalitiesand government agencies. Among Metropolis 2020’smajor recommendations, now enacted, was the creation of a Regional Planning Board that mergesCATS and NIPC; advocates are now calling on thatboard to help untangle this snarl of plans.

The potential for conflict over specific recommenda-tions, to say nothing of their expense or difficultyeven under the best of conditions, makes it unlikelythat either Metropolis 2020 or CAP will ever achievefull implementation. But then again, only parts of the Burnham Plan ever reached fruition. Much ofwhat did become reality was adjusted to suit changingconditions. But through its combination of visionary language and practical goals, the Burnham Plan provided a template for civic organization and boosterism that has lasted almost a century.

“The Plan long ago ceased to be a collection of proposals and Burnham a mere architect and urban designer,” wrote the authors of theEncyclopedia of Chicago. “They have become landmarks in the cityscape, as palpable a presence for any planner or civic leader as the Sears Tower or the Outer Drive.” By conspicuously invoking Burnham’s legacy, the authors of Metropolis 2020 and theCentral Area Plan both clearly indicate that they’re trying to do more than providelaundry lists of projects and policy proposals.They are trying to provide that magic whichmight “stir men’s blood.”

13

. . . the

Burnham Plan

provided a

template

for civic

organization

and boosterism

that has

lasted almost

a century.

Chic

ago

Off

ice

of T

ouri

sm

O

414

Mobilizing Regional Change

THE STORY OF THE REGIONAL PLANNING BOARD

Bill Hangley, Jr.

n August 8, 2005, Illinois Governor RodBlagojevich signed a law creating a regional agencycharged with coordinating land use and transporta-tion planning for all of northeastern Illinois: theRegional Planning Board (RPB).

To anyone unschooled in the politics of publicbureaucracies, the new agency would seem unre-markable. It simply merged the region’s principaltransportation planner (the Chicago Area Trans-portation Study, or CATS) with its principal landuse planner (the Northeastern Illinois PlanningCommission, or NIPC, pronounced “nipsy”). Theidea was that effective land use planning requiredfull coordination with transportation planning, and vice versa. CATS and NIPC, decades old, were built for an earlier time, and when GovernorBlagojevich signed the law he made their mergersound perfectly sensible.

“As Northeastern Illinois continues to grow andcommunities expand, we need to make sure we’replanning ahead to accommodate the additional traf-fic and increased demand on our transit systems,”he said. “By combining the region’s existing plan-ning authorities into one board, we can maximizeour limited resources and improve coordination onboth transportation and land use needs for theentire region.”

But if the logic is simple, the process of merging two long-established public agencies is anything but. How did this particular fusion come to pass?Last August’s announcement was the culmination of more than five years of sustained effort from civic groups, regional officials, and state legislators.On September 23, 2005, three key players gathered in Chicago’s Hotel Monaco to explain to the Leadership Exchange how they did it.

Chic

ago

Off

ice

of T

ouri

sm/P

eter

J. S

chul

z


LAUNCHING THE IDEA:

Frank Beal, Executive Director, Chicago Metropolis 2020

“We were persistent andannoying and repetitive,and we kept saying that it needs to be done.”

“The idea of merging CATS and NIPC and creating astronger planning agency is at least a decade old,” saidFrank Beal. “Civic organizations have been arguing thisfor a long time.”

Beal runs Chicago Metropolis 2020, a nonprofit created by the Commercial Club of Chicago to imple-ment the ideas laid out in its 1999 report, “ChicagoMetropolis 2020: Preparing Metropolitan Chicago forthe 21st Century.” The CATS/NIPC merger was onlyone of that report’s recommendations, but it was animportant one, since the Commercial Club saw thelack of strong regional institutions as a major barrier to effective regional development.

“The Commercial Club’s 1999 report was based ontwo simple ideas,” said Beal. “The first: Metropolitanareas [i.e. regions, not just cities] are the unit of eco-nomic competitiveness in the 21st century. There iswhere the race is won or lost, and if you’re not payingattention to the economy of the metropolitan area,you’re going to be missing something.

“And the second simple idea is that if you’re going tobe a winner, you’ve got to have a strong physical andsocial infrastructure. For which you need strongregional institutions. We have strong local governmentand strong state government, but the regional institu-tions are nonexistent, inadequate, or weak.”

In the wake of the 1999 report, Metropolis 2020began producing more specific recommendations,including transportation and freight plans. Each reiter-ated the need for a CATS/NIPC merger. “We pro-duced a transportation plan,” Beal said. “But we don’trepresent the people. We needed a public institution,and therefore we recommended that we should com-bine CATS and NIPC and create a new agency.

“Two years later, we came out with a report aboutfreight,” Beal continued. “The number one recom-mendation was, create a regional planning agency. Wewere persistent and annoying and repetitive, and wekept saying that it needs to be done.”

Despite the predictable opposition to the merger, therewere glimmers of support from the start. “We went toboth CATS and NIPC’s boards from day one and toldthem our position,” Beal said. “The reaction we got

ranged from, ‘Mind your own damn business,’ to, ‘Yes,we agree,’ to, ‘Perhaps you’re right, but I can’t say any-thing.’”

So Beal and Metropolis 2020 began working to shapepublic opinion. The group pitched its ideas regularly to newspaper editorial boards. It sent the resulting editorials to legislators. Metropolis 2020 testified inSpringfield, the state capital, when CATS was up forrecertification as the region’s designated MetropolitanPlanning Organization (MPO). It delivered letters ofsupport from business groups and labor alike.

“Twice, over this period, we testified that CATSshouldn’t be recertified because they were doing trans-portation planning without consideration of land useplanning, which is like one hand clapping — you can’tdo it,” said Beal. “We got the leaders of the IllinoisState Chamber of Commerce, the Chicago Chamberof Commerce, the Commercial Club, and the presi-dent of the Illinois AFL-CIO to sign a joint letter say-ing that they supported a regional planning board.

“So both labor and business are saying that our failureto do good planning is having an economic conse-quence on this region,” Beal said. “We’ve got civicgroups and other interests weighing in. We’ve got edi-tors saying it’s a good idea. We kept sending materialsto the General Assembly saying, this is a good idea, allthese papers think it’s a good idea, and you shouldthink it’s a good idea.”

As support solidified, Chicago Metropolis 2020 hired a legal team to draft actual legislation. “You’re always in a better position if you’ve got paper with you,” Bealsaid. “Over the past decade, they have taken staffresources away from the legislators, so it’s a lot easier if you can provide the legislation. So we drafted amodern, 21st century law creating the regional plan-ning board and circulated that among the legislature.That’s not what got passed — something else gotpassed — but it forced the issue.”

TAKING THE BATON:

David Bennett, Executive Director,Metropolitan Mayors Caucus

“The areas that get the dollars are those that have their act together.”

The greater Chicago area includes 272 separatemunicipalities, and in 1997, Chicago’s MayorRichard Daley invited their leaders to join aMetropolitan Mayors Caucus. David Bennett, theCaucus’s executive director, had been hearing about a CATS/NIPC merger for 20 years, and he gaveChicago Metropolis 2020 a lot of credit for helping 15

get it done. “Yes, they were annoying,” he saidwith a laugh, “but they were very helpful, too.”

But there were other players, and the Caucusserved as an active broker between local mayorsand county executives, interested legislators inSpringfield, and staff at CATS and NIPC.

The mayors and local officials brought a bottom-lineinterest to the table. “In a day and age when there are limited resources available, the areas that get thedollars are those that have their act together,” saidBennett. “The mayors were very much interested insaying, ‘we want to be leaders in regional planningand land use efforts,’ and integrating into one entitythe two entities we have now.”

16

The many municipal boundaries of Chicago’s 6-county region

The Caucus

served as an

active broker

between

local mayors

and county

executives,

interested

legislators in

Springfield,

and staff at

CATS and NIPC.


The Mayors Caucus got formally involved in themerger debate in early 2004, when the IllinoisGeneral Assembly created a Transportation TaskForce whose agenda included a CATS/NIPC merger,regional transit reform, and even the creation of a“transit czar.” “The whole effort got bogged down in politics,” Bennett said. “But the mayors said, ‘We really can’t give up on this idea of mergingCATS and NIPC. We need to keep plugging at itand get it separated from these issues.’”

So Bennett went directly to the boards of CATS andNIPC and asked them to produce their own plan fora merger. It took some prodding, but they soon hada list of eight reorganization scenarios. “We said,‘this is a great starting point. Now we need to whit-tle these down to one particular strategy,’” Bennettrecalled.

That strategy would have to address the mayors’three main concerns, the first of which was legal: thenew agency had to be structured to keep the flow offederal dollars coming without disruption. “We didnot want to jeopardize the state’s ability to get feder-al funding for highway and transportation projects,”said Bennett.

Their second concern was tactical: the mayors want-ed the new agency to be potent enough to serve asan effective advocate. “There have been times whenwe stumble over ourselves,” said Bennett. “We’vegone to Washington for transportation dollars whereyou’ve got the transportation authority coming, themayors coming, the business community coming,and they’re all saying, ‘Here are our priorities.’Sometimes they mesh and sometimes they don’t.This new agency should be something that can be avoice that marries all these concerns, so that whenwe go to Washington or Springfield, we’re all singingfrom the same hymnal.”

The third was simply about local control. “We want-ed to make sure that local governments retainedcontrol over local land use and zoning decisions,”Bennett said. “There is always this overriding con-cern by mayors and county board executives thatthis Regional Planning Board might come in and tellthem what types of zoning they need to have in theircommunity, what types of businesses, what types ofhousing. It goes back many years in Illinois law thatthese are exclusively local rights, and the mayorswanted to make sure they were maintained.”

Meanwhile, as the Mayors Caucus, CATS, andNIPC were starting to hammer out a plan, legisla-tors in Springfield were ready to move on legislation.State Representative Suzanne “Suzie” Bassi contactedthe Caucus.

“The memo said, ‘We want some ideas by April14th, and if you don’t give us your ideas we’re goingto proceed without you,’” Bennett recalled. “So we took their challenge, geared ourselves up, andended up hiring DePaul University’s GovernmentAssistance Program to facilitate our discussions.While things got a little testy at times, we were able to come up with this bill.”

THE SPRINGFIELD SPONSOR: State RepresentativeSuzie Bassi

“NIPC does land useplanning. CATS doestransportation planning.Why are they not working together?”

Representative Bassi, whose 54th District is a subur-ban area northwest of Chicago, knows well the perilsthat await those that even hint at challenging localcontrol. “Illinois has 7,000 units of government,”she said, “more than any other state. We’re a localcontrol state, and when you get involved in legisla-tion, local control is a major issue.”

So she wasn’t surprised when fellow Republicanswarned her away from any involvement with theCATS/NIPC merger. “My people said it would ruinmy career, that I would never be able to get reelectedif it took this, that it was nuts,” she recalled. “Theysaid, ‘This kind of stuff would never pass, and whyin the Sam Hill are you doing this, Suzie, when itdoesn’t do anything for your area?’

“I said, ‘Yeah it does, it’s regional transportation, andif we’re not looking at regional transportation we’recutting off our nose to spite our face.’”

Bassi, a former teacher, school board member, andself-described “soccer mom,” has been a legislator forseven years, and among her immediate concerns wasthe traffic congestion now endemic to the region,compounded by the lack of coordination betweenthe region’s public transit agencies. She’d becomeconvinced of the need for a merger over the courseof serving as a member of the Assembly’s transitcommittee.

“After being involved in some of these earlier meet-ings with NIPC and CATS, I myself was saying,‘NIPC does land use planning. CATS does trans-portation planning. Why are they not workingtogether?” she said. “This doesn’t make sense.” 17

18

When Metropolis 2020 came along with its legisla-tion, Bassi recalled thinking, “It’s about time. I wantto be a part of it.” After conferring with Democraticcolleagues, she decided to sponsor the legislationherself. “Most of the resistance is going to comefrom Republicans, so better it be a Republican who carries the legislation,” she said.

Among her first tasks was to push back against theoriginal Metropolis 2020 legislation, which was feltto be premature. “My leadership said ‘Don’t youdare, because it will be disastrous, and how will weget people to negotiate if there’s something alreadyout there?’ We went back and forth and back andforth, and everybody’s saying that this is a Daleyplot and it’s going to ruin the suburbs and it’s notgoing to happen, and the city’s going to suck ineverything. It was an interesting process,” sheadded with a laugh.

“Thank goodness the Mayors Caucus got involved.When I went to a couple of the planning groups,I’m sure they thought I was the devil personified:who’s this chubby little blonde who’s interested inregional planning? It was like, well, we’re lookingfor the same kind of thing, let’s get this done.

“It was also helpful that we could say, legislatively,‘If you don’t do it, we will.’”

Bassi worked with Metropolis 2020 and theMayors Caucus to craft something acceptable, and it wasn’t always easy. “At one point, Metropolis2020 said, ‘It’s not strong enough,’ and then themayors are saying, ‘It’s too much, we’re out ofhere,’ and then we get down to the week before the session and it’s filed and ready to go, and theparliamentarian says, ‘We’re not going to acceptthe language.’ So we went back and changed thelanguage so we could get it to the floor.”

They rushed it through the House, and then wentto work on Senate members who had the sameconcerns as many of her House colleagues. “TheRepublicans are going, ‘Oh no, you’re destroyingthe suburbs.’” Bassi said. “And I had to assurethem that this was not what was going to happen,that we’d protected local control.”

The bill passed the House and Senate with unani-mous support and was signed into law in August,2005.

TODAY: An Agency Begins

In October, the Regional Planning Board began athree-year transition period. Board members andofficers were announced, and the chair is MayorGerald Bennett of Palos Hills. The search for anexecutive director is underway. CATS and NIPCstaff went on a joint retreat in December, identify-ing strengths, weaknesses, and goals ranging fromenhanced regional economic growth to reducedasthma among the region’s residents. By early 2006they will move into new offices in Chicago’s SearsTower.

But if it is too early to judge whether the newagency meets its creators’ hopes and expectations,it is not too early to draw lessons. The merger wasthe result of a combination of forces: the regionalbusiness community’s concern for future growth,local mayors’ interest in accessing federal dollarswhile retaining local control, and state legislators’interest in quality-of-life issues like traffic conges-tion and public transportation. It took a variety ofproposals, counter-proposals, and negotiations, andit took a lot of work by public officials and citizenadvocates alike.

Mostly what it took was a sustained effort to convince the region’s many players that a moreeffective regional institution could benefit them all.“What we’re talking about is not the structure orthe legislation as much as we’re talking about thefocus,” said John Parr, the head of the Alliance forRegional Stewardship. “The point of this sort ofcase study is that in some ways it matters less whatthe structure or policy is, and more how you mobi-lize the region to make something happen, whetherit’s in Springfield — or in Harrisburg.”

“Thank

goodness

the Mayors

Caucus got

involved. . . .”

“The point of this sort of case

study is that in some ways

it matters less what the structure

or policy is, and more how you

mobilize the region to make

something happen, whether it’s in

Springfield — or in Harrisburg.”


19

Long before state law made it a reality, ScottGoldstein was a strong supporter of the RegionalPlanning Board concept. Goldstein is a vice presidentwith the Metropolitan Planning Council (MPC), aChicago-based nonprofit that promotes smart, coor-dinated development. Over the last ten years, as theChicago region has grown and simultaneously grownhungry for deals to support itself, the case for regionalcooperation has become steadily easier to make.

“When I started in 1995, we had just finished a doc-ument called ‘The Case for Regional Cooperation,’”Goldstein recalled. “A week into the job, my boss said, ‘Go out to Lakein the Hills and give thispresentation.’

“Lake in the Hills is aboutfifty miles from here, andat the time its population was about 5,000 people. It was a dinner club type thing. All the mayors cometogether. They’re eating their chicken dinner, I gavemy presentation, and there were no questions. And I left. It had absolutely no impact.”

But since then, between 1995 and 2005, metropoli-tan Chicago’s population has grown by 11 percent.Lake in the Hills is now home to 25,000 people.Fringe areas have new pressures, new problems, and a new impetus to work together. One of Goldstein’sfavorite examples is the region’s joint courtship ofBoeing’s new corporate headquarters. Chicago wascompeting with Denver and Dallas, so city, state, and suburban officials collaborated to create a list ofpossible sites across the region, with the understand-ing that they’d mutually accept whatever Boeingchose. When the company picked a downtown site,Goldstein said, the suburban mayors stuck with the deal.

What kept the infighting to a minimum was themutual realization that Boeing’s choice would helpthe region, no matter where the actual bricks-and-mortar headquarters were, Goldstein said.

“The jobs in Boeing — where do these executiveslive? They don’t all live in Chicago,” Goldstein said.“A lot of them live in the suburbs, and pay taxes

in the suburbs. It benefits the entire region. If theyhad gone to the suburbs instead, Chicago would’vebenefited as well. What law firms would Boeing hire?A lot of law firms are headquartered downtown. I’mnot saying there is no parochial fighting. There is. Butwhen crunch time comes. . . .”

That mutual understanding is the result, in part, of steady pressure from planners and smart-growthadvocates, said Goldstein. MPC supported theRegional Planning Board in part because it wouldkeep that pressure from dissipating among competingplanning agencies. “The division between CATS

and NIPC was not creating a seamless planthat the public under-stood, that could ener-gize,” he said. “Our business leaders said,

‘we want the buck to stop somewhere. It doesn’t stop anywhere right now.’”

But ultimately, Goldstein said, spending agendas forbig deals like the federal transportation package areworked out among the region’s politicians. “They’renot going to do it till the very last minute, whichfrustrates us to no end,” he said with a laugh. “Andthey’re not going to tell anybody about it. There’s nopublic process. CATS? Forget CATS. Forget NIPC.It’s the elected officials who, at the end of the day,make that choice.

“Now, it’ll all be based on good planning if we’vedone our jobs well,” he said. “Hopefully, we haveeducated these folks, so when the deal is made onwhat the top two or three projects are, they are goodprojects for the region. We’re not there yet, but Ithink we have a framework in place here that we didn’t have before.”

What is also in place is a greater awareness of thebenefits of regional cooperation. “That speech, ‘TheCase for Regional Cooperation,’ we used to go outand give it. We don’t do that anymore,” Goldsteinsaid. “Now we’re into, ‘How do we do the nextBoeing? How do we work together and make some-thing happen?’ ’’

— Bill Hangley, Jr.

The Right Message at the Right Time to the Right People:Making the Right Case for Regional InitiativesScott Goldstein, Vice President for Policy and Planning, Metropolitan Planning Council

“It’s the elected officials who, at theend of the day, make the choice.”

20

Edward K. Uhlir, FAIA

Northern cities in the United States with a cold climate and a diminishing industrial base have to create new opportunities to compete in today’s global economy. Retaining their existing population and businesses, maintaining healthy tax base, attracting new business, retaining and enhancing convention business and expanding tourism visitsare among the critical economic elements that a city must have to be successful. In 1998, Mayor Richard M. Daley initiated a project that would change the way the rest of the world would view Chicago. He established a partnershipwith Chicago’s generous philanthropic community and together they produced a spectacular cultural venue adjacentto the central business district that has become an economic dynamo. This cultural park has replaced all the othericons as the one that now defines Chicago to the world.

The Millennium Park EffectCREATING A CULTURAL VENUE WITH AN ECONOMIC IMPACT

Aerial view ofMillennium Parklooking north.

Pete

r J.

Sch

ulz

21


Millennium Park, Chicago’s newest addition to itsextensive lake front park system, was formallyopened with a grand celebration on July 16, 2004.

This 24.5 acre park, which is located at the north-west corner of Grant Park, Chicago’s “front yard,”has transformed 16.5 acres of commuter rail linesand a surface parking lot and another eight acres ofshabby park land which fronted historic MichiganAvenue into an outdoor cultural venue. It is a placefor Chicagoans and tourists to enjoy gardens, iceskating, outdoor and indoor concerts, restaurants,festivals and fairs, fountains and water features, andinteractive public art.

Creating a New Chicago Icon

Many architects, landscape designers and artistshave contributed to create this new Chicago icon.Frank Gehry designed the outdoor Jay PritzkerMusic Pavilion, which has monumental stainlesssteel sculptural curls that surround the proscenium.The venue accommodates 11,000 people, 4,000 infixed seats and 7,000 on the listening lawn. Healso designed the sinuous, stainless steel clad BPpedestrian bridge. Hammond Beeby Rupert Aingedesigned the 1,500-seat underground Joan W. andIrving B. Harris Theater for Music and Dance aswell as the two north Exelon Pavilions, which gen-erate electricity with their fully integrated curtainwalls of photovoltaic cells. These cells convert thesun’s energy into 68.8 KW of electricity annually.

Renzo Piano designed the two south ExelonPavilions to recall the design of his future ArtInstitute of Chicago addition, which will be direct-ly across the street from the park. The team ofKathryn Gustafson, Jennifer Guthrie, ShannonNichols (GGN), Piet Oudolf and Robert Israelwere selected after an international competition to design the Lurie Garden which metaphoricallyreflects the history of the site. The garden contains140 perennial plant varieties and a total of 28,000plants. OWP/P designed several elements alongMichigan Avenue including the historic Peristylereplacement in Wrigley Square and the McCor-mick Tribune Plaza and Ice Rink. SOM providedthe design for the other historic architectural fea-tures along Michigan Avenue and Muller andMuller Ltd. designed the 300-space undergroundcommuter bicycle facility.

There are two art pieces within Millennium Parkthat have received extraordinary public acceptancebecause they provide a community experience thatis very interactive. Anish Kapoor’s Cloud GateSculpture on the SBC Plaza is a 110-ton ellipticalobject best described as a very large drop of mer-

cury that is constructed of welded, highly polished,1/4 inch thick, stainless steel plates that presents a seamless reflection of the park, the sky, and thefabulous Chicago skyline. Jaume Plensa’s CrownFountain consists of two 50 feet high glass blocktowers that face off in a reflecting pool. The towersproject the faces of 1000 Chicago citizens on LEDscreens behind the glass, who during their fiveminutes of video exposure, expel a stream of waterfrom the center of each tower for the last minute.

Millennium Park’s many “enhancements” werefunded by an extraordinary public/private partner-ship. The city’s $270 million commitment whichwas used to provide the park’s infrastructure camefrom $175 million in construction bonds that willbe retired by the fees paid by people who park inthe 2,200-space Millennium Garage built beneaththe park and $95 million in tax increment financ-ing bonds provided by the Central Loop TIF. The private sector with $1 million minimumdonations from 105 individuals, foundations, andcorporations has generated $160 million for theMillennium Park enhancements and $60 million as a separate campaign for the Harris Theater forMusic and Dance. Ten of the donors gave between$3 million and $15 million to underwrite the special “enhancements” on top of the park. Thiscombined total of $220 million also includes amaintenance endowment of over $30 million.

The Crown Fountain

Edward K. Uhlir,FAIA, was the

Director of Researchand Planning at the

Chicago Park Districtuntil his appointmentby Mayor Richard M.

Daley in 1998 asDirector of Design forthe Millennium Park

construction project. He is now serving as

Director of Planning, Architecture and

Landscape for the completed

Millennium Park.

Pete

r J.

Sch

ulz

22

Impact on Chicago’s Economy

Millennium Park completely opened in the sum-mer of 2004, but its impact on Chicago’s economywas established years before since the park wasopened incrementally. Real estate values and theproperty tax base were enhanced as early as thespring of 2000 when it was reported that aMichigan Avenue commercial building was sold for $90 a square foot, more than double what theseller purchased it for six years before. The sellermaintained that this substantial increase wasbecause Millennium Park was under construction.As reported in Crain’s Chicago Business, the openingof Millennium Park stimulated the sales of condo-minium projects along central Michigan Avenue“with buyers standing in line for hours to putdown deposits, and sales contracts being signed ata faster pace than any other downtown neighbor-hood.”

A total of seven condominium projects areattributing their successful sales to MillenniumPark. The most prominent is the 57-story towerHeritage at Millennium Park which is now totallysold out and includes a unit that Mayor Daley will

be moving into. The average price per square footof the Heritage was $592 which puts it at a newtop fee for the condo market. As reported inCrain’s, Gail Lissner, president of AppraisalResearch Counselors Ltd., a Chicago research firm that tracks condo sales, said “the opening of Millennium Park has had a huge effect on themarket. It’s really pulling that center of gravity inthe condo market southward.”

Millennium Park has created a very strong appealfor young professionals, retirees or “empty nesters”to move back downtown from the suburbs. Thecentral business district not only has MillenniumPark with its largely free cultural attractions, but italso has many other cultural institutions, proximityto many business and corporate headquarters, andthe potential of great views of the park, the lakeand Chicago’s incredible skyline. The MillenniumPark, Economic Impact Study prepared by URSand the Goodman Williams Group and released inApril of 2005, calculated that the impact over thenext ten years on the adjacent real estate marketthat is directly attributable to Millennium Parktotals $1.4 billion.

Cloud Gate

Chri

s M

cGui

re


23

A second economic benefit of Millennium Park isits ability to attract new businesses or enhance theexisting businesses. This factor will result in morejobs, increased tax revenue, maximize occupancy ofretail spaces, expand hotel occupancy, and increasevisits to the area’s cultural institutions. The stretchof Michigan Avenue south of the river has alwayslacked the cache of the North Michigan Avenue’s“Magnificent Mile.” Until Millennium Parkopened there were quite a few vacancies and theexisting stores were not considered high end.

Central Michigan Avenue has always benefitedfrom the many cultural institutions located thereincluding the Art Institute of Chicago, the ChicagoCultural Center, Symphony Hall, the Fine ArtsBuilding, the Spertus Museum, and four majoruniversities and colleges. With the arrival ofMillennium Park this area can now rightly claimthe title of “Cultural Mile.” The Harris Theater at the north end of the park also is the easternanchor for the Randolph Street Theater District.Millennium Park sits at the nexus of all of thisactivity and has become the area’s greatest asset.The benefits over the next ten years, as calculatedin the Millennium Park, Economic Impact Study,will be from $428.5 million – $586.6 million forhotels, from $672.1 million – $867.1 million forrestaurants, and from $529.6 million – $711.1 million for retailers.

In a recent Chicago Tribune article, the manager of the Moonstruck Chocolate Co., which struggledfor three years before Millennium Park opened,was quoted saying “there’s been a big increase inthe amount of foot traffic, sales are up 50% fromwhere they were last year.”

Chicago also has to compete with cities with morefavorable weather to retain existing and attract newbusinesses. The quality of life which includes cul-tural opportunities is a major consideration. Theexistence of Millennium Park played a role inattracting Boeing and BP subsidiary Innovence tolocate their corporate headquarters in Chicago.

The third economic benefit provided byMillennium Park is the attraction of tourists. The largest segments are those traveling for pleasure whether they are from Chicago, theMidwest region or a foreign country. Three othertourist segments also will visit Chicago includingthose who attend conventions and meetings, thosewho have business related meetings and those whoare here for personal business, visiting relatives orfriends.

The Jay Pritzker Pavilion and the BP Bridgedesigned by one of the world’s greatest living archi-tects, Frank Gehry, have been significant touristdraws in their own right. When the GuggenheimMuseum opened in late 1997, the industrial city of Bilbao, Spain, became an instant tourist pilgrim-age, attracting 1.4 million visitors in the first year.The “Bilbao effect” is causing local and regionalgovernments everywhere to look at innovative andunusual architecture to lure the tourist dollar. Wenow consider our new park to have a similarimpact — the “Millennium effect”— althoughChicago has much more to offer than Bilbao.

The first six months after Millennium Park openedover 2 million people visited. We expect that theyearly visitation will be in excess of 3 million. Thisattendance translates into significant revenues to berealized by Chicago businesses. The average expen-diture for international visitors is $300 per day andovernight domestic visitors is $150 per day. Asquantified in the Millennium Park, EconomicImpact Study, total visitor spending over the nextten years from 2005 to 2015 will range between$1.9 billion and $2.6 billion.

The fourth economic benefit for Millennium Parkis its ability to attract retirees. Baby boomers arelooking for an active lifestyle with facilities, towork, live and play that anticipate their diminish-ing mobility and fixed incomes. Millennium Parkis compact and universally accessible and it hasmostly free programming. The Central BusinessDistrict with all its proximity to cultural program-ming, excellent transportation, and wonderfulhealth care is a logical place to retire. Senior citi-zens are also among the major constituents ofMillennium Park.

The first six months after Millennium Park opened

over 2 million people visited. We expect that

the yearly visitation will be in excess of 3 million. . . .

The average expenditure for international visitors

is $300 per day and overnight domestic

visitors is $150 per day.

24

Part of the Big Picture: Millennium Park and Downtown Development

The development of Millennium Park is a success story in its own right. But to be fully understood, it needsto be seen as an element of a larger plan whose goal is, in simplest terms, to expand downtown Chicago andfill it with more residents, workers, and visitors. This vision is laid out in the Central Area Plan (CAP), aproduct of Chicago’s Department of Planning and Development.

“We really had an economic motivation from the get-go,” said Jon B. DeVries, AICP, foundingdirector of the Chicago School of Real Estate, Roosevelt University, and a CAP consultant.“We’ve had two decades of extraordinary economic growth in the central area of Chicago. How do we position ourselves to continue that growth, and maybe even expand on it?”

Chicago’s downtown is generally defined as “the Loop” — a large rectangle of real estate nestled inthe crook of the Chicago River. In recent years, commercial development has increased across theriver in the so-called West Loop, while residential development has increased throughout the area,with over 30,000 units added since 2000.

CAP proposes using zoning changes and infrastructure investments, chiefly in public transportation but alsoin parks and streetscapes, to keep that boom going. Over the next 20 years, CAP’s goal is to expand down-town with 7 million new square feet of office space, 180,000 office workers, and 140,000 residents, alongwith thousands more students and millions more visitors.

Millennium Park fits snugly into CAP’s vision by boosting residential and retail development on the eastside of the Loop, pushing commercial development west, and drawing visitors who will patronize the area’sretail, hotel, and restaurant sectors.

The Park’s economic impact has been “tremendous,” DeVries said. It can be measured in increased demandfor downtown services. DeVries estimates that the Park, with between 3 and 4.4 million visitors annually,increases hotel earnings by $42-58 million a year, restaurant earnings by $67-87 million, and retail earningsby $53-71 million. And critically, it has helped downtown businesses replace suburban shoppers withtourists, conventioneers, and Park visitors. The latter group’s purchases now account for about 30 percent of downtown retail business, roughly comparable to what suburban shoppers provided a generation ago.

Less directly, the Park is helping turn offices to residential housing, and in turn provide commercial tenantsfor new office developments, mostly in the West Loop. “While we’ve added five new [office] buildings andseen our net demand stay relatively flat, vacancies haven’t taken much of a hit,” DeVries said. “The minute a [commercial] building moves from class A status to a more obsolete class B or C, residential developers are lining up to pick it up.”

Much of that shift is happening in Millennium Park’s East Loop area. “This was not a strong submarketbefore the Park,” he said. Consumer interest also translates into higher property values, DeVries continued.“We’re seeing an average bonus for units near the Park of $100 per square foot; we’re seeing absorptions of 30 to 50 percent faster than comparable projects away from the Park. That translates into an additional$1.4 billion in residential values.”

Thus, Millennium Park is a case study in how to create demand for downtown services and real estate.CAP’s goal is to continue boosting that demand with other investments, simultaneously adding zoningchanges that encourage the right mix of commercial and residential development, and preserve historic and “character” districts.

And while CAP contains detailed plans for downtown parks, including greenways, plazas, and riversidewalks, the most critical investments will be in transit. The plan calls for an improved network of “transit-ways,” mostly dedicated bus routes, that will help move workers and visitors in and out of the downtowncore, along with a major new West Loop transit hub to anchor that area’s commercial development. “We have to plan to accommodate an additional 180-200,000 commuter trips a day,” DeVries said. “That is our challenge.”


Millennium

Park is a case

study in how

to create

demand for

downtown

services and

real estate.

25

The Importance of Millennium Park

A Chicago Sun -Times editorial published soonafter Millennium Park opened sums up its impactand importance. “You can’t put a monetary valueon public works that enhance the image and quali-ty of life of a city. In so doing, they stand to drawhuge numbers of city and suburban dwellersdowntown to reclaim some of the communalurban experience that has been lost to draw peoplefrom outside Chicago to marvel again at the visionand cultural reach of this architectural First City.Cities are defined by progress as much as history.It is the function of architects and other artists toreflect both of those aspects of their identity —and, in doing so, declare their will and wherewith-al to push into the future, no matter what darkthreats may be gathering on the horizon. Evenwith all its finishing touches in place, the parkwon’t be perfect. But considering the burst of ener-gy and new life it will bring to the city, any flawswill shrink in importance.”

A much more enhanced and perhaps more impor-tant benefit of Millennium Park is its effect on theself esteem of the residents of the Chicago region.They now have another destination for friends andvisitors for which the almost universal response ispleasure and joy, and it is free. Millennium Park

has become an international press phenomenonand judging from the many different languagesbeing spoken in the park the world is coming toChicago. The large majority of the many visitorsto Millennium Park are leaving with a smile.

Millennium Park’s many “enhancements”

were funded by an extraordinary public/private

partnership. The city’s $270 million commitment . . .

came from $175 million in construction bonds . . . .

paid by people who park in the 2,200-space

Millennium Garage built beneath the park and

$95 million in tax increment financing bonds

provided by the Central Loop TIF.

The Grant ParkOrchestra performs on the stage of the Jay Pritzker Pavilionin Millennium Park.

Editors’ Note: This article is reprinted from the original in EconomicDevelopment Journal (vol. 4, No. 2, Spring 2005) published by theInternational Economic Development Council, 734 15th Street, N.W.,Washington, D.C. 20005, www.iedconline.org.


Broo

k Co

llins

O

Sadhu Johnston, Commissioner, City of Chicago Department of Environment

We are demonstrating that a major urban area can make protecting the environment a priorityand through this we can improve the quality of life in our city and our neighborhoods.

— Mayor Richard M. Daley

The Green Development:

26

MAKING CHICAGO AN ENVIRONMENTALLY FRIENDLY CITY

ver the last 14 years under the leadership ofRichard M. Daley, the city of Chicago has pio-neered green urbanism. Utilizing its purchasingpower, construction practices, and operations pro-tocol, Chicago is leading the way with innovationand changes that will help reshape how citiesworldwide approach their built and natural envi-ronments. This article aims to define green devel-opment concepts, outline the strategies used inChicago, and summarize a few accomplishments.

In 2004, Mayor Daley charged 18 members of hiscabinet to work together to develop Chicago’s firstenvironmental action plan. The goal of makingChicago the greenest city in the nation is driven byan understanding of the importance of resourceconservation, quality of life, and a conscious strate-gy designed to increase Chicago’s competitive edgeas a global city.

“Our commitment to greening and environmen-tally friendly practices in Chicago helps us savemoney and improve the quality of life in ourneighborhoods,” Daley said. “This builds pride inour city and contributes to making it a place wherepeople want to live, work, and raise a family.”

It Starts With Trees

The genesis of many of the city’s green initiativeswas Mayor Daley’s much-heralded landscapingeffort. Since the mayor was elected in 1989, thecity has planted more than 400,000 trees. Thirty-four miles of the city’s historic boulevard systemhave been renovated and replanted, and 70 linearmiles of medians have been constructed alongmany of the arterial streets and planted with urban-tolerant plants and more than 4,850 trees.

While providing ample aesthetic benefits and con-tributing, to some degree, to Chicago’s prominenceas a tourist and convention destination, this invest-ment in landscaped infrastructure has providedadditional benefits. The planted trees function as a“carbon sink” that removes the air borne particulatematter of an estimated 31,000 vehicles annually,while producing 23 tons of oxygen and reducingthe “urban heat island effect” (higher urban tem-peratures resulting from the heat reflective qualities


of asphalt and cement), decreasing the financial costsand pollution associated with air-conditioning sys-tems. It is estimated that for every one degree citywidetemperature is lowered, the city saves $150 million.

In addition, the city’s landscaping efforts have beencredited with neighborhood revitalization. The WestLoop, currently one of Chicago’s hottest real estatemarkets, was one of the first neighborhoods to receivean investment in arterial planted medians. This areaof once largely abandoned industrial buildings hassince become a destination for urban professionalsand the restaurants, clubs, and retail markets thatserve them. In 2004, The New York Times reported“snickers have turned into a growing chorus of cheers as tree plantings, elaborate landscaping, andstreetscape designs have become the catalyst for neighborhood revitalization.”

Green Construction

The city is also committing to building all of its facili-ties in an environmentally sound manner. On June10, 2004, Mayor Daley announced the city’s adoptionof The Chicago Standard, a new set of constructionstandards guiding the design, construction, and reno-vation of municipal facilities. The Standard commitsthe city to achieving the Leadership in Energy andEnvironmental Design (LEED™) certification by the U.S. Green Building Council. Adoption of theStandard will result in buildings that save 15 to 20percent in energy costs annually, conserve water andother natural resources, and provide healthier, moreproductive indoor environments.

The city’s most notable green building effort is theaward-winning Chicago Center for Green Technology,home of numerous environmentally-oriented compa-nies and city services. Its three green libraries featuresolar panels, recycled building materials, and high-efficiency HVAC systems. Several green fire stationsand public schools are in development, and a newgreen police station is being used to monitor the costsavings of high-performance buildings. The first greenbuildings were constructed at a 6-8 percent premium,but as the construction industry and city staff havelearned more, the additional costs for green buildingshave been virtually eliminated.

The city of Chicago is also considered a leader in promoting green roofs as a sustainable alternative tothe traditional roofing system. Green roofs replace traditional roofs with a growing medium and livingplant life (see sidebar on page 29). Meanwhile, theDepartment of Transportation has implemented aseries of other environmental initiatives: recycled tirerubber in the grates around sidewalk trees, recycled

asphalt in 20-30 percent of new Chicago streetasphalt, recycled fly ash (a by-product of coal firedpower plants) in city-poured concrete, and low-energyLED lights in stoplights.

These efforts highlight another important benefit ofthe city’s policy — economic development. Creating a market for an industry that did not exist a few yearsago has led to the development and expansion ofbusinesses and jobs that support this new economicengine as well as the development of new relation-ships between the roofing and landscaping industries.And a city program called Greencorps Chicago wasstarted to train residents for jobs in the greeningindustry, placing close to 200 residents in landscapejobs.

2001 Energy Plan and Utilization of Renewable Energy

In 2001, Daley laid out a strategy to assure Chicago’senergy sources would be clean, affordable, and reli-able. The 2001 plan addressed the central role energyplays in the everyday life of Chicagoans and wasdesigned to protect consumers, promote economicgrowth, and protect the environment.

“Using solar electricity is consistent with our goal as a city to expand the use of renewable energy.Chicago is committed to leading by example andincorporating technology that will not only savemoney but is good for the environment and the overall quality of life for our residents,” Daley said.The city’s accomplishments since 2001 include:

• Energy efficiency retrofits have been completed forover 15 million square feet of city and allied agencyfacilities. The city has installed LED lighting atmore than 450 intersections in the city, saving over17,000 MWh annually;

• Mayor Daley set a target of 20 percent of the city’senergy to come from renewable resources by 2006;by 2003 10 percent was achieved;

• City departments have 93 Compressed Natural Gas(CNG) vehicles and 161 Ethanol (E85) vehicles.The city also uses 25 hybrid sedans for a car-sharingprogram for city employees, and runs a free, naturalgas-powered “trolley” fleet that transports touristsand other visitors around downtown.

In addition, the city helps promote environmentallyhealth practices by providing recycling programs.And, it provides assistance and incentives to greenconstruction and renovation projects and works tobreak down barriers in the building codes that dis-courage environmentally friendly construction. 27

Since the

mayor was

elected in

1989, the city

has planted

more than

400,000 trees.

The city

estimates that

for every

one degree

citywide

that the

temperature

is lowered,

the city saves

$150 million.

Green Residential Development

For years, Chicago has worked to incorporate greenbuilding into residential development throughdemonstration projects, programs, and policies, suchas the citywide Energy Conservation Code and thegreen residential standards required for residentialprojects funded by the city.

The Green Bungalow Initiative, for example, wasdesigned to test the feasibility of green renovations for this classic Chicago house type. Nearly one-thirdof Chicago’s single-family homes are bungalows. In2001, the city employed a team of green buildingexperts, a historic preservationist, and residents toassess and implement different green building sys-tems. Four bungalows modeled different design tech-niques, testing renovation strategies like geothermalheat systems (whose savings were negligible) and high-efficiency furnaces and water heaters (whichdemonstrated savings of up to $849 a year).

The city of Chicago partnered with the HistoricBungalow Association and the Illinois Clean EnergyCommunity Foundation to provide $5 million ingrant funds to historic bungalow owners. The grantscan be utilized for the installation of solar heating systems, energy and/or water efficiency improvementsor other green building strategies.

The city also hosted a design competition to buildfive affordable green homes. Out of 73 submissions,five winning entries were built. Each highlighted different green building features: green roofs, naturalventilation, non-toxic paints and finishes, and car-pets made with recycled materials. The ChicagoHousing Authority and the Chicago Department of Housing integrated many of the winning entries’concepts into the construction and rehab of nearly25,000 housing units as part of the historic Plan forTransformation.

The City that Bikes

The city also promotes travel by bicycle. In 2001,Bicycling Magazine selected Chicago as the best“big” city for bicycling in North America. Thisrecognition was due in large part to the success of The Bike 2000 Plan. Prepared in 1992 by theMayor’s Bicycle Advisory Council, the plan identified 31 strategies to encourage bicycling in Chicago. Almost all of these strategies have been addressed to date, including:

• Establishing a network of 100 miles of on-streetbike lanes and 47 miles of off-street trails;

• Installing 10,000 bike racks — more than any other city in the United States;

28 Off

ice

of t

he M

ayor

, Cit

y of

Chi

cago

Mayor Daley (right) on Chicago City Hall’s

green roof.

“Delegations

come from all

over the world

to see these

keystone

projects. They

are worth their

weight in gold.

Any money

that they cost

initially is paid

off by the

excitement that

they build.”


• Permitting bicycles on CTA trains and equippingthe fleet of 2,000 buses with bike racks;

• Producing award-winning educational publications,including the Chicago Bike Map, Safe Bicycling inChicago, and Kids on Bikes in Chicago;

• Staging innovative outreach programs, such as SafeRoutes to School, the Bicycling Ambassadors, andthe annual Bike Chicago festival, which haveencouraged 750,000 Chicagoans to bicycle.

A bike commuter station located within MillenniumPark is the most recent addition to Chicago’s bicycleinfrastructure, featuring 300 indoor secure bike parking spaces. The facility provides free parking, bike repair services, bike rentals, and equipment sales,as well as numerous membership benefits such asaccess to lockers and showers. Partially powered bysolar panels and ventilated naturally, the facility is also home to the Chicago Police Bike Patrol.

By providing effective public transportation, andextensive bike infrastructure, Chicagoans are given analternative to automobile ownership, which frees upfunds and makes Chicago a more affordable place tolive. The estimated $6,000 annual cost of car owner-ship can be utilized for housing, food, or entertain-ment.

A Green City Is a Healthy City

The innovation underway in Chicago and other citiesdemonstrates that cities can contribute positively toredefining our society’s relationship to the naturalworld while improving quality of life and becomingmore economically prosperous.

Cities can capture rainwater and utilize it as a resourceinstead of paying the financial and environmentalcosts of sending it from one pipe to another. Citiescan be designed and built to encourage citizens to getout of their cars and onto bikes or the sidewalk. Citiescan lead by example by incorporating cutting edgeenvironmental strategies into our daily practices. The implications for improving the lives of billions of people around the world rely on taking theseefforts to the next step. We invite you to join us inredefining how cities function and in making the lives of city dwellers even more wonderful.

Editors’ Note: This article is adapted from the original inEconomic Development Journal (vol. 4, No. 2, Spring 2005)published by the International Economic DevelopmentCouncil, 734 15th Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20005,www.iedconline.org.

From Deutschland to Chicagoland: Green Roofs

At the root of Chicago’s green roof success lies yet another Richard M.Daley epiphany. “In the late 90s, the Mayor went to Europe and was trav-eling around Germany, and he saw green roofs,” recalled Sadhu Johnston,Commissioner of Chicago’s Department of the Environment, as he spoketo Exchange participants about the greening of Chicago. “He realized thatwe have some of the most prime real estate in the world, right in ourdowntown cities: hundreds of acres are rooftops, and they’re vacant.

“The mayor knew he wanted to take this idea and bring it to Chicago.And just like when he planted the medians, just like when he took over theschools, just like with public housing, he’s always got these ideas that peo-ple say are impossible, and he pursues them anyway.”

The modern green roof is a lightweight mini-meadow of wildflowers andgrasses, usually planted in as little as four inches of soil. They’ve been usedfor decades in Europe, and the latest technology allows them to weigh aslittle as 15 pounds per square foot, comparable to the weight of gravel bal-last used on many roofs. In addition to looking great, proponents say theyprovide insulation, manage stormwater, reduce the ambient temperaturearound the building, and preserve the roof itself.

Chicago’s first green roof went up on City Hall in 2001, installed byRoofscapes, Inc., a Philadelphia firm. Now the city requires any municipal-ly-funded building project to include one. Johnston said that Chicago currently has approximately two million square feet of green roofs.

“Green roofs are being recognized as tools to solve many of our environ-mental problems,” Johnston said. “The temperature on a green roof isabout 80 degrees in the summer, where a black roof is at least 120 degrees.We figure if we can get enough of them in downtown Chicago, we canactually bring down the temperature and make the city a more comfortableplace to live. They also absorb stormwater. When we get a major storm, weoften get a surge of raw sewage entering the river. Green roofs catch thatstormwater and they hold it for a 48-hour period.”

From the surrounding office towers, City Hall’s roof looks like a fuzzygreen lawn. “We’re saving about $10,000 a month; we’re not needing toheat and cool as much because of the insulation.” Johnston said. “We’vegot beehives on the roof. We harvest the honey and auction it off. There’s arumor that real estate values around City Hall are going up because you’vegot this beautiful, 20,000 square foot meadow. Instead of looking down ona black roof with a bunch of HVAC units sticking up, there are flowersthat bloom throughout the year. It’s always vibrant up there. There are but-terflies and dragonflies — it’s a very interesting experience.

“And free press that you get!” he added. “Delegations come from all overthe world to see these keystone projects. They are worth their weight ingold. Any money that they cost initially is paid off by the excitement thatthey build.”


29

This group of participating civic leaders is now able to reflect on their commonexperience and draw lessons and new relationships among ourselves. Newbridges among us will make attacking our challenges together more likely.

— John P. Claypool, AIA, Executive Director, American Institute of Architects, Philadelphia Chapter

If Philadelphia is going to grow . . . Philadelphia is going to have to think big again.And we’re going to have to learn . . . lessons from Chicago: act regionally, plan ahead,work together for one future, and think big. We are in competition not just with

Chicago but with vibrant metropolitan areas throughout the nation and the world.

— Andrew A. Chirls, Chancellor, Philadelphia Bar Association and Partner, WolfBlock

WHAT THEY SAY:

30

Despite losing three days in the office, Leadership Exchange

participants stated uniformly that they gained tremendously

from the experience. Talking, dining, and traveling

together made for new partnerships — and friends.

Bringing It All Back Home

31


Ithink what I saw more than anything is the importance of what leadership means, particularly coming out of the mayor’s office.

— Dwight Evans, PA State Representative

Iwas so struck by the mayor’s insistence that arts and culture is the brand for thecity (and the region) and without arts and culture it would be just another city. Ithink if our government and business leaders could understand that, we would be

on our way to having great pride in our city — we certainly have the cultural product.I also think Ben [Franklin] would agree!

— Peggy Amsterdam, Executive Director, Greater Philadelphia Cultural Alliance

A Challenge to Take Action

As Editor Bernard Dagenais wrote a month ago, this region doesn’t lack thoughtful analyses of GreaterPhiladelphia’s challenges and opportunities. Nor do we lack accomplished individuals and organizations who wakeup every day trying to improve our communities. Somehow, though, the analyses, the ideas and the doers oftenfail to meet in major sustained initiatives to improve our region.

That can change. Recently the Pennsylvania Economy League, on whose board we both serve, led the GreaterPhiladelphia Leadership Exchange, a team of 72 regional leaders — bank and college presidents, chamber leaders,CEOs of major arts and environmental organizations and board chairs of social service agencies — on a quest toChicago to learn how things get done there.

We served as co-chairs of the exchange, and spent 12 hours a day for three days meeting with an equally broadrange of Chicagoland leaders for a series of passionate, informed discussions of what works and why. We can nowtick off several impressive regional accomplishments in Chicago: Millennium Park, a $400 million downtown parkand instant civic icon, built with significant private leadership and funds; the Metropolitan Mayors Caucus, agathering of mayors from 272 regional communities united to speak with a regional voice; a legislative victory tocreate a Regional Planning Board, championed by Metropolis 2020, a highly influential business-led regional civicorganization.

We walked away with powerful lessons about how regions can compete and win.Leadership matters. Leadership from Mayor Richard M. Daley’s expansive vision, attention to details and insis-

tence on first-rate execution are omnipresent; private sector leadership to rock the boat without sinking it; and lead-ership to champion issues across state political boundaries. Philanthropic leadership to connect people and ideas.

Think big, plan big, and stay on a positive message. Leaders in Chicago echo often the words of DanielBurnham, the legendary Chicago architect and planner: Make no little plans. They have no magic to strike man’sblood. . . . More than one Chicago speaker sent ripples through the crowd by referring to Chicago as the “Centerof the World.”

Talented leaders of good will must cross political boundaries, boundaries between public and private sectors,ideological boundaries, boundaries between boosterism and problem-solving.

We’ve returned with a renewed sense of our region’s outstanding assets — history, culture, access and authentic-ity — and heightened determination to raise our collective expectations for our region. And we know that to real-ize those aspirations, we’ve got to organize and act. Maybe we didn’t just conclude a trip, but instead began amovement.

Tim Cost is executive vice president, Aramark CorporationDaniel E. Fitzpatrick is president, Bank of America – Pennsylvania.

We learned that we ourselves could accomplish a great deal if only wecould get past our self-imposed limits and give ourselves permissionto go forward.

— John F. Smith, III, Partner, Reed Smith LLP

Source: Philadelphia Business Journal, Sept. 30 – Oct. 6, 2005

32

What an energizing experience. I really appreciated the opportunity and look forward to the action that takes place as a result of working with somany people who are committed to this region.

— Kimberly A. Hall, Chester County Chamber of Commerce

The Leadership Exchange . . . helped me to focus on not just thinking big, but knowing that we can actually accomplish big things by working in concert. I am truly convinced that the spirit of Benjamin Franklin is alive and well in

Philadelphia and the entire region. We must now convert that spirit to action and momentum soon. I am very excited to be a part of it.

— Christopher M. Veno, Principal, Trion Group, Inc.

Ihave more positive energy and hope that together we can make significant progress for Philadelphia than I have for a long time. I feel privileged to have been a part of theexperience, and I’m looking forward to the next bold steps.

— J. Blaine Bonham, Jr., Executive Vice-President, Pennsylvania Horticultural Society

Greater Philadelphia Leadership Exchange Participants

Laurie Actman Chief Policy Development Officer, CEO Council for GrowthElmore Alexander Dean, Professor of Management, Philadelphia UniversityPeggy Amsterdam President, Greater Philadelphia Cultural AllianceMary Stengel Austen President & CEO, Tierney CommunicationsJohn K. Ball President, Shoemaker Construction Co.J. Blaine Bonham, Jr. Executive Vice President, The Pennsylvania Horticultural SocietyLauren Bornfriend Executive Director, Philadelphia Parks AllianceDaniel E. Bosin, AIA President, Daniel Bosin Associates LLCGregory O. Bruce Dean, School of Business Administration, LaSalle UniversityAndrew A. Chirls Partner, Wolf, Block, Schorr & Solis-Cohen LLPDella Clark President, The Enterprise CenterJohn P. Claypool, AIA Executive Director, American Institute of ArchitectsJeff Constable Consultant, SpencerStuartTimothy P. Cost Executive Vice President, ARAMARK CorporationPatricia A. Coulter President & CEO, Urban League of PhiladelphiaKaren Daly-Smith Principal & Area Leader, Trammell Crow CompanyPaul Decker President, Valley Forge Convention and Visitors BureauJoanne Denworth Senior Policy Manager, Governor's Policy OfficeJeff DeVuono Senior Vice President, Brandywine Realty TrustElizabeth Dow President, LEADERSHIP, Inc.Brian K. Edmonds Managing Principal, Key Commercial Real Estate AdvisorsDwight Evans State Representative, Pennsylvania House of RepresentativesHappy Craven Fernandez President, Moore College of Art & DesignDaniel K. Fitzpatrick President, Bank of America, PAOliver St. Clair Franklin President & CEO, International House of PhiladelphiaAnthony Fullard Director of Economic Development, African American Chamber of Commerce of PA, NJ, & DETerry Gillen CEO, The Collegiate Consortium for Workforce and Economic DevelopmentSallie A. Glickman Executive Director, Philadelphia Workforce Investment BoardGloria Guard President, People's Emergency CenterKimberly A. Hall Senior Vice President, Chester County Chamber of Business and IndustryBeverly A. Harper President, Portfolio Associates, Inc.Feather O. Houstoun President, The William Penn FoundationChristopher Howard Classified Advertising Director, Philadelphia Newspapers, Inc.Erik Kolar President & CEO, Patriot EquitiesNancy Lanham Executive Director, Delaware Valley GrantmakersPaul R. Levy Executive Director, Center City DistrictJohn MacDonald President & CEO, Impact Services CorporationBrett Mandel Executive Director, Philadelphia ForwardWilliam J. Marrazzo President & CEO, WHYY, Inc.Lynn A. Marks Executive Director, Pennsylvanians for Modern CourtsSharmain Matlock-Turner Executive Director, Greater Philadelphia Urban Affairs CoalitionJoseph P. McLaughlin, Jr. Assistant Dean, Temple UniversityGregg R. Melinson Partner, Drinker Biddle & Reath, LLPJanet Milkman President & CEO, 10,000 Friends of PennsylvaniaKaren Miller Executive Director, PEL, State OfficeThomas G. Morr President, Select Greater PhiladelphiaTom Muldoon President, Philadelphia Convention and Visitors BureauMichael A. Nutter Chair, Pennsylvania Convention Center AuthorityDenis O'Brien President, PECO Energy CompanyBeth Ounsworth President of Board, Philadelphia Parks AllianceJohn Parr President, Alliance for Regional StewardshipM. Moshe Porat Dean, Fox School of Business & Management, Temple UniversitySharon Rossi Vice President, Greater Philadelphia Tourism Marketing CorporationG. Craig Schelter Principal, Schelter and AssociatesMark S. Schweiker President & CEO, Greater Philadelphia Chamber of CommerceJosh Sevin Board Member, Young Involved PhiladelphiaBarry Seymour Assistant Executive Director, Delaware Valley Regional Planning CommissionKenneth Shear Executive Director, Philadelphia Bar AssociationJohn F. Smith, III Partner, Reed Smith LLPAnthony P. Sorrentino Director, External Relations, University of PennsylvaniaPatrick Starr Director, SE Regional Office, PA Environmental CouncilCharles Thomson Principal, Thomson CommunicationsDavid B. Thornburgh Executive Director, Pennsylvania Economy League – Southeastern PAAndrew Toy Program Officer, Local Initiatives Support CorporationJudith E. Tschirgi Chief Information Officer, SEI InvestmentsKimberly Turner District Office Chief of Staff, PA House of RepresentativesJerry Vallery JMAR Insurance AgencyChristopher M. Veno Principal, Trion Group, Inc.Lewis C. Wendell Executive Director, University City DistrictAndrew B. Wigglesworth President, Delaware Valley Health Care CouncilSteve Wray Deputy Director, Pennsylvania Economy League – Southeastern PAJames K. Wujcik Regional President, Sovereign Bank

1700 Market Street, Suite 3130Philadelphia, PA 19103

ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED

Non-Profit Org.

U.S. Postage Paid

Philadelphia, PA

Permit # 1200

The Pennsylvania Economy League has been a force for positive change since its founding in 1936. As Pennsylvania’s leading regionally-based, statewide public policy organization, PEL provides independent research and insight on emerging issues — stimulating public and private action to make Pennsylvania a better place to live, work and do business. The recognized hallmarks of the Pennsylvania Economy League are credible information, insight and integrity.

215-563-3640 • Fax: 215-563-1566 • e-mail: [email protected] • www.peleast.org

Fron

t an

d Ba

ck P

hoto

s Co

urte

sy: C

hica

go O

ffic

e of

Tou

rism

greater philadelphia regional review, winter 2006

Documents

regional leaders

chicago work

regional mayor

metropolitan chicago

front1philadelphia chicago

new regional approaches

regional planning board

e r p h i