the adaptive reuse of coal-fired power plants_full thesis

The Adap)ve Reuse of Coal-‐Fired Power Plants:

A Preliminary Analysis for Recycling Chicago’s Fisk

Genera)ng Sta)on

Bethany SalmonHonors College Capstone Thesis

Independent StudySanjeev Vidyarthi

Brenda ParkerSpring 2012

Table Of ContentsIntroduc)on 4

I. The Benefits of Adap)ve Reuse 9

Environmental Benefits 9

Economic Benefits 14

Social Benefits 17

II. Key Considera)ons and Barriers 23

Zoning 23

Compa)bility with Adjacent Land Uses 23

Exis)ng Structures and Site Quality 24

Historic Designa)on 24

Funding Mechanisms 30

Social Considera)ons 32

Other Considera)ons 33

III. Strategic Advantages and Opportuni)es in the Adap)ve Reuse of Coal-‐Fired Power Plants 37

An)cipated Coal Plant Re)rements 38

Inherent Building Advantages 39

Loca)on-‐Specific Advantages: Post-‐Industrial Waterfront Redevelopment 40

The Redevelopment of Post-‐Industrial Waterfronts: Lessons Learned 42

Specific Concerns for the Adap)ve Reuse of Power Plants 45

The Redevelopment Process: A Framework for the Adap)ve Reuse of Power Plants 47

The Future of Coal-‐fired Power Plants 49

IV. Case Studies: The Adap)ve Reuse of Power Plants 53

Lessons Learned 68

V. The History and Significance of Fisk Sta)on 75

Historic Significance 76

Historic Buildings Onsite 88

Fisk Sta)on’s An)cipated Re)rement 121

Current Site Condi)ons 123

Adap%ve Reuse of Coal-‐Fired Power Plants 2

VI. Analyzing the Adap)ve Reuse Poten)al of Chicago’s Fisk Genera)ng Sta)on 130

Poten)al for Historic Designa)on 131

Remedia)on 139

Zoning 140

Adjacent Land Uses 143

Poten)al Funding Mechanisms 144

Pilsen: A Neighborhood Analysis 145

VII. Recommenda)ons for Fisk Sta)on’s Future Use 159

Bibliography 182


Introduc3on Historic preserva)on and sustainable planning were originally viewed as independent

processes and implemented with separate purposes. However, a number of adap)ve reuse pro-‐

jects across the world have united these two concepts by connec)ng their shared goals in con-‐

serving resources, recycling exis)ng buildings, encouraging economic growth, revitalizing com-‐

muni)es, and planning for a becer future.

Adap)ve reuse is defined as conver)ng the original func)on of obsolete or vacant build-‐

ings into new uses. The large supply of exis)ng buildings worth retaining-‐-‐some which may not

possess historic characteris)cs, but are “simply underu)lized structures which exhibit signs of

life under a facade of age and neglect”-‐-‐present incredible opportuni)es in sustainable, eco-‐

nomic, and social growth to ci)es.1 Typically, structurally-‐sound buildings with dis)nct historic

or architectural significance possess a strong poten)al for adap)ve reuse.

Adap)ve reuse entails many of the same planning techniques, processes, and goals u)l-‐

ized in historic preserva)on, such as the remedia)on of brownfield sites, retaining original

building characteris)cs, commemora)ng a structure’s past heritage or opera)ons, and neigh-‐

borhood revitaliza)on. Yet, because projects are not limited to designated historic buildings,

adap)ve reuse offers addi)onal rehabilita)on opportuni)es compared to historic preserva)on.

By applying redevelopment to a larger building stock, a wide range of structures with seemingly

licle significance can be valuable environmental, economic, and social assets.

In addi)on to historic preserva)on, adap)ve reuse also involves sustainable develop-‐

ment prac)ces. Adap)ve reuse projects recycle the exis)ng materials already present in the

building stock, which reduces the amount of construc)on waste deposited in landfills and

minimizes addi)onal fossil fuel use. Many proper)es worth saving, par)cularly if historic, follow

pacerns of sustainable development due to their proximity to dense, central loca)ons. The lo-‐

ca)onal advantage results in greater walkability, transit accessibility, and connec)on to essen)al

services. However, many )mes, new construc)on, par)cularly in favor of green design, is pre-‐

ferred over preserving exis)ng buildings. This con)nuous cycle of demoli)on and new construc-‐

)on results in enormous consequences and and also represents immeasurable foregone oppor-‐

tuni)es.


Yet, within the past few decades, adap)ve reuse has gained an increasing acen)on in its

ability to transform lifeless structures into vibrant, sustainable, economically viable uses. In es-‐

sence, adap)ve reuse and historic preserva)on are both inherently green. However, the energy

efficiency and sustainable features in exis)ng buildings always have the ability to be improved

upon through retrofijng sites and implemen)ng green ra)ng systems such as Leadership in

Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) standards. In order to address climate change issues,

sustainable urban planning must turn its acen)on to the vast exis)ng building stock, which pro-‐

vides a rich source of raw materials for new projects. Although many )mes the challenges of

greening exis)ng buildings is greater than incorpora)ng sustainable elements into new build-‐

ings, innova)ve designs, carefully-‐constructed engineering plans, and technological improve-‐

ments can assist in overcoming retrofijng problems.

A building’s original purpose can become obsolete due to a variety of factors, such as

changes in economic demand for its services, natural deteriora)on, technological advances, as

well as social or legal shims.2 When the original func)on is no longer needed, typically a building

is demolished or rehabilitated. Rather than demolishing old buildings to make way for new con-‐

struc)on projects, adap)ve reuse extends the life of buildings through recycling the basic struc-‐

ture, fabric, and exis)ng raw materials. Rehabilita)on and altera)ons allows exis)ng buildings

to serve contemporary uses while preserving invaluable features from the past. As a result of

imagina)ve planning, buildings which were once wai)ng for demoli)on can once again provide

healthy economic support to developers and the surrounding neighborhood.

Vacant buildings, exis)ng obsolete buildings, or buildings approaching disuse create am-‐

ple opportuni)es in recycling basic structures. The adap)ve reuse of buildings, which essen)ally

“breaths new life into exis)ng buildings,” transforms the previous func)on into a new and im-‐

proved environmental, economic, and social op)on for the surrounding community.

Today, factors related to environmental degrada)on, changing economic condi)ons,

quality of life improvements are pushing adap)ve reuse projects forward. Specifically, the rising

costs of resources, the decreased availability of developable proper)es, and fewer acrac)ve

large-‐scale ventures have forced developers to seek alterna)ves in adap)ve reuse to maximize

their investment goals.3 But adap)ve reuse does not exclusively apply to the private sector, as


around the world non-‐profit organiza)ons, governments, and other stakeholders are also recy-‐

cling underu)lized structures and assigning them with new beneficial uses. And, in many cases,

the success of a project depends of the collabora)on and partnership of several of these stake-‐

holders.

However, assigning new func)ons to older structures requires careful planning and a

comprehensive evalua)on of issues related to zoning, adjacent land uses, neighborhood charac-‐

teris)cs, remedia)on, funding op)ons, stakeholder interests, market feasibility, and regula)ons.

Given these constraints, many structures may not be suitable for adap)ve reuse. Although the

general considera)ons that determine the viability and success rate for adap)ve reuse occur

through out all projects, each specific case must be analyzed independently due to variances

among factors.

Although there are countless examples of adap)ve reuse projects being applied to a va-‐

riety of building types and structures around the world, the overall purpose of this thesis is to

examine the poten)al for repurposing coal-‐fired power plants. Older power plants, many which

possess historic quali)es, represent electricity’s legacy, as well as future opportuni)es for build-‐

ing stronger post-‐industrial neighborhoods. In addi)on, this thesis provides a site-‐specific analy-‐

sis of one of Chicago’s coal-‐fired power plants, Fisk Genera)ng Sta)on, in order to iden)fy the

site’s adap)ve reuse opportuni)es and challenges .

In order to analyze the poten)al reuse value of Fisk Genera)ng Sta)on, first, the general

advantages produced by recycling the exis)ng building stock and major issues associated with

planning adap)ve reuse projects will be discussed. Chapter I will examine the various environ-‐

mental, economic, and social benefits related to adap)ve reuse. Chapter II will iden)fy and dis-‐

cuss the key considera)ons and barriers related to the successful planning of reuse projects,

which include factors such as zoning, land use op)ons, environmental remedia)on, funding

mechanisms, and regulatory issues. The collected informa)on from Chapters I and II are in-‐

tended to serve as an introduc)on for evalua)ng poten)al adap)ve reuse projects. In addi)on,

the discussed material is meant to construct a basic conceptual framework to introduce

adap)ve reuse to residents, communi)es, and urban planners and provide references relatable

to their own local projects.


Chapter II will focus on the importance of repurposing coal-‐fired power plants, given the

future an)cipated re)rements of a large por)on of the exis)ng coal fleet and site advantages

for redevelopment. Chapter IV will briefly showcase a number of coal-‐fired power plants that

have been rehabilitated or are currently in the process of being recycled for new building pur-‐

poses within the United States. These real-‐life examples and the lessons learned will help high-‐

light the actual planning issues and posi)ve outcomes for the adap)ve reuse of power plants.

Chapter V will largely concentrate on the historic and architectural significance of Fisk

Genera)ng Sta)on, a coal-‐fired power plant located in Chicago’s Pilsen neighborhood, to dem-‐

onstrate the site’s value in preserva)on. Built in 1903, Fisk Sta)on once held the most powerful

steam turbine genera)ng technology of its )me, which ul)mately aided Chicago’s electric

growth and stood as the world’s most sophis)cated engineering technology. Fisk Sta)on’s revo-‐

lu)onary turbine technology triggered a new era of innova)on and progress within the electric

industry. The site also contains a number of architecturally significant buildings built in the early

20th century, a rare feature in many opera)ng power plants. The current opera)ng condi)ons

and closure of the site will also be discussed.

Chapter VI will examine key considera)ons regarding Fisk Sta)on’s adap)ve reuse po-‐

ten)al. The possibility for lis)ng the site as an historic landmark, remedia)on issues, zoning re-‐

stric)ons, and a neighborhood analysis of Pilsen will be discussed. Given the recent announce-‐

ment of the power plant’s re)rement by the end of 2012, the ini)al adap)ve reuse evalua)on

for Fisk Sta)on’s historic structures presented in this thesis could not be more appropriate and

)me sensi)ve. Although the site faces difficult redevelopment challenges, Fisk Sta)on should

not be demolished, but preserved to commemorate its countless employees, monumental role

in the electric industry, and innova)ve turbine technology.

Chapter VI will prescribe a variety of recommended new land and building uses for the

site. While these suggested func)ons are not meant to include all the possibili)es for Fisk Sta-‐

)on’s redevelopment, the recommenda)ons are intended to help concerned par)es visualize

poten)al site opportuni)es and encourage other imagina)ve site uses. However, in order to en-‐

sure that Fisk Sta)on’s preserva)on and adap)ve reuse is successful, a more detailed site analy-‐

sis needs to be conducted and the proper planning process involving all the relevant stakehold-‐

ers must be ini)ated.


Introduc3on: Sec3on Endnotes


1 Urban Land Ins)tute. Adap%ve Use: Development Economics, Process, and Profiles (Washington: The Urban Land Ins)tute, 1978), 3.2 Craig Langston et al., "Strategic Assessment of Building Adap)ve Reuse Opportuni)es in Hong Kong," Building and Environment 43 (2008).3 Urban Land Ins)tute. Adap%ve Use: Development Economics, Process, and Profiles, 1.

I. The Benefits Of Adap3ve Reuse

Environmental Benefits

Although recycling has become a main prac)ce used to support sustainable efforts, ini-‐

)a)ves typically neglect the environmental benefits generated from repurposing exis)ng build-‐

ings. However, it has been commonly quoted that “the greenest building is the one that already

exists.” While adap)ve reuse has tradi)onally been underemphasized in green building prac-‐

)ces, it remains a prac)cal, sustainable alterna)ve to demoli)on and new construc)on, espe-‐

cially if green design and construc)on technologies are integrated. Because reusing the built

environment can reduce the use of fossil fuels and minimize waste genera)on, projects can

have a significant influence on climate change reduc)on.

It is easily forgocen that all man-‐made things, par)cularly buildings, require an exten-‐

sive amount of resources to create and manufacture. Many )mes, manmade items result in a

high environmental price, which is exacerbated when these items become expendable. How-‐

ever, recycling buildings takes advantage of “embodied energy,” which is the “energy consumed

by all of the processes associated with the produc)on of a building, from the acquisi)on of

natural resources to product delivery, including mining, manufacturing of materials and equip-‐

ment, transport and administra)ve func)ons.”1 Because adap)ve reuse retains embodied en-‐

ergy, it is inherently more sustainable than new construc)on in terms of conserving resources

and reducing energy use. These factors are par)cularly important given that building construc-‐

)on and opera)ons account for about 48% of greenhouse gas emissions in the United States.2

In addi)on, some es)mates conclude that it may take 35 to 50 years for an energy-‐efficient new

building to save on the amount of energy lost in demolishing a new exis)ng building.3

Repurposing buildings also decreases the amount of demoli)on and construc)on waste

deposited in landfills. In the United States, buildings account for 40% of nonindustrial solid

waste or the equivalent of 136 million tons of construc)on and demoli)on debris each year.4

Construc)on debris accounts for approximately 25% of the municipal waste stream each year.5

Municipal waste must be loaded, hauled, and transferred from trucks to trains to be dumped in

landfills, which consumes a great deal of energy and fossil fuels.6 Richard Moe, president of the


Na)onal Trust for Historic Preserva)on, further explains the environmental consequences of

these construc)on processes:

Demolishing a 500,000-‐sq.-‐m. building creates 40,000 tons of debris, enough to fill 250 railroad boxcars, a train two miles long, heading for the landfill. Construc)ng a new 500,000-‐sq.-‐m. building would release as much carbon into the atmosphere as driving a car 30 million miles.7

Reusing exis)ng buildings has the poten)al to significantly reduce demoli)on and construc)on

waste and fossil fuel use. In addi)on, these landfill processes also produce air, water, or soil pol-‐

lu)on through carbon emissions or from hazardous chemicals.

Instead of further harming the environment, adap)ve reuse projects avoid further con-‐

tamina)on, while also providing the opportunity to remediate sites. Many )mes industrial or

historic sites require remedia)on efforts, which can entail removing industrial equipment, un-‐

derground storage tanks, or hazardous contaminants like asbestos or lead paint.8 Remedia)on

alongside adap)ve reuse provides the chance to enhance the environment by cleaning the exist-‐

ing building stock and surrounding natural spaces.

The report, The Greenest Building: Quan%fying the Environmental Value of Building

Reuse, recently released by the Na)onal Trust for Historic Preserva)on’s Preserva)on Green

Lab, calculated and compared the environmental impacts of reuse and new construc)on for six

building types, including single-‐family residen)al, mul)-‐family residen)al, commercial office,

urban village mixed-‐use, elementary school, and warehouse. The study examined indicators

within four environmental impact categories: climate change, human health, ecosystem quality,

and resource deple)on. One of the first major findings was that, when comparing buildings with

a similar size and func)on, reuse almost always produces less environmental impacts than

demoli)on and new construc)on. Depending on building type, reuse saved between 4 to 46%

more than new construc)on with the same energy performance level.9 The only excep)on to

this trend involved the warehouse-‐to-‐mul)family conversion, where savings ranged from 8%

fewer to 6% greater impacts compared to new construc)on.10 The variance in the warehouse-‐

to-‐mul)family conversion is due to a number of factors, but relates to the amount or types of

materials used in these types of projects.

In addi)on, the study found that the reuse of buildings with an average energy perform-‐

ance level provides immediate climate change impact reduc)ons compared to more energy-‐


efficient new construc)on. Depending on the building type, it takes 10 to 80 years for a 30%

more efficient new building to overcome nega)ve climate change impacts related to the con-‐

struc)on process compared to an average-‐performing exis)ng building.11 However, only a

warehouse-‐to-‐mul)family conversion stood as an excep)on to the climate change impact sav-‐

ings based on the amount and kind of materials used for rehabilita)on. Because a warehouse-‐

to-‐mul)family conversion seems to offer less climate change advantages, “it may be especially

important to retrofit warehouse buildings for improved energy performance, and that care

should be taken to select materials that will maximize environmental savings.”12

Finally, The Greenest Building showed that “materials macer, ” especially because “the

quan)fy and type of materials used in building renova)on can reduce, or even negate, the

benefits of reuse.”13 Some reuse projects, such as the conserva)on of schools or warehouses,

require more material inputs. Subsequently, a project that demands a great deal of new materi-‐

als, extensive renova)on, and changes in the original building footprint generates less reuse

benefits than other building types. Similar to previous findings, the warehouse-‐to-‐mul)family

conversion may be a less preferred reuse op)on as projects were less environmentally prefer-‐

able than demoli)on and new construc)on.14 However, the report notes that while warehouse

and school reuse may require more materials than other renova)on projects, “reusing these

buildings is s)ll more environmentally responsible – in terms of climate change and resource

impacts – than building anew, par)cularly when these buildings are retroficed to perform at

advanced efficiency levels. Becer tools are needed to aid designers in selec)ng materials with

the least environmental impacts.”15

The findings presented in The Greenest Building indicate the broad impacts of reuse

compared to new construc)on. However, most buildings and adap)ve reuse projects will need

to be analyzed and implemented on an individual basis to determine and enhance the environ-‐

mental benefits.

Inherent Sustainable Elements in Historic or Older Buildings

Surprisingly, many historic buildings are remarkably energy efficient due to their “site

sensi)vity, quality of construc)on, and use of passive hea)ng and cooling.”16 Before technologi-‐

cal advances, architectural designs provided natural light and ven)la)on that inten)onally took


advantage of the outside environment and, as a result, decreased the building’s energy use. In-‐

teres)ngly, these are some of the same characteris)cs used today in sustainable design. Many

older buildings were constructed using quality materials that “display a useful life well in excess

of their more modern counterparts (e.g. use of solid stone walls, slated roofs, marble floors,

etc.)”17 These durable, quality materials innately have a longer life space, providing a stepping

stone to adap)ve reuse. Although some of these buildings may face retrofijng challenges or

for installing sustainable features, “this should not be considered as a significant issue, and in

many cases adap)ve reuse solu)ons will achieve higher opera)onal performance than their

new build counterparts.”18

Improving A Building's Sustainable and Energy Efficient Features

While the energy efficiency level of a specific property varies, collec)vely buildings con-‐

)nue to profoundly impact the environment during all phases of service, including construc)on,

opera)on, and demoli)on. In the United States, buildings account for 37% of primary energy

use, 68% of all electricity use, 60% of nonfood/fuel raw material use, 36 billion gallons of water

used per day, and a large percent of carbon dioxide, sulfur dioxide, and nitrous oxide

emissions.19 Thus, while individually some proper)es may be inherently efficient and ideal for

reuse, many buildings can be improved upon. In addi)on, while building reuse is sustainable in

itself, it alone cannot stop environment degrada)on and climate change impacts. Therefore, a

greater focus should be placed on how to incorporate sustainable design into exis)ng buildings.

In order to improve upon a building’s current performance level, first, an energy audit

can help iden)fy specific deficiencies in the envelope or mechanical systems. A building can be-‐

come more energy-‐efficient through elimina)ng air infiltra)on, installing efficient hea)ng or

cooling systems, using efficient electrical systems and appliances, repairing or upgrading win-‐

dows and doors, installing addi)onal insula)on, and adding shading devices such as awnings,

shades, or trees.20 Windows can be improved upon through simple caulking or glazing, or if

necessary, could be replaced with similar counterparts in terms of size, configura)on, materials,

and trim.21 On-‐site renewable energy, which includes solar panels, geothermal systems, and

wind turbines, should also be considered.


Sustainable designs also focus on the conserva)on of water.22 This can entail indoor fea-‐

tures such as low-‐flow toilets or on-‐demand hot water to reduce usage. Outdoor features such

as permeable pavement, rain barrels, cisterns, and rain gardens help prevent storm water runoff

and can even store water for safe reuse purposes, such as irriga)on needs. Exis)ng buildings

can also feature green roofs or living walls to provide addi)onal insula)on, absorb rainwater,

and help reduce air urban temperatures

In some cases, the original material of an exis)ng building may be at such a deteriorated

state that it cannot be repaired. Instead of simply replacing these materials, recycled or

environmentally-‐friendly materials should be used. Ideally, the most sustainable products will

be durable, have a long life span, can be made from renewable resources or post-‐consumer

waste, salvaged from previous projects, do not contain toxic substances, and may be produced

locally. If acemp)ng to maintain the historic or architectural quali)es, recycled materials can

also be used to match the original windows, doors, decora)ve trim, floors, or exterior surfaces.

The sustainable materials should also hold true for poten)al new construc)on added on to ex-‐

is)ng buildings to increase the square footage.

Rehabilita)on projects should strongly consider incorpora)ng green prac)ces to in-‐

crease energy efficiency and adhering to green ra)ng systems, such as the Leadership in Energy

and Environmental Design (LEED). Renova)ons incorpora)ng green design should preserve the

original architectural or significant characteris)cs of the building. If an historic designated prop-‐

erty is rehabilitated with federal funds, renova)ons must comply with the U.S. Secretary of the

Interior’s Standards for Historic Rehabilita%on, which will be explained in greater detail in Chap-‐

ter II.

Adap)ve reuse can reduce climate change impacts and further enhance the environ-‐

ment, par)cularly when compared to new construc)on. Although reuse benefits “may seem

small when considering a single building,” “the absolute carbon-‐related impact reduc)ons can

be substan)al when these results are scaled across the building stock of a city.”23 The Greenest

Building: Quan%fying the Environmental Value of Building Reuse notes that if the city of Portland

retroficed and reused single-‐family homes and commercial office buildings that are likely to be

demolish within the next 10 years, the poten)al total impact reduc)on would amount to about


231,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide, approximately 15% of the county’s total reduc)on tar-‐

gets over the next decade.24 Although this sta)s)c is based on a smaller, city-‐wide scale, if reuse

efforts were strengthened na)onally, environmental impacts could be substan)ally reduced.

Economic Benefits

In The Death and Life of Great American Ci%es, Jane Jacobs eloquently spoke of the in-‐

herent value in old buildings for s)mula)ng economic ac)vity and crea)ng lively areas:

Ci)es need old buildings so badly it is probably impossible for vigorous streets and dis-‐tricts to grow without them...The economic value of new buildings is replaceable in cit-‐ies. It is replaceable by the spending of more construc)on money. But the economic value of old buildings is irreplaceable at will. It is created by )me. This economic requi-‐site for diversity is a requisite that vital city neighborhoods can only inherit, and then sustain over the years.”25

According to Jacobs, the vitality and growth spurred by unique, old proper)es cannot be gener-‐

ated by new construc)on alone. Thus, recycling the exis)ng building stock is impera)ve in the

livelihood of neighborhood. Many facili)es appropriate for adap)ve reuse projects typically no

longer serve economically viable func)ons, have been abandoned, or are at risk of becoming

vacant. Adap)ve reuse of obsolete or underu)lized sites can help avoid vacancy by assigning

new func)ons and services to communi)es, which subsequently strengthens the city’s tax base.

Without redevelopment, these structures can acract addi)onal disinvestment or crime from

visible deteriora)on and vacancy.26 The economic benefits become increasingly important for

blighted industrial areas affected by the decline of U.S. manufacturing. Recycling old industrial

sites can help rejuvenate neighborhoods by s)mula)ng new business ac)vity. In addi)on, ac-‐

cording to a report published by PlaceEconomics for the Advisory Council on Historic Preserva-‐

)on, historic preserva)on has posi)ve affects on the local economy, in terms of job, property

values, heritage tourism, and downtown revitaliza)on.27

Repurposed sites foster local economic growth and community reinvestment by generat-‐

ing new tax revenue sources. For example, in 1997, the Na)onal Historic Rehabilita)on Tax

Credit cer)fied investment was $688 million, which then generated $762 million in income and

$319 million in taxes.28 To further support the local economy, materials and labor needed for

remedia)on, demoli)on, and construc)on can obtain from local businesses.29


Adap)ve reuse also creates employment opportuni)es offset by vacancy or a plant’s re-‐

)rement through remedia)on, demoli)on, and construc)on that generate temporary jobs. New

land uses require permanent employment posi)ons for staff, maintenance, or other posi)ons.

Research indicates that dollar for dollar, rehabilita)ng historic buildings generates more em-‐

ployment than new construc)on. For example, one study found that $1 million in historic pres-‐

erva)on ac)vity creates about 38 jobs, while $1 million in new construc)on of non-‐residen)al

structures creates 36 jobs.30 In Delaware, another report from 2010 found that $1 million spent

on rehabilita)ng historic proper)es created 14.6 jobs, whereas 11.2 jobs were created in new

construc)on and 9.2 jobs from manufacturing output with the same $1 million spent.31 Simi-‐

larly, in Georgia, a report from 2011 indicated that historic preserva)on created more jobs per

$1 million of economic ac)vity that in other major industries.32 While historic preserva)on gen-‐

erated 18.1 jobs, new construc)on created 14.9, poultry processing created 10.4, air transpor-‐

ta)on created 8.7, computer manufacturing created 4, and automobile manufacturing crated

3.5. Finally, historic preserva)on has the ability to generate a variety of jobs posi)ons. From

2002 to 2009, 4,443 total jobs were created in Kansas from historic rehabilita)on tax credit

ac)vi)es.33 While almost half of those jobs were in the construc)on industry, 832 were created

in services, 605 in retail, and 500 in manufacturing. In addi)on, other industry sectors were im-‐

pacted, including agriculture, mining, transporta)on, and public u)li)es.

Repurposing obsolete or vacant buildings also encourages local economic development

by acrac)ng new businesses and increasing property values.34 One study, which included thou-‐

sands of residen)al proper)es in 15 American ci)es, indicated the posi)ve effect on property

values. The study found that the value of historic designated proper)es was 5% to 20% higher

than comparable non-‐designated proper)es.35 In addi)on, historic proper)es produce a “halo

effect,” where even the proximity to a heritage district raised the value of non-‐designated prop-‐

er)es. Based off another study released in 2010, houses in the Na)onal Register historic dis-‐

tricts in Philadelphia priced 14.3% more than comparable proper)es not located in a historic

district.36 Similar results have been found in other ci)es and because of the increased property

values, the county and city received addi)onal tax revenues to support further growth.

While simultaneously encouraging sustainable development, adap)ve reuse u)lizes

“embodied energy” and does not have to compensate for costs already spent in construc)ng a

building. Recycling these buildings avoids demoli)on costs, which are predicted to increase with


the rise of future energy prices.37 Rehabilita)on can even cost less than demoli)on and recon-‐

struc)on, given there are no addi)onal issues like structural changes, major building code viola-‐

)ons, or environmental remedia)on.38 One report notes:

On average, the cost of a large commercial rehabilita)on will be about 4% lower than comparable new construc)on on a clear site. If the new building requires demoli)on of an exis)ng structure, the savings are greater…Even where rehabilita)on costs are more than new construc)on, it can s)ll produce a higher rate of return. Central loca)ons, in-‐teres)ng architecture and high-‐quality materials will omen lead to higher rents and oc-‐cupancy rates for heritage buildings.39

In addi)on to reusing the embodied energy in the original building, exis)ng infrastructure can

also be reused to case on costs. One es)mate concludes that preserva)on projects save 50% to

80% in infrastructure costs compared to new suburban developments.40

Projects that both recycle exis)ng buildings and add green design can also benefit the

property’s owner or managing agency by providing a good rate of return on the investment.

Some case studies have shown that businesses engaged in greening exis)ng buildings have re-‐

ceived payback for their incremental investment in as low as two years.41 Although the upfront

costs for retrofijng and adding sustainable design may be considered high for agencies, retro-‐

ficed buildings reduce costs in the long-‐term due to lower overall energy and opera)ng costs.

By greening an exis)ng building, the u)lity cost savings for energy and water typically range

from 25% to 40%.42 Sustainable adap)ve reuse projects also produce a higher rater of return for

building owners as the retroficed improvements typically increase average rents, average occu-‐

pancy rates, and the resale value.43

In addi)on, compared to construc)ng new space, rehabilita)on can be created more

quickly if extensive structural reconstruc)on is not required, subsequently lowering construc-‐

)on costs and other opera)onal expenses.44 For the same square footage, rehabilita)on can

take half to three-‐quarters of the )me as demoli)on and reconstruc)on.45

Heritage tourism created by historic preserva)on, which can be extended to many

adap)ve reuse projects, can also s)mulate the local economy through spending money on lodg-‐

ing, food, retail, transporta)on, as well as recrea)on and entertainment. Tourist spending can

contribute millions of dollars to state sales taxes and local government revenues, while also

suppor)ng employment and payrolls.46


Although the previous informa)on on economic development focuses primarily on his-‐

toric preserva)on, as it is the most relevant data available, it can be assumed that adap)ve

reuse would generate similar outcomes because it entails many of the same planning and reha-‐

bilita)on processes as historic preserva)on.

The discussed economic benefits poten)ally spurred by preserving old buildings are not

meant to insinuate that new construc)on is expendable. In fact, a diverse mixture of old and

new construc)on reflects the economic past throughout genera)ons and also encourages the

economic growth for the future. Jacobs writes, “The only harm of aged buildings to a city dis-‐

trict of street is the harm that eventually comes of nothing but the old age-‐-‐the harm that lies in

everything being old and everything becoming worn out.”47 Building diversity in age and struc-‐

ture helps create lively areas by supplying different affordability levels and economically valu-‐

able places for specific businesses and residents.

To conclude, Jacobs’ touches specifically on adap)ve reuse’s transforma)onal ability to

reflect on economic and social dynamism within neighborhoods:

Among the most admirable and enjoyable sights to be found along the sidewalks of big ci)es are the ingenious adapta)ons of old quarters to new uses. The town-‐house parlor that becomes a cramsman’s showroom, the stable that becomes a house, the basement that becomes an immigrants’ club, the garage or brewery that becomes a theater, the beauty parlor that becomes the ground floor of a duplex, the warehouse that becomes a factory for Chinese food, the dancing school that becomes a pamphlet printer’s, the cobbler’s that becomes a church with lovingly painted windows-‐-‐the stained glass of the poor-‐-‐the butcher shop that becomes a restaurant: These are the kinds of minor changes forever occurring where city districts have vitality and are responsive to human needs.48

Social Benefits

Old buildings are more than just bricks and mortar. Building walls contain countless nar-‐

ra)ves from the past, revealing historical periods, neighborhood or economic transforma)ons,

or the ajtudes and experiences of people that lived or worked in those spaces. Through pre-‐

serving these historic characteris)cs and celebra)ng once valuable community spaces, adap)ve

reuse has the ability to generate a variety of social benefits.

As one architect notes, “there is no built heritage without an ‘intangible dimension,’”

and historic heritage is vital as it transports “memory from a distant Time.”49 Exis)ng and his-‐


toric buildings are the “physical manifesta)on of memory” and “a community without memory

is a meaningless place.”50 Through their life cycles, buildings gain immaterial value. The “spirit of

the place” or the “intangible essence” are represented in a building’s form, architectural design,

materials used, use and func)on, and loca)on worth preserving.51 It is this spirit and essence

that assigns buildings as a living, changing part of a city’s environment.

Because adap)ve reuse preserves original building characteris)cs, the meaning and

value of a building’s past func)on is honored and remembered. But, in addi)on to preserving

the past memory embodied with a building, extending the life of a building and assigning new

func)ons further provides the opportunity to enhance the spirit of the place, or the intangible

essence, that deems these sites significant.

While each individual building has its own unique significance, buildings are not isolated

from their surrounding environment. Buildings contribute to the significance of a neighborhood

or city by represen)ng the past physical environment, former opera)ons, and architecture. In

addi)on, preserva)on of the built environment represents and helps maintain culture or a

neighborhood’s iden)ty. One regional planner describes the importance of cultural conserva-‐

)on as:

maintaining cultural diversity in much the same way that environmentalists seek to maintain biological diversity...To demolish the dis)nc)ve neighborhoods that character-‐ize the world’s ci)es and replace them with uniform twenty-‐first-‐ century seclements is analogous to cujng down a rain forest and replacing it with pasture or monocrop )ll-‐age. It reduces cultural diversity and increases entropy.52

Another scholar argues that “...physical reminders provide a sense of place acachment, con)nu-‐

ity and connectedness that we are rarely aware of but that play a significant role in our psycho-‐

logical development as individuals and in our ‘place iden)ty’ or ‘cultural iden)ty’ as families or

ethnic and cultural groups.”53 Preserva)on can strengthen civic pride and community engage-‐

ment by involving residents in the redevelopment process and celebra)ng their neighborhood’s

heritage.

According to a report published by PlaceEconomics for the Advisory Council on Historic

Preserva)on, preserva)on is also strongly related to a neighborhood’s quality of life:

The long-‐term quality and character of a community is directly related to its willingness to iden)fy, protect, and enhance those places that define and differen)ate it. Educa-‐)onal, cultural, aesthe)c, social, and historic values are building blocks of quality of life.


Historic preserva)on is not about ci)es being the museums of yesterday; historic pres-‐erva)on is about using heritage resources to build quality of life for tomorrow.54

Quality of life is also linked to and determined by a variety of the economic factors dis-‐

cussed in the previous sec)on, such as business ac)vity, employment, or vacancy rates. Through

assigned new func)ons to an exis)ng building, adap)ve reuse can benefit communi)es by re-‐

ducing the number of vacant or obsolete buildings, which further prevents crime or disinvest-‐

ment as well as generates new tax revenue and employment.55 Instead of limi)ng growth, re-‐

purposed buildings add valuable, used spaces that support revitaliza)on and vibrancy. While the

final intended use of a building can vary according to project type, affordable housing units,

community centers, schools, entertainment, and shopping centers can all provide needed or

desired services to further strengthen a neighborhood and its inhabitants.

If preserved, exis)ng buildings can pay tribute to the intangible history and heritage

through spreading knowledge about its past life. A greater knowledge of the immaterial, intan-‐

gible essence can help guide an adap)ve reuse project through preserva)on and revitalizing the

site with a new future. Neglec)ng a site’s past culture and heritage fails to take advantage of

poten)al opportuni)es for the best, future building func)ons. Historic designa)on status, the

educa)on poten)al to the public, and rela)onship to the neighborhood may be overlooked.

Because many )mes the economic aspects are stressed in adap)ve reuse projects, it is

difficult to preserve or enhance the original spirit of the place or the intangible essence, which

are overlooked or are taken into account to a lesser degree.56 Involved stakeholders in adap)ve

reuse projects typically strive to give a building the best new use, gain higher profits than be-‐

fore, and improve the community. But omen the intangible essence is lem out of the original in-‐

ten)ons for preserving the site as well as the surveys and evalua)ons. Author Stella Maris Casal

notes:

It needs that professionals involved are more aware of the intangible message that lies beneath the material message. They should be ready to react with sensi)vity, and also with crea)vity to enhance the hidden cultural references. Successful results will not be a problem of major or minor architectural resources, but plainly of a good architectural brief and proposal, based on a deep knowledge of the theore)cal background with re-‐gard to preserving the spirit of the place. The preserva)on of our architectural heritage is certainly not a task just for architects but a mul)disciplinary ac)vity, but it is the archi-‐tect who finally has to translate into concrete material ac)ons the ideas for the rehabili-‐ta)on and thus preserve and enlighten the intangible message of our built heritage.57


According to Casal, it is not enough to simply carry out historic research or conduct “a careful

survey and appraisal of architectural quali)es and technical condi)ons.”58

When analyzing the best use of an exis)ng building, some scholars have cau)oned

against transforming the site into a museum, as this preserves “almost all its features, except its

real life.”59 Instead of “mummifica)on,” a changing, new func)on can keep it alive. Preserved

relics, tes)monials, and references of the past such as the original building name, furniture,

equipment, or pictures should remain alongside the new purposes. Architect João Campos

writes:

One of the most obvious parallels that can be established is the danger of conver)ng the historical into a consumer product, serving the people who visit it without any links to the people who live in it...Monuments and sites will only cons)tute outstanding exam-‐ples of mankind’s genius if, to the aesthe)c quali)es of a know-‐how developed by differ-‐ent peoples, we add the percep)on of a cultural value that makes them unique and inter-‐relatable with a universal sense, in their historicity as well as in their authen)city.60

Both Casal and Campos comment on the difficulty for determining the best new use of an exist-‐

ing, especially in how to preserve the true intangible essence. Adap)ve reuse project must not

only consider and ques)on what the building has the poten)al to become, but what the build-‐

ing has been. The historic tes)mony and immaterial value embodied with a building is neces-‐

sary to understand in the process of determining whether to demolish or preserve a building.


Chapter I: Sec3on Endnotes


1 Commonwealth of Australia, Department of the Environment and Heritage, Adap%ve Reuse: Preserving Our Past, Building Our Future (Commonwealth of Australia, Department of the Environment and Heritage, 2004); Historic Charleston Founda)on, Annual Report 2010 (Historic Charleston Founda)on, 2010).2 Na)onal Trust for Historic Preserva)on, "Posi)on Statement: Historic Preserva)on and Sustainability,” Preserva-‐%on Na%on, accessed October 31, 2011.3 PlaceEconomics, Measuring the Economics of Preserva%on: Recent Findings (Advisory Council on Historic Preser-‐va)on, June 2011), 6.4 Carroon, Sustainable Preserva%on: Greening Exis%ng Buildings, 5-‐6.5 Kathryn Rogers Merlino and Peter Steinbrueck, "The Greenest Prac)ce: Cultural Sustainability, Adap)ve Re-‐use and the New Preserva)on Ethic," Column 5, no. 22 (2009), 70-‐73.6 Peter Steinbrueck and Kathyrn Rodgers Merlino,"We Recycle Cans and Bocles, Why Not Buildings?" The Sea]le Times, September 16, 2008.7 James T. Kienle, "Essay: Can Historic Preserva)on Help Lead Us Out of the Recession," Contract Magazine, Sep-‐tember 28, 2009.8 Richard A. Scadden and Stephen J. Mitchell, “Facility Decommissioning and Adap)ve Reuse” (paper presented, Na)onal Defense Industrial Associa)on (NDIA) 27th Environmental Symposium and Exhibi)on, Aus)n, Texas, April 23-‐26, 2001).9 Preserva)on Green Lab, Na)onal Trust for Historic Preserva)on, The Greenest Building: Quan%fying the Environ-‐mental Value of Building Reuse (Na)onal Trust for Historic Preserva)on, 2011), vi, 61.10 Ibid.11 Ibid., viii-‐ix.12 Ibid., ix.13 Ibid., 78.14 Ibid.15 Ibid., ix.16 Na)onal Trust for Historic Preserva)on, "Posi)on Statement: Historic Preserva)on and Sustainability.”17 Langston et al., "Strategic Assessment of Building Adap)ve Reuse Opportuni)es in Hong Kong.”18 Craig Langston, “Green Adap)ve Reuse: Issues and Strategies for the Built Environment,” (paper presented, 1st Interna)onal Conference on Sustainable Construc)on & Risk Management, Chongqing Municipality, China, June 12, 2010), hcp://epublica)ons.bond.edu.au/sustainable_development/75/.19 Carroon, Sustainable Preserva%on: Greening Exis%ng Buildings, 5-‐6.20 Advisory Council on Historic Preserva)on, Sustainability and Historic Federal Buildings (Washington D.C., May 2, 2011), 9, hcp://www.preserva)onna)on.org/issues/sustainability/green-‐lab/valuing-‐building-‐reuse.html.21 Ibid., 18.22 Ibid., 19-‐20.23 Preserva)on Green Lab, Na)onal Trust for Historic Preserva)on, The Greenest Building: Quan%fying the Environ-‐mental Value of Building Reuse, viii.24 Ibid.25 Jane Jacobs. The Death and Life of Great American Ci%es (New York and Toronto: Random House, 1961) 187, 199.26 Government of Saskatchewan, Heritage Resources Branch, Economic Benefits of Heritage Conserva%on (Govern-‐ment of Saskatchewan, accessed November 11, 2011)27 PlaceEconomics, Measuring the Economics of Preserva%on: Recent Findings, 2.28 David Listokin, Barbara Listokin, and Michael Lahr, "The Contribu)ons of Historic Preserva)on to Housing and Economic Development," Housing Policy Debate 9, no. 3 (1998): 456..

http://epublications.bond.edu.au/sustainable_development/75/


http://www.preservationnation.org/issues/sustainability/green-lab/valuing-building-reuse.html



29 Business Review, "Adap)ve Reuse of Historic Buildings Makes Economic Sense." The Business Review, October 21, 2002.30 Listokin, Barbara Listokin, and Michael Lahr, "The Contribu)ons of Historic Preserva)on to Housing and Economic Development.”31 PlaceEconomics, Measuring the Economics of Preserva%on: Recent Findings, 3.32 Ibid.33 Ibid.34 Business Review. "Adap)ve Reuse of Historic Buildings Makes Economic Sense."35 Government of Saskatchewan, Heritage Resources Branch, Economic Benefits of Heritage Conserva%on.36 PlaceEconomics, Measuring the Economics of Preserva%on: Recent Findings, 4.37 Commonwealth of Australia, Department of the Environment and Heritage, Adap%ve Reuse: Preserving Our Past, Building Our Future.38 Langston et al., "Strategic Assessment of Building Adap)ve Reuse Opportuni)es in Hong Kong,” 1711.39 Government of Saskatchewan, Heritage Resources Branch, Economic Benefits of Heritage Conserva%on.40 PlaceEconomics, Measuring the Economics of Preserva%on: Recent Findings.41 Jerry Yudelson, Greening Exis%ng Buildings (New York: McGraw-‐Hill Companies, 2010), 22. 42 Ibid., 76.43 Ibid., 35.44 Craig Langston et al., "Strategic Assessment of Building Adap)ve Reuse Opportuni)es in Hong Kong,” 1711.45 Ibid.46 PlaceEconomics, Measuring the Economics of Preserva%on: Recent Findings, 5.47 Jacobs, The Death and Life of Great American Ci%es, 198.48 Jacobs, The Death and Life of Great American Ci%es, 194-‐195.49 João Campos, “The Cultural Consistence of Built Heritage Cons)tutes its Intangible Dimension” (paper presented, 14th ICOMOS General Assembly and Interna)onal Symposium: ‘Place, memory, meaning: preserving intangible values in monuments and sites,’ Victoria Falls, Zimbabwe, 2003), 1.50 PlaceEconomics, Measuring the Economics of Preserva%on: Recent Findings, 9. 51 Stella Maris Casal,“The Spirit of Place and the New Uses” (paper presented, 16th ICOMOS General Assembly and Interna)onal Symposium: ‘Finding the spirit of place – between the tangible and the intangible,’ Quebec, Canada, 2008), 8, hcp://openarchive.icomos.org/199/.52 John Keene, "The Links Between Historic Preserva)on and Sustainability: An Urbanist's Perspec)ve," In Manag-‐ing Change: Sustainable Approaches to the Conserva%on of the Built Environment (Los Angeles: The Gecy Conser-‐va)on Ins)tute, 2003), 13, 15.53 Setha Low, "Social Sustainability: People, History and Values," in Managing Change: Sustainable Approaches to the Conserva%on of the Built Environment (Los Angeles: The Gecy Conserva)on Ins)tute, 2003), 47.54 PlaceEconomics, Measuring the Economics of Preserva%on: Recent Findings, 9.55 Langston et al., "Strategic Assessment of Building Adap)ve Reuse Opportuni)es in Hong Kong,” 1712.56 Stella Maris Casal,“The Spirit of Place and the New Uses,” 8.57 Ibid., 9.58 Stella Maris Casal, “The Adap)ve Re-‐Use of Buildings: Remembrance or Oblivion?” (paper presented, 14th ICO-‐MOS General Assembly and Interna)onal Symposium, Victoria Falls, Zimbabwe, 2003), 1.59 Ibid.60 Campos, “The Cultural Consistence of Built Heritage Cons)tutes its Intangible Dimension,” 4.

http://openarchive.icomos.org/199/


II. Key Considera3ons and Barriers

A number of major considera)ons and barriers should be examined in determining the

viability, best new land use, and success of an adap)ve reuse project. The following informa)on

is intended to introduce general issues related to redevelopment processes. Zoning, compa)bil-‐

ity with adjacent land uses, exis)ng structure, environmental contamina)on, historic designa-‐

)on process, funding mechanisms, as well as social, poli)cal, economic and regulatory consid-‐

era)ons will be discussed.

Zoning

Zoning dictates the allowed land use for a par)cular site, which varies by municipal or

local governments. These jurisdic)ons were originally intended to promote health, safety, and

general welfare. Property owners and site developers must ensure that the future use of an ex-‐

is)ng building will be permiced according to the designated zoning laws.

Although some exis)ng zoning classifica)ons can be changed and amended to assign

new adap)ve reuse building func)ons, government approval is typically needed. However,

some overlying districts or specific codes may make zoning changes difficult. For example, ci)es

such as Chicago have created Planned Manufacturing Districts (PMD), a special zoning classifi-‐

ca)on intended to prohibit land use changes to preserve exis)ng manufacturing areas and fos-‐

ter the city’s industrial base. Special zoning districts, such as PMDs, can make zoning changes

difficult and stand as a regulatory barrier, limi)ng the future new uses of an exis)ng building.

Compa3bility with Adjacent Land Uses

In order to successfully assign a cohesive and beneficial new use for an adap)ve reuse

site, the surrounding community, density, demographic data, exis)ng land uses, and desirability

of the loca)on must be analyzed. The amount of adjacent residen)al, commercial, business,

parks or manufacturing parcels and exis)ng infrastructure need to be examined to ensure that

the new building func)on and design spa)ally flows and connects with the neighborhood. For

example, a residen)al building may not be the best new use for an exis)ng building if the recy-‐

cled site is located next to a pollu)ng, noisy factory. Similarly, typically a grocery store would not


be the best choice for an adap)ve reuse project if another grocery store is located next to the

site. Rather, if a neighborhood lacks a specific service, the poten)al op)ons for the site should

seriously consider those needed resources. Finally, transporta)on and density of the surround-‐

ing land uses are crucial in determining walkability and accessibility to the site.

Exis3ng Structures and Site Quality

To reuse and modify the func)ons of the exis)ng buildings onsite, the structural integ-‐

rity, durability, lot size, and environmental quality need to be assessed. Feasibility and project

success can heavily depend on the exis)ng founda)on or poten)al construc)on issues. Al-‐

though many old buildings were inherently built with quality materials and sturdy frames, )me

and a lack of maintenance can contribute to physical deteriora)on or structural failure.1 In ad-‐

di)on to the structural characteris)cs, the condi)ons of the roof, windows, interior and exterior

walls, stairs, floors, plumbing, insula)on, ven)la)on, and ligh)ng should all be inves)gated to

determine the extent renova)on required. The ini)al analysis of these building features can

help iden)fy what areas need be improved upon to make the building more energy-‐efficient.

Nonetheless, extensive or unan)cipated structural, architectural, or design challenges can ex-‐

tend the rehabilita)on )me and drama)cally increase the total costs. Therefore, these issues

need to be iden)fied early in the adap)ve reuse process to calculate a cost/benefit ra)on and

determine the overall feasibility of repurposing a site.

Many old industrial or historic sites also require remedia)on to clean up environmental

contamina)on caused by harmful materials such as asbestos, lead, or underground tanks. The

level of remedia)on required by regula)ons will depend on the intended land uses and degree

of contamina)on. However, given the history of pollu)on caused by old coal-‐fired power plants,

sustainable features should be incorporated into a site’s new use to improve the neighborhood’s

quality of health and the exis)ng environment.

Historic Designa3on

The historic quali)es and architectural features of an exis)ng also should be studied in

order to preserve the original character and value within the community. To help ensure preser-‐

va)on, some buildings may qualify as a historically recognized property through the Na)onal


Historic Landmarks and Na)onal Register of Historic Places, both federal programs.2 Addi)onal

programs for designa)ng historic landmarks are provided through municipal or local govern-‐

ments.

In order for a building to qualify as a Na)onal Historic Landmark, it needs to represent

na)onal significance through an outstanding aspect of American history or culture, such as:

• be a loca)on with the strongest associa)on with a turning point or significant event in our na)on's history.

• be the best loca)on to tell the story of an individual who played a significant role in the history of our na)on.

• be an excep)onal representa)on of a par)cular building or engineering method, technique, or building type in the country

• provide the poten)al to yield new and innova)ve informa)on about the past through archeology.3

The building should contain a “high degree of integrity,” or should not be significantly modified

or deteriorated, to assure the property can convey its historical affilia)on or acribute.4 The des-‐

igna)on process usually takes 2 to 5 years.5

The designa)on criteria and process for the Na)onal Register of Historic Places is similar

to Na)onal Historic Landmarks, but differs in that chosen buildings for the Na)onal Register

have a smaller geographic significance, primarily on state or local level.6 As a result, in many

cases, there is a greater likelihood that a historic buildings will be eligible for Na)onal compared

to gaining Na)onal Historic Landmarks status. Thus, the Na)onal Register evalua)on criteria,

legal requirements, and program benefits will be described in greater detail.

For a site to become eligible for the Na)onal Register, it must first present a “quality of

significance in American history, architecture, archeology, engineering, and culture.”7 In addi-‐

)on, the property must “possess integrity of loca)on, design, sejng, materials, workmanship,

feeling, and associa)on” and that:

A. are associated with events that have made a significant contribu)on to the broad pacerns of our history; or

B. are associated with the lives of significant persons in or past; or


C. embody the dis)nc)ve characteris)cs of a type, period, or method of construc)on, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high ar)s)c values, or that represent a significant and dis)nguishable en)ty whose components may lack indi-‐vidual dis)nc)on; or

D. have yielded or may be likely to yield, informa)on important in history or prehistory.8

It should be noted that historic integrity, or whether the property has retained its original fea-‐

tures that convey its significance, is a crucial part of designa)on eligibility. Seven aspects of in-‐

tegrity include: loca)on, design, sejng, materials, workmanship, feeling, and associa)on.

Although “cemeteries, birthplaces, graves of historical figures, proper)es owned by re-‐

ligious ins)tu)ons or used for religious purposes, structures that have been moved from their

original loca)ons, reconstructed historic buildings, proper)es primarily commemora)ve in na-‐

ture, and proper)es that have achieved significance within the past 50 years” are typically not

eligible for the Na)onal Register, some excep)ons may allow these sites to qualify.9

The first step in gaining lis)ng a property in the Na)onal Register of Historic Places, re-‐

quires property owners, organiza)ons, government agencies, or other individuals and groups to

submit a historic designa)on nomina)on to state historic preserva)on offices.10 State historic

preserva)on offices are responsible for solici)ng public comments and reviewing the proposed

nomina)ons with the state’s Na)onal Register Review Board. While the length of the review

process varies by state, it typically “will take a minimum of 90 days.”11 During this period the

state offices also no)fy property owners and local governments of the nomina)on, and if own-‐

ers object historic designa)on status, the property cannot be listed. However, the nomina)on

may be forwarded to the Na)onal Park Service for a Determina)on of Eligibility for further re-‐

view. Amer, completed nomina)ons, accompanied by recommenda)ons, are presented to the

Na)onal Park Service for final review, which makes a decision within 45 days.12

The U.S. Secretary of the Interior is responsible for establishing standards for the preser-‐

va)on, rehabilita)on, and maintenance of historic buildings. The Secretary of the Interior’s

Standards for Rehabilita%on (Department of the Interior regula)ons 36 CFR 67) include details

on a building’s site, interior and exterior, materials, sizes, occupancies, landscaping, and reno-‐

va)ons. The Standards pertain to all historic listed in or eligible for lis)ng in the Na)onal Regis-‐

ter of Historic Places. The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilita%on are as follows:


1. A property shall be used for its intended historic purpose or be placed in a new use that requires minimal change to the defining characteris)cs of the building and its site and environment.

2. The historic character of a property shall be retained and preserved. The removal of his-‐toric materials or altera)on of features and spaces that characterize a property shall be avoided.

3. Each property shall be recognized as a physical record of its )me, place, and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or architectural elements from other buildings, shall not be undertaken.

4. Most proper)es change over )me; those changes that have acquired historic signifi-‐cance in their own right shall be retained and preserved.

5. Dis)nc)ve features, finishes, and construc)on techniques or examples of cramsman-‐ ship that characterize a historic property shall be preserved.

6. Deteriorated historic features shall be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deteriora)on requires replacement of a dis)nc)ve feature, the new feature shall match the old in design, color, texture, and other visual quali)es and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features shall be substan)ated by documentary, physical, or pictorial evidence.

7. Chemical or physical treatments, such as sandblas)ng, that cause damage to historic materials shall not be used. The surface cleaning of structures, if appropriate, shall be undertaken using the gentlest means possible.

8. Significant archeological resources affected by a project shall be protected and pre-‐served. If such resources must be disturbed, mi)ga)on measures shall be undertaken.

9. New addi)ons, exterior altera)ons, or related new construc)on shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differen)ated from the old and shall be compa)ble with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment.

10. New addi)ons and adjacent or related new construc)on shall be undertaken in such a manner that if removed in the future, the essen)al form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired.13

To qualify for federal tax credits or assistance, a rehabilita)on project must comply with

these standards to ensure changes are consistent with the original historic character. As a result,

the Standards are par)cularly significant when installing contemporary, green design elements

in a historic property. A more recent publica)on, the Illustrated Guidelines on Sustainability for

Rehabilita%ng Historic Buildings, serves as an addi)onal guide that showcases the best prac)ces


for how to incorporate sustainable features and cites recommenda)ons.14 Thus, early planning

and the use of professional staff can help ensure that rehabilita)on is carried out correctly, fed-‐

eral tax credits are received, and damage to a historic building’s fabric is avoided.

The success and viability of certain redevelopment projects may jeopardized due to the

length of the designa)on process and strict standards required if federal money or tax incen-‐

)ves are involved. However, these programs are instrumental in preserving valuable proper)es

that represent various aspects of na)onal, state, or local history, which otherwise might be de-‐

molished or harmfully altered. In addi)on, designa)on status can also encourage the rehabilita-‐

)on of historic sites, par)cularly within the private sector, through providing property owners

with a number of financial incen)ves.

Financial Incen3ves

Amer a property is listed in the Na)onal Register, owners can take advantage of the Fed-‐

eral Historic Preserva)on Tax Incen)ves program, federal preserva)on grants for planning and

rehabilita)on, preserva)on easements to nonprofit organiza)ons, and possibly Interna)onal

Building Code fire and life safety code alterna)ves.15 Other financial aid for rehabilita)ng his-‐

toric proper)es includes charitable contribu)ons, state tax incen)ves, tax credits for low-‐

income housing, and preserva)on easements. However, as previously noted, when federal

funding is involved, rehabilita)on projects must comply with The Secretary of the Interior’s

Standards for Rehabilita%on.

Administered through the Na)onal Park Service, Internal Revenue Service (IRS), and

State preserva)on offices, the Federal Historic Preserva)on Tax Incen)ves program offers either

a 20% or 10% rehabilita)on tax credit equal to the amount spend to rehabilitate a property. Al-‐

though both lower the amount of tax owed on the property, the programs differ in terms of eli-‐

gibility requirements.16

The 20% rehabilita)on tax credit applies to “a cer%fied rehabilita%on of a cer%fied his-‐

toric structure.”17 A cer%fied historic structure is a building listed in the Na)onal Register or lo-‐

cated within a registered historic district. The tax credit is available for the rehabilita)on of

income-‐producing buildings, specifically, “commercial, industrial, agricultural, or rental residen-‐

)al purposes, but it is not available for proper)es used exclusively as the owner’s private


residence.”18 A cer%fied rehabilita%on must be approved the Na)onal Park Service in order to

prevent damaging or destroying the interior or exterior features that define a building’s historic

character. Finally, to be eligible for the 20% tax credit, the rehabilita)on project must meet IRS

requirements, which are s)pulated in the Na)onal Park Service, Technical Preserva)on Serv-‐

ices’s report Historic Preserva%on Tax Incen%ves.

Amer comple)ng a rehabilita)on project, cer)fica)on paperwork is sent to the State

preserva)on office and the Na)onal Park Service to be evaluated.19 The tax credit is claimed

through an IRS tax form, which is filed with the Na)onal Park Service cer)fica)on for the pro-‐

ject. Finally, the property owner must possess the building for 5 years amer rehabilita)on is

completed, or pay back the credit in varying amounts depending on the length of ownership.20

The 10% tax credit differs in that it can be applied to the rehabilita)on of non-‐historic

buildings placed in service before 1936.21 Rehabilita)on must be for non-‐residen)al use only

and cannot be used on cer%fied historic structures. In addi)on, the project costs must exceed

either $5,000 or the adjusted value of the property, whichever is greater. While there is no for-‐

mal review process for the 10% rehabilita)on tax credit, the credit must be claimed through the

IRS. Finally, projects must meet three criteria: at least 50% of the external walls exis)ng at the

)me rehabilita)on began must remain in place at the project’s conclusion, at least 75% of the

exis)ng external walls must remain in place as either external or internal walls, and at least 75%

of the internal structural framework must remain in place.22

State and local governments may also offer designa)on programs that feature other fi-‐

nancial incen)ves for rehabilita)on. The sec)on )tled “Poten)al for Historic Designa)on,” in

Chapter V: The Adap)ve Reuse of Fisk Genera)ng Sta)on, will provide more in-‐depth informa-‐

)on on the designa)on process and financial aid provided specifically in Illinois and Chicago.

Clearly, all old buildings or newer buildings worth saving do not meet the criteria for his-‐

toric designa)on status or to receive financial aid. While these historic preserva)on programs

are vital in protec)ng eligible buildings, they exclude other sites and structures with adap)ve

reuse poten)al, especially if the property is less than 50 years old. Therefore, proper)es with-‐

out historic designa)on may face a greater likelihood of demoli)on due to the lack of federal


protec)on and financial support. But these valuable buildings should not be overlooked as their

reuse can provide various environmental, economic, and social benefits.

Funding Mechanisms

Rehabilita)on costs, par)cularly if they include sustainable design plans, are one of most

prominent barriers that limits the ini)a)on or con)nua)on of adap)ve reuse projects. Adap)ve

reuse costs are influenced by a number of factors that vary according to different building and

site condi)ons, including )me, poten)al remedia)on levels, extent of structural or construc)on

ac)vity, ownership, and project size. Because renova)on projects face a larger probability for

unintended costs, separate funds should be set aside to ensure rehabilita)on is completed. In

many cases, there is a percep)on that the costs will be greater than the future benefits.

However, to offset various rehabilita)on costs and avoid cost overruns, successful pro-‐

jects leverage mul)ple sources of investment and financing mechanisms. Although certain fund-‐

ing sources vary depending on the intended land use outcomes, mobilizing a mix of public and

private funds at each stage of the project can minimize costs. Public funding includes EPA reme-‐

dia)on or assessment grants, historic preserva)on tax credits, tax-‐increment financing districts,

new market tax credits, or sustainability grants. Private funds can derive from businesses, de-‐

velopers, or other organiza)ons to aid the ini)al equity investments, loans, or grants. Some spe-‐

cific available adap)ve reuse financing op)ons include:23

1. Brownfield and Remedia)on Grants administered by the U.S. Environmental Protec)on

Agency. Specific types consist of:

• Assessment Grants: provide funding to inventory, characterize, assess, and con-‐duct planning and community involvement related to brownfield sites.

• Revolving Loan Fund Program: funding for a grant recipient to capitalize a revolv-‐ing loan fund and to provide sub-‐grants to carry out cleanup ac)vi)es at brown-‐field sites. When loans are repaid, the loan amount is returned into the fund and re-‐lent to other borrowers, providing an ongoing source of capital within a com-‐munity. Recipients must generally cover a share of costs amoun)ng to 20% of total funds awarded.

• Cleanup Grants: provide funds to carry out cleanup ac)vi)es at brownfield sites. An eligible en)ty may apply for up to $200,000 per site. Cleanup grants require a


20% cost share, which may be in the form of a contribu)on of money, labor, ma-‐terial, or services, and must be for eligible and allowable costs.

2. The Economic Development Assistance Program administered by the Economic Devel-‐

opment Administra)on: Funds are typically alloced to provide decent affordable hous-‐

ing and create economic opportuni)es, primarily for low and moderate income people.

Grant criteria includes assis)ng economically distressed or underserved communi)es

and addressing na)onal strategic priori)es such as technology-‐led development, global

compe))veness and innova)on, and sustainable development. Grant recipients gener-‐

ally bear 50% of project costs.

3. Community Development Block Grants administered by the U.S. Department of Housing

and Urban Development: Grants are used to provide decent housing, a suitable living

environment, and expanded economic opportuni)es principally for low and moderate

income people. Funds must be applied for by local government en))es and may be used

for housing development purposes. Projects must use at least 70% of the funding to

benefit low and moderate income individuals.

4. Historical Preserva)on Tax Credits and grants administered by the Na)onal Park Service

or from State Historic Preserva)on Offices. Please refer to the previous sec)on )tled

“Historic Designa)on” for more informa)on.

5. New Markets Tax Credits (NMTC): Individuals and corporate investors receive a federal

income tax credit for making qualified equity investments in designated Community De-‐

velopment En))es. NMTC are intended to acracts investment capital to low-‐income

communi)es. A 39% credit of the investment is provided and is claimed over a seven-‐

year period. In each of the first three years, a credit equal to 5% of the amount paid for

stock or capital interest at the )me of purchase is alloced to the investor. In the final

four years, the credit increases to 6% annually.

6. Low-‐income Housing Tax Credits: These federal housing tax credits encourage the private

market to invest in affordable rental housing. Developers of qualified projects can then

sell these credits to investors to raise capital or equity for a projects, reducing the debt

that the developer would otherwise have to borrow. Because the debt is lower, a tax


credit property can in turn offer lower, more affordable rents. If the property complies

with program requirements, investors receive a dollar-‐for-‐dollar credit against their fed-‐

eral tax liability each year over a period of 10 years. The amount of the annual credit is

based on the amount invested in the affordable housing.

7. Tax Increment Financing (TIF): A tool used to finance a project using the steam of reve-‐

nue created by the project or other projects within a TIF district. Typically, when a TIF

district is created, the amount of tax revenue that the area is currently genera)ng is set

as a baseline level held over a period of )me. The addi)onal property tax growth

spurred by community improvements and TIF funding can then be used to fund new re-‐

development projects or pay back bonds issued to pay upfront costs.

Tax abatement for a specified )me period, energy efficiency incen)ves, private or non-‐profit

grants or loans, or other sources can also contribute funding to an project.

Social Considera3ons

Just as vacancy or obsolescence significantly impacts a neighborhood, so does the final

purpose or func)on of a building. Both public engagement and mul)-‐stakeholder involvement

are crucial aspects in adap)ve reuse project success to foster ini)al as well as con)nual finan-‐

cial, poli)cal, and community support. Municipali)es, planning officials, or developers need to

ensure that the public has a basic understanding of redevelopment concepts, through defining

the adap)ve reuse process and conveying how residents will benefit. Because the new use of a

building should aim to benefit the surrounding community and its inhabitants, residents’ feed-‐

back, concerns, ques)ons, and advice should be solicited and taken into considera)on. In some

cases, neighborhood opposi)on could delay or stop a project’s implementa)on. However, con-‐

sulta)on with residents and community organiza)ons can help preserve with exis)ng heritage

and culture, iden)fy the neighborhood’s wishes, gain a public consensus, meet the community’s

needs, and integrate new building uses with future neighborhood plans. Educa)onal sessions,

public workshops, and hearings can promote a necessary, con)nual dialogue between planners

or developers and neighborhood residents.


Other Considera3ons

In addi)on to the previously discussed considera)ons and poten)al barriers for adap)ve

reuse projects, other general factors should also be considered and include:

• Building Ownership: A knowledge of and a rela)onship with owners are necessary to

analyze the overall land acquisi)on processes. Ownership can help determine if or when

a property will be sold and the expected costs. The adap)ve reuse process can also de-‐

pend on whether the property owner ini)a)ng rehabilita)on is a private or public

agency.

• Poli)cal Agenda and Support: Poli)cians, mayors, city officials, planners and aldermen

can help drive the redevelopment of a building, which is especially important if approval

is needed for zoning changes or to push forward redevelopment plans. Poli)cal support

is also useful to providing municipal funding to projects.

• Regulatory Requirements: According to one report, released by the Na)onal Trust for

Historic Preserva)on’s Preserva)on Green Lab, “building policies and codes in the

United States have historically favored the needs and goals of new construc)on.” Rigid

regulatory codes can make adap)ve reuse difficult, especially if a project intends to in-‐

corporate energy-‐efficient, green design into an exis)ng building.24 Although legal regu-‐

la)ons will vary by the type of project and loca)on, many adap)ve reuse sites will need

to comply with federal, state, and local laws in terms of the extent of environmental re-‐

media)on, project approval, building and fire codes, accessibility, parking, or renova)on

permits. In some cases, code requirements may require extensive, costly building

changes and updates.

• Market Analysis: A building’s new use should be analyzed within a market context to en-‐

sure the intended func)on is an economically viable reuse op)on that will provide a use-‐

ful service to foster addi)onal economic growth. A market evalua)on can consider

whether the building func)on provides necessary, desirable, marketable, or affordable

services to the surrounding neighborhood. Poten)al tenants, which may be necessary as


rents could support project debt or maintenance amer the ini)al rehabilita)on invest-‐

ment, could also be analyzed.

Based on the discussed considera)ons and barriers, some exis)ng buildings may be suit-‐

able for reuse, par)cularly if the basic building structure or founda)on is severely compromised.

These considera)ons can help determine whether a proposed func)on may be the most appro-‐

priate or best fit for an adap)ve reuse project. Adap)ve reuse projects may be a a more costly,

riskier, unpredictable op)on than new construc)on. However, early, careful site evalua)ons and

planning lead a project to its success.


Chapter II: Sec3on Endnotes


1 Northcountry Coopera)ve Founda)on, Jeff Allman, Allman & Associates, Too Good to Throw Away: The Adap%ve Reuse of Underused Buildings (Northcountry Coopera)ve Founda)on, 2005), hcp://www.ncdf.coop/documents/Adap)veReuseFINAL.pdf.2 U.S. Department of the Interior, Na)onal Park Service, “Na)onal Historic Landmarks Program.” U.S. Na%onal Park Service, last modified December 13, 2010, hcp://www.cr.nps.gov/nhl/.3 U.S. Department of the Interior, Na)onal Park Service, “Na)onal Historic Landmarks Program, Page 1: What is a Na)onal Historic Landmark?” U.S. Na%onal Park Service, last modified December 13, 2010, hcp://www.nps.gov/history/nhl/tutorial/About/About1.htm.4 U.S. Department of the Interior, Na)onal Park Service, “Na)onal Historic Landmarks Program, Page 1: What is ‘a high degree of integrity’ and why is it an key requirement for NHL designa)on?,” U.S. Na%onal Park Service, last modified December 13, 2010, hcp://www.nps.gov/history/nhl/tutorial/Workshop2/criteria3.htm.5 U.S. Department of the Interior, Na)onal Park Service, “Na)onal Historic Landmarks Program, Page 8: How long does it take for a property to become a NHL?” U.S. Na%onal Park Service, last modified June 13, 2011, hcp://www.nps.gov/history/nhl/tutorial/Workshop1/begin8.htm.

6 U.S. Department of the Interior, Na)onal Park Service, “Na)onal Register of Historic Places Program: Fundamen-‐tals,” U.S. Na%onal Park Service, last modified June 13, 2011, hcp://www.nps.gov/history/nr/na)onal_register_fundamentals.htm.7 U.S. Department of the Interior, Na)onal Park Service. “How to Apply to the Na)onal Register: Criteria for Evalua-‐)on.” U.S. Department of the Interior, Na%onal Park Service. 2002. hcp://www.nps.gov/history/nr/publica)ons/bulle)ns/nrb15/nrb15_2.htm8 Ibid.9 Ibid.10 U.S. Department of the Interior, Na)onal Park Service, “Na)onal Register of Historic Places Program: Fundamen-‐tals.”11 Ibid.12 Ibid.13 U.S. Department of the Interior, Na)onal Park Service, The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilita%on & Illustrated Guidelines on Sustainability for Rehabilita%ng Historic Buildings (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of the Interior, 2011), viiii-‐ix, www.nps.gov/history/hps/tps/index.htm.14 Ibid.15 Illinois Historic Preserva)on Agency, “Benefits and Protec)ons Offered by Na)onal Register Lis)ng.” Illinois His-‐toric Preserva%on Agency, accessed February 11, 2012, hcp://www.illinoishistory.gov/PS/benefitsnr.htm; U.S. De-‐partment of the Interior, Na)onal Park Service. “Na)onal Register of Historic Places Program: Frequently Asked Ques)ons,” U.S. Department of the Interior, Na%onal Park Service, June 13, 2011, hcp://www.nps.gov/nr/faq.htm.16 U.S. Department of the Interior, Na)onal Park Service, Technical Preserva)on Services, Historic Preserva%on Tax Incen%ves, (U.S. Department of the Interior, Na)onal Park Service: 2009), hcp://www.nps.gov/tps/tax-‐incen)ves/taxdocs/about-‐tax-‐incen)ves.pdf17 Ibid., 4.18 Ibid.19 Ibid., 8.20 Ibid., 12-‐13.21 Ibid., 16.22 Ibid., 17.

http://www.ncdf.coop/documents/AdaptiveReuseFINAL.pdf


http://www.cr.nps.gov/nhl/


http://www.nps.gov/history/nhl/tutorial/About/About1.htm


http://www.nps.gov/history/nhl/tutorial/Workshop2/criteria3.htm


http://www.nps.gov/history/nhl/tutorial/Workshop1/begin8.htm


http://www.nps.gov/history/nr/national_register_fundamentals.htm


http://www.nps.gov/history/nr/publications/bulletins/nrb15/nrb15_2.htm




http://www.nps.gov/history/hps/tps/index.htm


http://www.illinoishistory.gov/PS/benefitsnr.htm


http://www.nps.gov/nr/faq.htm


http://www.nps.gov/tps/tax-incentives/taxdocs/about-tax-incentives.pdf





23 Richard A. Scadden, “Adap)ve Reuse of Obsolete Power Plants,” (paper presented, Air & Waste Management Associa)on (A&WMA) 94th Annual Conference, Orlando, FL, June 2001);Gregory C. Staple and Machew I. Slavin, “Repurposed Coal Plant Sites Empower and Revive Communi)es,” The Public Manager, Spring 2012, 45-‐47, www.cleanskies.org/wp-‐content/uploads/2012/03/43-‐47_featureStapleSlavin-‐1-‐1.pdf; Northcountry Coopera)ve Founda)on, Jeff Allman, Allman & Associates, Too Good to Throw Away: The Adap%ve Reuse of Underused Build-‐ings; Illinois Historic Preserva)on Agency, “Benefits and Protec)ons Offered by Na)onal Register Lis)ng;” Scadden, “Facility Decommissioning and Adap)ve Reuse;” American Clean Skies Founda)on, Repurposing Legacy Power Plants: Lessons For the Future (American Clean Skies Founda)on, August 2011).24 Preserva)on Green Lab, Na)onal Trust for Historic Preserva)on, The Greenest Building: Quan%fying the Environ-‐mental Value of Building Reuse, 85-‐86.

http://www.cleanskies.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/43-47_featureStapleSlavin-1-1.pdf




III. Strategic Advantages and Opportuni3es in the Adap3ve Reuse of Coal-‐Fired Power Plants

Many older coal-‐fired power plants possess inherent building characteris)cs that war-‐

rant these sites ideal for redevelopment. In addi)on, due to economic factors associated with

the use of coal for energy genera)on amidst stricter environmental regula)ons, a larger number

of exis)ng power plants in the United States will re)re within the next few years or decade.

Thus, greater acen)on should be placed on how to redevelop these obsolete coal-‐fired power

plants, par)cularly because recycling these sites presents various adap)ve reuse challenges.

However, the adap)ve reuse of obsolete industrial buildings “were probably the first

adap)ve use efforts to capture widespread public acen)on.”1 Due to changes in technology,

manufacturing pacerns, the labor force, and transporta)on systems, many industries have

changed loca)ons, leaving once-‐thriving industrial buildings or districts obsolete, underu)lized,

or abandoned. These “empty and lifeless” buildings can nega)vely influence surrounding neigh-‐

borhoods, either visually, socially, or economically.2 One of the major areas of concern is the lost

of tax revenues and employment generated from the decrease in manufacturing.

While the economics of any adap)ve reuse project is crucial in analyzing the success, the

redevelopment of many industrial sites, such as coal-‐fired power plants, depends on more than

a simple market analysis. With aesthe)c and historic quali)es, many of these buildings are valu-‐

able resources within urban areas and “provide visual documenta)on of American’s industrial

development, reflec)ng both changes in manufacturing methods and advancements in building

technology.”3 A new apprecia)on for industrial spaces now aids the crea)ve reuse and trans-‐

forma)on into a variety of new purposes, including residen)al loms, ar)st workspaces, offices,

new manufacturing uses, or other commercial func)ons. Recycling the exis)ng industrial build-‐

ing stock, including older coal-‐fired power plants, adds to the vitality and revitaliza)on of ci)es

and urban neighborhoods through regenera)ng new economic ac)vity while also preserving

the heritage of these sites.


An3cipated Coal Plant Re3rements

Over 150 electric genera)ng power plants, many of which were constructed decades

ago, are predicted to re)re due to new regula)ons on pollu)on control, increased energy costs,

and economic compe))on related to alterna)ve fuels, such as natural gas.4 Because a large

por)on of the current coal fleet is 40 to 50 years old, about one-‐third of the exis)ng coal fleet

lacks necessary emission control technology.5 Stricter pollu)on regula)ons required by recent

Environmental Protec)on Agency (EPA) legisla)on would require billions of dollars in retrofits to

these aging coal-‐fired power plants.6 Rather than install expensive pollu)on-‐control equipment

to meet EPA requirements, many u)li)es are choosing to the more cost-‐effec)ve op)on to close

their power plants. In addi)on, various states have adopted Renewable Energy Standards, which

requires u)li)es to provide a por)on of their electricity from renewable energy sources like

wind, solar, bio-‐fueled gas, and geothermal energy. In addi)on, due to the loca)on near dense

urban areas and nega)ve public sen)ment toward pollu)ng facili)es, coordinated ac)vist pres-‐

sure has pushed the re)rement of many coal-‐fired power plants forward.

The Electric Power Research Ins)tute recently es)mated that power from exis)ng coal-‐

fired power plants would be reduced approximately two-‐thirds by 2025, replaced largely by re-‐

newable energy or other alterna)ve sources.7 Re)ring old coal-‐fired power plants has become a

growing trend in the United States. From January 1, 2010 to February 29, 2012, u)lity compa-‐

nies have announced the re)rement of or closed 106 coal plants.8 The total energy output,

42,895 megawacs (MW), which amounts to 13% of the total coal fleet.

In many neighborhoods, coal-‐fired power plants are, or were, once a vital part of the lo-‐

cal economy as they contribute tax revenue and employ residents. However, due to deindustri-‐

aliza)on and decline of coal use, many of these facili)es no longer serve economically viable

func)ons, have been abandoned, or are at risk of becoming vacant. Without redevelopment,

these structures can acract addi)onal disinvestment or crime from visible deteriora)on and

vacancy.9 Redevelopment efforts should focus on repurposing power plants to revitalize indus-‐

trial areas, encourage economic growth, and generate environmentally-‐friendly employment. In

addi)on, because many coal-‐fired power plants have a history of pollu)on and environmental

injus)ce, adap)ve reuse or the redevelopment of these sites should strive to produce a cleaner

future through remedia)on and poten)ally incorpora)ng sustainable design into new land uses.


Inherent Building Advantages

A number of industrial buildings, par)cularly older coal-‐fired power plants, possess in-‐

herit redevelopment advantages, making them acrac)ve candidates for adap)ve reuse. The

structure and facades of industrial spaces were omen designed to reflect the specific func)ons

of building. When industrial spaces no longer serve their original func)on, most “prove to be

solid, have flexible spa)al quali)es and be of expressive interest. If the seclement has some po-‐

ten)al for development, there is an acrac)ve conversion business in sight.”10 The Urban Land

Ins)tute comments on the unique, appealing features of industrial design:

A sense of strength, simplicity, and dignity can be expressed in these u)litarian struc-‐tures. Windows are usually arranged in rhythmic pacerns, and decora)ve elements such as arches, brick corbeling, or corner quoins break the severity of exterior walls. Interiors are characterized by exposed structural elements of heavy )mber of cast iron and by great volumes of unobstructed spaces.11

While “the exis)ng fabric of the building can be a determining factor in the adap)ve use design”

for most other building types, industrial buildings are typically “shells with interior framing. This

lack of constraint in the interior allows great flexibility in introducing contemporary design

elements.”12 In addi)on, innate building characteris)cs, such as large open spaces and tall ceil-‐

ings, offer countless possibili)es in redesigning and repurposing the site. Unique features such

as exposed materials, including the exis)ng brick or piping, and mechanical equipment can also

increase the acrac)veness of reusing these buildings. While these descrip)ons only generally

portray industrial buildings, each site is unique and should be examined individually for its

adap)ve reuse poten)al.

In terms of coal-‐fired power plants, many of the older sites contain architectural, aes-‐

the)c, or historical appeal. Besides represen)ng countless people and events from the electric

age, many of these industrial relics physically provide unique, ample space for new uses. Most

older plants were constructed with spacious turbine-‐generator halls, purposely built with tall

ceilings to house large steam-‐cycled turbines and boilers.13 These large rooms provide remark-‐

able and versa)le design opportuni)es that can accommodate a variety of new func)ons on a

grand scale. The exterior and interior of buildings may also exhibit invaluable, detailed architec-‐

ture that is not present in the new construc)on of power plants. These architectural features

can be preserved to maintain historic or industrial iden)ty for the structure itself and past role


in the surrounding community. Similar to preserving original industrial equipment and architec-‐

tural features, other material ar)facts, such as plaques, pictures, and even furniture, should be

considered in redevelopment plans to preserved the immaterial, intangible values that repre-‐

sent the site when it once operated.

As men)oned in Chapter I, many historic or older buildings have inherent energy-‐

efficient and sustainable elements due to their site sensi)vity, construc)on quality, and use of

natural light and ven)la)on.14 However, because these building systems pre-‐date modern green

technology, energy efficiency can certainly be improved upon. Thus, the adap)ve reuse of coal-‐

fired power plants provides the opportunity to enhance energy efficiency and incorporate sus-‐

tainable design. In addi)on, green building features become notably important when recycling a

coal-‐fire power plant, given the history and opera)ons of these buildings are marked by unsus-‐

tainable and environmentally-‐unfriendly ac)vi)es such as fossil fuel use, environmental degra-‐

da)on, and pollu)on.

Loca3on-‐Specific Advantages: Post-‐Industrial Waterfront Redevelop-‐ment

Older coal-‐fired power plants are also acrac)ve adap)ve reuse candidates due to their

loca)on. Historically, many power plants were built in strategic loca)ons along waterfronts and

near dense urban centers to support business opera)ons and provide access to necessary

resources.15 Because of their historic proximity to city centers, many sites are pedestrian-‐

friendly and situated near exis)ng infrastructure, such as roads, public u)li)es, and transporta-‐

)on routes. Waterfront access also encourages redevelopment through providing valuable land

for recrea)onal ac)vi)es or open, green space.16 Due to these geographic advantages, power

plants can be incorporated into urban renewal efforts. In the past, power plants’ inherent quali-‐

)es have aided adap)ve reuse into a variety of new uses such as residen)al, commercial, green

industrial, entertainment-‐oriented, recrea)onal, educa)onal, community-‐based, mixed-‐use, or

open space developments. Successful adap)ve reuse projects of coal-‐fired power plants will be

showcased in detail in Chapter IV.


Historically, waterfronts were important nodes for ci)es, serving as port loca)on for im-‐

por)ng or expor)ng goods while also providing space for manufacturing ac)vi)es. The “indus-‐

trial capital and produc)on” once contributed to the vitality and wealth of a city.17 However,

with the decrease in manufacturing and now the an)cipated closure of many coal-‐fired power

plants, large industrial parcels with waterfront access no longer serve their previous func)ons.

The shim toward a service economy, outsourcing from globaliza)on, new technological im-‐

provements, and the use of other types of transport has lessened the need for the heavy use of

industrial buildings and land.

Today, ci)es’ post-‐industrial urban waterfronts are becoming highly-‐valued for their re-‐

development poten)al. While acrac)ve, these waterfront areas, such as those that possess

coal-‐fired power plants, typically contain a number of redevelopment issues. Areas once “where

the Industrial Revolu)on was manifest,” now possesses a legacy of contamina)on and environ-‐

mental degrada)on to be avoided.18 Post-‐industrial land is typically isolated or underu)lized,

separated from the physical, social, and economic ac)vity occurring in the city. Thus, the chal-‐

lenge is to reconnect residual industrial land back to the neighborhood or city.

Challenges aside, many of these industrial buildings, including coal-‐fired power plants,

are definitely worth preserving. Recycling these spaces has the ability to integrate historic pres-‐

erva)on and past heritage into the contemporary city. While abandoned or obsolete industrial

buildings may present difficul)es in how to acract new capital, assign new ac)vi)es and func-‐

)ons, or remediate polluted sites, they present rare opportuni)es within urban sejngs for

residents, visitors, or tourists to once again enjoy water’s edge. These redevelopment projects,

“speak to our future, and to our past. They speak to a past in industrial produc)on, to a )me of

tremendous growth and expansion, to social and economic structures that no longer exist, to a

)me when environmental degrada)on was an unacknowledged by-‐product of growth and

profit.”19 In addi)on, these projects speak to the future through supplying the opportunity to

reconnect sites with the city and assign more beneficial func)ons to support neighborhood or

city growth.

Author Richard Marshall writes that urban waterfront revitaliza)on efforts provide a

“hope for urban vitality.”20 Marshall describes the immense poten)al in revitalizing these areas,

par)cularly as the large availability of land is generally rare within city limits. This “land allows


for programs, omen at odds with the scale and grain of the tradi)onal city, to find places to lo-‐

cate. These are the sites for big program facili)es such as museums, exhibi)on halls conven)on

centers and sports stadiums.”21

The geographic loca)on of some post-‐industrial land and coal-‐fired power plants also

strengthens redevelopment poten)al. Author Mar)n Millspaugh notes that, because the origi-‐

nal city relied on piers and head-‐houses, historic neighborhoods developed around industrial

areas. Industrial buildings and land are:

likely to be surrounded by the city’s oldest and most beau)ful neighborhood of build-‐ings, streets, and plazas—surroundings which produce an ideal sejng for redevelop-‐ment of the abandoned property with new uses, especially those that are generated by the growing need of the people of the world for new and expanded leisure and recrea-‐)onal facili)es.”22

In addi)on to acrac)ve historic surroundings, a central loca)on near the city center creates the

advantage of easy access to exis)ng public transit systems, which include the local streets,

highways, trains, or buses. Millspaugh also comments a prominent redevelopment advantage

for post-‐industrial land is due to “simply the presence of water” as:

it has a magical quality that acracts and moves the human spirit like no other element. The presence of a sizeable body of water gives all port areas an emo)onal appeal which is ideal for recrea)on, entertainment and cultural ac)vi)es—which in economic terms create the founda)ons for tourism as well as for leisure ac)vi)es of the local popula)on.23

The Redevelopment of Post-‐Industrial Waterfronts: Lessons Learned

Geographic loca)on, large proper)es, and waterfront access are major factors in acract-‐

ing redevelopment. However, in order to achieve post-‐industrial waterfront redevelopment suc-‐

cess, Millspaugh comments on a number of lessons learned. Because public and private sectors

contain similar objec)ves, public-‐private partnerships should be formed to move toward eco-‐

nomic development.24 An agreed-‐upon master plan for the future land uses, which is supported

by a realis)c business plan projec)ng the market demand and availability of funding sources, is

also crucial. Next, Millspaugh writes on the significance of community involvement:

It is important that the plans, and the )metable, have a consensus of support from the community at large. The local popula)on needs to be sold on a concept before it will be embraced by out-‐of-‐town developers and investors, and the best way to obtain a sus-‐


tained community consensus is by making the ci)zens feel they ‘own’ the project, and the developer is simply the instrument of the public will.25

The public and community members should be allowed to influence the redevelopment or

adap)ve reuse design, which could include aspects such as building sizes, massing, height and

propor)on, and aesthe)cs. Professionals alone cannot create a project that reflects “the implicit

values of the local people and their environment. Aerial, or bird’s-‐eye, view are helpful to gain

understanding of a three-‐dimensional plan, but the final test is the view seen by the man or

woman in the street, or at water level.”26 A successful adap)ve reuse of industrial waterfront

areas cannot risk losing touch with the “residents, who will ul)mately be the most important

customers, or cons)tuents, of the project” and favorable public rela)ons must be maintained.27

Gaining support and authorizing the project through the local poli)cal process is another

major aspect in implemen)ng redevelopment plans. Depending on the project and who actually

owns the property, governments and elected officials are typically necessary for policy and fiscal

control, acrac)ng private funds, and public infrastructure. Many )mes, a contract or develop-‐

ment agreement between a city, private en)ty, or non-‐profit organiza)on is formed to ensure

specific objec)ves or func)ons ensue.

Due to the large parcel sizes or con)nuous tracts, architectural designs for the construc-‐

)on on post-‐industrial waterfront areas should be coordinated to ensure a uniformly high stan-‐

dard of aesthe)c quality within various projects. In addi)on, the control and coordina)on of the

)ming of construc)on is essen)al in order to achieve a complementary phasing process and

minimize the disrup)on of other ac)vi)es. Thus, the process should be somewhat flexible and

con)nuously monitored to respond to poten)al changes in the economy or in the original plan.

Rinio Brucomesso also comments on factors that contribute to the successful post-‐

industrial waterfront redevelopment projects. Waterfront sites represen)ng “industrial archeol-‐

ogy” should be refined with a new image and defini)ve func)on to enhance urban quality.28 A

designated, specific importance, such as becoming a hub for water taxis, and an assigned new

iden)ty creates an acrac)ve image for future users.

According to Brucomesso, there should be a “plurality of func)ons assigned to the area,

in rela)on to both its regenera)on as well as its rela)onship with the rest of the city” to allow

the waterfront to have different but complementary roles.29 Large areas of redeveloped land


should not be limited to a single func)on, but contain a mix of purposes with both public and

private sectors co-‐exis)ng in the new func)ons, spaces, and actors managing services.

In addi)on, to enhance the quality of post-‐industrial waterfront proper)es, the area

must be opened and accessible to the public. To link the area to the city center and outlying

zones, pedestrian access is essen)al and various modes of public transit, through either land or

water, must be improved upon. However, “limita)ons on vehicle traffic” is recommended.30 In-‐

stead, upgraded transporta)on through the adjacent waterways, which can include methods

such as water taxis, can help residents rediscover different types of mobility and relieve pres-‐

sure on city streets and the other exis)ng transit op)ons. Modal interchanges can help link the

different transit systems of land and water while also encouraging an acrac)ve flow of visitors.

Finally, post-‐industrial waterfronts should be enjoyed within its surrounding urban land-‐

scape. Elements, such as the design and aesthe)cs, should be salvaged as a testament to the

site’s past character to rediscover or introduce symbolic values associated with presence of wa-‐

ter, industrial past, and its determining use. Brucomesso recommends that the redeveloped

area should be:

highlighted by the environmental and urban features of the waterfront, to emphasize the unusual nature of this urban zone (its contact with the water, the view of the water, and the city from this border zone, the presence of usual consolidated ac)vi)es, ect.), in order to make it appreciated by those to frequent it.31

Thus, in order to achieve this recommenda)on, the redeveloped land and the adjacent water

must be of high quality. If necessary, remedia)on of the land or water should be conducted.

Redevelopment should not simply focus on the end-‐product, ignore the risk and prob-‐

lems, be removed from the crucial poli)cal and financial mechanisms, or neglect the context or

the site’s rela)onship to area. Marshall comments that there is a tendency to view post-‐

industrial urban waterfronts as “a kind of urban panacea, a cure-‐all for ailing ci)es in search of

new self-‐images or ways of dealing with issues of compe))on for capital development or tourist

dollars.”32 Each project must be analyzed realis)cally and independently. Redevelopment re-‐

quires significant sources of capital, gradual phasing and build-‐up processes due to large land

sizes, and the par)cipa)on of differing government bodies, the private sector, and nonprofit or-‐

ganiza)ons. Millspaugh writes, “the players will need to understand that the stakes are high—

both for winning or losing—because the waterfront is probably the only one the community


has, and they’d becer be prepared to do it right because they won’t be given another chance.”33

Because of the higher levels of risk and difficul)es, implementa)on should remain flexible while

simultaneously adhering to the original adopted vision or principles.

Specific Concerns for the Adap3ve Reuse of Power Plants

It should be noted that some industrial sites or power plants lack the criteria for com-‐

ple)ng a successful adap)ve reuse project. Coal-‐fired power plants face a number of dis)nct

adap)ve reuse barriers. Repurposing may not be an op)mal choice for some sites due to a lack

of architectural or historic character, structural integrity problems, ownership and property ac-‐

quisi)on, stakeholder involvement, )ming, or other factors previously discussed in Chapter II. In

some cases, demoli)on may be the preferred outcome.

Total Adap3ve Reuse Costs and Timeframe

Adap)ve reuse planning and outcomes varies from case to case, which will be shown in

greater detail in Chapter IV. Thus, the redevelopment of each coal-‐fired power plant will entail

different levels of cost and )me depending on factors such as remedia)on, the final reuse func-‐

)on, funding sources, and building issues. Based on a variety of case studies, total costs for the

redevelopment of obsolete power plants ranges from $10 million for small projects, $40-‐$80

million for medium-‐size programs, and $150-‐$180 million for larger projects.34

Similar to cost, the )ming to complete a redevelopment project remains variable. How-‐

ever, site development, including both remedia)on and rehabilita)on, typically takes several

years. The process may be extended due to zoning changes, unan)cipated problems, historic

designa)on, or financing issues.

Remedia3on

Almost all coal-‐fired power plants will require remedia)on. Industrial equipment, coal

ash piles, underground storage tanks, and hazardous contaminants, including asbestos, lead

paint, mercury, or polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), must be removed to leave a clean building

shell for an adap)ve reuse project.35 While remedia)on can be a )me-‐consuming and costly


process, successful environmental clean up efforts have been implemented at a number of coal-‐

fired power plant.

Building a cleaner future for the surrounding neighborhoods is par)cularly important

given that many power plants emit hazardous substances such as par)culate macer, mercury,

or other chemicals, which nega)vely affect human health and contaminate air or water

supplies.36 Repurposing coal-‐fired power plants enhances the environment by cleaning the exist-‐

ing building stock as well as surrounding natural spaces. Instead of simply demolishing a build-‐

ing that once polluted surrounding communi)es, adap)ve reuse has the ability to transform

power plants, which once contributed to the degrada)on of the environmental and polluted

communi)es, into clean sites that foster neighborhood vitality rather than harming community

health. In addi)on, their past nega)ve iden)fy can be reshaped into a more sustainable and

beneficial use for the community. Today, repurposed power plants include sustainable designs

in their final building and land uses.

Sites that require significant remedia)on efforts may face larger redevelopment costs.

Site cleanup varies depending on the new intended land use and whether asbestos, landfills,

above-‐ground fuel storage tanks, transmission substa)on, lead-‐based paint, or other hazardous

chemicals need to be removed. Because Hunter’s Point Power Plant, located in San Francisco,

was heavily contaminated, the es)mated costs for remedia)on in 2003 totaled $25 million.37

Remedia)on at the Comal Power Plant in New Braunfels, Texas required $11.3 million over a

period of 3 years.38 In general, the costs of remedia)on is lower for newer coal-‐fired power

plants as less hazardous chemicals were used in the construc)on or opera)ons. While remedia-‐

)on can be expensive and )me consuming, early planning and local, state, or federal assistance

programs can minimize the costs.

Vacancy and Postponed Redevelopment

Success stories across the United States featuring the adap)ve reuse of power plants

illustrate that, many )mes, redevelopment is worth the challenge. In his conference paper to

the Na)onal Defense Industrial Associa)on’s 27th Environmental Symposium and Exhibi)on,

Richard Scadden states that a lack of ac)on or interven)on for re)ring or obsolete coal-‐fired

power plants:


should be approached cau)ously. In some cases, owners view this as the least cost ap-‐proach with minimal impact on their con)nued opera)ons and budget. This can be a false impression if environmental liabili)es exist or the building is in disrepair. Not ad-‐dressing environmental contamina)on can lead to undesirable results such as migra)on of contamina)on, more severe environmental impacts, regulatory enforcement ac)ons, bad publicity, and more costly cleanups at a later date. Abandonment of buildings or de-‐ferred maintenance can lead to an exacerba)on of small issues, animal infesta)ons, and safety hazards because of structural deteriora)on or hazardous materials exposure. Un-‐controlled or abandoned buildings also can become a target for transients and homeless people.39

In a number of cases, amer re)ring, power plants have been lem vacant for years or even

decades. These abandoned, derelict structures can harm local communi)es through crea)ng

blight and by not providing vital tax revenue or jobs.

However, electric companies’ early announcements declaring the re)rement of specific

power plants could be advantageous to redevelopment. By an)cipa)ng a par)cularly site’s clo-‐

sure, ci)es and developers can begin planning before the plant officially re)res and avoid for-‐

gone opportuni)es. Instead of vacancy, abandonment, or demoli)on, early planning for reuse

can encourage economic and community growth. By jumpstar)ng the redevelopment process,

site evalua)ons, property acquisi)on, funding, stakeholder involvement, remedia)on, future

site func)ons, innova)ve design solu)ons, and tax revenue and employment replacements may

be determined or secured sooner to help promote adap)ve reuse success.

The Redevelopment Process: A Framework for the Adap3ve Reuse of Power Plants

The following framework, adapted from Richard Scadden’s Facility Decommissioning and

Adap%ve Reuse, describes the sequen)al planning process for the adap)ve reuse of coal-‐fired

power plants as well as the contextual rela)onship of specific considera)ons and barriers.40

This process is also helpful in evalua)ng whether or how a building should be reused, or demol-‐

ished. The descrip)on below is intended to show the general rela)ve order of adap)ve reuse

opera)ons. However, because each building and site is unique, these factors can occur at differ-‐

ent stages or may even be absent. The general process includes:41


1. An Ini&al Building and Site Assessment to define the current site condi)ons, regula-‐)ons, major areas of concern, general cost ranges, and poten)al op)ons for the future adap)ve reuse of the site. This stage is comprised of:

• An Environmental assessment of the soil, groundwater, and buildings is necessary to determine if any hazardous materials, equipment, or chemicals are present and the extent of contamina)on onsite. Site sampling, previous studies, inter-‐views with senior staff, original site plans and photos, maintenance ac)vi)es, regulatory inspec)ons, and/or building construc)on informa)on can be used to complete this task. In addi)on, building age, processes associated with electric genera)on, hazardous material storage or spills, and past abatement ac)vi)es can also provide valuable informa)on on the exis)ng contamina)on levels.

• A Regulatory Review of federal, state, and local requirements should be con-‐ducted to provide a basis for the allowed methods and levels of environmental contamina)on on site as well as for es)ma)ng the cleanup levels required for the intended future use.

• An Equipment inventory inside buildings and on the property should be per-‐formed to provide informa)on on remedia)on, the necessary dismantling of in-‐dustrial equipment, and the associated cost analysis.

• A Building inspec%on of the architectural design, historical significance, construc-‐)on materials, current condi)on, poten)al physical deteriora)on, structural in-‐tegrity, and square footage.

• The Site Assets and Loca%on should also be evaluated. This includes site acreage, surrounding neighborhood, adjacent land uses, demographic informa)on, com-‐munity needs, and exis)ng infrastructure such as access to transporta)on or public u)li)es.

2. An Evalua&on of the Alterna&ve Ac&ons should be performed to help decide the viabil-‐ity of an adap)ve reuse project and to move toward developing a general plan and im-‐plementa)on strategy for the desired future use of the site. The es)mated costs and in-‐forma)on collected in the Ini%al Building and Site Assessment will help determine which alterna)ve is the most appropriate, desired course of ac)on. Generally, the poten)al alterna)ves include leaving the facility as is to be dealt with at a later date, remediate the site and leave the facility to be dealt with at a later date, remediate the site and dis-‐mantle all the equipment to prepare for an adap)ve reuse project, or demolish the facil-‐ity. To comprehensively evaluate the alterna)ves, the step typically includes analyzing:

• The environmental goals to determine the extent of remedia)on ac)on in re-‐gards to the poten)al demoli)on, preserva)on of the exis)ng buildings, or new construc)on

• Public and community interests for redeveloping site


• Poli)cal and financial support for ac)on

• Engineering, design, and modeling specifica)ons or plans

• Economic analysis of overall costs, new tax revenue genera)on, job crea)on, growth for the community

• Funding op)ons and financial issues

• Scheduled )meline

3. Facility Decommissioning should occur amer the site assessment, analysis of alterna)ve op)ons, and preliminary planning ac)vi)es. This stage is prepares the site for adap)ve reuse, which can include comple)ng:

• Environmental remedia)on

• Equipment dismantling

• Building demoli)on

• Regulatory approval (permits, ect)

4. Comple&ng the Adap&ve Reuse Project is the final stage where selected final plans are implemented. Depending on the final reuse of the site, implementa)on can include re-‐habilita)on of the exis)ng facility to prepare it for its new intended use and return the site to an economically viable func)on that benefits the community. If the building has been demolished, the site can be prepared for new construc)on or open space.

The Future of Coal-‐fired Power Plants

Many coal-‐fired power plants are a crucial aspect of post-‐industrial waterfront redevel-‐

opment efforts. Because many coal-‐fired power plants were typically built on large parcels of

waterfront property with a close proximity to city centers and related infrastructure, they are

ideal candidates for redevelopment. Given the large number of an)cipated re)rements,

adap)ve reuse of coal-‐fired power plants can help reconnect obsolete industrial spaces back to

the surrounding city and neighborhood. Although these facili)es are becoming obsolete and no

longer serve their originally intended use, coal-‐fired power plants can be assigned a new, unre-‐

lated purpose.


New func)ons for obsolete power plants can help create a becer, economically viable

alterna)ve for these site, while also increasing residents’ quality of life. Instead of vacancy, un-‐

employment, and a significant loss in taxes, these buildings are revived to house new business

ac)vity and employment posi)ons. Adap)ve reuse projects have the op)on of incorpora)ng

crea)ve or unconven)onal new land uses that also encourage addi)onal physical, economic,

social improvements along the waterfront. For example, the development of new transporta-‐

)on infrastructure, such as by integra)ng a water taxi system connected to other modes of pub-‐

lic transit within the city, may increase site accessibility, promote a becer quality of life for resi-‐

dents, and even acract tourists or visitors. Capitalizing on these opportuni)es can help promote

a healthier environment overall by encouraging vitality and vibrancy rather than decline. Thus,

the past problems of redundant, residual waterfront industry can be transformed into one of

opportunity through bringing new users, purposes, and services to exis)ng facili)es.

The redevelopment issues can be daun)ng as reuse requires a great deal of innova)on,

)me, and financial assets due to large property sizes, environmental contamina)on, regula)ons,

overlapping jurisdic)ons, or other factors. But urban waterfront regions and their industrial

buildings possess the opportunity to create new func)onal, enriching land joined with the city

rather than remaining separate. Marshall writes:

In these possibili)es, we remember that urban development is not just for profit, or per-‐sonal aggrandizement, but for the benefit of humanity and the planet as well. It is on the urban waterfront that these visions of the city are finding form.

...Ci)es will not succeed by ignoring the physical realm of the city. As ci)es shim from in-‐dustrial to service economies, a major aspect of their success will be in the quality of their urban environments. It is here that the waterfront plays a cri)cal role. Waterfronts are omen the most degraded places in the city, being the sites of the former industries. Waterfronts are also highly visible loca)ons in most ci)es. The image of the city can be remade here.42


Chapter III: Sec3on Endnotes


1 Urban Land Ins)tute. Adap%ve Use: Development Economics, Process, and Profiles, 217.2 Ibid.3 Ibid.4 American Clean Skies Founda)on, Repurposing Legacy Power Plants: Lessons For the Future, 6; Scadden, “Adap)ve Reuse of Obsolete Power Plants,” 1; Brian Koenig, “Dozens of Power Plants Closing Due to New EPA Rules,” The New American, December 20, 2011, hcp://thenewamerican.com/tech-‐mainmenu-‐30/energy/10253-‐dozens-‐of-‐power-‐plants-‐closing-‐due-‐to-‐new-‐epa-‐rules.5 Simon Lomax, "‘Massive’ Closures of U.S. Coal Plants Loom, Chu Says" Bloomberg Businessweek, February 9, 2011; American Clean Skies Founda)on, Repurposing Legacy Power Plants: Lessons For the Future, 6.6 Dina Spector, "Dozens Of Coal Factories Forced To Shut Down In Response To Strict EPA Regula)on," The Business Insider, August 9, 2011; American Clean Skies Founda)on, Repurposing Legacy Power Plants: Lessons For the Fu-‐ture, 6.7 Union of Concerned Scien)sts, A Risky Proposi%on: The Financial Hazards of New Investments in Coal Plants (UCS Publica)ons, March 2011), 44, hcp://www.ucsusa.org/assets/documents/clean_energy/a-‐risky-‐proposi)on_report.pdf.8 Stephen, Lacey. “Nine More Dirty, Aging Coal Plants Set to Close, Bringing Total U.S. Re)rements to 106 Plants Since 2000,” Think Progress, February 29, 2012. hcp://thinkprogress.org/romm/2012/02/29/435012/dirty-‐aging-‐coal-‐plants-‐set-‐to-‐close/?mobile=nc9 Government of Saskatchewan, Heritage Resources Branch, Economic Benefits of Heritage Conserva%on.10 Casal, “The Adap)ve Re-‐Use of Buildings: Remembrance or Oblivion?” 1.11 Urban Land Ins)tute. Adap%ve Use: Development Economics, Process, and Profiles, 217.12 Urban Land Ins)tute. Adap%ve Use: Development Economics, Process, and Profiles, 218.13 Scadden, “Adap)ve Reuse of Obsolete Power Plants,”3. 14 Na)onal Trust for Historic Preserva)on, "Posi)on Statement: Historic Preserva)on and Sustainability;” Langston et al., "Strategic Assessment of Building Adap)ve Reuse Opportuni)es in Hong Kong;” Langston, “Green Adap)ve Reuse: Issues and Strategies for the Built Environment.” 15 Scadden, “Adap)ve Reuse of Obsolete Power Plants,” 2-‐4.16 Na)onal Trust for Historic Preserva)on, "Posi)on Statement: Historic Preserva)on and Sustainability.”17 Richard Marshall, “Contemporary Urban Space-‐making at the Water’s Edge,” in Waterfronts in Post-‐Industrial Ci%es, edited by Richard Marshall, 3-‐14 (London: Spon Press, 2001), 5.18 Ibid., 3.19 Ibid., 5.20 Ibid., 3. 21 Ibid., 6.22 Mar)n Millspaugh, “Waterfronts as Catalysts for City Renewal,” in Waterfronts in Post-‐Industrial Ci%es, edited by Richard Marshall, 74-‐85 (London: Spon Press, 2001), 78.23 Ibid.24Ibid., 81.25 Ibid., 82.26 Ibid.27 Ibid., 83.28 Rinio Brucomesso, “Complexity of the Urban Waterfront,” in Waterfronts in Post-‐Industrial Ci%es, edited by Rich-‐ard Marshall, 39-‐49 (London: Spon Press, 2001), 40.

http://thenewamerican.com/tech-mainmenu-30/energy/10253-dozens-of-power-plants-closing-due-to-new-epa-rules




http://www.ucsusa.org/assets/documents/clean_energy/a-risky-proposition_report.pdf


http://thinkprogress.org/romm/2012/02/29/435012/dirty-aging-coal-plants-set-to-close/?mobile=nc



29 Ibid., 43.30 Ibid., 46.31 Ibid.32 Marshall, “Contemporary Urban Space-‐making at the Water’s Edge,”6.33 Millspaugh, “Waterfronts as Catalysts for City Renewal,” 85.34 American Clean Skies Founda)on, Repurposing Legacy Power Plants: Lessons For the Future, 27.35 Scadden, “Adap)ve Reuse of Obsolete Power Plants,” 2; Northcountry Coopera)ve Founda)on, Jeff Allman, All-‐man & Associates, Too Good to Throw Away: The Adap%ve Reuse of Underused Buildings, 9.36 U.S. Environmental Protec)on Agency, “Reducing Air Pollu)on from Power Plants,” U.S. Environmental Protec%on Agency, April 26, 2011.37 Ibid.38 Ibid.39 Scadden, “Facility Decommissioning and Adap)ve Reuse;” 6-‐7.40 Ibid.41 Ibid.42 Marshall, “Contemporary Urban Space-‐making at the Water’s Edge,” 4,9.

IV. Case Studies: The Adap3ve Reuse Of Power Plants

Given the impending re)rement of coal-‐fired power plants across the United States and

the advantageous site characteris)cs ideal for redevelopment, many of these buildings possess

a high poten)al for future adap)ve reuse projects. Coal-‐fired power plants have become acrac-‐

)ve candidates for adap)ve reuse due to their industrial features, unique architecture, size, and

proximity to the waterfront or dense urban centers. As more old facili)es close and no longer

serve their originally intended use, they can be assigned a new, unrelated purpose that incorpo-‐

rates both sustainable design and historic preserva)on.

The following cases studies highlight successful adap)ve reuse projects, which have

been completed or are currently in the process of being redeveloped. In general, the examples

demonstrate the extraordinary opportuni)es for power plants along with the best methods and

different approaches for effec)vely recycling old, obsolete genera)ng sta)ons. These case stud-‐

ies also illustrate and build upon previously discussed topics related to the environmental, eco-‐

nomic, and social benefits detailed in Chapter I, and the development considera)ons from

Chapter II. Although power plants have been repurposed in other countries, which showcases

these sites’ interna)onal significance in redevelopment projects, for the purpose of this thesis,

only examples located in the United States will be included. By only focusing on na)onal case

studies, these examples intend to present more realis)c, prac)cal project comparisons based on

similar regulatory requirements, poli)cal structures, and funding op)ons.

Power plants have been converted into a diverse range of new building and land uses for

both public and private purposes. In past examples, these sites were transformed into offices,

community spaces, museums, schools, shopping centers, entertainment districts, condomini-‐

ums and apartments, or mix-‐use developments projects. However, regardless of the final build-‐

ing use, one of the most important aspects to be gained from the collec)on of examples is that,

even though reusing power plants can be one of the most challenging types of adap)ve reuse,

projects are feasible and have many )mes been successful. The cases studies from across the

United States strongly illustrate that, many )mes, redevelopment is worth the challenge.

Collec)vely, these case studies create a compelling case for remedia)ng and repurposing

other valuable re)ring or decommissioned coal-‐fired power plants. While the physical transfor-‐

ma)ons are visually impressive, these projects symbolize the coexistence of historic preserva-‐


)on and sustainability through preserving the original industrial history while simultaneously

assigning a more environmentally-‐friendly purpose to benefit the surrounding communi)es.

The adap)ve reuse of coal-‐fired power plants is not limited to the six case studies pre-‐

sented below. For example, in Portland, Oregon, Sta)on L Power Plant was converted into the

Oregon Museum of Science and Industry, which features sustainable design elements and cost a

total of $40 million.1 The South Street Power Sta)on, located in Providence, Rhode Island, will

be soon house a restaurant, museum, office space, and luxury hotel at a cost es)mated to total

over $150 million.2 In 2013, PG&E Power Sta)on B, in Sacramento, California, will be reopened

as the Powerhouse Science Center, a high-‐tech educa)on facility that is es)mated to cost $50

million.3 Other repurposed power plants, or those that are in the process of being redeveloped,

include: Salem Harbor Power Sta)on, in Salem Massachusecs; Chester Power Sta)on in Chester,

Pennsylvania, IRT Powerhouse in New York City, New York; Pennsylvania Railroad Powerhouse in

Queens, New York; Mission Road Power Plant in San Antonio, Texas; and Ocawa Street Power

Sta)on in Lansing, Michigan. The growing number of projects featuring the adap)ve reuse of

coal-‐fired power plants indicate that these buildings and sites are an acrac)ve and popular re-‐

development op)on for ci)es and developers.

Amer describing each adap)ve reuse case study, various lessons learned will be exam-‐

ined and summarized.


PraV Street Power PlantBal)more, Maryland


Original Use: Prac Street Power Plant, 1900-‐1973

Current Use: Mixed-‐use entertainment, retail, and office space

Redevelopment Dates: 1995-‐1999

Project Costs: $50 million

Major Funding Mechanisms: Private funding from Cordish Companies

Key Project Features and Results:

• Amer sijng vacant for many years, the City of Bal)more bought the site in 1977. How-‐ever, amer a number of failed acempts to reuse and renovate Prac Street Power Plant, the City allowed Cordish Co. to convert the site into an entertainment hub. Thus, this project showcases the importance of public-‐private partnerships and success through large private investments.

• The site’s new uses include ESPN Zone, the Hard Rock Cafe, Barnes and Noble, and a variety of restaurant. Today, the Prac Street Power Plant is a tourist des)na)on, which acracts about 10 million visitors and generates millions of dollars in taxes to the public sector.

Maryland Historic Trust

PraV Street Power PlantBal)more, Maryland


Cordish Co

.


• The building is architecturally significant, featuring Neo-‐Classical details, and also played an important role in the development of Bal)more City, as it provided power to the city’s trolley system. It was placed on the Na)onal Register in 1987.

• The adap)ve reuse project is an excellent example of visually preserving the past in-‐dustrial uses of the site. Cordish Co. preserved many original building features, includ-‐ing the four smokestacks, coal chutes, and large open floor plan.

• Due to the Power Plant’s success, Cordish Co. invested an addi)onal $35 million in the adjacent pier, crea)ng a con)nuous entertainment district. Opened in 2001 and 2002, Power Plant Live! features an outdoor live-‐music venue, restaurants, bars, and clubs.

Redevelopment Issues:

• During the 1980s, Six Flags Theme Parks acempted to convert the Power Plant into an indoor amusement park. The amusement park failed and was closed in 1989, leaving the site vacant.

• During redevelopment, Cordish Co. wanted to increase the openness of the building’s interior by removing the original coal chutes and smokestacks. However, Maryland’s historic preserva)on agency vetoed the idea, forcing the company to adapt its reuse plans. Today, the coal chutes at the base of the smokestacks are used as reading rooms in Barnes and Noble.

Moran PlantBurlington, Vermont


Original Use: Moran Plant, 1953-‐1986

Current Use: To be converted into a LEED cer)fied, community-‐owned recrea)on center

Site Size: Approximately 4 acres

Redevelopment Dates: 1990-‐

Project Costs: $16-‐20 million

Major Funding Mechanisms:

• City of Burlington

• Vermont Department of Environ-‐mental Conservation Grants

• Federal Historic Rehabilita)on Tax Credits

• Tax Increment Financing

• New Market Tax Credits

• U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development: Brownfields Economic Development Initiative Grant, Section 108 Loan, Com-‐munity Development Block Grant

• U.S. Environmental Protec)on Agency: Brownfields Assessment Grants and Brownfields Sustain-‐ability Program Grant


• The previous building owner, Burlington Electric, had properly decommissioned Moran Plant by removing most major equipment and hazardous materials. Although addi)onal reme-‐dia)on was needed to prepare Moran for reuse, these previous efforts served as re-‐development advantage.

Shay Toc

enWaymarking

Moran PlantBurlington, Vermont



• In order to finance the project without increasing property taxes, the City of Burling-‐ton u)lized mul)ple funding sources for all stages of the redevelopment process, such as site analysis, remedia)on, and rehabilita)on. Redevelopment is also intended to be self-‐suppor)ng, as future tenants ren)ng the space will generate revenue for the City to cover expenditures.

• The adap)ve project is an)cipated to trigger economic growth for the city by crea)ng 500 construc)on and 80 permanent jobs.

• Moran Plant sat vacant and contaminated for many years, but will soon serve as a new recrea)on center, or “family adventure center,” intended to benefit the community. An indoor ice ska)ng rink, rocking climbing, sailing center, as well as restaurants and cafes will be built at Moran. The site is also part of a larger waterfront park redevelopment plan, that includes new bike paths, green space, and a skate park.

• Sustainable elements are to be incorporated into Moran Plant’s new design.

Redevelopment Issues:

• Two poten)al tenants, the Lake Champlain Mari)me Museum and the Vermont Chil-‐dren’s Museum, withdrew their offers to rent spaces onsite. Their offers were with-‐drawn due to construc)on delays caused by the postponement of the development agreement and financial nego)a)ons between the City and the developer, which needed City Council approval.

• Although the adap)ve reuse of Moran Plant has been funded by a variety of sources, future tenants are vital in financing the project’s debt.

Jane

Lindh

olm

SDG&E Sta3on BSan Diego, California


Original Use: SDG&E Sta)on B, 1911-‐1983

Current Use: Electra Condos, lux-‐ury residen)al high rise



Major Funding Mechanisms: Pri-‐vate by Bosa Development Co.


• Sta)on B once powered San Diego’s streetcar system. The original building featured both Neoclassical and Art Deco architecture. Due to its aesthe)c and historic signifi-‐cance, the building was des-‐ignated a City Landmark in 1998, despite the fact that the smokestacks had been previously removed in 1994.

• After remaining vacant for 20 years, Bosa Development Co. converted Station B into San Diego’s tallest residential building at 43-‐stories tall. The units were originally priced between $500,000 and $2.5 million.

• Today, Electra Condos features luxury amenities such as an open lounge, business cen-‐ter, 24-‐hour concierge and security service, fitness center, roof-‐deck, swimming pool, and garden.

San Diego State University

Danne

cker & Associates

SDG&E Sta3on BSan Diego, California


Lew Breeze


• In order to building the 43-‐story residen)al building within its landmark status, Bosa Development Co. only preserved Sta)on B’s original facade and built the high-‐rise tower on top. Although the original turbine hall was demolished, it was rebuilt in the final design to match the original and now func)ons as a conservatory. Sta)on B is an interes)ng example of the adap)ve reuse of power plants in that only the facade has been preserved.

• Projects with large redevelopment costs, like the $248 million provided Bosa Devel-‐opment Co., are typically endured by private investments.

Comal Power PlantNew Braunfels, Texas


Original Use: Comal Power Plant, 1925-‐1973

Current Use: Landmark Loms, residen)al loms and apartments

Site Size: 28 acres


Project Costs: Approximately $35.5 million


• Private: $20 million for building reno-‐va)on by the Larry Peel Company

• Public, quasi-‐governmental u)lity company: $11.5 million for the envi-‐ronmental clean up by the building’s previous owner and operator, Lower Colorado River Authority (LCRA)


• Amer standing vacant for almost 30 years, the previous owner and opera-‐tor of the site, LCRA, began remedia-‐)on. LCRA was not required to clean up Comal Power Plant, and instead could have demolished or con)nued to leave the site vacant. Completed in 1999, environmental remedia)on entailed dismantling genera)ng equipment, stripping lead paint, re-‐pairing the Comal Dam, as well as removing asbestos and other haz-‐ardous materials.

• Amer remedia)on, private funding largely paid for the rehabilita)on of Comal Power Plant. Larry Peel Com-‐pany converted the site into 110 loms and also built 178 separate apart-‐ments on the surrounding property. Although primarily residen)al, vaca)on rentals and provided and the site also houses office and retail space.

Larry Peel Com

pany

Larry Peel Com

pany

Comal Power PlantNew Braunfels, Texas



• When built in 1926, the site was the largest power plant west of the Mississippi River. The power plant originally carried out Presi-‐dent Roosevelt’s ini)a)ve to spread power to rural areas and farms and also played an impor-‐tant role in supplying electricity to military bases during World War II. In 2004, the building was listed in the Na)onal Register of Historic Places and received Recorded Texas Historic Landmark designa-‐)on. Due to its Na)onal Register status, tax credits were used for rehabilita)on.

• Many of the building’s original features were preserved, including the 100-‐ton crane inside. The exterior also retained the same basic appearance, with the preserva)on of two smokestacks and the original LCRA roof-‐top sign.

• Comal Power Plant’s redevelopment was also due to the face that it is located adja-‐cent to the Comal River and Landa Park, both popular recrea)on areas and tourist at-‐trac)ons.

Larry Peel Com

pany

Larry Peel Com

pany

Seaholm Power PlantAus)n, Texas


Original Use: Seaholm Power Plant, 1950-‐1989

Current Use: To be converted into a mixed-‐use retail, office, condominiums, hotel, event, and more than 3 acres of open green space

Site Size: 7.8 acres

Redevelopment Dates: 2005-‐

Project Costs: $150-‐180 million

Major Funding Mechanisms: Public-‐private partnership


• Seaholm Power Plant features Art Deco Moderne style architecture, which will be preserved in the final reuse project. While the site was deemed eligible to be listed in the Na)onal Register of Historic Places, it has yet to be officially desig-‐nated as historic.

• The original driving force behind the site’s redevelopment was due to the local ci)zens group, Friends of Seaholm. In 1996, Friends of Seaholm began cam-‐paigning to save the site and convert it for new public uses. The group’s collec-‐)ve ac)on led the Aus)n City Council to examine Seaholm Power Plant’s adap)ve reuse poten)al and form a planning commicee. As a result, the City directed the public u)lity, Aus)n Energy, to de-‐commission the site. The redevelopment process has con)nued to heavily involve the public.

• In 2004, the City and its public u)lity company, Aus)n Energy, completed re-‐media)on. The 9-‐year, $15 million envi-‐ronmental cleanup effort entailed removing industrial equipment, asbestos, metal-‐based paints, mercury, and polychlorinated biphenyls.

Friend

s of Seaho

lmSeaholm Pow

er, LLC

Seaholm Power PlantAus)n, Texas



• Amer the power plant was deemed ready for reuse, the City considered bids from de-‐velopers, eventually accep)ng $117.2 million from Seaholm Power Plant, LLP.

• Seaholm Power Plant showcases a successful example of a public-‐private partnership. While the majority funds are from private sources, the City contributed over $18 mil-‐lion to the total project costs, to be used for street and u)lity projects, public parks, and a parking garage. The City also ini)ated remedia)on, began planning for the site’s reuse by forming a redevelopment team, and created a Tax-‐Increment Financing zone. Seaholm Power Plant’s success is largely due to the City’s strong involvement and close collabora)on with the site developer, Seaholm Power Plant, LLC.

• The final site uses includes a concert and event space, a 160-‐room bou)que hotel, 800 condominiums, offices, retail shops, and open green space. The project is expected to create over 200 jobs and generate $2 million in tax revenue annually.

• Like most adap)ve reuse project featuring power plants, an electrical substa)on typi-‐cally remains on the site. However, these substa)ons present aesthe)c and safety challenges. Seaholm Power Plant’s redevelopment included a unique way to merge electrical opera)ons with the future increase in pedestrian, residen)al, and economic ac)vity. Aus)n City Hall approved the construc)on of a wall, es)mated at $800,000, which will confine the electrical substa)on. In addi)on, instead of building a conven-‐)onal barrier, the substa)on wall will feature public art, making the project Aus)n’s most expensive public art project to date. The majority of funding will be provided by Aus)n Energy, with the City’s Art in Public Places program paying the rest.

Seaholm Pow

er, LLC

Sears, Roebuck, & Co. Power HouseChicago, Illinois


Original Use: Sears, Roebuck, & Co. Power House, 1905-‐1973

Current Use: Power House High (Public Charter High School) and Charles H. Shaw Technology and Learning Center

Site Size: 90,000 sq. m. building on a 55-‐acre site




• Approximately 50% of funding from pri-‐vate contributions: capital campaign, loans, and the Homan Arthington Founda-‐tion

• Federal Historic Tax Credits

• New Market Tax Credits

• City of Chicago, Chicago Development Fund

• Grants, from organizations such as the Illinois Clean Energy Community Founda-‐tion and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation


• The Sears Power House once provided electricity to the entire 55-‐acre Sears complex, the largest mail order and mer-‐chandise facility of its time. The complex closed in 1973 when Sears moved its headquarters to downtown Chicago. Many buildings on site were designated a National Historic Landmark in 1978. However, the Sears Power House sat vacant for over 30 years.

• In the late 1980s, Sears’ execu)ves, developer Charlie Shaw, and the City began to plan the redevelopment of the en)re Sears complex, today known as Homan Square.

• Before it was suggested to convert the building into a school, the developers spent ap-‐proximately $2 million on remedia)on to remove asbestos and lead paint.

John

Chu

ckman

“Hom

an Squ

are Po

wer Hou

se”




• The Power House was converted into a public charter high school and a community mee)ng. The neighborhood surrounding the Power Plant has been plagued with eco-‐nomic disinvestment, low high school gradua)on rates, and poor school districts. Rather than remain vacant, the building now provides a valuable space and educa)onal re-‐sources to benefit the neighborhood and its residents.

• As part of a larger neighborhood redevelopment plan, the adap)ve reuse of the Sears Power House has helped revitalized Homan Square. Today, Homan Square has expanded neighborhood service, new mixed-‐income housing units, shops, grocery stores, a movie theater, a police sta)on, recrea)on and health centers, and schools.

• The project highlights multi-‐stakeholder involvement. Planning for Power House High’s reuse incorporated public, private, and community partnerships with The City of Chicago, Homan Arthington Foundation, Henry Ford Learning Institute, MacRostie Historic Advisors, architect Farr Associates, community leaders, and businesses representatives. Although almost 50% of the total project costs were funded by private investments, the City played an important role by contributing millions of dollars in road, sewer, and infrastructure im-‐provements and committed $15 million to building a new Park District site.

Darris Lee Harris

Darris Lee Harris

Foun

da)o

n for Hom

an Squ

are




• The Sears Power House is an excellent of merging historic preservation and sustainable, green design. The adaptive reuse project preserved many of the building’s historic and industrial features such as the original windows, terra cotta floor tiles, a turbine, 40-‐ton gantry crane, the smokestack, coal hoppers, coal ash conveyor belt, and steam piping. In addition to restoring the powerhouse’s original charac-‐teristics, Power House High also achieved LEED-‐Platinum status with its geo-‐thermal heating and cool-‐ing system, retrofitted historic windows, energy effi-‐cient lighting system, and low-‐flow toilet features. The turbine room, in which an original turbine has been preserved, now serves as cafeteria, school assembly hall, and community event space.

• Power House High showcases the successful integra-‐tion of historic preservation and sustainable develop-‐ment in coal-‐fired power plants, especially for educa-‐tional purposes. The school’s curriculum at Power House High incorporates themes associated with envi-‐ronmental sustainability and green technology. Fo

unda)o

n for Hom

an Squ

are

Darris Lee Harris

Foun

da)o

n for Hom

an Squ

are

Lessons Learned

Each case study highlights a different approach in preserving the historic and architec-‐

tural characteris)cs as well as assigning a new purpose to an obsolete power plant. Although

each adap)ve reuse example is unique, collec)vely they illustrate a variety of lessons in regards

to recycling coal-‐fired power plants. The valuable lessons gained from collec)vely examining

these case studies include:

• A power plant’s close proximity to an urban center or loca)on along the waterfront has aided redevelopment through spurring private investment and acrac)ng City acen)on. Even though these buildings have outlived their original use, they are typically located on proper)es that have an underlying value. This may be due to the exis)ng infrastruc-‐ture, transporta)on access, or other nearby services.

• The success of a project is not necessary based on the final building or land use, as power plants have been repurposed for a variety of new public and private func)ons. However, the surrounding area should be examined in order to determine what is the best fit for reuse.

• Many power plants have been lem vacant for years or decades amer re)ring, which can contribute to the erosion of a neighborhood’s character and harm on the local economy. But, today, many sites have been repurposed and transformed into vibrant community spaces.

• In some cases, adap)ve reuse spurred further economic development in the surround-‐ing area or were implemented in conjunc)on with larger redevelopment plans. Instead of remaining derelict or vacant, sites have become acrac)ve, integral parts of the sur-‐rounding neighborhood by genera)ng new jobs, tax revenue, and business opportuni-‐)es.

• Power plants offer a variety of unique industrial and architectural features that have re-‐peatedly been preserved in the final reuse. Industrial equipment once used for generat-‐ing electricity, such as the turbines, smokestacks, steam pipes, or coal hoppers, may seem unfavorable for redevelopment. However, many adap)ve reuse projects have pre-‐served original features in order to maintain the power house’s iden)ty and have even taken advantage of these characteris)cs through using them as a unique marke)ng tool.

• Older power plants’ large turbine-‐generator halls provide a vast open space to house new building use. These turbine-‐generator halls are an appealing building feature due to the versa)lity in implemen)ng new func)ons or purposes.

• Mul)-‐stakeholder involvement is key regardless of who is direc)ng and funding the pro-‐ject. A city, private developers, neighborhood organiza)ons, and residents should all be involved in the planning process for the building’s future use. These partnerships are necessary in order to gain social, poli)cal, or financial support that moves the redevel-‐opment process forward.


• Who currently owns the site may determine the future for adap)ve reuse. For example, in many cases, the power plant may s)ll be owned by the u)lity company, which may refuse to sell the site to pursue their own objec)ves or place the building on the market to earn a profit. However, many power plants have been repurposed due to strong ex-‐ternal support outside the u)lity company, by community organiza)ons or the local gov-‐ernment.

• Because power plants are or once were a vital part of a neighborhood’s local history and economy, residents and community organiza)ons play a strong role in the redevelop-‐ment process. In some cases, ci)zens have been the driving force for adap)ve reuse and have helped determine the final land use op)ons. Understanding the local context and public role is vital in crea)ng a new, valuable, and economically viable building func)on.

• Most power plants require remedia)on, which typically entails dismantling industrial equipment as well as removing asbestos, lead paint, underground tanks, or any other hazardous materials.

• Although the total costs for an adap)ve reuse project varies case to case, recycling power plants may be more expensive due to environmental clean up efforts and the chosen building use. A few projects were primarily funded by private investments. How-‐ever, most adap)ve reuse examples u)lized a variety of financial mechanisms from both public and private sources to minimize the total costs and help pay for each stage of re-‐development.

• In some examples, historic preserva)on has been implemented alongside sustainable design. These projects highlight the ability to successfully restore a power plant’s original features, while also retrofijng features to increase energy efficiency and lessen the en-‐vironmental impacts caused by the building. Some power plants, which once polluted the surrounding neighborhood, are now LEED-‐cer)fied structures. In one case, sustain-‐ability was even integrated into a charter school’s curriculum.

• In general, the “best” adap)ve reuse design depends on a number of circumstances, in-‐cluding the building characteris)cs and future site use. Many )mes a reuse design re-‐flects the community’s goals or civic pride. In some examples, only the exterior of the original power plant has been preserved. However, in other cases, the industrial equip-‐ment has either been reu)lized for new manufacturing purposes or been restored as a showcase piece to pay tribute to building’s history in power genera)on. Some examples also incorporated green design elements. Regardless of the final reuse, repurposing power plants provides a unique opportunity to preserve and reuse a building’s dis)nc-‐)ve architecture and structure features.

The highlighted case studies display diverse and ambi)ous final building and land op)on

for power plants. These industrial relics, many of which remained vacant for decades before re-‐

development, today serve as an impressive, educa)onal resource on the history of electricity.


The lessons learned are crucial in understanding the different strategies and factors related to

the reuse of power plants. They have demonstrated the methods used to preserve power-‐

house’s original character and assign these spaces new func)ons. In addi)on, these examples

emphasize the future civic, economic, and recrea)onal value of repurposing power plants, es-‐

pecially as they have helped foster community revitaliza)on in the past.

These case studies are valuable in considering the adap)ve reuse of Chicago’s Fisk Gen-‐

era)ng Sta)on, discussed in-‐depth in the following chapters. Analyzing how similar structures

have been reused may be worthwhile in determining the site’s final outcome. Pujng loca)on

and other local redevelopment challenges aside, each example is relevant for comparing and

determining Fisk Sta)on’s adap)ve reuse poten)al. The informa)on and insight yielded from

these examples shed light into how Fisk Sta)on could similarly benefit from adap)ve reuse and

helps visualize the crea)ve possibili)es for the site’s future.


Sec3on Sources

PraV Street Power PlantColumbia University, Department of Historic Preserva)on of the Graduate School of Architecture, Planning &

Historic Preserva)on. Preserving the Former IRT Powerhouse: A Preserva%on Plan, Columbia University, 2009, 68-‐69.

Cordish Companies. “Featured Developments.” The Cordish Companies, 2008. hcp://www.cordish.com/sub.cfm?sec)on=newdev

Hequet, Marc. “Power Plants.” Retail Traffic, November 1, 2006. hcp://retailtrafficmag.com/development/retail_power_plants/

Maryland Historical Trust's Na)onal Register.,“Prac Street Power Plant,” Maryland Historical Trust. Accessed March 10, 2012, hcp://mht.maryland.gov/nr/NRDetail.aspx?HDID=978&FROM=NRMapFR.html

Scadden, Richard A. “Adap)ve Reuse of Obsolete Power Plants.” Presenta)on at the Air & Waste Management Associa)on (A&WMA) 94th Annual Conference, Orlando, FL, June 2001, 5.

Moran PlantCity of Burlington, Vermont, Community and Economic Development Office. “Moran Plant: Overview.” Burling-‐

ton Community and Economic Development Office. Accessed March 1, 2012. hcp://burlingtonvt.gov/CEDO/Waterfront/Moran/Overview/

City of Burlington, Vermont, Community and Economic Development Office. “Moran Plant: History and Past Ideas.” Burlington Community and Economic Development Office. Accessed March 1, 2012. hcp://burlingtonvt.gov/CEDO/Waterfront/Moran/History-‐and-‐Past-‐Ideas/

City of Burlington, Vermont, Community and Economic Development Office. “Moran Plant: Financing Plan.” Burlington Community and Economic Development Office. Accessed March 1, 2012. hcp://burlingtonvt.gov/CEDO/Waterfront/Moran/Financing-‐Plan/

City of Burlington, Vermont, Community and Economic Development Office. “Moran Plant: Site Data.” Burling-‐ton Community and Economic Development Office. Accessed March 1, 2012. hcp://burlingtonvt.gov/CEDO/Waterfront/Moran/Site-‐Data/

De Sousa, Christopher. “Moran Center, Burlington, Vermont: A U.S. EPA Brownfields Sustainability Pilot.” Uni-‐versity of Illinois at Chicago, Ins)tute for Environmental Science and Policy, June 2011. www.uic.edu/orgs/brownfields/research-‐results/documents/MoranCenter.pdf

Engineering Ventures. “Moran Plant Renova)on.” Engineering Ventures. Accessed March 1, 2012. hcp://www.engineeringventures.com/projects/structural-‐engineering/recrea)onal/moran-‐plant-‐renova)on

ENPRO Services, Inc., “From EPA Brownfields Site to Community Center,” ENPRO Services, Inc., 2010, www.enpro.com/tes)monials/MoranPowerPlant.pdf

Lindholm, Jane. “Bob Kiss on IRV, Burlington Telecom And The Moran Plant.” Vermont Public Radio, March 4, 2010. hcp://www.vpr.net/news_detail/87395/bob-‐kiss-‐on-‐irv-‐burlington-‐telecom-‐moran-‐plant

“Moran Municipal Genera)on Sta)on -‐ Burlington, Vermont.” Waymarking, accessed March 12, 2012. hcp://www.waymarking.com/gallery/image.aspx?f=1&guid=737a5463-‐edf6-‐44b2-‐bcc0-‐bb94e967b175

Tocen, Shay. “Burlington May Finally Give the Old Moran Plant a New Life.” Seven Days, September 23, 2009. hcp://www.7dvt.com/2009burlington-‐may-‐finally-‐give-‐old-‐moran-‐plant-‐new-‐life

Tocen, Shay. “Mari)me Museum Withdraws from Moran Redevelopment.” Seven Days, September 28, 2011. hcp://7d.blogs.com/blurt/2010/09/mari)me-‐museum-‐withdraws-‐from-‐moran-‐redevelopment.html.

U.S. Environmental Protec)on Agency. “Burlington Reaps $25K EPA Grant for Brownfields Sustainability Pro-‐ject,” U.S. Environmental Protec)on Agency, Re-‐development of Former Coal Plant. News Releases from Region 1, September 4, 2008. hcp://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/6d651d23f5a91b768525735900400c28/8ace26d5891e188b852574ba006bc828!OpenDocument


http://www.cordish.com/sub.cfm?section=newdev


http://retailtrafficmag.com/development/retail_power_plants/




http://mht.maryland.gov/nr/NRDetail.aspx?HDID=978&FROM=NRMapFR.html


http://burlingtonvt.gov/CEDO/Waterfront/Moran/Overview/


http://burlingtonvt.gov/CEDO/Waterfront/Moran/History-and-Past-Ideas/




http://burlingtonvt.gov/CEDO/Waterfront/Moran/Financing-Plan/


http://burlingtonvt.gov/CEDO/Waterfront/Moran/Site-Data/


http://www.uic.edu/orgs/brownfields/research-results/documents/MoranCenter.pdf




http://www.engineeringventures.com/projects/structural-engineering/recreational/moran-plant-renovation






http://www.enpro.com/testimonials/MoranPowerPlant.pdf


http://www.vpr.net/news_detail/87395/bob-kiss-on-irv-burlington-telecom-moran-plant/


http://www.waymarking.com/gallery/image.aspx?f=1&guid=737a5463-edf6-44b2-bcc0-bb94e967b175


http://www.7dvt.com/2009burlington-may-finally-give-old-moran-plant-new-life


http://7d.blogs.com/blurt/2010/09/maritime-museum-withdraws-from-moran-redevelopment.html


http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/6d651d23f5a91b768525735900400c28/8ace26d5891e188b852574ba006bc828!OpenDocument




U.S. Environmental Protec)on Agency. “Green Design Op)ons for the Moran Center at Waterfront Park Revi-‐taliza)on Project.” U.S. Environmental Protec)on Agency. Accessed March 2, 2012. epa.gov/brownfields/sustain_plts/factsheets/burlington_susfs.pdf

SDG&E Sta3on BBosa Development. “Electra.” Bosa Development. Accessed March 1, 2012. hcp://electra.bosadev.com/Breeze, Lew. “San Diego's Comprehensive Source for Downtown Living: Electra.” Lew Breeze. Accessed March

1, 2012. hcp://www.sdcondo.com/electra.htmlColumbia University, Department of Historic Preserva)on of the Graduate School of Architecture, Planning &

Historic Preserva)on. Preserving the Former IRT Powerhouse: A Preserva%on Plan. Columbia University, 2009, 77.

Dannecker and Associates. “Electra San Diego Condos.” Dannercker and Associates. Accessed March 2, 2012. hcp://www.welcometosandiego.com/san-‐diego-‐neighborhoods/condos-‐for-‐sale-‐downtown-‐san-‐diego/columbia-‐the-‐waterfront/electra-‐san-‐diego/#img0

San Diego State University, College of Professional Studies and Fine Arts. “New SDSU Gallery.” San Diego State University, March 2, 2012. hcp://downtowngallery.sdsu.edu/index.php/gallery/about/

Save Our Heritage Organiza)on. “SDG&E Sta)on ‘B.’” Reflec%ons Newsle]er 35, no. 3, 2004. hcp://sohosandiego.org/reflec)ons/2004-‐3/2004-‐11_sdge.htm

Showley, Roger M. “Second Time Around: Three Old Kids on the Block Come to Life for a New Genera)on.” San Diego Union-‐Tribune, September 18, 2005. hcp://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20050918/news_mz1h18second.html

Comal Power Plant Comal County Government. “Comal Power Plant.” Comal County Government. Accessed March 3, 2012.

hcp://www.co.comal.tx.us/Historical/Proper)es/Comal_Power_Plant.htmDupuy, Richard, Robert Ashworth, and Lydia Frenzel. “Turning a Liability into an Asset! The Story of an Old

Power Plant.” Ultra High Pressure (UHP) Projects, Inc. Accessed March 3, 2012. hcp://www.uhpprojects.com/services/comal2.htm

Larry Peel Company, “The Landmark, New Braunfels, TX.” Larry Peel Company. Accessed March 3, 2012. hcp://landmarkloms.com/history/

McLeod, Gerald E. “Day Trips.” The Aus%n Chronicle, April 11, 2003. hcp://www.aus)nchronicle.com/columns/2003-‐04-‐11/154443/

McLeod, Gerald E. “Day Trips: The Defunct Comal Power Plant in New Braunfels Finds New Life as a hotel.” The Aus%n Chronicle, June 2, 2010. hcp://www.aus)nchronicle.com/columns/2000-‐06-‐02/77427/


Seaholm Power PlantAmerican Clean Skies Founda)on. Repurposing Legacy Power Plants: Lessons For the Future. American Clean

Skies Founda)on, August 2011, 18-‐19.Claire van Ryzin, Jeanne. “Council OKs rainbow-‐hued Seaholm Wall Design.” The Statesman, February 9, 2012.

hcp://www.statesman.com/news/local/council-‐oks-‐rainbow-‐hued-‐seaholm-‐wall-‐design-‐2164175.htmlCollins, Mark. “Planned Seaholm Development Puts Re)red Power Plant to Different Use,” Community Impact

Newspaper, April 10, 2009. hcp://impactnews.com/ar)cles/planned-‐seaholm-‐development-‐puts-‐re)red-‐power-‐plant-‐to-‐different-‐use

Columbia University, Department of Historic Preserva)on of the Graduate School of Architecture, Planning & Historic Preserva)on. Preserving the Former IRT Powerhouse: A Preserva%on Plan. Columbia University, 2009, 75.


http://electra.bosadev.com


http://www.sdcondo.com/electra.html


http://www.welcometosandiego.com/san-diego-neighborhoods/condos-for-sale-downtown-san-diego/columbia-the-waterfront/electra-san-diego/#img0






http://downtowngallery.sdsu.edu/index.php/gallery/about/


http://sohosandiego.org/reflections/2004-3/2004-11_sdge.htm


http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20050918/news_mz1h18second.html


http://www.co.comal.tx.us/Historical/Properties/Comal_Power_Plant.htm


http://www.uhpprojects.com/services/comal2.htm


http://landmarklofts.com/history/


http://www.austinchronicle.com/columns/2003-04-11/154443/




http://www.statesman.com/news/local/council-oks-rainbow-hued-seaholm-wall-design-2164175.html


http://impactnews.com/articles/planned-seaholm-development-puts-retired-power-plant-to-different-use


Friends of Seaholm. “The Adap)ve Reuse of Seaholm Power Plant.” Friends of Seaholm. Accessed March 4, 2012. hcp://friendsofseaholm.com/

Geiser A., “Repurposing a Downtown Icon: Firm to Buy Defunct Historical Seaholm Power Plant Amid Cri)-‐cism,” The Daily Texan, May 5, 2010, hcp://www.dailytexanonline.com/content/repurposing-‐downtown-‐icon;

Hinkle, Josh and Doug Shupe. “Seaholm to have Lighted, Colorful Wall.” KXAN, February 10, 2012. hcp://www.kxan.com/dpp/news/local/aus)n/seaholm-‐to-‐have-‐lighted-‐rainbow-‐wall

Jonsson, Kayla. “Aus)n Energy finances wall art for Seaholm Power Plant.” The Daily Texan, February 15, 2012. hcp://www.dailytexanonline.com/news/2012/02/15/aus)n-‐energy-‐finances-‐wall-‐art-‐seaholm-‐power-‐plant


Scadden, Richard A. and Stephen J. Mitchell. “Facility Decommissioning and Adap)ve Reuse.” Presenta)on at Na)onal Defense Industrial Associa)on (NDIA) 27th Environmental Symposium and Exhibi)on, Aus)n, Texas, April 23-‐26, 2001, 10-‐11.

Seaholm Power, LLC. “Power Plant Redevelopment.” Seaholm Power, LLC. Accessed March 3, 2012. hcp://www.seaholm.info/

Sears, Roebuck, & Co. Power HouseAmerican Clean Skies Founda)on. Repurposing Legacy Power Plants: Lessons For the Future. American Clean

Skies Founda)on, August 2011, 10.Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning (CMAP). “Charles H. Shaw Technology and Learning Center.” Chicago

Metropolitan Agency for Planning. Accessed December 4, 2011.Chuckman, John. “Postcard-‐Chicago-‐Sears Roebuck Plant-‐Aerial-‐Early.” Chuckman’s Collec)ons: Chicago Post-‐

cards, Volume 8. October 1, 2010 hcp://chuckmancollec)onvolume8.blogspot.com/2010/10/postcard-‐chicago-‐sears-‐roebuck-‐plant.html

Founda)on for Homan Square. Annual Report Update: 2011. Founda)on for Homan Square, 2011. hcp://www.homansquare.org/files/pdf/2010-‐11_annual_report.pdf

Founda)on for Homan Square. Annual Report Update: 2009-‐2010. Founda)on for Homan Square, 2010. hcp://www.homansquare.org/files/pdf/homan_square_ar_2009-‐10_r3.pdf

Founda)on for Homan Square. “Henry Ford Academy Power House High: Power House High Campaign Up-‐date.” Founda)on for Homan Square, First Quarter 2008.

Founda)on for Homan Square. “History.” Homan Square. Accessed March 4, 2012. hcp://www.homansquare.org/history

Founda)on for Homan Square. “Power House” Homan Square. Accessed March 4, 2012. hcp://www.homansquare.org/power-‐house

Gerfen, Ka)e. “Charles H. Shaw Technology and Learning Center.” Architect, February 16, 2010. hcp://www.architectmagazine.com/adap)ve-‐reuse/charles-‐h-‐shaw-‐technology-‐and-‐learning-‐center.aspx

Harris, Darris Lee. “Sears Power House.” Darris Lee Harris Accessed March 2, 2012. hcp://www.darrisharris.com/

Homan Square Community Center Founda)on. A Short History of a Long Journey: Homan Square Annual Re-‐port 2005. Homan Square Community Center Founda)on, 2005.

Homan Square Community Center Campus. “Homan Square: From Vacancy to Vibrancy.” Homan Square Com-‐munity Center Campus, 2007.

“Homan Square Power House. “ DTKindler Communica%ons, Shoo fly design. Accessed March 3, 2012. hcp://homansquarepowerhouse.com

Illinois Clean Energy Community Founda)on. “Energy Efficiency.” Illinois Clean Energy Community Founda)on, Accessed March 2, 2012. hcp://www.illinoiscleanenergy.org/ph-‐energy-‐efficiency/


http://friendsofseaholm.com


http://www.dailytexanonline.com/content/repurposing-downtown-icon


http://www.kxan.com/dpp/news/local/austin/seaholm-to-have-lighted-rainbow-wall


http://www.dailytexanonline.com/news/2012/02/15/austin-energy-finances-wall-art-seaholm-power-plant




http://www.seaholm.info


http://chuckmancollectionvolume8.blogspot.com/2010/10/postcard-chicago-sears-roebuck-plant.html


http://www.homansquare.org/files/pdf/2010-11_annual_report.pdf


http://www.homansquare.org/files/pdf/homan_square_ar_2009-10_r3.pdf


http://www.homansquare.org/history


http://www.homansquare.org/power-house


http://www.architectmagazine.com/adaptive-reuse/charles-h-shaw-technology-and-learning-center.aspx


http://www.darrisharris.com/


http://homansquarepowerhouse.com


http://www.illinoiscleanenergy.org/ph-energy-efficiency/


Kamin, Blair. “Power play: architects help turn old Sears power plant in Chicago into new charter school.” City-‐scapes, Chicago Tribune, September 01, 2009. hcp://featuresblogs.chicagotribune.com/theskyline/2009/09/power-‐play-‐architects-‐help-‐turn-‐old-‐sears-‐power-‐plant-‐in-‐chicago-‐to-‐new-‐charter-‐school-‐.html

Long, JT. “Crea)ng a Powerhouse School.” Constructor, March-‐April 2010. hcp://constructoragc.construc)on.com/mag/2010/Mar-‐Apr/1003-‐PepperConstruc)on.asp

MacRos)e Historic Advisors, LLC. “Adap)ve Reuse for Educa)onal Facili)es: The Charles H. Shaw Technology and Learning Center.” MacRos)e Historic Advisors, LLC. Accessed March 5, 2012. hcp://www.macros)ehistoric.com/pages/sears_power_house_/106.php

Petersen, Laurie. “Power Switch: This New High School is a Spark For Students—and the Neighborhood.”Chicago Architect, January-‐February 2012, 27-‐30.

U.S. Na)onal Park Service. “The Na)onal Historic Landmark Database: Sears, Roebuck, And Company.” Na-‐)onal Park Service. Accessed February 11, 2012. hcp://tps.cr.nps.gov/nhl/detail.cfm?ResourceId=1755&ResourceType=Building.

Chapter IV: Sec3on Endnotes


1 American Clean Skies Founda)on, Repurposing Legacy Power Plants: Lessons For the Future, 12.2 Ibid., 24-‐25.3 Ibid., 14.

http://featuresblogs.chicagotribune.com/theskyline/2009/09/power-play-architects-help-turn-old-sears-power-plant-in-chicago-to-new-charter-school-.html




http://constructoragc.construction.com/mag/2010/Mar-Apr/1003-PepperConstruction.asp


http://www.macrostiehistoric.com/pages/sears_power_house_/106.php


http://tps.cr.nps.gov/nhl/detail.cfm?ResourceId=1755&ResourceType=Building


V. The History And Significance Of Fisk Sta3on

Today, Fisk Genera)ng Sta)on, located in Chicago’s Pilsen neighborhood, is commonly

known for the community protests against the power plant’s pollu)on and environmental injus-‐

)ces. However, less know of Fisk Sta)on’s role in the electric industry and its historic signifi-‐

cance. In the late nineteenth century, the conven)onal reciproca)ng steam engine had reached

its capacity in power produc)on. Despite these limita)ons in genera)on technology, house-‐

holds, the elevated train system, and businesses con)nued to demand electricity. Samuel Insull,

president of Chicago Edison, which then only a small u)lity company, was forced to find an an-‐

swer to increase energy produc)on while maintaining low customer rates. Thus, Fisk Sta)on

provided the solu)on and became the founda)on for which the electric industry would build

upon in the future.

Built in 1903, Fisk Sta)on became the largest steam genera)ng plant in the world, hold-‐

ing the first 5 megawac (MW) steam turbine. The power plant stood as a daring innova)on for

its day, as there was no guarantee that the 5 MW turbine would become commercially success-‐

ful. But, the decision to build the largest turbine for its )me exceeded cau)ous experimenta)on

beyond the tradi)onal electric genera)ng design. As a result, the turbines installed at Fisk Sta-‐

)on largely influenced Chicago Edison’s growth, the expansion of electricity within Chicago, and

the technologic improvements in the electric industry.

Only years amer Fisk Sta)on’s ini)al success, turbines con)nued to generate greater

electricity outputs and Chicago Edison was renamed to Commonwealth Edison Company, which

s)ll survives today. Today, Fisk Genera)ng Sta)on is owned by Midwest Genera)on, a subsidiary

company of Edison Interna)onal. On February 28, 2012, Midwest Genera)on announced that it

would close Fisk Sta)on by the end of 2012.

Given the short )meframe un)l re)rement, Fisk Sta)on’s redevelopment should place

greater emphasis on preserva)on as the site greatly contributed to Chicago’s history and is vital

in commemora)ng the city’s growth in the early twen)eth century. Of Chicago’s earliest central

power sta)ons, today, Fisk Sta)on is one of the only to survive. Because the power plant sym-‐

bolizes both the growth of electricity and turbine technology in Chicago and the United States,


it is a historic site worth preserving. A number of Fisk Sta)on’s buildings, which feature ornate,

classical revival architecture, remain on the site today.

The demoli)on of Fisk Sta)on’s historic buildings would cause the loss of many magnifi-‐

cent and irreplaceable buildings, which symbolize the site’s rich history. Fisk Sta)on offers valu-‐

able redevelopment opportuni)es that can drive employment and preserve community iden)ty

while improving public and environmental health. Transforming Fisk Sta)on from an old, pollut-‐

ing genera)ng sta)on into a vital neighborhood landmark would showcase posi)ve community

investment, celebrate the current cultural values, and promote a healthy, sustainable future.

What was once the largest steam genera)ng plant in the world could one day again serve future

genera)ons.

This chapter will explore Fisk Sta)on’s history and current condi)ons, iden)fy its mean-‐

ingful use and contribu)ons over )me, up the the present, where Midwest Genera)on an-‐

nounced the power plant’s closure. In addi)on, specific building and industrial structures will be

showcased. The following chapter will examine the poten)al and barrier for its adap)ve reuse.

Historic Significance

Fisk Genera)ng Sta)on’s is more recently known for its issues surrounding environ-‐

mental injus)ce and community protests over the power plant’s pollu)on. Yet, in the early

twen)eth century, the plant greatly influenced Chicago’s electric revolu)on and signified the

na)on’s technologic improvements in power produc)on. Few people are aware of the site’s his-‐

toric significance, which is a crucial component in considering Fisk Sta)on’s preserva)on and

redevelopment.

The Growth of Electricity in Chicago

Chicago’s demand for electricity began as early as 1878, which simultaneously resulted

in u)lity growth and compe))on, increased manufacturing, the expansion of the rapid street

transit system, and residen)al electric use.1 But, as Chicago became a flourishing industrial and

railroad hub, electricity service was limited.

Chicago’s transforma)on into an electric city depended heavily on Samuel Insull, Thomas

Edison’s former appren)ce. In 1892, Insull became president of Chicago Edison Company, a


small u)lity company that eventually grew into Commonwealth Edison. Upon arriving to the

city, Insull stated Chicago presented, "the best opportunity...in the United States to develop the

business of the produc)on and distribu)on of electrical energy."2 He later went on to become

“the most important na)onal leader of the electric u)lity industry.”3 Through out the early

twen)eth century, Insull directed the expansion of Chicago’s electricity service by building a

powerful corporate monopoly, maintaining widespread low rates, marke)ng acrac)ve adver-‐

)sements, and making risky engineering decisions in new untested technology.

During Insull’s first years as president of Chicago Edison, the company possessed limited

genera)ng power, which only served about 5,000 ligh)ng customers.4 At that )me, Chicago Edi-‐

son was not the city’s largest or most powerful u)lity company. However, Insull envisioned an

electricity market that provided universal, affordable service for all Chicagoans, which at the

)me totaled approximately a million people.5 In order to achieve his goals of expanding service,

Chicago Edison would have to increase sales and power genera)on, lower rates, and consolidate

the city’s sprawling electric industry.6 Thus, Chicago Edison gradually became a monopoly, as

Insull began a legacy of purchasing compe)tor companies and consolida)ng franchise rights.7

The company also introduced aggressive sales campaigns to en)ce new customers and built

transmission lines that extended service to suburban areas outside of Chicago.

Insull also concentrated on the city’s prevalent isolated plants. During the late 1800s,

many large buildings, skyscrapers, factories possessed self-‐contained genera)ng systems.8 Be-‐

cause the isolated system provided addi)onal control and convenience, many building and

business owners preferred self-‐genera)ng power. However, Insull believed that central service

sta)ons were more appropriate, as specific genera)ng sites had the ability supply power far be-‐

yond the power plant. Dealmaking, adver)sing, the geographic extension of high-‐voltage

transmission lines, and low energy rates made the central sta)on a becer alterna)ve to the self-‐

contained, isolated systems. By 1904, new isolated plants began to drama)cally decline.

Turbine Technology: Barriers and Innova3on

As electricity consump)on and popularity rapidly increased, Chicago Edison struggled

with supplying consistent power during peak hours.9 By 1901, the company had exceed the ca-‐

pacity of their generators.10 Chicago Edison’s growth was limited by current genera)ng technol-‐


ogy. In his book, The Electric City: Energy and the Growth of the Chicago Area, 1880-‐1930, Har-‐

old Plac, writes, “Engineers and investors had an)cipated the problems of designing larger and

more efficient prime movers. But un)l the rapid growth of demand for electricity in Chicago

forced Insull to find a solu)on, technological innova)on had proceeded at the slow pace of cau-‐

)ous experimenta)on.”11

Addi)onal genera)ng sta)ons would not be enough to increase power supply while

maintaining low customer rates. In order to promote the mass consump)on of electricity, tur-‐

bines would have to generate more power. But the current technologic constraints presented a

huge challenge:

Up un)l that point, most of the prevailing power-‐genera)on technology relied upon two basic components: a steam engine and a dynamo. They were two separate units con-‐nected by belts, which resulted in a tremendous loss in energy. Not only were they inef-‐ficient, they were limited as to how much power they could produce since the dynamo could turn only so fast in this arrangement.12

En)rely new generator technology was needed to “replace the size-‐limited, gasoline-‐powered,

piston-‐driven engines.”13 Chicago Edison teamed with manufacturer General Electric to develop

a more efficient steam turbine, the turbogenerator, based off of European designs.14 The new,

innova)ve turbogenerator unified once separate machine components into a more powerful,

efficient system. The new turbogenerators presented a number of benefits compared to the

previously used technology:

A steam turbine, however, eliminated the engine en)rely. A coal-‐fired boiler would heat water to create a high-‐pressure stream that would turn the blades in the turbine, whose sham was directly connected to the dynamo. Instead of being 40 percent efficient in its conversion of heat and mo)on to electricity, the new unit could be 80 percent efficient. Less coal was needed, the turbine could turn faster and create more power. It was a rela)vely simple principle that is essen)ally s)ll in use today in every coal-‐, gas-‐, and oil-‐fired power plant.15

With cheaper, less resource and space intensive steam turbines, Chicago Edison would be able

to expand electric service further. The next step was to build an fully-‐func)onal power plant run

by turbogenerators in Chicago.

In 1900, General Electric built a half-‐MW (megawac) prototype, “about what was being

readied abroad, but Insull decided that prime movers of 5 MW each were necessary for a 14-‐


unit, 70 MW sta)on. This was a grand leap from what had come before, and Insull wanted the

first three units now in order to meet Chicago's growing demand.”16 A turbine that could pro-‐

duce 5 MW was more than twice as large as what Wes)nghouse, the leader in AC turbines, had

in opera)on at the )me.17 Although General Electric and the engineers working on the project

considered Insull’s vision a huge manufacturing risk, Insull insisted on building a machine that

would exceed the limits of the exis)ng technology. During a speech on June 26, 1912 before the

Brooklyn Edison Company Sec)on of the Na)onal Electric Light Associa)on, Insull recalled his

daring decision to build the largest 5 MW turbogenerator yet, as “to make a steam turbine a

fimh that size would be a step backward.”18

Even with his business reputa)on at stake, Insull rejected conserva)ve advice. Because

he intended to supply a large amount of power to Chicago’s elevated transit system, only un-‐

tested turbine size and technology would be sufficient.19 “Such a large customer would require

a generator that did not exist in the engineer’s minds. Insull would not be denied as he envi-‐

sioned his company supplying power for the en)re metropolitan area, something no producer

had done before. That was (Thomas) Edison’s dream, although the wizard never had the means

nor the technology to make that dream come true. Insull did.”20

Insull told his board of directors, that his dream of widespread electricity “could only be

obtained from highly economical power sta)ons resul)ng in a very low cost of energy, compet-‐

ing against privately owned uneconomical steam plants. The opportunity to get this large power

business was right at my threshold and I knew that unless I built the most economical power

sta)on possible, that opportunity would be lost.”21 In order for General Electric to take the

manufacturing risk building with the 5 MW turbine, Insull agreed that Chicago Edison would as-‐

sume the expenses if the technology failed.22

Fisk Genera3ng Sta3on’s Technologic Success

In December of 1901, Insull placed the order for the untested 5 MW turbine and, as he

put it, the “great experiment” began.23 The same year, a site, located on a “a quiet street in an

industrial district in an area known as Pilsen,” was purchased to house the untested turbo-‐

generator technology (Fig. 5.1).24 Built on this newly acquired land, Fisk Street Genera)ng Sta-‐

)on “would mark a historic departure from the current standards of the industry.”25 Due to its


loca)on on the South Branch of the Chicago River, the powerhouse was equipped with a steady

supply of water and fuel access provided by coal barges.

On October 2, 1903, Fisk Street Genera)ng Sta)on opened, containing the 5 MW,

11,000-‐horsepower coal-‐fired turbine.26 As Fisk Sta)on was powered up, Insull commented on

the poten)al for the new technology to fail, sta)ng, “If it goes up, I will blow up with it anyways

in more ways than one, so I might as well stay here.”27

Powered from water boiled by burning coal, Fisk Sta)on’s 5 MW turbine was the largest

turbogenerator in the world. Each unit measured 29' in height and 16'-‐6"in diameter (Fig. 5.2).

Although the original plant designs intended to place 14 generator units inside the powerhouse,

SPECIAL REPORT ~ 54 ~ FIRST & FASTEST

engineers at General Electric used their sliderules to prove that everything was impossible.Even Fred Sargent told me it couldn’t be done.We were at the practical capacity of reciprocat-ing steam engines. We needed a bold solution,and I was prepared to go to the directors witha bold solution. The business was there if wecould provide a low rate.

So I dispatched Ferguson and Sargent toEurope to study the turbine installations in

various countriesand report backto me. CharlesCoffin (presidentof GeneralElectric) did notwant to take therisk of manufac-turing 5,000 kilo-watt units. I per-sisted, and wenegotiated a com-promise. GeneralElectric wouldbuild the unitsand take the riskthat they would

operate, and I (Commonwealth Edison) wouldpay for the installation.

On June 25, 1902, we broke ground on a 16-acre parcel along the South Branch of theChicago River at Fisk Street, about a quartermile west of Halsted Street. I will never forgetthat date. I was as nervous as I could bethroughout the construction. We were taking

a huge risk building the world’s largest turbineplant. Huge amounts of water would be neededas each turbine would be served by eight boil-ers. The condensers alone were a significantchallenge.

The boilers are four in a row with a firingisland between the two rows of boilers.Separate boiler and turbine rooms would belocated under a common roof. The switchhouse would be separate, 50 feet from themain building. Boiler pressure was designed at180 pounds per square inch, with the steamsuperheated another 150 degrees Fahrenheitand the turbines rotating at 750 rpm. We werereally breaking new ground, and it would bethe first 5,000 kilowatt unit placed in service.

On October 21, 1903, Sargent was superin-tending the steaming up of the unit. It made aterrific noise when it first started, and Sargentsuggested that I leave. I inquired, Fred, whatdo you think is going to happen? He did notknow but was concerned that there might bean explosion. I told Sargent that he shouldthen leave as well. His response was that it washis duty to stay. My response was that I wouldstay, because if he was going to be blown up, Iwould prefer to be blown up with him since, ifthe turbine failed, I would be blown up anyway.It worked, and I immediately ordered twomore units.

My men went to the elevated railways andgot their business, and we got the street rail-way business as well. While we sold a lot ofelectricity, we had to be very careful in collect-ing our bills. The elevated railways were in

constant financial trouble, and I do not knowwhy people ever invested in them. It would becrazy to expect that they would pay a dividend.We may have to make a financial investment inthose companies. We are working on a consol-idation plan as we speak. The Lake Street com-pany is a challenging situation. It looks like Imay have to get personally involved.

The street railway companies were a biggerfinancial mess, and Arnold has his hands fullover there at the BOSE. (Bion Arnold is theChairman of the Board of SupervisingEngineers, Chicago Traction—See WireReport.) While we have great interest in seeingthese street railway operations succeed, I do notwant to get involved as there is more thanenough for me to do in the electric business.Arnold is doing a good job, and he will beinvolved with a reorganization of all those com-panies under a common operating company.

About two years ago, I purchased a farmnear Libertyville. Mrs. Insull and Chappiespend a lot of time there. However, I am con-sumed with my work. A year ago last summer,while Chappie and his mother were travelingin Europe, I bought one of those newmachines (automobile). When I bought thefarm, there was no electricity, so I ran a line forthe six miles from Lake Bluff to Libertyville.While out driving around in that very peacefulcountryside, I began thinking, why not link upthe various power stations that compriseNorth Shore Electric, which I own as well.

Then I was thinking about the interurban,the Chicago & Milwaukee Electric, that cameto Libertyville in 1902. They have their ownpower plant in Highwood. North ShoreElectric has power plants in Waukegan andHighland Park. Why couldn’t I do the samething in Lake County that I am doing inChicago? We conducted a thorough survey ofthe area last year. There are 22 towns wellback from the towns along the lake. Ten ofthose towns have electric service, but only onehas service at night. The sheriff is constantlyat the door of these small power plants as theyare so financially insecure. Why not servethem with a central station and interconnect-ing power lines?

These areas are sparsely populated today, soit is a long-term situation. The interurbans canconnect them together, and we can sell powerto the interurbans as well as the farmers andthe residents. My brother, Martin, is doing thatvery thing in the New Albany, Indiana, areadown near Louisville. On thing we are going tohave to deal with is that about two years agothe Milwaukee interurban went into bankrupt-cy before they ever reached Milwaukee. Someof my boys are already looking at that situationas the Illinois communities that the interur-ban serves have very wealthy residents whocould use a lot of electricity.

Fisk Street Station as it appeared while under construction in 1903. The general construction is ofsteel covered with red pressed brick and ornamented with heavy cut Bedford stone. Photo fromThe Sargent & Lundy Story

Frederick Sargent whowas also one of the incorporators of theNorthwestern Elevated.Sargent & Lundy photo

Fig. 5.1: View of Fisk Sta)on during its construc)on in 1903.

Printed in Shore Line Interurban Historical Society, “A Conversa)on with Samuel Insull,” First & Fastest 26, vol. 1 (2009): 54.


in the end only three of the turbines were installed.28 Eight boilers, arranged perpendicular to

the turbines, eight boilers provided turbogenerators with steam. “This turbine-‐boiler arrange-‐

ment was a departure from the conven)onal method of sejng the boilers in a line parallel to

the turbines.”29

Fig. 5.2: Thomas Edison and others standing in front of the 5 MW turbine-‐generator

monument in Schenectady, New York in 1922.

Image from John C. Zink, “Steam Turbines Power an Industry: A Condensed History of

Steam Turbines,” Power Engineering, August 1, 1996.


Fisk Sta)on’s mechanical success became instantly apparent, as the new unit produced

twice as much power as any steam engine ever built.30 Not only did the turbines achieved 80%

energy efficiency, double that of Chicago Edison’s previous reciproca)ng unit technology, but

they also spun ten )mes faster than the reciproca)ng predecessors, were one-‐tenth the weight,

and required less maintenance.31 “The turbine proved to be an engineering wonder since its

blades were the first human-‐made devices to travel faster than the speed of sound. The tur-‐

bine’s hardened metal also maintained its shape despite being blasted by high-‐temperature

steam, and the unit operated under these red-‐hot condi)oned consistently for twenty-‐four

hours a day.”32

Power produc)on demanded less fuel, with a kilowac (KW) hour now requiring less than

four pounds of coal compared to the previous seven pounds needed.33 The greater energy out-‐

puts coupled with a reduc)on in coal consump)on provided an addi)onal benefit to the sur-‐

rounding city and its residents by lessening smoke pollu)on.34

This new power produc)on was significant in that it allowed Chicago Edison to supply

power to the transit system, the largest electrical customer at the )me. But even more impor-‐

tant, Fisk Sta)on’s turbines became the first step in improving the efficiency of generator ma-‐

chinery and technology. The turbine “would be one of many because it was not all that efficient

and the technology would be refined. Yet what had happened that day was the equivalent of

taking a space program from orbi)ng around the earth to orbi)ng around the moon...From that

point on, Chicago was on its way to becoming the most energy-‐intensive place in the world.”35

Insull stated Fisk Sta)on’s success was “the greatest thing which has happened in our

business. In the months of November and December, we produced power at Fisk at a lower cost

than any plant I have ever heard of using coal as a basis of power produc)on. Our balance

sheets for the year will show up very well.”36 From simultaneously achieving an increase in

power output and a decrease produc)on costs, Chicago Edison was now capable of selling

power to more customers. The improved efficiency certainly aided the city’s subsequent electric

revolu)on and the con)nual growth of Chicago Edison.

Because the site represented monumental engineering accomplishments, “it was no

surprise that visitors from the European electric industry traveled first to Chicago and to Fisk” to

view the technology.37 Fisk became its own tourist acrac)on as notable people, such as Thomas


Edison and Britain’s King George and Queen Mary, visited the power plant.38 Fisk Sta)on also

held a number of garden par)es to showcase the excep)onal technology in which, “hundreds of

visitors...wandered all over the place, admiring something new at every turn.”39 Today, the

original guestbook, filled with the signatures of countless visitors, s)ll remains the the site. Fisk

Sta)on’s fame in the early twen)eth century contributes to the historic significance of the site.

Technologic Improvements A\er Fisk Sta3on’s Ini3al Success

The original technologic improvements and enhanced efficiency from 1903 cut produc-‐

)on costs by half, which provided Chicago Edison with new opportuni)es for growth. Chicago

Edison, which became Commonwealth Edison in 1907, con)nued to acquire more power com-‐

panies and proceeded to expand electric service to the surrounding metropolitan area. Generat-‐

ing technology also became more cost effec)ve and energy efficient.

Because the turbines at Fisk Sta)on were so successful, three more 5 MW turbines were

installed by 1905.40 However, the “development of turbine engines was so great that within six

years not one of the original four was s)ll being used.”41 Instead, the steam turbine technology

at Fisk Sta)on was con)nually improved upon. Chicago Edison’s guaranteed contracts with Chi-‐

cago’s transit companies provided the investment capital needed for upgrading the power

plant’s first genera)ng system and steam turbine technology. By 1907, the turbine units were

retroficed to an increased size of 12 MW, with a 140% boost in output.42 By 1910, the power-‐

house contained 14 turbines and a total output of 168 MW.43 According to Insull, the retrofits

were ensued all “with the same building, the same number of boilers, the same grate surface,

the same stack capacity, [and] prac)cally the same amount of money invested.”44

By 1949, Fisk Sta)on again became Commonwealth Edison’s largest genera)ng sta)on of

the 10 in opera)on with the installa)on of a new 150 MW unit.45 In 1959, a 305 MW unit was

installed, which produced “enough electricity to serve a city of nearly half a million

popula)on.”46 This technologic improvement increased the total net genera)ng capability to

613 MW, a staggering comparison to Fisk Sta)on’s first opera)onal capacity of 5 MW.

Because the power plant was con)nually upgraded to generate more electric power,

none of the original generators are located at Fisk Sta)on today. However, the original 5 MW

turbine was returned to the headquarters of General Electric, the original manufacturer, in


Schenectady, New York, “where is stands today as a monument to engineering genius.”47 Ac-‐

cording to one author, when viewing the original turbines, “you can get a feel for what an awe-‐

some process power produc)on is, even in this age.”48 The original 5 MW Cur)s turbine genera-‐

tor unit was designated a na)onal engineering landmark by the American Society of Mechanical

Engineers in 1975.49

Fisk Sta3on’s Technologic Impact on the Electricity Industry and in Chicago

Eloquently put by Insull, Fisk Sta)on’s original turbogenerator represented true innova-‐

)on and risk. The power plant stood as:

a monument to one of the greatest developments that has taken place in connec)on with our industry. The ability to mass very large amounts of energy produc)on, the abil-‐ity to do that at a very low investment cost, and to produce the energy from such ma-‐chinery at an opera)ng cost never heard of with reciproca)ng engines and at an effi-‐ciency never heard of with reciproca)ng engines, has, to my mind, had a greater influ-‐ence on the development of our business during the last decade than any other one thing.

True, we were looking for some means of producing energy in greater quan))es at lower cost, and under circumstances of greater reliability than produc)on could possibly be with a reciproca)ng engine, as compared with the low investment cost, low bearing cost, and great reliability of a rota)ng prime mover; but the fact is that in agreeing to take the risks of manufacture, and to give the industry something which it needed badly....The history of the last decade, bringing us directly up to today or yesterday, has been one of marvelous progress in our industry, but, to my mind, it is but the start of what we can expect may come in the future.50

The 5 MW steam turbine “also helped introduce the turbine to America; within a year

amer Fisk Street began opera)on, General Electric and Wes)nghouse received orders for

540,000 KW (540 MW) of turbogenerator capacity.”51 Alongside influencing Chicago’s electric

revolu)on, the new steam turbogenerators also represent an industry-‐wide triumph of when

the “the future of primary power arrived.”52 Today, amer extensive decades of refinement, the

advanced steam turbine technology remains a dominant power generator, represen)ng more

than 60% of all power generated.53 Although the steam turbine would not evolve into its more

modern design for another decade, Fisk’s technology was crucial for crea)ng the pathway to

improve u)lity companies’ central sta)ons. The groundbreaking 5 MW units subsequently trig-‐


gered the era of rapid technological advances in size and efficiency for energy produc)on as

well as led to relentless compe))on toward the goal of cheap electricity.

Even though the 5 MW turbines were quickly replaced at Fisk Sta)on, the power plant

greatly influenced the evolu)on and upward growth of the electric industry, which con)nued to

be a central part of Chicago Edison’s genera)ng power even amer the site’s ini)al success.

In 1908, five years amer Fisk Sta)on first began opera)ng, an editorial from the magazine

Electrical World, commented on the site’s persis)ng significance. Although the magazine wrote

of Fisk Sta)on in previous issues, the editorial stated, “no ar)cle can do jus)ce to the care and

thought bestowed on it, or to the completeness and beauty of the whole. It is a great cathedral,

devoted to the religion of power, and a feeling of worship is inspired by the gigan)c machines,

the towering walls, the long-‐drawn aisles.”54 In 1915, an adver)sement produced by Common-‐

wealth Edison )tled, called Fisk Sta)on “A Mecca” as it “revolu)onized the methods of making

electricity.”55 The adver)sement also alluded to the power plant’s influence on the “high repu-‐

ta)on that Chicago enjoys in the electrical industry is due in large part to the enterprise, the

boldness of ini)a)ve, the recogni)on of the economic fundamentals on which this business is

based, and the desire to play fair, which this company has exhibited.”56

In 1928, at the 25th anniversary commemora)ng the installa)on of Fisk Sta)on’s first 5

MW steam turbine engine, Insull commented on how the success of the “experiment” at the

site revolu)onized electric genera)ng power. Insull stated, “I think this sta)on marks the begin-‐

ning of modern day development of the produc)on of electric energy from steam and its distri-‐

bu)on over large areas, such as we now have…The Fisk street sta)on, as long as it stands, will

be a monument to that departure.”57

As turbo-‐genera)ng technology became more cost effec)ve, Chicago Edison con)nued

to build new powerhouses with greater genera)ng capaci)es. For example, Quarry Street Sta-‐

)on, located across the Chicago River from Fisk Sta)on, opened in 1908, housing six 24 MW

turbines.58 Quarry Street Sta)on and Fisk Sta)on were connected with large electric lines to as-‐

sist each plant according to varying peak and low loads as well as adding reliability to their

opera)ons.59 While the sta)ons remained independent plants in order to ensure that a break-‐

down in one would not affect the other, their loca)on near each other provided an economic,

convenient advantage for combined opera)on. In addi)on, the two sta)ons shared a chief en-‐


gineer and a ferry service.60 The integrated system showcased innova)on beyond just the single

turbine.

In 1912, Northwest Street Sta)on opened with two 20 MW units, four )mes the capacity

of Fisk Sta)on’s original turbines built just a decade before.61 Just two years later, a 30 MW tur-‐

bine was installed at Northwest Street Sta)on, which at the )me was the largest in the world.62

By the mid-‐1920s, a single turbine could generate 175 MW, which was enough to power a small

city.63 In addi)on, the amount of coal needed to generate 1 KW-‐hour of electricity decreased

from 7.3 pounds in 1902 to 1.5 pounds in 1932, which undoubtedly reduced input costs

further.64

The increasing supply of power and lower costs increased electricity’s role in Chicago’s

growing entertainment, transit, and residen)al appliance industries. Commonwealth Edison

con)nued to expand service into the outlying suburbs to create a united network of power. Chi-‐

cago was transforming into “the electric city” in which Insull had envisioned.65

The Role of Samuel Insull

Ini)ally, Insull’s daring experimenta)on and risky engineering decisions directed the

construc)on of Fisk Sta)on’s ill-‐advised turbines. Yet, at the )me, Insull could not predict how

the first 5 MW unit would set the stage for future turbogenerator advancements in both Chi-‐

cago and the electric industry at large. Although a great deal of Fisk Sta)on’s success has been

acributed to Insull, he is not soley responsible for Chicago’s growth and turbine technology evo-‐

lu)on. However, author Thomas P. Hughes notes Insull’s significance:

The technology and organiza)on of the Chicago system were a synthesis of the ideas and ac)vi)es of innumerable inventors, engineers, entrepreneurs, manufacturers, and man-‐agers from all parts of the world. Insull did not invent the Chicago system to the extent that Edison invented the Pearl Street system. Edison acquired patents on the essen)al components of his system and the organizing concept of the system was clearly his. In-‐sull was not a professional inventor or an engineer. He was, however, a systems concep-‐tualizer comparable to Edison, but on a high level of abstrac)on. Edison, though deeply aware of the seamless fabric of economics and technology, was rela)vely naive about the long-‐term economic and social factors making up the environment within which his system func)oned...Edison did not ar)culate his technological and economic concepts so that a large organiza)on could make decisions and carry out policy without his imme-‐diate supervision.


Insull, by contrast, analyzed and ar)culated concepts that guided policy not only in Chi-‐cago but in other u)li)es as well. His conceptual syntheses involved social and market needs, financial trends, poli)cal (especially regulatory) policies, economic principles, technological innova)ons, engineering design, and managerial techniques. Insull dis-‐cussed his concepts, policies, and experiences in addresses to u)lity groups and to the public.66

As president of Chicago Edison, which later was renamed to Commonwealth Edison, Insull

played a crucial role in construc)ng the founda)on of today’s electric grid in Chicago. Through

managing and controlling Chicago Edison’s agenda, Insull directed decisions that resulted in the

use of central sta)ons rather than isolated power plants and the crea)on of the most efficient

steam turbine technology of its day, which replaced the reciproca)ng engine. His risky “experi-‐

ment” in building the 5 MW turbine triggered the era of rapid technological advances in steam

turbine technology, which inaugurated a new era of power genera)on.

Employees at Fisk Sta3on

In addi)on to Fisk Sta)on’s technologic and electric significance in history, the countless

employees that worked at the plant throughout its history should not go unno)ced. While the

plant’s safety has been drama)cally improved over the past century, a number of men died in

accidents throughout the twen)eth century.67 Today, a memorial garden located adjacent to

Fisk Sta)on’s Original Powerhouse commemorates the workers and firefighters that lost their

lives in these industrial accidents. Fisk Sta)on also offered remarkable accommoda)ons and

ameni)es to employees, which will be discussed later in this chapter.

Fisk Sta3on’s Contribu3on to Electric Technology and Growth

Chicago Edison’s success was largely based on coupling improved genera)ng technology

with the acquisi)on and consolida)on of rivaling companies, and exclusivity agreements. These

factors allowed Chicago Edison to scale up genera)on and distribu)on to serve more customers

at a cheaper rate. The efficient turbogenerators, such as the 5 MW units installed at Fisk Sta)on,

pushed the company’s business growth as well as future technologic innova)ons in the engi-‐

neering world further.


Chicago Edison’s success, the growth of electricity within Chicago, and the moderniza-‐

)on and technologic improvements of the electric industry are embodied with Fisk Sta)on. In

the late nineteenth century, the conven)onal reciproca)ng steam engine had reached its capac-‐

ity in power produc)on. Despite the limita)ons in genera)on, Chicago required addi)onal elec-‐

tricity. As a result, Fisk Sta)on was constructed to hold the largest steam turbine yet.

Fisk Sta)on’s first 5 MW steam turbine was a daring innova)on for its day. When or-‐

dered, their was no guarantee of commercial success. However, the decision to build the tur-‐

bines once housed in Fisk Sta)on exceeded cau)ous experimenta)on. With the most innova)ve

technology of its kind and of any size, Fisk Sta)on became the largest steam genera)ng plant in

the world. Of Chicago Edison’s earliest central power sta)ons, today Fisk Sta)on is one of the

only to survive. Fisk Sta)on’s buildings-‐-‐many of which are s)ll intact onsite-‐-‐are worth preserv-‐

ing to commemorate their historic significance, architectural uniqueness, contribu)on in revo-‐

lu)onizing the electric industry, and countless employees. This site greatly contributed to Chi-‐

cago’s history and is vital in commemora)ng the city’s growth in the early twen)eth century.

Historic Buildings Onsite

While Fisk Sta)on symbolically represents a turning point in both Chicago and the elec-‐

tric industry’s evolu)on, its buildings contain their own architectural significance. Compared the

architecture in more recently built power plants, Fisk Sta)on’s various buildings are unique and

surprisingly ornate, as they were built with classical revival architecture. Classical revival archi-‐

tecture commonly features “symmetrical facades, minimal use of bays, towers or other project-‐

ing building elements, classical ornament, including columns, cornices, and triangular pedi-‐

ments, and wide variety of materials, including brick, stone, terra coca, and wood.”68

The poten)al historic structures featured in the Historic American Engineering Record

site analysis and/or that were viewed on a tour to Fisk Sta)on include the Original Powerhouse,

the Administra)on Building, Switch House No. 1, Switch House No. 2 and Transmission Terminal,

and the Maintenance Building.69 A number of other large structure or industrial equipment are

also present. The general site layout is shown in Fig. 5.3, 5.4, and 5.5.

The following analysis of the exis)ng buildings is based on outdated informa)on, either

from the early 1900s or the mid 1980s, as well as from the author’s personal site tour in March


2012. Therefore, the present condi)ons and status need to be further analyzed for their struc-‐

tural integrity and preserva)on poten)al. Although the buildings will be described by their his-‐

toric characteris)cs, it should be noted that the descrip)ons may not be an accurate represen-‐

ta)on given the possibility of renova)ons or natural deteriora)on. Nevertheless, the following

images and descrip)ons s)ll serve as a introduc)on to Fisk Sta)on’s unique architectural char-‐

acteris)cs. The redevelopment of the site should highly consider preserving these ornate build-‐

ings in order to commemorate the historic engineering, electric, and architectural significance.

Fig. 5.3: Site layout of Fisk Genera)ng Sta)on’s Historic and Non-‐Historic Structures.

Image created by author.

00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14

00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14

10

09

08

07

06

05

04

03

02

01

00

10

09

08

07

06

05

04

03

02

01

00

Historic(Buildings

Non0Historic(Structures

1.##Original#Powerhouse2.##Administra7on#Building3.##Switch#House#No.#14.##Switch#House#No.#25.##Maintenance#Shop6.##Frequency#Changer#House

7.##1959#Powerhouse8.##Transmission#Sta7on9.##Peaker#Units10.##Old#Transmission#Terminal#

1

3

2

6

4

5

9

10

8

7

Cermak Road

Chicago River


00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35

00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35

35

34

33

32

31

30

29

28

27

26

25

24

23

22

21

20

19

18

17

16

15

14

13

12

11

10

09

08

07

06

05

04

03

02

01

00

35

34

33

32

31

30

29

28

27

26

25

24

23

22

21

20

19

18

17

16

15

14

13

12

11

10

09

08

07

06

05

04

03

02

01

00

Historic(Buildings


1. Original*Powerhouse2. Administra7on*Building3. Switch*House*No.*14. Switch*House*No.*25. Maintenance*Shop6. Frequency*Changer*House

7.**1959*Powerhouse8.**Transmission*Sta7on9.**Peaker*Units10.**Old*Transmission*Terminal*

12

3

6

5

4

10

9

8

7




Historic(Buildings


1. Original*Powerhouse2. Administra7on*Building3. Switch*House*No.*14. Switch*House*No.*25. Maintenance*Shop6. Frequency*Changer*House

7.**1959*Powerhouse8.**Transmission*Sta7on9.**Peaker*Units10.**Old*Transmission*Terminal*

1

2

36

5

410

9 8

7




The Original Powerhouse

Built in 1903, the Original Powerhouse once contained the most advanced and powerful

5 MW turbogenerators for its )me.70 In his eloquent portrayal, author John Wasik describes the

original characteris)cs of the powerhouse and its turbines when it first became opera)onal:

The building itself was ornate for a power sta)on, featuring graceful three story mul-‐lioned arched windows and terra coca ornamenta)on. Inside the generator room, streetlights lit the cavernous space. The turbine generator itself was a steel octopus, with pipes coming out of the bocom. Looking like something out of a Jules Verne novel, brass railings ringed the top and lower sec)on of the unit. Oval-‐shaped openings on the turbine made it look like a strange nau)cal vessel landlocked in the middle of a cathedral of power.71

In 1908, author William Hodge commented on the architecture of the Original Power-‐

house in contrast to the neighborhood, sta)ng, “The buildings stand out in grateful relief

against less acrac)ve surroundings.”72 An addi)onal descrip)on wricen in 1908 in an editorial

from the magazine Electrical World, commented on the persis)ng significance and beauty of the

site. Although the magazine had wricen of Fisk Sta)on and the Original Powerhouse in previous

issues, the editorial stated, “no ar)cle can do jus)ce to the care and thought bestowed on it, or

to the completeness and beauty of the whole. It is a great cathedral, devoted to the religion of

power, and a feeling of worship is inspired by the gigan)c machines, the towering walls, the

long-‐drawn aisles.”73

Featuring classical revival architecture, the exterior of the powerhouse is adorned with

large arched windows that measure 25 feet wide and 32 feet high, large skylights that provided

“perfect ligh)ng and ven)la)on,” decora)ve red bricks, and white Bedford stone.74 A site analy-‐

sis by the Historic American Engineering Record, conducted in the mid-‐1980s, describes the ex-‐

terior architectural features:

The exterior of the power house features a pedimented gable above the entrance...This building has slightly canted corners, and contains such decora)ve elements as rus)cated quoins and pilasters, and embellished pendrils. Large arched windows extend up to two-‐thirds of the building's height. A wide concrete belt course extends around the building above the founda)on and below the windows. The cornice is composed of a second concrete belt.75

The photograph in Fig. 5.6 displays the northern exterior of the powerhouse circa 1908.

The architectural and structural outline of the northern exterior of the Original Powerhouse is


shown in Fig. 5.7. However, only the turbine-‐generator room located in west end of the building

remains today (Fig. 5.8). The demoli)on of the original boiler room is due to construc)on up-‐

grades in 1959, which will be discussed in the following sec)on, “1959 Turbine-‐Generator Room

Addi)on to the Original Powerhouse.”

The architectural features of the west facade of the Original Powerhouse are showcased

in Fig. 5.9, Fig. 5.10, and Fig. 5.11. Today, there is a small memorial garden along the western

sec)on of the powerhouse that commemorates people that have perished in fires and accidents

at the site.

The interior of the original powerhouse also contained unique features rare in contem-‐

porary construc)on that deemed the room “very handsome.”76 The interiors walls possess

“white enameled )le adorned with decora)ve brass lamps.”77 The concrete floors in the turbine

room were once “covered with two-‐inch hexagonal terra-‐coca )le,” but today the original floor-‐

ing seems to have been removed or covered, as it now is concrete.78 Fig 5.12-‐Fig. 5.17 shows

the interior features from the present and past, as well as the different turbine units once

housed in the building.

Although various sources disagree on who actually designed the building, the Historic

American Engineering Record claims the Original Powerhouse was designed by Shepley, Butan,

& Coolidge whereas the Commission on Chicago Landmarks cites Burnham, D.H., & Co. as the

responsible architect.79 Plans for Fisk Sta)on’s redevelopment should strongly consider preserv-‐

ing the Original Powerhouse due to its ornate architecture and historic significance in engineer-‐

ing and electricity.


Fig. 5.6: The exterior of the Original Powerhouse, circa 1908, looking south.

Printed in McGraw-‐Publishing Company, "The System and Opera)ng Prac)ce of the Commonwealth Edison Company, Chicago,” Electrical World 51, no. 20 (1908): 1025.

Fig. 5.7: The architectural details of the northern facade of the Original Powerhouse circa 1908.

Printed in George Frederick Gebhardt, Steam Power Plant Engineering (New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1908), 776.


Fig. 5.8: The north entrance to the Original Powerhouse turbine room, circa 1908.

Image from Library of Congress, Prints & Photographs Division, Historic American Engineering Record, “Common-‐wealth Electric Company, Fisk Street Electrical Genera)ng Sta)on,” survey number HAER ILL, 16-‐CHIG, 140, Photo

#8, hcp://hdl.loc.gov/loc.pnp/hhh.il0671/photos.034788p.


http://hdl.loc.gov/loc.pnp/hhh.il0671/photos.034788p


Fig. 5.9: West facade of the Original Powerhouse, looking southeast, circa 1980.

Image from Library of Congress, Prints & Photographs Division, Historic American Engineering Record, “Commonwealth Electric Company, Fisk Street Electrical Genera)ng Sta)on,” survey

number HAER ILL, 16-‐CHIG, 140, Photo #9, hcp://hdl.loc.gov/loc.pnp/hhh.il0671/photos.034789p




Fig. 5.10: West facade entrance to the Original Powerhouse, looking south (lem) and details of the building’s historic windows (right), in 2012.

Photographs by author.

Fig. 5.11: West facade entrance to the Original Powerhouse, in 2012, looking northwest.

Photograph by author.


Fig. 5.12: Interior view of the turbine room in the Original Power House circa 1908.

Printed in McGraw-‐Publishing Company, "The System and Opera)ng Prac)ce of the Common-‐wealth Edison Company, Chicago,” Electrical World 51, no. 20 (1908): 1023.

Fig. 5.13: 20 MW and 25 MW turbines at Fisk Sta)on, installed in 1914.

Printed in Samuel Insull, Central Sta%on Electric Service: Its Commercial Development and Eco-‐nomic Significance as Set forth in the Public Addresses (1897-‐1914) of Samuel Insull (Chicago: Pri-‐

vate Print, 1915), 420.


Fig. 5.14: View of the turbine-‐generator room in the Original Powerhouse, circa 1980. Turbine Unit. No. 18 has since been removed.

Image from Library of Congress, Prints & Photographs Division, Historic American Engineering Re-‐cord, “Commonwealth Electric Company, Fisk Street Electrical Genera)ng Sta)on,” survey number

HAER ILL, 16-‐CHIG, 140, Photo #16, hcp://hdl.loc.gov/loc.pnp/hhh.il0671/photos.034796p

Fig. 5.15: View inside the Original Powerhouse (lem) and exis)ng elevator (right) in 2012.




Fig. 5.16: View on the floor of the Original Powerhouse turbine-‐room circa 1909.

Printed in McGraw-‐Publishing Company, "Prac)cal Opera)on of Fisk Street and Quarry Street Sta)ons in Chi-‐cago," Electrical World 53, no. 22 (1909): 1292.


Fig. 5.17: View of the Original Powerhouse turbine-‐room circa 1909.

Printed in McGraw-‐Publishing Company, "Prac)cal Opera)on of Fisk Street and Quarry Street Sta)ons in Chicago," Electrical World 53, no. 22 (1909): 1293.


1959 Turbine-‐Generator Room Addi3on to the Original Powerhouse

In 1959, a large, red metal clad boiler and turbine-‐generator room was constructed and

acached to the exis)ng original 1903 powerhouse (Fig. 5.18, Fig. 5.19)80 The new turbine-‐

generator building is the most visually prominent building seen from Fisk Sta)on’s entrance on

Cermak Road. The original smokestacks were removed and replaced with a single, 550-‐foot

smokestack, which is also visible from many distant parts of the city.81

While the building is s)ll func)onal, the southern por)on of the 1959 Powerhouse fac-‐

ing toward the Chicago River was destroyed during a fire in November 1976. Other buildings

onsite were also damaged due to the fire. According to an ar)cle in the Chicago Tribune, “The

fire destroyed a quarter-‐mile-‐long conveyor system that carried the coal directly from barges to

furnaces that supply steam to operate the turbine generators. The blaze also damaged an elec-‐

trical control room, maintenance shops for the boiler rooms, and related buildings in the Com-‐

monwealth Edison complex.”82 Another ar)cle from the Chicago Tribune commented on the

damage caused by the fire, which “roared along the steel conveyor to a fly-‐ash warehouse, then

collapsed on a building that stored resistors, bringing down power poles and cables as it fell.

The burning conveyor next set fire to the roof of the switch house, then collapsed on the roof of

a control room, and set fire to the roof of a building housing a boiler and the steam turbines.”83

According to the Historic American Engineering Record, the southern facade of the 1903 Origi-‐

nal Powerhouse was also damaged during the fire.84 Walter Watroba, a firefighter, then 41, was

trapped in debris when conveyor system collapsed and died several hours later.

The southern facade of the powerhouse circa 1980 and in 2012 is shown in Fig. 5. 20

while the interior is shown in Fig. 5.21 and Fig. 5.22.

Due to its more recent date of construc)on, this building may hold less historic and ar-‐

chitectural value compared to the other buildings onsite. But the 1959 turbine-‐generator build-‐

ing visually defines the site by symbolizing Fisk Sta)on due to its size, prominent red color, and

outward facing posi)on, which could be considered for preserva)on purposes.


Fig. 5.18: Fisk Genera)ng Sta)on single smokestack and red, metal clad 1959 addi)on to the Original Powerhouse.

Image from Eric Allix Rogers, “Fisk Sta)on,” Flickr, October 5, 2008.


Fig. 5.19: The original site layout. The boiler room, highlighted in red, was replaced by the 1959 addi-‐)on to the Original Powerhouse. The Original Powerhouse, shown in orange, remains onsite today.

Adapted from William H. Hodge, “The Commonwealth Edison Company,” Public Service Management 4, no. 5 (May 1908): 133.

Fig. 5.20: A detailed view of the coal conveyor system, looking north at the 1959 powerhouse, circa 1980 (Lem). The southern facade in 2012, which has been altered due to fire damage (right).

Lem: Image from Library of Congress, Prints & Photographs Division, Historic American Engineering Record, “Commonwealth Electric Company, Fisk Street Electrical Genera)ng Sta)on,” survey number

HAER ILL, 16-‐CHIG, 140, Photo #5, hcp://lcweb2.loc.gov/pnp/habshaer/il/il0600/il0671/photos/034785pv.jpg


http://lcweb2.loc.gov/pnp/habshaer/il/il0600/il0671/photos/034785pv.jpg

http://lcweb2.loc.gov/pnp/habshaer/il/il0600/il0671/photos/034785pv.jpg

Fig. 5.21: Turbine Unit No. 19 located in the 1959 addi)on to the Original Powerhouse, circa 1980.

Image from Library of Congress, Prints & Photographs Division, Historic American Engineering Record, “Commonwealth Electric Company, Fisk Street Electrical Genera)ng Sta)on,” survey number HAER ILL, 16-‐

CHIG, 140, Photo #18 hcp://hdl.loc.gov/loc.pnp/hhh.il0671/photos.034798p

Fig. 5.22: Turbine Unit No. 19 located in the 1959 addi)on to the Original Powerhouse, 2012.





The Administra3on Building

The Administra)on Building, which measures 300’ by 80’, is located directly to the west

of the Original Powerhouse and features similar ornate architectural quali)es. The building

stands three stories tall, flanked on both sides by one-‐story acachments that lead to subterra-‐

nean storage halls. The Historic American Engineering Record describes the structure:

The detailing on the administra)on building includes rus)cated quoins, small two-‐over-‐two light paired windows, and a large, segmental arch door with concrete keystones on the north facade. There are concrete belt courses at the founda)on and two parallel belts at the architrave, with a gabled facade and a flat roof.85

Unfortunately, based on informa)on provided on a site tour, today the Administra)on Building

is closed off to Fisk employees due to asbestos contamina)on. The extent of contamina)on and

interior condi)ons of the building are unknown. Images of the exterior of the building are

shown in Fig. 5.23 and Fig. 5.24.

Fig. X: North and west facade of the Administra)on Building, looking southeast.


HAER ILL, 16-‐CHIG, 140, Photo #12, hcp://hdl.loc.gov/loc.pnp/hhh.il0671/photos.034792p.




Switch House No. 1

Switch House No. 1 is located to the west of the Administra)on Building. Built in 1920,

Switch House No. 1 is similar to the other classical revival architecture featured onsite:

A rus)cated base is defined by the concrete belt course. The facade is broken by seg-‐mental arch windows. Four of the arched windows have a concrete keystone. Windows from the top of the base rise in slender ver)cal columns to the top of the structure; a feature similar to the nearby maintenance building. The top one-‐third of the building is defined by a wide steel beam which appears as a wide window transom. A thin concrete course is set across the brick facade on the base of the top story.86

The Historic American Engineering Record, when published in the mid-‐1980s, noted that the

switch house contained some of the original switching boxes that converted power for use in

Chicago’s electric street railways. A walkway, which connects the second floor of Switch House

No. 1 to the Administra)on Building, remains today. The exterior of Switch House No. 1 is illus-‐

trated in Fig. 5.25-‐5.29.

Fig. 5.24: The Administra)on Building in 2012, looking southeast.



Originally, Switch House No. 1 offered special facili)es for Fisk Sta)on’s employees.

These provided conveniences meant keep “the highest grade of faithful employees.”87 In 1908,

an ar)cle in Electrical World, went as far to write, “The provisions for the comfort and welfare

of employees around the Fisk Street sta)on are even more notable than the engineering fea-‐

tures of the sta)on.”88

Offices for the chief engineer and clerks, living quarters for turbine-‐room and electrical

workers, and showers with individual lockers were located on second floor.89 Sleeping rooms for

employees “who may have been detained at the sta)on very late at night are provided. Also

two or three rooms for special employees whose du)es may be such that this is par)cularly

advisable.”90 The building also housed large dining rooms, which served meals some-‐what be-‐

low cost to all working men at the plant (Fig. 5.29). “An elaborately equipped kitchen and 200-‐

pound refrigera)ng plant adjoin the main dining room and electrically cooked meals are served

every day.”91 Ameni)es such as the dining rooms and sleeping quarters were “even more neces-‐

sary at the Fisk Street sta)on than it would be in some other loca)ons, because the sta)on is in

a district surrounded by railroad yards, factories, lumber yards, and a poor class of dwellings, so

that restaurants and other facili)es for the men are not to be found in the neighborhood.”92

Although the employee accommoda)ons were divided according to occupa)on, most were far

superior to those usually provided to lower-‐ranking laborers, which was “ undoubtedly a paying

policy to care for the employees in this manner.”93

Switch House No. 1 also included an assembly and reading room, “where all important

engineering periodicals are on files, together with many books of reference.”94 The original

added accommoda)ons at Fisk Sta)on offered “almost the facili)es of a club for its occupants,

and in emergencies men can live there in comfort for days at a )me.”95

Unfortunately, based on informa)on provided on a site tour, today Switch House No. 1 is

closed off to Fisk employees due to asbestos contamina)on. The extent of contamina)on and

interior condi)on of the building are unknown.


Fig. 5.25: North and east facade of the Switch House No. 1, looking southeast. The Admin-‐istra)on Building is located to the lem.

Image from Library of Congress, Prints & Photographs Division, Historic American Engi-‐neering Record, “Commonwealth Electric Company, Fisk Street Electrical Genera)ng Sta-‐

)on,” survey number HAER ILL, 16-‐CHIG, 140, Photo #10, hcp://hdl.loc.gov/loc.pnp/hhh.il0671/photos.034790p.

Fig. 5.26: The eastern facade of Switch House No. 1 in 2012. The second-‐story walkway con-‐nects to the Administra)on Building.





Fig. 5.27: The eastern facade of Switch House No. 1 in 2012.


Fig. 5.28: The western facade of Switch House No. 1 in 2012.



Switch House No. 2 and the Transmission Terminal

Switch House No. 2 and the Transmission Terminal are situated on the northernmost

por)on of the Fisk Sta)on site (Fig. 5.30). Built in 1940, the one-‐story building contains:

...rus)cated red-‐brick walls res)ng on a concrete founda)on. Two oversized concrete entrances also have rus)cated concrete pilasters. The ornamenta)on is stylized Classical mo)fs and exaggerated size. Of reinforced concrete construc)on, this building is sym-‐metrical in plan with a slightly projec)ng central sec)on. Its concrete cornice has a row of roof drains in square concrete orifices. An imposing metal double door marks the en-‐trance to the building.96

Shaw, Naess, & Murphy are credited as the architects for Fisk Sta)on’s Switch House No. 2.97

Fig. 5.29: One of the dining rooms located in Switch House No. 1.

Printed in William H. Hodge, “The Commonwealth Edison Company,” Public Service Man-‐agement 4, no. 5 (May 1908): 134.


Maintenance Building

The three-‐story Maintenance Building is located south of Switch House No. 2 and the

Transmission Terminal. The building measures 200’ by 80.’ Although a date is not given for when

the building was constructed, the Maintenance Building features similar architecture to the

other buildings onsite and has a:

rus)cated, one-‐story base with a concrete belt course above the base. There is also a concrete cornice above the main block of windows. The main massing has tall arched ver)cal lights. All windows are broken by a wide concrete band.98

The Maintenance Building is shown in Fig. 5.31.

Fig. 5.30: East facade of Switch House No. 2, looking west.

Image from Library of Congress, Prints & Photographs Division, Historic American Engineering Record, “Common-‐wealth Electric Company, Fisk Street Electrical Genera)ng Sta)on,” survey number HAER ILL, 16-‐CHIG, 140, Photo

#11, hcp://hdl.loc.gov/loc.pnp/hhh.il0671/photos.034791p




Frequency Changer House The Frequency Changer House is located on the southeast corner of the site, west of

Switch House No. 1 (Fig. 5.32, Fig. 5.33). Although the original construc)on date is not known,

“It was here that 60-‐cycle AC power was converted to 25-‐cycle DC power for use by Chicago's

electric street railways...The building is in excellent condi)on, although no longer used.”99 Ac-‐

cording to the Historic American Engineering Record, circa 1980, the building was used for stor-‐

age. The current uses and ownership of the building are unknown.

Fig. 5.31: South and east facade of the Maintenance Shop, looking northwest.

Image from Library of Congress, Prints & Photographs Division, Historic American Engineering Record, “Com-‐monwealth Electric Company, Fisk Street Electrical Genera)ng Sta)on,” survey number HAER ILL, 16-‐CHIG, 140,

Photo #20 hcp://hdl.loc.gov/loc.pnp/hhh.il0671/photos.034800p




Fig. 5.32: East facade of the Frequency Changer House, looking west.

Image from Library of Congress, Prints & Photographs Division, Historic American Engineering Record, “Commonwealth Electric Company, Fisk Street Electrical Genera)ng Sta)on,” survey

number HAER ILL, 16-‐CHIG, 140, Photo #13, hcp://hdl.loc.gov/loc.pnp/hhh.il0671/photos.034793p

Fig. 5.33: Frequency Changer House in 2012, looking north.





Addi3onal Buildings, Industrial Structures, and Dis3nct Historic Features Onsite

In addi)on to Fisk Sta)on’s historic buildings, other structures and industrial equipment

are located on the site. Known structures include a water treatment system that extends along

the Chicago River, eight peaker plants located to the west of Switch House No. 2 and the Main-‐

tenance Building, conveyor belts, an “auxiliary boiler, coal handling and processing units, tur-‐

bines fired with diesel and natural gas, and a gasoline storage tank.”100 Some of these structures

are shown in Fig. 5.34 -‐ Fig. 5.38.

One of the most prominent redevelopment issues facing Fisk Sta)on is the complicated

ownership of the site. Midwest Genera)on and the electric u)lity company, Commonwealth

Edison (ComEd), coordinate in their regular business ac)vi)es through electricity transmission

and genera)on.101 As a result, ComEd owns a number of structures and electric lines located on

or that directly travel through land owned by Midwest Genera)on. Based on informa)on pro-‐

vided in a tour to the site, ComEd owns the transmission sta)on located on the western por)on

of the property as well as an unused concrete, metal structure that once housed electricity-‐

related opera)ons located to the west of Switch House No. 2. Because of this haphazard owner-‐

ship, dividing Fisk Sta)on’s land for redevelopment could prove to be difficult as both ComEd

and Midwest Genera)on would have to agree to sell their property and electric lines may need

to be redirected.

If the property is sold for redevelopment, the ComEd transmission sta)on on the west-‐

ern por)on of the site would remain. This may pose as a problem for certain future land uses at

Fisk Sta)on, as the transmission sta)on remains visually unacrac)ve. Addi)onally, the eight

peaker units, owned by Midwest Genera)on, are under contract un)l at least 2015.102

Many )mes, adap)ve reuse projects preserve the original equipment to honor the in-‐

dustrial history of the site. In the case of coal-‐fired power plants, turbines, conveyor belts, coal

hoppers, and overhead cranes have been restored to showcase past coal opera)ons. Some of

Fisk Sta)on’s industrial equipment could poten)ally be preserved to symbolize the site’s past

and role within the electric industry. However, in remedia)ng the site, most of the hazardous or

heavy industrial equipment will need to be removed. The industrial equipment or hazardous

materials onsite need to be further examined in order for remedia)on efforts to ensue.


Fisk Sta)on also possesses various unique, non-‐industrial features. A memorial garden,

which commemorates the workers and firefighters that have lost their lives in these industrial

accidents, is located between the Original Powerhouse and the Administra)on building. In ad-‐

di)on, a number of known historic ar)facts remain at Fisk Sta)on today, including large metal

plagues that celebrated various site anniversaries and the original guestbook, which was signed

by hundreds of visitors, such as Thomas Edison and Britain’s King George and Queen Mary. One

of the site’s commemora)ve metal plagues, mounted on the Original Powerhouse, is shown in

Fig. 5.39. Just as Fisk Sta)on’s historic buildings should be preserved, so should these original

historic relics to commemorate each aspect of the site’s role in the electric industry.

Fig.5.34: The ComEd owned substa)on, looking north west.



Fig. 5.35: Transmission line onsite, located to the south of Switch House No. 1



Fig. 5.36: Water treatment equipment located on the southern por)on of the site, along the Chicago River.

Photographs by author.

Fig. 5.37: Fisk Sta)on’s peaker plants, located to the east of the Maintenance Shop and Switch House No. 2.



Fig. 5.38: Coal dock, coal conveyor belt, and southern facade of 1959 Genera)ng Sta)on on the southeast por)on of the site. A remnant of the original boiler house, a single wall and large arched

window is located below the conveyor belt, but no longer exists on the site.


HAER ILL, 16-‐CHIG, 140, Photo #4, hcp://hdl.loc.gov/loc.pnp/hhh.il0671/photos.034784p

Fig. X: Plague located at the north entrance to the Original Powerhouse, commemora)ng Fisk Sta)on’s 100-‐year anniversary, in 2012.





The Current Structural Integrity and Condi3ons of the Historic Buildings

In terms of known structural integrity, the Historic American Engineering Record states,

the exis)ng “four large buildings...contain reinforced concrete founda)ons, steel frames, and

common-‐bond brick walls.”103 However, the site analysis does not make clear exactly which

buildings this descrip)on refers to or other specific details on site integrity. Because the Historic

American Engineering Record was conducted in the mid-‐1980s and addi)on informa)on on the

current condi)ons is limited, the true integrity of these buildings is unknown.

Analyzing building integrity is important as natural deteriora)on or a lack of mainte-‐

nance over the past decades could have harmed site structures. As previously noted, based off

of informa)on provided on a site tour, the Administra)on Building and Switch House No. 1 are

both closed due to asbestos contamina)on. It was unclear whether the Frequency Changer

House is also closed due to contamina)on or who owns the building. The current structural and

interior condi)ons of these buildings are unknown, as well as if other hazardous materials, such

as lead paint, industrial equipment, or storage is present inside. If preserved, remediated would

be necessary due to asbestos contamina)on or for other hazardous materials. Based on a visible

examina)on of the exterior of the buildings, some windows are broken and would need to be

repaired or replaced.

The total extent of damage caused by the fire in 1976 is also unknown. Although some

of the specific buildings harmed by the fire could not be determined through relevant sources

or a site tour, por)ons of the exis)ng 1959 turbine-‐generator room and the Original Power-‐

house were damaged.

In some cases, such as that with the Frequency Changer House and Maintenance Build-‐

ing, no original construc)on date is given and should be iden)fied to determine the extent of

significance. However, based on the images provided, these structures seems to contain similar

historic and architectural significance compared to the other buildings located at Fisk Sta)on.

Despite some uncertain)es in informa)on, each historic buildings provides a unique op-‐

portunity for adap)ve reuse. Of the historic buildings, the Original Powerhouse, the Adminis-‐

tra)ve Building, Switch House No. 1 and 2, the Maintenance Building, and the Frequency

Changer House need to be further examined for their historic quali)es, unique architectural fea-‐

tures, structural integrity, and current condi)ons. While it would be ideal to preserve all the his-‐


toric buildings to maintain Fisk Sta)on’s architectural, electric, and engineering value, only some

of the selected structures may be suitable for adap)ve reuse. For example, historic designa)on

status on the Na)onal Register, which would help provided protec)on and necessary funding to

redevelopment the site, may only apply to certain buildings that have not been significantly al-‐

tered by previous renova)ons. In addi)on, severe deteriora)on, damage, structural issues may

deem some of the structures inadequate for building reuse. Because the architectural and inte-‐

rior characteris)cs for many of the buildings has been recorded in historic documents and pho-‐

tographs, the adap)ve reuse of Fisk Sta)on presents a unique opportunity to restore some of

the buildings’ the original features have been altered or are no longer present.

Fisk Sta3on’s An3cipated Re3rement

On February 28, 2012, Midwest Genera)on announced that it would shut Fisk Sta)on

down by the end of 2012. The decision was based on a number of factors, including pressure

from decade long protests by environmental and community organiza)ons on the environ-‐

mental injus)ce and pollu)on generated by Fisk, a lawsuit against Midwest Genera)on on emis-‐

sion controls, and a largely supported Clean Power Ordinance that would require Fisk Sta)on to

clean up or shut down.104 Similar to other coal-‐fired power plants in the United States, Fisk Sta-‐

)on’s re)rement is largely to the increasing costs in coal genera)on and pollu)on control

retrofijng.105 According to Pedro Pizarro, president of Midwest Genera)on's parent company,

Edison Mission Group, "Unfortunately, condi)ons in the wholesale power market simply do not

give us a path for con)nuing to invest in further retrofits.”106 Poli)cal pressure also played a vital

role as a final deal to shut down Fisk Sta)on was brokered by Mayor Rahm Emanuel, who sup-‐

ported efforts to clean up Chicago’s power plants before taking office.107

The ac)vism and support by environmental and community organiza)ons, aldermen,

and the Mayor were vital in contribu)ng to Fisk Sta)on’s closure. Although the closure of Fisk

Sta)on has been referred to as an historic victory and one of the biggest environmental suc-‐

cesses in Chicago, Fisk Sta)on’s redevelopment will require con)nued efforts and acen)on as

the site s)ll faces many difficul)es.

Fortunately, environmental organiza)ons and Mayor Emanuel have already displayed

support for the site’s remedia)on and transforma)on into a safe, produc)ve community asset.


Amer the ini)al announcement to close Fisk Sta)on, support remains strong on the part of

Mayor Emanuel, aldermen, and community organiza)ons. Following the announcement of the

power plant’s closure, local community organiza)ons have begun to organize mee)ngs and in-‐

forma)on sessions seeking community input on how to proceed with redevelopment.

In addi)on, Mayor Emanuel has pledged to begin planning for the redevelopment of the

site in order to promote future economic development and employment opportuni)es.108 The

Mayor and the City of Chicago recently created a task force, which will work toward redevelop-‐

ing the site. An advisory group is to be assembled, consis)ng of “three community members,

one member from Midwest Genera)on, the alderman, one representa)ve from labor, and two

economic development representa)ves from City Hall.”109 The advisory group will assess the

site, consider community input, as well as determine poten)al economic and employment de-‐

velopment op)ons for the site. The Delta Ins)tute, a non-‐profit organiza)on, will lead the en)re

process as “independent facilitators of the group and be responsible for the final report.”110 The

Joyce Founda)on and the Sierra Club have agreed to help fund the planning process, with each

contribu)ng $50,000.

Although the redevelopment process already includes a number of important commu-‐

nity organiza)ons, financial resources, poli)cal issues, private interests could s)ll pose concerns

over reusing the site in a publicly beneficial manner. Amer over a decade of figh)ng to close Fisk

Sta)on, some residents and community organiza)ons may remain wary of how city official and

Midwest Genera)on will handle the redevelopment process. However, currently, most stake-‐

holders seem op)mis)c in commijng to building beneficial uses at the site.

Because the planning process is in its ini)al stage, the outcomes remain unclear. The

short )meframe given to create a comprehensive, preliminary report by the Mayor’s task force

and leading up to Fisk Sta)on’s official re)rement may prove to be problema)c. Although the

site’s redevelopment should not be rushed, it should be considered a high priority in terms of

restoring the loss in employment and tax revenues, as well as crea)ng a beneficial,

environmentally-‐friendly use for the the surrounding neighborhood and residents.

Under current regula)ons and the agreement to re)re Fisk, Midwest Genera)on is re-‐

quired to dismantle the power plant’s equipment to ensure that it cannot be restarted. The


company is not obligated to sell the site, but instead, must secure the property. Because Mid-‐

west Genera)on has yet to publicly announce any plans for selling Fisk Sta)on, it is uncertain

whether it will remain a contaminated, unused, and fenced-‐off property. If Fisk Sta)on is not

sold, Midwest Genera)on would s)ll need to pay for a number of maintenance costs, such as on

security and u)li)es. However, Midwest Genera)on’s spokesman, Doug McFarlan, has com-‐

mented that the company does not want to own the site for a long period of )me.111 McFarlan

has also stated that Midwest Genera)on is commiced “to facilitate future uses of both proper-‐

)es for the public benefit or the private development acceptable for the community.”112

Property acquisi)on may also be problema)c as Fisk Sta)on is haphazardly divided in

ownership. Commonwealth Edison owns a transmission sta)on, electric lines, buildings, and

industrial structures located on the site. Other site challenges include restric)ve zoning regula-‐

)ons, remedia)on, and historic designa)on, which will be explained in further detail later in this

chapter. Although Fisk Sta)on’s redevelopment presents difficult obstacles and may occur over

many years, early planning stage and con)nued interest is vital for successful site reuse.

Current Site Condi3ons

Over the past century, Fisk Sta)on’s site opera)ons have been significantly altered. In

1999, Commonwealth Edison sold Fisk Sta)on to Edison Interna)onal’s Midwest Genera)on.

Today, Fisk Sta)on is located on approximately 44 acres, which includes the switchyard owned

by Commonwealth Edison on the western por)on of the property.113

The updated genera)ng units, s)ll powered by coal, now provide a total output of ap-‐

proximately 326 MW. Coal is delivered by barge from South Branch of the Chicago River. Accord-‐

ing to Midwest Genera)on, “Fisk has no ground storage and receives its coal on a ‘just in )me’

basis...The barge towing company delivers two to three barges daily and removes empty

barges.”114 Eight peaker units are also located on the site, which provide addi)onal power when

electricity demand increases in the summer, during power outages, or to maintain reliability. In

addi)on to coal, Fisk Sta)on is powered by natural gas for igni)on, combus)on support, boiler

opera)ons, and the peaker units. According to one report, “Peoples Gas delivers natural gas un-‐

der a delivery contract that includes balancing storage, which is shared by the Crawford

Sta)on.”115


Fisk Sta3on’s Economic Impacts

Unfortunately, the re)rement of Fisk Sta)on will generate significant economic conse-‐

quences in terms of employment and tax revenue. According to a Midwest Genera)on fact

sheet released in 2005, Fisk Sta)on provided approximately $1 million in property taxes.116 In

addi)on, the site currently provides approximately 68 jobs, the majority of which are union

workers.117 In 2005, the payroll and benefits totaled approximately $7.5 million.118 While the

number of jobs lost is significant in itself, many of Fisk Sta)on’s employees have been working at

the site for 20 to 30 years.

The most recent data released by Midwest Genera)on combines the economic impacts

of Fisk Sta)on with the nearby power plant Crawford Sta)on. While these combined impacts do

not individually represent Fisk Sta)on, the informa)on gives insight into the power plants’ con-‐

tribu)on to the neighborhood and city at large. According to a fact sheet released in 2011 by

Midwest Genera)on, the Fisk and Crawford power plants:

• Provide $1.9 million in annual local property taxes to the city of Chicago.

• Pay $1.1 million in annual payroll taxes.

• Donate $400,000 to local chari)es and nonprofit agencies annually.

• Spend $23 million annually with local suppliers and organized labor to support plant op-‐era)ons and maintenance ac)vi)es during the year.

• Employ 235,000 man-‐hours of contract labor annually, among the largest in the building and construc)on trades in Chicago.

• Contribute $30,000 in scholarships to local students annually.119

The economic support provided by Fisk Sta)on is significant. The closure of the power plant will

have profound impacts in terms of tax revenue, employment, and public funding. It is vital that

the site’s new intended land uses provide new employment opportuni)es and sources of reve-‐

nue that are similar or greater than the economic benefits Fisk Sta)on once generated.


Chapter V: Sec3on Endnotes


1 Harold Plac, “Gas and Electricity,” In Encyclopedia of Chicago, edited by Janice L. Reiff, Ann Durkin Kea)ng, and James R. Grossman, (Chicago Historical Society, 2005), accessed January 27, 2012, hcp://encyclopedia.chicagohistory.org/pages/504.html. 2 Robert L. Bradley, Edison to Enron: Energy Markets and Poli%cal Strategies (Salem: Scrivener Publishing LLC, 2011), 65.3 Harold L. Plac, The Electric City: Energy and the Growth of the Chicago Area, 1880-‐1930 (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1991), xvii.4 Ibid., 69.5 Ibid.6 Ibid., 71.7 Ibid., 72-‐73.8 Plac, The Electric City: Energy and the Growth of the Chicago Area, 1880-‐1930, 101-‐102.9 Bradley, Edison to Enron: Energy Markets and Poli%cal Strategies, 92.10 Plac, The Electric City: Energy and the Growth of the Chicago Area, 1880-‐1930, 109.11 Ibid., 113.12 John Wasik, The Merchant of Power: Sam Insull, Thomas Edison, and the Crea%on of the Modern Metropolis (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2006), 84.13 Richard Munson, From Edison to Enron: The Business of Power and What it Means for the Future of Electricity (Westport: Praeger Publishers, 2005), 53; Bradley, Edison to Enron: Energy Markets and Poli%cal Strategies, 92.14 Bradley, Edison to Enron: Energy Markets and Poli%cal Strategies, 92.15 Wasik, The Merchant of Power: Sam Insull, Thomas Edison, and the Crea%on of the Modern Metropolis, 84.16 Bradley, Edison to Enron: Energy Markets and Poli%cal Strategies, 92-‐93.17 Wasik, The Merchant of Power: Sam Insull, Thomas Edison, and the Crea%on of the Modern Metropolis, 84.18 Samuel Insull, Central Sta%on Electric Service: Its Commercial Development and Economic Significance as Set forth in the Public Addresses (1897-‐1914) of Samuel Insull (Chicago: Private Print, 1915), 354.19 Wasik, The Merchant of Power: Sam Insull, Thomas Edison, and the Crea%on of the Modern Metropolis, 84.20 Ibid.21 Ibid.22 Thomas P. Hughes, “The Electrifica)on of America: The System Builders,” Technology and Culture 20, no 1. (Janu-‐ary 1979): 145.23 Bradley, Edison to Enron: Energy Markets and Poli%cal Strategies, 93; Hughes, “The Electrifica)on of America: The System Builders,” 145. 24 Wasik, The Merchant of Power: Sam Insull, Thomas Edison, and the Crea%on of the Modern Metropolis, 84.25 Plac, The Electric City: Energy and the Growth of the Chicago Area, 1880-‐1930, 114.26 Bradley, Edison to Enron: Energy Markets and Poli%cal Strategies, 93.27 Philip Hampson, “Edison Plans Fete for Old Turbine Plant,” Chicago Daily Tribune, September 11, 1953, C7.28 Library of Congress, Prints & Photographs Division, Historic American Engineering Record, “Commonwealth Elec-‐tric Company, Fisk Street Electrical Genera)ng Sta)on, 1111 West Cermak Avenue, Chicago, Cook County, IL,” Li-‐brary of Congress. [survey number HAER ILL, 16-‐CHIG, 140-‐; accessed February 14, 2012], 3, hcp://www.loc.gov/pictures/collec)on/hh/item/il0671/29 Ibid.30 Wasik, The Merchant of Power: Sam Insull, Thomas Edison, and the Crea%on of the Modern Metropolis, 86.31 Bradley, Edison to Enron: Energy Markets and Poli%cal Strategies, 94.32 Munson, From Edison to Enron: The Business of Power and What it Means for the Future of Electricity, 53.

http://encyclopedia.chicagohistory.org/pages/504.html


http://www.loc.gov/pictures/collection/hh/item/il0671/



33 Bradley, Edison to Enron: Energy Markets and Poli%cal Strategies, 94.34 Plac, The Electric City: Energy and the Growth of the Chicago Area, 1880-‐1930, 115.35 Wasik, The Merchant of Power: Sam Insull, Thomas Edison, and the Crea%on of the Modern Metropolis, 86.36 Wasik, The Merchant of Power: Sam Insull, Thomas Edison, and the Crea%on of the Modern Metropolis, 91-‐92.37 Bradley, Edison to Enron: Energy Markets and Poli%cal Strategies, 112.38 Wasik, The Merchant of Power: Sam Insull, Thomas Edison, and the Crea%on of the Modern Metropolis, 87.39 McGraw-‐Publishing Company, "Chicago Conven)on Na)onal Electric Light Associa)on," Electrical World 51, no. 22 (1908): 1150.40 Hughes, “The Electrifica)on of America: The System Builders,” 146.41 Hampson, “Edison Plans Fete for Old Turbine Plant,” C7.42 Plac, The Electric City: Energy and the Growth of the Chicago Area, 1880-‐1930, 114.43 Bradley, Edison to Enron: Energy Markets and Poli%cal Strategies, 112.44 Ibid., 93.45 “New Edison Turbo-‐Unit in Service,” Chicago Daily Tribune, July 21, 1949, A7.46 “Giant Edison Turbine Unit Put In Service,” Chicago Daily Tribune, April 4, 1959, E5.47 Plac, The Electric City: Energy and the Growth of the Chicago Area, 1880-‐1930, 114.48 Wasik, The Merchant of Power: Sam Insull, Thomas Edison, and the Crea%on of the Modern Metropolis, 263.49 Library of Congress, Prints & Photographs Division, Historic American Engineering Record, “Commonwealth Elec-‐tric Company, Fisk Street Electrical Genera)ng Sta)on, 1111 West Cermak Avenue, Chicago, Cook County, IL,” 1.50 Insull, Central Sta%on Electric Service: Its Commercial Development and Economic Significance as Set forth in the Public Addresses (1897-‐1914) of Samuel Insull, 354-‐355.51 Ibid.52 Bradley, Edison to Enron: Energy Markets and Poli%cal Strategies, 94.53 Wasik, The Merchant of Power: Sam Insull, Thomas Edison, and the Crea%on of the Modern Metropolis, 87.54 McGraw-‐Publishing Company, "Chicago Conven)on Na)onal Electric Light Associa)on," 1150.55 Commonwealth Edison Company, “Fisk Street a Mecca: No. 2 of a Series of Adver)sements on Electric Service in Chicago,” Chicago Daily Tribune, October 7, 1915, 9.56 Ibid.57 “Insull Unveils Tablet at Fisk Edison Sta)on,” Chicago Daily Tribune, November 15, 1928, 13.58 Wasik, The Merchant of Power: Sam Insull, Thomas Edison, and the Crea%on of the Modern Metropolis, 88.59 William Keily, "Quarry Street Sta)on of the Commonwealth Edison Company, Chicago," Electrical World 53, no. 1 (1909): 1860 Ibid., 19.61 Bradley, Edison to Enron: Energy Markets and Poli%cal Strategies, 112.62 Ibid.63 Munson, From Edison to Enron: The Business of Power and What it Means for the Future of Electricity, 53.64 Ibid.65 Plac, The Electric City: Energy and the Growth of the Chicago Area, 1880-‐1930, 139.66 Hughes, “The Electrifica)on of America: The System Builders,” 148.67 Wasik, The Merchant of Power: Sam Insull, Thomas Edison, and the Crea%on of the Modern Metropolis, 87.68 City of Chicago, The Commission on Chicago Landmarks, "Classical Revival/Beaux-‐Arts," Chicago Landmarks, ac-‐cessed January 27, 2012, hcp://webapps.cityofchicago.org/landmarksweb/web/styledetails.htm?styId=204; City of Chicago, “Demoli)on Delay,” City of Chicago Historic Preserva%on, accessed March 19, 2012, hcp://www.cityofchicago.org/content/city/en/depts/dcd/supp_info/demoli)on_delay.html69 Library of Congress, Prints & Photographs Division, Historic American Engineering Record, “Commonwealth Elec-‐tric Company, Fisk Street Electrical Genera)ng Sta)on, 1111 West Cermak Avenue, Chicago, Cook County, IL,” 4-‐5.

http://webapps.cityofchicago.org/landmarksweb/web/styledetails.htm?styId=204



70 Library of Congress, Prints & Photographs Division, Historic American Engineering Record, “Commonwealth Elec-‐tric Company, Fisk Street Electrical Genera)ng Sta)on, 1111 West Cermak Avenue, Chicago, Cook County, IL,” 1.71 Wasik, The Merchant of Power: Sam Insull, Thomas Edison, and the Crea%on of the Modern Metropolis, 85.72 William H. Hodge, “The Commonwealth Edison Company,” Public Service Management 4, no. 5 (May 1908): 140. 73 McGraw-‐Publishing Company. "Chicago Conven)on Na)onal Electric Light Associa)on." Electrical World 51, no. 22 (1908): 1150.74 Hodge, “The Commonwealth Edison Company,” 140.75 Library of Congress, Prints & Photographs Division, Historic American Engineering Record, “Commonwealth Elec-‐tric Company, Fisk Street Electrical Genera)ng Sta)on, 1111 West Cermak Avenue, Chicago, Cook County, IL,” 3-‐4.76 Ibid., 141.77 Library of Congress, Prints & Photographs Division, Historic American Engineering Record, “Commonwealth Elec-‐tric Company, Fisk Street Electrical Genera)ng Sta)on, 1111 West Cermak Avenue, Chicago, Cook County, IL,” 3-‐4.78 George Frederick Gebhardt, Steam Power Plant Engineering (New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1908), 744. 79 City of Chicago, The Commission on Chicago Landmarks, “Historic Survey: Details for building at (1029-‐1179) W CERMAK RD,” Chicago Landmarks, accessed January 27, 2012, hcp://webapps.cityofchicago.org/landmarksweb/search/searchdetail.htm?pin=1729200002&formNumber=310107001; City of Chicago, The Commission on Chicago Landmarks, “Historic Survey: Details for building at (1029-‐1179) W CERMAK RD,” Chicago Landmarks, accessed January 27, 2012, hcp://webapps.cityofchicago.org/landmarksweb/search/searchdetail.htm?pin=1729200007&formNumber=310107003; City of Chicago, The Commission on Chicago Landmarks, “Historic Survey: Details for building at (1029-‐1179) W CERMAK RD,” Chicago Landmarks, accessed January 27, 2012, hcp://webapps.cityofchicago.org/landmarksweb/search/searchdetail.htm?pin=1729200002&formNumber=310107004; Library of Congress, Prints & Photographs Division, Historic American Engineering Record, “Commonwealth Electric Company, Fisk Street Electrical Genera)ng Sta)on, 1111 West Cermak Avenue, Chicago, Cook County, IL,” 3.80 Library of Congress, Prints & Photographs Division, Historic American Engineering Record, “Commonwealth Elec-‐tric Company, Fisk Street Electrical Genera)ng Sta)on, 1111 West Cermak Avenue, Chicago, Cook County, IL,” 3.81 Wasik, The Merchant of Power: Sam Insull, Thomas Edison, and the Crea%on of the Modern Metropolis, 87.82 Philip Wacley, “Plant at Half Capacity: Edison Fire Es)mate: $2 million,” Chicago Tribune, November 24, 1976, 6.83 Philip Wacley, “Edison Plant Ruins Combed for Clues,” Chicago Tribune, November 23, 1976, 5. 84 Library of Congress, Prints & Photographs Division, Historic American Engineering Record, “Commonwealth Elec-‐tric Company, Fisk Street Electrical Genera)ng Sta)on, 1111 West Cermak Avenue, Chicago, Cook County, IL,” 4.85 Ibid.86 Ibid., 4-‐5.87 McGraw-‐Publishing Company, "The System and Opera)ng Prac)ce of the Commonwealth Edison Company, Chi-‐

cago," Electrical World 51, no. 20 (1908): 1030.88 McGraw-‐Publishing Company, "The System and Opera)ng Prac)ce of the Commonwealth Edison Company, Chi-‐

cago," Electrical World 51, no. 20 (1908): 1030.89 Hodge, “The Commonwealth Edison Company,”144.90 Ibid.91 Ibid.92 McGraw-‐Publishing Company, "The System and Opera)ng Prac)ce of the Commonwealth Edison Company, Chi-‐

cago," Electrical World 51, no. 20 (1908): 1030.93 Frank Koester, Steam-‐Electric Power Plants: A Prac%cal Trea%se on the Design of Central Light and Power Sta%ons and their Economical Construc%on and Opera%on (New York: D. Van Nostrand Company, 1908), 381. 94 Koester, Steam-‐Electric Power Plants: A Prac%cal Trea%se on the Design of Central Light and Power Sta%ons and their Economical Construc%on and Opera%on, 381.

http://webapps.cityofchicago.org/landmarksweb/search/searchdetail.htm?pin=1729200002&formNumber=310107001













95 McGraw-‐Publishing Company, "The System and Opera)ng Prac)ce of the Commonwealth Edison Company, Chi-‐cago," Electrical World 51, no. 20 (1908): 1030.96 Library of Congress, Prints & Photographs Division, Historic American Engineering Record, “Commonwealth Elec-‐tric Company, Fisk Street Electrical Genera)ng Sta)on, 1111 West Cermak Avenue, Chicago, Cook County, IL,” 4.97 City of Chicago, The Commission on Chicago Landmarks, “Historic Survey: Details for building at (1029-‐1179) W CERMAK RD,” Chicago Landmarks, accessed January 27, 2012, hcp://webapps.cityofchicago.org/landmarksweb/search/searchdetail.htm?pin=1729200007&formNumber=310107003 98 Library of Congress, Prints & Photographs Division, Historic American Engineering Record, “Commonwealth Elec-‐tric Company, Fisk Street Electrical Genera)ng Sta)on, 1111 West Cermak Avenue, Chicago, Cook County, IL,” 4.99 Ibid., 5.100 Illinois Environmental Protec)on Agency, In The Macer of Midwest Genera)on, LLC Fisk Genera)ng Sta)on and Crawford Genera)on Sta)on: Order Responding to Pe))oners Request that the Administrator Object to Issuance of a State Opera)ng Permit. Pe))on number V-‐2005-‐1, CAAPP No. 95090081 and 95090076, March 25, 2005, 1. hcp://yosemite.epa.gov/r5/r5ard.nsf/8a853ab744d510c68625745800533fd5/4da3fdd18eece3a8862574c8006fd26b/$file/order.midwestgen.fiskcrawford.pdf101 Ci)zens Against Ruining the Environment, The Environmental Law and Policy Center, Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., Respiratory Health Associa)on of Metropolitan Chicago, Sierra Club v. Midwest Genera)on. No. 09-‐cv-‐05277, (N.D. IL May, 14, 2010), 24.102 Ben Meyerson, “Powering Forward: What Happens Amer Pilsen's Fisk Power Plant Unplugs in December,” Chi-‐

cago Journal, March 14, 2012. hcp://www.chicagojournal.com/News/03-‐14-‐2012/Powering_forward103 Library of Congress, Prints & Photographs Division, Historic American Engineering Record, “Commonwealth Electric Company, Fisk Street Electrical Genera)ng Sta)on, 1111 West Cermak Avenue, Chicago, Cook County, IL,” 3.104 “Cleaning out the coal-‐fired clunkers,” Chicago Tribune, June 06, 2011, hcp://ar)cles.chicagotribune.com/2011-‐06-‐06/news/ct-‐edit-‐coal-‐20110606_1_fisk-‐and-‐crawford-‐state-‐line-‐power-‐sta)on-‐midwest-‐genera)on; Pilsen Environmental Rights and Reform Organiza)on (PERRO),“Chicago’s Coal Plants to Re)re: Clean Power Coali)on, City of Chicago and Midwest Genera)on Sign Historic Agreement,” PERRO Press Release, February 21, 2012.105 Michael Hawthorne ,“2 Coal-‐Burning Plants to Power Down Early.” Chicago Tribune, March 1, 2012, hcp://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-‐met-‐coal-‐plant-‐shutdowns-‐20120301,0,4861271.story106 City of Chicago, Office of the Mayor, “Mayor Emanuel Announces Agreement With Midwest Genera)on to Re)re Two Coal-‐fired Power Plants in Chicago,” City of Chicago, February 29, 2012. hcp://www.fiskandcrawford.com/assets/content/pdf/MWGEN_FiskCrawfordRe)rement.pdf.107 Ibid.108 “Emanuel says coal-‐plant sites will be redeveloped,” 13 WREX, WorldNow, March 8, 2012,hcp://www.wrex.com/story/17114159/emanuel-‐says-‐coal-‐plant-‐sites-‐will-‐be-‐redeveloped; City of Chicago, Office of the Mayor, “Mayor Emanuel Announces Agreement With Midwest Genera)on to Re)re Two Coal-‐fired Power Plants in Chicago,”109 City of Chicago, Mayor's Press Office, “Mayor Emanuel Announces Plan to Develop Economic Development and Job Crea)on Alterna)ves for Fisk and Crawford Power Plants,” City of Chicago, March 8, 2012,hcp://www.cityofchicago.org/city/en/depts/mayor/press_room/press_releases/2012/march_2012/mayor_emanuel_announcesplantodevelopeconomicdevelopmentandjobcre.html110 Ibid.111 Kari Lydersen, “When Coal Plants Shut Down, What Happens Next?” Midwest Energy News, March 20, 2012,

hcp://www.midwestenergynews.com/2012/03/20/when-‐coal-‐plants-‐shut-‐down-‐what-‐happens-‐next/





http://yosemite.epa.gov/r5/r5ard.nsf/8a853ab744d510c68625745800533fd5/4da3fdd18eece3a8862574c8006fd26b/$file/order.midwestgen.fiskcrawford.pdf




http://www.chicagojournal.com/News/03-14-2012/Powering_forward

http://www.chicagojournal.com/News/03-14-2012/Powering_forward

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2011-06-06/news/ct-edit-coal-20110606_1_fisk-and-crawford-state-line-power-station-midwest-generation




http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-met-coal-plant-shutdowns-20120301,0,4861271.story


http://www.fiskandcrawford.com/assets/content/pdf/MWGEN_FiskCrawfordRetirement.pdf




http://www.wrex.com/story/17114159/emanuel-says-coal-plant-sites-will-be-redeveloped


http://www.cityofchicago.org/city/en/depts/mayor/press_room/press_releases/2012/march_2012/mayor_emanuel_announcesplantodevelopeconomicdevelopmentandjobcre.html




http://www.midwestenergynews.com/2012/03/20/when-coal-plants-shut-down-what-happens-next/



112 Alejandro Escalona, “Amer Pilsen, Licle Village plants close, will lomy ambi)ons mesh?” Chicago Sun-‐Times,

April 10, 2012.

hcp://www.sun)mes.com/news/escalona/11124939-‐452/amer-‐pilsen-‐licle-‐village-‐plants-‐close-‐will-‐lomy-‐ambi)ons

-‐mesh.html113 U.S. Securi)es and Exchange Commissions, Form 10-‐K: Annual Report Pursuant to Sec%on 13 of 15(d) of the Se-‐curi%es Exchange Act of 1934 for the Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 2006 for Midwest Genera%on, LLC. Commis-‐sion File Number 333-‐59348 (Washington D.C.: February 28, 2007), 5. 114 Midwest Genera)on, “Fisk Sta)on Fact Sheet,” Edison Interna)onal, January 2005, www.edison.com/files/2005_factsheet_fisk.pdf115 U.S. Securi)es and Exchange Commissions, 5.116 Midwest Genera)on, “Fisk Sta)on Fact Sheet.”117 Midwest Genera)on,“Financial Benefits to the Community,” Fisk & Crawford Fact Sheets, September 7, 2011, hcp://www.fiskandcrawford.com/assets/content/pdf/MWG_FiskCrawford_FinancialBenefits.pdf118 Midwest Genera)on, “Fisk Sta)on Fact Sheet.”119 Midwest Genera)on,“Financial Benefits to the Community.”

http://www.suntimes.com/news/escalona/11124939-452/after-pilsen-little-village-plants-close-will-lofty-ambitions-mesh.html




http://www.edison.com/files/2005_factsheet_fisk.pdf


http://www.fiskandcrawford.com/assets/content/pdf/MWG_FiskCrawford_FinancialBenefits.pdf




VI. Analyzing The Adap3ve Reuse Poten3al Of Chicago’s Fisk Genera3ng Sta3on

As examined in Chapter V, Fisk Sta)on was a daring innova)on for its day. In 1903, it

stood as the the largest steam genera)ng plant in the world and housed the first 5 MW steam

turbine. Fisk Sta)on largely influenced Chicago Edison’s growth, the expansion of electricity in

Chicago, and the moderniza)on of the electric industry.

Today, of Chicago’s earliest central power sta)ons, Fisk Sta)on is one of the only to sur-‐

vive. Because the power plant is a rare example of its kind, as it symbolizes both the growth of

electricity and turbine technology in Chicago and the United States, it is a historic site worth

preserving. A number of Fisk Sta)on’s buildings, which feature ornate, classical revival architec-‐

ture, remain on the site today. The demoli)on of Fisk Sta)on would cause the loss of many

magnificent, irreplaceable buildings and eliminate the opportunity to preserve the site’s rich

history. Architecturally dis)nct features, such as the red brick, large arched windows, and white

glazed )les, along with site’s immaterial value cannot be replaced once demolished. What once

stood as the largest steam genera)ng plant in the world should be transformed into a valuable

community space to be used by future genera)ons.

Given Fisk Sta)on is to close by the end of 2012, it is impera)ve that historic preserva-‐

)on and adap)ve reuse are considered for the site’s redevelopment. Although the power plant

will no longer serve its original purpose, the buildings can be modified to house new func)ons.

Fisk Sta)on’s unique architecture, historic significance, close proximity to downtown Chicago,

and waterfront access deem the site an ideal candidate for redevelopment and encourage pro-‐

ject feasibility. Although the power plant faces a number of barriers related to site ownership,

short )meframe un)l it is re)red, remedia)on, and redevelopment costs, repurposing Fisk Sta-‐

)on’s historic buildings offers a unique opportunity to strengthen the site’s underlying value as

well as to encourage addi)onal social, economic, and environmental growth in Pilsen.

The prospects for the adap)ve reuse of Fisk Sta)on are yet to be fully explored, but may

be magnificent in themselves. As the site prepares to close by the end of 2012, the City of Chi-‐

cago, poten)al developers, community organiza)ons, and Pilsen residents should iden)fy the


range of possibili)es for Fisk Sta)on, including preserva)on, and take appropriate steps in mak-‐

ing this site a memorable and beneficial resource for the future.

This chapter examines the major considera)ons related to the adap)ve reuse of Fisk

Sta)on. The process for lis)ng the site as a historic landmark, future remedia)on issues, zoning

restric)ons, adjacent land uses, poten)al funding mechanisms, and a neighborhood analysis of

Pilsen will be discussed in order to iden)fy the site-‐specific redevelopment barriers and oppor-‐

tuni)es. In addi)on, these factors will be vital for iden)fying feasible future reuse op)ons,

which will be explored in Chapter VII.

Poten3al for Historic Designa3on

Due to its dis)nct architecture and historic value, Fisk Sta)on may be eligible for either

lis)ng under the Na)onal Register of Historic Places or Chicago Landmark status. Historic desig-‐

na)on under either of these preserva)on programs may be vital in protec)ng Fisk Sta)on’s

buildings from demoli)on as well as to fund rehabilita)on projects.

Na3onal Register of Historic Places

As noted in the sec)on )tled “Historic Designa)on” in Chapter II, proper)es with historic

significance site may be eligible for the Na)onal Register of Historic Places. Designa)on under

the Na)onal Register is important for historic proper)es as it legally protects these sites from

demoli)on or harmful renova)ons and provides access to a number of financial incen)ves for

rehabilita)on. See Chapter II, “Historic Designa)on,” for more detailed informa)on on the des-‐

igna)on process and federal support for the Na)onal Register program.

Due to the site’s significance in history, architecture, and engineering, Fisk Sta)on’s vari-‐

ous buildings may qualify for the Na)onal Register lis)ng. To be eligible, a property must first

meet one of the following criteria for evalua)on:

• An event, a series of events or ac)vi)es, or pacerns of an area's development (Crite-‐rion A);

• Associa)on with the life of an important person (Criterion B);

• A building form, architectural style, engineering technique, or ar)s)c values, based on a stage of physical development, or the use of a material or method of construc-‐)on that shaped the historic iden)ty of an area (Criterion C); or


• A research topic; the property has informa)onal value that yields important infor-‐ma)on on prehistory or history (Criterion D).1

First, Fisk Sta)on may qualify for the Na)onal Register as the events that occurred at the

site have contributed to history on the local and na)onal level (Criterion A). Fisk Sta)on stands

as a relic of the electric industry’s history within Chicago, Illinois, and even the United States.

The Original Powerhouse once held the largest steam turbine system in the world, which ul)-‐

mately triggered a revolu)on in turbine technology, the growth of Chicago’s electricity system,

and Chicago Edison’s success. Even during Fisk Sta)on’s first decade of opera)ons, the site was

deemed a monument in engineering, acrac)ng thousands of visitors from across the world. Al-‐

though the original 5 MW turbine is no longer located in the Original Powerhouse, the unit was

designated a na)onal engineering landmark by the American Society of Mechanical Engineers in

1975.2 The other buildings onsite that helped the power plant operate also hold preserva)on

value as they were a vital part of the electric industry’s history. The events that occurred at Fisk

Sta)on in the early twen)eth century have made a significant contribu)on to the subsequent

development in engineering technology and electricity.

Second, Fisk Sta)on is associated with the life and decisions of an important person in

history whose ac)vi)es are proven important (Criterion B). The 5 MW turbine housed at Fisk

Sta)on would not have been possible with out Samuel Insull, president of Chicago Edison.

Against his colleagues’ advice, Insull demanded General Electric build the largest, most energy

efficient steam turbine generator for its day. His daring decisions and vision for expanding Chi-‐

cago’s electricity service pushed turbine technology and the electric industry forward. Although

the site’s success was made possible by countless people, Fisk Sta)on also illustrates Insull’s im-‐

portant achievements.

Finally, Fisk Genera)ng Sta)on may meet the Na)onal Register criteria as the various

proper)es possesses a dis)nct architectural style (Criterion C). As seen in site photographs and

through historic descrip)ons, most of the buildings at Fisk Sta)on showcase classical revival ar-‐

chitecture, typically rare in other powerhouses. These ornate characteris)cs occur both in the

buildings’ exterior and interior features, which deem each structure beau)ful and unique.

Unfortunately, because Fisk Sta)on has operated since 1903, the site has been repeat-‐

edly altered and undergone mul)ple renova)ons. The 1959 addi)on to the Original Power-‐

house has drama)cally changed the ini)al structure, even though a large por)on of the struc-‐


ture is s)ll intact. In addi)on, a fire in 1976 caused extensive damage to the site to the southern

por)on of the 1959 turbine-‐generator addi)on and the Original Powerhouse. However, the full

extent of damage remains unclear.

Typically, reconstructed historic buildings are not eligible for the Na)onal Register, al-‐

though some excep)ons exist. The historic integrity, or the original features of a property that

convey its significance, many )mes is compromised amer extensive renova)ons.3 In terms of as-‐

sessing the integrity of proper)es, the ul)mate ques)on is whether the property has retained

the iden)ty for which it is significant. Building altera)ons may conflict with Na)onal Register

eligibility in historic integrity based on aspects such as loca)on, design, sejng, materials,

workmanship, feeling, and associa)on.4 Specifically, Fisk Sta)on’s various renova)ons may con-‐

tradict the following requirements in historic integrity, cited in the “Criteria for Evalua)on” by

the Na)onal Park Service:

• Design: Design is the combina)on of elements that create the form, plan, space, struc-‐ture, and style of a property. It results from conscious decisions made during the original concep)on and planning of a property (or its significant altera)on) and applies to ac)vi-‐)es as diverse as community planning, engineering, architecture, and landscape archi-‐tecture. Design includes such elements as organiza)on of space, propor)on, scale, tech-‐nology, ornamenta)on, and materials.

A property's design reflects historic func)ons and technologies as well as aesthe)cs. It includes such considera)ons as the structural system; massing; arrangement of spaces; pacern of fenestra)on; textures and colors of surface materials; type, amount, and style of ornamental detailing; and arrangement and type of plan)ngs in a designed land-‐scape....

• Materials: Materials are the physical elements that were combined or deposited during a par)cular period of )me and in a par)cular pacern or configura)on to form a historic property. The choice and combina)on of materials reveal the preferences of those who created the property and indicate the availability of par)cular types of materials and technologies. Indigenous materials are omen the focus of regional building tradi)ons and thereby help define an area's sense of )me and place.

A property must retain the key exterior materials da)ng from the period of its historic significance. If the property has been rehabilitated, the historic materials and significant features must have been preserved....a property whose historic features and materials have been lost and then reconstructed is usually not eligible...

• Workmanship: Workmanship is the physical evidence of the crams of a par)cular culture or people during any given period in history or prehistory. It is the evidence of ar)sans' labor and skill in construc)ng or altering a building, structure, object, or site. Workman-‐ship can apply to the property as a whole or to its individual components. It can be ex-‐


pressed in vernacular methods of construc)on and plain finishes or in highly sophis)-‐cated configura)ons and ornamental detailing. It can be based on common tradi)ons or innova)ve period techniques.

Workmanship is important because it can furnish evidence of the technology of a cram, illustrate the aesthe)c principles of a historic or prehistoric period, and reveal individual, local, regional, or na)onal applica)ons of both technological prac)ces and aesthe)c principles. Examples of workmanship in historic buildings include tooling, carving, paint-‐ing, graining, turning, and joinery.

• Feeling: Feeling is a property's expression of the aesthe)c or historic sense of a par)cu-‐lar period of )me. It results from the presence of physical features that, taken together, convey the property's historic character. For example, a rural historic district retaining original design, materials, workmanship, and sejng will relate the feeling of agricultural life in the 19th century.

• Associa%on: Associa)on is the direct link between an important historic event or person and a historic property. A property retains associa)on if it is the place where the event or ac)vity occurred and is sufficiently intact to convey that rela)onship to an observer. Like feeling, associa)on requires the presence of physical features that convey a prop-‐erty's historic character. For example, a Revolu)onary War baclefield whose natural and manmade elements have remained intact since the 18th century will retain its quality of associa)on with the bacle. Because feeling and associa)on depend on individual per-‐cep)ons, their reten)on alone is never sufficient to support eligibility of a property for the Na)onal Register.5

In terms of the Na)onal Register’s criteria regarding integrity, altera)ons in the original

design, sejng, materials, workmanship, feeling, and associa)on may present obstacles for Fisk

Sta)on’s historic designa)on. The 1959 turbine-‐generator room addi)on to the Original Power-‐

house is the most prominent example of a large building renova)on onsite. It is unfortunate

that the Original Powerhouse, which contained the 5 MW turbines and thus largely represents

the site’s historic significance, has been the most altered. In addi)on, the original 5 MW turbine

was removed from the building and now located in New York at General Electric’s headquarters.

Its historic integrity is the most compromised in terms of design, materials, workmanship, feel-‐

ing, and associa)on.

Even though the original turbines, smokestacks, and some interior features have been

removed, a great deal of historic interior and exterior features remain onsite. In order to deter-‐

mine if the historic integrity of Switch House No. 1 and 2, the Administra)ve Building, the Main-‐

tenance Building, and the Frequency Changer House has been weakened, the site will need to


be further evaluated. While the exteriors of some of buildings show signs of visible deteriora-‐

)on, overall, it seems as though these buildings have undergone less altera)ons.

While the Na)onal Park Service’s “Criteria for Evalua)on” states, “It is not necessary for

a property to retain all its historic physical features or characteris)cs,” the property must main-‐

tain “the essen)al physical features that enable it to convey its historic iden)ty.”6 Depending on

the reasons for designa)ng a site within the Na)onal Register, different levels of integrity are

required. For example, if a property is listed for its “building form, architectural style, engineer-‐

ing technique, or ar)s)c values...(Criterion C),” the property “must retain most of the physical

features that cons)tute that style or technique.”7 However:

A property that has lost some historic materials or details can be eligible if it retains the majority of the features that illustrate its style in terms of the massing, spa)al rela)on-‐ships, propor)on, pacern of windows and doors, texture of materials, and ornamenta-‐)on. The property is not eligible, however, if it retains some basic features conveying massing but has lost the majority of the features that once characterized its style.8

The Na)onal Register “Criteria for Evalua)on” also considers designa)on based on a compari-‐

son of similar proper)es and for rare examples of a property type.9

Although the discussed condi)ons and site changes at Fisk Sta)on conflict with the Na-‐

)onal Register criteria, the power plant may s)ll be eligible for historic designa)on due to a

number of excep)ons. Because Fisk Sta)on contains more than one historic building, it is also

possible that only selected eligible buildings that have not been significantly altered could be

listed in the Na)onal Register. However, each historic building, apart from the 1959 turbine-‐

generator room, should be collec)vely preserved as they all once contributed to the site’s op-‐

era)ons and significance. Many of the historic buildings s)ll possess their essen)al physical fea-‐

tures and dis)nct architectural quali)es that convey their significance within the en)re power

plant.

Chicago Landmark Status

Fisk Sta)on’s historic buildings may also be eligible for city-‐designated historic status. In

Chicago, a property can be officially designated as a Chicago Landmark by the City Council. To be

become a Chicago Landmark, a property is be considered if it meets the criteria for designa)on

by represen)ng value as a part of the city, state, or na)onal heritage, a significant historic event,


significant person, exemplary architecture, work of significant architect or designer, dis)nc)ve

theme, or unique or dis)nc)ve visual feature.10 In addi)on, the proposed landmark must con-‐

tain preserved integrity in which the original characteris)cs that express the property’s signifi-‐

cance remain. Similar to state and federal historic designa)on programs, the Chicago Landmarks

program is vital in that it provides legal protec)on for preserva)on and poten)ally financial aid

for rehabilita)on.

The Commission on Chicago Landmarks is responsible for the recommenda)on of sites

for preserva)on and reviewing the proposed alterna)on, demoli)on, or new construc)on of

designated proper)es. In general, the Chicago Landmark Designa)on Process includes:

1. Preliminary Summary of Informa)on: The Commission on Chicago Landmarks staff re-‐searches significances of a site, and then submits a report to the Commission for review.

2. Preliminary Recommenda)on: The Commission votes on whether they will consider the proposed designa)on. If the Commission votes to proceed, the Commission gains the authority to review building permits.

3. Report from the Department of Housing and Economic Development: The report states how the proposed landmark designa)on may affect neighborhood plans, the Compre-‐hensive Plan of the City of Chicago, or any other policies. In addi)on, the report includes the Commissioner’s recommenda)ons in terms of relevant planning considera)ons and regarding approval, rejec)on, or modifica)on of the proposed designa)on.

4. The Commission Requests Owner Consent: Owner consent is advisory, but not required, for designa)on except for houses of worship. If the property owner does not consent, a public hearing is held.

5. Public Hearing: A public hearing provides the opportunity for people to tes)fy or present evidence to assist the Commission in its considera)on for a proposed landmark. Any person, organiza)on, or other legal en)ty whose use or enjoyment of the proposed landmark may be injured by designa)on or the approval or disapproval of a proposed altera)on, construc)on, reconstruc)on, erec)on, demoli)on, or reloca)on of a pro-‐posed or designated landmark may become a party to a permit applica)on proceeding.

6. Final Commission Recommenda)on: Amer reviewing the en)re record, the Commission votes whether to recommend the proposed landmark designa)on to the City Council.

7. Hearing by City Council’s Commicee on Zoning, Landmarks and Building Standards: The Commission’s recommenda)on is sent to the City Council’s Commicee on Zoning, Landmarks and Building Standards, which votes on whether to recommend the designa-‐)on to the full City Council.


8. Vote on Designa)on by City Council: The designa)on the proposed Chicago Landmark becomes a legisla)ve act of the City Council.11

Currently, some of Fisk Sta)on’s historic buildings have a reasonable chance to be pre-‐

served for their historic significance and to be designated as a Chicago Landmark. The Original

Powerhouse as well as Switch House No. 1 and 2 are currently classified as “orange” rated build-‐

ings under the City of Chicago’s Demoli)on-‐Delay Ordinance, indica)ng they possess poten)ally

significant architectural or historical features.12 The Demoli)on-‐Delay Ordinance may aid the

preserva)on of these buildings as it is intended “to ensure that no important historic resource

can be demolished without considera)on as to whether it should and can be preserved.”13

According to the City of Chicago, the ordinance, “establishes a hold of up to 90 days in

the issuance of any demoli)on permit for certain historic buildings in order that the Department

of Housing and Economic Development can explore op)ons, as appropriate, to preserve the

building, including but not limited to landmark designa)on.”14 The delay period begins when

the demoli)on permit is submiced to the Historic Preserva)on Division of the Department of

Housing and Economic Development. This period can also be extended past 90 days if mutual

agreement with the applicant is present.

However, the Demoli)on-‐Delay Ordinance only provides limited preserva)on protec)on

against the demoli)on of Fisk Sta)on’s historic buildings. Further measures should be taken to

ensure that the site’s redevelopment plans include preserva)on. In addi)on, only three build-‐

ings have “orange” rated classifica)ons, which neglects the historic and architectural signifi-‐

cance of the Administra)on Building, the Maintenance Shop, and the Frequency Changer

House. Demoli)on-‐Delay Ordinance should be extended to all buildings onsite to increase the

possibility of preserving the en)re site.

Financial Incen3ves for Rehabilita3on

Similar to the Na)onal Register, a property listed as a Chicago Landmark can qualify for a

number of funding incen)ves. For example, the rehabilita)on of a building in a commercial or

industrial use may be qualified for Class-‐L Property Tax Incen)ves, which reduces the property

tax rate for 12 years if the building upholds to the Cook County’s land assessment requirements

and the project includes a minimum investment of 50% of the building’s assessed value.15

Commercial, industrial, hotel, or office buildings can also qualify for the Facade Easement Do-‐


na)on, the Facade Rebate Program, or a Permit Fee Waiver for City Building Permits.16 Other

buildings may qualify for financial aid through Enterprise Zone Programs, the Vintage Homes

Program, and Retail Chicago Business Assistance programs. Finally, landmark status at the city-‐

level in Chicago can also provide building or zoning code excep)ons and technical assistance

from city preserva)on specialists.17

Addi)onal funding for the rehabilita)on of a historic property is available through the

state preserva)on offices. The Illinois state preserva)on office, Illinois Historic Preserva)on

Agency, provide other types of financial aid. For example, historic proper)es owned by non-‐

profit organiza)ons or public en))es can qualify for the Illinois Heritage Grant Program, which is

matches the funds used in rehabilita)on.18

The Poli3cal Process Behind Historic Designa3on

Acaining designa)on status can prove to be difficult as it requires strong poli)cal back-‐

ing. In the ar)cle “Boundaries of Power: Poli)cs of Urban Preserva)on in Two Chicago Neigh-‐

borhoods,” author Yue Zhang comments on the historic designa)on process in Pilsen. Zhang

notes that historic designa)on status in Chicago is almost impossible without poli)cal support.

While demographics, economics, and the physical condi)ons of communi)es influence urban

preserva)on, “none of them is a determinant factor for landmark designa)on.”19 Instead, urban

poli)cs play a large role in urban preserva)on as it dictates the policy process.

Although the final designa)on decision for the Na)onal Register of Historic Places is

made at the federal level, local poli)cal support, par)cularly by aldermen, is essen)al. In addi-‐

)on, Chicago’s Historic Preserva)on Division and the Commission on Chicago Landmarks play

central roles in the designa)on policy process, but Chicago’s aldermen maintain substan)al

power over zoning and redevelopment. Alderman have veto power over preserva)on efforts in

their wards and without their support, city staff will not propose or pass certain buildings for

landmark status.20 Zhang writes:

it seems aldermen do not par)cipate in the process of urban preserva)on un)l the final City Council vote; however, they have invisible agenda-‐sejng power to influence the landmark designa)on from the very beginning. Preserva)on ini)a)ves opposed by the aldermen do not have the chance to enter the formal policy process, whereas those supported by the aldermen are endorsed by the (Commission on Chicago Landmarks). In


other words, it is the preference of the local alderman that determines the administra-‐)ve decision on landmark designa)on outside the formal decision-‐making process.21

Without strong support by Alderman Danny Solis, Pilsen may have not been listed as a historic

district on the Na)onal Register of Historic Places.

Remedia3on

Typically, industrial or historic sites require remedia)on efforts, which can entail remov-‐

ing industrial equipment, underground storage tanks, or hazardous materials, such as asbestos

or lead paint.22 Fisk Sta)on will undoubtedly require remedia)on as the century of coal opera-‐

)ons and adjacent industrial ac)vi)es have polluted the property. A more detailed and compre-‐

hensive site analysis, involving soil, water, and building tests, needs to be conducted in order to

determine the full extent and costs for cleaning and restoring the site.

In order to prepare Fisk Sta)on’s property and buildings for an adap)ve reuse project,

the industrial equipment will need to be dismantled and removed. Structures on site include a

water treatment system, eight peaker plants, conveyor belts, an “auxiliary boiler, coal handling

and processing units, turbines fired with diesel and natural gas, and a gasoline storage tank.”23

The water in the Chicago River and soil should also be tested to ensure proper remedia-‐

)on. Past opera)ons and a history of industrial pollu)on in the area has undoubtedly lem the

site contaminated. According to Midwest Genera)on, today, “Fisk has no ground storage and

receives its coal on a ‘just in )me’ basis.”24 However, while coal is not currently stored on site,

the site’s abundant land was once used to hold coal for Fisk Sta)on’s power genera)on needs,

which may have polluted soil and water.25

Fisk Sta)on is also located on the South Branch of the Chicago River, which has been his-‐

torically polluted from waste, sewage, and heavy industrial ac)vi)es.26 Fisk Sta)on has previ-‐

ously been cited for dumping debris in the Chicago River. For example, in 1968, Commonwealth

Edison received a )cket by the Chicago Sanitary District and was required to remove and clean

some debris deposited in the river.27 Although the river was cleaned, some pollu)ng remnants

from Fisk Sta)on’s past most likely remain.


Site contamina)on may be sizable due to the lack of strict regula)ons in the early twen-‐

)eth century on pollu)on controls and industrial ac)vi)es. Fisk Sta)on most likely has cumula-‐

)ve levels of contamina)on due to over a century of coal-‐related opera)ons and emissions as

well as from other adjacent industrial opera)ons near the site. In addi)on to soil and water

hazards, some of the original historic buildings, such as the Administra)on Building and Switch

House No. 1, will need to be remediated due to asbestos. Lead paint or other hazardous sub-‐

stances may also be present.

Remedia)on of Fisk Sta)on’s en)re property could be difficult due to the haphazard

ownership of the site by both Midwest Genera)on and ComEd. Assuming the property will be

sold before remedia)on efforts ensue, both companies must be involved in the selling process.

However, the removal of hazardous contaminants and equipment on site provides the chance to

enhance the environment, which was once plagued by pollu)on. Cleaned and restored building

and land uses may provided new spaces for the community to benefit from.

Zoning

Fisk Sta)on is currently zoned within a Planned Manufacturing District (PMD), a special

zoning classifica)on that seeks to preserve exis)ng manufacturing areas and foster the city’s

industrial base.28 Under the PMD classifica)on, only certain land uses compa)ble with industrial

growth are permiced. For example, no residen)al uses are allowed. The site is specifically lo-‐

cated in PMD 11 Subdistrict A, which has its own set of allowed land use regula)ons. Please see

Appendix I for the specific uses allowed at Fisk Sta)on.

In general, the decision to amend exis)ng zoning is to be done in the “best interests of

the public health, safety and general welfare, while also recognizing the rights of individual

property owners.”29 Proposed zoning changes should be consistent with adopted area plans and

is appropriate based on changes in the area’s character “due to public facility capacity, other

rezonings, or growth and development trends.”30 The decision considers if the proposed

changes will be compa)ble with the area’s surrounding zoning, other uses, density, and building

scale as well as if public infrastructure facili)es and city services will be adequate to serve the

proposed development at the )me of occupancy.


While the permiced and prohibited uses are typically strict within PMDs, special uses

may be allowed amer being reviewed and approved by the Zoning Board of Appeals. According

to the Chicago Zoning Ordinance and Land Use Ordinance, a proposed new special use for a

PMD must meet the following criteria:

1. complies with all applicable standards of the Zoning Ordinance;

2. is in the interest of the public convenience and will not have a significant adverse impact on the general welfare of the neighborhood or community;

3. is compa)ble with the character of the surrounding area in terms of site planning and building scale and project design;

4. is compa)ble with the character of the surrounding area in terms of opera)ng charac-‐teris)cs, such as hours of opera)on, outdoor ligh)ng, noise, and traffic genera)on; and

5. is designed to promote pedestrian safety and comfort.31

The Zoning Board of Appeals and City Council must determine if the rezoning of property will

nega)vely affect the viability of the industrial corridor. Thus, PMD zoning changes considers the

district’s size, the number of exis)ng firms and employees, public and private investments, po-‐

ten)al to support addi)onal industrial uses and increased manufacturing employment, propor-‐

)on of land currently devoted to industrial uses and non-‐manufacturing uses, and the area’s

importance to the city as an industrial district.32

The process to change PMD or industrial corridor zoning first includes filing an applica-‐

)on with the Zoning Administrator, who then reviews and forwards a recommenda)on to the

City Council Commicee on Zoning.33 Amerwards, a hearing is held by the by the City Council

Commicee on Zoning, where further recommenda)ons are made. The final rezoning decision is

determined by a vote by the City Council.

In addi)on to PMD zoning, Fisk Sta)on is also located within the Pilsen Industrial Corri-‐

dor. Similar to PMD designa)on, Chicago industrial corridor districts are intended to promote

industrial development, typically rezoning should be avoided.34 However, in some cases rezon-‐

ing may be appropriate. In addi)on to the tradi)onal rezoning process described above, addi-‐

)onal approval is needed by the Chicago Plan Commission. Before a hearing is held by the City

Council Commicee on Zoning, the Plan Commission must also hold a hearing to make recom-‐

menda)ons on the proposed changes.35 In general, an industrial corridor property can be re-‐

zoned if:


1. the physical characteris)cs of the site make it intrinsically unsuitable for industrial de-‐velopment. Physical constraints include irregular site configura)on, access barriers and other site-‐specific issues that, taken together, limit development; or substan)al change in the character of the immediately surrounding area makes industrial redevelopment of the site imprac)cal. Such change would be indicated by adopted plans, pacern of rezon-‐ing or the establishment of significant adjoining non-‐industrial uses; or the proposed non-‐industrial development fills an unmet need for a neighborhood service or public fa-‐cility; and

2. the proposed non-‐industrial development will not result in burdensome zoning or other regulatory restric)ons on neighboring industries; and

3. traffic to be generated by the development will not exceed exis)ng street capacity (or otherwise be accommodated through specific measures to be taken by the applicant).36

Fisk Sta)on’s redevelopment must consider these land use restric)ons. The site’s current

designa)on as a PMD may prohibit a variety of desired future uses, such as residen)al devel-‐

opment, zoning can poten)ally be changed with City Council approval if the proposed rezoning

does not adversely affect the con)nued industrial viability of the PMD or the industrial outlined

in the Chicago Zoning Ordinance and Land Use Ordinance.37 Most industrial uses are allowed

onsite, which is ideal for housing new green manufacturing facili)es that generate revenue and

jobs. Given that Fisk Sta)on’s PMD and industrial corridor zoning are intended to retain manu-‐

facturing within the city, environmentally-‐friendly industrial land uses should be considered. In

addi)on to its zoning, because Fisk Sta)on has excellent transporta)on access to accommodate

industrial businesses and is surrounded by other manufacturing facili)es, the preserva)on of

some industrial ac)vity would be prac)cal.

But, given Fisk Sta)on’s history of pollu)on, which has harmed public health, the site’s

new land uses should feature cleaner opera)ons that promote community wellness. Special use

approval could be granted for parks and recrea)on, urban farms, entertainment venues, medi-‐

cal services, or other services that would benefit Pilsen residents. If manufacturing opera)ons

are deemed necessary, it is possible that only a por)on of Fisk Sta)on’s property could be re-‐

zoned. This scenario could combine new industrial uses with other services or open space to

most benefit the community.


Adjacent Land Uses

Although Fisk Sta)on is zoned within PMD 11 and located near industrial proper)es, the

site is surrounded by a variety of adjacent land uses to the north of Cermak Road. The intended

new land uses for the site should be compa)ble with the adjacent community and exis)ng land

uses. Currently, a mix of parks, residen)al, commercial, business, and manufacturing parcels

surround the Fisk site. Based on the surrounding ameni)es, Fisk Sta)on’s “walk score” is calcu-‐

lated at 85 out of 100, meaning the site is “very walkable” and most errands can be accom-‐

plished on foot.38 Walkable ameni)es include a number of restaurants, coffee shops, grocery

stores, small stores, schools, parks, book stores, bars, and banks.

In terms of the public transporta)on assessment, Fisk Sta)on’s has a good transit score,

ra)ng 62 out of 100, with “many nearby public transporta)on op)ons.”39 In terms of buses, Bus

Route 21 is the closest, stopping .05 miles away from Fisk Sta)on at Cermak Road and Carpen-‐

ter Street. In addi)on, Bus Route 60, Route 8, Route 9, Route 18 are located within a mile. Trains

are also located within a mile of the site and include the CTA Pink Line 18th Street Sta)on, the

CTA Orange Line Halsted Sta)on, and the Metra Burlington Norther Santa Fe (BNSF) Halsted

Sta)on. Expressways increase accessibility to the site, with the Dan Ryan Expressway (I-‐90, I-‐94)

and the Stevenson Expressway (I-‐55) nearby.

Fisk’s Sta)on’s close proximity and access to downtown, access to numerous roads, rail

and bus transporta)on routes, and waterfront access on the South Branch of the Chicago River

make the site an acrac)ve loca)on for redevelopment.

In addi)on, two Planned Development (PD) parcels are located along the Chicago River

to the east of Fisk Sta)on. The PD zoning classifica)on is intended to:

• ensure adequate public review of major development proposals;

• encourage unified planning and development;

• promote economically beneficial development pacerns that are compa)ble with the character of exis)ng neighborhoods;

• ensure a level of ameni)es appropriate to the nature and scale of the project;

• allow flexibility in applica)on of selected use, bulk, and development standards in order to promote crea)ve building design and high-‐quality urban design; and

• encourage protec)on and conserva)on of natural resources.40


While the PD zoning classifica)on includes a variety of regula)ons, land adjacent to waterways

must meet specific development criteria to enhance and protect the “beauty, amenity, eco-‐

nomic poten)al, recrea)on value and environmental quality of Chicago’s waterways.”41 A few of

the requirements for PD waterfront parcels include providing public paths, landscaping, a set-‐

back from the water while complying with goals set forth in the city’s waterway design guide-‐

lines.

Poten3al Funding Mechanisms

In order to offset remedia)on and renova)on costs, the redevelopment and rehabilita-‐

)on of Fisk Genera)ng Sta)on’s historic structures can financed through a variety of sources. As

men)oned in Chapter II, “Funding Mechanisms,” adap)ve reuse projects similar to Fisk Sta)on

have u)lized:

1. Brownfield and Remedia)on Grants administered by the U.S. Environmental Protec)on Agency.

2. The Economic Development Assistance Program administered by the Economic Devel-‐opment Administra)on

3. Community Development Block Grants administered by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

4. Historical Preserva)on Tax Credits and grants administered by the Na)onal Park Service or from State Historic Preserva)on Offices, if listed on the Na)onal Register for Historic Places.

5. New Markets Tax Credits.

6. Private investments and contribu)ons.

7. Other public or private grants.

If Fisk was designated a Chicago Landmark, the site may qualify for the building permit

waiver, facade rebate program, facade easement dona)on, or Class-‐L property tax incen)ves.42

Other financial aid for historic designa)on may be provided by the Illinois historic preserva)on

office.

Tax-‐increment financing (TIF) should also be considered as a poten)al funding op)on in

Fisk Sta)on’s redevelopment. The site is located within Pilsen’s Industrial TIF Corridor, a 907-‐

acre district intended to preserve manufacturing within Chicago.43 According to the City of Chi-‐


cago, funds within the 907-‐acre district “are targeted for the assembly and prepara)on of land

for new construc)on projects, to foster rehabilita)on projects where feasible, and to assist with

private and public investment projects that support local ins)tu)onal uses. Addi)onal priori)es

include improvements to seawalls along the Chicago River and assistance for job training and

readiness programs.”44 Pilsen TIF district funds has been allocated for redevelopment projects

including a Target store, the Chicago Interna)onal Produce Market, Steiner Linen Corpora)on,

Benito Juarez High School, and road and infrastructure improvements.45

Fisk Sta)on is also located in Enterprise Zone 1, a specific area intended to foster and

create employment opportuni)es through incen)ves such as sales tax exemp)on, property tax

reduc)on, finance assistance, real estate tax exemp)on, investment tax credit, state jobs crea-‐

)on credit, machinery and equipment sales tax exemp)on, and u)lity tax exemp)on.46

Fisk Sta)on’s redevelopment could u)lize these discussed financial mechanisms to

minimize costs and reinvest money back into Pilsen. The total project costs will depend on a va-‐

riety of factors such as the extent of environmental contamina)on, the final land and building

uses, or the buildings’ structural issues. The majority of cases involving the successful adap)ve

reuse of coal-‐fired power plants have leveraged a mix of public and private funding sources at

each stage of the redevelopment project. Because recycling power plants can prove to be costly,

these financing tools may help minimize costs and push adap)ve reuse forward.

Pilsen: A Neighborhood Analysis

While Fisk Sta)on itself is a historic site, its surrounding neighborhood, Pilsen, also pos-‐

sesses a notable and vibrant past. Pilsen, located only 3 miles southwest of Chicago’s down-‐

town, is bounded by 16th Street to the north, Western Avenue to the west, and the south

branch of the Chicago River to the east and south. Pilsen has been historically known as a port

of entry for working-‐class immigrants.47 In the late 1800s and early 1900s, Pilsen’s close proxim-‐

ity to industrial factories and affordable housing acracted Polish, Czechoslovakians and Lithua-‐

nians immigrants to the neighborhood.48 The Bohemians transformed Pilsen into a self-‐

sufficient enclave, with a retail strip, churches, and manufacturing district with plen)ful em-‐

ployment opportuni)es all located in the community.49 In addi)on, the Bohemians, many of

which were cramsmen or ar)sans, built ornate European-‐inspired buildings in the area, much of


which has been preserved.50 In the 1950s, the European popula)on began to decrease with the

influx of working-‐class La)no immigrants, primarily of Mexican descent.51 By 1970, Pilsen be-‐

came the first majority La)no neighborhood in Chicago.

Today, Pilsen remains an important cultural center and is one of Chicago’s largest La)no

communi)es. According to 2000 census data, Pilsen s)ll remains a strong working-‐class com-‐

munity, with a median household income of $27,763, more than $10,000 below Chicago’s me-‐

dian income of $38,625.52 At the )me, Pilsen possessed 88.9% Hispanics, with 49.1% of the

popula)on foreign-‐born.53

Historic and Current Land Use

Because Pilsen survived the Great Chicago Fire in 1871, the neighborhood contains a va-‐

riety of historic structures built between the 1850’s and 1920’s.54 Not only does Pilsen contain a

high propor)on of historic buildings, but the community possesses some of the oldest housing

s)ll preserved in the en)re City of Chicago.55 Because many late nineteenth and early twen)eth

century proper)es have been preserved, Pilsen was designated a historic district in the Na)onal

Register of Historic Places in 2006.56

Pilsen’s current land use and development largely reflects historic immigrant seclement

pacerns. According to the registra)on form for Pilsen’s designa)on as a historic district in the

Na)onal Register of Historic Places, the neighborhood possesses several aspects that dis)nguish

it from other immigrant enclaves in Chicago.

First, Pilsen’s ini)al European seclers “enthusias)cally expressed their na)onal iden)ty

in architectural terms, construc)ng many buildings based on the forms and styles of in their

homeland.”57 The Bohemians replicated the “materials, massing, decora)on, and func)ons of

the buildings they knew in Europe” in order to transport their original heritage to Pilsen.58 To-‐

day, many buildings con)nue to feature Baroque and European architectural styles, character-‐

ized by ornate moldings, variegated brickwork, and rus)cated stonework.

Second, the Bohemians “created an environment with an usually high degree of func-‐

)onal eclec)cism.”59 Densely placed ac)vi)es as well as mixed-‐use buildings were designed to

enhance the efficient use of space and create an environment where all immigrants’ basic needs

could be met. Mixed-‐used buildings united various func)ons while industrial ac)vi)es, restau-‐


rants, shops, spaces for social interac)ons, and housing were all placed in close proximity to

each other, typically on the same block. Thus, the Bohemians “created a crazy quilt, mixed-‐use,

urbanism that stands in sharp contrast to the carefully zoned and delimited neighborhoods that

were subsequently added to Chicago in the course of the twen)eth century.”60 Pilsen’s unique

mixed land use and zoning historically encouraged economic and social self-‐sufficiency.

The original self-‐sufficient design in mixed-‐land use helped shape Pilsen’s current density

and vitality. Today, Pilsen remains very dense, containing a popula)on density almost twice that

of Chicago, and possesses few vacant lots.61 Compared with other Chicago neighborhoods, Pil-‐

sen’s land use is unusually mixed with residen)al, commercial, and industrial buildings all lo-‐

cated on the same block. Although the majority of industrial ac)vi)es operated in Pilsen’s

Planned Manufacturing District (PMD), which is posi)oned at the south end of the neighbor-‐

hood, manufacturing and warehouse buildings s)ll operate in the heart of Pilsen in close prox-‐

imity to parks, schools, and businesses. In addi)on, most residen)al blocks con)nue to feature

unique “hybrid corner buildings,” with stores on the ground floor and apartments above.62

Pilsen’s unique neighborhood characteris)cs were also strongly influenced by the influx

of Mexican immigrants beginning in the 1950s. “Pilsen’s Bohemian builders were so successful

in shaping an environment suited to their needs as newly arrived immigrants that the neighbor-‐

hood con)nues to be dominated by immigrants and their American-‐born children a century

later.”63 La)nos beneficed from the deliberate neighborhood designs just as the Bohemians did,

and could retain their cultural iden)ty and connec)on to their homeland by taking advantage of

the dense land uses and public spaces. Thus, Pilsen’s unique architecture and density was “cre-‐

ated en)rely by and for its newly arrived seclers. Pilsen’s buildings and ins)tu)ons have

blended the influences of the distant countries with urban forms and elements.”64

Although “the Bohemians had been the builders of Pilsen, the Mexicans were its

preserva)onists.”65 Mexican immigrants simultaneously preserved the urban fabric created by

their Bohemian predecessors and adapted neighborhood space to meet their own dis)nct

needs. The cohesive community elements created by Bohemians are carried on today by Mexi-‐

can and La)no residents. Professor and author John Betancur describes the neighborhood’s cur-‐

rent characteris)cs: “Pilsen boasts a sense of Mexican heritage unparalleled to any other Chi-‐

cago neighborhood. The community hosts well-‐known fes)vals, adorns buildings with murals,


and plays host to numerous ethnic businesses catering to La)nos.”66 The various ameni)es, af-‐

fordable housing stock, churches, restaurants, and unique shops reflect La)no residents’ cul-‐

ture, lifestyle, and iden)ty.

The ethnic shim from Eastern Europeans to La)nos is s)ll highly visible in the neighbor-‐

hood’s physical form as historic European architecture that once celebrated the Bohemians’

heritage now coexists alongside countless La)no-‐inspired murals honoring South American cul-‐

ture. Pilsen’s immigrant seclement pacerns helped merge the Bohemian architectural land-‐

scape with the more recent Mexican heritage. In Chicago’s Seven Most Threatened Buildings:

Pilsen, Preserva)on Chicago states, “Pilsen’s 19th Century persona...has been overlain by a

Mexican American sensibility, expressed in the numerous murals, mosaics, and pastel painted

cocages on every block.”67 Diverse immigrant popula)ons have transformed Pilsen into a dy-‐

namic, unique neighborhood unlike any in Chicago.

Pilsen’s Lack of Parks and Open Space

Due to the neighborhood’s high density, Pilsen lacks green, open spaces.68 In addi)on,

public access to open space along the South Branch of the Chicago River is prac)cally non-‐

existent in Pilsen as the area is closed off by industrial business.69 The main green spaces are

city parks, including Harrison Park and Barrec Park on the western por)on of the neighbor-‐

hood. Pilsen’s eastern sec)on features Throop Park, Dvorak Park, and Reyes Park. But beyond

these parks:

the eastern por)on of the neighborhood includes few trees and licle grass. Because the residen)al lots are so densely built, yard space is minimal. There are few public street lawns along the streets. Some houses that are not pushed up to the edge of their lots have small front and/or back yards, occasionally planted with decora)ve or vegetable gardens. The western sec)on of the district is less densely built and has considerably more trees, street lawns, and yard space.70

In order to enhance the neighborhood quality of life, encourage recrea)on, and promote addi-‐

)onal social interac)ons, Pilsen should have greater access to parks and open spaces. Fisk Sta-‐

)on may be an ideal loca)on to build a park and river walk, as the site contains a substan)al

amount of land situated along the South Branch of the Chicago River.


Current Commercial and Industrial Ac3vi3es

Pilsen’s major commercial arteries are located along 18th Street, Halsted Street, Western

Avenue, Cermak Road, Ashland Avenue, and Blue Island Avenue. These main commercial strips

feature a wide variety of stores “that acract tourists and customers from across the city, and a

bustle of sidewalk vendors and other entrepreneurs.”71 Many of these local stores and restau-‐

rants have been owned and operated by the same families for genera)ons.72 18th Street exem-‐

plifies Pilsen’s diverse business ac)vity and historic vitality:

Establishments selling tacos, carnitas, and horchatas (Mexican milkshakes) have replaced the Bohemian saloons and ships of the District’s late nineteenth century days, but the street con)nues to epitomize the character of the neighborhood. Pilsen was and re-‐mains a largely self-‐sufficient neighborhood, able to support a vibrant community with a complete network of residen)al, commercial, cultural, and industrial resources. West 18th Street – on street out of many that are included in the District – captures this qual-‐ity in microcosm.73

In 2009, the Local Ini)a)ves Support Corpora)on (LISC) MetroEdge conducted a retail

scan to assess Pilsen’s current and poten)al opportuni)es for commercial development. The

study showed Pilsen is a good place to live and visit based on its easy access to services such as

grocery stores, bakeries, ar)st community, restaurants, and neighborhood events.74 Pilsen’s

strong Mexican iden)ty also “makes it a des)na)on for dining, merchandise, arts and

events/fes)vi)es.”75 The LISC retail scan report also found that buying power is strong within

Pilsen, ranking 8 out of Chicago’s 77 community areas.76 However, Pilsen s)ll has unmet retail

needs in some categories including hardware stores and general merchandise stores, which in-‐

clude businesses similar to Target, Macy’s, or dollar stores.77

Industrial ac)vity is predominately located within the Pilsen Industrial Corridor and

Planned Manufacturing District (PMD) along the South Branch of the Chicago River. However,

some industrial spaces are s)ll situated in close proximity to residences, parks, schools, and

businesses.

Gentrifica3on

Within the past few decades, Pilsen has been targeted for urban renewal, designated as

a desirable loca)on for upscale redevelopment.78 Beginning in 1985, Pilsen began to slowly at-‐

tract higher-‐income popula)ons. As a result, the renewal and rebuilding of the neighborhood to


accommodate wealthier residents threatens to displace former working-‐class popula)on that

can no longer afford rising property values or taxes.

Many of Pilsen’s neighborhood characteris)cs are conducive to gentrifica)on. The close

proximity to Chicago’s downtown area and the University of Illinois at Chicago, access to nu-‐

merous transporta)on routes, rela)vely low rents and property values, and unique character

have deemed Pilsen an acrac)ve place to live.79 Tax-‐increment financing (TIF), the rise of the

“Chicago Arts District” in East Pilsen, con)nual excep)ons to zoning laws, poli)cal ac)ons, and

the decrease in manufacturing have also aided gentrifica)on processes, making Pilsen increas-‐

ingly acrac)ve to ar)sts and middle-‐class professionals.80 Because Pilsen’s manufacturing facili-‐

)es are no longer central to the area’s economy, developers and builders have specifically fo-‐

cused on the conversion of abundant industrial proper)es into upscale residen)al loms.81

As a result, Pilsen’s property values, taxes, and rents have increased, making the neigh-‐

borhood less affordable to its exis)ng La)no residents.82 Between 1990 and 200, housing prices

rose on average by 68%, while between 1995 and 2002, average rents increased by 44%.83 In-‐

creases in rental prices is notable, as approximately 74% of all housing units are renter occu-‐

pied, with almost 60% of residents spending more than 30% of their income on rent.84 The con-‐

version of large industrial facili)es into upscale residen)al proper)es provide a telling example

of the neighborhood's increasing property values. In 2005 and 2006, luxury condominiums built

in the eastern por)on of Pilsen possessed market rate values as high at $699,000 per unit, well

above the neighborhood median income of $27,000.85

A recent report, The Pilsen Building Inventory Project, analyzed current building condi-‐

)ons and publicly available informa)on on building permits, property taxes, assessed values,

property sales, and ownership to examine the gentrifica)on processes occurring in Pilsen from

Fall 2004 to Spring 2006. First, the study found a drama)c increase in the property values for all

zoning. There was 25% to 49% increase in 43% of Pilsen’s proper)es’ assessed values, with an

addi)onal 50% to 74% increase in assessed values in 23% of the proper)es.86 In addi)on, 24

proper)es experienced an increase in over 125% in assessed value, from $30,000 to over

$200,000.87 Property values were directly linked to increases in property taxes, as $1000 in-‐

crease in the assessed value correlated with $165 increase in taxes.88 Thus, the escalated prop-‐

erty values and taxes are making Pilsen less affordable to the exis)ng working-‐class popula)on.


In addi)on, The Pilsen Building Inventory Project found a mismatch between current zon-‐

ing and actual land use, which has made it easier for developers to gentrify the neighborhood.

According to the report, “This mismatch between zoning and actual use means that developers

can buy a single family home, demolish it, and rebuild three to four story condominiums or

rental units in its place, all without any community or city zoning board approval.”89 As a result,

some of Pilsen’s historic buildings have been demolished to make way for new, upscale and

higher priced buildings. The mismatch between exis)ng zoning and actual land use also has an

influence on the neighborhood’s industrial spaces as some are zoned for residen)al use. Be-‐

cause residen)al conversion has a higher rate of return than manufacturing, many of these old

industrial spaces are easily being legally transformed into residen)al loms.

Thus, long-‐)me residents, par)cularly renters, are vulnerable to displacement as in-‐

creasing property values demand higher paying customers. Businesses are also threatened as

“higher income tenants...shopping habits and demands cut on their business and, in the event

of total gentrifica)on, tend to ride them out of business.”90 Betancur writes that Pilsen’s gentri-‐

fica)on threatens:

tradi)onal building and home owners along with ethnic retailers represen)ng the bulk of Pilsen while benefi)ng banks, speculators with the proper financial back up and know how, trendy retailers, large chain stores and large box retailers, and owners of large tracks of land and manufacturing buildings.91

In Gentrifica%on before Gentrifica%on? The Plight of Pilsen in Chicago, Betancur analyzes

the role local governments, developers, and private investors aid neighborhood redevelopment

by packaging and selling the culture of a place.92 Pilsen’s dis)nct ethnic culture and Mexican

heritage have been used as a “marke)ng tool in the quest to make areas more appealing to out-‐

side residents, developers, and businesses...As such, it is by defini)on, a process of co-‐opted

culture—indeed it implies a process of dis-‐embedding and repackaging of local culture along

the lines of the general industry of culture.”93 For example, tourism has become increasing cen-‐

tral to Pilsen’s development through acrac)ons like The Mexican Fine Arts Center Museum,

walking tour maps, trolley rides, tourist buses, and Fiesta del Sol, Pilsen’s annual street fes)val.

According to Betancur, this type of tourism and development poten)ally neglects residents:

Tourist ini)a)ves can be damaging to communi)es, such as Pilsen, where low-‐income residents are struggling for resources; these resources are instead being funneled to


support people who enter the community for a brief period of )me, consume and ab-‐sorb certain aspects of it, and then leave it to its own self-‐preserva)on and the omen pollu)ng effects of this tourism....Tourism, however, as a primary local development tac-‐)c may carry the danger of solely providing an experience to the tourist while ignoring factors influencing quality of life for its residents.94

Although Pilsen’s strong cultural iden)ty have been an integral part of the resistance against

development and displacement, it is also being used as a selling point to trigger gentrifica)on.

Consequently, the “commodifica)on of culture on the part of the city and developers be the

eventual displacement of the same heritage they are promo)ng. Ironically, community residents

strive to exert a strong cultural iden)ty as a means of solidarity and resistance to outside pres-‐

sures—the same element policy makers manipulate to induce gentrifica)on.”95

Pilsen as a Historic District

Pilsen’s abundant historic proper)es and rich history helped add the neighborhood to

the Na)onal Register of Historic Places in 2006.96 Historic designa)on is vital in that it helps pro-‐

tect the area against some gentrifica)on processes. Rather than demolishing and replacing his-‐

toric buildings with new construc)on, over 4,400 eligible proper)es in Pilsen’s historic district

will be preserved and rehabilitated. In addi)on, Pilsen’s original architecture and character,

which commemorates the historic development and different working-‐class immigrant groups,

is protected. Thus, historic designa)on can help balance upscale, new development projects

alongside preserva)on.

Designa)on is also helping to reduce displacement, as the Na)onal Register of Historic

Places offers tax incen)ves for the rehabilita)on of historic proper)es in the district.97 Eligible

building owners can qualify for a property tax freeze in return for renova)ng and preserving

their historic buildings.98 A freeze in the assessed value of a qualified building can extend over 8

years, followed by an addi)onal 4 years where the property’s assessed value will be gradually

readjusted to its current market value.99

The 12 years in reduced property taxes are significant in that they provide financial sup-‐

port for property owners to reinvest in Pilsen’s current building stock, rather than new con-‐

struc)on or demoli)on. This incen)ve program is also vital in terms of gentrifica)on, as rising

property values and taxes in Pilsen have led to the displacement of lower-‐income and minority


residents. Instead of displacement, through rehabilita)ng historic proper)es, long-‐)me home-‐

owners benefit from the increase value of their property and maintain the same rate in prop-‐

erty taxes. This incen)ve program may prove to be crucial in helping exis)ng residents improve

their proper)es without being priced out of the neighborhood.

However, lis)ng Pilsen on the Na)onal Register of Historic Places has not been a perfect

cure for protec)ng the neighborhood against gentrifica)on.100 The large percentage of renters

can not take advantage of the historic rehabilita)on incen)ves. In addi)on, many of the neigh-‐

borhood’s working-‐class homeowners cannot afford to renovate their historic proper)es, leav-‐

ing them vulnerable against Pilsen’s increasing property values and taxes.

Historic preserva)on alone cannot stop gentrifica)on. Today, Pilsen con)nues to acract

new development projects geared toward higher income groups. As a result, Pilsen’s long-‐)me

residents, its original historic architectural, and heritage remain threatened. Preserva)on Chi-‐

cago describes the neighborhood's unique urban characteris)cs which need to be preserved

and protected:

Taking a stroll down any street acests to the viability of a neighborhood that must be preserved, in its en)rety, at all costs. The simple act of turning a corner can reveal a mu-‐ral exploding from the side of a building. A garage door becomes an ar)st’s canvas, tell-‐ing the story of a community and its people to anyone who passes by. In a neighborhood starved for green space, the street becomes a ball field and chairs has)ly borrowed from the kitchen table instantly transform the sidewalk into a welcoming front porch. The in-‐s)nct to place flowerpots on a windowsill, on the front steps, or on any other horizontal surface seldom goes unfulfilled. Fences are not fences, but art galleries and, what would be an ordinary sidewalk sale in any other Chicago neighborhood, in Pilsen becomes an outdoor Bazaar. Pushcarts selling ices and other delectable Mexican treats ply the streets or are found strategically parked on busy corners, and a constant chorus of chil-‐dren’s voices underscores it all. Even the faded and peeling paint lends an aura of charm-‐ing realness in a city whose current administra)on favors newness and suburban sterility.101

Gentrifica)on remains a threat as “on some blocks, almost every building has been demolished

and replaced with luxury housing.”102

Preserving Pilsen’s History

Throughout its history, Pilsen’s working-‐class Bohemians and La)nos built and preserved

the neighborhood’s rich architecture, diverse ethnic heritage, and unique urban character. Pil-‐

sen’s neighborhood characteris)cs must be protected to thwart the nega)ve effects of gentrifi-‐


ca)on, including the displacement of exis)ng La)no residents and their dis)nct culture as well

as the destruc)on of the Pilsen’s historic architecture. It is inevitable that Pilsen will contribute

to change and grow with )me. However, future redevelopment projects should be mindful of

Pilsen’s exis)ng residents and its ethnic heritage.

The preserva)on of Fisk Sta)on is vital in preserving Pilsen’s historic architecture and

heritage. However, the power plant is located just a block outside the Pilsen Historic District

boundaries and, thus, is not a recognized as a historic landmark. Without this historic status,

Fisk Sta)on remains unprotected and cannot receive necessary financial aid for rehabilita)on. In

addi)on, it is unclear whether the city or aldermen are in favor of the historic preserva)on of

Fisk Sta)on. Because historic designa)on lis)ng relies heavily on local poli)cal support, Fisk

Sta)on’s preserva)on must also seek to obtain aldermanic support.


Chapter V: Sec3on Endnotes


1 U.S. Department of the Interior, Na)onal Park Service. “How to Apply to the Na)onal Register: Criteria for Evalua-‐)on.”2 Library of Congress, Prints & Photographs Division, Historic American Engineering Record, “Commonwealth Elec-‐tric Company, Fisk Street Electrical Genera)ng Sta)on, 1111 West Cermak Avenue, Chicago, Cook County, IL,” 1.3 U.S. Department of the Interior, Na)onal Park Service. “How to Apply to the Na)onal Register: Criteria for Evalua-‐)on.”4 Ibid.5 Ibid.6 Ibid.7 Ibid.8 Ibid.9 Ibid.10 City of Chicago, Commission on Chicago Landmarks, Landmarks Ordinance and the Rules and Regula%ons of the Commission on Chicago Landmark (Chicago: City of Chicago, August 3, 2011), 4-‐5, hcp://www.cityofchicago.org/content/dam/city/depts/zlup/Historic_Preserva)on/Publica)ons/Chicago_Landmarks_Ordinance.pdf11 City of Chicago, Housing and Economic Development Historic Preserva)on, “Landmarks Designa)on Process.” City of Chicago, accessed March 24, 2012, hcp://www.cityofchicago.org/content/city/en/depts/dcd/supp_info/landmarks_designa)onprocess.html; City of Chicago, Commission on Chicago Landmarks, Landmarks Ordinance and the Rules and Regula%ons of the Commis-‐sion on Chicago Landmark, 5-‐9.12 City of Chicago, The Commission on Chicago Landmarks, “Historic Survey: Details for building at (1029-‐1179) W CERMAK RD.”13 City of Chicago, “Demoli)on Delay.”14 Ibid.15 City of Chicago, Department of Housing and Economic Development, “Economic Incen)ves for the Repair and Rehabilita)on of Historic Buildings.” City of Chicago, accessed March 23, 2012, 1, hcp://www.cityofchicago.org/content/dam/city/depts/zlup/Historic_Preserva)on/Publica)ons/Incen)ves_Flyer.pdf16 Ibid.17 City of Chicago, Department of Housing and Economic Development. “Preserva)on Incen)ves.” City of Chicago, Chicago Landmarks, accessed February 14, 2012,hcp://webapps.cityofchicago.org/landmarksweb/web/preserva)on.htm18 Illinois Historic Preserva)on Agency, “Benefits and Protec)ons Offered by Na)onal Register Lis)ng.”19 Yue Zhang, “Boundaries of Power: Poli)cs of Urban Preserva)on in Two Chicago Neighborhoods,”Urban Affairs Review 47, no 4 (2011): 516.20 Ibid., 522.21 Ibid., 524.22 Scadden, “Adap)ve Reuse of Obsolete Power Plants,” 2.23 Illinois Environmental Protec)on Agency, In The Macer of Midwest Genera)on, LLC Fisk Genera)ng Sta)on and Crawford Genera)on Sta)on: Order Responding to Pe))oners Request that the Administrator Object to Issuance of a State Opera)ng Permit. Pe))on number V-‐2005-‐1, CAAPP No. 95090081 and 95090076, March 25, 2005, 1.24 Midwest Genera)on, “Fisk Sta)on Fact Sheet.”25 McGraw-‐Publishing Company. "The System and Opera)ng Prac)ce of the Commonwealth Edison Company, Chi-‐cago,” 1027.

http://www.cityofchicago.org/content/dam/city/depts/zlup/Historic_Preservation/Publications/Chicago_Landmarks_Ordinance.pdf




http://www.cityofchicago.org/content/city/en/depts/dcd/supp_info/landmarks_designationprocess.html




http://www.cityofchicago.org/content/dam/city/depts/zlup/Historic_Preservation/Publications/Incentives_Flyer.pdf




http://webapps.cityofchicago.org/landmarksweb/web/preservation.htm



26Jeanne Gang, Reverse Effect: Renewing Chicago's Waterways (Chicago: Studio Gang Architects, 2011), 9-‐18. 27 Casey, Bukro. “Edison Will Remove, Truck Away Debris,” Chicago Tribune, October 23, 1968, 5.28 City of Chicago, “Chicago Zoning Ordinance and Land Use Ordinance” (City of Chicago: American Legal Publishing Corpora)on, 2011), 17-‐6-‐0400 PMD, Planned Manufacturing Districts, hcp://www.amlegal.com/nxt/gateway.dll/Illinois/chicagozoning/chicagozoningordinanceandlanduseordinanc?f=templates$fn=default.htm$3.0$vid=amlegal:chicagozoning_il29 City of Chicago, “Chicago Zoning Ordinance and Land Use Ordinance” (City of Chicago: American Legal Publishing Corpora)on, 2011), 17-‐13-‐0308 Review and Decision-‐Making Criteria.30 Ibid.31 City of Chicago, “Chicago Zoning Ordinance and Land Use Ordinance” (City of Chicago: American Legal Publishing Corpora)on, 2011), 17-‐13-‐0905 Approval Criteria.32 City of Chicago, “Chicago Zoning Ordinance and Land Use Ordinance” (City of Chicago: American Legal Publishing Corpora)on, 2011), 17-‐13-‐0403 Review and Decision-‐Making Criteria.33 Ibid.34 City of Chicago, Corridors Of Industrial Opportunity: A Plan For Industry In Chicago (Chicago, 2004), 1. 35 City of Chicago, “Chicago Zoning Ordinance and Land Use Ordinance” (City of Chicago: American Legal Publishing Corpora)on, 2011), 17-‐13-‐0400 Zoning map amendments within industrial corridors.36 City of Chicago, Corridors Of Industrial Opportunity: A Plan For Industry In Chicago, 3-‐4.37 City of Chicago, “Chicago Zoning Ordinance and Land Use Ordinance” (City of Chicago: American Legal Publishing Corpora)on, 2011), 17-‐13-‐0403 Review and Decision-‐Making Criteria.38 Walk Score, “Walk Score for 1111 W Cermak Rd Chicago, IL,” Walk Score, accessed February 23, 2012, hcp://www.walkscore.com/score/1111-‐w-‐cermak-‐rd-‐chicago-‐il. 39 Ibid.40 City of Chicago, “Chicago Zoning Ordinance and Land Use Ordinance” (City of Chicago: American Legal Publishing Corpora)on, 2011), 17-‐8-‐0100 Planned Development, Purpose.41 City of Chicago, “Chicago Zoning Ordinance and Land Use Ordinance” (City of Chicago: American Legal Publishing Corpora)on, 2011), 17-‐8-‐0509 Development Along Waterways, 17-‐8-‐0912 Waterways.42 City of Chicago, Department of Housing and Economic Development. “Economic Incen)ves for the Repair and Rehabilita)on of Historic Buildings.” City of Chicago, accessed March 23, 2012, 1, hcp://www.cityofchicago.org/content/dam/city/depts/zlup/Historic_Preserva)on/Publica)ons/Incen)ves_Flyer.pdf43 Ibid.44 Ibid.45 Ibid.46 City of Chicago. “Enterprise Zone Program.” City of Chicago. Accessed February 13, 2012. hcp://www.cityofchicago.org/city/en/depts/dcd/supp_info/enterprise_zone_program.html47 Gabriela F. Arredondo, “Lower West Side,” In Encyclopedia of Chicago, edited by Janice L. Reiff, Ann Durkin Kea)ng, and James R. Grossman (Chicago Historical Society, 2005), hcp://encyclopedia.chicagohistory.org/pages/765.html48 John Betancur, Gentrifica%on before Gentrifica%on? The Plight of Pilsen in Chicago (Chicago: Nathalie P. Vorhees Center for Neighborhood and Community Improvement, 2005), 6, hcp://www.uic.edu/cuppa/voorheesctr/Publica)ons/Gentrifica)on%20before%20Gentrifica)on.pdf49 Susan F. Grossman et al., “Pilsen and The Resurrec)on Project: Community Organiza)on in a La)no Community,” Journal of Poverty 4, no. 1-‐2 (2000): 135, hcp://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J134v04n01_06. 50 Historic Preserva)on Program, University of Virginia. Na%onal Register of Historic Places: Registra%on Form, Pil-‐sen Historic District (U.S. Department of the Interior, Na)onal Park Service. October 2005), Sec)on 8, Page 15.

http://www.amlegal.com/nxt/gateway.dll/Illinois/chicagozoning/chicagozoningordinanceandlanduseordinanc?f=templates$fn=default.htm$3.0$vid=amlegal:chicagozoning_il




http://www.walkscore.com/score/1111-w-cermak-rd-chicago-il








http://www.cityofchicago.org/city/en/depts/dcd/supp_info/enterprise_zone_program.html




http://www.uic.edu/cuppa/voorheesctr/Publications/Gentrification%20before%20Gentrification.pdf


http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J134v04n01_06



51 Betancur, Gentrifica%on before Gentrifica%on? The Plight of Pilsen in Chicago, 6; Preserva)on Chicago. Chicago’s Seven Most Threatened Buildings: Pilsen, 1.52 Yue Zhang, “Boundaries of Power: Poli)cs of Urban Preserva)on in Two Chicago Neighborhoods,”Urban Affairs Review 47, no 4 (2011): 526, hcp://uar.sagepub.com/content/47/4/511.53 Betancur, Gentrifica%on before Gentrifica%on? The Plight of Pilsen in Chicago, 7. 54 Preserva)on Chicago. Chicago’s Seven Most Threatened Buildings: Pilsen, 1.55 Great Ci)es Ins)tute, “Pilsen (Lower West),” Great Ci%es Ins%tute, Neighborhoods Ini%a%ve, accessed March 14, 2012, hcp://www.uicni.org/page.php?sec)on=neighborhoods&subsec)on=pilsen.56 Elizabeth Duffrin, “Tax Freeze Helps Preserve Pilsen,” ChicagoTalks, November 17, 2008, hcp://www.chicagotalks.org/2008/11/17/tax-‐freeze-‐helps-‐preserve-‐pilsen/57 Historic Preserva)on Program, University of Virginia. Na%onal Register of Historic Places: Registra%on Form, Pil-‐sen Historic District, Sec)on 8, 11.58 Ibid.59 Ibid.60 Ibid., Sec)on 8, 11-‐12.61 Betancur, Gentrifica%on before Gentrifica%on? The Plight of Pilsen in Chicago, 15; Great Ci)es Ins)tute, “Pilsen (Lower West).”62 Ibid., Sec)on 7, 2.63 Historic Preserva)on Program, University of Virginia. Na%onal Register of Historic Places: Registra%on Form, Pil-‐sen Historic District, Sec)on 8, 11.64 Ibid.65 Ibid., Sec)on 8, 17.66 Betancur, Gentrifica%on before Gentrifica%on? The Plight of Pilsen in Chicago, 23.67 Preserva)on Chicago. Chicago’s Seven Most Threatened Buildings: Pilsen, 2.68 Preserva)on Chicago. Chicago’s Seven Most Threatened Buildings: Pilsen, 2; Field Museum, Department of Envi-‐ronment, Culture, and Conserva)on (ECCo), Engaging Chicago’s Diverse Communi%es in the Chicago Climate Ac%on Plan. Community #4: Pilsen’s Mexican Community: Findings and Recommenda%ons At-‐A-‐Glance (Field Museum, Chicago: December 2010), 3; Historic Preserva)on Program, University of Virginia. Na%onal Register of Historic Places: Registra%on Form, Pilsen Historic District, Sec)on 7, 3.69 Tom McCann, “Riverfront Renewal Not Reaching Pilsen,” Chicago Tribune, July 02, 2000,hcp://ar)cles.chicagotribune.com/2000-‐07-‐02/news/0007020100_1_parks-‐chicago-‐river-‐navy-‐pier

70 Historic Preserva)on Program, University of Virginia. Na%onal Register of Historic Places: Registra%on Form, Pil-‐sen Historic District, Sec)on 7, 3.71 Great Ci)es Ins)tute, “Pilsen (Lower West).”72 Susan F. Grossman et al., “Pilsen and The Resurrec)on Project: Community Organiza)on in a La)no Community.” Journal of Poverty 4, no. 1-‐2 (2000): 137. 73 Historic Preserva)on Program, University of Virginia. Na%onal Register of Historic Places: Registra%on Form, Pil-‐sen Historic District, Sec)on 8, 13. 74 Ibid.75 Ibid.76 Ibid.77 Ibid., 2-‐4.78 Yue Zhang, “Boundaries of Power: Poli)cs of Urban Preserva)on in Two Chicago Neighborhoods,”Urban Affairs Review 47, no 4 (2011): 526; David Wilson, Jared Wouters, and Dennis Grammenos. “Successful protect-‐community discourse: spa)ality and poli)cs in Chicago's Pilsen neighborhood.” Environment and Planning 36, (2004): 1182.

http://uar.sagepub.com/content/47/4/511


http://www.uicni.org/page.php?section=neighborhoods&subsection=pilsen


http://www.chicagotalks.org/2008/11/17/tax-freeze-helps-preserve-pilsen/


http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2000-07-02/news/0007020100_1_parks-chicago-river-navy-pier



79 Kaaren Fehsenfeld, "Zoning in on Pilsen: As Development Moves in, Old-‐Timers Move Out," Chicagotalks, May 26, 2010, hcp://www.chicagotalks.org/2010/05/26/zoning-‐in-‐on-‐pilsen-‐as-‐development-‐moves-‐in-‐old-‐)mers-‐move-‐out/80 Yue Zhang, “Boundaries of Power: Poli)cs of Urban Preserva)on in Two Chicago Neighborhoods,”Urban Affairs Review 47, no 4 (2011): 526; David Wilson, Jared Wouters, and Dennis Grammenos. “Successful protect-‐community discourse: spa)ality and poli)cs in Chicago's Pilsen neighborhood.” Environment and Planning 36, (2004): 1182; Fehsenfeld, "Zoning in on Pilsen: As Development Moves in, Old-‐Timers Move Out.”81 Winifred Curran and Euan Hague. The Pilsen Building Inventory Project (DePaul University Department of Geog-‐raphy, Chicago: 2006), 4, hcp://steans.depaul.edu/aboutus/partnerships/geography.asp82 Betancur, Gentrifica%on before Gentrifica%on? The Plight of Pilsen in Chicago, 11.83 Yue Zhang, “Boundaries of Power: Poli)cs of Urban Preserva)on in Two Chicago Neighborhoods,”Urban Affairs Review 47, no 4 (2011): 528. 84 Yue Zhang, “Boundaries of Power: Poli)cs of Urban Preserva)on in Two Chicago Neighborhoods,”Urban Affairs Review 47, no 4 (2011): 527; Winifred Curran and Euan Hague. The Pilsen Building Inventory Project (DePaul Uni-‐versity Department of Geography, Chicago: 2006), 3.85 Ibid.86 Winifred Curran and Euan Hague. The Pilsen Building Inventory Project (DePaul University Department of Geog-‐raphy, Chicago: 2006), 1.87 Ibid.88Ibid.89 Ibid., 1-‐2.90 Betancur, Gentrifica%on before Gentrifica%on? The Plight of Pilsen in Chicago, 12. 91 Ibid.92 Betancur, Gentrifica%on before Gentrifica%on? The Plight of Pilsen in Chicago, 20-‐21.93 Ibid., 20.94 Ibid., 28-‐29.95 Ibid., 27.96 Duffrin, “Tax Freeze Helps Preserve Pilsen.” 97 Miriam Y. Cintron, “Tax incen)ves strengthen Pilsen’s Historic District.” Gaze]e, September 4, 2009, hcp://www.gazecechicago.com/index/2009/09/tax-‐incen)ves-‐strengthen-‐pilsen%E2%80%99s-‐historic-‐district; Duffrin, “Tax Freeze Helps Preserve Pilsen.”98 Illinois Historic Preserva)on Agency, “Property Tax Assessment Freeze.” Illinois Historic Preserva%on Agency, ac-‐cessed March 14, 2012, hcp://www.illinoishistory.gov/PS/taxfreeze.htm.99 Ibid.100 Yue Zhang, “Boundaries of Power: Poli)cs of Urban Preserva)on in Two Chicago Neighborhoods,”Urban Affairs Review 47, no 4 (2011): 527.101 Preserva)on Chicago. Chicago’s Seven Most Threatened Buildings: Pilsen, 2.102 Ibid.

http://www.chicagotalks.org/2010/05/26/zoning-in-on-pilsen-as-development-moves-in-old-timers-move-out/


http://steans.depaul.edu/aboutus/partnerships/geography.asp


http://www.gazettechicago.com/index/2009/09/tax-incentives-strengthen-pilsen%E2%80%99s-historic-district


http://www.illinoishistory.gov/PS/taxfreeze.htm


VII. Recommenda3ons For Fisk Sta3on’s Future Use

The future of Fisk Sta)on is yet to be uncovered given the recent announcement to close

Fisk Sta)on. Site ownership, remedia)on, zoning, and project funding represent only a few of

the difficult hurdles ahead. Within the coming months and years, new informa)on and plans

regarding the site’s future will be unveiled, especially as Mayor Emanuel’s task force has begun

to further inves)gate the redevelopment poten)al.

City officials, private developers, community members, local organiza)ons, and other

interested stakeholders must first consider preserving Fisk Sta)on’s various buildings. Fisk Sta-‐

)on possesses a remarkable place in history, serving as a tangible representa)on of Chicago’s

development and the growth of the electric industry. The power plant’s recent history is also

worth remembering and preserving. For over a decade, environmental and community organi-‐

za)ons campaigned against the pollu)on and environmental injus)ces caused by Fisk Sta)on.

The struggles, embodied within the site, should be remembered by the community and Chicago

at large.

Even though Fisk Sta)on will no longer serve its original func)on in genera)ng electric-‐

ity, the soon-‐to-‐be obsolete facility possesses enormous opportuni)es in regenera)ng economic

ac)vity and providing valuable services to Pilsen residents. Given its rich history, large acreage,

and waterfront access, Fisk Sta)on possesses a strong reuse poten)al to once again house new

economically viable func)ons and serve as a community anchor. While the closure of Fisk Sta-‐

)on has been deemed a historic victory in itself, efforts should now turn toward preserving the

site and assigning its exis)ng buildings new, posi)ve iden))es with beneficial func)ons.

The demoli)on of Fisk Sta)on would cause the loss of architecturally district structures

that symbolize the moderniza)on of electricity in the twen)eth century and community ac)v-‐

ism. The ornate buildings and their significance cannot be replaced once demolished. Even if

demoli)on was deemed more cost effec)ve than preserva)on, it is not a recommended op)on

for redevelopment as it would remove invaluable and priceless structures from Pilsen. Instead,

these buildings should be allowed to con)nue to thrive and serve the surrounding community.

Another worst-‐case scenario might include the site remaining unoccupied, fenced-‐off,

and unused. Similar to demoli)on, vacancy would eliminate the opportunity to transform Fisk


Sta)on into a space to meet the needs of Pilsen residents, the community, and serve future

genera)ons. Given the current economic environment, redevelopment may become a lengthy,

extensive process, which could leave the 44-‐acre site to remain vacant for an indefinite period

of )me. Prolonged vacancy would hamper community development and adversely affect the

local economy. But, ideally, remedia)ng, beau)fying, and revitalizing Fisk Sta)on can help re-‐

capture economic investment and allow people to u)lize the once polluted land.

Given its rich historic and architectural significance, it is clear that Fisk Sta)on’s buildings

should be protected in order to become a permanent feature in Pilsen to contribute to the

neighborhood's dynamic fabric. However, the prominent issue remaining is how to transform

Fisk Sta)on into a purposeful place that creates jobs, fosters business growth, and enhances

residents’ quality of life.

In order to ensure Fisk Sta)on is preserved and assigned new viable func)ons, the site

needs to be further examined for the extent of remedia)on necessary, building integrity and

structural issues. In addi)on, feasibility studies, a financial and economic assessment for future

reuse should be conducted along with an extensive dialogue process involving Pilsen residents,

local organiza)ons, representa)ves from community business, historical preserva)on organiza-‐

)ons, and redevelopment stakeholders.

The following recommenda)ons for the site have been determined by u)lizing the les-‐

sons presented in the case studies featuring the adap)ve reuse of power plants shown in Chap-‐

ter IV. In addi)on to the site-‐specific details explored in Chapter V and Chapter VI were u)lized.

These recommenda)ons are by no means meant to be defini)ve. Instead, they stand as sugges-‐

)ons which hopefully will inspire other crea)ve reuse ideas within and without the Pilsen com-‐

munity.

However, regardless of specific future land uses, Fisk Sta)on’s buildings, unique charac-‐

ter, defining architectural features should be preserved and restored. In addi)on, new func)ons

should retain Pilsen’s cultural, ethnic, and historic values, while also encouraging posi)ve com-‐

munity development and economic growth. The recommenda)ons are as follows:


1. AVain Historic Designa3on Status to Preserve Fisk Sta3on’s Buildings

As discussed in Chapter VI, “Poten)al for Historic Designa)on,” Fisk Sta)on may be eligi-‐

ble for lis)ng under the Na)onal Register of Historic Places or obtain Chicago Landmark status

due to its dis)nct architecture and historic value. Historic designa)on under either of these

preserva)on programs may be vital in protec)ng Fisk Sta)on’s buildings from demoli)on and to

fund rehabilita)on projects.

Historic preserva)on can be used as a tool for economic development as it is vital in

providing a number of financial mechanisms for rehabilita)ng Fisk Sta)on. These incen)ves are

useful in offsejng redevelopment costs and to ensure the site will be transformed into a bene-‐

ficial use in the future. For further informa)on on incen)ves, refer to Chapter II, “Historic Desig-‐

na)on” and Chapter VI, “Poten)al for Historic Designa)on.”

Fisk Sta)on offers a variety of unique industrial and architectural features that have re-‐

peatedly preserved in the adap)ve reuse of other power plants across the United States. While

industrial equipment once used for genera)ng electricity, such as the turbines, smokestacks,

steam pipes, or coal hoppers, may seem unfavorable for redevelopment, other adap)ve reuse

projects have restored selected features to maintain the power plant’s iden)ty. Projects have

even taken advantage of these characteris)cs and used them as unique marke)ng tools. Defin-‐

ing features onsite could be preserved.

One defining characteris)c of older power plants is their spacious turbine-‐generator

halls, which provide a large open space to house crea)ve new func)ons. Fisk Sta)on actually

possesses two generator rooms due to the 1959 addi)on. Select industrial equipment or other

invaluable piece, such as the various plaques commemora)ng the site anniversaries, could be

restored to showcase the site’s past in electricity genera)on.

Since it first began opera)ng in 1903, Fisk Sta)on’s buildings have been repeatedly al-‐

tered. The 1959 turbine-‐generator room addi)on to the Original Powerhouse, which contained

the original 5 MW turbine and thus largely represents the site’s historic significance, is the most

prominent example of all the site renova)ons. The construc)on of the large, red metal clad

turbine-‐generator building led to changes in interior features, the deconstruc)on of the original

boiler room, and removal of several smokestacks, which has compromised the historic integrity


of the exis)ng buildings. The site’s original integrity is crucial for lis)ng the site in the Na)onal

Register of Historic Places and as a Chicago Landmark.

However, many of Fisk Sta)on’s historic and architectural features remain on the site to-‐

day. Though the 1959 addi)on dras)cally changed the Original Powerhouse’s ini)al form, the

turbine room has been preserved and con)nues to exhibit unique interior and exterior features

da)ng back to its construc)on in 1903. Other buildings onsite seem to have undergone less

renova)ons.

The fact that Fisk Sta)on has con)nued to operate since 1903 should be considered in

designa)ng the site historic. From its need to con)nually generate greater electricity, the power

plant required numerous technologic upgrades. Stylis)cally different than the other historic

buildings onsite, the minimal, modern design featured in the 1959 addi)on to the Original Pow-‐

erhouse architecturally reflects the )me it was constructed. However, this building alongside

the loss of other characteris)cs due to renova)ons, are symbolic of Fisk Sta)on’s ongoing func-‐

)ons that lasted for over a century.

Due to its more recent date of construc)on, the 1959 addi)on does not necessarily rep-‐

resent the site’s architecture or significance in history. Although some of the exis)ng industrial

equipment may hold a degree of significance and could be showcased in an adap)ve reuse pro-‐

ject, the overall structure may not be worth saving. Demoli)on may be favorable in order to in-‐

crease open space along the Chicago River, house new ac)vi)es onsite, or place further empha-‐

sis on other historic buildings. While accommoda)ng new func)ons, removing this structure

would also not compromise the overall integrity of the site and its separate buildings. However,

the removal of the 1959 addi)on may be difficult if the Original Powerhouse is preserved be-‐

cause the two buildings are physically connected and may share structural features.

Yet, despite its lack of historic or architectural significance, the removal of the 1959 ad-‐

di)on would be to selec)vely edit Fisk Sta)on’s chronological development. The 1959 turbine-‐

generator building has become the visual representa)on for iden)fying Fisk Sta)on due to its

size, prominent red color, outward facing posi)on, and smokestack that is visible from many dis-‐

tant parts of the city. If preserved, the 1959 addi)on could commemorate Fisk Sta)on’s dis)nct

iden)ty, opera)ons, and events. The building could also pay tribute to the decade of ac)vism by

environmental and community organiza)ons against Fisk Sta)on’s pollu)on, to the con)nual


technological upgrades that occurred amer the original 5 MW turbine’s ini)al success, and to

the countless employees who worked at the site. If the redevelopment plans for Fisk Sta)on in-‐

tend to preserve the building’s more recent industrial past, the red metal clad structure pro-‐

vides a unique visual connec)on and memory to the site.

Without historic status, Fisk Sta)on remains unprotected and cannot receive necessary

financial aid for rehabilita)on. The power plant is located just a block outside the Pilsen Historic

District boundaries and, thus, is not a recognized as a historic landmark. In addi)on, a few of the

buildings on site are rated “orange” on the City of Chicago’s Historic Resources Survey. Under

Chicago’s Demoli)on-‐Delay Ordinance, these buildings would be subject for review during a 90-‐

day hold before demoli)on, but only provides limited protec)on against being torn down. Be-‐

cause historic designa)on lis)ng relies heavily on local poli)cal support, Fisk Sta)on’s preserva-‐

)on must also seek to obtain aldermanic and officials’ support.

In order to advocate for the historic preserva)on of Fisk Sta)on, residents, community

organiza)ons, preserva)on groups, and city officials should be involved to understand the site’s

historical and architectural significance and ensure it is protected in the future. If necessary,

methods to advocate for preserva)on could include a lecer wri)ng pe))on, gaining support by

elected officials and city officials, mee)ng with the current owner Midwest Genera)on to dis-‐

cuss preserva)on, direc)ng preserva)on groups and community organiza)ons to lead cam-‐

paign, or holding public events.

Although the discussed renova)ons and alterna)ons may pose a challenge in designat-‐

ing the site historic, Fisk Sta)on’s buildings may s)ll be eligible. Because Fisk Sta)on contains

numerous buildings, it is possible that only selected buildings could be listed. However, these

historic buildings should be collec)vely preserved as they all once contributed to the site’s op-‐

era)ons and significance. Many of the historic buildings s)ll possess their essen)al physical fea-‐

tures and dis)nct architectural quali)es that convey their significance within the en)re power

plant. Even though building features have been stripped over the power plant’s life)me, historic

designa)on will help ensure the unique characteris)cs will not be lost in the future.


2. Subdivide the Property for Mixed Land Uses

Fisk Sta)on’s large site size and various historic buildings allows for a range of new, crea-‐

)ve land use op)ons. Mixed-‐uses may be the most beneficial op)on rather than a single pur-‐

pose as it would take advantage of the site’s unique layout and could serve all stakeholders in-‐

volved, par)cularly residents.

Each historic building onsite could one day hold different purposes. The diversity in each

building’s acributes, such as square footages, layout, or loca)on on the site, should be studied

further for decision making. The unique buildings features should be u)lized to assign the best

new uses, that realis)cally fit into the spaces, and to acract poten)al tenants. For example, the

Original Powerhouse contains a large turbine-‐generator room with tall ceilings and ornate inte-‐

rior details. The poten)al uses of the Original Powerhouse would no doubt differ from the Fre-‐

quency Changer House, which is much smaller in size and located closer to the remaining sub-‐

sta)on and Chicago River. Overall, redevelopment should take full advantage of the poten)al

create uses of Fisk Sta)on’s unique buildings and layout.

Rehabilita)ng Fisk Sta)on’s historic structures into market uses should be a priority in

terms of restoring the loss in employment and tax revenues. In order to con)nue to support the

city’s tax base and surrounding community, there is substan)al pressure for the redevelopment

project to create an equal or larger amount of revenue and employment opportuni)es than

those offset by Fisk Sta)on’s re)rement. Remedia)on, rehabilita)on, and construc)on on the

site can generate diverse types of temporary jobs while the final redevelopment project will re-‐

quire permanent employment posi)ons. Acrac)ons geared toward tourists may also be a con-‐

siderable op)on to create permanent, year-‐round jobs and expand the local economy.

The new land and building uses should also be considered in regards to larger economic

development goals and local issues in Pilsen. Understanding the local context and public role is

vital in crea)ng new, valuable, and economically viable building func)ons. To ensure Fisk Sta-‐

)on’s reuse support Pilsen’s future prosperity, residents’ input, unmet needs, and Pilsen’s long-‐

term goals should be examined. The market for poten)al tenants and an assessment of the fu-‐

ture prices for services in rela)on to residents’ need and affordability should also be evaluated.

Regardless of the specific future func)ons, general redevelopment goals for Fisk Sta)on

should include preserving and strengthening Pilsen’s cultural and historic character, incorporat-‐


ing environmentally-‐friendly uses for residents to enjoy, providing affordable services to be used

by residents, encouraging posi)ve community investment, and triggering economic growth.

Overall, Fisk Sta)on should play a suppor)ve role in Pilsen’s future and avoid magnifying

gentrifica)on in the area. The gentrifica)on processes occurring in Pilsen-‐-‐specifically upscale

development projects and the conversion of industrial spaces into ar)st work spaces or resi-‐

den)al loms-‐-‐places Fisk Sta)on in a precarious situa)on. The site’s large acreage and water-‐

front access deems it an acrac)ve, valuable property for private real estate developers. Given

that the planning process for redevelopment has only just begun, it is difficult to chart a course

for Fisk Sta)on’s future role in the community. But Fisk Sta)on should not become part of the

current trend in demoli)on or the conversion of industrial spaces oriented toward higher-‐

income popula)ons. Instead, Fisk Sta)on’s new land uses could be alloced to both public and

private purposes.

Mixed-‐use development also may be crucial in dispersing project costs over )me and in

enhancing project feasibility. Because Fisk Sta)on possesses a large site size, a unique layout,

and separate buildings, redevelopment could occur in phases. Remedia)ng or rehabilita)ng one

building or land parcel at a )me may lessen the financial risk due to con)nually monitoring

changes in the marketplace and ensuring funding will be available over the long-‐run. In addi-‐

)on, a coordinated, staged process could also help avoid the vacancy of all buildings for pro-‐

longed periods and providing addi)onal )me to deal with other site problems. For example, the

site is divided in a complicated manner in terms of ownership. ComEd owns transmission and

electric lines, a substa)on, and others structures located throughout the site. Thus, if the site is

developed, electric lines may need to be rerouted. Phased development could allow for some

por)ons of the site to operate, while simultaneously addressing other problems or planning as-‐

pects in different areas or buildings.

However, the ques)on remains in how to make Fisk Sta)on a purposeful place for all to

benefit and learn from. Specific land use op)ons could include new light industrial ac)vity, small

businesses, waterfront access and parks, or a museum or cultural center. Based on its current

zoning and loca)on, Fisk Sta)on is ideal for housing new industrial ac)vi)es. But zoning changes

to allow other civic uses may also prove beneficial to the community.


Collec)vely, the poten)al new land and building uses discussed below could provide dif-‐

ferent types of jobs and various ameni)es to Pilsen residents. These recommended purposes

are explained in greater detail below.

Industrial and Small Business Development With an Emphasis on Sustainability

Fisk Sta)on’s future land uses need to be considered in terms of zoning restric)ons. Due

its current loca)on within Pilsen’s Planned Manufacturing District (PMD) and its surrounding

industrial opera)ons, industrial opera)ons remain an ideal future use. Fisk Sta)on could poten-‐

)ally be transformed into a sustainable manufacturing facility in order to create green jobs and

foster Pilsen’s economic growth. Because it is surrounded by a variety of industrial businesses,

the site could also poten)ally work with nearby industrial businesses in terms of materials, divi-‐

sion of labor, or the like. A green manufacturing facility is a feasible op)on as this type of land

use is permiced under the current PMD status and some of the exis)ng industrial equipment

could poten)ally be reused. In addi)on, because Fisk is currently connected to the electric grid

through its exis)ng infrastructure, renewable energy genera)on could more easily be integrated

into redevelopment designs.

Finally, Fisk Sta)on could also serve as a loca)on for sustainable workforce, technology,

or business development in order to support green job training, entrepreneurship, and manu-‐

facturing growth. Large buildings, such as the Administra)on Building or Switch House No. 1

could serve as a business incubator, which would house new businesses with modest means.

Parks and Open Space: Waterfront Redevelopment

Pilsen has historically lacked parks and open spaces due to its density and development

pacerns. In addi)on, much of the Chicago River is closed off and inaccessible due to industrial

opera)ons. Today, “Many locals have a contradictory or complicated ajtude toward the river.

They see it as polluted, dirty, smelly…many local residents steer clear of the river or don’t even

know exactly where it is or how to access it. This confusion is certainly jus)fied. Winding

through industrial areas and city fleet management vehicle depots, the stretch of waterway on

either side of the Racine Avenue Pumping Sta)on in Bridgeport is elusive, its banks mostly

blocked and obscured by chain-‐link fencing, thick vegeta)on, and imposing old brick buildings.”1


Similarly, Fisk Sta)on has been closed off to residents for decades. However, a por)on of

the site could poten)ally be transformed into a publicly accessible park, which features green

space and trails. Because Fisk is located on the South Branch of the Chicago River, it remains a

valuable property that could provide future waterfront access, open space, and recrea)onal ac-‐

)vi)es to residents.

Two proper)es, zoned as Planned Developments (PD), are located to the east of Fisk

Sta)on and feature a short, vegetated public trail along the South Branch of the Chicago River.

However, the trail is very short and most residents are not aware of its existence. The only entry

point is located at the back of the distribu)on warehouse at 929 W. Cermak Road. The riverside

path on the PD parcels to the east offer the poten)al to extend the trail and green space to

Fisk’s waterfront. Building a con)guous natural open space would welcome pedestrian traffic,

further enhance the area’s environmental quality, benefit the community. Because Pilsen lacks

parks and natural open spaces, adding a public river walk is essen)al.

Fisk Sta)on could also prove importa)on in changing the percep)on and nature of the Chicago

River in Pilsen. The site could help improve upon the health and well-‐being of residents by pro-‐

viding recrea)onal outdoor ac)vi)es, such as sports fields, canoeing, kayaking, picnic areas, or

fishing. Instead of pollu)ng Pilsen and restric)ng access to the river, Fisk Sta)on could one day

provide a place for families to enjoy nature, learn about na)ve plants and urban wildlife, and

spend )me together.

Fisk Sta)on could poten)ally be connected to Chicago’s water transporta)on system,

making the site an new entry point for Pilsen. This may include extending river taxis, architec-‐

tural boat tours, kayaking, and canoeing from the Loop. Although bringing river taxis and boat

tours to Pilsen may seem costly or unlikely, waterway transit already extends to the nearby

neighborhood of Chinatown and also has provoked an interest in involved stakeholders. Lynn

Osmond, the Chicago Architecture Founda)on President and CEO, has discussed extending the

organiza)on’s boat tours to Pilsen.2 The Founda)on’s architectural boat tour is used by 200,000

people per year, producing $5 million in revenue for the company, not including the addi)onal

indirect impacts related to tourism. Osmond states:

Right now, the majority of the ac)vity around the river is contained downtown, but that could be addressed…The plan is to con)nue that, ideally all the way to Pilsen, so that you end up with a con)nuous flow across the city…With Pilsen, if you had something to


show along the river, people would start to see the area as an asset...It would be fabu-‐lous to go out to Pilsen regularly—if, every Sunday morning for instance, there was this extended river tour that really went up to the North and South Branches. The changes in the river have had a lot to do with the buildings. If you look at the number of new build-‐ings in the last 20 years, a major propor)on around the river has been built since then. Their success is clearly connected.”3

Connec)ng Pilsen to Chicago’s transporta)on and tourist system at Fisk Sta)on could

spur addi)onal economic development in the neighborhood, draw more visitors to tour the Pil-‐

sen Historic District, and also provide a new transit route for residents.

With new green spaces and a water transit system, Fisk Sta)on could become a dis)n-‐

guished site for both Pilsen and Chicago. It has the poten)al to become a des)na)on, that

draws in both community residents and tourist, while also providing an exci)ng place to visit

and enjoy.

Museum or Educa3on Center

One of Fisk Sta)on’s historic buildings could poten)ally house a museum or educa)onal

center to celebrate the history of Fisk Sta)on or Pilsen’s ethnic or cultural past. A museum or

educa)on center is ideal as it could create year-‐round jobs and provide a learning environment

for both residents and tourists.

One poten)al op)on would include crea)ng a museum dedicated to the site’s industrial

history and the growth of electricity, which perhaps is affiliated with Chicago’s Museum of Sci-‐

ence and Industry. In addi)on to crea)ng a place for all people to learn about electricity’s de-‐

velopment and technologic innova)ons, Fisk Sta)on would also service as a memorial to the

power plant’s role within the industry. Besides the historic buildings, a number of historic ar)-‐

facts remain at the site today. For example, industrial equipment related to past coal opera)ons,

the memorial garden which commemorates past employees and firefighters that have lost their

lives in industrial accidents, historic photographs, and large metal plagues that celebrated vari-‐

ous site anniversaries could be preserved and restored within a museum. The original guest-‐

book signed by hundreds of visitors, including Thomas Edison and Britain’s King George and

Queen Mary, remains at the site. These original historic pieces are vital in honoring and remem-‐

bering the importance of Fisk Sta)on, but also in educa)ng the public on the site’s past.


Although the original 5 MW turbine has been removed from the site, it has been pre-‐

served and remains at General Electric’s headquarters in New York. The 5 MW turbine was a

daring innova)on for its day and led to Fisk Sta)on’s success. As a result, the turbine has been

designated na)onal engineering landmark by the American Society of Mechanical Engineers.

General Electric could return the 5 MW turbine to Fisk Sta)on for public display and to com-‐

memorate the power plant’s past. Preserving both the industrial and non-‐industrial ar)facts in

Fisk Sta)on would provide a unique educa)onal experience for Pilsen residents and visitors.

Addi)onally, a museum could also be geared toward honoring Pilsen’s various cultures

and immigrant, working-‐class groups that have greatly influenced the neighborhood’s develop-‐

ment. A facility of this type could also adopt a broader historic focus in related to Pilsen’s His-‐

toric District and provide walking tours to nearby historic landmarks and shops. A museum

dedicated to Pilsen’s culture and history will help promote addi)onal business opportuni)es

and heritage tourism.

The crea)on of a museum in one of Fisk Sta)on’s buildings would welcome pedestrian

ac)vity. Thus, addi)onal ameni)es, such as cafes, ar)st galleries, small stores, or performance

spaces, could be built into the site to serve the needs of residents and visitors. However, if one

of Fisk Sta)on’s buildings were to be reused as a museum, the space should also be u)lized to

house neighborhood ac)vi)es and support. Although tourism is important in strengthening Pil-‐

sen’s economic growth,

Tourist ini)a)ves can be damaging to communi)es, such as Pilsen, where low-‐income residents are struggling for resources; these resources are instead being funneled to support people who enter the community for a brief period of )me, consume and ab-‐sorb certain aspects of it, and then leave it to its own self-‐preserva)on and the omen pollu)ng effects of this tourism....Tourism, however, as a primary local development tac-‐)c may carry the danger of solely providing an experience to the tourist while ignoring factors influencing quality of life for its residents.4

Thus, tourism should not be priori)zed over exis)ng residents, but instead alongside commu-‐

nity support. A cultural center could house mee)ngs, public events, fes)vals, and exhibi)ons. In

addi)on, other community resources and services, such as job training or placement, could be

provided.

Fisk Sta)on presents a rare opportunity in promo)ng an understanding and educa)on of

electricity, immigrant popula)ons, and Pilsen’s historic aspects. Industrial equipment that once


helped in the power plant’s opera)ons along with other historic ar)facts that remain at the site

today. These unique features are vital in conveying informa)on on Fisk Sta)on’s rich legacy and

paying tribute to its past. At the same )me, Fisk Sta)on can also house valuable community

spaces that support Pilsen residents and their cultural ac)vi)es.

Moving Toward a Mixed-‐Use Future

These proposed uses demonstrate the extraordinary possibili)es in assigning Fisk Sta)on

diverse and crea)ve land op)ons. Amer a detailed site analysis, feasibility studies should be

conducted to iden)fy the site’s true market poten)al and ensure that the land use op)ons ad-‐

here to the community’s needs.

3. Integrate Sustainable Design and Purposes Into the Site’s Final Uses

Fisk Sta)on’s historic preserva)on should be implemented alongside sustainable design.

Fisk Sta)on should follow in the footsteps of other adap)ve reuse cases that have successfully

restored a power plant’s original features, while also retrofijng the building to increase energy

efficiency and lessen the site’s environmental impacts. Some power plants, which once polluted

the surrounding neighborhood, are now LEED-‐cer)fied structures. Addi)onally, these facili)es

have even integrated sustainability into their new building func)ons, such as in the case of a

charter school’s curriculum.

Green infrastructure and design could include energy produc)on via a geothermal sys-‐

tem or solar panels, retroficed historic windows, storm water management, energy efficient

hea)ng and cooling systems, green roods, onsite urban agriculture. These sustainable elements

should be used to showcase innova)ve solu)ons in reu)lizing industrial power plants and how

contaminated sites can be repurposed for a cleaner future. In addi)on, because the site is

zoned for industrial ac)vity, the site could also poten)ally house businesses that manufacture

sustainable-‐based products or technology.

Given the site’s history of pollu)on, sustainable aspects should be incorporated into Fisk

Sta)on’s future land uses to improve upon residents’ quality of health and the exis)ng envi-‐

ronment. Fisk Sta)on should become a city acrac)on that demonstrates how a dirty power


plant can be successfully transformed into an environmentally-‐friendly, vibrant space that en-‐

gages public ac)vity.

4. Mul3-‐Stakeholder Involvement

Mul)-‐stakeholder involvement is key in redeveloping Fisk Sta)on, regardless of who is

direc)ng or funding the project. The city, elected officials, private developers, preserva)on

firms, Midwest Genera)on, engineers, architects, neighborhood organiza)ons, residents, or any

other local stakeholders should be involved in the planning process for the site’s future uses.

These partnerships are necessary in order to provide various exper)se and perspec)ves, as well

as to gain community, poli)cal, or financial support to move redevelopment forward.

However, each of these stakeholders will have different goals and objec)ves for future

use. For example, the site owner, a real estate developer would be most interested in obtaining

the best return on an investment, a preserva)on group would aim to save the original integrity

of buildings, whereas Pilsen residents may want to focus on services they need most in the

community. Fisk Sta)on’s final use should try to sa)sfy most, if not all, interests involved, but

should also place addi)onal emphasis for Pilsen residents and community organiza)ons as the

final land reuse would affect them most.

Thus, public engagement is crucial for the site’s success and the process must be opened

to all residents for their input on the future land uses. Fisk Sta)on played an important role in

Pilsen’s local history and economy, through providing employment, revenue, and other financial

assistance. In addi)on, the pollu)on generated by the power plant was a major historical con-‐

cern for residents and community organiza)ons, which triggered over a decade of protests. The

redevelopment project within Pilsen should strive to preserve historic and cultural iden)ty

while also mee)ng the community’s needs.

5. Compe33ve Project Proposals

Because Fisk Sta)on will no longer generate electricity by the end of 2012, new crea)ve

uses must be assigned to the property. As stated in the previous recommenda)on, a variety of

par)cipants should be included in the redevelopment process. Specifically, community organi-‐

za)ons, students and departments from nearby Chicago universi)es, local architectural design


companies, and engineering firms should be encouraged to engage in the process through de-‐

signing site proposals or providing exper)se on various topics.

Specially, a contest for the future land uses or architectural designs could be opened to

the public, community organiza)ons, and poten)al businesses. These types of proposals are

vital in iden)fying unseen crea)ve and innova)ve ideas to be used for finding unique future

reuse op)ons. A compe))ve contest would help create a vision for the site’s future and allow

the public to par)cipate in the planning process.

6. Crea3ve Designs for the Exis3ng Substa3on

While the redevelopment of Fisk Sta)on would entail removing various industrial

equipment that once aided electricity genera)on, the electrical substa)on, owned by ComEd, is

to remain on the site amer the power plant re)res. The substa)on presents aesthe)c and safety

challenges for certain future land uses at Fisk Sta)on. High voltage substa)ons also need to be

secured to ensure the public is protected from harms or possible malfunc)ons.

However, crea)ve solu)ons can help merge electrical opera)ons with a future increase

in pedestrian or economic ac)vity. For example, in Aus)n, Texas, the substa)on at Seaholm

Power Plant will be concealed with a wall. Addi)onal informa)on on the adap)ve reuse of this

site is discussed in Chapter IV. Instead of a conven)onal barrier, the wall will showcase public art

and various designs, which may include wood, concrete panels, perforated metal, and even

rainbow-‐colored lights at night.5 Aus)n City Hall has approved the construc)on of a 12 to 25

foot wall at an es)mated cost of $800,000. The preliminary drawings for the wall are shown in

Fig. 7.1-‐7.4. The costs will be primarily funded by the property owner, Aus)n Energy. The re-‐

maining costs will come from Aus)n’s Art in Public Places program, which requires designated

funds for city art projects.

Seaholm Power Plant’s redevelopment is to include new stores, a hotel, residences, and

an event space, which will increase overall ac)vity in the area. As a result, the wall is important

in crea)ng a pedestrian friendly environment for enhanced safety, while also serving as an at-‐

trac)on. Rather than remaining visually unacrac)ve or dangerous, the wall benefits both visi-‐

tors and those who live or work near Seaholm Power Plant.


Fisk Sta)on could poten)ally follow a solu)on like the one provided by Seaholm Power

Plant that transformed an ordinary chain-‐linked fence into an ar)s)c, unique wall. Addi)onally,

a substa)on wall surrounding the substa)on at Fisk Sta)on could take advantage of Pilsen’s ar-‐

)s)c resources and contribute to Pilsen’s ethnic heritage. The wall could complement the

neighborhood’s La)no-‐inspired murals and mosaics, that have long reflected the values of Pilsen

residents.

14

Substation�Art�Wall

Southeast�Corner�at�Shoal�Creek�and�the�planned�2nd Street�Bridge

14

18

West�Wall�at�planned�West�Avenue�Extension,�across�the�street�from�SeaholmDevelopment.�5’Ͳ0” minimum�clear�pedestrian�way�planned�for�east�side�of�West�Avenue

5’


18


17

NIGHT.�Southwest�Wall�at�planned�2nd Street�and�West�Avenue,�across�the�street�from�the�Seaholm Power Plant.


17

25East�Wall�along�Shoal�Creek�Trail.


25


Fig. 7.1-‐7.4: Preliminary Designs for the substa)on Wall at Seaholm Power Plant.

Image by NADAAA, “Seaholm Substa)on Wall, Art In Public Places Project: Schema)c Design Updated Rendering,”

NADAAA, Presenta)on to the City Council, February 9, 2012.

Conclusion

Many power plants across the United States today have been converted into valuable

community spaces and remain impressive educa)onal resources on the history of electricity.

The redevelopment of Fisk Sta)on should follow similar footsteps of past successful examples

by showcasing the future civic, economic, and recrea)onal value of repurposing power plants.

It is crucial to note that Fisk Sta)on offers valuable redevelopment opportuni)es that

can drive employment and preserve community iden)ty while improving public and environ-‐

mental health. Transforming Fisk Sta)on from an old, pollu)ng coal-‐fired power plant into a vital

neighborhood landmark would showcase posi)ve community investment, celebrate current cul-‐

tural values, and promote a healthy, sustainable future for Chicago.

These featured recommenda)ons highlight the immense possibili)es for Fisk Sta)on,

but are no means intended to define the site’s future. The extraordinary opportuni)es remain

to be seen for Pilsen and for Chicago at large. However, if preserved and reused for posi)ve

purposes, Fisk Sta)on’s historic buildings can become a valuable asset to Chicago, illustra)ng

crea)ve outcomes alongside historic preserva)on. The site should con)nue to honor the inge-‐

nuity and moderniza)on in the electric industry while also providing new economic benefits

and an exci)ng place to visit. What was once the largest steam genera)ng plant in the world

should one day serve future genera)ons without erasing the past.


Chapter VII: Sec3on Endnotes


1 Jeanne Gang, Reverse Effect: Renewing Chicago's Waterways (Chicago: Studio Gang Architects, 2011), 99.2 Jeanne Gang, Reverse Effect: Renewing Chicago's Waterways (Chicago: Studio Gang Architects, 2011), 35.3 Ibid.4 Ibid., 28-‐29.5 Kayla Jonsson, “Aus)n Energy finances wall art for Seaholm Power Plant,” The Daily Texan, February 15, 2012.

hcp://www.dailytexanonline.com/news/2012/02/15/aus)n-‐energy-‐finances-‐wall-‐art-‐seaholm-‐power-‐plant



Appendix

PMD (Planned Manufacturing District)Use Table and StandardsPMD 11, Subdistrict A

City of Chicago Zoning Ordinance, 17-‐6-‐0403-‐F, Supp. No. 15

P = Permiced by Right S = Special Use Approval Required PD = Planned Development Approval Required -‐ = not allowed

Public And CivicPublic And CivicPublic And Civic

A. Day CareA. Day Care -‐

B. Deten)on and Correc)onal Facili)es B. Deten)on and Correc)onal Facili)es -‐

C. Parks and Recrea)on (except as more specifically regulated)C. Parks and Recrea)on (except as more specifically regulated) S

1. Community Centers, Recrea)on Buildings and Similar Assembly Use -‐

2. Community Garden -‐

D. Postal ServiceD. Postal Service P

E. Public Safety ServicesE. Public Safety Services P

F. U)li)es and Services, MinorF. U)li)es and Services, Minor P

U)li)es and Services, MajorU)li)es and Services, Major P

CommercialCommercialCommercial

H. Adult UseH. Adult Use -‐

I. Animal ServicesI. Animal ServicesI. Animal Services

1. Shelters/Boarding Kennels P

2. Sales and Grooming -‐

3. Veterinary S

4. Stables P

J. Ar)st Work SpaceJ. Ar)st Work Space -‐

K. Building Maintenance ServicesK. Building Maintenance Services P


L. Business Support ServicesL. Business Support ServicesL. Business Support Services

1.Copying and Reproduc)on P

Business/Trade School P

3. Day Labor Employment Agency P

4. Employment Agencies P

M. Urban FarmM. Urban FarmM. Urban Farm

1. Indoor Opera)on P

2. Outdoor Opera)on

3. Roomop Opera)on P

N. Communica)on Service EstablishmentsN. Communica)on Service Establishments P

O. Construc)on Sales and ServiceO. Construc)on Sales and ServiceO. Construc)on Sales and Service

1. Building Material Sales P

2. Contract/Construc)on Storage Yard P

P. Drive-‐Through FacilityP. Drive-‐Through Facility -‐

Q. Ea)ng and Drinking EstablishmentQ. Ea)ng and Drinking EstablishmentQ. Ea)ng and Drinking Establishment

1. Restaurant, Limited P

2. Restaurant, General P

3. Tavern P

R. Entertainment and Spectator SportsR. Entertainment and Spectator SportsR. Entertainment and Spectator Sports

1. Small Venue -‐

2. Medium Venue -‐

3. Inter-‐Track Wagering Facility S

4. Indoor Special Event Class A, including incidental liquor sales P

5. Indoor Special Event Class B, including incidental liquor sales P

S. Financial Services (except as more specifically regulated)S. Financial Services (except as more specifically regulated) P

1. Consumer Loan Establishment -‐


2. Payday Loan Store -‐

3. Pawn Shop -‐

T. Food and Beverage Retail SalesT. Food and Beverage Retail Sales P

U. Gas Sta)onsU. Gas Sta)ons S

V. Medical ServiceV. Medical Service P

W. Office (except more specifically regulated)W. Office (except more specifically regulated) P

1. High Technology Office P

2. Electronic Data Storage Center P

X. Parking, Non-‐AccessoryX. Parking, Non-‐Accessory P

Y. Personal ServiceY. Personal Service P

Z. Repair or Laundry Service, ConsumerZ. Repair or Laundry Service, Consumer P

AA. Residen)al Storage WarehouseAA. Residen)al Storage Warehouse S

BB. Retail Sales, GeneralBB. Retail Sales, General P

CC. Sports and Recrea)on, Par)cipantCC. Sports and Recrea)on, Par)cipant -‐

DD. Schools, Elementary and High (non-‐boarding)DD. Schools, Elementary and High (non-‐boarding) -‐

EE. Vehicle Sale and ServiceEE. Vehicle Sale and ServiceEE. Vehicle Sale and Service

1. Auto Supply/Accessory Sales -‐

2. Car Wash or Cleaning Service S

3. Heavy Equipment Sales/Rental P

4. Light Equipment Sales/Rental (e.g., auto, motorcycle and boat sales) -‐

5. Motor Vehicle Repair Shop, not including body work, pain)ng or commercial vehicle repairs

P

6. Motor Vehicle Repair Shop, may include body work, pain)ng or commercial vehicle repairs

P

7. Vehicle Storage and Towing P

8. RVs or Boat Storage P

IndustrialIndustrialIndustrial


FF. Manufacturing, Produc)on and Industrial ServiceFF. Manufacturing, Produc)on and Industrial ServiceFF. Manufacturing, Produc)on and Industrial Service

1. Ar)san (on-‐site produc)on of goods by hand manufacturing, involving the use of hand tools and small-‐scale, light mechanical equipment)

P

2. Limited (manufacturing of finished parts of products, primarily from previ-‐ously prepared materials)

P

3. General (all manufacturing-‐-‐except intensive manufacturing-‐-‐of finished or unfinished products, primarily from extracted or raw materials, or recycled or secondary materials, or bulk storage and handling of such products)

P

4. Intensive (manufacturing of acetylene, cement lime, gypsum or plaster-‐of-‐ paris, chlorine, corrosive acid or fer)lizer, insec)cides, disinfectants, poisons, explosives, paint, lacquer, varnish, petroleum products, coal products, plas)c and synthe)c resins and radioac)ve materials)

P

GG. Mining/Excava)onGG. Mining/Excava)on -‐

HH. Recycling Facili)esHH. Recycling Facili)esHH. Recycling Facili)es

1. Class I P

2. Class II P

3. Class III S

4. Class IVA S

5. Class IVB S

6. Class V S

II. Warehouse and Freight Movement (except as more specifically regulated)II. Warehouse and Freight Movement (except as more specifically regulated) P

1. Container Storage P

2. Freight Terminal P

3. Outdoor Storage or Raw Materials as a Principal Use P

JJ. Waste-‐Related UseJJ. Waste-‐Related UseJJ. Waste-‐Related Use

1. Hazardous Materials Disposal or Storage S

2. Incinerators -‐

3. Incinerators, Municipal S

4. Liquid Waste Handling Facili)es S

5. Reprocessable Construc)on/Demoli)on Material Facility S


6. Resource Recovery Facili)es S

7. Sanitary Landfills S

8. Transfer Sta)ons S

9. Modified Transfer Sta)ons S

OtherOtherOther

LL. Wireless Communica)on Facili)es LL. Wireless Communica)on Facili)es S

1. Co-‐located P

2 .Free-‐standing (Towers) P


BibliographyAdvisory Council on Historic Preserva)on. Sustainability and Historic Federal Buildings. Wash-‐

ington D.C., May 2, 2011. hcp://www.preserva)onna)on.org/issues/sustainability/green-‐lab/valuing-‐building-‐reuse.html

American Clean Skies Founda)on. Repurposing Legacy Power Plants: Lessons For the Future. American Clean Skies Founda)on, August 2011.

American Ins)tute of Electrical Engineers. The Chicago Electrical Handbook. Chicago: American Ins)tute of Electrical Engineers, 1904. hcp://openlibrary.org/books/OL23413423M/The_Chicago_electrical_handbook

American Society of Mechanical Engineers. “The First 500-‐Kilowac Cur)s Ver)cal Steam Tur-‐bine: An Interna)onal Historic Mechanical Engineering Landmark.” The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, July 23, 1990. hcp://files.asme.org/ASMEORG/Communi)es/History/Landmarks/5527.pdf

Arredondo. Gabriela F. “Lower West Side.” In Encyclopedia of Chicago, edited by Janice L. Reiff, Ann Durkin Kea)ng, and James R. Grossman. Chicago Historical Society, 2005. hcp://encyclopedia.chicagohistory.org/pages/765.html

Avila, Oscar. “Pilsen Goes on Historic List.” Chicago Tribune, February 28, 2006. hcp://ar)cles.chicagotribune.com/2006-‐02-‐28/news/0602280132_1_tax-‐freeze-‐historic-‐list-‐historic-‐district.

Baker, Joseph. “Out With The Old: More Coal-‐Fired Genera)on Closures Announced.” Energy Boom, March 1, 2012. hcp://www.energyboom.com/emerging/out-‐old-‐more-‐coal-‐fired-‐genera)on-‐closures-‐announced

Benfield, Kaid. "Turning Pollu)ng Power Plants into Green Neighborhood Development." Switchboard, Natural Resources Defense Council Staff Blog, September 8, 2011.

Bernhard, F.H. “New Features of Central-‐Sta)on Service in Chicago.” Electrical Review and West-‐ern Electrician 54, no. 22 (1909): 968-‐1976. hcp://books.google.com/ebooks/reader?id=HYYfAQAAMAAJ&printsec=frontcover&output=reader

Betancur, John. Gentrifica%on before Gentrifica%on? The Plight of Pilsen in Chicago. Chicago: Nathalie P. Vorhees Center for Neighborhood and Community Improvement, 2005. hcp://www.uic.edu/cuppa/voorheesctr/Publica)ons/Gentrifica)on%20before%20Gentrifica)on.pdf

⎯. “Gentrifica)on and Community Fabric in Chicago.” Urban Studies 48, no. 2 (2011): 383-‐406. Bouman, Mark J. “‘The Best Lighted City in the World’: The Construc)on of a Nocturnal Land-‐

scape in Chicago,” in Chicago Architecture and Design, 1923-‐1993: Reconfigura%on of an American Metropolis, edited by John Zukowksy, 33-‐52. Chicago: Art Ins)tute of Chicago, 1993.

Bradley, Robert L. Edison to Enron: Energy Markets and Poli%cal Strategies. Salem: Scrivener Publishing LLC, 2011.

Bosa Development. “Electra.” Bosa Development. Accessed March 1, 2012. hcp://electra.bosadev.com/






http://openlibrary.org/books/OL23413423M/The_Chicago_electrical_handbook

http://openlibrary.org/books/OL23413423M/The_Chicago_electrical_handbook

http://files.asme.org/ASMEORG/Communities/History/Landmarks/5527.pdf

http://files.asme.org/ASMEORG/Communities/History/Landmarks/5527.pdf



http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2006-02-28/news/0602280132_1_tax-freeze-historic-list-historic-district




http://www.energyboom.com/emerging/out-old-more-coal-fired-generation-closures-announced




http://books.google.com/ebooks/reader?id=HYYfAQAAMAAJ&printsec=frontcover&output=reader










Breeze, Lew. “San Diego's Comprehensive Source for Downtown Living: Electra.” Lew Breeze. Accessed March 1, 2012. hcp://www.sdcondo.com/electra.html

Brucomesso, Rinio. “Complexity of the Urban Waterfront.” In Waterfronts in Post-‐Industrial Cit-‐ies, edited by Richard Marshall, 39-‐49. London: Spon Press, 2001.

Bukro, Casey. “Edison Will Remove, Truck Away Debris.” Chicago Tribune, October 23, 1968.Business Review. "Adap)ve Reuse of Historic Buildings Makes Economic Sense." The Business

Review, October 21, 2002. Campos, João. “The Cultural Consistence of Built Heritage Cons)tutes its Intangible Dimension.”

Paper presented at the 14th ICOMOS General Assembly and Interna)onal Symposium: ‘Place, memory, meaning: preserving intangible values in monuments and sites,’ Victoria Falls, Zimbabwe, 2003.

Carroon, Jean. Sustainable Preserva%on: Greening Exis%ng Buildings. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2010.

Casal, Stella Maris. “The Adap)ve Re-‐Use of Buildings: Remembrance or Oblivion?” Paper pre-‐sented at the 14th ICOMOS General Assembly and Interna)onal Symposium: ‘Place, memory, meaning: preserving intangible values in monuments and sites,” Victoria Falls, Zimbabwe, 2003. hcp://openarchive.icomos.org/489/.

Casal, Stella Maris. “The Spirit of Place and the New Uses.” Paper presented at the 16th ICOMOS General Assembly and Interna)onal Symposium: ‘Finding the spirit of place – between the tangible and the intangible,’ Quebec, Canada, 2008. hcp://openarchive.icomos.org/199/.

Cintron, Miriam. “Tax incen)ves strengthen Pilsen’s Historic District.” Gaze]e, September 4, 2009. hcp://www.gazecechicago.com/index/2009/09/tax-‐incen)ves-‐strengthen-‐pilsen%E2%80%99s-‐historic-‐district.

Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning (CMAP). “Charles H. Shaw Technology and Learning Center.” Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning. Accessed December 4, 2011.

Chuckman, John. “Postcard-‐Chicago-‐Sears Roebuck Plant-‐Aerial-‐Early.” Chuckman’s Collec)ons: Chicago Postcards, Volume 8. October 1, 2010 hcp://chuckmancollec)onvolume8.blogspot.com/2010/10/postcard-‐chicago-‐sears-‐roebuck-‐plant.html

Ci)zens Against Ruining the Environment, The Environmental Law and Policy Center, Natural Re-‐sources Defense Council, Inc., Respiratory Health Associa)on of Metropolitan Chicago, Sierra Club v. Midwest Genera)on. No. 09-‐cv-‐05277, (N.D. IL May, 14, 2010).

City of Burlington, Vermont, Community and Economic Development Office. “Moran Plant: Overview.” Burlington Community and Economic Development Office. Accessed March 1, 2012. hcp://burlingtonvt.gov/CEDO/Waterfront/Moran/Overview/

⎯. “Moran Plant: History and Past Ideas.” Burlington Community and Economic Development Office. Accessed March 1, 2012. hcp://burlingtonvt.gov/CEDO/Waterfront/Moran/History-‐and-‐Past-‐Ideas/

⎯. “Moran Plant: Financing Plan.” Burlington Community and Economic Development Office. Accessed March 1, 2012. hcp://burlingtonvt.gov/CEDO/Waterfront/Moran/Financing-‐Plan/

⎯. “Moran Plant: Site Data.” Burlington Community and Economic Development Office. Ac-‐cessed March 1, 2012. hcp://burlingtonvt.gov/CEDO/Waterfront/Moran/Site-‐Data/


























City of Chicago. “Chapter 2: Physical & Economic Assessment.” In The Chicago Central Area Plan, 20-‐32. Chicago: 2003. hcp://www.cityofchicago.org/content/dam/city/depts/zlup/Planning_and_Policy/Publica)ons/Central_Area_Plan_DRAFT/03_Central_Area_Plan_Chapter2a.pdf

⎯. “Chicago Zoning Ordinance and Land Use Ordinance.” City of Chicago, American Legal Pub-‐lishing Corpora)on, 2011. hcp://www.amlegal.com/nxt/gateway.dll/Illinois/chicagozoning/chicagozoningordinanceandlanduseordinanc?f=templates$fn=default.htm$3.0$vid=amlegal:chicagozoning_il

⎯. Corridors Of Industrial Opportunity: A Plan For Industry In Chicago. Chicago, 2004.⎯. “Demoli)on Delay.” City of Chicago Historic Preserva%on. Accessed March 19, 2012.

hcp://www.cityofchicago.org/content/city/en/depts/dcd/supp_info/demoli)on_delay.html

⎯. “Enterprise Zone Program.” City of Chicago. Accessed February 13, 2012. hcp://www.cityofchicago.org/city/en/depts/dcd/supp_info/enterprise_zone_program.html

⎯. “Pilsen Industrial Corridor TIF.” City of Chicago. Accessed February 13, 2012. hcp://www.cityofchicago.org/city/en/depts/dcd/supp_info/)f/pilsen_industrialcorridor)f.html

⎯. “Tax Increment Financing Program.” City of Chicago. Accessed February 13, 2012. hcp://www.cityofchicago.org/content/city/en/depts/dcd/supp_info/tax_increment_financingprogram.html

City of Chicago, Commission on Chicago Landmarks. Landmarks Ordinance and the Rules and Regula%ons of the Commission on Chicago Landmarks. Chicago: City of Chicago, August 3, 2011. hcp://www.cityofchicago.org/content/dam/city/depts/zlup/Historic_Preserva)on/Publica)ons/Chicago_Landmarks_Ordinance.pdf

City of Chicago, Department of Housing & Economic Development. “Chicago Department of Zoning.” Zoning Data Reflects all Ordinances Passed Prior to April 13, 2011. hcps://gisapps.cityofchicago.org/zoning/liability.html

⎯. “Economic Incen)ves for the Repair and Rehabilita)on of Historic Buildings.” City of Chi-‐cago. Accessed March 23, 2012. hcp://www.cityofchicago.org/content/dam/city/depts/zlup/Historic_Preserva)on/Publica)ons/Incen)ves_Flyer.pdf

⎯. “Preserva)on Incen)ves.” City of Chicago, Chicago Landmarks. Accessed February 14, 2012. hcp://webapps.cityofchicago.org/landmarksweb/web/preserva)on.htm

City of Chicago, Housing and Economic Development Historic Preserva)on. “Landmarks Desig-‐na)on Process.” City of Chicago. Accessed March 24, 2012. hcp://www.cityofchicago.org/content/city/en/depts/dcd/supp_info/landmarks_designa)onprocess.html

City of Chicago, Mayor's Press Office. “Mayor Emanuel Announces Agreement With Midwest Genera)on to Re)re Two Coal-‐fired Power Plants in Chicago.” City of Chicago, February 29, 2012. hcp://www.fiskandcrawford.com/assets/content/pdf/MWGEN_FiskCrawfordRe)rement.pdf


http://www.cityofchicago.org/content/dam/city/depts/zlup/Planning_and_Policy/Publications/Central_Area_Plan_DRAFT/03_Central_Area_Plan_Chapter2a.pdf








http://www.cityofchicago.org/content/city/en/depts/dcd/supp_info/demolition_delay.html








http://www.cityofchicago.org/city/en/depts/dcd/supp_info/tif/pilsen_industrialcorridortif.html




http://www.cityofchicago.org/content/city/en/depts/dcd/supp_info/tax_increment_financingprogram.html








https://gisapps.cityofchicago.org/zoning/liability.html

https://gisapps.cityofchicago.org/zoning/liability.html















⎯. “Mayor Emanuel Announces Plan to Develop Economic Development and Job Crea)on Al-‐terna)ves for Fisk and Crawford Power Plants.” City of Chicago, March 8, 2012. hcp://www.cityofchicago.org/city/en/depts/mayor/press_room/press_releases/2012/march_2012/mayor_emanuel_announcesplantodevelopeconomicdevelopmentandjobcre.html

City of Chicago, The Commission on Chicago Landmarks. "Classical Revival/Beaux-‐Arts." Chicago Landmarks. Accessed January 27, 2012. hcp://webapps.cityofchicago.org/landmarksweb/web/styledetails.htm?styId=204.

⎯. “Historic Survey: Details for building at (1029-‐1179) W CERMAK RD.” Chicago Landmarks. Accessed January 27, 2012. hcp://webapps.cityofchicago.org/landmarksweb/search/searchdetail.htm?pin=1729200002&formNumber=310107001.

⎯. “Historic Survey: Details for building at (1029-‐1179) W CERMAK RD.” Chicago Landmarks. Accessed January 27, 2012. hcp://webapps.cityofchicago.org/landmarksweb/search/searchdetail.htm?pin=1729200007&formNumber=310107003

⎯. “Historic Survey: Details for building at (1029-‐1179) W CERMAK RD.” Chicago Landmarks. Accessed January 27, 2012. hcp://webapps.cityofchicago.org/landmarksweb/search/searchdetail.htm?pin=1729200002&formNumber=310107004

Claire van Ryzin, Jeanne. “Council OKs rainbow-‐hued Seaholm Wall Design.” The Statesman, February 9, 2012. hcp://www.statesman.com/news/local/council-‐oks-‐rainbow-‐hued-‐seaholm-‐wall-‐design-‐2164175.html

Claire van Ryzin, Jeanne. “Schema)c design for Seaholm Substa)on Wall Art approved; Colored lights added.” Aus)n 360, February 10, 2012. hcp://www.aus)n360.com/blogs/content/shared-‐gen/blogs/aus)n/seeingthings/entries/2012/02/10/schema)c_design_for_seaholm_s.html

“Cleaning Out the Coal-‐fired Clunkers.” Chicago Tribune, June 06, 2011. hcp://ar)cles.chicagotribune.com/2011-‐06-‐06/news/ct-‐edit-‐coal-‐20110606_1_fisk-‐and-‐crawford-‐state-‐line-‐power-‐sta)on-‐midwest-‐genera)on.

Collins, Mark. “Planned Seaholm Development Puts Re)red Power Plant to Different Use,” Community Impact Newspaper, April 10, 2009. hcp://impactnews.com/ar)cles/planned-‐seaholm-‐development-‐puts-‐re)red-‐power-‐plant-‐to-‐different-‐use

Columbia University, Department of Historic Preserva)on of the Graduate School of Architec-‐ture, Planning & Historic Preserva)on. Preserving the Former IRT Powerhouse: A Preser-‐va%on Plan. Columbia University, 2009.

Comal County Government. “Comal Power Plant.” Comal County Government. Accessed March 3, 2012. hcp://www.co.comal.tx.us/Historical/Proper)es/Comal_Power_Plant.htm

Commonwealth Edison Company. “Fisk Street a Mecca: No. 2 of a Series of Adver)sements on Electric Service in Chicago.” Chicago Daily Tribune, October 7, 1915.

⎯. “Display Ad 5: Reliability is the Keynote of Commonwealth Edison Service.” Chicago Daily Tribune, January 24, 1912.


























http://www.austin360.com/blogs/content/shared-gen/blogs/austin/seeingthings/entries/2012/02/10/schematic_design_for_seaholm_s.html














⎯. “Display Ad 11: A Capacity of 180, 000 Horsepower from These 10 Turbo-‐Generators at Fisk Street Sta)on.” Chicago Daily Tribune, April 12, 1912.

Commonwealth of Australia, Department of the Environment and Heritage. Adap%ve Reuse: Preserving Our Past, Building Our Future. Commonwealth of Australia, Department of the Environment and Heritage, 2004.

Cordish Companies. “Featured Developments.” The Cordish Companies, 2008. hcp://www.cordish.com/sub.cfm?sec)on=newdev

Curran, Winifred and Euan Hague. The Pilsen Building Inventory Project. DePaul University De-‐partment of Geography, Chicago: 2006. hcp://steans.depaul.edu/aboutus/partnerships/geography.asp

Dannecker and Associates. “Electra San Diego Condos.” Dannercker and Associates. Accessed March 2, 2012. hcp://www.welcometosandiego.com/san-‐diego-‐neighborhoods/condos-‐for-‐sale-‐downtown-‐san-‐diego/columbia-‐the-‐waterfront/electra-‐san-‐diego/#img0

De Sousa, Christopher. “Moran Center, Burlington, Vermont: A U.S. EPA Brownfields Sustainabil-‐ity Pilot.” University of Illinois at Chicago, Ins)tute for Environmental Science and Policy, June 2011. www.uic.edu/orgs/brownfields/research-‐results/documents/MoranCenter.pdf

Duffrin, Elizabeth. “Tax Freeze Helps Preserve Pilsen.” ChicagoTalks. November 17, 2008. hcp://www.chicagotalks.org/2008/11/17/tax-‐freeze-‐helps-‐preserve-‐pilsen/

Dunbar, Wells. “Will an Art Wall Determine the Future of Downtown's Seaholm Redevelop-‐ment?” KUT News, Fenruaru 9, 2012. hcp://kutnews.org/post/will-‐art-‐wall-‐determine-‐future-‐downtowns-‐seaholm-‐redevelopment

Dupuy, Richard, Robert Ashworth, and Lydia Frenzel. “Turning a Liability into an Asset! The Story of an Old Power Plant.” Ultra High Pressure (UHP) Projects, Inc. Accessed March 3, 2012. hcp://www.uhpprojects.com/services/comal2.htm

“Emanuel says coal-‐plant sites will be redeveloped.” 13 WREX, WorldNow, March 8, 2012. hcp://www.wrex.com/story/17114159/emanuel-‐says-‐coal-‐plant-‐sites-‐will-‐be-‐redeveloped

Engineering Ventures. “Moran Plant Renova)on.” Engineering Ventures. Accessed March 1, 2012. hcp://www.engineeringventures.com/projects/structural-‐engineering/recrea)onal/moran-‐plant-‐renova)on

ENPRO Services, Inc., “From EPA Brownfields Site to Community Center,” ENPRO Services, Inc., 2010, www.enpro.com/tes)monials/MoranPowerPlant.pdf

Escalona, Alejandro. “Amer Pilsen, Licle Village plants close, will lomy ambi)ons mesh?” Chicago Sun-‐Times, April 10, 2012. hcp://www.sun)mes.com/news/escalona/11124939-‐452/amer-‐pilsen-‐licle-‐village-‐plants-‐close-‐will-‐lomy-‐ambi)ons-‐mesh.html

Falk, Tyler. "Transforming Old Pollu)ng Power Plants into Green Urban Spaces." SmartPlanet, September 8, 2011. hcp://www.smartplanet.com/blog/ci)es/transforming-‐old-‐pollu)ng-‐power-‐plants-‐into-‐green-‐urban-‐spaces/892


















http://kutnews.org/post/will-art-wall-determine-future-downtowns-seaholm-redevelopment


















http://www.smartplanet.com/blog/cities/transforming-old-polluting-power-plants-into-green-urban-spaces/892




Fehsenfeld, Kaaren. "Zoning in on Pilsen: As Development Moves in, Old-‐Timers Move Out." Chicagotalks. May 26, 2010. hcp://www.chicagotalks.org/2010/05/26/zoning-‐in-‐on-‐pilsen-‐as-‐development-‐moves-‐in-‐old-‐)mers-‐move-‐out/

Field Museum, Department of Environment, Culture, and Conserva)on (ECCo). Engaging Chi-‐cago’s Diverse Communi%es in the Chicago Climate Ac%on Plan. Community #4: Pilsen’s Mexican Community. Field Museum, Chicago: December 2010.

⎯. Engaging Chicago’s Diverse Communi%es in the Chicago Climate Ac%on Plan. Community #4: Pilsen’s Mexican Community: Findings and Recommenda%ons At-‐A-‐Glance. Field Mu-‐seum, Chicago: December 2010.

Founda)on for Homan Square. Annual Report Update: 2009-‐2010. Founda)on for Homan Square, 2010. hcp://www.homansquare.org/files/pdf/homan_square_ar_2009-‐10_r3.pdf

⎯. Annual Report Update: 2011. Founda)on for Homan Square, 2011. hcp://www.homansquare.org/files/pdf/2010-‐11_annual_report.pdf

⎯. “Henry Ford Academy Power House High: Power House High Campaign Update.” Founda)on for Homan Square, First Quarter 2008.

⎯. “History.” Homan Square. Accessed March 4, 2012. hcp://www.homansquare.org/history⎯. “Power House” Homan Square. Accessed March 4, 2012.

hcp://www.homansquare.org/power-‐houseFriends of Seaholm. “The Adap)ve Reuse of Seaholm Power Plant.” Friends of Seaholm. Ac-‐

cessed March 4, 2012. hcp://friendsofseaholm.com/Gebhardt, George Frederick. Steam Power Plant Engineering. New York: John Wiley & Sons,

1908. hcp://books.google.com/books?id=KH5DAAAAIAAJ&dq=fisk+Commonwealth+edison+layout+plan&source=gbs_navlinks_s

Geiser A., “Repurposing a Downtown Icon: Firm to Buy Defunct Historical Seaholm Power Plant Amid Cri)cism,” The Daily Texan, May 5, 2010, hcp://www.dailytexanonline.com/content/repurposing-‐downtown-‐icon

Gellman, Erik. “Pilsen.” In Encyclopedia of Chicago, edited by Janice L. Reiff, Ann Durkin Kea)ng, and James R. Grossman. Chicago Historical Society, 2005. hcp://encyclopedia.chicagohistory.org/pages/2477.html

Gerfen, Ka)e. “Charles H. Shaw Technology and Learning Center.” Architect, February 16, 2010. hcp://www.architectmagazine.com/adap)ve-‐reuse/charles-‐h-‐shaw-‐technology-‐and-‐learning-‐center.aspx

“Giant Edison Turbine Unit Put In Service.” Chicago Daily Tribune, April 4, 1959. Government of Saskatchewan, Heritage Resources Branch. Economic Benefits of Heritage Con-‐

serva%on. Government of Saskatchewan. Accessed November 11, 2011.Great Ci)es Ins)tute. “Pilsen (Lower West).” Great Ci%es Ins%tute, Neighborhoods Ini%a%ve. Ac-‐

cessed March 14, 2012. hcp://www.uicni.org/page.php?sec)on=neighborhoods&subsec)on=pilsen.

Grossman, Susan F., Rita M. Cardoso, Giselle G. Belanger, Jerry Belski, Tyra C. Corethers, Mary E. Pejnelli, and Maurice A. Redd. “Pilsen and The Resurrec)on Project: Community Or-‐
















http://books.google.com/books?id=KH5DAAAAIAAJ&dq=fisk+Commonwealth+edison+layout+plan&source=gbs_navlinks_s














ganiza)on in a La)no Community.” Journal of Poverty 4, no. 1-‐2 (2000): 131-‐149. hcp://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J134v04n01_06.

Hampson, Philip. “Edison Plans Fete for Old Turbine Plant.” Chicago Daily Tribune, September 11, 1953.

Harris, Darris Lee. “Sears Power House.” Darris Lee Harris Accessed March 2, 2012. hcp://www.darrisharris.com/

Hawthorne, Michael. “2 Coal-‐Burning Plants to Power Down Early.” Chicago Tribune,, March 1, 2012. hcp://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-‐met-‐coal-‐plant-‐shutdowns-‐20120301,0,4861271.story

Hequet, Marc. “Power Plants.” Retail Traffic, November 1, 2006. hcp://retailtrafficmag.com/development/retail_power_plants/

Hinkle, Josh and Doug Shupe. “Seaholm to have Lighted, Colorful Wall.” KXAN, February 10, 2012. hcp://www.kxan.com/dpp/news/local/aus)n/seaholm-‐to-‐have-‐lighted-‐rainbow-‐wall

Historic Charleston Founda)on. Annual Report 2010. Historic Charleston Founda)on, 2010. Historic Preserva)on Program, University of Virginia. Na%onal Register of Historic Places: Regis-‐

tra%on Form, Pilsen Historic District. US Department of the Interior, Na)onal Park Serv-‐ice. October 2005.

Hodge, William H. “The Commonwealth Edison Company.” Public Service Management 4, no. 5 (May 1908): 131-‐144. hcp://books.google.com/ebooks/reader?id=r_LlAAAAMAAJ&printsec=frontcover&output=reader

Homan Square Community Center Founda)on. A Short History of a Long Journey: Homan Square Annual Report 2005. Homan Square Community Center Founda)on, 2005.

Homan Square Community Center Campus. “Homan Square: From Vacancy to Vibrancy.” Homan Square Community Center Campus, 2007.

“Homan Square Power House. “ DTKindler Communica%ons, Shoo fly design. Accessed March 3, 2012. hcp://homansquarepowerhouse.com

Hughes, Thomas P. “The Electrifica)on of America: The System Builders.” Technology and Cul-‐ture 20, no 1. (January 1979): 124-‐161. hcp://www.jstor.org/stable/3103115.

Illinois Clean Energy Community Founda)on. “Energy Efficiency.” Illinois Clean Energy Commu-‐nity Founda)on, Accessed March 2, 2012. hcp://www.illinoiscleanenergy.org/ph-‐energy-‐efficiency/

Illinois Environmental Protec)on Agency. In The Macer of Midwest Genera)on, LLC Fisk Gener-‐a)ng Sta)on and Crawford Genera)on Sta)on: Order Responding to Pe))oners Request that the Administrator Object to Issuance of a State Opera)ng Permit. Pe))on number V-‐2005-‐1, CAAPP No. 95090081 and 95090076. March 25, 2005. hcp://yosemite.epa.gov/r5/r5ard.nsf/8a853ab744d510c68625745800533fd5/4da3fdd18eece3a8862574c8006fd26b/$file/order.midwestgen.fiskcrawford.pdf

Illinois Historic Preserva)on Agency. “Benefits and Protec)ons Offered by Na)onal Register List-‐ing.” Illinois Historic Preserva%on Agency. Accessed February 11, 2012. hcp://www.illinoishistory.gov/PS/benefitsnr.htm.

⎯. “Property Tax Assessment Freeze.” Illinois Historic Preserva%on Agency. Accessed March 14, 2012. hcp://www.illinoishistory.gov/PS/taxfreeze.htm.
















http://books.google.com/ebooks/reader?id=r_LlAAAAMAAJ&printsec=frontcover&output=reader






http://www.jstor.org/stable/3103115

http://www.jstor.org/stable/3103115











⎯. “Benefits and Protec)ons Offered by Na)onal Register Lis)ng.” Illinois Historic Preserva%on Agency. Accessed February 11, 2012. hcp://www.illinoishistory.gov/PS/benefitsnr.htm

⎯. “Property Tax Assessment Freeze.” Illinois Historic Preserva%on Agency. Accessed March 14, 2012. hcp://www.illinoishistory.gov/PS/taxfreeze.htm.

Insull, Samuel. Central Sta%on Electric Service: Its Commercial Development and Economic Sig-‐nificance as Set forth in the Public Addresses (1897-‐1914) of Samuel Insull. Chicago: Pri-‐vate Print, 1915.

“Insull Unveils Tablet at Fisk Edison Sta)on.” Chicago Daily Tribune, November 15, 1928.Jacobs, Jane. The Death and Life of Great American Ci%es. New York and Toronto: Random

House, 1961.Jenkins, W.C. “Chicago’s Marvelous Electrical Development: What Thomas A. Edison Has Lived

to See.” Na%onal Magazine. February and January, 1911. hcp://www.archive.org/details/na)onalmagazine33brayrich

Jonsson, Kayla. “Aus)n Energy finances wall art for Seaholm Power Plant.” The Daily Texan, Feb-‐ruary 15, 2012. hcp://www.dailytexanonline.com/news/2012/02/15/aus)n-‐energy-‐finances-‐wall-‐art-‐seaholm-‐power-‐plant

Kamin, Blair. “Power play: architects help turn old Sears power plant in Chicago into new charter school.” Cityscapes, Chicago Tribune, September 01, 2009. hcp://featuresblogs.chicagotribune.com/theskyline/2009/09/power-‐play-‐architects-‐help-‐turn-‐old-‐sears-‐power-‐plant-‐in-‐chicago-‐to-‐new-‐charter-‐school-‐.html

Keene, John. "The Links Between Historic Preserva)on and Sustainability: An Urbanist's Per-‐spec)ve." In Managing Change: Sustainable Approaches to the Conserva%on of the Built Environment. Los Angeles: The Gecy Conserva)on Ins)tute, 2003.

Keily, William. "Quarry Street Sta)on of the Commonwealth Edison Company, Chicago," Electri-‐cal World 53, no. 1 (1909): 17-‐24. hcp://www.archive.org/details/electricalworld53newy

Kienle, James T. "Essay: Can Historic Preserva)on Help Lead Us Out of the Recession." Contract Magazine, September 28, 2009.

Koenig, Brian. “Dozens of Power Plants Closing Due to New EPA Rules.” The New American, De-‐cember 20, 2011. hcp://thenewamerican.com/tech-‐mainmenu-‐30/energy/10253-‐dozens-‐of-‐power-‐plants-‐closing-‐due-‐to-‐new-‐epa-‐rules

Koester, Frank. Steam-‐Electric Power Plants: A Prac%cal Trea%se on the Design of Central Light and Power Sta%ons and their Economical Construc%on and Opera%on. New York: D. Van Nostrand Company, 1908. hcp://books.google.com/ebooks/reader?id=ISgKAAAAIAAJ&printsec=frontcover&output=reader

Langston, Craig. “Green Adap)ve Reuse: Issues and Strategies for the Built Environment.” Paper presented at the 1st Interna)onal Conference on Sustainable Construc)on & Risk Man-‐agement, Chongqing Municipality, China, June 12, 2010. hcp://epublica)ons.bond.edu.au/sustainable_development/75/

Langston, Craig, Francis K.W. Wong, Eddie C.M. Hui, and Li-‐Yim Shen. "Strategic Assessment of Building Adap)ve Reuse Opportuni)es in Hong Kong." Building and Environment 43 (2008): 1709-‐1718.






http://www.archive.org/details/nationalmagazine33brayrich

http://www.archive.org/details/nationalmagazine33brayrich









http://www.archive.org/details/electricalworld53newy






http://books.google.com/ebooks/reader?id=ISgKAAAAIAAJ&printsec=frontcover&output=reader






Lacey, Stephen. “Nine More Dirty, Aging Coal Plants Set to Close, Bringing Total U.S. Re)rements to 106 Plants Since 2000.” Think Progress, February 29, 2012. hcp://thinkprogress.org/romm/2012/02/29/435012/dirty-‐aging-‐coal-‐plants-‐set-‐to-‐close/?mobile=nc

Larry Peel Company, “The Landmark, New Braunfels, TX.” Larry Peel Company. Accessed March 3, 2012. hcp://landmarkloms.com/history/

Library of Congress, Prints & Photographs Division, Historic American Engineering Record. “Commonwealth Electric Company, Fisk Street Electrical Genera)ng Sta)on, 1111 West Cermak Avenue, Chicago, Cook County, IL.” Library of Congress. [survey number HAER ILL, 16-‐CHIG, 140-‐; accessed February 14, 2012]. hcp://www.loc.gov/pictures/collec)on/hh/item/il0671/

Lindholm, Jane. “Bob Kiss on IRV, Burlington Telecom And The Moran Plant.” Vermont Public Ra-‐dio, March 4, 2010. hcp://www.vpr.net/news_detail/87395/bob-‐kiss-‐on-‐irv-‐burlington-‐telecom-‐moran-‐plant

Listokin, David, Barbara Listokin, and Michael Lahr. "The Contribu)ons of Historic Preserva)on to Housing and Economic Development." Housing Policy Debate 9, no. 3 (1998): 431-‐478.

Local Ini)a)ves Support Corpora)on (LISC) and the Pilsen Planning Commicee. Pilsen: A Center of Mexican Life, Quality-‐of-‐Life Plan. LISC New Communi)es Ini)a)ve, Chicago: 2006. www.newcommuni)es.org/cmadocs/Pilsen_QofL_2006.pdf

Local Ini)a)ves Support Corpora)on (LISC) and the Resurrec)on Project. Improving the Quality of Life in Pilsen. LISC New Communi)es Ini)a)ve, Chicago: 2000. www.newcommuni)es.org/cmadocs/PilsenQofLplan2000.pdf

Local Ini)a)ves Support Corpora)on (LISC) MetroEdge. Pilsen (Retail) Scan Execu%ve Summary. Local Ini)a)ves Support Corpora)on, October 2009.

Lomax, Simon. "‘Massive’ Closures of U.S. Coal Plants Loom, Chu Says." Bloomberg Busi-‐nessweek, February 9, 2011.

Long, JT. “Crea)ng a Powerhouse School.” Constructor, March-‐April 2010. hcp://constructoragc.construc)on.com/mag/2010/Mar-‐Apr/1003-‐PepperConstruc)on.asp

Low, Setha. "Social Sustainability: People, History and Values." in Managing Change: Sustainable Approaches to the Conserva%on of the Built Environment. Los Angeles: The Gecy Con-‐serva)on Ins)tute, 2003.

Lydersen, Kari. “When Coal Plants Shut Down, What Happens Next?” Midwest Energy News, March 20, 2012. hcp://www.midwestenergynews.com/2012/03/20/when-‐coal-‐plants-‐shut-‐down-‐what-‐happens-‐next/

MacRos)e Historic Advisors, LLC. “Adap)ve Reuse for Educa)onal Facili)es: The Charles H. Shaw Technology and Learning Center.” MacRos)e Historic Advisors, LLC. Accessed March 5, 2012. hcp://www.macros)ehistoric.com/pages/sears_power_house_/106.php

Marshall, Richard. “Contemporary Urban Space-‐making at the Water’s Edge.” In Waterfronts in Post-‐Industrial Ci%es, edited by Richard Marshall, 3-‐14. London: Spon Press, 2001.

Maryland Historical Trust's Na)onal Register.,“Prac Street Power Plant,” Maryland Historical Trust. Accessed March 10, 2012, hcp://mht.maryland.gov/nr/NRDetail.aspx?HDID=978&FROM=NRMapFR.html














http://www.newcommunities.org/cmadocs/Pilsen_QofL_2006.pdf

http://www.newcommunities.org/cmadocs/Pilsen_QofL_2006.pdf

http://www.newcommunities.org/cmadocs/PilsenQofLplan2000.pdf






















http://thenewamerican.com/component/mailto/?tmpl=component&link=aHR0cDovL3RoZW5ld2FtZXJpY2FuLmNvbS90ZWNoLW1haW5tZW51LTMwL2VuZXJneS8xMDI1My1kb3plbnMtb2YtcG93ZXItcGxhbnRzLWNsb3NpbmctZHVlLXRvLW5ldy1lcGEtcnVsZXM%3D

http://thenewamerican.com/component/mailto/?tmpl=component&link=aHR0cDovL3RoZW5ld2FtZXJpY2FuLmNvbS90ZWNoLW1haW5tZW51LTMwL2VuZXJneS8xMDI1My1kb3plbnMtb2YtcG93ZXItcGxhbnRzLWNsb3NpbmctZHVlLXRvLW5ldy1lcGEtcnVsZXM%3D

McCann, Tom. “Riverfront Renewal Not Reaching Pilsen.” Chicago Tribune, July 02, 2000. hcp://ar)cles.chicagotribune.com/2000-‐07-‐02/news/0007020100_1_parks-‐chicago-‐river-‐navy-‐pier

McGraw-‐Publishing Company. "Chicago Conven)on Na)onal Electric Light Associa)on." Electri-‐cal World 51, no. 22 (1908): 1146-‐1153. hcp://books.google.com/books/reader?id=LQVRAAAAYAAJ&

⎯. "Prac)cal Opera)on of Fisk Street and Quarry Street Sta)ons in Chicago," Electrical World 53, no. 22 (1909): 1289-‐1294. hcp://www.archive.org/details/electricalworld53newy

⎯. "The System and Opera)ng Prac)ce of the Commonwealth Edison Company, Chicago." Elec-‐trical World 51, no. 20 (1908): 1023-‐1039. hcp://books.google.com/books/reader?id=LQVRAAAAYAAJ&.

McLeod, Gerald E. “Day Trips.” The Aus%n Chronicle, April 11, 2003. hcp://www.aus)nchronicle.com/columns/2003-‐04-‐11/154443/

⎯. “Day Trips: The Defunct Comal Power Plant in New Braunfels Finds New Life as a hotel.” The Aus%n Chronicle, June 2, 2010. hcp://www.aus)nchronicle.com/columns/2000-‐06-‐02/77427/

Midwest Genera)on. “Financial Benefits to the Community.” Fisk & Crawford Fact Sheets. Sep-‐tember 7, 2011. hcp://www.fiskandcrawford.com/assets/content/pdf/MWG_FiskCrawford_FinancialBenefits.pdf

⎯. “Fisk Sta)on Fact Sheet.” Edison Interna)onal. January 2005. www.edison.com/files/2005_factsheet_fisk.pdf

⎯. “Midwest Genera)on Employees: Serving Communi)es Where They Live And Work.” Fisk & Crawford Fact Sheets. September 9, 2011. hcp://www.fiskandcrawford.com/assets/content/pdf/MWG_FiskCrawford_Employees.pdf

Millspaugh, Mar)n. “Waterfronts as Catalysts for City Renewal.” In Waterfronts in Post-‐Industrial Ci%es, edited by Richard Marshall, 74-‐85. London: Spon Press, 2001.

“Moran Municipal Genera)on Sta)on -‐ Burlington, Vermont.” Waymarking, accessed March 12, 2012. hcp://www.waymarking.com/gallery/image.aspx?f=1&guid=737a5463-‐edf6-‐44b2-‐bcc0-‐bb94e967b175

Munson, Richard. From Edison to Enron: The Business of Power and What it Means for the Fu-‐ture of Electricity. Westport: Praeger Publishers, 2005.

NADAAA. “Seaholm Substa)on Wall, Art In Public Places Project: Schema)c Design Updated Rendering.” NADAAA, Presenta)on to the City Council, February 9, 2012. hcps://www.documentcloud.org/documents/291429-‐seaholm-‐wall-‐presenta)on.html

Na)onal Trust for Historic Preserva)on. "Posi)on Statement: Historic Preserva)on and Sustain-‐ability." Preserva%on Na%on. Accessed October 31, 2011.

“New Edison Turbo-‐Unit in Service.” Chicago Daily Tribune, July 21, 1949.Northcountry Coopera)ve Founda)on, Jeff Allman, Allman & Associates. Too Good to Throw

Away: The Adap%ve Reuse of Underused Buildings. Northcountry Coopera)ve Founda-‐)on, 2005. hcp://www.ncdf.coop/documents/Adap)veReuseFINAL.pdf

Petersen, Laurie. “Power Switch: This New High School is a Spark For Students—and the Neighborhood.”Chicago Architect, January-‐February 2012, 27-‐30.






http://books.google.com/books/reader?id=LQVRAAAAYAAJ&


















http://www.fiskandcrawford.com/assets/content/pdf/MWG_FiskCrawford_Employees.pdf










https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/291429-seaholm-wall-presentation.html

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/291429-seaholm-wall-presentation.html



Pilsen Environmental Rights and Reform Organiza)on (PERRO).“Chicago’s Coal Plants to Re)re: Clean Power Coali)on, City of Chicago and Midwest Genera)on Sign Historic Agree-‐ment.” PERRO Press Release, February 21, 2012.

PlaceEconomics. Measuring the Economics of Preserva%on: Recent Findings. Advisory Council on Historic Preserva)on, June 2011. hcp://www.landmarks.org/pdfs/Measuring%20the%20Economics%20of%20Preserva)on.pdf

Plac, Harold L. The Electric City: Energy and the Growth of the Chicago Area, 1880-‐1930. Chi-‐cago: The University of Chicago Press, 1991.

⎯. “Gas and Electricity.” In Encyclopedia of Chicago, edited by Janice L. Reiff, Ann Durkin Kea)ng, and James R. Grossman. Chicago Historical Society, 2005. Accessed January 27, 2012. hcp://encyclopedia.chicagohistory.org/pages/504.html.

Preserva)on Chicago. Chicago’s Seven Most Threatened Buildings: Pilsen. 2006. www.preserva)onchicago.org/userfiles/file/pilsen.pdf

Preserva)on Green Lab, Na)onal Trust for Historic Preserva)on. The Greenest Building: Quan%-‐fying the Environmental Value of Building Reuse. Na)onal Trust for Historic Preserva)on, 2011.

Rogers Merlino, Kathryn, and Peter Steinbrueck. "The Greenest Prac)ce: Cultural Sustainability, Adap)ve Re-‐use and the New Preserva)on Ethic." Column 5, no. 22 (2009): 70-‐73.

San Diego State University, College of Professional Studies and Fine Arts. “New SDSU Gallery.” San Diego State University, March 2, 2012. hcp://downtowngallery.sdsu.edu/index.php/gallery/about/

Save Our Heritage Organiza)on. “SDG&E Sta)on ‘B.’” Reflec%ons Newsle]er 35, no. 3, 2004. hcp://sohosandiego.org/reflec)ons/2004-‐3/2004-‐11_sdge.htm

Scadden, Richard A. “Adap)ve Reuse of Obsolete Power Plants.” Paper presented at the Air & Waste Management Associa)on (A&WMA) 94th Annual Conference, Orlando, FL, June 2001.

Scadden, Richard A. and Stephen J. Mitchell. “Facility Decommissioning and Adap)ve Reuse.” Paper presented at Na)onal Defense Industrial Associa)on (NDIA) 27th Environmental Symposium and Exhibi)on, Aus)n, Texas, April 23-‐26, 2001.

Schmic, Zachary. “The Topographical Determinants of Intraurban Air Pollu)on Exposure: An As-‐sessment of the Crawford and Fisk Coal-‐fired Power Plants in Chicago, Illinois.” M.S. diss., Northern Illinois University, 2010. hcp://proquest.umi.com/pqdlink?did=2068234381&Fmt=7&clientId=1509&RQT=309&VName=PQD.

Seaholm Power, LLC. “Power Plant Redevelopment.” Seaholm Power, LLC. Accessed March 3, 2012. hcp://www.seaholm.info/

Shore Line Interurban Historical Society. “A Conversa)on with Samuel Insull.” First & Fastest 26, vol. 1 (2009): 52-‐55. www.shore-‐line.org/_pdfs/Insull_Spring10.pdf

Showley, Roger M. “Second Time Around: Three Old Kids on the Block Come to Life for a New Genera)on.” San Diego Union-‐Tribune, September 18, 2005. hcp://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20050918/news_mz1h18second.html

Spector, Dina. "Dozens Of Coal Factories Forced To Shut Down In Response To Strict EPA Regula-‐)on." The Business Insider, August 9, 2011.


http://www.landmarks.org/pdfs/Measuring%20the%20Economics%20of%20Preservation.pdf






http://www.preservationchicago.org/userfiles/file/pilsen.pdf

http://www.preservationchicago.org/userfiles/file/pilsen.pdf





http://proquest.umi.com/pqdlink?did=2068234381&Fmt=7&clientId=1509&RQT=309&VName=PQD






http://www.shore-line.org/_pdfs/Insull_Spring10.pdf

http://www.shore-line.org/_pdfs/Insull_Spring10.pdf



Spielman, Fran. “Emanuel brokers deal to shut two pollu)ng coal fire plants.” Chicago Sun-‐Times. February 28, 2012. hcp://www.sun)mes.com/news/10943296-‐417/emanuel-‐brokers-‐deal-‐to-‐shut-‐two-‐pollu)ng-‐coal-‐fire-‐plants.html

Staple, Gregory C. and Machew I. Slavin. “Repurposed Coal Plant Sites Empower and Revive Communi)es.” The Public Manager, Spring 2012. www.cleanskies.org/wp-‐content/uploads/2012/03/43-‐47_featureStapleSlavin-‐1-‐1.pdf

Steinbrueck, Peter, and Kathyrn Rodgers Merlino. "We Recycle Cans and Bocles, Why Not Build-‐ings?" The Sea]le Times, September 16, 2008.

Tocen, Shay. “Burlington May Finally Give the Old Moran Plant a New Life.” Seven Days, Sep-‐tember 23, 2009. hcp://www.7dvt.com/2009burlington-‐may-‐finally-‐give-‐old-‐moran-‐plant-‐new-‐life

⎯. “Mari)me Museum Withdraws from Moran Redevelopment.” Seven Days, September 28, 2011. hcp://7d.blogs.com/blurt/2010/09/mari)me-‐museum-‐withdraws-‐from-‐moran-‐redevelopment.html.

Union of Concerned Scien)sts. A Risky Proposi%on: The Financial Hazards of New Investments in Coal Plants. UCS Publica)ons, March 2011. hcp://www.ucsusa.org/assets/documents/clean_energy/a-‐risky-‐proposi)on_report.pdf

Urban Land Ins)tute. Adap%ve Use: Development Economics, Process, and Profiles. Washington: The Urban Land Ins)tute, 1978.

U.S. Department of the Interior, Na)onal Park Service. “How to Apply to the Na)onal Register: Criteria for Evalua)on.” U.S. Department of the Interior, Na%onal Park Service. 2002. hcp://www.nps.gov/history/nr/publica)ons/bulle)ns/nrb15/nrb15_2.htm

⎯. “The Na)onal Historic Landmark Database: Sears, Roebuck, And Company.” U.S. Na%onal Park Service. Accessed February 11, 2012. hcp://tps.cr.nps.gov/nhl/detail.cfm?ResourceId=1755&ResourceType=Building.

⎯. “Na)onal Historic Landmarks Program.” U.S. Na%onal Park Service. Last modified December 13, 2010. hcp://www.cr.nps.gov/nhl/.

⎯. “Na)onal Register of Historic Places Program: Frequently Asked Ques)ons.” U.S. Depart-‐ment of the Interior, Na%onal Park Service. June 13, 2011. hcp://www.nps.gov/nr/faq.htm.

⎯. “Na)onal Register of Historic Places Program: Fundamentals.” U.S. Na%onal Park Service. Last modified June 13, 2011. hcp://www.nps.gov/history/nr/na)onal_register_fundamentals.htm.

⎯. “Na)onal Historic Landmarks Program, Page 1: What is ‘a high degree of integrity’ and why is it an key requirement for NHL designa)on?.” U.S. Na%onal Park Service. Last modified December 13, 2010. hcp://www.nps.gov/history/nhl/tutorial/Workshop2/criteria3.htm.

⎯. “Na)onal Historic Landmarks Program, Page 1: What is a Na)onal Historic Landmark?” U.S. Na%onal Park Service. Last modified December 13, 2010. hcp://www.nps.gov/history/nhl/tutorial/About/About1.htm

⎯. “Na)onal Historic Landmarks Program, Page 8: How long does it take for a property to be-‐come a NHL?” U.S. Na%onal Park Service. Last modified June 13, 2011. hcp://www.nps.gov/history/nhl/tutorial/Workshop1/begin8.htm


http://www.suntimes.com/news/10943296-417/emanuel-brokers-deal-to-shut-two-polluting-coal-fire-plants.html
































⎯. The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilita%on & Illustrated Guidelines on Sus-‐tainability for Rehabilita%ng Historic Buildings. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of the Interior, 2011. www.nps.gov/history/hps/tps/index.htm.

U.S. Department of the Interior, Na)onal Park Service, Technical Preserva)on Services. Historic Preserva%on Tax Incen%ves. U.S. Department of the Interior, Na)onal Park Service: 2009. hcp://www.nps.gov/tps/tax-‐incen)ves/taxdocs/about-‐tax-‐incen)ves.pdf

⎯. “Tax Incen)ves for Preserving Historic Proper)es.” U.S. Department of the Interior, Na%onal Park Service. Accessed March 21, 2012. hcp://www.nps.gov/tps/tax-‐incen)ves.htm

U.S. Environmental Protec)on Agency. “Reducing Air Pollu)on from Power Plants.” U.S. Envi-‐ronmental Protec%on Agency. April 26, 2011.

⎯. “Burlington Reaps $25K EPA Grant for Brownfields Sustainability Project,” U.S. Environmental Protec)on Agency, Re-‐development of Former Coal Plant. News Releases from Region 1, September 4, 2008. hcp://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/6d651d23f5a91b768525735900400c28/8ace26d5891e188b852574ba006bc828!OpenDocument

⎯. “Green Design Op)ons for the Moran Center at Waterfront Park Revitaliza)on Project.” U.S. Environmental Protec)on Agency. Accessed March 2, 2012. epa.gov/brownfields/sustain_plts/factsheets/burlington_susfs.pdf

U.S. Securi)es and Exchange Commissions. Form 10-‐K: Annual Report Pursuant to Sec%on 13 of 15(d) of the Securi%es Exchange Act of 1934 for the Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 2006 for Midwest Genera%on, LLC. Commission File Number 333-‐59348. Washington D.C.: February 28, 2007.

Walk Score. “Walk Score for 1111 W Cermak Rd Chicago, IL.” Walk Score. Accessed February 23, 2012. hcp://www.walkscore.com/score/1111-‐w-‐cermak-‐rd-‐chicago-‐il.

Wasik, John. The Merchant of Power: Sam Insull, Thomas Edison, and the Crea%on of the Mod-‐ern Metropolis. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2006.

Wacley, Philip. “Edison Plant Ruins Combed for Clues.” Chicago Tribune, November 23, 1976.⎯. “Plant at Half Capacity: Edison Fire Es)mate: $2 million.” Chicago Tribune, November 24,

1976.Wilson, David, Jared Wouters, and Dennis Grammenos. “Successful protect-‐community dis-‐

course: spa)ality and poli)cs in Chicago's Pilsen neighborhood.” Environment and Plan-‐ning 36, (2004): 1173 -‐1190.

Wilson, Mark R., Stephen R. Porter, and Janice L. Reiff. “Commonwealth Edison Co.” In Encyclo-‐pedia of Chicago. Chicago Historical Society, 2005. Accessed January 27, 2012. hcp://encyclopedia.chicagohistory.org/pages/2622.html

Yudelson, Jerry. Greening Exis%ng Buildings. New York: McGraw-‐Hill Companies, 2010.Zhang, Yue. “Boundaries of Power: Poli)cs of Urban Preserva)on in Two Chicago

Neighborhoods.”Urban Affairs Review 47, no. 4 (2011): 511–540. hcp://uar.sagepub.com/content/47/4/511

Zink, John C. “Steam Turbines Power an Industry: A Condensed History of Steam Turbines.” Power Engineering, August1, 1996.

hcp://images.pennnet.com/ar)cles/pe/cap/cap_pe43958-‐56.gif








http://www.nps.gov/tps/tax-incentives.htm

http://www.nps.gov/tps/tax-incentives.htm











http://images.pennnet.com/articles/pe/cap/cap_pe43958-56.gif

http://images.pennnet.com/articles/pe/cap/cap_pe43958-56.gif

the adaptive reuse of coal-fired power plants_full thesis

Documents