We can make Chicago a Preservation First city
By: Mary Lu Seidel
Tags: Equitable Development, History, Urban Planning, Historic Preservation, Community

With great success, people across Chicago sounded the alarms and grieved the near-loss of the iconic La Luce restaurant building in the West Loop.

In the 11th hour, the City of Chicago rescinded the demolition permit, and agreed to spend 90 days reviewing whether the Queen Anne-style gem at 1399 W. Lake Street should become a Chicago Landmark.

The people, with a united voice, helped to get to this outcome. It was a powerful display of organic organizing, and it speaks volumes to the character of the Chicago community.

This win is temporary, though. We have a lot of work to do to get this building protected. While we are hard at work on 1399 W. Lake Street, the City of Chicago released a demolition permit for 808 W. Lake Street, the Hollenbach Seed Company building from the early 1900s.

The turret at 1399 W. Lake Street; Photo Credit: Mary Lu Seidel

These 11th hour battles happen nearly every day in Chicago. Beautiful, cherished, and extraordinary buildings are toppled daily. The fight to save a building at the last minute is a tough one, and it drains resources from organizations and people across Chicago.

Preservation Chicago has been at work for nearly 20 years to save Chicago’s culture and history. Being proactive in the movement to save history and community is the most efficient and effective way to get our work done, but we are too often forced to react because that is how the system is currently set up. Imminent threats occur so frequently, we are left to put out fires instead of preventing them.

Imagine what would happen if Chicago became a Preservation First city? One that erred on the side of preservation in all its policies and ordinances. One that put the onus on developers to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that demolition was the only solution forward. One that by default erred on the side of buildings, community, history, and the environment.

It is a monumental task to shift the focus from fire extinguisher to fire preventer, but Chicago has people who are all in to help us get there. We can get to Preservation First and more equitable programs, and here’s a short list of where we can start.

Community engagement. Priority should be on processes that mandate meaningful community engagement from the very beginning, not just near the end seen as checking off a formal “community engagement” box. Brought in early and in a genuine way, in the last 30 years of my community organizing work I have seen the community get it right nearly 100% of the time. They understand markets. They understand property owner rights. They understand what their communities need.

Instinctively, people respond negatively when they feel they have been excluded from the process. The recent proposed Pilsen Landmark District reminds us how essential it is to involve the community in vetting and planning for its own future. Bring the community in early, and let them work with the City and developers to find a solution that works for everyone.

Longer review times for historic buildings. The 90-day demolition delay mandated for buildings that are identified as potentially significant is woefully short given the complexity of trying to engage the community, negotiate with owners, identify preservation-friendly developers, and advocate for Landmark designation. Now imagine 5–10 buildings hitting the 90-day demolition delay list near the same time. Other cities have 180-day and 365-day delays. Chicago should follow suit.

Demolition as a last resort. We need ordinances that make it much harder to demolish older buildings. Increase the fees. Mandate strenuous salvage requirements to keep solid building materials from being dumped in landfills. Establish penalties for demolition by neglect.

No demolition until new construction plans/financing approved. How many times do we see a beautiful building come down only to sit as another vacant lot for months, years, and even decades?

We need a bigger preservation toolbox. Right now, the most effective tool to prevent demolition in Chicago is to get a building Landmarked. That works for some buildings, but oftentimes the City lacks the time and resources to Landmark all the buildings that need saving. And some buildings are important to save but do not meet the rigorous criteria to become a Landmark.

808 W. Lake Street, presently destined for demolition; Photo Credit: Mary Lu Seidel

Chicago passed a neighborhood character district ordinance in 2020, and that will help to establish criteria for redevelopment projects related to setbacks, building mass, materials, and scale. This ordinance does not prohibit demolitions. Finally, it is expected that working to create a district through this process will be lengthy and complicated. It’s a great tool, but we need more.

Historic review for buildings over 50 years old. Require a thorough review for historic potential any building over 50 years old in Chicago.

It is our dream to have an updated Chicago Historic Resource Survey, the document developed in the 1980s and early 1990s identifying potential historic assets in Chicago. That list is a great start, but it is not the Alpha and the Omega. We see preservation through a different lens than we did in 1985, leaving so many important structures excluded from the list. The CHRS does not rate as valuable buildings that were less than 50 years old in 1985–1995. The list tends to focus on architecturally significant buildings and not on the extraordinary people who lived in them.

If we require review of all buildings older than 50, it allows the space and time to explore the full history of a place — its place in the community, the people who lived there, its place along a block of similarly designed buildings that define the character of our neighborhoods.

The Emmett Till and Mamie Till-Mobley Home in West Woodlawn, which is working its way through the final Chicago Landmarking process, was not listed on the Chicago Historic Resources Survey. It was a humble 2-flat designed by an unknown architect. And even if the City in 1985–1995 was noting buildings with connections to important national events, it would have had to exclude the Till home because its “period of significance” — 1955 — had not passed the 50-year threshold.

To be sure, there are serious demands on City of Chicago resources — COVID-19, systemic racism, police reform, school reform, violence, homelessness, mental health crises, economic development. I am not suggesting that saving buildings should take priority over these, but it can be done in addition to these. The Department of Planning has staff tasked to advance historic preservation, and they can carry out that work in a way that protects our built environment and advances equity and inclusion.

As Chicago moves forward in a post-COVID era with limited resources to carry out its work, the onus needs to go onto developers to prove why they should tear down well-constructed, high-character, historically significant buildings in Chicago neighborhoods. I believe the people of Chicago can help make that happen.

Talk to your alders. Attend public meetings. Organize your neighbors. Identify important places in your neighborhood that should be protected. Stand with one voice for community identity and history. It worked for the La Luce building. It can work for all of Chicago.