From Oak Park Residents

We are now presented with a challenge to this public trust in the guise of a building that would permanently shade portions of the park to an unprecedented degree. Graphics of the shade patterns on the park have been circulated. The shadows that are thrown onto the park are not just momentary snapshots on one date during the year. The shadows will linger for weeks before and after the dates in the sample graphics. People and plantings in the park will be affected, greeted by longer periods of darkness in the winter and into the spring, reducing the temperatures in the shadow areas and greatly reducing the pleasing warmth of the sun on a winter day in much of the park. It means that a much larger swath of the park will stay colder, slowing the thaw in the spring and the awakening of the spring flowers and other plants.

The impact of the shade cannot be measured with certainty. The trees, shrubs and flowers within the park will adapt and fail at differing rates and the impact will be felt over many years. The effect will be gradual. Along with shadows, wind patterns have noticeably changed in the park. In the 18-month period during the construction of the current high-rise, five canopy shade trees have been lost to wind storms in the 50 foot area along the south perimeter of the park. While this is anecdotal evidence of a change in wind patterns, it is certainly rare to lose so many trees in such a small geographic area.

Austin Gardens, a natural area dedicated to passive use, has a great diversity of trees and plant materials, unique in Oak Park. This diversity is enabled by a natural phenomenon of sandy sub-soil conditions, found only in a swath of Oak Park west of the “continental divide”.

As a landscape architect, I have always appreciated the greenspaces and natural areas that make up our public park system in Oak Park. On behalf of the Park District, my firm prepared the Master Plan for Austin Gardens as part of the improvements and enhancements after the referendum in the early 2000’s. The Master Plan was completed in spring of 2005 and updated in January of 2016, and both phases benefitted from public input and community meetings. The new Environmental Education Center and the Learning Garden, with their commitment to educational outreach, fulfilled the goals of the master planning process, are consistent with the natural character of the park and creates continuity with Austin’s original endowment.

For several generations, Austin Gardens has served as a refuge, natural area, and green respite in our increasingly urban world. It is a critical green space located within single-family and multi-family housing districts, the primary commercial district of Downtown Oak Park and within the nationally recognized Frank Lloyd Wright Historic District, which draws thousands of visitors to our Village every year. It is imperative that we measure the value of this greenspace within our urban fabric and assure that this special asset is not diminished for future generations.

Carol JH Yetken Landscape Architect & Oak Park resident

I'm signing because I am against the proposed Albion building. An 18 story tower on the corner of Lake and Forest would cast a shadow on Austin Gardens, literally and figuratively. Austin Gardens is widely used by Oak Park residents. It is also a beautiful and inviting park for those visiting the Frank Lloyd Wright studio and touring local architecture. With the Albion tower, visitors would no longer experience the warmth of Austin Gardens while strolling about, but instead feel the cold effect of a darkened shadow cast by not one but two large looming structures south of the park.

The shadow studies that Albion presented to Oak Park offered the most minimal of information. 4 days of the year? That was a little insulting. No shadow study was done on the building’s shadows over a long-term period and its effect on plant growth. An independent shadow study ought to be required by the Village Trustees. Also, nothing was presented on the building’s effect on reduced energy by casting shadows on the Austin Garden’s buildings solar panels. Will this cause a loss to stored solar power? If so, what effect will this have on the cost to the Park District/Village?

For Oak Parkers, unless you live directly across the street from a park, you may go to the closest park unless you want a certain experience. For example, if I want to work out, I go to Barrie Park where I do the stairs. If I want to take my little niece to the playground, I like Rehm Park’s playground best. If I want to take a nice stroll or plan a serene book-reading picnic, then there is no better place than Austin Gardens. Even Mills Park – another serene Oak Park park, is, in my opinion, not as nice due to the tall tower looming in the background. So I certainly don’t want that now in Austin Gardens.

In my opinion, the best use of that land is to extend Austin Gardens to Lake Street. It would invite more people into the park. It would encourage visitors to pick up food to go from a local restaurant and walk right into Austin Gardens to picnic. It would be go-to place to stroll with their yogurt or ice cream. Or a place to go read the book that you just bought from The Book Table. It would bring light and openness to Lake Street and take away from the congestion that is developing already on Lake Street.

Even if a building is to be built in that area, then I also propose that Oak Park require commercial property builders include in their building plan a Landscape plan, i.e., a required percentage of land area devoted strictly to landscaping and green space. I believe that this is required in certain places such as Orange County, CA. Too many of the newer construction buildings in Oak Park are built to the “seams” -- budding up against the side walk. As a result, it creates a feeling of congestion with little greenery (besides a few planted pots). These buildings offer no aesthetics to the Oak Park area.

Mary P

Build a Park Not a Tower

The Oak Park Comprehensive Plan recommends finding more open space. The Park District of Oak Park Master Plan states that opportunities should be sought to increase park space. The Oak Park-River Forest Sustainability Plan includes the goal of increasing green space and green infrastructure in the villages.

Yet, Oak Park is in danger of destroying one of our most precious open-space, historic treasures: Austin Gardens. The 21-story Vantage Oak Park already casts long morning shadows where there were none before. Now a developer interested in the property at 1000 Lake wants a zoning variance to build another tall building. This might be good for Albion. However, for Oak Park residents, the long-term results would be diminished quality of life and a ruined park. Trees, some over 100 years old, would be in danger of dying. The village as a whole would lose.

There’s a better idea. The Village, possibly in partnership with the Park District and other entities, should purchase the land and build a park. This would have several advantages beyond the admirable ones of beauty and delight. A park would enhance the Lake Street streetscape, provide a gateway to Austin Gardens and the Frank Lloyd Wright district beyond, and possibly increase surrounding property values. A multifunctional park would add to the district’s livability, improve quality of life, and provide a welcoming atmosphere for locals and the many visitors arriving each year.

What might this urban oasis be like? Benches, tables and chairs would attract people to meet, eat lunch, and relax. Sustainability and green infrastructure features could include a sunshelter--roofed with solar panels--over part of the area, a rain garden featuring flowering native plants, and well-placed native trees. The park would provide welcome habitat for humans, birds and pollinators alike, while feeding clean power into the grid and helping manage stormwater.

In summer, there could be a tourist information booth, a food truck might provide al fresco meals, and pre-performance talks might be held by Oak Park Festival Theatre. A mini-farmers market on Wednesday evenings, mini-art fairs on certain Saturdays and weekly lunchtime concerts would increase foot traffic. In winter, a small christkindlemarket where people could buy presents or a cup of hot chocolate would add to holiday fun.

Besides these practical benefits, taking such a bold step would demonstrate our village’s commitment to a shared vision of a human-scaled community that puts the well being of its residents first and prioritizes caring for the great historic assets we have.

Perhaps Oak Park could use another large building. But while dense housing can add to a vibrant downtown community, overbuilding risks creating a generic, over-congested urban space from which the special character that people expect in Oak Park would disappear. We don’t need another skyscraper, especially not there. Oak Park definitely needs another park, and more public meeting space; the corner of Lake and Forest is the perfect place. Let’s seize this opportunity to make Oak Park an even better place to live, while saving and even enhancing historic Austin Gardens. Let’s continue our leadership in urban placemaking and sustainability. By doing so, we’ll make our village an even more attractive, vibrant and sustainable community.

Bio: Long-time resident Adrian Fisher is active in sustainability issues in Oak Park. She is a member of the core team of PlanItGreen, the Sustainability Plan for Oak Park and River Forest and contributed to the drafting of Oak Park’s Comprehensive Plan as part of the sustainability group. She is also a member of West Cook Wild Ones and volunteers for the Forest Preserve District of Cook County.

An open letter to the Village Board,

This letter is prompted by Village Board Trustee Colette Lueck’s Wednesday Journal piece sharing her thoughts on public service, but it is directed to all of our Village Board members.

In describing the qualities of open-mindedness which Trustee candidates should possess, she also asks that quality of the voters. She describes a transparent process as one which starts in a neutral nonjudgmental place, and requiring open channels of communication. Since the Albion development proposal is becoming a galvanizing issue for some, she mentions it by name.

She is asking us to reserve judgement until the review process for a proposal has begun with the formal PUD Application submitted to the Village Board. This will begin a series of public Plan Commission meetings in which the developer will make their case and citizens will have a chance to express their opinions.

Since this process has not yet begun, I have a question for each of the sitting Trustees.

Can you honestly assure the citizens of Oak Park that there have been no communications to the developer that there is any likelihood one way or another of a Zoning Variance? No intimations that the Village Board would favor any certain direction?

If so, I applaud your ethical decorum. In that case the expectations of the developer are based solely on the multiple zoning variances the Village Board granted to the 21 story Vantage Building, similarly zoned for an 80’ tall building. As are the expectations of the current and past property owners of 1000 Lake Street who set the land value so high that a developer can claim economic hardship unless he can build an 18 story building.

Which leads us to the power of precedent. When the variances granted for PUD developments are so extremely large, there should really be quite a bit of public discussion, because the publicly owned spaces - the parks, the sidewalks, the streets, the places we collectively dwell- are being altered dramatically. Each variance granted recalibrates the property values for the entire area and changes every future development.

If we believe that the public should truly have a voice in all of this, I would like to make a case for the value of the Greater Downtown Master Plan prepared by the people of Oak Park with the professional planning firm of Crandall Arambula. This represents a major investment of time, money, and broad participation by Oak Park residents. It is objectively the clearest vision we have of what Oak Parkers want for their physical community. It describes itself as “a tool which will help Oak Park’s leaders proactively plan for the future rather than reactively respond to development pressures”. It is available on the Oak Park Village website and I would encourage every resident of Oak Park to take a look at it. After all, we paid for it.

I would also like to make a case for the value of the Zoning Ordinance itself, which receives ongoing scrutiny and careful expert thought in its creation and maintenance. In the particular case of 1000 Lake Street, the Zoning Ordinance has been fashioned very specifically for that stretch of Lake Street. The underlying B-4 District is modified by the Downtown Lake Street Height and Massing Overlay District, as well as the Transit-Related Retail Overlay District.

How much more specific can you get? Of the Lake Street properties contained in this Zoning District, arguably 1000 Lake Street is the most sensitive for height and bulk due to its adjacency to Austin Gardens.

In light of the power of precedent, I would also like to point out that Lake Street buildings west of this site, with the exception of the Historically designated Marshall Fields building, have absolutely no protection of any kind from being razed for larger developments, including the Lake Street Theater. If Oak Park wishes to preserve any of the remaining character, scale, and history of Lake Street, it is absolutely essential for us to vigilantly uphold our existing Zoning Ordinance.

Debra McQueen