Ald Smith: Why I Support Children's Museum Move

The following was in July 3rd e-mail blast from 48th Ward Alderman Mary Ann Smith. Dear Neighbors, Many people have asked me why I choose to vote in favor of allowing the Chicago Children's Museum to move to Grant Park. I firmly believe I made the right decision, although I know some of you disagree. I read your e-mails, listened to your voice mails and gave careful thought to my decision. Now I want you to understand the arguments that, in the final analysis, decided my vote. I believe that spin, passion and distortion overwhelmed the discussion. I do not believe the argument was about the facts of the museum proposal or even about Grant Park itself. I believe it was about who will control the downtown parks - the City as a whole or the immediate residents. The opponents of this proposal did a tremendous job presenting their case. But that skill at manipulation cannot change the facts, even if the facts are obscured, ignored or dismissed. And those facts are the facts I acted on. Greenspace and usable public space will be lost. This is not a valid argument. The open, light-filled entrance pavilion replaces the concrete bunker-like entrance to a parking garage, and the expanded field house will add more usable public space. In the the three photos you can link to on our website, you can see the concrete that will be removed to make way for the museum. You also will see a bird's eye view of the portion of the museum that will be above ground and an aerial with a red circle showing the museum in relation to the park. Structures don't belong in Grant Park. The structure is already there. This section of Grant Park is actually a multistoried parking garage with a green roof. The bottom line here is that the museum space is replacing existing underground parking spaces. The parking structure is being remade into a multi-story children's facility with a green roof. It is not a new structure; it is a better use in a park. Use of downtown park space for a museum sets a bad precedent. The precedent already exists with latest additions to the Art Institute which also are located in Grant Park. And certainly a not-for-profit children's facility is a better use of public property than a parking garage. The complaint has been made that you have to pay to enter the Children's Museum. But you pay to go to the Art Institute, and you certainly pay to use the garages. Yet thirty percent of the visitors to the Children's Museum get in free, and the museum is committed to implementing a shuttle system that would allow disadvantaged kids to get to the museum more easily. Good uses for parks, particularly parks downtown, are those that draw us in and provide access and activities for all. This section of Grant Park was originally lake, then a dump for debris. It was filled in to accommodate railroad yards and later an enormous open air parking lot was built on the site. Because of the height elevations of the surrounding streets, having this section of Grant Park at grade (matching the height of the surrounding roadways rather than sunk below them) means that we must either have a structure below the park surface or use massive amounts of backfill. Without raising or building on this land, the park element is gone. The only real question is, "How should the space below the surface be used?" I believe a not-for-profit, first class facility that draws families into our front yard is an ideal use. Finally, putting the museum here not only connects kids to our downtown, for many it will open their eyes to a different world and a myriad of potential. It will do this in a healthy, quality environment that emphasizes the value that we place in them, enhances their relationship to our common communal space and removes their experience from the relentless commercialism that pervades so much else in their lives. Sincerely, Mary Ann Smith Alderman, 48th Ward