It’s almost impossible to overstate the importance of Carl Sandburg Village to the revitalization of Chicago’s near north side and the then-nascent redevelopment of Lincoln Park.
During the 60’s and 70s developer Arthur Rubloff transformed an urban renewal parcel stretching from Division St to North from a formerly-blighted area to an oasis and an anchor.
Sandburg Village now encompasses over 2,600 housing units, shops, offices, tennis courts and swimming pools, supermarkets and more.
Prudential Rubloff’s Blanche Murges has been officing and selling at Sandburg for over 30 years and knows the Village as well as anyone alive. Join me and Blanche for the first part of an extensive tour of Sandburg Village – and a look back at the original prices of some of the units there.
Kind of a north side version of Dearborn Park I and II
tup,
The similarities are only superficial and the comparison diminishes the impact and the achievement of Sandburg Village.
Sandburg is the far superior project from an urban planning standpoint. Its impact radiated almost immediately in all four directions from its location. Dearborn Park had a different objective: to stabilize the then-deteriorating Loop commercial district by, in the cynical words of one important participant, “building a wall of white people between the south side and the Loop.”
Sandburg is integrated into the street grid in a way that Dearborn Park isn’t. It incorporated mixed-uses in a way that Dearborn Park didn’t. It was transit-oriented in a way that Dearborn Park wasn’t. It’s a more unitary development than Dearborn Park. The invidious comparisons that would be important to planners can go on and on.
I just leased an apartment (MLS) to a client here – she is very happy. Olympic pool at her building! Two in the complex.
I lived in Sandburg for many years. It was wonderful; especially when they sponsored an Arts and Craft Show which later moved to Wels Street. Lots of memories here.
Joe – I think you’re being unkind to Dearborn Village – just a little bit, though I’d agree it was far too closed off to the east side and with current development, probably should have engaged the Roosevelt bridge and viaduct more (and been higher density to boot). It was rather more adventurous architecturally – just a little bit, than Sandburg. But now my serious question, do you think it made a difference in the current development of the south loop, did it hinder further development or advance it.
Sheridan B,
I don’t think there’s any question but that Dearborn Park advanced the development of the South Loop. It established, in a variety of ways, the viability of the area for residential development.
Dearborn Park I was high-density, predominantly high-rise and mid-rise construction. Dearborn Park II was almost exclusively townhomes and single-families.
When MCL and Dan McLean got involved they made a belated attempt to integrate Dearborn II better into the street grid. Note the single-families that McLean built that are open to the street rather than walled off.
Dearborn Park also created the residential density that was necessary for commercial infrastructure to develop.
The early phases of Dearborn Park were an incredibly gutsy, high-risk venture that only happened because of the backing of large employers and financial institutions. Development began just before the collapse of the real estate market in the early 80s and wouldn’t have happened without large subsidies from private civic-minded entities. DP was one of a number of deals that resulted in the collapse of Continental Bank, then one of the largest banks in the world.
Dearborn Park II was also a risky venture. The money simply wasn’t there to integrate it better with Roosevelt Road. Integration also would, to a large extent, have undermined the appeal of what was essentially envisioned as an in-town bedroom suburb.
By comparing Dearborn Park’s execution and impact unfavorably with Sandburg Village’s I don’t in any way intend to demean or diminish the importance of Dearborn Park in the development of the South Loop and the stabilization of what was then a rapidly-declining Loop.
It’s easy for all of us to second-guess what was built. I’d rather be grateful to the people who took the risks to build what they did. It turned out rather well when all the obstacles are taken into consideration, in my view.