A lawsuit challenging plans for the Lucas museum along Chicago's lakefront can proceed, a federal judge ruled Thursday, leaving legal hurdles in place if the selected site remains between Soldier Field and McCormick Place. Friends of the Parks filed a lawsuit in November against the Chicago Park District and the city of Chicago over the museum plans, contending the proposed site near Lake Michigan violates the public trust. — Chicago Tribune
The lawsuit asserts that proposed site for the Lucas Museum requires approval by the Illinois General Assembly, something contested by the Park District and the city who argue the museum will be provide public benefits. It was filed last year by the Friends of the Parks, who assert that since the site is made up of land that was reclaimed from a protected waterway, it should be preserved as an open space. The land was part of Lake Michigan until it was formed in the 1920s.
The noted filmmaker George Lucas selected Chicago for the location of his proposed museum last year. The director plans to fully-fund the project, which would contain paintings, photographs, illustration and films related to movie-making. The city offered 17 acres of lakefront property, assumedly in the hopes that, once built, the museum would serve as a tourist attraction. While the property is currently serving as a parking lot, according to the lawsuit, the planned development would restrict public access to the Lake.
Last year, the Lucas Museum of Narrative Art revealed designs for the Chicago site by MAD Architects. The plans generated their own controversy as well as a defense by Frank Gehry.
If the project does get the ax, there's a chance that it could move to Los Angeles (something that Mayor Eric Garcetti has publicly supported).
4 Comments
The open space that Friends of the Park is fighting to preserve is a parking lot.
Very early in my career I worked for a wealthy developer and he owned an old building in our CBD on the waterfront that we restored, next to it was a huge open parcel that sloped to the water.... he had me design a park for it with a band shell out in the water for concerts.... he presented the design to the city that owned it promising to pay for the whole thing.... and never mentioned that he didn't want his name on it.... there was public outcry just like in this instance, just the thought that he might want his name on was enough for everyone to spread rumors and speak negatively about it... he got mad real quick and retracted his offer.... that was 41 years ago and the parcel remains a vacant eyesore to this day.... let this guy do this, he's paying for it for Christ sake.
^ Dollars to donuts it is a programed space in the design brief.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.