Website Home   or   Forum Home

Riverside Info » About Riverside

1. TomJacobs
   Member

   What is the appropriate architecture for Riverside? I am an architect myself, and one of the great things about the profession is that there are always as many opinions as there are people discussing it. However, as unscientific as any discussion about beauty and appropriateness will always be, a large majority of people recognize the artistic superiority of a Frank Lloyd Wright, Mies van der Rohe, Le Corbusier, Alvar Aalto etc. There is only one way to experience these buildings in order to understand and fully appreciate them: visit them in person, and leave everything at home except your 5 senses. Good architecture can be felt.

   In Riverside, the list of the best buildings seems very straight forward to me: Coonley Estate and Playhouse, Tomek House, Thorncroft Residence by Drummond, LeBaron Jenney Homes, Freeark Residence by John Vinci etc. I am sure I am missing some that should be in the top ten list, but the point is simple: great buildings are done by great architects. Masterpieces are done by the best of the great architects and great clients. And in almost all buildings that we now revere as masterpieces, the design was avant-garde, and materials and methods were innovative and on the cutting edge of technology.

   The right architecture for Riverside is an architecture that is driven by the needs and opportunities of the present and future, not the past. While existing structures of quality need to be protected, and I think the Riverside Preservation Commission is doing a great job, new building proposals need to aspire to a much higher standard than has been set lately.

   The Village Center Development currently under construction is a caricature at best, one which the next 4 generations of Riverside residents will be living with. It seems fair to assume that people 100 years from now will not want to come see this building, the way people come from all over the world to look at FLW projects. Of course, not every new building can possibly be measured against the works of the Great Masters, however, the fees for a talented and visionary architect are typically just about the same as the fees for an architect who views himself as a provider of drafting services.

   Gunny Harboe was mentioned in a different thread as a possible great architect for Riverside. His expertise in historic preservation/ restoration is probably unmatched in the Midwest, and I very much agree that he is the kind of architect owners should talk to in regards to our landmarks. As far as new buildings and additions, my advice to any client would be this: interview at least 5 different architects, and settle for the very best only. And then, challenge him/her to meet your needs while going beyond your expectations artistically—“ you might just end up with a piece of architecture, instead of a just a building.

   Posted Saturday Mar 31, 2007 19:27 #

2. Wilkins
   Member

   Very nice observations.

   What is the appropriate architecture for Riverside?

   My answer:

   If I look at a building and have to ask myself "Is that an original or is that new construction?" then that automatically qualifies as appropriate.

   Of course I am not advocating that we live in a museum. I have seen a few modern interpretations in other neighborhoods over the years that don't necessary blend in but still make nice additions to the fabric of a neighborhood. I couldn't give examples without doing a little research.

   Posted Saturday Mar 31, 2007 20:08 #

3. chrisrobling
   Member

   great architecture fits here. we have a higher percentage than most places, but we can always use more.

   Posted Saturday Mar 31, 2007 20:11 #

4. spatny
   Member

   I think people that know me understand that I really love Riverside - Olmsted's Riverside. I moved back here from Mill Valley, CA, which arguably has a better climate and some pretty nice environs. I am perhaps the only person in this burg that grew up looking at the Coonley and Tomek houses and was influenced enough by them to quit the U of I and jump in my '53 Olds and drive to Taliesin West and pitch the Master for a job - and get one. Sadly, he died with the year, and Taliesin changed - and so did I but that's not waht i want to say here.

   I started out cruising these curvilinear roads on my Schwinn, graduated to a Harley 125, then a string of about 30 or 40 of the nicest old sleds you ever saw. Not fakes, real ones. Even being gone for three plus decades I still probably burned up more gas on these streets than anyone still living here. I love it, I will never let these people screw up the Swan Pond where I learned about beer and girls, not necessarily in that order, but I have to tell you - there are only a few great houses in town, a few more that are quite interesting, and there is a lot of schlock that is not particularly well-cared for. Most of the homes here were built by contractors, not architects. Most of Olmsted's great plan was never built. Most of the original lots were subdivided. Now, when you cruise the streets you see how fast the in-fill of McMansions - oversize faux this or that at the absolute max of lot coverage (and mayb more since I think some of these places are encroaching into the public spaces) are taking over. How sad.

   People of questionable taste build this stuff and then make us look at it - by day and night - since the trend to destroy Riverside's wonderful night darkness by stringing lights and fake lamp standards and kitsch decorations is taking over. Just take one street - or rather two - Nuttall and Longcommon. Walk in Longcommon at night there and witness the garish, overbright lighting that is there now. Soon it will be our very own Milwaukee Avenue. The overbright electric lights near the station have crawled up Woodside and down Quincy. Churches put blinding floodlights up that make it nearly impossible to walk toward them, their lights are so bright. Who knows what we will get in Centennial "Plaza?"

   The Library reading circle, the VC, Delaplaine Crossing and lots more coming. We need people with taste and brains (and money) to build quality homes they want to live in -people that will hire good architects of all stripes. Modern buildings are not out of place - and never were. But what we get are schlockmeisters that create fakes for developers. If you want to see something really awful take a ride out to County Line Road and go south. Make no mistake - that's what is coming here, oversize dreck on lots that now have small ranch homes. The EAV will go up but the quality won't. That's what is coming here. We need to understand that Riverside started to go downhill when the lots started to be subdivided - it has just been gradual. We're fortunate that it was overlooked for so long as a place to gentrify, and we're still more fortunate that there are enough families with enough kids to keep the old big houses intact. But the turnout for the workshops and even for this forum should make us realize what we have to work with.

   The facts are that probably 90% of the people in this village don't care about architectural design or anything much past their plasma screen and taxes. They do care about those, and those with kids presumeably care about the quality of the schools - but lets face it - not many beyond 900 residents are even going to comment on all this, let alone vote. That's why, in the face of overwhelming apathy and disinterest, those that care are going to have to work even harder to stop this TIF, because to give this Village Board, perhaps any village board, a sequestered revenue stream for 23 years would destroy this town as we know it. I think thi TIF is that dangerous. If we have to cut back on services it will be better than if we let the town be transformed into just another 'suburb" for commuters with a station and a parking deck. That's my view.

   Posted Saturday Mar 31, 2007 21:18 #

5. TomJacobs
   Member

   We lived in Sausalito. Could not afford anything in Mill Valley. Really a place where there was an understanding that bulk is bad. A place where California Poles went up, came down, and nothing was built on (and the property still worth gazillions!)
   The little was precious.
   Oh, and the smells. That was the hardest to leave to come back here. Everything always in bloom, the water, it was always fresh, fragrant.
   Kim J

   Posted Saturday Mar 31, 2007 21:59 #

6. spatny
   Member

   Pattersons Bar. I still have a bottle of Sheep Dip scotch from there. You should have known it in the sixties/seventies, when the Trident was going. Now there was a place. And Old Sally sitting in the Barber Chair at the Valhalla getting loaded. The smell of the Blue Gum eucalptus pods - we used to string them on leather thongs for natural flea collars for our dogs. Always smelled nice and fresh. Nice places but way overcrowded now. That's what happens - you have something nice but it's finite - you can't stretch it to accommodate everyone or you lose it. Like the dog and the bone. Theere was a pasture across the street from our house at Horse Hill, at the Blithedale turn off, it was 63 acres of prime land with bay and mountain views. The Nature Conservancy bought it from some Taiwan guys that wanted to develop it and put it into perpetual protection as a pasture for 13 horses. My big dog Khan and I would walk there everyday and he'd run with the horses. The land was probably worth $25 mil and it's now a horse pasture. For ever! Beautiful. So we have to make some small sacrifices to save what little is left here.

   Posted Saturday Mar 31, 2007 22:56 #

7. Wilkins
   Member

   I looked at the picture of Berwyn circa 1900 into today's Tribune on page 22. The Berwyn that we see today is probably very similar to the Berwyn of say 1930. In other words, there was a period of rapid development for 20 or 30 years followed by a period of relative stability for 70 years. Those initial 20 or 30 years were crucial to setting the character of the neighborhood for many years to come.

   Is it possible that after many years of relative stability, that another period, a period of rapid RE-development can dramatically affect the future for many years to come?

   In my opinion, the question raised in the first post of this thread is a critical one. “What is the appropriate architecture for Riverside?— I would further sub-divide that question to apply to residential and commercial architecture.

   What effect does architecture have on the value of Riverside brand?

   Picture the results of blueprint 1: We tear down every house except those of the famous architects. We then hire a team of world famous architects. We then provide them a fully detailed master plan and a strict set of guidelines. Would the end result add to the value of our Riverside brand? Maybe, maybe not, but neither you nor I would be able to afford to live here any more. In my opinion, it would be extremely hard to come up with an —˜instant classic' that has more value than the tapestry of our village that has been gently woven over time.

   Picture the results of blueprint 2: We tear down every house except those of the famous architects. We then hire a team of world famous architects. We then provide them with no master plan and only a few guidelines. I would be scared to think of the result.

   Picture the results of blueprint 3: We tear down every house except those of the famous architects and replace each one with a Mc Mansion. Now blindfold an individual and plop them down on a side street. Will that person be able to tell if they are in Hinsdale or Riverside? If the person can't tell where they are, have we destroyed part of the value of our brand —“ one house at a time?

   Don't think that a neighborhood will ever be redeveloped that quickly?

   Take a look at this article: http://xchangeproperties.com/NYTarticle.pdf and take a look at the website that the article is posted on.

   Let's move from blueprint 3 where we are operating today to blueprint 4. What does blue print 4 look like? I can't answer that because it has to be a team, democratic effort to come up with it. But, as mentioned by others, we need a plan; we need to agree what appropriate architecture is for our village; and we need to raise our standards.

   Posted Sunday Apr 1, 2007 10:34 #

8. spatny
   Member

   I was n't criticizing what we have, I was just trying to considser what is really valuable here. Olmsted's plan, developed before the advent of the motorcar, served us very well because it's street pattern turned away a lot of people. In the 50s, on a Sunday, whn a car slowed down it was usually someone asking how to get to the zoo. People entered the Village - usually at Longcommon, and since there weren't all the stop signs we have now drove along under those dark tunnels of trees and hit the center of town, where they often made a wrong turn. Maybe the advent of on-board navigation systems will be our undoing. I mentioned the identification by someone of the 600 smaller ranch houses on lots big enough for a McMansion because they are really being sought now as sites for teardowns. My buddy often goes to estate sales and the few times I've gone with him I was really surprised to se what really bad shape the houses that looked OK from the street were in. There's one no right off Riverside Road that is an old place stuck way back on the lot that has a demolition fence around the lot. When they start - a couple days and "Poof!" - it's gone, and then by next year some pseudo schloss will rise in it's place, complete with "gourmet" kitchen and granite counter tops and all the other kitsch of our day. Of course, when I walk or drive around I can remember other kids who lived in houses and where we used to go to play with our friends and all that, and the new people can't - but when you see a place get "hot" and ripe for gentrification it happens quickly. Many of the places where grandma and grandpa now live will be new 4 BR homes wioth three kids and a dog, and the schools will be overflowing - again. We won't have to wait long, and we sure won't need a strip of condos on Pine or Forest or Burlington to house them. This thing is occurrimng both out of sequence and at exactly the wrong time. Thye vanity of plans.

   Posted Sunday Apr 1, 2007 11:27 #

9. Catherine
   Member

   We were having a tangential discussion on what it is likely that TIF-inspired architecture will look like. ChrisRobling did not answer that question, and I cannot figure out whether he voted to approve the VC, although he says he is against it.

   How are we going to get decent architecture and materials if any new building takes place? I really very rarely see new buildings with good architecture and materials. Can anyone point out some examples?

   How are we going to get that when the village approved cheap fake brickface?

   Posted Monday Apr 2, 2007 15:45 #

10. MikeT
    Member

    This is residential, but from the street, the new house on Bloomingbank looks like it used good materials and lines that fit in well with its surrounding area.

    Posted Monday Apr 2, 2007 17:01 #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply »

You must log in to post.