remnants of parcels part of which are condemned for public improvement,
and authorizes the city to sell any of such remnants subject to any
building or other restrictions which the proper authorities may see
fit to impose. The power to take the whole of a tract when part only
is needed is limited to the case where the remnant after such taking
would, from its size or shape, be unsuited for the erection of suitable
and appropriate buildings, and where also the public convenience and
necessity require such taking. There are provisions authorizing such
remnants to be sold and united with adjacent property if the owner
thereof consents; but the legislature refused to adopt the more radical
plan, recommended by a committee, of uniting such remnants with the
contiguous property, without the consent of the owner thereof, by
condemning his land in order to incorporate the remnant with it and
thus effect an advantageous sale. This act has never been tested in
the courts, and it may be surmised that, in spite of the very liberal
views of the Massachusetts courts, the fate of a proceeding under its
provisions would be problematical, unless it could be made to appear
that the “public convenience and necessity” actually did require
such taking of entire tracts for the purpose of imposing upon the
odd remnants some conditions and restrictions germane to the major
improvement.
Another statute, framed on somewhat similar lines, but also never
submitted to a judicial test, is Section 10 of the Ohio Municipal
Code, as amended in 1904. This section provides that all municipal
corporations shall have power to appropriate real estate within their
corporate limits for certain specific purposes, among which are the
following:
“For establishing esplanades, boulevards, parkways, park grounds
and public reservations in, around and leading to public buildings,
and for the purpose of reselling such land, with reservations in
the deeds of such resale as to the future use of said lands so as
so protect public buildings and their environs, and to preserve
the view, appearance, light, air and usefulness of public grounds
occupied by public buildings and esplanades and parkways leading
thereto.”
Chapter 194 of the Acts of the Virginia General Assembly for the
session of the year 1906 provides as follows:
“Any city or town of this Commonwealth may acquire by purchase, gift
or condemnation property adjoining its parks, or plats on which its
monuments are located, or other property used for public purposes, or
in the vicinity of such parks, plats or property, which is used and
maintained in such a manner as to impair the beauty, usefulness or
efficiency of such parks, plats or public property, and may likewise
acquire property adjacent to any street, the topography of which,
from its proximity thereto, impairs the convenient use of such
street, or renders impracticable, without extraordinary expense,
the improvement of the same, and the city or town so acquiring any
such property may subsequently dispose of the property so acquired,
making limitations as to the uses thereof, which will protect the
beauty, usefulness, efficiency, or convenience of such parks, plats
or property.”
CONGESTED AREAS
In considering a model plan for the city of Chicago, attention is
naturally called to the example of European cities which have removed
the inhabitants from whole areas where the population was congested
or the arrangement of the streets unwholesome, and have transplanted
them to new territory while the condemned area was being renovated
or rebuilt. The Plan of Chicago does not contemplate any imitation
of such examples. The police power is adequate to the destruction,
without recompense, of single buildings which are insanitary or unsafe;
but the legislature of Illinois has not yet undertaken to go further
and license the condemnation by municipal authorities of congested or
unwholesome areas under the power of eminent domain. Local drainage
districts may be organized, with power to reclaim wet agricultural
lands and locate ditches over private property, on the payment of
proper compensation; and it would also doubtless be competent for the
legislature to sanction the taking by eminent domain of a district even
within the city which was by nature low or pestilent, as was done with
the Back Bay flats in Boston. Different considerations, however, apply
to an area where the noxious conditions are due to the arrangement of
streets or to the manner of building upon land by individual owners.
Each proprietor might with reason demand the right to be dealt with
individually; and if his own lot was vacant, or was improved with
buildings transgressing no sanitary laws or regulations, he might well
oppose any scheme which required him to part with his land on account
of the transgression of his neighbors. A tract of land fit to breed
pestilence because of the niggardliness of nature might be reclaimed
under the power of eminent domain, because the arch offender was not
subject to the police jurisdiction of the state; but if a plague spot
has been created by the fault of men, an innocent victim of their
malfeasance would have some reason and more law on his side if he
insisted upon the state proceeding against the culprits singly.
Accordingly, the Chicago Plan deals only incidentally with this
subject. The city can, as has been done in some European capitals,
open wide thoroughfares and avenues through congested areas, or take
the heart of the district for a public park; and the legislature might
authorize the condemnation of a zone of reasonable width around these
open spaces on the principles already laid down. It may be doubted,
however, whether the courts would sustain as constitutional a statute
designed to appropriate a whole congested area merely for the purpose
of renovating it. If the power to do so in a flagrant case were
sustained by the Supreme Court of the state, or if such a project were
authorized by constitutional amendment, the measure would probably not
be condemned by the federal courts as contravening the Constitution of
the United States. To the opening of wide streets, however, through
congested districts, as proposed in the Plan, there is no obstacle
unless it be the lack of financial resources.
PRESENT BORROWING AND TAXING POWERS
In carrying out so comprehensive a scheme of development as is
outlined in the Plan of Chicago, some subsidiary sources of revenue
may be found, but the main dependence must be upon the taxing power
of the state and its agencies. Current expenses are properly met by
current taxes; but it is a main principle of economics that the cost
of permanent improvements should be distributed over a series of
years commensurate with the probable duration of the benefit. Lest,
however, the existing generation should lay inordinate burdens upon
posterity, limitations have been set upon the amount and duration of
indebtedness which may be incurred by any municipal body. Section 12
of Article IX of the constitution of the State of Illinois declares
that no municipal corporation shall become indebted for any purpose to
an amount exceeding five per cent of the value of the taxable property
therein, as ascertained by the last assessment; and that, at or before
the time of incurring such debt, the municipality shall provide for
the collection of a direct annual tax sufficient to pay the interest
and to discharge the principal within twenty years from the time when
the debt was contracted. Under the present revenue laws applicable to
Cook County, all taxable property is valued by assessors at its “full
value,” and one-fifth of that figure is entered in the books as the
“assessed value,” and, as afterwards equalized, is made the basis on
which all tax and debt limitations are computed.[89]
The constitutional limit of municipal indebtedness does not mean that
every public corporation has power to incur debts to that amount.
Municipalities have no greater powers than the legislature confers upon
them. There is no constitutional limit on the amount of taxes that the
legislature can authorize municipalities to levy.[90] They may incur
only such debts, not exceeding the constitutional limit, and levy such
taxes as the general assembly authorizes them to do. Several municipal
corporations, however, may be created under legislative authority for
different purposes, embracing all or part of the same territory, and
each of these overlapping municipalities may be given power to levy
taxes and incur debts up to the constitutional limit. To restrain
the increasing burden of taxes, the legislature in 1901 passed the
so-called Juul law, designed to limit the aggregate taxes which might
be levied upon any community in any one year to five per cent of the
assessed valuation of property therein; but the constitutionality of
this statute has been questioned and the amendments of and numerous
exceptions to its provisions made by the legislature have left its
operation, if not its continued existence, so doubtful that its repeal
has been sought on divers occasions.[91]
The county of Cook is permitted to levy taxes not exceeding
seventy-five cents on every one hundred dollars, without popular
vote, and to levy any additional taxes voted by the people. County
bonds may be voted by the people in any such amount as not to cause
the total debt of the county to exceed five per cent of the assessed
value of the property therein. The assessed value for the year 1908
was $514,730,186, of which five per cent is $25,736,509. Up to that
limit the county might become indebted by vote of the people. The
present bonded debt is $9,360,000, and the floating debt averages about
$1,600,000. Without aiming at nicety of detail, it may be said that
the county has at present a borrowing capacity, in round figures, of
$15,000,000. The operation of the Juul law, however, now reduces the
tax available for the general expenses of Cook County to sixty-five
cents on one hundred dollars; and the increasing demands upon the
county would probably necessitate a modification of this law, so as
specifically to exclude from its limitations the taxes necessary to
care for additional bond issues and provide for future maintenance of
county parks or boulevards.
The city of Chicago is practically indebted at all times to the
constitutional limit of five per cent of its assessed valuation, and
has been given power by the legislature to levy an annual tax for
corporate purposes not exceeding two per cent on that valuation,
exclusive of taxes levied for the payment of bonds. Under the
operation of the Juul law, the maximum rate has been cut down to one
and eight-tenths per cent. The assessed valuation of city property
for 1908 was $477,190,399. A two per cent tax on that amount is
$9,543,808, and a five per cent indebtedness would be $23,859,520. The
legislature could authorize a higher annual tax, but could not, under
the constitution, increase the limit of indebtedness unless by means
of some change in the method of assessing the property on which the
limitation was to be computed.[92] One of the chief reasons for asking
a new charter was to increase the bond-issuing power of the city by
changing the basis of computation of the limit of indebtedness.
The taxing powers of the three park districts in the city of Chicago
are contained in a mass of separate laws, which authorize the issuing
of bonds for particular purposes and the levying of taxes to pay
the interest and retire the principal. The park boards could be
authorized by the legislature to incur debts somewhat in excess of
their present bonded liability, without infringing the provisions of
the constitution; but here also the tax limitations of the Juul law
would have to be modified unless maintenance expenditures were scaled.
The assessed valuation for the year 1908 of property in the West Park
district was $105,614,809, of which five per cent is $5,280,740. The
present bonded debt of the West Park board is $3,270,000, leaving a
possible margin of about $2,000,000 of additional indebtedness that the
legislature could authorize to be incurred by the board.
An entirely new taxing body could, with the consent of the voters, be
created by the legislature, having jurisdiction over all or part of
Cook County. That body, if properly constituted, could be invested with
power to levy such taxes as might be deemed advisable, and with power
to issue bonds up to the constitutional limit of five per cent of the
assessed valuation. It is also to be borne in mind that by some slight
changes in the method of fixing the assessed valuation of property,
which is now arbitrarily defined as one-fifth of the full valuation,
the legislature could largely increase the borrowing power of all the
taxing bodies.
Large improvements need not only extensive borrowing powers, but the
distribution of the burden over a long series of years. While twenty
years has been heretofore deemed the limit of time which ought to be
allowed for paying any debt incurred by the issue of bonds, it may be
thought that the radical changes contemplated by the Plan of Chicago
are of such unusual magnitude and of such permanent character that
justice might demand distribution of the burden over more than one
generation. Upon that view, bonds running for a longer period might be
thought reasonable. The present constitutional limit of twenty years
is, however, absolute, and an amendment to the constitution would be
required to enable any municipality to issue bonds for a longer term.
CONCLUSIONS
From the foregoing examination of the legal aspects of the Plan of
Chicago it appears
First: That without any additional legislation many of the
recommendations of the Plan can be adopted and practical steps be taken
to carry them into effect;
Second: That the legislature has ample power to grant either to the
city or to other governmental agencies such additional authority as may
be necessary to carry out all of the recommendations of the Plan as
fully and as rapidly as may be found wise; and
Third: That additional authority, and especially a substantial
increase in the local bonding power, is essential to the effective
accomplishment of the most important of these recommendations.
It remains for the people of Chicago, through their legally constituted
representatives, to decide upon the wisdom of the suggestions and to
adopt them in the order of their relative importance and availability.
The necessary funds can no doubt be secured as rapidly as it can be
clearly shown that their expenditure will result in real advantage to
the individual citizens who constitute “the public,” and upon whom
rests, directly or indirectly, the burden of expense. In the last
analysis it must be clear that a community which makes wise expenditure
for public works not only imposes no real burden upon private property,
but increases the value of all private property within its limits. Such
a community should be given adequate authority to levy taxes and incur
debt, subject always to such intelligent supervision of expenditures
as will effectively guard against extravagance and waste. Certainly,
any limitations upon a progressive municipality should be broad enough
to make it possible to undertake such public enterprises as are
recommended in this Plan.
Fortunately, this is entirely possible in Chicago within the
constitutional limitations upon municipal indebtedness. By
consolidating the local authorities within the city of Chicago under
the provisions of the so-called charter amendment to the state
constitution (Article IV, Sec. 34), the present bonding capacity of
the city can be multiplied five times, less the aggregate indebtedness
of the consolidating bodies, and subject to such limitations as may
be imposed in the consolidating act. By merely changing the statutory
method of fixing the assessed value of property, the present bonding
power will be proportionately increased. By utilizing the county for
making such improvements as it may well be authorized to make, we can
secure additional bonding capacity even greater than that available
through the agency of the city. There would seem to be no valid
objection to an act authorizing any county which chose to adopt its
provisions by popular vote to acquire, construct, and maintain parks
and boulevards, with all the powers (including those of eminent domain)
already recommended as to cities and park or forest-preserve districts,
and with appropriate increase of taxing and of bonding powers subject
to popular approval. For many, if not all, of the purposes now sought
under the Forest-Preserve Act, the county of Cook would seem to be the
appropriate and available agency. It would be a distinct public gain to
enlarge its functions so that membership on its board of commissioners
would both demand and permit the highest type of public service. If
the Forest-Preserve Act, or an act of this general character, is
constitutional, the agency thereby provided is also available for many
of the purposes of the Plan, and could be given additional bonding
power subject only to the constitutional limitation. It will thus be
seen that ample bonding power for all the purposes of the Plan can be
conferred by the legislature. Significant precedents are not lacking
to justify the expectation that private generosity will co-operate
in the accomplishment of some of the recommendations here made for
the practical and effective promotion of the public welfare. Some of
the conspicuous benefactions of this general nature, already made by
public spirited citizens of Chicago, have been mentioned earlier in
this volume,[93] and the movement for small parks and playgrounds has
already received very substantial assistance from the generosity of
private individuals. To other individuals other features, such as outer
parks or the improvement of tenement conditions, may make an equal or
greater appeal.
Some increase in the bonding power of the city is, however, essential
to the effective accomplishment of certain park and street improvements
which the city itself should immediately undertake. The two great
connecting links—that between the North and South Divisions at Michigan
Avenue, and that between the West and South Divisions by means of
Twelfth Street—might well proceed immediately; and yet to raise the
entire cost of these improvements by special assessment, spread over
a wide area, would be to arouse vigorous opposition both in and out
of the courts. This contest should, if possible, be confined to the
adjustment of damages and benefits to the property directly affected
and which abuts on or is in the immediate vicinity of the improvements.
Property which is clearly benefited in a special and peculiar manner
should be assessed its fair share—and only its fair share—of the cost
of these improvements, and the remaining cost should be borne by the
city at large as a public benefit. The present machinery of the special
assessment law is adequate for all these purposes. What is needed is
sufficient bonding power to enable the city to issue bonds for the
portion of the cost assessed as “public benefits.”
The power to condemn or otherwise acquire easements, and to acquire
and thereafter sell the fee simple title to property in the immediate
vicinity of public parks and boulevards, subject to such easements as
may enhance and protect the public use, would be of great advantage
in the practical accomplishment of many improvements, and might aid
in overcoming serious financial obstacles. The available space will,
however, not permit the discussion of the particular instances to which
this suggestion especially applies.
It remains only to consider the official agencies which are most
desirable and most available for the effective working out of the Plan.
As a matter of theory, the best results could be achieved through a
consolidation of the city and county governments, or by placing the
entire metropolitan district, which constitutes the real city of
Chicago, under a unified municipal administration, endowed with broad
powers of local self-government, including the power to levy taxes and
incur indebtedness. Practically, however, the enlargement of the powers
of these two governing bodies—the city and the county—within the limits
permitted by the present constitution, is probably the most available
method of attaining desirable results. As a means of co-ordinating the
two it is respectfully suggested that a permanent Commission on City
and County Plan should be created by joint resolution or ordinance of
the city council and the county board. This commission should contain
appropriate representation for each body, and it should be charged
with the duty of reporting to each its recommendations as to all
matters falling within the general scope of a city and county Plan. It
might well be ordained by the city council that no public buildings
should be hereafter located or erected, and that no parks should be
acquired and no streets or boulevards be opened, without a report from
the commission or the city members thereof. The commission might
be composed entirely of city and county officials, or might contain
some representation of those who are not public officials but who are
particularly interested in and particularly qualified for its work. The
city board of local improvements and the present park boards or any
future consolidated park board should be directly represented.
Whether the functions of the Commissions on Municipal Art and Small
Parks should in the interest of simplification and efficiency be
transferred to such a Commission on City and County Plan might be
profitably considered. While such an advisory commission would be
entirely extra-legal, it would be of distinct service in securing the
harmonious development of a single comprehensive Plan for the city of
Chicago and its environs.
FOOTNOTES:
[27] Freund on Police Power, sec. 182, note 5.
[28] Freund on Police Power, sec. 181, note 50.
[29] Freund on Police Power, sec. 181, note 50.
[30] Statutes at Large, vol. 102, p. 730; see also subsequent Acts
shown in Chitty’s Statutes, vol. 8, “Metropolis” p. 253, and vol. 10,
“Public Health” p. 53.
[31] House Document No. 288, Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Dec. 29,
1903, pp. 62 and 63, and citations there made from _L’Economiste
Français_.
[32] _City of Belleville_ v. _Turnpike Co._, 234 Ill. 428, 437; _City
of Chicago_ v. _Gunning System_, 214 Ill. 628, 635.
[33] 22 Amer. & Eng. Encyc. of Law, 916.
[34] In the case of _Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railway Co._ v.
_People_, 212 Ill. 103, 116, the Supreme Court quotes with approval the
following language from the American and English Encyclopædia of Law:
“The police power is to be clearly distinguished from the right of
eminent domain; and the distinction lies in this: that in the exercise
of the latter right, private property is taken for public use and the
owner is invariably entitled to compensation therefor, while the police
power is usually exerted merely to regulate the use and enjoyment of
property by the owner, or, if he is deprived of his property outright,
it is not taken for public use, but rather destroyed in order to
promote the general welfare of the public, and in neither case is the
owner entitled to any compensation for any injury which he may sustain
in consequence thereof, for the law considers that either the injury
is _damnum absque injuria_ or the owner is sufficiently compensated
by sharing in the general benefits resulting from the exercise of the
police power.”
This decision was affirmed by the Supreme Court of the United States,
200 U. S. 561.
[35] Hurd’s Statutes of Illinois, edition of 1908, p. 1532.
[36] Hurd’s Statutes of Illinois, edition of 1908, p. 1546.
[37] Hurd’s Statutes of Illinois, edition of 1908, p. 1574-5.
[38] Acts of 1893, chap. 407.
[39] Hurd’s Statutes of Illinois, edition of 1908, p. 1129.
[40] See _Russell_ v. _High School Board_, 212 Ill., 327.
[41] House bill No. 350, introduced in the Illinois legislature, March
23, 1909, provides (Art. IV, Sec. 9) that “the city shall have power
to acquire, by dedication, gift, purchase, or condemnation, lands or
easements inside or outside of the city limits, for park purposes, and
for ways connecting parks with the city or with each other.”
[42] Constitution of Illinois, Art. IV, Sec. 34.
[43] Hurd’s Statutes of Illinois, edition of 1908, p. 316.
[44] Hurd’s Statutes of Illinois, edition of 1908, p. 336.
[45] _Shoemaker_ v. _United States_, 147 U. S. 282; _Dunham_ v.
_People_, 96 Ill. 331; _People_ v. _Brislin_, 80 Ill. 423.
[46] Hurd’s Statutes of Illinois, edition of 1908, p. 421.
[47] House bill No. 350, Illinois, 1909, already mentioned, which
contemplates the merger of the park boards in the city government,
provides (Art. IV, Sec. 19) as follows: “The provision of the statutes
governing the making of local improvements in the city shall be as
nearly as possible applied to the proceedings for the taking of lands
and the meeting of the expenses in connection with such improvements,
except that the board of park commissioners shall act in place of the
board of local improvements.”
[48] Hurd’s Statutes of Illinois, edition of 1908, p. 321.
[49] _Kreigh_ v. _Chicago_, 86 Ill. 407.
[50] _Harder’s Storage Co._ v. _Chicago_, 235 Ill. 58.
[51] _Cicero Lumber Co._ v. _Cicero_, 176 Ill. 9; _Brodbine_ v.
_Revere_, 182 Mass. 598.
[52] _People_ v. _Walsh_, 96 Ill. 232.
[53] _Ligare_ v. _City of Chicago_, 139 Ill. 46; _Smith_ v. _McDowell_,
148 Ill. 51.
[54] Hurd’s Statutes of Illinois, edition of 1908, p. 408.
[55] Hurd’s Statutes of Illinois, edition of 1908, p. 1518.
[56] Hurd’s Statutes of Illinois, edition of 1908, p. 1521.
[57] Hurd’s Statutes of Illinois, edition of 1890, p. 1560.
[58] Hurd’s Statutes of Illinois, edition of 1908, p. 1569.
[59] Hurd’s Statutes of Illinois, edition of 1908, p. 1544.
[60] House Bill No. 350, Illinois, 1909, already mentioned, contains
the following provision: “Art. IV, Sec. 14. The city shall have
authority to acquire and hold lands for the erection and maintenance
thereon of public buildings of the city and for public grounds
surrounding such buildings or connected therewith, and shall have the
right to permit buildings of the County of Cook, the State of Illinois,
the United States of America or other governmental or public bodies to
be erected and maintained on such lands and grounds upon such terms and
conditions as the city council may prescribe. Subject to such use, the
board of park commissioners shall, when directed by the city council,
have the same power to manage and control, improve, maintain, and
beautify such lands and grounds, as is in this Act conferred upon said
board with respect to parks; and for any of the purposes hereinbefore
in this section specified, the city may acquire or dispose of the title
to or rights in lands or rights or easements in or over lands abutting
on or in the vicinity of such lands or public grounds in like manner
and to like extent as in this Act provided with respect to parks.”
[61] Hurd’s Statutes of Illinois, edition of 1908, p. 1129.
[62] Hurd’s Statutes, edition of 1908, p. 1570.
[63] Hurd’s Statutes, edition of 1908, p. 1572.
[64] Hurd’s Statutes, edition of 1908, p. 1577.
[65] Hurd’s Statutes, edition of 1908, p. 1578.
[66] Hurd’s Statutes, edition of 1908, p. 1562.
[67] Hurd’s Statutes, edition of 1908, p. 1563.
[68] Hurd’s Statutes, edition of 1908, p. 1564.
[69] Hurd’s Statutes, edition of 1908, p. 1565.
[70] Hurd’s Statutes, edition of 1908, p. 1570.
[71] Hurd’s Statutes, edition of 1908, p. 1540.
[72] House Bill No. 352, introduced in the Illinois legislature on
March 23, 1909, proposes to confer on the city complete legal power
to create harbors and provides as follows: “Sec. 14. For the purpose
of acquiring or constructing wharves, docks, levees, or in connection
with such wharves, docks, or levees, elevators, warehouses, vaults
or necessary or appropriate tracks or terminal facilities, the city
may reclaim the submerged lands under any public waters within the
jurisdiction of or bordering upon the City of Chicago, and shall
thereupon be vested with the absolute title, in fee simple, to the
lands so reclaimed; and for any of the purposes aforesaid the city
may acquire, by purchase, condemnation or otherwise, the title of the
private or public owners, if any there be, to lands lying beneath such
public waters and to any lands penetrating into or abutting on such
public waters, and also the riparian or other rights, if any there be,
of the owners of the shore lands abutting on such public waters in or
over such public waters or the submerged lands under such waters. The
city and the owner or owners of any such abutting lands or riparian or
other rights are hereby authorized to agree upon a division of the said
submerged lands between the said city and the said owners, and upon a
boundary line dividing the submerged lands acquired or to be acquired
by said city, and the submerged lands to be taken, owned and used by
said owners in lieu of and as compensation for the release or transfer
of such riparian or other rights to said city; subject, however, to the
requirement that in all cases in which said city shall have agreed upon
any such division, the said city shall file a petition or petitions
in chancery and obtain a decree of court thereon, in like manner as
is provided with respect to boards of park commissioners in and by a
statute of the State of Illinois entitled, ‘An Act authorizing park
commissioners to acquire and improve submerged and shore lands for park
purposes, providing for the payment therefor, and granting unto such
commissioners certain rights and powers and to riparian owners certain
rights and titles,’ approved May 2, 1907.”
[73] _Lobdell_ v. _Chicago_, 227 Ill. 218
[74] See Report of National Civic Federation Commission on Public
Ownership and Operation, Part 1, Vol. 1, p. 25.
[75] Digest of City Charters, prepared for Chicago Charter Convention,
pp. 25, 26.
[76] Vol. xx, p. 43.
[77] _McPherson_ v. _Village of Chebanse_, 114 Ill. 46.
[78] _Welch_ v. _Swasey_, 193 Mass. 364.
[79] _Attorney General_ v. _Williams_, 174 Mass. 476.
[80] _City of St. Louis_ v. _Hill_, 116 Mo. 527; _Chicago_ v. _Gunning
System_, 214, Ill. 628.
[81] _City of St. Louis_ v. _Dorr_, 145 Mo. 466.
[82] _Dunham_ v. _Hyde Park_, 75 Ill. 371.
[83] _Matter of Albany Street_, 11 Wend. 148.
[84] _Embury_ v. _Conner_, 3 N. Y. 511; _Dorgan_ v. _Boston_, 12 Allen,
223.
[85] _Brooklyn Park Comm’rs._ v. _Armstrong_, 45 N. Y. 234, 243.
[86] _Heyward_ v. _New York_, 7 N. Y. 314; _Rexford_ v. _Knight_, 11 N.
Y. 308; _Malone_ v. _Toledo_, 34 Ohio, 541.
[87] _Meyer_ v. _Teutopolis_, 131 Ill. 552; _People_ v. _Wieboldt_, 233
Ill. 572; _Wisconsin River Improvement Co._ v. _Pier_, 118 N. W. Rep.
857.
[88] House Bill No. 350, Illinois, 1909, already mentioned, contains
the following provisions, the legality of which is based upon the
conclusions above stated.
Art. IV, Sec. 10. “The city council, on recommendation of the board
of park commissioners, shall have power to extend the park system
of the City of Chicago, both within and outside of the city limits,
by adding to or otherwise enlarging any parks, and by opening and
establishing new parks, and by extinguishing or acquiring such title
to, or such easements and rights in or over, any lands abutting on or
in the vicinity of any existing or projected park as may be necessary
or appropriate to control the surroundings of such park so as to
increase the advantage thereof to the public, or secure to the public
the full benefit, use and enjoyment thereof. For any such purpose the
city may extinguish easements or rights in land, and may acquire lands
and easements and rights in or over land, by gift, devise, dedication,
purchase or condemnation, and may in its discretion, take under the
power of eminent domain or otherwise the title in fee simple absolute
to any land which the city is authorized to acquire, or in or over
which it is authorized to acquire easements and rights as aforesaid,
and such title shall not terminate or be defeated by cessation or
abandonment of the use for which it was acquired. The declaration of
the city council that any such lands or easements or rights in or over
land are necessary or appropriate for any such purpose shall constitute
sufficient prima facie evidence of such necessity or appropriateness.
The city council may vacate streets and alleys within the limits of or
adjacent to any lands acquired for the purpose of this section.”
Art. IV., Sec. 13. “The provisions in this Act contained authorizing
the city to acquire the absolute title in fee simple to lands in or
over which the city is authorized to acquire easements or rights, shall
be subject to the provision that any lands so taken for such purpose
shall, unless appropriated to some public use within ten (10) years
after acquisition of the title thereto, be sold and disposed of by
the city in the manner now or hereafter provided by statute for the
sale and conveyance of property no longer required for the use of the
city, subject, however, to such easements or rights in said lands,
and to such conditions, covenants and restrictions respecting the use
or improvement thereof as the city, upon recommendation of the board
of park commissioners, shall, in the deed of conveyance, impose or
reserve, and subject further to the power (which is hereby granted) of
the city council, with the consent of the board of park commissioners,
to release, waive or (by or with the consent of the grantee or owner
of the conveyed premises) alter any such easements rights, conditions,
covenants or restrictions.”
[89] House Bill No. 293, introduced at Springfield, March 11, 1909,
seeks to make the assessed value one-third, instead of one-fifth, of
the full value.
[90] _Schnell_ v. _Rock Island_, 232 Ill. 89, 98.
[91] For the Juul law as amended see Hurd’s Statutes of Illinois,
edition of 1908, p. 1814.
[92] House Bill No. 293, Illinois, 1909, already mentioned, would, if
enacted into a law, give the city power to issue bonds for its share
of the cost of the north and west connecting boulevards, or for a
beginning on the Civic Center. The other necessities of the city would,
however, exhaust most of the increased bonding power provided by this
bill.
[93] See Chapter VIII.
INDEX
INDEX
A
Advertising, regulation of, 127, 131, 132, 140.
Algonquin, 40.
Alvord, John W., his paper on good roads, 39 (note);
his report on Chicago pavements, 83.
American cities, centers of industry and traffic, 4.
Annapolis, Md., laid out on lines similar to those proposed by Wren
for London, 29.
Ancient civilization, decay of, 13.
Antwerp, 100;
the influence of the Rubens collection on, 116;
treatment of the river banks in, 116.
Apartment houses, 33, 34.
Arc de Triomphe de l’Etoile, Paris, begun by Napoleon I, finished by
Louis Phillippe, 17.
Arc du Carrousel, Paris, 17.
Architects, present plans for World’s Columbian Exposition, 6, (note);
should work together in street building, 86.
_Architectural Record_, quoted, 18.
Armour Institute of Technology, 120.
Arnold, Bion J., estimates increase in the population of Chicago, 33.
Art, a source of wealth and moral influence, 116.
Art Institute, the Lake Front improvements presented at, 6;
students at, 109;
new building for, 114;
cost of, 120, 121.
Art Schools, 34.
Ashland Avenue, 117.
_Atlantic Monthly Magazine_, quoted, 19.
Athens, works of Pericles in, 11;
characteristics of architecture in, 11;
the Acropolis, 117.
Athletic Field, proposed location on the lake front, 116.
Aurora, 40.
Austria, finds new strength in union with Hungary, 19.
Automobiles, damage to roads by, 39;
promote suburban life, 42, 46.
Avenue, the, character of, 82;
division of traffic on, 84;
use of the ellipse in, 90.
B
Babylon, the greatest commercial city of ancient times, 10;
description of, 10.
Baltic, the, yachtmen of, 52.
Baltimore, improvements in, 28.
Baguio, summer capital of the Philippines, plan for, 29.
Batavia, 40.
Baths, in Rome, accommodations of, 13.
Baumeister, German city-builder, 21, (note).
Baxter, Sylvester, secretary of Metropolitan Improvement Commission,
Boston, 20.
Beauty, Greek passion for, 11;
commercial advantages of, 110.
Berlin, rapid growth of, 1;
physical conditions in, 14;
parks of, 49, 80;
building restrictions in, 107.
Bill-boards, 41, 131, 140.
Blue Island, 40, 41.
Board of Local Improvements, powers of, 133.
Boating facilities, need of increased, 115.
Bois de Boulogne, 48.
Bois de Vincennes, 48.
Bond issues for improvements, 151.
Boston, defenses of, 9;
cost of park system, 27;
metropolitan sewage and park commissions, 38;
extension of streets, 38;
extent of park system, 49;
apartment houses in, 88;
improvements in Back Bay district, 108, 110.
Boulevard, character of, 82.
Boulevards of Chicago, 84, 93, 120.
British Museum, 110.
Brown, Glenn, Secretary American Institute of Architects, 21, (note).
Brussels, boulevards in, 20, 90.
Budapest, commercial progress of, 19;
treatment of the Danube in, 116.
Buildings, regulation of the height of, 141.
Building lines, 127.
Burnham, Daniel H., 6 (note);
plan for San Francisco, 28.
Burns, John, town-planning scheme of, 22, 128.
Bushy Park, London, 48.
C
Chicago, rapid growth of population, 1;
realizes that a city plan is necessary, 1;
the plan presented the result of experience, 2;
justification of the plan, 4;
legal aspects of plan, 127-156;
Chicago a center of industry and traffic, 4;
future greatness, 4;
public spirit, 4;
understands the necessity of experts, 4;
results of the World’s Fair, 6;
plans for improvement of the Lake front, 6;
Merchants Club begins plan, 7;
prosperity the result of comprehensive plan, 8;
the Spirit of Chicago, 8;
a typical example of a palisaded town, 9;
surroundings similar to those of Paris, London and Berlin, 14;
opportunity for systematic improvement, 15;
population greater than that of Paris when Haussmann’s work
began, 18;
nature of the Chicago problem, 30;
the metropolis of the Middle West, 31;
extent of city’s influence, 32, 34;
probable growth, 32, 33;
size of the city not the first consideration, 32;
lack of foresight after the fire of 1871, 32;
B. J. Arnold’s estimates of growth of population, 33;
James J. Hill’s prophecy as to growth, 33;
circulation of Chicago newspapers, 33;
bank reserves, 33;
commercial influence, 34;
political headquarters, 34;
responsibilities of the city, 34;
Commission to lay out territory adjoining the city, 34;
provision should be made for public buildings and playgrounds, 35;
churches, 36;
suburbs, 36;
need of highways into surrounding country, 38;
building of good roads, 39;
highways surrounding the city, 40, 41;
streets of Chicago, 43;
beginnings of park system, 43;
park area second to that of Philadelphia, 44;
park extension begins, 44;
small parks, 44, 54;
proposed arrangement of new parks, 44;
park area relative to population, 44;
park circuits, 45;
recommendations of Special Park Commission, 46;
development of suburban railway service, 46;
need for outlying parks, 47;
compared with London, 48;
opportunities for large parks, 50;
development of Lake front, 50;
yachting, 52;
Chicago made largely by the railroads, 61;
problem of freight traffic, 61;
necessity for revising transportation facilities, 62;
only goods to be consumed in city should enter therein, 63;
a traffic clearing-house proposed, 64;
railway and water traffic compared, 64;
relief from congestion of traffic, 65;
harbors, 65;
tunnel system, 65;
a loop system, 66;
excursion piers, 68;
circuits for freight and passenger traffic, 68;
passenger stations, 70, 71;
locations of passenger stations, 72, 112;
street-car loop system, 73;
extension of business area, 74;
suburban passenger traffic, 74;
mail service, 76;
ideal nature of proposed transportation system, 78;
natural features of Chicago, 79;
how effective results may be obtained, 80;
needs of the growing city, 80;
adequate circulation and sufficient park area essential, 80;
cost of postponing improvements in circulation system, 81;
report on street paving, 83;
existing diagonals, 84;
location of the city, 89;
advantages of rectilinear street system, 89;
circular avenues, 90;
necessity for platting outlying district, 91;
preserving width of existing avenues, 92;
circuit arteries suggested, 92;
avenues paralleling railways, 94;
diversion of traffic from the business center, 95;
proposed circuits, 95-96;
encroachments on the river, 97;
treatment of river banks, 97, 112;
widening of streets, 97;
requisites for area outside the business center, 98;
the heart of Chicago, 99;
spread of population, 99;
disposition of traffic within the business center, 99;
Michigan Avenue the base line of the city, 100;
width of streets, 100;
bridge at Michigan Avenue, 105;
expenditures for permanent improvements, 107;
the improvement of Halsted Street, 107; slums of the city, 108;
Berlin an example for housing conditions, 109;
opportunity for comprehensive treatment of the central portion of
the city, 110;
development of Grant Park, 110;
economy and effectiveness of group-plan for Grant Park, 111;
a yacht harbor, 111;
gifts by citizens should be encouraged, 112;
Congress Street as the grand axis, 113;
reasons for choice of Congress Street for grand axis, 113, 114;
the civic center, 115;
buildings composing civic center, 115, 116;
dome of civic center, 116, 118;
Federal group of buildings, 117;
increase in real estate values, 119;
raising street levels, 120;
creation of the park system, 120;
purification of Lake Michigan, 120;
cost of World’s Fair, 120;
cultivation of the fine arts, 120;
influence of the universities, 120;
taxing powers, 153.
City-planning, begins in Paris, 13;
in Europe, 19;
French and German theories, 20.
Civic Center of Chicago, buildings comprising, 115;
location of, 115;
architecture of, 117;
dome of, 118;
cost of, 123;
power of park commissioners to acquire land for, 134.
Civil Law, unifying force of, 31.
Cleanliness, a necessity for the city, 82.
Cleveland, Ohio, group-plan for, 27;
cost of improvements in, 27.
Club houses for the people, 44.
Colbert, one of the Paris planners, 15, 20.
Commerce, governing motive in location of cities, 9;
beginning of in Europe, 13;
expansion of, 19;
makes art creations possible, 22.
Commercial Club, undertakes plan of Chicago, 1;
designs for Lake Front improvement presented to, 6;
consolidates with Merchants’ Club, 7;
carries on work for plan of Chicago, 7;
meetings of, 7;
discussion of good roads, 39 (note).
Condemnation, limitations on the right of, 128;
congested areas, power to open, 151.
Congress of the Confederation, 31.
Congress Street, should be developed as central axis of city, 113;
width of, 114;
its relation to Grant Park, 115.
Cook County, creates outer belt Commission, 44;
County building part of the civic center group, 116;
attempt to organize a forest-preserve district, 132;
limited powers of, 134;
taxation in, 152.
Courtland, 40.
Courts, building for, 116.
Crerar, John, endows Crerar Library, 109.
Crerar Library, 108, 114, 120.
Crown Point, 40.
Calumet Feeder, 55.
Calumet River, importance of harbor, 57.
Canal Street, location of railway stations on, 107;
widening of, 113.
Cathedral, the, embodied the highest expression of civic art, 13.
Cedar Lake, 40.
Cemeteries, Roman, 12;
characteristics of modern, 36.
_Century Magazine_, quoted, 21, (note).
Charles River, Mass., improvement of, 49.
Charleston, 9.
Chicago Avenue, traffic on, 116, 117.
Chicago Heights, 40.
Chicago Ridge, 41.
Chicago River, forests along, 56;
improvement of, 97;
treatment of the banks, 116.
Chicago University, 51, 120, 121.
China, opening of, 33.
Christianity, unifying force of, 31.
Churches, usually not architecturally important, 36.
City, the, formless growth of neither economical nor satisfactory, 1;
overcrowding and congestion of traffic paralyzes vital functions
of, 1;
complicated problems of not beyond control of public sentiment, 1;
efforts to bring about best conditions of life in, 1;
parks the lungs of, 12;
strain of life in, 32;
opportunities for the ambitious, 33;
needs adequate circulation and sufficient park area, 80;
needs created by increase in population, 81;
reasons for growth of population, 81;
general character of, 82, 87.
D
Danube, the, 110, 116.
Darmstadt, 20.
Defense, governing motive in location of cities, 9.
De Kalb, 40, 47.
Department of State, facilitates work on plan of Chicago, 7.
Des Plaines River, scenery along, 40;
beauty of, 55, 90, 91.
_Der Stadteban_, magazine, 21, (note).
Dewey, Stoddard, on foreign money spent in Paris, 19.
Diagonals necessity for, 84;
function of, 91;
those proposed for Chicago, 92.
Diodorus, his description of Babylon, 10.
District of Columbia, L’Enfant plan extended over the entire
District, 25;
plan of, 91.
(See also Washington, D. C.)
Douglas Park, 44.
Drainage Canal, 55;
cost of, 120.
Dresden, 20, 110, 116.
Driveways, extent of proposed, 58.
Dundee, 40.
Du Page County, 55.
Du Page River, 40.
E
Eagle Lake, 40.
Education, unifying force of in the Northwest, 32.
Edwards, Percy J., his history of London street improvements,
21, (note).
Egypt, defended by deserts, 10;
pyramids and temples of, 10.
Electric railways bind outlying towns to central city, 42;
promote neighborliness, 42.
Elgin, 40.
Eliot, President, Charles W., quoted, 123.
Ellis Park, 43.
Elmhurst, 40.
Eminent domain, exercise of power of, 129, 140, 141, 142;
right to take more than necessary lands, 144, 151.
England, beginning of national life in, 13;
growth of commerce, 19;
housing schemes, 21, 128;
town planning, 21, 22, 34;
holds Northwestern posts after the Revolution, 31;
roads, 39;
regulation of advertising, 127.
Epping Forest, 48.
Evanston, 40, 50.
Evergreen Park, 56.
Euphrates River, tunnel under, 10.
Europe, national life begins in, 13;
changes in cities, 19, 22.
F
Federal Building in Chicago, 117.
Ferguson Monument Fund, 121.
Field, Marshall, gives Field Museum of Natural History to
Chicago, 108.
Field Museum, the importance of, 108, 114;
new building for, 114;
location of, 121.
Fischer, Prof. Theodore, German city-builder, 21, (note).
Flag Creek, 55.
Florence, beauty and power of, 13, 20.
Folleston, 40.
Fontainebleau, Forest of, 48.
Foreign peoples in Chicago, 1.
Forest parks, 53, 131, 136.
Fort Dearborn, 115.
Fortifications, in relation to cities, 9;
changed into boulevards, 90.
Fountains, location of, 86.
Fox River, 40.
France, beginning of national life in, 13;
leads the world in art and taste, 19;
improvement of cities, 19;
roads, 39.
Franco-Prussian war, improvements in European cities since, 19.
Frankfort-on-the-Main, 20.
Franklin, Benjamin, his connection with the Northwest, 31.
G
Ganges River, 10.
Garfield Park, 44.
Gary, 40, 58.
Geneva, 40.
Genoa, 40.
German city improvements, nature of, 20;
modification of French system, 20;
aim of to produce variety and interest, 20;
in Frankfort-on-the-Main, 20;
advertising regulations, 127.
Germany, beginning of National Life in, 13.
Germany, effect of peace on, 19;
magnitude of the city-planning movement in, 21 (note);
municipal expositions, 21, (note).
Gibbs Woods, 54.
Gifts by public-spirited citizens, advantage of to a city, 110, 116.
Glencoe, entrance to park system at, 54, 55.
Glenview Golf Club, 55.
Good Roads, economic effects of, 42.
(See also highways.)
Governor of Illinois inspects work on plan of Chicago, 7.
Government, enlarged participation of people in, 1.
Grade crossings of railroads, 71.
Grant Park, improvement of, 6, 44, 52;
proposed treatment of, 108;
grouping of buildings in, 109, 114, 115;
intellectual center of Chicago, 116.
Grant, Gen. U. S., embodiment of the spirit of the Middle West, 32.
Great Lakes, 32.
Griffith, 40.
Gurlitt, Cornelius, as to German city-planning, 20, 21.
H
Hainault Forest, London, 48.
Hall of Records, 116.
Halsted Street, longest business street in the world, 106;
treatment of, 106;
known as the king of streets, 106, 117.
Hamburg, 20.
Hammond, 40.
Hampton Court, England, 48.
Harbors, in Chicago, 65, 68.
Harlem, 55.
Hartford, improvement of, 29.
Harvard Medical School, location of, 115.
Harvey, 40.
Haussmann, George Eugene, becomes prefect of the Seine, 17;
his place as a city builder, 18;
builds on the foundations laid by Louis XIV., 18;
character of his work, 18;
cost of his improvements, 19;
imitation of, 19.
Heart of Chicago, the, 99, 110 (see also Business Center).
Henley, regattas at, 48.
Highways, necessity for adequate, 38;
commercial advantages of, 38;
along railways, 41, 94;
drainage of, 41;
proposed system of, 121;
cost of creating, 121 (see also Roads).
Hill, James J., predicts future population of Chicago, 33;
on improvement of railway terminals, 62.
Hinsdale, 40.
Hobart, 40.
Holidays, necessity of caring for crowds on, 88.
Housing conditions in England, 21;
in Chicago, 113, 141.
Hudson Palisades, improvement of, 38.
Humboldt Park, 44.
Hungary, 19.
Hunt, Richard M., presents plan for Administration building at
World’s Fair, 6 (note).
I
Illinois, good roads in, 39;
park legislation, 44, 127;
tendency toward city life in, 47;
constitutional limitations on improvements, 128.
Illinois Central Railway, 52.
India, 10.
Indian country of North America, settlement of, 9.
Indiana, coöperation of, 130.
Indians in the Northwest, 31.
Irrigation of western lands, 33.
Italy, 13, 19.
J
Jackson Park, site of World’s Columbian Exposition, 6, 44, 53.
Japan, opening of, 33.
Jay, John, pertinacity of on behalf of the Northwest, 31.
Jefferson Park, 43.
Jefferson, Thomas, aids L’Enfant in planning Washington, 23, 25.
Joliet, 40.
Johnson, A. N., Illinois State Highway Commissioner, as to good
roads, 39 (note).
Juniper, suitable for lake shore planting, 38.
K
Kankakee, 40.
Kankakee River, 40.
Kansas City, improvement of, 29.
Kenilworth, 130.
Kenosha, 39, 40, 47.
Kew Gardens, 48.
L
La Crosse, 40.
Lagoons, along Lake Front, 52.
Lake Calumet, 55;
park reservations near, 57.
Lake Forest University, 120.
Lake Front, improvement of suggested by World’s Columbian
Exposition, 6;
testimony as to advantages of to Chicago, 6;
progress of plan for, 6;
favored by press, 7;
of right belongs to the people, 50;
to be made from city waste, 50, 122;
improvement of, 122;
legislation for improvements, 137, 138.
Lake Michigan, driveway along shore of, 38;
beauty of, 50;
boating on, 51;
treatment of shores, 53.
Lake Zurich, 40, 60.
Lanciani, L., his description of ancient Rome, 13.
La Porte, 40.
La Salle Street, improvement of, 107, 113.
L’Enfant, Peter Charles, makes plan of Washington, 23, 49, 91.
Le Nôtre, plans of for Paris, 15.
Libertyville, 40.
Lincoln Park, 43, 44, 135, 136.
Lincoln, Abraham, embodiment of the spirit of the Middle West, 34;
Saint-Gaudens’ statue of, 112.
Little Calumet River, 55.
London, physical conditions in, 14;
street changes, 20;
cost of delaying improvements in, 21;
opportunities offered by the Great Fire of 1666, 21;
Sir Christopher Wren’s plan of, 21;
cost of recent improvements in, 21;
cost of proposed new thoroughfares, 21;
suburbs, 34;
police jurisdiction, 37;
rehousing of working people, 37, 107, 128;
recreation grounds, 48;
monuments, 80;
housing conditions, 113;
treatment of Thames, 116;
influence of National Gallery and British Museum, 116.
London Traffic Commission, plan for diminishing congestion, 21.
Louisburg, Cape Breton, a fortified city, 9.
Louis XIV., of France, plan of Paris, 14;
his plan a model in Europe, 19, 22, 87, 91.
Louis Phillippe, finished Arc de Triomphe, 17.
Los Angeles, Cal., expenditure for roads, 39 (note).
Lutetia, original name of Paris, 14.
M
Mackinac, defenses of, 9.
Mail service of Chicago, 76.
Manhattan, 40.
Manila, improvement of, 29.
Manufacturers, buildings for, 86.
Marengo, 40.
Massachusetts, good roads in, 39 (note);
metropolitan park commission, 131.
Maysville, 40.
McHenry, 40.
Media, 10.
Merchants’ Club, Lake Front Improvements presented to, 7;
arranges for complete plan of Chicago, 7;
consolidates with Commercial Club, 7.
Metropolitan Art Museum, New York, 115.
Michigan Avenue, the base line of Chicago, 100;
traffic on, 100; proposed improvement of, 100;
grades of, 102;
elevation of, 103;
necessity for open spaces, 115, 117;
the city has power to improve, 136.
Michigan City, 40, 47.
Middle Ages, conditions prevailing among European cities, 19, 31.
Middle West, limits of, 31;
Chicago the metropolis of, 31;
its distinct history, 31;
extent of, 32;
navigable waters of, 32;
phenomenal growth of, 32;
meaning of term, 33.
Milan, 20, 90.
Miller, John S., on maintenance and repair of Chicago streets, 83.
Millington, 40.
Milwaukee, 38.
Minneapolis, improvement of, 28.
Mississippi Valley, development of, 33.
Mobile, 9.
Momence, 40.
Monee, 40.
Morgan, J. Pierpont, president of the American Scenic and Historic
Preservation Society, gift of, 38 (note).
Morris, 40.
Mt. Forest, 55.
Music in Chicago, 34, 120.
N
Nantasket Beach, Boston, bathing at, 38.
Naperville, good roads in, 39.
Napoleon Bonaparte, his belief in and work for Paris, 15, 17;
suggests improvements for London, 21.
Napoleon III., transformation of Paris under, 17.
Natural forces applied to industry, effects of, 19.
Natural scenery, desirability of for city workers, 53.
Newberry Library, 120.
New Orleans, 9.
New York, rapid growth of, 1;
defenses of, 9;
civic improvement in, 27;
railway congestion at, 62;
Riverside Drive, 116;
Metropolitan Museum of Art, 109, 116;
sudden expansion of, and waste of money in, 153.
Newspapers of Chicago, 34.
Nile, the, 10.
Niles, 40.
Noises, 74.
North Western University, 51, 120.
Norton, Prof. Charles Eliot, his characterization of Venice, 13.
Nuisances, 141.
O
O’Day, Edward, editor of plan for San Francisco, 28 (note).
Ohio River, 32.
O’Meara, Dr. Barry E., his talks with Napoleon, 21.
Ordinance of 1787, 31.
Orient, rapid growth of cities in the, 1.
Outer belt of parks, scheme for, 7;
Commission for, 41, 52, 121;
cost of, 123;
legislation for, 130, 133.
P
Pacific Coast, commercial development of, 33.
Palisades of the Hudson, commission for, 38.
Palisades of the Potomac, 49.
Palos, 56.
Panama Canal, influence of on growth of Chicago, 33.
Parks, economic effects of 51;
character of, 54.
Paris, first modern city, 14;
has reached the highest state of civic development, 14;
origin of, 14;
growth the result of commerce, 14;
plans of Louis XIV., 14;
new portions of laid out in vacant places, 14, 23;
congestion of population, 15;
grows according to a well-considered plan, 15;
improvements of Napoleon I., 15;
a center of commerce, 17;
first sidewalks in, 17;
the quays, 17;
commemorative monuments, 17;
plans of Napoleon III., 17;
transformations wrought by Haussmann, 17;
grouping of railway stations, 18;
compared with Chicago, 18;
cost of Haussmann’s improvements, 19;
civic pride, 19;
amount of foreign money spent in, 19;
Wren anticipates features of Paris plan, 21, 54;
parks, 48, 54, 87, 90, 91, 94, 108;
treatment of Seine, 116;
influence of the Louvre, 116;
commercial advantages of improvements, 124;
condemnation of land in, 128.
Paving, report of Commercial Club Committee on street paving in
Chicago, 83.
Peace, results of in Europe since 1872, 19.
Pennsylvania Railroad, improvement of station buildings, 77.
People, increased participation of in government, 1;
determination to secure better conditions of life, 2.
Pericles, character of his work, 11.
Perkins, Dwight Heald, compiles report of the Special Park
Commission, 44.
Persia, 10.
Peterson Woods, 54.
Philadelphia, improvements in, 28;
park system, 44.
Philippine Islands, plans for summer capital in, 29.
Pittsburg, railway congestion at, 62.
Place de la Concorde, Paris, 15.
Place de l’Etoile, Paris, 15.
Place Vendôme, Paris, 15, 87.
Plainfield, 40.
Plan of the City, necessity for, 1;
impossibility of perfection in, 2;
real test of is in its application, 2;
not an expense but a measure of economy, 4;
insures orderly growth, 4.
Planting, for Lake Shore drive, 38;
winter effects should be studied, 78.
Play grounds, need of, 35, 45;
on Lake Front, 51.
Pleasant Prairie, 40.
Plutarch, his description of the works of Pericles, 11.
Poles, disfigurement of streets by, 84.
Police Headquarters, part of the civic center group, 116.
Police power, extent of, 128, 140.
Population, density of in Chicago, 48, 115.
Post-office, 68, 76;
new building for, 117.
Potomac Park, Washington, 49.
Potomac, treatment of banks of, 110.
President’s House, (White House) the, 23.
Providence, R. I., improvement of, 28.
Public Health Department, 116.
Public Libraries, 35.
Public Library, possible location for in Grant Park, 114.
Public Schools, 35.
Public service plans for heating, lighting and power, 76.
Public Works, department of, 115.
Pullman, 58.
Pyramids of Gizeh, 10.
Q
Quebec, a fortified city, 9.
R
Railway stations, treatment of, 36, 42;
in Europe, 70;
embellishment of, 77;
grouping of on Canal and Twelfth Streets, 110, 116.
Railways, dependence of Chicago on, 61;
congestion of traffic, 62;
necessity for improved terminals, 62;
necessity of combination among to secure Chicago terminals, 62, 121;
electrification of, 106; cost of scheme for terminals, 122
(see also Transportation).
Real Estate Board of Chicago, report of on Michigan Avenue, 101.
Recreation piers, 68, 115.
Residence streets, 83, 91.
Revere Beach, bathing at, 38, 49.
Richmond Park, near London, 48.
Ringstrasse, the, Vienna, 20.
River Forest, 55.
Riverside, 40, 55.
Riverside Drive, New York, 110.
Rivers, transformation of banks of, 116.
Riviera, the, 51.
Roads, John Alvord’s paper on, 39 (note);
in Buena Park, 39;
from Versailles to Chartier, 39;
English and French roads, 39;
value of good roads to the community, 39;
in Los Angeles, 39;
in Illinois, 39;
an adjunct of Chicago life, 40.
Roanoke, Va., improvement of, 29.
Robey, 41.
Rogers Park, 130.
Roman Law, unifying force of, 13.
Rome, growth of, 1;
possessed elements that characterize the modern city, 11;
parks and gardens of, 12;
rejuvenation of, 13;
baths, 13;
the Forum, 13, 117, 20;
suburbs, 34;
aqueducts, 72;
railway stations, 87.
Royal British Institute of Architects, 21 (note).
Rouen, 90.
Rue de la Paix, Paris, 15.
Rue de Rivoli, Paris, opened by Napoleon, 15.
S
Sag Valley, 56.
Saint-Gaudens, Augustus, opinion of architect’s meeting for the
World’s Fair, 6 (note);
statue of Lincoln, 112.
Salt Creek, 55.
Sandwich, 40.
San Francisco, comprehensive plan for, 28.
Scheldt, the, 110.
Schools, location of on highways, 39, 98.
Seattle, improvement of, 29.
Seine, the, 51, 110.
Senate Park Commission, the, (Daniel H. Burnham, Charles Follin
McKim, Augustus Saint-Gaudens, Frederick Law Olmstead, Jr.)
makes plan for park system of the District of Columbia, 25;
opposition to plan of, 25;
members of the commission also planners of World’s Columbian
Exposition, 25.
Semiramis, queen of Babylon, the first city builder, 10.
Shaw, Albert, as to cost of delays in London planning, 21.
Shade, advantages of in city, 84.
Shelby, 40.
Sherman Farm, 56.
Sheridan Road, 39 (note), 57.
Sidewalks, first in Paris built by Napoleon I., 17.
Sienna, beauty and power of, 13.
Sistine Madonna, 112.
Slavery excluded from the North West territory, 31.
Slums of Chicago, 106, 129.
Smith, Edward R., on the transformation of Paris, 18.
Smoke, 71, 77, 112.
Sorbonne, the, Paris, 114.
South Chicago, 51, 52, 53.
South Park Commissioners suggest improvement of Lake Front, 6;
meeting of on Lake Front improvements, 6;
arrangement for Grant park, 114, 134.
South Parks, expansion of, 7, 44.
Special Park Commission, plan of Metropolitan Park system, 7, 44;
report of, 46.
Spirit of Chicago, the, 8.
Sport Park at Stockholm, 52.
Spring Forest, 55.
Square of the Innocents, Paris, transformation of, 93.
St. Charles, 40.
St. Louis, plan for improvement of, 28.
St. Paul’s Cathedral, London, 21.
St. Paul, Minn., improvement of, 28.
St. Peter’s Cathedral, Rome, 116.
Statues, location of, 86.
Stëubben, German city-builder, 21 (note).
Stockholm, yachting at, 52.
Stony Creek, 55.
Street plan of Chicago, cost of, 123.
Streets, the desirable width of, 83;
regulation of traffic on, 88.
Submerged lands granted for park purposes, 44.
Suburban highways, commission for, 39.
Suburbs, apt to be ugly and squalid, 35;
when attractive, 34;
connections among, 38;
residents of concerned with city communication, 41;
railway stations in, 77.
Summit, 55.
Sweden, yachting of, 52.
Swimming, exhibition of at Stockholm, 52.
Sycamore, 40.
T
Taxation, limitations on power of, 129, 151.
Terminal railway passenger stations in Chicago, 68.
Territory Northwest of the Ohio River, conquered by Virginia
troops, 31;
retained as first territorial acquisition, 31;
diplomacy, 31;
endowed with freedom and popular education, 31.
Thames, the, London, the embankment a part of Wren’s plan, 21 (note);
use of the river on Sunday, 48, 51;
treatment of the banks, 110.
Thatchers Park, 55.
Thoroughfares, improvement of, 37.
Tigris River, 10.
Town-planning in England, 21, 34, 128.
Townships, powers of in suburban development, 130.
Trajan’s Forum in Rome, cost of, 13.
Transportation system for Chicago, suggested, 61-76;
legislation necessary for, 139.
Treaty of 1783, secures the Northwest, 31.
Trees along streets, 84.
Tuileries, gardens of the, 15.
Twelfth Street, widening of, 110, 116, 117.
U
Union Park, 43.
United States, consuls furnish reports on civic improvements, 7;
offices in Chicago, 117;
constitutional limitations on city planning, 127.
V
Valparaiso, 40.
Venice, a commercial city, 13;
canals of, 15;
St. Mark’s Square, 117.
Vernon Park, 43.
Versailles, 39;
fountains, 49.
Vicksburg, 9.
Vienna as a center of activity, 19;
follows example of Paris in planning, 20;
parks, 49, 80, 90;
boulevards, 94;
treatment of the Danube, 116.
Virginia troops conquer the Northwest, 31.
W
Walled towns, 9.
Washington, D. C., planned as National Capital, 22;
L’Enfant’s plan, 23;
city regarded as a unit, 23;
comprehensive character of the original plan, 23;
plan ridiculed, 23;
effect of Civil War on the city, 23;
extension of L’Enfant’s plan, 23;
plan of the Senate Park Commission, 23;
Union Station, 71, 87;
apartment houses, 88;
ownership of front yards, 92;
Potomac Quay, 116;
influence of Library of Congress, 112.
Washington, George, directs L’Enfant in planning the Federal
City, 23-25.
Washington Park, 44.
Washington Square, 43.
Waterhouse, Paul, observations on London improvements, 21 (note).
Waukegan, 38, 40.
Wealth, rapid increase of in modern times, 1, 19.
Wellsboro, 40.
West Park Commissioners, project for improvement of Lake Front
presented to, 6, 134.
Wheaton, connected with Chicago by good road, 39.
White House, the, 29.
Williamsburg, Va., suggests features of plan of Washington, 29.
Wilmette, 38, 53, 130.
Wilmington, 40.
Wilmot, 40.
Windsor Great Park, 48.
Winnetka, 40, 122, 130.
Winter Sports, 52.
Wisconsin, coöperation of, 130.
Women’s Club, Lake Front Improvement presented to, 6.
Woodstock, 40.
World’s Columbian Exposition of 1893, origin of plan of Chicago
traced to, 4;
the beginning of orderly arrangements of public buildings and
grounds, 4;
results of, 6;
suggests improvements of Lake Front, 6;
spirit in which conceived, 6;
architects present plans for, 6 (note);
reasons for success of, 6;
effect of on Washington plans, 25;
impressiveness of Peristyle, 109;
cost of, 120;
indicated appreciation of good order and municipal beauty, 120.
Working classes, English schemes for housing, 21.
Wren, Sir Christopher, his plan of London anticipates certain
features of Paris designs, 21;
plan of Annapolis, similar to his plan of London, 29.
Y
Yacht harbor, on lake front, 52, 109, 115.
Yachting on Lake Michigan, 52.
Z
Zoological Park, Washington, 49.
ENGRAVED AND PRINTED FOR THE
COMMERCIAL CLUB OF CHICAGO, IN THE
YEAR NINETEEN HUNDRED AND NINE,
BY R. R. DONNELLEY & SONS COMPANY,
AT THE LAKESIDE PRESS, CHICAGO
TRANSCRIBER’S NOTE
Illustrations in this eBook have been positioned between paragraphs
and outside quotations. In versions of this eBook that support
hyperlinks, the page references in the List of Illustrations lead to
the corresponding illustrations.
Illustrations without captions have had a description added, this is
denoted with parentheses.
The index was not checked for proper alphabetization or correct page
references.
Obvious typographical errors and punctuation errors have been
corrected after careful comparison with other occurrences within the
text and consultation of external sources.
Some hyphens in words have been silently removed, some added, when a
predominant preference was found in the original book.
Except for those changes noted below, all misspellings in the text,
and inconsistent or archaic usage, have been retained.
Page
xi Replaced “Bastile” with “Bastille”
21 Replaced “beeen” with “been”
29 Replaced “Bagnio” with “Baguio”
31 Replaced “Ordinanace” with “Ordinance”
32 Replaced “Chicaco” with “Chicago”
48 Replaced “Fountainebleau” with “Fontainebleau”
51 Replaced “playgounds” with “playgrounds”
52 Replaced “Stockhom” with “Stockholm”
59 Replaced “aquisition” with “acquisition”
62 Replaced “Pittsburg” with “Pittsburgh”
63 Replaced “satifies” with “satisfies”
96 Replaced “streets” with “street”
111 Replaced “found” with “bound”
159 Replaced “Reubens” with “Rubens”
Index: Replaced “neccessity” with “necessity” in
“Chicago understands the necessity”
Replaced “pubic” with “public” in
“City complicated problems of not...”
Replaced “Halstead” with “Halsted” in
“Halsted Street, longest business street...”
Replaced “Manilla” with “Manila” in
“Manila, improvement of”
Replaced “Napierville” with “Naperville” in
“Naperville, good roads in”
Replaced “Pallisades” with “Palisades” in
“Palisades of the Potomac”
Replaced “appartment” with “apartment” in
“Washington, D. C., apartment houses”