As a group of nonprofit organizations that are located in, invested in and committed to the future and vitality of downtown Springfield, we voice our concerns over the preliminary proposal from the Springfield-Sangamon Growth Alliance that could result in the demolition of four blocks of existing small businesses and nationally recognized historic buildings. Tearing down these places is not the best path toward creating a university presence in downtown Springfield.
We understand and value the benefits of bringing university facilities into our historic downtown. Adding students, faculty and employees as our fellow neighbors could be a win/win – bringing new energy to downtown and generating economic activity for our local businesses. For years, the community has rallied to promote the revitalization of small businesses downtown. We are disappointed to see SSGA propose an initial concept that knocks down the very buildings where these small businesses thrive.
Instead of prioritizing new construction on empty lots, SSGA’s plan would evict existing small businesses such as Custom Cup and JP Kelly’s and relocate established organizations like the Illinois Chamber of Commerce and Sangamo Club. This preliminary plan proposes the demolition of 17 buildings listed on the National Register of Historic Places.Â
The Comprehensive Plan for Springfield and other previous planning reports highlight the opportunity for adaptive reuse of historic buildings along with new construction on vacant and surface parking lots. Our preliminary research indicates that these priorities are consistent with other successful, downtown Midwestern universities, integrating seamlessly into the existing urban fabric.
Furthermore, our research shows there are dozens of acres of vacant and surface parking lots within downtown Springfield. These acres represent a blank canvas ready for the university’s program-area creations and should be prioritized before demolition, thus adding to the overall density of downtown. Higher density helps create walkable communities, supports more housing and greater affordability and improves public safety.
A university presence, strategically planned, has the potential to be an economic engine supporting the continued revitalization of our downtown. With an emphasis on creativity and innovation, planning efforts should prioritize repurposing historic buildings and converting vacant lots into new landmarks. Instead of requiring a new university enclave, student and administrative buildings can integrate into the existing downtown, creating a vibrant urban environment where people want to live, work, play and learn.
Our collective organizations want to see this project happen, and our organizations are ready to lend expertise. By working together, we can have both a university presence and an expanded beautiful, bustling, historic downtown.
Stacey Pfingsten, Executive Vice President, American Institute of Architects Illinois;
Scott Troehler, Board President, Downtown Springfield Heritage Foundation;
Frank Butterfield, Director of Springfield Office, Landmarks Illinois
This article appears in Far from home.
this makes sense in light of the trends in Education leaning towards greater accessibility via internet. It continues to unfortunately discourage some students from pursuing higher degrees with the uncertainty surrounding job placement these days.
In short, why did Springfield preserve the surrounding neighborhoods all these past years? , Let the tourists see what our famous neighbor, Abraham Lincoln saw. A wonderful, happy environment created by great Midwestern people.
It costs the Universities less to build out new structures versus rehabilitating exiting structures. And the suburbs seem to accommodate.
This is the most idiotic idea I have ever seen. We have blocks of ugly, empty, gravel parking lots that degrade the Capitol complex that could be redeveloped. Instead, some great minds think that we ought to tear down some more of the little heritage remaining in downtown Springfield. Is this the brain trust making decisions about the future of Springfield? Shame on them.
Thanks to these organizations for a well reasoned statement of why we should not follow the proposal to tear down a historic segment of our downtown. I don’t know the powers that be who made this original proposal, but I beg them to reconsider. Many in Springfield have fought over the years for the preservation of individual historic structures. Sometimes the fight has been successful (Iles House) and sometimes not. (Lincoln/Carnegie Library) But this is the mother of all proposals to destroy the fabric of our historic downtown. Please, please reconsider and come up with an alternative site on undeveloped land (parking lots) in the downtown area or better yet choose to reuse the old buildings to provide the space needed to bring the university downtown. If you need a model, look at Savannah Georgia and the Savannah School for Art and Design’s reuse of older structures. Once again, I respectfully beg you to reconsider your proposal. Richard E. Hart
Help us build up downtown within the walls of the Springfield we fell in love with, not on top of it’s foundations. There’s enough empty space downtown for everyone.
Learn to preserve the beautiful buildings that have stood there for decades instead of tearing everything down and replacing it with a modern building that will need replaced by 2050. You’re tearing down history! Stop it!
It’s called “compromise”… Of course, preserve some treasures, but some of these old run-down buildings need to go. Parking is already an issue in portions of downtown, so I suspect this project is very complex. Existing parking facilities, especially underground should be some of the first considerations. These are eyesores in need of upgraded lighting, security and general appearance. The garage at 4th & Washington is another very bad example that should probably be condemned. Let’s all work together and support this project for the viability of a City & State on the brink.