S Chicago Morphology

When trying to define the morphology of a particular city one seeks to understand the spatial structure and character by looking at various aspects of that place such as the physical structures, patterns of movement, land use, ownership and occupation (Bennett et al, 1987). In the case of Chicago the analysis of the physical form and layout of the city focuses on street pattern and the change in urban design over time, and how these changes relate to segregation within the city of Chicago.

Late 18th and Early 19th Century Chicago:

The first permanent settlement that was established in Chicago dates back to the 1770s when the city was only a small trading post (Berry et al, 1976). A man named Jean Baptiste Point du Sable who was a pioneer from Quebec decent claimed to be the first settler in Chicago at the mouth of the Chicago River (Berry et al, 1976). A variety of other settlers followed Jean coming and going from present day Chicago throughout the late 18th and into the early 19th centuries. These settlers described the town as quite 'dull' and 'boring' and noted that there [was] too much uniformity in the scenery and...[that the city] consists of but few huts (Berry et al, 1). The conditions during this time period in Chicago were quite 'chaotic', 'mud rubbish' and 'confusion' were the three words that can be used to describe the early interior of the 19th century village known today as Chicago (Berry et al, 1976). This early 19th century city also encompassed a classic gridstreet pattern and took advantage of the citys strategic location close to Lake Michigan and other waterways such as the Chicago and Calumet Rivers. With its location in the relative center of the country, the city of Chicago also established itself as a trading and transportation hub that linked the east and western portions of the United States together (Berry et al, 1976).From very early on Chicago has been known to be home to many different races and ethnicities, and one visitor describes the diversity of Chicagos residents in 1833: All nations and kindred and people and tongues. Black and white and red and grey and they live in all manner of ways (Berry et al, 2). There is evidence of great ethnic diversity in Chicago dating all the way back to the early 19th century, indicating that the city has historically been rich in culture.

Mid to Late 19th century Chicago:

By the 1850s, just some twenty to thirty years later, rapid construction of housing was made possible by Chicagos early architectural innovations. Some of these innovations include the balloon frame, the garden suburb, planned satellite cities and the steel frame skyscraper; all ideas that came out of mid 19th century Chicago (Berry et al, 1976). These architectural innovations combined with Chicagos shifting focus as the transportation and communication link between the east and west helped rapidly populate what was once a small trading post not much more than fifty years before this (Berry et al, 1976). By 1850 the construction of railroads had began and there was only one line that entered the city of Chicago in 1850. By 1856 Chicago was the focus of ten larger trunk lines that fanned out from the city core, creating finger like development along these lines before they headed off to the Midwest region of the country (Berry et al, 3). In Figure 1 you can clearly see one very small rail line heading west from the southern tip of Lake Michigan in the 1850 map, and by 1860 the close-up image shows evidence of rapid construction of both east-west and north-south bound rail lines in the city of Chicago. Figure 1 Map showing the railway network in 1850 and 1860 Chicago Source: C1

http://homicide.northwestern.edu/images_fk/timeline/1871/large/215. Another aspect of the urban morphology, present in every modern city is housing. Housing at the time included a mix of small affordable homes and larger luxury homes for the upper class. Some of the first exclusive residential areas in Chicago were developed in the later 19th century, mainly along the streets south of the city center (Berry et al, 1976). At the same time, immigrants from Europe were littering the city with much more affordable housing which typically included crudely built wooden cottages on small plots of land, where paved streets and sewers were nowhere to be found (Berry et al, 1976). Since many of these immigrants were looking for work in Chicagos factories they tended to segregate themselves into tightly knit ethnic neighbourhoods (Berry et al, 3) that were generally located close to the city center. Pockets of Swedes, Norwegians and Irish were said to have their own separate districts (Berry et al, 4) such as Bridgeport for the Irish. In 19th century Chicago there is evidence of residential segregation based on economic status and race, as seen by the contrasting neighbourhoods of predominantly white, rich neighbourhoods on the southern portions of the city (and along what would later be named the Gold Coast) and the very poor black and European immigrant receiving areas in the central core of the city.At the same time that these immigrants were moving to the city center and the very rich were moving to exclusive neighbourhoods on the southern

portions of the city, cable cars, electric street lines and commuter railroads made it possible and affordable for the middle class to expand outward from the city center to more desirable areas along the lakeshore and on the periphery of the city (Bennett et al, 1987). This further increased levels of segregation in the city as it made it possible for the less affluent charter population to escape the pollution, crowding, and diversity of the inner city and move to the suburban periphery. The desire for open space and environmental amenities inspired the growth of planned garden suburbs which included curvilinear street patterns and larger homes with larger lots; a change from the grid-street pattern that had dominated Chicagos urban landscape until then (Bennett et al, 1987). These suburbs grew rapidly along the commuting lines leaving the city of Chicago, and some of these more notable commuter suburbs include: Kenwood, Austin, Ravenswood, Park Ridge and Riverside especially (Bennett et al, 1987). In 1871 a large portion of the city would be drastically altered in the Great Fire that destroyed a combination of upper class residential neighbourhoods and poorly built ethnic enclaves, as well as the commercial and the industrial core of the city (Berry et al, 1976). It would also and leave a third of the population homeless (Berry et al, 1976). Figure 2 shows the large geographic area that the great fire of 1871 affected.

Figure 2 Map showing the affected area of the great fire of 1871 Source: http://voteview.ucsd.edu/images/railnet1850. C2 Following this disaster would come one of the largest building projects in American history that would shape Chicagos towering skyline and modernized urban network that they are known for today. C3 Source: Explore Chicago. Retrieved March 25, 2009, from http://www.explorechicago.org/city/en/neighborhoods/austin.html?

The Rebuilding of Chicago:

Immediately after the city burnt down the town started a refashioning of the old inner city of Chicago. The central business district, also known as the CBD was rebuilt with much taller buildings at much higher densities, and older one story wooden framed homes were replaced with block after block of apartments (Berry et al, 6) that were three to six stories high on average. The city also went to work developing an elevated mass transportation system in Chicagos downtown called the loop (Berry et al, 6) which opened in 1897 and involves a loop of rails that circle the over-sized central business district. By the 1900s Chicagos ever expanding central business district included the State Street

shopping core, the Board of Trade and La Salle Street financial center, and it was also home to the city government functions, Chicagos art institute, medical and dental services, leading social and political groups and the wholesale and produce markets (Berry et al, 6). For the time, this scale and concentration of services in the city center was unmatched, and Chicago was emerging as the epitome of the core-oriented nineteenth century industrial metropolis (Berry et al, 6). Although it is not central to the morphology of Chicago it is also important to note that city officials managed to reverse the flow of the Chicago River in 1900 so that it flowed into the Mississippi River system rather than the Great Lakes system via Lake Michigan. This sparked the growth of the first sanitary district (Berry et al, 6) that provided clean water and sanitation for the citys residents.In 1884 a man named Potter Palmer started a trend known as the gold rush (Berry et al, 6) when he moved from his luxury mansion located just south of the loop to Lake Shore Drive which was just north of the loop. This sparked a trend, as many of Chicagos most affluent and wealthy families followed Palmer leaving their southern mansions for newer ones that were being built in more northern parts of the city (Berry et al, 1976). These people who were participating in the gold rush saw their old mansions being bought up, sub-divided and sold to those working class residents that could afford it (Berry et al, 1976). Meanwhile, the middle classes continued to flood into newly developed suburbs along lines of mass transportation, leaving the older suburbs available for the affluent working class and ethnic minorities; a process known as morphogenesis (Berry et al, 1976). It is important to note that at this point, at the end of the 19th century, Chicagos city center was a very dense vertically expansive network that was severely overcrowded and home to the very poorest working class and ethnic minority citizens. The growth of mass commuter transportation lines only further increased the levels of segregation within the city of Chicago. In terms of industry, the first organized industrial district in the United States was along the Chicago River in 1890 (Berry et al, 1976). Other industries and industrial satellite cities would follow, locating in the southwest portions of Chicago in the very late 19th century. Heavy industry would soon after move even further south near the Calumet Harbour followed by the most marginalized working class and ethnic minority residents who sought employment in industrial production and usually ended up living in ethnic enclaves around these factories (Berry et al, 1976). By the beginning of the 20th century the most visible immigrant groups included the Polish, Czechs, Italians, European Jews, Russian Jews, Irish and African Americans (Berry et al 1976). Most of the literature indicates that these different immigrant groups tended to live together in their own ethnic enclaves around industrial satellite cities and areas that provided working class employment (Berry et al, 1976; Bennett et al. 1987). As a result of this many sub-communities were developed in Chicagos industrial and manufacturing core in the south and south west of the city, creating their own neighbourhoods with distinctly different social identities and characteristics (Berry et al 1976). A visitor from the 1893 World Columbian Exposition gives a very good idea of the ethnic diversity and segregation within late 19th century Chicago: Chicago, Queen and guttersnipe of cities, cynosure and cesspool of the world!...The most beautiful and the most

squalid...the most American of American cities, and yet the most mongrel; the second American city of the globe, the fifth German city, the third Swedish, the second Polish...Where in all the world can words be found for this miracle of paradox and incongruity. (Berry et al, 7).

Chicago at the Turn of the Twentieth Century:

During the early twentieth century the city of Chicago adopted Daniel Burnhams Plan of Chicago that encompassed a very grand and large scale City Beautiful movement (Berry et al, 8). This movement involved policy that produced a grand civic center, a belt of continuous beaches and parks along Chicagos eastern lakefront, greenbelts of forests encircling built-up (metropolitan) areas, wide streets and boulevards to hurry movement of traffic, and lastly a highway running from the city center to the outskirts in the east-west direction (Berry et al, 1976). This City Beautiful movement exploded in the first quarter of the twentieth century, as economic prosperity saw the skyline of the downtown loop rise dramatically, the Gold Coast continued to flourish and the urbanites of Chicago increased rapidly in numbers and their density of living. Building styles also evolved as the apartment boom transformed the inner city (Berry et al, 8) and the mass production of the automobile made development possible in periphery areas of the city that the commuter rail did not reach. Chicago was booming until the Second World War.

World War II and the Depression:

These twenty-five to thirty years of economic prosperity and growth that the city of Chicago experienced in the early part of the twentieth century would be followed by another twenty years of depression and economic downturn as the cumulative effects of both the world wars and the great depression were realized. Between 1930 and 1950 Chicago would experience significant inner-city decline and deteriorating infrastructure and housing in the most utilized urban core of the city (Bennett et al, 1987). The focus shifted from Burnhams City Beautiful movement and the planned construction of a new subway and superhighways system to slum clearance and the establishment of cheap and affordable public housing in the central core (Bennett et al, 1987). It is also not surprising that as the housing supply in the core of the city shrank, the religious and racial conflict between different ethnic groups escalated as each fought to maintain and preserve their own ethnic enclaves (Bennett et al, 1987). The second world war greatly increased tension for minority groups whos home country was fighting against North America, and conflict between white and mainly European immigrants was intense. The net effect of the depression and WWII on Chicago was substantial, and the construction of commercial, office and residential

buildings within the city virtually stopped. For example, the value of new total construction in the city of Chicago in 1932 was $3,824,500 US or about one onehundredth of the figure of $366,586,400 that was spent on construction in 1926 (Bennett et al, 3). The total number of housing units fell so low that there are only records of the construction of 137 new housing units in 1933 Chicago (Bennett et al, 1987). As mentioned above this only worsened the ethnic conflict between the countless racial minorities living in the city as there were more people migrating to the city than housing being constructed (Bennett et al, 1987).

Post-War Chicago:
The majority of building projects that had been started or planned to be started during the great depression and war had been put on hold, and as the war ended work on these projects resumed. The growth that Chicago experienced in the mid twentieth century and into the 1970s was unprecedented, and allowed Chicago to establish themselves as the second-most important city in the United States, and in North America for that matter (Bennett et al, 1987).The rich and middle class had further segregated themselves from the ethnic minorities and ghettos of the inner city as the white flight to the suburbs or high rise apartments on the Lake Michigan shore continued stronger than ever (Bennett et al, 1987). Figure 3 shows the white flight to the suburbs as there is evidence of huge population decline in the central city and rapid population growth in the suburban periphery. Figure 3 Map showing population change in the Chicago SMSA, 1960-1970. The white area in the upper right portion of the map represents Lake Michigan. Source: Chicago Transformations of an Urban System. C4 The number of Inner city ethnic minorities remained very tightly knit (Bennett et al, 82) as the people tried to maintain old social bonds with their ethnically similar neighbours. Also the city within the city (Berry et al, 10) known as Black Chicago was taking shape in the poorest areas of the central city. Chicagos growth in the post-war years and especially into the 1960s is said to be unmatched in American history and the explosion of construction of all types imaginable gives evidence of this.\\\ The first thing Chicago did in the post-war years was reiterate their role as the nations most powerful and most important transportation hub. They claimed that more tons of freight move out of Chicago by rail and highway than any other area in the country (Berry et al, 10) and the region ha[d] the greatest trucking and wholesaling complex in the country (Berry et al, 10). After this they went to work building. Chicago spent $7, 809 million dollars on general new construction between 1966 and 1971, more than Los Angeles (7,732) and New York City (7,280) (Berry et al, 1976). Also realizing the lack of affordable housing for the most marginalized groups the city of Chicago

spent $5,211 million dollars in constructing new housing units in a seven year span from 1965 to 1971 (Berry et al, 1976). Again this was nearly 45,000 more homes than their competition Los Angeles and about 30,000 more units than New York City, which is said to be the most powerful American city next to Chicago (Berry et al 1976). In terms of industry Chicago also had the most growth in manufacturing plants and was also very successful in attracting big reputable businesses to invest in the downtown core. Chicago spent $3,826 million between 1964 and 1969 on plant and equipment expenditures to solidify their position as an industrial strength, but also managed to attract an additional five fortune top 500 businesses (Berry et al 1976). This is saying something because New York City lost a net 33 fortune top 500 companies during this same time period (Berry et al, 1976). Figure 4 shows the number of plants that have moved to and from Chicago between 1966-1970, and the number of black dots (representing new plants moving to the city) outnumber the amount of plants leaving the city (white dots) by at least two or three to one. Figure 4 Number of plants that have moved to Chicago (black dots) and the number of plants that have relocated from Chicago (white dots), 1966-1970. Source: Chicago Transformations of an Urban System C5 This is a fairly substantial number of new industries in only a five year span, and it is also interesting to note that the vast majority have located on the eastern half the city, closer to the lakefront and city core that houses the working class industrial workers. Next to New York City, Chicago also had the largest growth in private and public office space in the central city between the 1960s and 1970s, also evidence of the growth and expansion of the business and economic functions of the city. In an attempt to join New York as a leader in the league of major skyscrapers (Berry et al, 11) many of these newer office buildings emphasized vertical expansion and the newest building technologies available. Some examples would include the Sears Tower and the John Hancock Center, two of Chicagos highest towers in the downtown region.More so than any other city, the city of Chicago experienced massive outward movement of residents to suburbia for a place to live and also a place to work. Chicagos suburban population grew by 941,000 between 1960 and 1970, about 85,000 more than the next highest region which was New York (Berry et al 1976). Many of the central city jobs that had been so popular at the turn of the twentieth century were being replaced, and those who could afford to commute shifted to the suburbs for work. The massive suburbanization of Chicago in such a short amount of time has lead to serious consequences for the central city. High levels of segregation and polarization between black Chicago and the various ethnic communities, but also with white communities has lead to the massive redevelopment of affordable housing. Chicago has maintained their position as a transportation hub and industrial powerhouse of the United States while constructing one of the most modern and tallest sky-lines of the twenty-first century. Despite all these innovations they have still not solved the problem of

segregation within Chicago.