***Editor's Note:  Below is the letter written by Friends of the Parks to President and Mrs. Obama

                              advocating for no Public Parkland to be used in the placement of the Presidential Library

The President and Mrs. Obama
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500

Dear Mr. President and Mrs. Obama:
Friends of the Parks is thrilled that you are considering Chicago as a potential site for the Obama Presidential Library (OPL). A Chicago location would honor not only your presidential legacy, but also your significant contributions to the city. We understand the important academic, archival and educational advantages that this facility will bring to Chicago and we celebrate potential partnerships between the OPL and the University of Illinois, University of Chicago and other institutions in the city.
Our one concern is that the addition of this important facility to Chicago not come at the expense of parks or public open space. Friends of the Parks is now in its 40th year of protecting, preserving, improving and promoting the use of parks and open spaces throughout the Chicago area and concern with such issues is central to our mission. Similar to our opposition to the placement of the George Lucas Museum in a Chicago lakefront park (currently in litigation), Friends of the Parks opposes the placement of the Obama Presidential Library in a park or public open space. There
is significant community opposition to any park site for the OPL similar to the strong opposition to the proposed siting of the Olympic Stadium in Washington Park during Chicago's bid for the 2016 Olympics.The historic parks that the University of Chicago has proposed as potential sites for the OPL are non-renewable resources that benefit the residents of Chicago. Chicago already lags significantly behind other high-density U.S. cities, ranking 14 out of 18 high density cities when measuring acres of open space per 1000 residents (by the Trust for Public Land). Furthermore, Chicago has failed to meet the goals set forth in the City and Chicago Park Districts' own CitySpace plan of 1998, which requires the city to achieve two acres per 1000 residents by 2010 in each community area (and a further goal of five acres per 1000 residents by 2020). Accordingly, any erosion of Chicago's parks or public open space would exacerbate that the citizens of Chicago are significantly underserved by open space throughout the majority of its community areas.Given the public controversy surrounding the potential use of these intentionally-planned, historic parks for the Obama Presidential Library, we respectfully ask that you consider alternative, non-park sites on which to locate your facility. Such alternative locations will put large areas of underutilized and mostly vacant land back into use while providing important economic development in the neighborhoods. Sites within the urban grid - and not in our large-scale, planned, parks and public open spaces - will further support an appropriate urban building solution for our nation's first truly urban presidential library that is reflective of the leading-edge character of your presidential achievements.
Placement of the Presidential Library in a neighborhood street grid is consistent with and can take cues from the responsible use of land by other nearby new buildings, such as the 170 foot tall Logan Center for the Arts, the most visible beacon on the University of Chicago campus. Responsible non-park placement of the OPL should demonstrate the high value and irreplaceability of Chicago's
land by delivering a level of density appropriate for Cook County which the Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning (CMAP) expects to grow by approximately 850,000 residents and 435,000 jobs in the next 25 years. When combined with the current migration of the population to urban centers and towards urban waterfronts, there is significant anticipated growth in these neighborhoods that will create even higher demand for parks and open space as a respite from higher urban densities.
It would be a tribute to the legacy of your history of community organizing if the decision regarding your library site underscored the important principle that parks are "the lungs of a city" that contribute to quality of life and the health of our residents. Parks play an important role in the sense of space and place in our neighborhoods and are one of the few places where diverse populations come together in community.  
We discount the argument that placement of buildings in parks creates safety and is the only way to draw people to recreational open spaces in transitional neighborhoods. Well-targeted recreational investment and community support would return these parks to the thriving, safe and collaborative spaces they once were and are designed to be much more effectively than would the placement of a Presidential Library.

We further discount that any option that involves building on existing parkland can be truly "park-positive", even if it was accompanied by the demolition of existing park buildings or the replacement of newly acquired parkland (and dedication of park capital improvement dollars) elsewhere, particularly when the design of a historic park is being negatively impacted. There is already significant competitive demand for the use of our City's parks, including both Washington and Jackson Parks, with little underutilized space during peak periods.

Building in our open spaces sets a dangerous precedent for the rest of the city's open spaces as we would proceed down a slippery slope of building in our parks and public open spaces which are on-renewable resources and our city's greatest natural assets. Chicago's parks system, our public lakefront and our boulevards are central features which distinguish Chicago and allows it to compete internationally as a world-class city that benefits from a legacy of forward-thinking vision.

In support of Chicago's two University bids, we hope you will select Chicago as the home of the Obama Presidential Library, but that you reject the concept of a campus setting in an existing and instead use placement of your library as the model for good urban community development without eroding parkland. We ask you to strongly consider the two Chicago proposals that do not erode Chicago parks or public open space:

Friends of the Parks supports both of these non-park options. The selection of one of these two site alternatives will stand as a symbol of your commitment to the preservation of important community open space resources and healthy urban growth which we will continue to strive for in our city, the home of our nation's first community- grown president.

Most sincerely,
Lauren Moltz Fred Bates
Cassandra J. Francis
Board Chair Board Vice-Chair
President


cc: Mayor Rahm Emanuel, Mayor, City of Chicago
Mike Kelly, General Superintendent, Chicago Park District
Derek Douglas, Vice President Civic Engagement, University of Chicago