By Adam Harrington
Special to Inside
Several months into the process of demolishing the seawall between Belmont Ave. and Diversey Pkwy., the Illinois Historic Preservation Agency (IHPA) has issued a challenge to the planned construction of concrete revetments in place of the former limestone structure. Members of the South East Lake View Neighbors Association (SELVN) discussed the IHPA's challenge at a meeting Monday at the Wellington Ave. Church, 615 W. Wellington Ave.
The IHPA is challenging proposed concrete revetments at Belmont and at Promontory Point, a seawall in Hyde Park on the South Side. The stretches of Lake Michigan shoreline that front the two seawalls both have landmark protection.
SELVN president Bob Clarke said he had not expected the challenge from the IHPA.
"I was totally unprepared for it," Clarke said. "Someone who did research in Hyde Park heard an inkling that in 1993, the Army Corps of Engineers and city agencies agreed to replace the revetment basically in a limestone form, pretty much replicating the historic revetment. That was not agreed to."
Clarke said the IHPA had admitted failure to keep a more vigilant watch on seawall demolition and construction.
"They said, '"We screwed up; we should never have signed off on what's happening there,'" Clarke said. "They're coming to Chicago to find out some amiable understanding to help us protect the revetment."
Clarke said he would ensure that SELVN and other community groups would have a stake in discussions between the city and the IHPA, but warned that elected officials can overrule state preservationists.
Meanwhile, SELVN's fight with the city continues. In a letter to Ald. Tom Tunney (44th), Chicago Department of the Environment Commissioner Marcia Jimenez challenged the feasibility of many of SELVN's requests for revision of the seawall plan.
SELVN had asked the city to increase the length of the "toe berms," a set of crushed limestone blocks from the old seawall that will be submerged in the water, and to lower the height of the revetments. Jimenez wrote that this was not possible.
"It is not advisable that toe stone be placed within 18 inches of the promenade. Due to the proximity of Belmont andDiversey harbors, and since this area is a navigable waterway, stone placed to this level would create a safety hazard for water craft," Jimenez wrote. "[And] if the height of the revetment were lowered, the width would have to be increased to offer the same degree of protection. Similarly, if the width of the revetment were reduced, the height would have to increase for the same reason."
Jimenez did suggest that to lengthen the toe berm, the city use some of the "art stones" they had saved for their historic graffiti, or import more "rough-shaped rubble stone."
Clarke said he was not satisfied with the city's response.
"The city agencies have been completely obstinate and arrogant about this," he said. "They said, 'Nobody is going to slow us down, period. We've got contracts, we've got our plans, we are going to build a concrete revetment and that's it.'"
Clarke said that while preservation negotiations may not need to go beyond the IHPA and the city, it is possible that a series of public meetings involving the IHPA may be required.
|
