By Peter von Buol
Special to Inside
Controversy continues to surround the on going reconstruction of "the Belmont Rocks", the part of Chicago's lakefront that stretches from Belmont to Diversey avenues.
At a mid-September town meeting hosted by Ald. Tom Tunney (44th), officials from the City of Chicago as well as state and federal agencies involved with the reconstruction explained the current status of the project.
Representing concerned constituents at the meeting were U.S. Representatives, Rahm Emanuel and Jan Schakowsky. Many community residents and activists were dismayed by some of the comments they heard from the government officials.
Members from the Southeast Lake View Neighbors, the East Lake View Neighbors and the Belmont Harbor Neighbors associations, along with the Lake View
Citizens Council, say the City of Chicago has broken a couple of its promises, including its promise to use some of the old limestone to build two 125-foot long toe-berms (lower areas that would have provided easy access to the lake).
According to the Southeast Lake View Neighbors Association, city officials admitted it is already too late to reuse the giant limestone blocks— already crushed to gravel. The only remaining pieces of the old limestone seawall are those which were set aside due to their unique graffiti artwork. "We've repeatedly asked for longer toe-berms but after crushing the limestone, the city now says there's not enough for any berms at all," said a participant.
Lake View residents for more than six decades enjoyed visiting the section of lakefront officially known as the Belmont Revetment (a revetment is a facing of masonry built to protect an embankment). To some, the limestone construction reminded them of European coastlines.
Built from rugged, Indiana limestone, the original revetment was inspired by the naturalistic design principles of Fredrick Law Olmstead and Daniel Burnham. Lacking a straight line, its asymmetrical multi-tiered steps allowed for easy access to the water. It seemed as if they had been cut by the waves of the lake and not by humans.
Supporters of the old design say it was the unique construction of the Belmont Rocks that made it a popular gathering place. They found its naturalistic design had character, and it not only allowed easy entry into the lake for those who wanted to cool off, but it was also an ideal place to just sit and enjoy the vista of lake, city, and sky.
The design of the new Belmont Revetment will be built of concrete and metal. It will also be built with straight lines and fewer tiers. Neighborhood activists decry the missing limestone and say the new lakefront barrier will lack the character of the older version. Some critics have said the new design will have more in common with a dockyard or a pier than Chicago's lakefront parks.
The neighborhood groups say they believe the City of Chicago seems to have made up its mind and will continue with the new design and therefore does not want to listen to their concerns. The groups are now appealing to the Illinois Historic Preservation Agency (IHPA) to withhold its support from the project. The state agency approved the northern half of the reconstruction project but may yet withhold its approval of the southern half.
At the meeting, Schakowsky and Emanuel said they would lobby the state agency to ask for it to investigate the possibility of preserving or restoring the limestone. Both sent letters to agency officials and asked the state agency to continue to investigate the matter. In an open letter to the IHPA, dated Sept. 15, U.S. Rep. Emanuel writes, "I...ask for your continued attention to the historic elements of the Chicago shoreline project. The portion of the Lakefront project in Lakeview is not only historic in what it represents to the neighborhood and the City but is also one of the most beautiful parts of the city. I hope you will continue to advocate for an aesthetically pleasing element to this project."
Days after the meeting took place, U.S. Rep. Schakowsky sent her own open letter to the state agency. "Several of my constituents have approached me about this important issue, and I would like to voice my support to their efforts [to] maintain the historic elements of this indispensable resource to our community and environment," wrote Schakowsky.
Earlier this year, in an open letter to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Anne Haaker, deputy preservation officer of the IHPA said she was against the proposed "improvements" and supported restoring the Belmont revetment to its past appearance. She noted that Lincoln Park is listed on the National Register of Historic places and needs to be preserved.
"It is our opinion that the proposal to replace the existing step stone revetment with a sheet of pile wall and concrete stair step revetment does not meet [U.S.] Secretary of the Interior's "Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Restoring Historic Buildings," wrote Haaker.
"The number one option of the IHPA is to support the preservation of the Belmont revetment as it was and with its original materials. If that is not possible, the agency supports a restoration using materials and construction similar to the original," said IHPA spokesperson David Blanchette.
While restoring some of the limestone may add to the cost of the project, one of the panel participants, Colonel Gary Johnston, of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, said additional funding may be available because the revetment project may impact endangered bird species.
One neighborhood resident found the colonel's statement somewhat ironic. "Maybe we've been arguing for the wrong species. We have been arguing for people but maybe migratory birds carry more weight," says Karen Kennedy, a member of the Save Our Shore Coalition.
|
