By Mary Corrado
Editor
The Lincoln Park Community Shelter (LPCS), operating for the last 20 years with hundreds of donors and thousands of volunteers, may shut down if certain neighbors have their way. Four people have filed a lawsuit charging that the Shelter is in violation of the zoning code, and that it has caused an increase in crime and a decrease in property values.
According to the Shelter, it appears there has been no increase in crime in the general neighborhood (about five surrounding beats) over the last five years, and no significant crimes clearly linked to Shelter residents. However, the plaintiffs' attorney, Reuben Hedlund, told Inside that the area immediately around the plaintiffs' property has indeed experienced an increase in crime. Real estate prices remain extremely high, but Hedlund points out that anything that diminishes the attractiveness of an area can be said to hurt the property values. But all agree that the Shelter currently lacks the special use permit required by zoning.
THE LAWSUIT
Four plaintiffs who live near the Shelter, Colleen Day, Charles Werner, Douglas Neumeier, and Amanda Clayman, filed suit against Lincoln Park Community Shelter, an Illinois not-for-profit corporation, and Lincoln Park Presbyterian Church, in June. It states: "This suit is brought to enjoin a violation of the Chicago Zoning Ordinance at 600 W. Fullerton Pkwy. and 2335 N. Orchard in Chicago, where Defendants are unlawfully operating Temporary Overnight Shelters and Transitional Shelters without a special use as required by the City of Chicago." The Shelter uses donated space in the basement of the Fullerton premises and also uses donated space at the Orchard premises; the Presbytery of Chicago owns the Fullerton site.
"LPCS provides at the Subject Properties sleeping accommodations and temporary residential accommodations for three or more persons who are not related to the property owner, operator, manager or other occupants by blood or marriage," the suit continues. It then notes that the Fullerton site is zoned RT-4, the Orchard site RM-5, and thus each would need a special use permit to operate a shelter.
"Plaintiffs are substantially affected by LPCS's violation of the Zoning Ordinance through the fact of the violation itself, as well as through decreased property values, and an increase in criminal activity in the vicinity of the Subject Properties and Plaintiff's property. Though certainly some of the Defendants' clients ('LPCS clients') are law-abiding citizens, others are not. Criminal activity by Defendants' clients include, but are by no means limited to: (1) a March 26, 2005 incident of trespassing at the home located at 2421 N. Geneva where the trespasser threatened to kill the occupants of the home; (2) an April 11, 2005 incident where a father and his 18-month-old daughter were assaulted by an LPCS client at 2417 N. Geneva; (3) a Dec. 16, 2004 home invasion and battery at 2420 N. Geneva Terrace on two elderly individuals; (4) numerous incidents of public drinking and intoxication, fighting, loitering, trespass, voyeurism (peeping), theft, public urination, and aggressive panhandling."
"...Plaintiff respectfully requests that the Court enter an injunction prohibiting Defendants from using the Subject Properties in violation of the Chicago Zoning Ordinance, and award Plaintiff's costs, including attorney's fees..."
ARE CRIMES LINKED TO CLIENTS OR NOT?
A check of the police records on all three crimes shows that no arrests were made in any of them. In addition, Charles Eastwood, a spokesman for Ald. Vi Daley (43rd), said that the victim of crime number two, the assault, told the alderman a few minutes afterwards that the offender "did not look like a homeless person" even though he was crouched behind a bush on the Shelter property. Eastwood also said that in crime number three, the home invasion, the three offenders pulled up in a new car and were not likely to be homeless people. And recent CAPS meetings indicate that crime is not increasing in the area overall.
Hedlund defends the attribution of the three specific crimes to clients of the Shelter, saying it is "based upon observation and knowledge of plaintiffs and others in the neighborhood."
As for the general rowdy behavior, "there are numerous incidents of public drunkenness at 2 a.m.," said Linda Packard, rector of Church of Our Saviour, 530 W. Fullerton Ave. "But none of them involve the homeless. It's local residents making their way home on foot [from bars]."
ALD. DALEY TRIES
When complaints about the Shelter's being in violation arose earlier this spring, Ald. Vi Daley (43rd) set up a task force with representatives of all concerned to try to work out some solutions. However, after one meeting, the plaintiffs decided to file a lawsuit rather than talk any more.
WOULD CLOSING SHELTER GET RID OF HOMELESS?
The controversy raises questions of a community's social responsibility. It also brings up an important question: Would getting rid of the Shelter effectively erase the blight of homelessness from Lincoln Park?
"The shelter can be moved — but do you think the homeless will go there? No! That's ludicrous. They barely get enough to eat. How will they get to social services? Do you think they can navigate the network of possible assistance? They have no financial wherewithal, and some have no wits about them," said Lino Darchun, a Lincoln Park resident.
"Every community has some degree of homelessness. We don't benefit by having the homeless sleeping in our entranceways to stores and offices. It makes sense to come up with solutions...The issue is far too complex to be dismissed by NIMBYs saying, 'Not In My Back Yard,'"
Darchun continued.
"The LPCS is an avenue to the legitimate social services which they are being denied, particularly if they are mentally ill. LPCS gets them off the street. Give the homeless an opportunity to have a home also. If no one is helping them, they'll never have it. They are not ogres, they are God's creatures," he said.
About the lawsuit, Darchun said, "It's mean-spirited, the height of arrogance and xenophobia. Even suggesting busing the homeless away makes Lincoln Park a laughing stock."
Charles Eastwood of Ald. Daley's office agreed that closing the Shelter would not eliminate the homeless from Lincoln Park. "I doubt if you would even notice any decrease," he said. Concurring with this is Linda Packard, the rector, who pointed out that "people are looking for assistance everywhere you go."
Peg Wander, vice president of the board of directors of the Shelter, would not comment on the lawsuit. However, she said that "the Shelter staff and board has been and continues to be committed to working with the neighborhood to find solutions to their concerns." The Shelter has applied for the special use permit.
The next step in the courts, according to Hedlund, is for the defendants to file an appearance and make a response.
Calls to Plaintiffs Colleen Day and Charles Werner were not returned by press time. |
