The Rogers Park Review
has asked our neighbors to contribute
their thoughts and opinions.
Anne M. Sullivan writes:
In Defense of the
Lakefront Protection Ordinance
I have been accused of being obstructionist, an opponent of change. I admit that I’m a lifelong tree-hugger. I admit that I love some old things simply because they are old. I love conversations with old folks who can tell you what it was like to dance at the Marine Room at the Edgewater Beach Hotel when it was actually on the beach or what Evanston was like before the streets were paved. I love holding old books and letters in my hands that were read by others over a hundred years ago. I love old Victorians with their wide, tree-shaded lots even if they are in deplorable condition. I love big vintage apartments with crown molding and bathroom fixtures that date back to the turn of the century.
I’m a sap for Europe where the “old part of town” often dates back to the Romans. When I visited Ireland a hostess apologized to us that the part of the castle we were sleeping in was “only about 400 years old”! When I stood among the stones at Stonehenge I was practically in tears. I saw a gnarled old tree standing in the middle of a field which generations of farmers had tilled around rather than chop it down. These things could not happen here where “ruins” are not allowed to stand and everything old is torn down to make way for something bigger, newer, shinier; even if it is far inferior to what stood before. What would Rome look like if it were run like the 49th Ward where the Granada Theater gave way to the Granada Tower and the Adelphi Theater will now give way to condos? The Coliseum and the Parthenon wouldn’t stand a chance!
And this is, in essence, why I oppose any breach of the Lakefront Protection Ordinance. The way I see it, the ordinance was created to protect the lakefront in Rogers Park from turning into Edgewater. The entire lakefront there wasn’t suddenly torn down and replaced with towering high-rises of glass and steel. It happened slowly, piece by piece. It goes like this: a stately old home on a huge triple lot is torn down and a tower is built that fills the property to its edge. The neighbors on the whole block live through a construction zone nightmare for more than a year: the jackhammers, the diesel fumes from equipment, the dirt, the rumbling trucks and pounding ironworkers. When it’s done, the immediate neighbors find that their breeze, their view, their sunlight is gone. They sit in the shadow of this thing, now looming above. The predatory developers smell their discomfort and move in, offering them good money for their homes because there is even bigger money in the high-rises. And one by one they fall.
That’s actually what happened to Connie Abel’s home, before there was a Lakefront Protection Ordinance. The homes on either side of her gave way to something bigger and taller and her home now stands in the shadows of a mini-canyon where grass will not grow. The answer is not to build another tower on that spot that will cast a shadow on its neighbors. We must draw a line and that line is HERE.
Why? Take a walk over to Berger Park. Walk through those two stately homes on the lake. THAT’S what Edgewater’s lakefront used to look like. Now look south at the canyon of high-rise on Sheridan Road, and ask yourself: is THAT progress?
Tuesday at 7pm the 49th Ward Zoning and land Use Committee will meet at Joe Moore’s 49th Ward office (7356 N. Greenview Ave). They will vote on Connie Abels request for a zoning variance. Be there to voice your opposition. Call Joe’s office (312-744-3067). Fax him (312-744-3080). E-mail him (aldmoore@aol.com).
We can stop this now.
has asked our neighbors to contribute
their thoughts and opinions.
Anne M. Sullivan writes:
In Defense of the
Lakefront Protection Ordinance
I have been accused of being obstructionist, an opponent of change. I admit that I’m a lifelong tree-hugger. I admit that I love some old things simply because they are old. I love conversations with old folks who can tell you what it was like to dance at the Marine Room at the Edgewater Beach Hotel when it was actually on the beach or what Evanston was like before the streets were paved. I love holding old books and letters in my hands that were read by others over a hundred years ago. I love old Victorians with their wide, tree-shaded lots even if they are in deplorable condition. I love big vintage apartments with crown molding and bathroom fixtures that date back to the turn of the century.
I’m a sap for Europe where the “old part of town” often dates back to the Romans. When I visited Ireland a hostess apologized to us that the part of the castle we were sleeping in was “only about 400 years old”! When I stood among the stones at Stonehenge I was practically in tears. I saw a gnarled old tree standing in the middle of a field which generations of farmers had tilled around rather than chop it down. These things could not happen here where “ruins” are not allowed to stand and everything old is torn down to make way for something bigger, newer, shinier; even if it is far inferior to what stood before. What would Rome look like if it were run like the 49th Ward where the Granada Theater gave way to the Granada Tower and the Adelphi Theater will now give way to condos? The Coliseum and the Parthenon wouldn’t stand a chance!
And this is, in essence, why I oppose any breach of the Lakefront Protection Ordinance. The way I see it, the ordinance was created to protect the lakefront in Rogers Park from turning into Edgewater. The entire lakefront there wasn’t suddenly torn down and replaced with towering high-rises of glass and steel. It happened slowly, piece by piece. It goes like this: a stately old home on a huge triple lot is torn down and a tower is built that fills the property to its edge. The neighbors on the whole block live through a construction zone nightmare for more than a year: the jackhammers, the diesel fumes from equipment, the dirt, the rumbling trucks and pounding ironworkers. When it’s done, the immediate neighbors find that their breeze, their view, their sunlight is gone. They sit in the shadow of this thing, now looming above. The predatory developers smell their discomfort and move in, offering them good money for their homes because there is even bigger money in the high-rises. And one by one they fall.
That’s actually what happened to Connie Abel’s home, before there was a Lakefront Protection Ordinance. The homes on either side of her gave way to something bigger and taller and her home now stands in the shadows of a mini-canyon where grass will not grow. The answer is not to build another tower on that spot that will cast a shadow on its neighbors. We must draw a line and that line is HERE.
Why? Take a walk over to Berger Park. Walk through those two stately homes on the lake. THAT’S what Edgewater’s lakefront used to look like. Now look south at the canyon of high-rise on Sheridan Road, and ask yourself: is THAT progress?
Tuesday at 7pm the 49th Ward Zoning and land Use Committee will meet at Joe Moore’s 49th Ward office (7356 N. Greenview Ave). They will vote on Connie Abels request for a zoning variance. Be there to voice your opposition. Call Joe’s office (312-744-3067). Fax him (312-744-3080). E-mail him (aldmoore@aol.com).
We can stop this now.
6 Comments:
I vote no. I sent the Alderman and Connie a letter this week stating my reasons and posted the letter on my blog too. Very eloquently said by you.
But is this a public meeting? I thought not?
rpneighbor-
thanx for stopping by. it is a "public" meeting but there is also limited space at the aldermans office. both rebbecca and i have asked and rcvd' a reserved spot and i think you could do the same. the pivot point redo is also being reviewed tomorrow.
Thanks again for this thoughtful essay Anne, and for being our first community "guest contributer".
We welcome all of our readers to approach us with your ideas for posts you would like to create for RPR.
RPneighbor, thanks letting us know you posted the letter you sent Joe and Connie on your blog. I am going to go pay you a visit now.
On tomorrow's zoning meeting, I would like to add that certain portions of the meeting are not open to the public. Portions of the meeting that are open are non-participatory; members of the public may attend as observers only.
Yeah, this proposal is hideous. There should probably be a 3 or 4 story building there, similar to the ones on each side. It's not like this screeching phallus of a building is the only possible project on this site.
Abels is doing what she always does, she is an agent.
This challenge to the Lakefront Protection Ordinance orchestrated by Alderman Moore and real estate mogul/restaurateur Reza Toulabi has to be viewed in the context of a decades-old coordinated assault on local control of development by our real estate developer industry. In 2004, our real estate developers demonstrated that their wholesale purchase of our Mayor and Aldermen allowed them to re-write our zoning laws at will. Next they plan to demonstrate that the Plan Commision is just one more legal bump on the road.
Make no mistake, there is a war going on, a war to control development in our neighborhoods, and we are losing. Neighborhood voices are under attack. Our biggest problem as neighbors is also our biggest problem at a national level: business interests are dominating ordinary citizens. We don't have big oil or defense contractors or pharmaceutical companies here on Chicago's north side, but we do have real estate developers. They have purchased our government. We need to take it back.
For more information, please see The Great Special District Purge of 2004
I am not trying to split hairs here, because I have already explained in an earlier post why I don't agree with this project as it was presented to us. But it is very important to understand that the actual language in the LPO contains ambiguities that people like Mr. Banks are leveraging to make their cases. Please, everyone, read the text of the ordinance, think carefully about how that language is crafted, and how you would make your arguments from within the language of the ordinance. I think the opportunities are there for counter arguments to positions such as Mr. Banks', but we must learn how to articulate them in order to really be protected by the LPO in the way we desire.
Text of the LPO can be found here. See chapter 16-4.
Post a Comment
<< Home