About four years ago work crews came to Lincoln Park, fenced off the lakefront, and started ripping out the limestone at the edge of the lake. It was the first phase of the much vaunted $300-million project that’s supposed to protect about eight miles of the shoreline from erosion by replacing the old rocks at the water’s edge with long stretches of concrete. “I suppose they thought they were doing us all a favor,” says Bob Clarke, president of the South East Lake View Neighbors. But activists from Lakeview to Hyde Park have been wondering ever since how the city allowed itself to spend so much money on such a hideous scheme.
Still, many north-side residents say the project’s been one horror story after another. For starters, the Irving to Belmont section took much longer than expected. “We understand that some construction projects are necessary, and they take time,” says Charlotte Newfeld, a north-side activist. “But they had the lakefront there fenced off from the public for three years–that’s way too long. They had this big mound of limestone rock–I called it Mount Waveland–sitting in a field for the longest time. It was a disgrace.”
Best of Chicago voting is live now. Vote for your favorites »
The delay creates a dilemma for city officials. Should they go ahead with replacing the rocks between Belmont and Diversey with concrete walls and runways, or should they hold off until they see the report on the Point? According to Rio, they’re going ahead with the original plan, and construction is set to start as early as next spring. “Contracts for the first phase of the Belmont to Diversey project should be awarded in September or October,” she says. “The project’s on schedule.”
At the very least, Clarke and West want the city to wait until the Hyde Park study is released. “I don’t understand the rush,” says West. “I don’t understand why they can’t wait until they have the Hyde Park report. If the report comes back and says the only way you can shore up the shoreline is with concrete, well, then the city should be able to do what it wants. But if the report says it’s less expensive and more attractive and just as protective to use the limestone rocks, we ought to do it. If you’re going to make such a big effort you might as well do it right.”
Last Tuesday, July 23, the matter came before a Board of Elections hearing officer. At first the case looked bleak for Farbman. The judge noted that Election Board officials had questioned the validity of more than 1,700 of Farbman’s signatures–enough to knock him off the ballot. “Just after the hearing officer said that, Kasper stood up and said, ‘The objector withdraws her petition,’” says Farbman. “I’m like, ‘Huh?’ And just like that the case was over–and I am on the ballot, dude.”
“I say, let the voters decide,” he responds. “I’ve done a great job in my community, so let them have a choice. Besides, I think the Democrats and the Green Party have similar platforms on a lot of things. When it comes to the environment and open and clean campaigns, I’ll put up my voting record against anybody’s in the state.”
