If you ever wanted to visit the public beach at Chase and Sherwin in Rogers Park, you'd be greeted with this lock. I learned at the meeting this past week a group of neighbors put it there because stuff was getting stolen.
"The city reclaimed the privately owned lakefront beaches by the 1920s. The 1919 Race Riot started a history of race riots related to beach resources. In this confrontation, a black youth unknowingly transgressed a racial line of demarcation on the beach and was stoned and drowned setting off days of rioting that lead to several deaths. Many other riots are mentioned under the appropriate beaches below. A group known as the Hamburg Athletic Club, whose members included a 17-year-old Richard J. Daley, future mayor of Chicago, contributed to gang violence in the area." Source.
But why is there a gate and fence placed here in the first place? Is this a way for a group of neighbors to keep what they think is the "undesirables" out?
My research shows this easement should be open, free and clear. Not locked up.
I have to side with Aronson on this case. What the fuck are these neighbors locking this gate up for? This has got to be illegal. They don't OWN this fucking strip of land that goes to the beach.
And if they claim they do, I want to see some actual city blueprints!
What I did find was this on the city website. From everyone I spoke with - anyone who owns property within this area is entitled to use the beach. Not just a select few who know the combination to the lock.
While I'm sure this won't result in a race war like 1919 - it'll surely be a battle to see who wins this one in court.
21 comments:
Craig, you have here touched upon one of the most important issues regarding lakefront access and the mandate to keep the lakefront "forever open and clear".
These appropriations of the beach by private property owners fronting the lake seems to be a pretty flagrant violation of the Lakefront Protection Ordinance and amounts to a theft of public property.
Another blogger, guy who referred to himself as "bloggerbob", wrote about this violation of our riparian rights on his blog, yet there has never been an outcry in Rogers Park or Edgewater about the sequestering of parts of the beach by apartment buildings along the lakefront. There are at least a half dozen buildings along the beach that have appropriated entire sections of it and closed them to the public, which is a clearcut violation and illegal appropriation of public property.
We really need to organize and fight to have this land restored to the public. We can expect howls of protest from these property owners, but just because this has been allowed for decades doesn't make it proper.
This is way new to me I have to get out more. Historically the building on the South side of Sherwin and the Lake prevented public access but we all new how to sneak thru the tunnel and get on the beach, We didn't necessarily need to swim there. It was just to let them know it is a public beach. The Chase beach was always open so I am unsure where this fence is. There is some problem with the building at Sherwin on the Lake on the North side. They think and have thought for years the beach is theirs. Unfortunately I have a multitude of pics showing us back in the day swimming there so yes the beach is public no matter how you attempt to keep people out. tsk! Tsk! Some people just have nothing better to do. FREE THE BEACH I say!
Considering what kind of people live in this area, I can completely understand why they want that strip of beach just for themselves. I don't blame them one bit. And there's plenty of beach left over otherwise for the rest of the huddled masses to filth up.
V&J, people's "feelings" don't give them the right to violate the law and prevent access to public law.
If these people are so concerned about "the type of people" who might use their beach, they would do better to join public efforts to clean up bad buildings AND to elect leadership that will target slumlords and owners of problem businesses.
We ALL wish we could insulate ourselves from the problems we have around here. Does that entitle my landlord to, say, barricade the alley behind our building to keep lowlifes out of it and away from the backside of our building? I don't think so.
Permitting this situation to continue is to give tacit approval to private "land grabs" by private parties who neither paid for the land, nor have any legitimate claim on it. An important principle is at stake here.
What about the beach just south of Jarvis park? Those condo owners put up posts and signs stating that the beach leading up to their building is private. If what Craig says is true, it sounds like that beach can't be private, so why were they allowed to do rope it off like that?
I'd like to clearify something here. The beach in question is the beach directly behind the easement. That beach is what can be considered public. If you look at the property lines of the Sherwin building and Chase building. The beach directly behind these buildings is their property up to the water line. They own the land that extends directly behind their building to the water line. Everything from the water into the lake is owned by the City. The easement is to provide access to the beach directly behind and the water. The Sherwin and Chase people's concern are people going on to their property and making a mess, causing problems etc. They don't mind if people use the easement beach as long as they clean up after themselves and not cause problems. The easment beach extends from the property line of Sherwin's pier to the Chase Condo's fence.
People in this neighborhood need to start standing up for their rights.
The beach belongs to ALL OF US not just a privileged few.
If bad people leave trash in the easement or trash the beach then arrest THEM. Prosecute THEM. Give THEM tickets. But that's not what this is really about of course. This is about exclusivity - expropriating PUBLIC land for PRIVATE gain for the benefit of a FEW.
I am wondering if the residents of this neighborhood have the right to CUT DOWN this illegal lock that prevents US the good people of Rogers Park access to what belongs to US. Craig, do you know?
I do know that there was a court battle about who owns those beaches. I think the one at sherwin was deemed to be property of the building that fronts it. Call the caps/neighbors office in 024. They would know what the truth is.
Does Clark and Devon hardware rent bolt cutters? It seems as though the solution may be a simple one.
Kudos. Nice work, Craig. Let's find out why Ald. Moore has allowed this to continue for 17 years.
I'm for using the bolt cutters. These are Chicago beaches, not exclusive spots on the French Rivera. Are they kidding?
Having been at the meeting and hearing from the condo owners who have in an interest in the easement, I came away feeling that all is not clear here. At least one owner stated that a court case allowed them to do what they were doing. A second owner stated that CPS does not come down to that beach and hasn't, the abutting condos are keeping the property up. I am not a zoning lawyer, and I don't have the history, but presumably there is a legal record that lays out who has what legal rights here.
Honestly I have studied thispicture all day.This is not at Chase or Sherwin. It looks more like Farewell. This pic is not at Chase or Sherwin. Where is it?
This is just like the debate over owning your street parking spot if you shovel out the snow during winter.
It'd be funny to identify the folks who think Sherwin and Chase beaches should have free access, but who also believe in "saving" their wintertime parking spots with milk crates and lawn chairs.
I've always been astonished at the effrontery of people who barricade "their" parking spaces on very public streets with chairs, boxes, whatever. Neighborhood permit parking only endorses this anarchistic practice, by fining visitors to a neighborhood by parking there in order to make spaces for locals.
How about just putting parking meters on all streets, so that car owners can pay for the space in proportion to their use. NOBODY is entitled to free parking.
The public right-of-way should be exactly that.
Am I missing something?
Why is it that we allow our own citizens to block off beaches, but everytime someone comes in with a new building, harbors, etc. we all go crazy!!!!!
Can you say hypocrite??
There is such a double standard in the hood that it kind of makes ya sick!!
From what I have read, property that is located on the water in Chicago is public way--from the high water mark to the lake. In other words the immediate shore line is open to the public. What I am curious about is whether the "Private Lakefront" shown in the graphic is a privately held piece of land or a privately held piece of land with an easement. And if it does have an easement -- what are the terms of use?
Hi Craig,
We spoke in the past about pianos.
I'd like to invite you over to discuss this issue.
Call me.
Save the piano, save the world.
FYI
The area in question, (that being the horseshoe of Chase, Sherwin & that portion of Sheridan Rd. connecting the two former two streets) are lots 1-16 in Block 15 (the Re-Subdivision of Birchwood Beach), City of Chicago, County of Cook.
The section North of Touhy, was known as South Evanston & Germania.
Before being annexed by Chicago, Rogers Park was already incorporated and real estate property lines had been established. As you may know (weather we like it or not) some w/ private beach/riparian rights others without. At the time, the thought of living right on the lakefront wasn’t as desirable then as it is today. (Marshy in spots, too windy, brutally cold in the winter…etc.)
A Mr.Bathrich & a Mr.Gondon, purchased said Block 15, in 1894. When sub-dividing said block 15, he set aside lots 15 (the grass easement w/ riparian rights) and 16 (the intersecting perpendicular alley “which once was also grassy”)... FOR THE USE AND ENJOYMENT FOR ALL OWNERS OF LOTS 1-14 INCLUSIVE . Furthermore, “no building commonly known as an apartment structure or flats were to be built on any of said lots 1-14 for a period of 15 years”. Thereby discouraging developers from over-developing that portion of the lakefront. Unfortunately a developer’s greed shows no time limitation. And, as you can see, when the statute expired, 1205 Sherwin & 7301 Sheridan were constructed as resorts.
In 1908 each (half section) of any part of said lots 15 & 16 adjacent to lots 1-14 were conveyed to the owners of said lots 1-14 with the stipulation that the OWNERS of said lots 1-14 may still use their neighbors portions of lot’s 15 & 16 as a continuing easement.
No portion of said lots 15 nor 16 may be sold nor conveyed without the consent of all the other said owners of lots 1-14. (Although, each potion of said lot 15 or 16 does of course transfer along with a sale of any of said lots 1-14 adjacent to 15 or 16.)
Threatening to cut off the lock on their property is equivalent to kicking in your own neighbors back fence and saying, "Who the Hell do you think you are? I want to hang out on your back yard!!!." And personally, I don’t want anything to do with any dumb ass radical behavior. ( I’ve heard ignorance isn’t a good defense in a court of law.)
If you want to verify any of this, spend some time pouring through the documents in the "dungeon" at the Cook County Recorder of Deeds office (you can only search on line up until 1985). Or, hire a title researcher.
Richard Aronson (the developer) tried to make himself look like a "Hero" by inappropriately airing a “civil issue” at a public venue, in an attempt to upset those who may not be as...shall we say… well versed on the subject matter as they should be. Apparently, his tactic worked.
Cheers
By, mistake (Or rather by my own inexperience at blogging.) I may have posted my comment way too many times.
My apologies
Sort of recall there is an alley to the Sherwin Beach. So why cut somebody's lock just to walk through their backyard? Chase is rip-rap (rocks). Not a beach. None of the other Northern Riparians have beaches. Just slabs and rip-rap.
If you want to fight for something fight for your right to go on the rocks at Jarvis. And fight for your right to actually swim in Lake Michigan. And not just wade right next to those travesties (row-boats).
Post a Comment