Stop the Lakefill (Or whatever you want to call it)
The 48th Ward voted in favor of the ballot measure to prohibit lakefront expansion. 18,965 votes were cast. 11,402 (60.12%) said YES to prohibit lakefill. 7563 (39.88%) said let them lakefill.
Hurray! I think most of us would agree that our lake front and parks are one of the nicest things about Rogers Park. We've got the best in all of Chicago!
people didnt even know what they wrer voting for or against. This referendum wasnt presented int the 48th ward at any block clubs or organizations. People voted on a concept not an actual plan, a concept. Wow, it doesn't get more crazy then that. I protest, a bunch of higrise people who dont worry about anything else in neighborhood except whining that their view will be interupted or now a LSD plan that doesnt exist. This referendum was a sad day for th 48th ward. A stealth no information referendum by the wealthy white entiteled white people who think someday maybe just maybe a plan might come in front of us and back in 2008 they already voted it down.
It disgusts me that our leaders didn't listen to the first referendum, back in 2006, in which 88% of affected Edgewater and Rogers Park voters expressed their opposition to any expansion of the outer drive or park, or the construction of a marina.
It really disgusts me that the affected 49th Ward voters were not permitted to vote on this. It was nowhere on my ballot Tuesday, and I'm told it was on the ballot only in the 48th Ward.
We don't want the expansion or infill or marina, we overwhelmingly don't want our beaches destroyed, and we feel this issue should have been totally shelved after the referendum of 2006.
Our leaders didn't give up after the controversy of 2006 and they're not giving up now. Mayor Daley is completely determined to ram this destructive and costly boondogle down our throats, for the benefit of people who don't live or own in the affected neighborhoods. We don't need the park extension, we don't need more pavement, we don't need a marina.
Much more action is needed to oppose this plan. We need to get busy. Is a lawsuit possible, that could block this? Legislation?
We speak through meetings and referendums, but believe me, the powers are not listening. Our Aldermen Joe Moore and Mary Ann Smith are NOT representing us here, and they're both rubberstamps for Da Mare.
I do agree with you. My concern is the transparency of the referendum, I mean what were we really voting on? A plan? A concept? Fear? Who knew of this referendum, a few, once it was approved for ballot it shoud have been brought in front of the public for question and information and guidance from both sides.
I couldn't care less what a few lakefront dwellers think about on this issue! The lake belongs to all of us, not just the few who have gotten lucky enough to live next to it. Their attitude is no different than that of the multi-millionaires in Malibu, Cal. that stymied beach access for 20 years until too many lawsuits piled up & there was a real threat of losing their property altogether. The only difference between Malibu & Edgewater/Rogers Park is the incomes of the NIMBYs!
Excuse me, sock, but here, unlike Malibu, the public HAS beach access and we want for the public to be able to KEEP beach access. Malibu denizens were trying to PREVENT the public from accessing their beaches, while we are trying to KEEP THE BEACHES FOR THE PUBLIC.
I would like to go further and restore the riparian rights of access to parts of the beach that have been blocked off by some apartment buildings. They don't own these parts of the beach.
We are trying to KEEP OUR PUBLIC BEACHES.
We don't need anymore pavement, or accommodations for autos in this country. And we REALLY don't need to destroy OUR PUBLIC BEACHES for rich boat owners.
Most of the people discommoded by the traffic on Sheridan Road are affluent north suburban motorists who insist upon driving their damn cars to work downtown. Let'm ride the train, if the traffic bothers them.
And ONLY rich boat owners will benefit from a marina. There might be ten residents of Rogers Park and Edgewater together who can afford a motorboat and the harbor slip for it.
We will lose our public beaches in exchange for more traffic and ungodly highway noise, at a cost to the public till that would buy us a badly-needed new rail line, or go a long way toward restoring our decrepit water and sewer infrastructure.
There is going to be less and less public money available in coming years as we dig ourselves out of the current financial hole we're in. We're going to have to make extremely wise choices when it comes to infrastructure projects, and we already have many critical needs in that area that are not being met. Our streets all need repair and we need to provide for future needs. Let's not add to them by building a totally unnecessary and UNWANTED road that will only add to our ongoing maintenance costs while destroying our lakefront forever- all so north shore suburbanites can go faster in the gas guzzlers I see speeding up Sheridan Road every night at rush hour.
I think there is also the issue of the enormous costs associated with this two-mile project.
It's hard to get behind hundreds of millions of dollars spent to extend a bicycle path two miles when our city budget is a train wreck and the parks we have aren't being properly maintained.
You're right, the cost is unacceptable and unaffordable.
We'll be lucky if we can meet our minimum service needs and provide for the repair and maintenance of what we already have, given the economic and fiscal pit this country is in right now and the bleak prospects for the next 3 or 4 years. On top of that, we've committed most of our future local tax increases to servicing a quilt of TIF districts, which should never have been.
On top of that, we're going to need vastly expanded public transit to accommodate all of those who will find themselves unable to afford cars on any terms as oil supplies tighten further. Don't count on current cheap fuel prices lasting.
We have towering unmet public needs, notably in the matter of badly deteriorated water and sewer infrastructure, and steeply underfunded and undermanned police and fire departments, and we don't know where we're going to get the money to pay for it all as it is.
No, we would get a few hundred acres of park, in addition to no more traffic on Sheridan Rd. Instead of being such NIMBYs, get a deal that limits an extension of LSD to two lanes in each direction. Require large tunnels under it every block, not every two or four blocks. And you don't seem to understand riparian rights. It's the private owners that have riparian rights, meaning they own the land out to the point where the lake shore would be when the lake is at 578 feet above sea level. The public has absolute access to any part of the land below 578 feet above sea level or to the water at any level. Do you really want Sheridan Rd. to keep being the jammed up idiocy it's been for the last 50 years? It's got to go somewhere, so put there, to the east, away from people who live on Sheridan.
And it wasn't just access to the beach that was limited in Malibu, there were private owners that tried to block people from walking on the beach in front of their beach front homes.
It's the owners of property with riparian rights that are the biggest challengers of an extension of Lincoln Park.
And I can assure you that they will also fight a landfill without an extension of LSD! They want their water access, no matter what!
"It's the owners of property with riparian rights that are the biggest challengers of an extension of Lincoln Park."
That's simply not true. The 2006 vote in the 49th ward was overwhelmingly against the expansion, and the 49th ward has one of the highest rental residence rates in the city. It is the residents of Rogers Park, renters and owners alike, who would be most impacted by the expansion, and who are against it for a myriad of reasons which have been clearly articulated here by several posters. It simply can't be permitted to happen.
12 comments:
Hurray!
I think most of us would agree that our lake front and parks are one of the nicest things about Rogers Park. We've got the best in all of Chicago!
people didnt even know what they wrer voting for or against. This referendum wasnt presented int the 48th ward at any block clubs or organizations. People voted on a concept not an actual plan, a concept. Wow, it doesn't get more crazy then that. I protest, a bunch of higrise people who dont worry about anything else in neighborhood except whining that their view will be interupted or now a LSD plan that doesnt exist. This referendum was a sad day for th 48th ward. A stealth no information referendum by the wealthy white entiteled white people who think someday maybe just maybe a plan might come in front of us and back in 2008 they already voted it down.
Thanks for setting me straight Dorthy.
You have got to agree with me about the beach parks though, yes?
It disgusts me that our leaders didn't listen to the first referendum, back in 2006, in which 88% of affected Edgewater and Rogers Park voters expressed their opposition to any expansion of the outer drive or park, or the construction of a marina.
It really disgusts me that the affected 49th Ward voters were not permitted to vote on this. It was nowhere on my ballot Tuesday, and I'm told it was on the ballot only in the 48th Ward.
We don't want the expansion or infill or marina, we overwhelmingly don't want our beaches destroyed, and we feel this issue should have been totally shelved after the referendum of 2006.
Our leaders didn't give up after the controversy of 2006 and they're not giving up now. Mayor Daley is completely determined to ram this destructive and costly boondogle down our throats, for the benefit of people who don't live or own in the affected neighborhoods. We don't need the park extension, we don't need more pavement, we don't need a marina.
Much more action is needed to oppose this plan. We need to get busy. Is a lawsuit possible, that could block this? Legislation?
We speak through meetings and referendums, but believe me, the powers are not listening. Our Aldermen Joe Moore and Mary Ann Smith are NOT representing us here, and they're both rubberstamps for Da Mare.
I do agree with you. My concern is the transparency of the referendum, I mean what were we really voting on? A plan? A concept? Fear? Who knew of this referendum, a few, once it was approved for ballot it shoud have been brought in front of the public for question and information and guidance from both sides.
I forgot that part North Shore, thats another reason this referendum smells funny. How does something become a referendum anyhow?
I couldn't care less what a few lakefront dwellers think about on this issue!
The lake belongs to all of us, not just the few who have gotten lucky enough to live next to it.
Their attitude is no different than that of the multi-millionaires in Malibu, Cal. that stymied beach access for 20 years until too many lawsuits piled up & there was a real threat of losing their property altogether.
The only difference between Malibu & Edgewater/Rogers Park is the incomes of the NIMBYs!
Excuse me, sock, but here, unlike Malibu, the public HAS beach access and we want for the public to be able to KEEP beach access. Malibu denizens were trying to PREVENT the public from accessing their beaches, while we are trying to KEEP THE BEACHES FOR THE PUBLIC.
I would like to go further and restore the riparian rights of access to parts of the beach that have been blocked off by some apartment buildings. They don't own these parts of the beach.
We are trying to KEEP OUR PUBLIC BEACHES.
We don't need anymore pavement, or accommodations for autos in this country. And we REALLY don't need to destroy OUR PUBLIC BEACHES for rich boat owners.
Most of the people discommoded by the traffic on Sheridan Road are affluent north suburban motorists who insist upon driving their damn cars to work downtown. Let'm ride the train, if the traffic bothers them.
And ONLY rich boat owners will benefit from a marina. There might be ten residents of Rogers Park and Edgewater together who can afford a motorboat and the harbor slip for it.
We will lose our public beaches in exchange for more traffic and ungodly highway noise, at a cost to the public till that would buy us a badly-needed new rail line, or go a long way toward restoring our decrepit water and sewer infrastructure.
There is going to be less and less public money available in coming years as we dig ourselves out of the current financial hole we're in. We're going to have to make extremely wise choices when it comes to infrastructure projects, and we already have many critical needs in that area that are not being met. Our streets all need repair and we need to provide for future needs. Let's not add to them by building a totally unnecessary and UNWANTED road that will only add to our ongoing maintenance costs while destroying our lakefront forever- all so north shore suburbanites can go faster in the gas guzzlers I see speeding up Sheridan Road every night at rush hour.
I think there is also the issue of the enormous costs associated with this two-mile project.
It's hard to get behind hundreds of millions of dollars spent to extend a bicycle path two miles when our city budget is a train wreck and the parks we have aren't being properly maintained.
You're right, the cost is unacceptable and unaffordable.
We'll be lucky if we can meet our minimum service needs and provide for the repair and maintenance of what we already have, given the economic and fiscal pit this country is in right now and the bleak prospects for the next 3 or 4 years. On top of that, we've committed most of our future local tax increases to servicing a quilt of TIF districts, which should never have been.
On top of that, we're going to need vastly expanded public transit to accommodate all of those who will find themselves unable to afford cars on any terms as oil supplies tighten further. Don't count on current cheap fuel prices lasting.
We have towering unmet public needs, notably in the matter of badly deteriorated water and sewer infrastructure, and steeply underfunded and undermanned police and fire departments, and we don't know where we're going to get the money to pay for it all as it is.
No, we would get a few hundred acres of park, in addition to no more traffic on Sheridan Rd.
Instead of being such NIMBYs, get a deal that limits an extension of LSD to two lanes in each direction.
Require large tunnels under it every block, not every two or four blocks.
And you don't seem to understand riparian rights. It's the private owners that have riparian rights, meaning they own the land out to the point where the lake shore would be when the lake is at 578 feet above sea level.
The public has absolute access to any part of the land below 578 feet above sea level or to the water at any level.
Do you really want Sheridan Rd. to keep being the jammed up idiocy it's been for the last 50 years?
It's got to go somewhere, so put there, to the east, away from people who live on Sheridan.
And it wasn't just access to the beach that was limited in Malibu, there were private owners that tried to block people from walking on the beach in front of their beach front homes.
It's the owners of property with riparian rights that are the biggest challengers of an extension of Lincoln Park.
And I can assure you that they will also fight a landfill without an extension of LSD!
They want their water access, no matter what!
"It's the owners of property with riparian rights that are the biggest challengers of an extension of Lincoln Park."
That's simply not true. The 2006 vote in the 49th ward was overwhelmingly against the expansion, and the 49th ward has one of the highest rental residence rates in the city. It is the residents of Rogers Park, renters and owners alike, who would be most impacted by the expansion, and who are against it for a myriad of reasons which have been clearly articulated here by several posters. It simply can't be permitted to happen.
Post a Comment