But this sort of change is not good:
South Side of Promontory Point, 1998/99*
August, 2007And to think: this is the relatively more weather-protected side of the Point that the SAVE THE POINT crew thought needed minimal refurbishing.
Within the span of only about 8 years -- which is equivalent to two nanoseconds on the geological clock -- there's a substantial cave-in on the promenade, with a large crack forming behind it. Notice that the limestone block at which the arrow is pointing has completely collapsed.
I'm no engineer, but I would say that the crack and collapsed blocks indicate that the soil beneath the promenade has eroded away through wave action, and there's nothing supporting it but some rotted wood pilings and wavy steel girders.
I'm no engineer, but I would say that the crack and collapsed blocks indicate that the soil beneath the promenade has eroded away through wave action, and there's nothing supporting it but some rotted wood pilings and wavy steel girders.
*1998/99 photo courtesy of Vasile Jurca, Civil Engineer, Chicago Dept. of Environment, who is not responsible for the content of this post, or the opinions expressed therein.
5 comments:
Could we get the text of the Heitzman/Tjaden plan (and any of the others) and make it/them available on the blog? It would be useful for reference.
Yes, I'll try to do that in a future post, but I think even the Point Savers have given up on the Heitzman/Tjaden plan, so it's not terribly relevant.
With your questions you're honing in on the reason that the project is so stalled: the supposed community group has no alternative plan anymore, just a vague notion that they want "preservation" and "historical integrity."
True "preservation" is not possible, because (a) the entire structure must be rebuilt, and (b) the materials will be different.
"Historical integrity" is not desirable, because the original 1930s design was not intended for swimming or univeral access.
I wish everyone would give up those two false notions (preservation and historical integrity) and say, "What do we need out of this revetment now, in the 21st Century? What would look good? What materials would last? And what would function well for the users?"
"With your questions you're honing in on the reason that the project is so stalled: the supposed community group has no alternative plan anymore, just a vague notion that they want "preservation" and "historical integrity."
Funny, that seems to be the case with every project that's on the table in Hyde Park. Maybe we're on to something here. Isn't this the dictionary defintion of "reactionary"? A desire to preserve things as they were, regardless of changed circumstances and needs? I think the core of Establishment activism has been so hollowed out that obstructionism is all that remains. Plus a good dose of spleen.
You have to give up if you seek logical consistency in the positions of the Point Savers. They can't define their objective in opposition to designs except that they are opposed to anything that might have a reasonable chance to be built.
They are in favor of the status quo as classic NIMBY's. This is a case of criminal neglect for the Point. The Point is absolutely unique on the Chicago lakefront. Anyone who wants to turn down 20+ million dollars to fix it up should have their heads examined.
All along, the Point Savers have said the revetment is fine and will last almost indefinitely. They know they are lying when they say this. There is plenty of evidence that revetment is in very bad shape.
Beth's photo proves that the City and the CPD are right -- if we don't repair this revetment it will continue a steady decline. If we get a bad fall season of storms, heaven help us.
Post a Comment