Greetings all,

Breaking news

The Tribune and Sun-Times are both reporting today that the Obama Presidential Center will be located in Jackson Park. In response to these reports, we sent the following message to Michael Strautmanis, vice-president of civic engagement of the Obama Foundation, with whom we met last week (see below):

“If indeed the Obama Presidential Center is to be located in Jackson Park as reports indicate, as coordinators of Jackson Park Watch we wish to welcome the Obama Center to Jackson Park. In keeping with President Obama’s personal commitment to community engagement and history of community involvement, we ask that the Obama Foundation convene a community engagement process to create a common vision for the future of the Obama Presidential Center in our great park, and also ask that all pending plans for changes in the park be set aside in favor of the outcomes of this vital community process.”

Meetings around town

Margaret and Brenda met recently with the leaders of the Friends of the Parks and of Openlands  to discuss shared concerns for the preservation and enhancement of the city’s parks, including in particular JPW concerns about Project 120 proposals.  Such periodic conversations are wonderful opportunities for JPW to bring these organizations up to date on the latest developments in our efforts to promote community input in planning for Jackson Park and to learn from similar issues and efforts in other parks around Chicago.  We greatly appreciate their wise counsel and words of encouragement.

Margaret and Brenda also met last week with representatives of the Obama Foundation – Michael Strautmanis (VP of Civic Engagement) and Roark Frankel (Director of Planning and Construction) – to acquaint them with JPW’s role in promoting community engagement and transparency in planning for Jackson Park and to share community concerns about Project 120 proposals.  While they did not reveal the site for the Obama Presidential Center (surprise, surprise), they did affirm their commitment to including the full South Side community in planning for the Center, wherever it is located.  We look forward to working with them as their plans evolve.

Taking community views to the Park District Commissioners

Knowing that the Park District’s seven appointed commissioners can’t be aware of all that is happening in all of the city parks, Brenda and Margaret have become regulars at the monthly meetings of the Board of Commissioners.  At the July 13 meeting, we used the “People in the Parks” spot on the agenda to share community concerns about Project 120s’ proposed pavilion/music venue and to underscore the need for Project 120 to develop a proposal for a revised, downsized, relocated pavilion without a music venue feature.  We also raised questions about the reasonableness of Project 120’s plan to install Yoko Ono’s “Sky Landing” on Wooded Island this fall when the island may be fenced off entirely, and when, even if the fence were down, the closure of the Darrow Bridge means that Wooded Island has no access to parking or public restrooms.  Look under the “Key Documents” section on the JPW website (http://jacksonparkwatch.org) to see the complete statements to the Commissioners.

Welcome developments in The Trib

The Chicago Tribune seems to have become a forum for discussion of questions relating to the proper usage of public parks. This is a development to applaud!

Following the article on opposition to proposed music venues in Jackson, Douglas and Montrose Parks (www.chicagotribune.com/newslocal/breaking/ct-parks-music-venue-jackson-douglas-montrose-met-20160704-story.html) and the editorial on “Parks and the sweet sound of silence,” (www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/editorials/ct-music-in-the-parks-edit-0715-md-20160714.story.html) the Tribune also published last week a follow-up letter by birder Nancy Tikalsky, “Chicago’s parks are for nature — not noise.”

(You can read it at  http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/letters/ct-chicago-s-parks-are-for-nature-8212-not-noise-20160721-story.html.)

We know that many other JPW participants submitted letters to the Tribune that were not printed due to space constraints or the pressures of breaking news.  We are very grateful for those efforts, which even though unpublished were important indicators to the editorial staff of  interest in the issue.  In the future, to be sure to get our messages out there, we may want to both send letters to the editor via e-mail and also (for those who are digital subscribers to the Trib) add to the ‘Comments” section following any park-related article.

JPW participants may also be interested in Sunday’s column by Blair Kamin, urging Mayor Emanuel to transform the lakefront site once proposed for the Lucas Museum into a proper park space, green and accessible, without either an intrusive structure or the current sprawling parking lot.

(http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/ct-lakefront-parking-lot-kamin-met-0724-20160722-column.html )

What’s new on the JPW website?

You may want to check out additions and improvements to the JPW website.  We’ve redone the opening page to better reflect community views on Project 120 proposals.  We’ve improved the Key Documents page, adding a section with the statements to the monthly meetings of the Park District Board of Commissioners.  And we’ve added the recent Tribune pieces.  Take a look for yourself, and then share with friends who haven’t yet signed on to the JPW g-mail list.

Brenda Nelms and Margaret Schmid
Jackson Park Watch
http://jacksonparkwatch.org
Like us on our Facebook page.

(To unsubscribe from this g-list, simply send “unsubscribe” to jacksonparkwatch@gmail.com.)

Greetings all,

Another positive development

It was good news last week when Alderman Leslie Hairston announced that she plans to use a community engagement process to further review of the plans for Jackson Park currently being advanced by Project 120.  In another positive development for the community, the Chicago Tribune published a major article on Tuesday, noting the controversies about proposals for music venues in Jackson Park and several other city parks.  The article mentioned Jackson Park Watch and included a lengthy statement by Margaret outlining concerns about the need for and appropriateness of Project 120’s proposed pavilion.  Of equal importance the article highlighted a significant public policy issue:  are our public parks meant to be free and open for the public, or should they be seen as tourist attractions or commercial ventures that can generate revenue for the Park District and the city?

This question has been at the center of controversies throughout the history of our city, with notable conflicts over proposals to erect buildings in public parks along the lakefront.  Many of us know of Montgomery Ward’s long, lonely, and successful struggle to prevent construction in Grant Park.  The fight over building the Lucas museum on the lakefront is the most recent example.  Community voices calling to keep Jackson Park free of an out-sized visitors center/music venue and to preserve large numbers of healthy trees slated for destruction to create a “Great Lawn” echo many of these themes and assert the need for transparency and community input in Park District planning.

(Read the article at http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-parks-music-venue-jackson-douglas-montrose-met-20160704-story.html.)

JPAC monthly meeting, Monday, 7/11

Note special location:   Iowa Building (on 56^th Street, across from Montgomery Place)    —-6:30 p.m., Picnic (potluck);  7:00 p.m., Business Meeting

At its June meeting, the Jackson Park Advisory Council considered a proposal to amend its bylaws regarding the definition of voting members.  Concerns were voiced about the imprecise wording of the amendment, and there was also a suggestion for an alternative proposal.  JPAC officials decided to bring a revised proposal to the July meeting.  Here are the variations, as we understand them:

• Current rule:  A member may vote if s/he is attending at least the second meeting in the preceding 12-month period.
• Change proposed by JPAC board:  A member may vote if s/he is attending at least the fourth meeting in the preceding 12-month period.
• Alternative proposal from the floor:  A member may vote after having attended two meetings in the preceding 12 months (i.e., may vote at the third meeting).

If this is an issue on which you wish to weigh in and you are qualified under the current rule, please come to meeting so that your vote for or against can be counted.  We will be there.

Brenda Nelms and Margaret Schmid
Jackson Park Watch
http://jacksonparkwatch.org
Like us on our Facebook page.

(To unsubscribe from this g-list, simply send “unsubscribe” to jacksonparkwatch@gmail.com.)

Greetings all,

Alderman Hairston favors community engagement process as next step for Jackson Park 

Just one month ago many of us attended the meeting Alderman Hairston convened at La Rabida to discuss the future of Jackson Park.  As those who were there recall, it was an overflow crowd, full of people with many questions, all supportive of the Park.

At her monthly ward meeting on Tuesday, June 28, the Alderman reported on that May 31 meeting.  Recounting that she had called the meeting to offer clarity and defuse misperceptions, she noted the differing opinions that had been voiced, but that all who were there showed their concern for the Park.  Continuing on, Hairston said she is now putting together a plan in conjunction with the Park District for next steps.  Reflecting the voices of many in the community, she said she would like to create a community engagement process to further explore what the community wants to see in the Park in the future.  Jackson Park Watch has offered to work with her office to help make this a reality.

Worth a thousand words

Local architect Jim San has created a graphic juxtaposing the rendering of the pavilion that Project 120 wants to put on the parking lot at the north end of Jackson Park with Olmsted’s drawing of the same area.  Jim says “My only comment is that the old saying ‘a picture’s worth a thousand words’ is true.  Olmsted’s drawing is a document that directly conveys his intentions and it must be properly understood.”

(Look for Jim’s highly informative graphic under “worth a thousand words” at the end of the Key Documents portion of this website)

And an appreciation for Olmsted’s vision for theWooded Island

Eric Ginsburg’s recent letter to the Hyde Park Herald also addresses Olmsted’s intentions and recognizes the continuing relevance of Olmsted’s focus on natural spaces.  You can read it at:

http://hpherald.com/2016/06/29/there-is-no-need-to-mar-the-middle-of-jackson-park-with-another-intrusive-artificial-object/

Brenda Nelms and Margaret Schmid
Jackson Park Watch
http://jacksonparkwatch.org
Like us on our Facebook page.

(To unsubscribe from this g-list, simply send “unsubscribe” to jacksonparkwatch@gmail.com.)

Greetings All!

This Update includes information about the status of the Darrow Bridge restoration and answers some questions about the dimensions of Project 120’s proposed pavilion as described at the May 31 meeting. We report on Monday night’s JPAC meeting, and to recommend a few things you might find of interest.

Next Steps on Darrow Bridge Restoration

We met on June 9 with Luis Benitez and Tanera Adams, the Chicago Department of Transportation staff who are managing the restoration of the Clarence Darrow Bridge (known to CDOT as the Columbia Bridge). They confirmed that the restored bridge will be open only for pedestrians, bicyclists and emergency vehicles. Interestingly, they told us that now all new pedestrian bridges are designed to accommodate emergency vehicles.

They explained the scheduled for the restoration as follows:

1. As was announced in November 2015, CDOT has secured funding for the engineering study and design phases of the project, and has selected a consulting firm, Stanley Consultants. However, the work cannot actually begin until the legal department gives an okay with a “Notice To Proceed,” which has yet to happen.
2. Once the NTP is given, Phase I (the engineering study phase) will begin. It will take 1 to 2 years with at least one opportunity for community input. The CDOT staff will notify JPW of the opportunities for community input, and we will publicize them widely.
3. Phase II, the design phase, will follow, with additional opportunities for community input.
4. Then of course, at long last, will come Phase III, the actual construction, which CDOT anticipates would begin, at the earliest, in spring 2019.

The good news is that there will be opportunities for community input, which JPW will know about and will publicize. The bad news is that we are talking about multiple years. This prompts questions about the wisdom of proceeding with other initiatives as long as the Darrow Bridge is closed.

How big was that?

At the May 31 meeting, Park District staff said that the footprint of the pavilion proposed by Project 120, said to be 15,000 square feet, was only as big as 2.5 tennis courts. This prompted some expressions of disbelief and a variety of calculations. We asked the Park District for clarification, and were told that the tennis court analogy was based on these assumptions:

• Project 120’s proposed pavilion would be two levels, with 8,500 sq. ft. on the top level and 6,500 sq. ft. in a below-grade basement.
• The tennis court measurement included open space surrounding the court in addition to the playing area proper.
• The estimate of the size of the footprint excluded the area under the proposed wide eaves and the redone “music court,” with trees removed, where there would be seating for the outdoor music performances.

All in all, this way of describing the size of the proposed pavilion grossly underestimates the scale of the facility and its impact on the park. Clearly, a downsized, relocated pavilion is in order.

JPAC June 13 meeting

The JPAC meeting began with a lengthy power-point presentation of what JPAC has done and plans to do. Brenda and Margaret hope that they accomplish all they have described, past and present! Thanks to the other JPW stalwarts who were there as well. It was a looooong meeting.

Eventually the agenda moved to the proposal to amend the bylaws regarding the requirements for voting. Questions were raised as to the exact meaning of the proposed amendment. Various concerns and alternatives were presented. In the end, JPAC officials decided to bring a revised proposal to the next meeting, without clarity as to what that proposal might be.

You may be interested

We’ve updated our website to reflect the May 31 meeting, the fact that Project 120’s proposal for traffic across the Darrow Bridge has been taken off the table, and to reflect concerns about Yoko Ono’s “Skylanding” piece. You can take a look at http://jacksonparkwatch.org.

You may also want to read the presentation JPW made to the June 8 meeting of the Park District Board of Commissioners. It is available on our website on the newly revised “documents” page.

Finally, a report: the JPW open letter to Alderman Hairston was published in the Hyde Park Herald. You can read it at http://hpherald.com/2016/06/15/thanks-to-alderman-hairston/.

Brenda Nelms and Margaret Schmid
Jackson Park Watch
http://jacksonparkwatch.org
Like us on our Facebook page.

Greetings all!

This Update is devoted in the main to follow-up on the very successful May 31 meeting that so many of you participated in. Thanks to all of you who were there along with so many others from the community.

On behalf of JPW, we have sent an open letter to Alderman Hairston with a copy to the Hyde Park Herald Letters to the Editors, thanking her for convening and leading the meeting (see below). We encourage any of you who want to share your own comments about the meeting to communicate directly with Alderman Hairston (ward05@cityofchicago.org) and/or with the Herald (Letters@hpherald.com ).

Thanks to Alderman Hairston!
An open letter to Alderman Leslie Hairston from Jackson Park Watch

Dear Alderman Hairston,

Jackson Park Watch wants to thank you for convening and leading the May 31 community meeting on the future of Jackson Park. The fact that over 170 residents from communities surrounding the park came out on a very wet and stormy night to listen to and question Park District CEO Michael Kelly and others indicates the depth and breadth of interest in and concern about the proposals for the future of our park that have been promoted by Project 120.

We congratulate you especially on a well-run meeting that, in spite of the overflow crowd, allowed participants to give voice to questions on a variety of issues representing many points of view — the history of Project 120, the role of the Park District, the scale and location of the proposed Phoenix Pavilion (including whether any new structure is needed at all), concern about loss of trees, green space and parking, as well as about the fates of the golf course and driving range, basketball court, and tennis courts, among them.

We are particularly pleased that the meeting provided the community with clarifications on some key concerns:

• Contrary to Project 120’s recent presentations, traffic over the restored Darrow Bridge will be limited to pedestrians, bicycles, and emergency vehicles only. There will not be a road for regular automobile traffic leading over the Bridge with parking along both sides.
• The pavilion proposal is a concept, not a done deal.   Because the idea of a road across the Bridge is off the table, there is a great opportunity to revisit not only the proposed location of this pavilion (on the current parking lot), but also its size and scope. A relocated, down-sized, simplified pavilion could far better align with community views.

We are grateful that you are committed to working with Mr. Kelly to develop a procedure and process for community input that will fully represent the Jackson Park community in all its diversity. The May 31 meeting was a great step toward that goal, and, once again we thank you.

Thanks to the Park District as well

As a second follow-up to the May 31 meeting, Margaret appeared at the monthly meeting of the Chicago Park District Board of Commissioners to give a two- minute statement in the “People in the Parks” part of the meeting (and yes, it was timed!). The Park District generally videos these meetings, so the statement may eventually appear on video at https://chicagoparkdistrict.legistar.com/Calendar.aspx – scroll down to find the 6/8/16 meeting. Note that Brenda was out of town.

Here’s a summary of the JPW presentation. We also gave a hard copy of a longer version with more detail and relevant attachments to the individual commissioners and CEO Kelly.

1. We thanked CEO Mike Kelly and other staff for participating, for taking off the table the Project 120 proposal for a one-way road for regular automobile traffic across the Darrow Bridge with parking along each side, and for committing to further dialogue with the community in conjunction with Alderman Hairston.
2. We reported significant community concerns with Project 120’s proposed pavilion, including the loss of picnic and parking space, loss of trees, threats to birds, and noise. We observed that since the idea of a road across the Bridge with parking along both sides had been taken off the table, there was an excellent opportunity for a revised design of a downsized, relocated, simplified pavilion more in keeping with the wooded nature of the park and community concerns.
3. We noted that another opportunity to preserve trees and green space would be to redesign Project 120’s proposals for the Music Court and “Great Lawn” to limit the loss natural area.
4. We noted that it is very surprising that the Yoko Ono “SkyLanding” piece would be installed on Wooded Island at a time when, due to the closure of the Darrow Bridge, there would be no access to adequate parking or public restrooms. (In the expanded version, we also pointed to potential problems with the piece attracting graffiti and climbers, and questioned whether it would need to be fenced. A rendering of the piece is included in the Hyde Park Herald’s original online coverage of the May 31 meeting, see http://hpherald.com/2016/06/01/proposed-music-pavilion-the-focus-of-discussion-at-jackson-park-planning-meeting/.)

Finally, in conclusion we made two requests:

“We ask that the Park District work with Alderman Hairston to ensure a transparent and inclusive process for community review of a revised Project 120 proposal aligned with community concerns; and that the Park District delay the installation of the Sky Landing sculpture until the Darrow Bridge is reopened.”

JPAC meeting Monday 6/13
7 p.m., Jackson Park Field House, 6401 S. Stony Island Ave.

As you may recall, at its June meeting JPAC will consider a proposal to change its by-laws concerning the requirements for voting. Currently one can vote when attending a second meeting within the span of 12 months; the proposed revision would increase the attendance requirement to four meetings. If this proposed change is an issue on which you wish to weigh in and you are qualified under the current two-meeting rule, please come to meeting so that your vote for or against can be counted. We will be there.

Brenda Nelms and Margaret Schmid
Jackson Park Watch
http://jacksonparkwatch.org
Like us on our Facebook page.

(To unsubscribe from this g-list, simply send “unsubscribe” to jacksonparkwatch@gmail.com.)