STOP THE LANDFILL

A Comparison of Parkland and Recreational Land Mileage

Great Lakes Communities

The primary reason given by the Friends of the Parks (FOTP) for proposing that Lincoln Park be extended northward, through the currently non-public areas of Edgewater and Rogers Park, is that Chicago residents currently have limited access to lake Michigan.  They, together with Daniel Burnham (historically speaking), want to see the entire Lake Michigan shoreline of the City of Chicago as public parkland.  To somewhat gauge the rationality of this proposal, it might be instructive to examine the relative parkland shoreline mileages of other significant Great Lakes metropolitan areas. 

Table 1 below gives the shoreline mileages of a number of other Great Lakes communities together with their corresponding shoreline mileages of parks and recreational lands within each community.  The data was obtained from the best available free internet maps, and the sources include state Department of transportation maps, county maps, community maps, park district maps and Google and Yahoo maps.  Some of the maps consulted were not of the best quality (i.e. distance scales were not always included and some states/communities had better maps than others), but in every case reasonable estimates of distances involved were arrived at by working between 1 to 3 maps.  The data is only of preliminary accuracy, but in all cases should be “in the ballpark”.   The data could be improved upon if USGS Quad maps were used in every instance, but these were not available as a “free” internet resource.

1.  Preliminary data – based on “free” Internet available maps

2.  Buffalo, NY has shore frontage along both Lake Erie, and the Niagara River

3.  Presque Isle State Park, a very popular Lake Erie park, is located on a curved peninsula that surrounds The City of Erie, like an offshore breakwater

4.  The Detroit waterfront is along the Detroit River, between Lake St. Clair and Lake Erie

5.  Does not include Belle Isle Park, as that is a park completely contained on an island, not shore-connected

6.  Traverse City contains a very long (15+ mile) peninsula within the City limits, but the only significant city park is located at the end of that peninsula

7.  Park District controlled lakefront mileage from CPD web-site 7/15/2008

8.  The only City controlled parkland along the L. Michigan shore is 1-mile of beach that is only open, free of charge, to Waukegan residents

The most striking thing about the above table, and the shoreland park mileage(s) contained therein, is  the huge difference between the Chicago parkland mileage, and that of any of the other Great Lakes communities, large or small.  The only other communities that are anywhere close are Milwaukee and Kenosha, with about 48% of their shorelines as parks.  But even these good figures pale in comparison with Chicago’s 91%!  (Note: the Chicago mileage of 26 miles, as given in the Chicago Park District web-site on 7/15/2008 must contain the shoreline along the old Chicago Southworks US Steel mills.  Word in some circles is that Chicago/CPD has made an agreement with the owners/developers of this property, allowing them to develop condos and shopping centers in exchange for rights for a new lakefront park along this shoreline reach.  However, no information on this new park can be found on either the City of Chicago web-site or the CPD web-site.  Very strange indeed, for one of the biggest CPD coups in decades!  A related point is that[word on other web-sites] one of the key issues the City/CPD had in mind in making the agreement with the developers was that Lake Shore Drive would definitely be extended through the new parkland.  This, of course, would just strengthen the “feeling” many have that extension of LSD is an important component of any further park expansion along the lakefront.)

Back to the parkland mileage comparison – The larger Duluth parkland % (39.5) probably isn’t very relevant, as the majority of the parkland in that % figure is located along the 6-mile long Minnesota Point sand bar, the largest freshwater sand bar in the world.  If that is eliminated, and the parkland in St. Louis Bay (really the mouth of the St.Louis River as it empties into Lake Superior) is eliminated, the Duluth shore/parkland % drops to 13.6%.

In addition to, or along with, the 26-miles of CPD controlled lakeshore, the CPD proudly lists 26 swimming beaches, from Juneway Terrace on the City’s far north side to Calumet Beach almost on the Indiana border.  These beaches are: Juneway Terrace; Howard; Fargo; Jarvis; Leone; Hartigan/Pratt; Columbia; North Shore; Rogers; Albion; Loyola; Lane; Osterman; Foster; Montrose; North Ave.; Oak St.; 12^th St.; 31^st St.; 57^th St.; 63^rd St.; South Shore; Ashe; Rainbow; & Calumet.   And of course, in between are the many miles of non-beach open shoreline along the shores of Loyola, Lincoln, Grant, Burnham, Jackson, and Calumet parks.  The City of Chicago is surely blessed with a plethora of open, available lakefront resources, the envy of communities all around this great land of ours, and the world. 

On a related front, the National Park Service recently completed a survey (updated in June 2007) of potential park sites along all the Great Lakes.   While not directly considering relative parkland availability, they did have a few comments relevant to the matter.  They were highly complimentary of the many parks and open spaces along Chicago’s lakefront and in the Forest Preserves along the area’s rivers.  To give the FOTP their due, they did note that the large population of Chicago did require a lot of recreational space.  However, the immediate Chicago area was not high on their list of needed park improvements.  Some of their comments follow:

Illinois

Happily, beneath the virulent Chicago skyline, the city maintains nearly 16 miles of highly landscaped lake frontage. Designed for intensive use by the area's millions, they are outstanding in every way. On the 11 city beaches, youngsters, teen-agers and adults may fill spare hours with healthy outdoor recreation. Evanston and other shoreline towns also provide for local beach needs, and private clubs and resorts maintain beaches for their patrons.

The Cook County Forest Preserve, preserving a ring of green around Chicago, is known to park and conservation men throughout the country. Its record for providing fine recreation facilities and resisting nonconforming use of Preserve lands is the envy of less fortunate park organizations. The preservation of these natural areas is of inestimable value to all the people of the Chicago area.

Minnesota

From Duluth to the Canadian line, U.S. Highway 61--the

Ohio

Over half of the United States shore of Lake Erie lies in Ohio, which, counting islands and Sandusky Bay, amounts to 312 miles. Generally, this shoreline has three facets. From the Michigan line eastward to Vermilion, the landscape is monotonously flat. Rich farmland occupies this former lakebed. Along the shoreline are marshes, usually separated from the lake by narrow barrier beaches. These marshes are of great importance to migrating waterfowl, but with two exceptions these are private lands of hunting clubs.

From the vicinity of Vermilion to the Pennsylvania line is the shore bluff sector. This segment of Lake Erie compares with the most heavily developed shores on the Great Lakes. A vast complex of marinas, private beaches, exclusive developments, and industrial operations crowd to the edge of the eroding bluffs. Since the natural scene has long been altered, since development is essentially complete, little possibility exists of obtaining natural frontage for public recreation along this section.

Of the five states with more than 100 miles of Great Lakes shoreline, Ohio probably has the greatest degree of lakeside development. There are no extensively forested lands fronting Erie's shores. There are no long, untouched tracts of beach. Farmland, cottage and resort development, industrial frontage, highways and cities have long since appropriated the vast majority of the shoreline. Ohio has a population of over 9,000,000 people, and the need for public recreation areas on Lake Erie is undeniably great. .  .  .   Because of their natural importance, plus their proximity to large centers of population--Detroit and Cleveland are both less than 100 miles distant--the marshes on the study area were long ago acquired by private and commercial duck clubs.

Cleveland

Ohio's Lake Erie shoreline is dominated by the huge metropolitan area centered around Cleveland--the third largest city on the Great Lakes. Together with its highly populated suburbs, this industrial giant covers 44 miles of lake frontage with industry, shipping and residential provisions.

Of these three, residential development consumes the major portion. For mile after mile private homes line the bluffs that rise abruptly 40 to 50 feet from the water's edge. Here, the benefit derived from proximity to the lake is limited primarily to summer breezes and water panoramas. Except during periods of low water, beaches along this section are practically nonexistent, and active water erosion of the bluffs is threatening to undermine some homes near the edge.

Public access to Lake Erie's shoreline is also limited by these factors. Within this metropolitan area, slightly more than ten percent of the shoreline is devoted to park-type use, but bathing beach frontage is less than four percent, providing less than one-tenth of an inch per person living within ten miles of the lake. This situation, of course, is already inadequate to answer present demands for access to this recreation resource along the city's doorstep. Here is a case where natural shoreline is not only "vanishing"--it's already gone!

High real estate values and development along Cleveland's waterfront preclude possibilities for acquisition of additional public frontage.

New York

The 77 miles of Lake Erie shoreline in New York have already been developed to such an extent as to nearly preclude further possibilities. Two state parks already exist along this shore.

On Lakes Erie and Ontario, New York has but slightly over 11 miles (less than two percent) of mainland shoreline in state parks. The total water frontage of the various island and mainland parks on the Niagara and St. Lawrence Rivers raises the total to 50 miles. In this report, eight study areas with 28.4 miles of shoreline and 11,400 acres of land are recommended for further study as inclusions within the state park system. This would give the state a total of 78.4 miles of the over-all 775 miles of shoreline. Yet this would amount to only slightly over 10 percent, still far short of the 15 percent considered optimum to satisfy public recreation

The NPS comments, in general, were not too encouraging.  But again, they had nothing but good words for the immediate Chicago area’s existing lakeshore park facilities.

Considering the above results, the continuing insistence by the FOTP that Chicago NEEDS the “last 4-miles” (or 2-1/2 miles or whatever) to provide reasonable access to the lakefront for Chicago residents borders on the non-sensical.  Common sense says this is so; the opinions of local residents say this is so; local, unbiased reporters say this is so; and the existing patterns of lakefront development throughout the Great Lakes say this is so.  Considering the weight of all the arguments against this course of action, compared to the feather-light arguments for this proposal, one wonders where the FOTP is coming from.  What more do they need to induce them to abandon this wrong-headed course?  The opinion of some long-dead turn-of the-century architect surely cannot be the rationale for pursuing such a silly course of action.  Civic arrogance would be the best face to put on it.  Or might they be pursuing some hidden agenda?