Status Quo or Forward-Thinking: Which LSD Vision Will Prevail?

The LSD/Michigan/Oak area could get a Museum Campus-style transformation.
The LSD/Michigan/Oak area could get a Museum Campus-style transformation.

keating

Last week the Illinois Department of Transportation and the Chicago Department of Transportation presented the first of two distinct visions for the future of the lakefront at the latest meeting on the North Lake Shore Drive Reconstruction Study. They revealed potential designs that generally keep the existing number of travel lanes open for motorists, rather than creating dedicated space for transit. Designs that prioritize greener modes won’t be shown until a future meeting.

The LSD study involves a complex planning process that must take into account the many different, and sometimes competing, uses of the highway and shoreline. As a result, the initial planning stages involved multiple private and public meetings that have dragged on for several years. But it appears that this session and others planned for later this year are a sign that the planning process is picking up steam.

Last week’s meeting started off with a short presentation to bring attendees up to speed about the project or refresh their memories from the last session in December. In response to previous feedback that some of the visuals presented at the meetings have been a little confusing, officials handed out an “Alternatives Key” to help people better understand the maps and distinguish whether a pictured roadway or bus lane is below ground, at street level, or elevated.

Attendees at last week's meeting. Photo: Charles Papanek
Attendees at last week’s meeting. Photo: Charles Papanek

The day’s focus was on “Context Tailored Treatments” or as the presentation put it “Improvements that assume existing travel lanes are maintained (for the most part).” Therefore new configurations of LSD that included bus-only lanes, light rail lines, or managed travel lanes were not shown, but the maps did include bus-only queue jumps at key locations. Those more progressive alternates that prioritize transit are still in development and will hopefully be shown this fall.

The project as presented was broken down into three sections: Grand to Diversey, Diversey to Montrose, and Montrose to Hollywood. Three different conceptual alternatives were presented for each stretch: Corridor Modernization, prioritizing safety and bottleneck reduction; Compressed Roadway seeking to minimize ROW impacts; and the Frontage Drive concept envisioning something more akin to a proper highway.

It’s important to keep in mind that different elements from these conceptual alternatives can be mixed and matched based on community input and future analysis. IDOT and CDOT are specifically looking for feedback on issues, concerns, and preferences with regard to design elements, as well as locations where additional information and clarification is needed.

During the interactive portion of the meeting, attendees were placed in discussion groups, and I joined a group that focused on the Grand to Diversey segment. This is by far the busiest section of North Lake Shore Drive for all modes. Participants said they were excited about the possibility of expanding the lakefront through infill to create more parkland, such as a larger Oak Street Beach.

2017-05-18 12.28.47
Unlike most of the designs show, the renderings for the stretch from Montrose to Hollywood included the possibility of converting travel lanes to transit-only lanes. Click to enlarge.

The possibility of redesigning the complex and dangerous intersection of LSD, Oak Street, and Michigan Avenue was also cited as a major opportunity. There’s a potential to create something on the level of Museum Campus, with full grade separation and new underpasses meant to cope with the high pedestrian and bike traffic. The conceptual drawings showed a new fountain near the intersection, but this space could be occupied by any number of things, including a new bus terminal.

Speaking of terminals, one of the three models included a small bus facility squeezed under a new LaSalle/LSD junction that could easily fit into other designs. Another striking feature of this proposals was two new pedestrian/bike bridges across Lincoln Park’s South Lagoon, linking Lincoln Park Zoo to nearby beaches.

After reviewing the Grand to Diversey designs, my group shifted to the Diversey to Montrose section which includes the redesign of the Belmont/LSD intersection. This is a challenging location, a tiny space that must accommodate high use from every mode. Thankfully, in all of the proposed scenarios, the monument to General Philip Henry Sheridan, located just north of the junction, would remain in place.

The most striking concept for Belmont had the northbound lanes of the Drive entering a tunnel under the junction while the southbound lanes were left in their current elevated state. While this would be a complex and expensive redesign, it’s the only one that retained the current right-of-way size.

The other two proposals encroach into the harbor space, requiring the relocation of parking and the local dog beach. However, unlike boat parking, all of the metered car parking would probably need to be replaced due to the city’s hated parking contract.

Interestingly, an idea is on the table to build a new junction at Addison that would allow northbound traffic to exit the Drive and southbound traffic to enter. Currently there’s a gate between Outer and Inner Lake Shore Drive at this location, only opened during Cubs games, that allows southbound drivers to exit. Allowing this move 24-7 would likely increase the amount of cars on Addison.

This LSD exit gate at Addison is only opened during Cubs games, but there could be a permanent exit here in the future. Image: Google Street View
This LSD exit gate at Addison is only opened during Cubs games, but there could be a permanent exit here in the future. Image: Google Street View

Finally our group checked out the stretch between Montrose and Hollywood. Positive changes proposed include the removal of on- and off-ramps at Wilson (since drivers can already enter and exit the Drive two blocks north and south at Lawrence and Montrose.) And unlike most alternatives shown at this meeting renderings floated the possibility of reducing the number of travel lanes from eight to six on this segment.

The designs also called for tightening the ramps and adding signals at all intersections to slow down motorists. Several ideas for a redesigned Hollywood terminus were also shown, including an at-grade option, but that aspect of the Drive project is mostly being handled by a separate team, which will be holding its next community meeting on June 6 at Senn High School.

At the end of the meeting the different discussion groups shared their impressions of the project. My sense is that there are two competing visions for the future of the Drive and the parkland it sits in. One point of view assumes that the car-centric status quo will be maintained. The other looks to a future where cars no longer dominate our world, but instead the more efficient and healthier modes of walking, biking, and transit are prioritized.

While it’s going to be a challenge to get progressive changes made to the Drive, it’s a battle worth fighting. Those of us who care about smart transportation need to make sure our voice are heard at the next reconstruction project meeting on July 12 at DePaul University. In the meantime, we need to leaving as much feedback as we can on the project website to show government officials that they need to show leadership by leveling the playing field in favor of sustainable transportation.

This post is made possible by a grant from the Illinois Bicycle Lawyers at Keating Law Offices, P.C., a Chicago, Illinois law firm committed to representing pedestrians and cyclists. The content is Streetsblog Chicago’s own, and Keating Law Offices neither endorses the content nor exercises any editorial control.

  • Courtney

    How about transit-only lane from South Shore to Hollywood? I’m glad transit users were thrown a bone but we deserve more.

  • Based on the title, will a vision of pink elephants prevail?

  • johnaustingreenfield

    Don’t hold Charles responsible for that headline — he didn’t write it.

  • With studies now showing that ride hailing is now having a negative impact on congestion, and by extension bus travel times, there is stronger need than ever for dedicated bus lane-age.

    My guess is that the separated bike lanes now being installed Diversey to North or where-ever will be too little too late. My guess is that we could well see induced bike demand on the LFT where separation happens. That would argue for including some form of accommodation for bikes on LSD. Yes sounds crazy but Amsterdam wasn’t Amsterdam in the 1970s. Meaning that it took a lot of effort to turn around a car packed downtown headed for expressway style urban renewal at that time into the bike Mecca that it is now.

    But… And it is a big but. Driverless cars that communicate with each other will likely eliminate the need for dedicated lanes. SInce the redesign of LSD is likely a forty to fifty year investment the advent of driverless technology will likely happen in its lifetime.

    Now the thing is driverless tech will also likely have it’s own induced demand reality. And there are two strongly possible outcomes. One drverless tech eliminates congestion and degradation of buses (also driverless), so fine. Or more likely increases congestion and the need for buses (still driverless). But here is the interesting caveat. The V2V (vehicle to vehicle) communication technology will also allow for forcing the driverless cars to pull over and let the bus pass at a faster speed. Some cars will be forced to slow to allow the blocking cars to be forced into their lane, that’s how.

    But that is likely at ten or even more years off. In the meantime there is an even greater need because of ride-hailing and their attempts to at least advertise themselves as bus replacements but in reality inducing more congestion, for dedicated bus lanes on LSD.

  • semperfi1371

    First, eliminate the Chicago Ave northbound exit, it’s a deathtrap.

  • For those of you who want to take a deep dive into the topic, the full presentation and all accompanying documents for the Task Force Meeting #6 are now posted on the project website for public viewing. Those who like pictures instead of maps may want to look at the Chicago Ave, Oak St and LaSalle Dr renderings linked at the bottom of the page.
    http://www.northlakeshoredrive.org/involved_task_forces.html

  • **

    I absolutely support a greener vision for the on and off ramps in Uptown, but am very concerned about the proposed combined southbound on-ramp between Wilson and Montrose. Uptown’s Lincoln Park in this area is already cut up by three streets (last I checked ca. 34,000 cars a day). The proposed on-ramp will add yet another double-wide street to the mix. Combined with the proposed off-street parking lots on either side of the service yard (a contributing structure to Lincoln Park’s National Register listing), these new ramps will basically ruin this part of Lincoln Park for any future use as park.

    Uptown’s residents are stars in use of public transit, biking, and walking. Per the last American Community Survey, 75% of people in the Clarendon Park census tract commute by green modes: https://censusreporter.org/profiles/14000US17031031502-census-tract-31502-cook-il/. There’s got to be a way to reward that model sustainable behavior as part of this project, which is aligned with the “green” values of many in the area. Adding even more streets and ruining a huge tract of Uptown’s interior Lincoln Park is not it.

    Also, while adding truly dedicated bus lanes would go a long way to reducing traffic, I’m not convinced that shifting the southbound on-ramp from Montrose to a combined ramp to the north is going to solve the problem of congestion on Montrose, especially in summer. It may make it worse since cars seeking to access the Drive will have to make a left-hand turn from Montrose. My sense is that the majority of Drive-related car traffic is going to shift to Lawrence. Lawrence is US Bike Route #37, something of such strong economic potential that it should be considered as part of this redesign.

    One of the confounding aspects of the current traffic situation is that the two streets with the densest residential populations at street level, often in low-to-midrise buildings, are those currently carrying the most cars to and from the Drive. Especially Lawrence has a lot healthcare facilities and housing for seniors—whom studies have shown may be more impacted by noise pollution. Wilson is wider throughout Uptown because it was the historic, grander business district. Today it is commercial at street-level and in some cases there is a solid set back (for example, at Uplift High School). In addition, Weiss’s ER entrance is located on Wilson, so access needs to be carefully weighed.

    As long as I’m listing concerns, perhaps my deepest is that I can’t find the Uptown schools, hospitals, park advisory groups, and neighborhood groups that sit right along the Drive in the task force lists. Am I missing them somehow? I see a number of Lincoln Park schools, institutions, and the Lincoin Park advisory council, but cannot find the equivalents in Uptown—Weiss Hospital, Chicago Lakeshore Hospital, Clarendon Park Advisory Council, Margate Park Advisory Council, Walt Disney Magnet, Uplift High School, and American Islamic College. Active neighborhood groups like Buena Park Neighbors and Lakeside Neighbors seem to missing too.

  • **

    Michelle, any way to get the project team to post a comprehensive doc that isn’t so large? It’s really hard to download even by sections because the PDFs are so large. Some people can’t afford a lot of data to look more closely. Thanks a lot!

  • **

    Now THAT is an idea I can support. Personally I’d go for two lanes in each direction in case there’s a breakdown or—I know this is dreaming—in some way spec in room for a future something-or-other like light rail.

  • Sorry, I forgot to respond to this! I will pass along your concern to the project team, but I think these huge documents will always be hard to present in a more manageable form. However, maybe they will have some ideas.

  • This is detailed, local knowledge about the conditions and possibilities that is needed and welcomed for each stretch of the project. I hope that you will send your comments to the NLSD project team via the website or e-mail it to info@northlakeshoredrive.org

  • Jordan Jones

    Under the Task Force Meeting #6 heading of the Task Forces section, all the exhibits from “Grand to Diversey: Corridor Modernization Concept” to “Montrose to Hollywood: Frontage Drive Concept” have been compressed, which should make for easier downloading.

    Unfortunately we were not able to do so for any of the other renderings. Due to the amount of detail within the images, they are best suited to being viewed on a full size laptop or computer monitor. Was there a particular document or image you were interested in seeing?

    Please contact info@northlakeshoredrive.org with any additional questions.

ALSO ON STREETSBLOG

Chicago Should Take Over the North Lake Shore Drive Redesign Project

|
Last week, the Illinois Department of Transportation hosted the first public meeting on the North Lake Shore Drive reconstruction project in almost a year and a half. This state-jurisdiction road, which is located entirely within the city limits, currently restricts access to our lakefront. And since CTA “express” buses are forced to share travel lanes with cars, […]

IDOT Provides an Update on the North Lake Shore Drive Reconstruction Study

|
Starting in 2013, the Illinois and Chicago transportation department have hosted a series of public meetings on the North Lake Shore Drive reconstruction study, dubbed “Redefine the Drive.” At a hearing in July 2014, planners introduced Chicagoans to the project’s latest purpose and needs statement (essentially a mission statement), while also asking attendees to chime in with […]