Why not get rid of Lake Shore Drive's At-Grade Intersections

[kernals12]

As part of the ambitious plans for North Lake Shore Drive, the city is planning to remove the signalized intersection at East Chicago Avenue. So why not remove all of them? The resulting reduction in transit dependence could allow for the removal of some el train lines which blight enormous parts of the city 

Is it a money issue?

[silverback1065]

Probably.

Pixel 5

[Max Rockatansky]

Funny, I used to use that intersection to get to my Dad's apartment back in the 1990s.  It was particularly infamous for long back ups which would clog the turn lane.  Really most of the intersections south of there weren't all that bad and didn't really seem back when I revisited a couple years ago. 

[kernals12]

Funny, I used to use that intersection to get to my Dad's apartment back in the 1990s.  It was particularly infamous for long back ups which would clog the turn lane.  Really most of the intersections south of there weren't all that bad and didn't really seem back when I revisited a couple years ago.

But what about during rush hour?

[Max Rockatansky]

Funny, I used to use that intersection to get to my Dad's apartment back in the 1990s.  It was particularly infamous for long back ups which would clog the turn lane.  Really most of the intersections south of there weren't all that bad and didn't really seem back when I revisited a couple years ago.

But what about during rush hour?

I never found Lake Shore any worse than the Kennedy or Dan Ryan through downtown.  South of Navy Pier Lake Shore is pretty well access controlled as is.  Getting rid of at-grade intersections anywhere along Grant Park would require some extensive pedestrian considerations be made.  I used to use the signal at Jackson to cross from the running path on Lake Michigan a lot, it did have a long pedestrian cycle. 

[edwaleni]

As part of the ambitious plans for North Lake Shore Drive, the city is planning to remove the signalized intersection at East Chicago Avenue. So why not remove all of them? The resulting reduction in transit dependence could allow for the removal of some el train lines which blight enormous parts of the city 

Is it a money issue?

From Monroe to McFetridge there are a couple of issues.

There is a long standing covenant for Grant Park which requires it to maintain an unobstructed view of Lake Michigan.

This means to remove the lights in this area, LSD would have to go down.

While technically possible, it would require a Boston like "big dig" to get LSD below lake level.

Grant Park is all landfill that was recovered from Lake Michigan and certain parts are still subject to subsidence. Closer to Michigan Avenue the city was able to create Millennium Park by covering the former Illinois Central tracks (which were originally on piers in the actual water).

So you either raise the entire park or lower the entire road to stay in compliance with the covenant.

Chicago has had long conversations and engineering reports on the possibility of connecting Queens Landing and Buckingham Fountain using some sort of pedestrian viaduct under LSD.

One of the big issues with this has been drainage. An elaborate pump system would have to be installed as it is illegal for that water to be vented directly into the lake. It has to pass through the city system.

[kphoger]

As part of the ambitious plans for North Lake Shore Drive, the city is planning to remove the signalized intersection at East Chicago Avenue. So why not remove all of them? The resulting reduction in transit dependence could allow for the removal of some el train lines which blight enormous parts of the city

Which L trains, specifically, could be removed if the intersections were grade-separated?  Lake Shore Drive doesn't even come within a half-mile of any elevated CTA station.

(OK, as the crow flies, I suppose it gets to a half-mile from the Loop itself...)

[kernals12]

As part of the ambitious plans for North Lake Shore Drive, the city is planning to remove the signalized intersection at East Chicago Avenue. So why not remove all of them? The resulting reduction in transit dependence could allow for the removal of some el train lines which blight enormous parts of the city

Which L trains, specifically, could be removed if the intersections were grade-separated?  Lake Shore Drive doesn't even come within a half-mile of any elevated CTA station.

(OK, as the crow flies, I suppose it gets to a half-mile from the Loop itself...)

The Green Line runs on a roughly parallel alignment. If LSD had all this extra capacity, many Southside residents could drive to work. For those that can't afford cars or don't have parking available at work, you can put a dedicated bus lane on the LSD.

[Max Rockatansky]

As part of the ambitious plans for North Lake Shore Drive, the city is planning to remove the signalized intersection at East Chicago Avenue. So why not remove all of them? The resulting reduction in transit dependence could allow for the removal of some el train lines which blight enormous parts of the city

Which L trains, specifically, could be removed if the intersections were grade-separated?  Lake Shore Drive doesn't even come within a half-mile of any elevated CTA station.

(OK, as the crow flies, I suppose it gets to a half-mile from the Loop itself...)

The Green Line runs on a roughly parallel alignment. If LSD had all this extra capacity, many Southside residents could drive to work. For those that can't afford cars or don't have parking available at work, you can put a dedicated bus lane on the LSD.

If you're trying to drive into downtown Chicago when you have a train line available you're doing it wrong.  Upgrading LSD does little to impact the overall bottleneck downtown is and the overall lack of limited access capacity getting there. 

There was this guy on the forum once that was into Sabbs that thought he had all the answers for that... 

[JoePCool14]

I don't think it's feasible for LSD to be converted into a full freeway at this point without dumping huge sums of money to accomplish that. Huge sums of money that the city nor the state have right now.

[ChiMilNet]

I don't think it's feasible for LSD to be converted into a full freeway at this point without dumping huge sums of money to accomplish that. Huge sums of money that the city nor the state have right now.

The only feasible solution I see downtown would be essentially to "tunnel" it while keeping the at grade boulevard type setup through Grant Park and Museum Campus. Too much land would be needed otherwise, and with the cost of such an undertaking, I highly doubt that would happen in our lifetimes. I am glad that they have plans to remove the Chicago Ave intersection and straighten out that curve at Oak Street Beach. However, if they really wanted to make LSD more viable for commuters from the North Suburbs, they'd need to extend it to Evanston (something Rogers Park residents will fight tooth and nail).

[kernals12]

I don't think it's feasible for LSD to be converted into a full freeway at this point without dumping huge sums of money to accomplish that. Huge sums of money that the city nor the state have right now.

The only feasible solution I see downtown would be essentially to "tunnel" it while keeping the at grade boulevard type setup through Grant Park and Museum Campus. Too much land would be needed otherwise, and with the cost of such an undertaking, I highly doubt that would happen in our lifetimes. I am glad that they have plans to remove the Chicago Ave intersection and straighten out that curve at Oak Street Beach. However, if they really wanted to make LSD more viable for commuters from the North Suburbs, they'd need to extend it to Evanston (something Rogers Park residents will fight tooth and nail).

How would you extend lsd to Evanston? Fill in Lake Michigan?

[kphoger]

As part of the ambitious plans for North Lake Shore Drive, the city is planning to remove the signalized intersection at East Chicago Avenue. So why not remove all of them? The resulting reduction in transit dependence could allow for the removal of some el train lines which blight enormous parts of the city

Which L trains, specifically, could be removed if the intersections were grade-separated?  Lake Shore Drive doesn't even come within a half-mile of any elevated CTA station.

(OK, as the crow flies, I suppose it gets to a half-mile from the Loop itself...)

The Green Line runs on a roughly parallel alignment. If LSD had all this extra capacity, many Southside residents could drive to work. For those that can't afford cars or don't have parking available at work, you can put a dedicated bus lane on the LSD.

You mean like how the Red Line doesn't exist south of Loop, because everyone drives the Ryan?  Or how the Blue Line doesn't exist west of the Loop, because everyone drives the Ike?

Anyway...  People don't take the Green Line from Bronzeville to the Loop because traffic sucks at a few stoplights on Lake Shore Drive.  They take the Green Line because they live near it or can get to it by bus, don't own a car or don't want to pay for parking or don't want the hassle of driving downtown, work somewhere that's also easily accessible by CTA...  Grade-separating LSD wouldn't change any of those factors, except minutely diminishing the hassle of driving downtown–which only applies to those trips where people would actually be taking Lake Shore Drive, which is very few, considering that the Ryan would be a more direct route for most of them.

Hyde Park and Jackson Park, I guess.  You might get some people off the Cottage Branch of the Green Line.  Maybe.  That's it.

[kernals12]

As part of the ambitious plans for North Lake Shore Drive, the city is planning to remove the signalized intersection at East Chicago Avenue. So why not remove all of them? The resulting reduction in transit dependence could allow for the removal of some el train lines which blight enormous parts of the city

Which L trains, specifically, could be removed if the intersections were grade-separated?  Lake Shore Drive doesn't even come within a half-mile of any elevated CTA station.

(OK, as the crow flies, I suppose it gets to a half-mile from the Loop itself...)

The Green Line runs on a roughly parallel alignment. If LSD had all this extra capacity, many Southside residents could drive to work. For those that can't afford cars or don't have parking available at work, you can put a dedicated bus lane on the LSD.

You mean like how the Red Line doesn't exist south of Loop, because everyone drives the Ryan?  Or how the Blue Line doesn't exist west of the Loop, because everyone drives the Ike?

Anyway...  People don't take the Green Line from Bronzeville to the Loop because traffic sucks at a few stoplights on Lake Shore Drive.  They take the Green Line because they live near it or can get to it by bus, don't own a car or don't want to pay for parking or don't want the hassle of driving downtown, work somewhere that's also easily accessible by CTA...  Grade-separating LSD wouldn't change any of those factors, except minutely diminishing the hassle of driving downtown–which only applies to those trips where people would actually be taking Lake Shore Drive, which is very few, considering that the Ryan would be a more direct route for most of them.

Hyde Park and Jackson Park, I guess.  You might get some people off the Cottage Branch of the Green Line.  Maybe.  That's it.

The Dan Ryan is a parking lot.

[ChiMilNet]

I don't think it's feasible for LSD to be converted into a full freeway at this point without dumping huge sums of money to accomplish that. Huge sums of money that the city nor the state have right now.

The only feasible solution I see downtown would be essentially to "tunnel" it while keeping the at grade boulevard type setup through Grant Park and Museum Campus. Too much land would be needed otherwise, and with the cost of such an undertaking, I highly doubt that would happen in our lifetimes. I am glad that they have plans to remove the Chicago Ave intersection and straighten out that curve at Oak Street Beach. However, if they really wanted to make LSD more viable for commuters from the North Suburbs, they'd need to extend it to Evanston (something Rogers Park residents will fight tooth and nail).

How would you extend lsd to Evanston? Fill in Lake Michigan?

That's how it was extended North back in the day was via landfill. On top of it, the realignment and removal of the Chicago Ave intersection is going to require some notable landfill to make happen. Actually, this would add a lot of nice parkland along the lakefront (plus extend the lakefront trail North). However, the reason I say Roger's Park will fight it is because of private properties that stand to lose their private shorelines, unless they could find a way to "lagoon" to them.

[kernals12]

I don't think it's feasible for LSD to be converted into a full freeway at this point without dumping huge sums of money to accomplish that. Huge sums of money that the city nor the state have right now.

The only feasible solution I see downtown would be essentially to "tunnel" it while keeping the at grade boulevard type setup through Grant Park and Museum Campus. Too much land would be needed otherwise, and with the cost of such an undertaking, I highly doubt that would happen in our lifetimes. I am glad that they have plans to remove the Chicago Ave intersection and straighten out that curve at Oak Street Beach. However, if they really wanted to make LSD more viable for commuters from the North Suburbs, they'd need to extend it to Evanston (something Rogers Park residents will fight tooth and nail).

How would you extend lsd to Evanston? Fill in Lake Michigan?

That's how it was extended North back in the day was via landfill. On top of it, the realignment and removal of the Chicago Ave intersection is going to require some notable landfill to make happen. Actually, this would add a lot of nice parkland along the lakefront (plus extend the lakefront trail North). However, the reason I say Roger's Park will fight it is because of private properties that stand to lose their private shorelines, unless they could find a way to "lagoon" to them.

I don't think Roger's park residents will get much sympathy for trying to stop the city from creating more public space for the enjoyment of all. If the funds were available, the mayor and governor would hold a groundbreaking ceremony tomorrow for Chicago's newest park. They would essentially tell Rogers' Park residents "So sue us"

[ChiMilNet]

I don't think it's feasible for LSD to be converted into a full freeway at this point without dumping huge sums of money to accomplish that. Huge sums of money that the city nor the state have right now.

The only feasible solution I see downtown would be essentially to "tunnel" it while keeping the at grade boulevard type setup through Grant Park and Museum Campus. Too much land would be needed otherwise, and with the cost of such an undertaking, I highly doubt that would happen in our lifetimes. I am glad that they have plans to remove the Chicago Ave intersection and straighten out that curve at Oak Street Beach. However, if they really wanted to make LSD more viable for commuters from the North Suburbs, they'd need to extend it to Evanston (something Rogers Park residents will fight tooth and nail).

How would you extend lsd to Evanston? Fill in Lake Michigan?

That's how it was extended North back in the day was via landfill. On top of it, the realignment and removal of the Chicago Ave intersection is going to require some notable landfill to make happen. Actually, this would add a lot of nice parkland along the lakefront (plus extend the lakefront trail North). However, the reason I say Roger's Park will fight it is because of private properties that stand to lose their private shorelines, unless they could find a way to "lagoon" to them.

I don't think Roger's park residents will get much sympathy for trying to stop the city from creating more public space for the enjoyment of all. If the funds were available, the mayor and governor would hold a groundbreaking ceremony tomorrow for Chicago's newest park.

Not going to disagree with you on that! There have been proposals in the past, though nothing that gained much footing, and at this point, the state barely has enough money to fix the highways it has, let alone extend LSD North. I can't even imagine the cost to do such an extension! Although, that would definitely enhance the need to consider removing the at grade intersections in Grant Park!

[74/171FAN]

Can I just end the debate by referencing this recent NASCAR news for a downtown Chicago iRacing event that includes Lake Shore Drive?

https://www.jayski.com/2021/03/24/nascar-to-run-iracing-event-on-chicago-street-course-could-lead-to-actual-race/

[kphoger]

Can I just end the debate ... ?

doubt it

[1995hoo]

Regarding kernals12's comment about removing L trains, which I interpret as a reference to burying L trains underground (although I'm sure he means just getting rid of the trains altogether), I recall the last time I was in Chicago, I visited my (then-)firm's Chicago office (I don't work for that firm anymore) and I commented on how noisy and unsightly the elevated trains are in the modern world. They unanimously agreed but said they're generally viewed as being a sort of local institution or trademark that most people in Chicago would just as soon preserve as they are–similar to how some sports fans don't want older ballparks like Wrigley Field or Fenway Park replaced even though those ballparks have cramped seating, sometimes obstructed views, and often inadequate facilities like restrooms.

[kphoger]

It takes surprisingly little time of living by the L tracks to get used to the noise.  So they tell me.

(I've never lived next to the L, but I did briefly live/stay next to the UP-W in DuPage County, here–with Metra commuter trains, intermodal hotshots, and coal unit trains running down it at all hours.  It was summer, the apartment had no air conditioning, and I slept in the front room with the door open.  By the time those six weeks were over, I was already used to the trains.)

[skluth]

As part of the ambitious plans for North Lake Shore Drive, the city is planning to remove the signalized intersection at East Chicago Avenue. So why not remove all of them? The resulting reduction in transit dependence could allow for the removal of some el train lines which blight enormous parts of the city 

Is it a money issue?

Far cheaper and easier to just make all the LSD intersections roundabouts. Voila, no stoplights. Tracks saved. Everyone wins. 

[kphoger]

or RIROs

[kernals12]

Regarding kernals12's comment about removing L trains, which I interpret as a reference to burying L trains underground (although I'm sure he means just getting rid of the trains altogether), I recall the last time I was in Chicago, I visited my (then-)firm's Chicago office (I don't work for that firm anymore) and I commented on how noisy and unsightly the elevated trains are in the modern world. They unanimously agreed but said they're generally viewed as being a sort of local institution or trademark that most people in Chicago would just as soon preserve as they are–similar to how some sports fans don't want older ballparks like Wrigley Field or Fenway Park replaced even though those ballparks have cramped seating, sometimes obstructed views, and often inadequate facilities like restrooms.

Really? Why can't elevated highways get that kind of love?

[kphoger]

Elevated highways aren't nostalgic.

(cue everyone to provide counterexamples)