When will we stop giving away public land for personal use? The “preferred alternative” of the Illinois and Chicago Departments of Transportation — the version of North DuSable Lake Shore Drive they intend to reconstruct — would require spending at least $3.4 billion on a project that does not meaningfully increase the amount of parkland compared to our current lake shore.
A spatial analysis of the proposed plan discovered that currently, for each hectare of space dedicated to roadway, only 2.88 are dedicated to parkland. The preferred alternative only increases that allocation by 7%, to 3.08 hectares. The current use of the lake shore (east of Inner DLSD/Marine Drive) has 74.2% of land dedicated as parkland; that increases to only 75.5% under the preferred alternative.
IDOT and CDOT have cherry-picked statistics to highlight that the preferred alternative adds 42 hectares of lakefront parkland — but conveniently left out that the size of North DuSable Lake Shore Drive is also increasing by 8.7 hectares, or 10% from its current size.
This isn’t just an expansion of parkland — it’s an expansion of highway.
Large infrastructure projects need to be financially responsible, and this one is not. Nearly a third of the cost ($1.3 billion) would go to shoreline restoration. While Chicago needs to protect its shoreline and restore habitats, the money dedicated towards it in this plan is not being done efficiently and is not based on science-backed restoration methods.
In all, 96% of the restoration would come between Oak Street and Fullerton Avenue. By expanding the shoreline in these areas, IDOT and CDOT have given themselves permission to bring the highway closer to Lake Michigan and expand the width in key sections.
At Chicago Avenue, the current width of Outer and Inner NDLSD is 140 feet. By expanding the shoreline, the width of that intersection would balloon to 331 feet. This is not $1.3 billion for shoreline restoration — it is $1.3 billion for a highway expansion.
With 200 feet of added width around Chicago Avenue, pedestrians would face an increased risk of fatality as vehicles fly around the bend at greater speeds on the exit and entrance ramps. A widened and straightened curve would mirror the same crossing experience where DLSD meets Monroe Street, Jackson Drive, and Balbo Drive. Cyclist Gerardo Marciales was fatally struck there in 2022.
Reducing beach access, lowering economic value
Residents decry when public stretches of beach are made private in suburban areas. What CDOT and IDOT intend to do is similar. To accommodate the straightened Oak Street curve, Oak Street Beach would see an 880 feet (1/6 mile) reduction in access to lakeshore waters. Because the depth of the beach is increasing, the design agencies are considering this expansion as a net positive for beach-goers.
But a wide, shallow beach is vastly more favorable than a beach that is deep and narrow. The redesign of this public beach to accommodate private vehicles is unacceptable and a loss for beach-goers who would face a decreased amount of direct and safe access to the lake.
There is also a financial cost. Using beaches in Delaware as a case study, University of Delaware researchers determined that a 25% reduction in beach access would result in a loss of about $4.75 per visitor each day they visited, while doubling a beach’s size would generate about $2.60 of value per visitor each day they visited.
These values would change for Chicago, but it’s generally understood that narrow beaches are economically harmful and decrease visitor experience. By making the beach less desirable, researchers outlined a correlation that would result in Chicago generating less income and by extension, less sales tax that could be appropriated for shoreline preservation and marine health, something Chicago has and continues to grapple with.
The lakefront would see an additional five access points added, but at some major crossings, easy access to the lakefront is not the primary thought. As part of the outdated design goals of the project, vehicle throughput is being prioritized, which forces pedestrian traffic beneath and above NDLSD while vehicle traffic is kept at grade.
Given the diversity of mobility issues, a primary goal should have been to keep all pedestrian crossings at the same grade and require motorized vehicles to go underground. That approach was used for Boston’s I-93 over two decades ago.
Chicagoans deserve a future that prioritizes their physical and mental health, safety, and freedom of movement. This plan locks in restrictive patterns of movement that put the needs of individual interests above the needs of communities. Chicago, you and the people you care about deserve better than this.
Nik Hunder is an environmental policy analyst and public transit advocate in Chicago.
The views and opinions expressed by contributors are their own and do not necessarily reflect those of the Chicago Sun-Times or any of its affiliates.
The Sun-Times welcomes letters to the editor and op-eds. See our guidelines.
Get Opinions content delivered to your inbox.