CHICAGO | General Developments

[Rizzo]

Originally Posted by ardecila

I disagree. The park and the highway can coexist harmoniously if designed correctly.

No need to spend extra billions sweeping the highway underground like an embarrassment, especially when the lakefront has plenty of room to spare via lakefill. If there is room to create proper landscaped buffers, berms, etc, and frequent pedestrian access, I don't see a problem keeping the highway daylighted. More scenic for drivers, the public gets additional parkland, and it all gets delivered at a lower cost than tunneling.

No way a billion more. They aren't excavating deeper, but berming up around the approaches to the overpass. You'd be extending the berms and having several overpasses to cover as much as possible without mechanical exhaust systems. I would say tens of millions more in cost for additional cover over. With the exception of the onramps, I find it hard to believe LSD going beneath that bridge is an actual depression. That would be insane.

[The North One]

That doesn't connect the city with the waterfront, it just creates more parkland, which doesn't solve the problem.

Lake Shore drive should be tunneled from Burton all the way to Grand Avenue.

[Via Chicago]

There are a lot of things that "should" happen. The state is broke. Be happy were even getting this.

[10023]

They need to take lanes away from LSD, really. Make it two in each direction and add speed control features. It should be a scenic parkway, not something like an interstate expressway.

And for god sakes, cut down the lanes on Columbus and other roads that traverse Grant Park. Balbo should be closed, as should Jackson. Intelligent use of roundabouts could keep traffic moving around the park without so many roads.

[aaron38]

I doubt they'd ever cut down actual pavement on Columbus. It's used for too many races, evernts where grass gets trampled.

[aaron38]

Oh, also saw a report that the Sun Times is up for sale. Wonder if that has any implications for everyone's least favorite building?

[10023]

Originally Posted by aaron38

I doubt they'd ever cut down actual pavement on Columbus. It's used for too many races, evernts where grass gets trampled.

You don't need that much pavement for races. I don't think there's a single six lane road anywhere along the London marathon route.

The optimal width would be two lanes in each direction, which allows for left turn lanes and passing slower traffic.

You could add a nice median with trees in the middle, and then widen the pavement for pedestrians. You only lose one lane-width of paving, but significantly beautify the park. Grant Park is quite underwhelming, frankly.

Oh, and get rid of the damn parking lanes. Why are there parking lanes in the middle of the park?

[aaron38]

I just ran the JP Morgan corporate chase, and it took 20 minutes after race start just to hit the starting line. The width is needed.
Now that doesn't mean it has to be street, auto lanes. It could be plaza.

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by 10023

You don't need that much pavement for races. I don't think there's a single six lane road anywhere along the London marathon route.

The optimal width would be two lanes in each direction, which allows for left turn lanes and passing slower traffic.

You could add a nice median with trees in the middle, and then widen the pavement for pedestrians. You only lose one lane-width of paving, but significantly beautify the park. Grant Park is quite underwhelming, frankly.

Oh, and get rid of the damn parking lanes. Why are there parking lanes in the middle of the park?

Agree 1000%

Move the goddamn race elsewhere then. Columbus Dr absolutely RUINS Grant Park

[TimeAgain]

Originally Posted by 10023

They need to take lanes away from LSD, really. Make it two in each direction and add speed control features. It should be a scenic parkway, not something like an interstate expressway.

And for god sakes, cut down the lanes on Columbus and other roads that traverse Grant Park. Balbo should be closed, as should Jackson. Intelligent use of roundabouts could keep traffic moving around the park without so many roads.

As someone who actually drives on LSD.

Are you nuts?!?! It's backed up to death now and most of that traffic comes from tourists or out of towners visiting the city.

[Khantilever]

Originally Posted by TimeAgain

As someone who actually drives on LSD.

Are you nuts?!?! It's backed up to death now and most of that traffic comes from tourists or out of towners visiting the city.

Adding or removing capacity isn't going to really change travel time in the long-run. People adjust their commuting/travel patterns based on what an acceptable travel time is to them.

The bigger question is whether and how the city would benefit/suffer from a lower volume of people traveling on LSD. Tourists are probably far less time-sensitive than commuters, so I think the main loss will be from fewer people using LSD to get to work. Presumably some businesses might suffer, jobs might move, etc.

On the other hand, the park and lake becomes nicer and more accessible.

[msu2001la]

The NLSD design team looked at several tunneling options of varying lengths, both at Oak St and further north at Belmont. IDOT even studied an option that tunneled the entire stretch from Hollywood to Grand, and converted the existing roadway back into a surface-street boulevard. In the end, IDOT determined that the tunneling options were too costly to advance, and CDOT also had concerns about ongoing maintenance costs for long tunnels.

The design team also looked at light rail options. Not surprisingly, IDOT also determined that this was too costly to advance. CTA didn't really support it either, and instead wanted facilities that improved existing bus lines.

[msu2001la]

Originally Posted by Khantilever

Adding or removing capacity isn't going to really change travel time in the long-run. People adjust their commuting/travel patterns based on what an acceptable travel time is to them.

The bigger question is whether and how the city would benefit/suffer from a lower volume of people traveling on LSD. Tourists are probably far less time-sensitive than commuters, so I think the main loss will be from fewer people using LSD to get to work. Presumably some businesses might suffer, jobs might move, etc.

On the other hand, the park and lake becomes nicer and more accessible.

The goal of this project is to accomplish both. Increased capacity (people, not cars) and improved access to the lakefront.

The current alternates include several transit options to improve capacity like dedicated bus lanes, bus queue jumps, level boarding, signal priority, etc. The redesign of Chicago ave will also remove a major choke point and increase capacity for buses and cars.

As for access, if you've ever walked from N. Michigan Ave to Oak St beach, or East down Chicago to the lakefront you understand how bad the current lakefront access is. Many tourists won't venture through those awful tunnels now, and there is a huge missed opportunity for Chicago Park District to generate revenue from beach/lakefront facilities that goes way beyond parking fees.

[TimeAgain]

Originally Posted by Khantilever

Adding or removing capacity isn't going to really change travel time in the long-run. People adjust their commuting/travel patterns based on what an acceptable travel time is to them.

The bigger question is whether and how the city would benefit/suffer from a lower volume of people traveling on LSD. Tourists are probably far less time-sensitive than commuters, so I think the main loss will be from fewer people using LSD to get to work. Presumably some businesses might suffer, jobs might move, etc.

On the other hand, the park and lake becomes nicer and more accessible.

Taking away a lane isn't going to make much of a difference when it comes to the park and lake. Most of the pedestrian sidewalks on LSD are barren, and few people use them. The issue is that that portion of the lake just isn't that attractive. There's nothing to do. Grant Park itself is arguably the most disappointing part of downtown. It's beautiful, but somehow barren. There isn't a playground, a pond, anything. Yes, there are bright spots here and there, and the occasional festival, but it feels uninviting. Before we start talking about removing lanes from LSD, how about covering up the tracks? How about adding a playground? How about something to make it a real park like Jackson or Lincoln? I go through Grant Park pretty frequently and I hardly see anyone. Let's take advantage of the space already there before we start demanding more pedestrian space from LSD. Columbus is worse anyway.

[emathias]

Originally Posted by 10023

...
You could add a nice median with trees in the middle, and then widen the pavement for pedestrians. You only lose one lane-width of paving, but significantly beautify the park. Grant Park is quite underwhelming, frankly.

There's a lot that could be done to make Grant Park more park-like. Before it was a park, there was just a narrow strip of a park, called Lake Park, on the east side of Michigan, then the shoreline just west of where the train tracks are now. Then about 150 years ago, the railroads built a causeway sort of like on a breakwater, approximately where there are still tracks. That created a lagoon which was filled in with debris soon after. Then with the Great Fire, a lot of that rubble got shoved into the lake on the east side of the tracks and was added to with mud from various tunneling projects. It was a park that just sort of evolved over time without a cohesive plan. It is a grand park, but it doesn't really have the sort of cohesive planning that other large parks that were created in their entirety all at once. In a lot of ways, Grant Park is more like a hodge-podge of various events spaces than one cohesive park.

Currently, "Grant Park" is made up of Maggie Daley Park, Peanut Park, Hutchinson Field (Upper and Lower), Presidents Courts (North and South), Arvey Field, Spirit of Music Garden, Rose Gardens (South and North), Buckingham Fountain Flower Garden, Formal Gardens, Congress Median garden, Butler Field, Sir Georg Solti Garden, South Garden, the Art Institute, North Garden, the Cancer Survivors' Garden, and, of course, Millennium Park - which is, itself, made up of Wrigley Square, Chase Promenade North, Central and South, McCormick Tribune Plaza, Cloud Gate, Harris Theatre, Jay Pritzker Pavilion, Boeing Gallery North and South, Crown Fountain, and Lurie Garden.

It's funny, because parts of it are among the best parks in the world, and parts look no better than any of thousands of small pieces of grass across the globe given the title of "Park." In some ways it can be compared to New York's Central Park even though it's 2 1/2 times bigger than Grant Park. Central Park has the advantage of a more cohesive plan because it was plotted all at once. It also has the advantage of actually being a natural feature of the island of Manhattan as opposed to being land created formed over a span of decades out of a burned city's rubble, scrap, and mud bored out of the earth below. Grant Park also has the disadvantage of being treated more like a fairgrounds than a park for half the year.

I do share your perception of Grant Park on the whole, though. Overall, it is underwhelming even though there specific parts I like a lot.

Originally Posted by 10023

Oh, and get rid of the damn parking lanes. Why are there parking lanes in the middle of the park?

Because people still do drive to the park. Cannon Drive in Lincoln Park also has parking.

I feel like Grant Park is largely treated more like a fairgrounds than a park for much of the year.

[msu2001la]

Originally Posted by TimeAgain

Taking away a lane isn't going to make much of a difference when it comes to the park and lake. Most of the pedestrian sidewalks on LSD are barren, and few people use them. The issue is that that portion of the lake just isn't that attractive. There's nothing to do. Grant Park itself is arguably the most disappointing part of downtown. It's beautiful, but somehow barren. There isn't a playground, a pond, anything. Yes, there are bright spots here and there, and the occasional festival, but it feels uninviting. Before we start talking about removing lanes from LSD, how about covering up the tracks? How about adding a playground? How about something to make it a real park like Jackson or Lincoln? I go through Grant Park pretty frequently and I hardly see anyone. Let's take advantage of the space already there before we start demanding more pedestrian space from LSD. Columbus is worse anyway.

Interesting observations and comparisons.

The lakefront between Belmont and Grand is pretty heavily used by pedestrians. I'm not totally sure where you are seeing pedestrian sidewalks on LSD that are barren. The lakefront trail has over 30,000 users daily at some points in this stretch. These numbers have been observed since 2013 by the project team and are rising every year.

The footprint of NLSD roadway isn't changing. The roadway is being reconfigured, and may convert a lane to dedicated transit, but the amount of pavement will remain roughly the same. The additional park space is created by filling in the lake, which is necessary to revise the roadway geometry to straighten out the S-curve and lengthen ramps to current standards.

The reason IDOT is looking at this project at all is because the current bridges and underpasses are in need of replacement, and additional protection from the lake is needed to prevent roadway flooding. Rather than rebuild what's there (and be stuck with existing bad design) and put up a big wall, they are using this as an opportunity to rework the entire stretch of NLSD. This isn't an "either/or" scenario where they're choosing to do this project instead of improving Grant Park (which has recently seen massive improvements via Millennium Park and Maggie Daley Park). The NLSD project is being run through IDOT, with cooperation from CDOT, CTA and CPD. Grant Park improvements would generally be run through CPD and have nothing to do with IDOT, CDOT or CTA. They use different funding mechanisms.

[r18tdi]

Originally Posted by spyguy

Retail & private residence

So is this where those LG micro units were supposed to go? Looks really cold and uninviting.

[ithakas]

Originally Posted by r18tdi

So is this where those LG micro units were supposed to go? Looks really cold and uninviting.

Across the street, on the east side of Dearborn (versus LG on the west).

[Mr Downtown]

^Architect/owner is Chris Talsma, of Filoramo Talsma. He's done some nice contemporary stuff in West Town, so I was expecting much better and more disciplined work, something that would use the forms and proportions of historic Printers Row, just in modern materials. Instead he chose to design his dream home from the inside out, and have the exterior massing follow function. Thus the overhanging fourth floor and the utterly alien metal cladding for the cantilever. I don't know why Landmarks didn't put up more of a fight, but they just asked him to change the brick color and called it a day.

[Swicago Swi Sox]

^This is so similar to the home above the Starbucks at Dearborn and Harrison. When I first saw it I assumed it was the same one with a second story addition. Crazy.

https://chicago.curbed.com/2014/8/15...st-hidden-loft