Chicago’s City Hall works in secret to plan for ugly new bridge
The city of Chicago is offering to give away a famous North Side bridge at no cost.
The Chicago Dept. of Transportation is proposing the removal and replacement of the handsome and historic bridge that carries Chicago Ave. traffic over the North Branch of the Chicago River… and few people have heard anything about it.
Their lone public notice states that “Pursuant to Title 23 U.S.C. 144 (o) (4), Chicago must first make the bridge available for free as a donation to the state, local or another responsible entity before moving forward.”
Therefore, in that lone public notice placed online last week, the Chicago Dept. of Transportation is offering the Chicago Ave. Bridge to any qualifying state, lo¬cal or responsible entity, as soon as they agree to enter into an agreement to the following conditions:
1. That they maintain the bridge and the features that give it its historic significance, and
2. Assume all future legal financial responsibility for the bridge, which may include an agreement to hold the City of Chicago harm¬less in any liability action.
According to Historicbridges.org, this bridge is similar to the nearby Grand Ave. Bridge. Both are examples of the first design of the pony truss bascule bridge that Chicago came up with, often referred to as the second generation bascule bridge design. Additionally, the Chicago Ave. Bridge is historically significant for its unique concrete bridge tender house. This bridge was one of the first Chicago bascule bridges to employ a “permanent” bridge tender building that was constructed of materials more substantial than wood, which had been used previously.
“We all realize that many of these bridges spanning the Chicago River are aging, but so many of them are suffering from deferred maintenance, to the point where they are deteriorating and in need of expensive repairs and sometimes full replacement,” said Ward Miller, Executive Director Preservation Chicago. “It’s unfortunate that the City does not have a regular maintenance program in place to address this need, and that even the newest bridges, like the North Ave. Bridge fall into disrepair quickly, with rusted surfaces, broken lighting systems and miscellaneous cords, and loose wiring hanging from the structure.”
“It’s also tragic that the famous Bascule bridges, an iconic Chicago feature of our City, and an amazing collection of these unique historic structures, are being lost so rapidly in and around the North Branch Corridor.”
While Chicago has preserved its historic bridges in the downtown Loop area, there is a clear discrepancy on the North Branch of the Chicago River where the rate of demolition is very high, despite the fact that some of the most historically significant bridges in Chicago are on the North Branch. The city has proven that its historic bascule bridges can be rehabilitated, with parts replicated as needed, and this is perhaps what should instead be done with this bridge since it is historic. The city could look to Cortland St. Bridge, Kinzie St. Bridge, and Wells St. Bridge as examples of the feasibility of preservation.
Ironically, a review of the 1911 Annual Report of the Chicago Dept. of Public Works noted that the city intended to eventually build a subway under Chicago Ave., and so the Chicago Ave. Bridge was specially designed to accommodate the future construction of a double subway tunnel. The report stated that shafts filled with concrete were used instead of piles for the piers and abutments of the bridge for this very reason. Perhaps instead of condemning this historic bridge, Chicago could make use of the foresight of engineers from over 100 years ago, and construct a subway?
As plans currently stand, the existing historic bridge and bridge tender house is to be demolished and replaced with a fixed (non-movable) steel girder bridge similar in design to a large freeway overpass like those that pass over the Kennedy and Dan Ryan Expressways.
Preservation Chicago says they would like to see a collection of these structures designated as Chicago Landmarks, spanning the main branches of the Chicago River, and extending to communities, industrial corridors and neighborhoods alike. “So many of these bridge houses downtown are in need of repairs, painting, tuckpointing and stone repairs, yet they go without the needed attention that they deserve,” said Miller.
In the case of the Chicago Avenue Bridge, if not repairable, Miller says the city should – at minimum – try to reuse what’s possible of the existing bridge and incorporate these features into a new span. “It would also be good to consider if the existing bridge houses could also be restored, or reconstructed as necessary and integrated into the new bridge as well. These are several ideas and concepts which could easily be considered, and could further enhance the riverfront.”
“The new and extended Riverwalk paths are tremendous, but the historic bridges and bridge houses also need to also be considered for repairs, restoration and regular maintenance, and in tandem in the future, as part of future work and extensions,” said Miller. “We also need to identify, restore and protect these bridges and Landmark them, or at least the most important of these for the future.”
According to Historicbridges.org, normally the Section 106 Review process to “consider ways to avoid, minimize, or mitigate the loss of this historic bridge should be open, transparent, and involve the input of the public.” However, Section 106 was conducted in virtual secrecy and indeed the public notice the city placed was buried on the city’s web site and never published in an independent newspaper.
“HistoricBridges.org monitors the news and happenings in Chicago closer than any other area covered. No news articles about the Section 106 were noted, nor was a project website (and associated documentation) made available to the public on the City of Chicago website. Even today, no project website is present for this bridge. The first notice HistoricBridges.org received about the bridge was from a third party, the Chicago Art Deco Society. Without a reason¬able level of public involvement, possible creative ways to avoid, minimize, or mitigate adverse effect were missed out on.”
For example, one mitigation solution that might have been useful would be to reuse the bascule trusses as decorative elements on the replacement bridge. This however has not been considered in Section 106.
Under this offer, any entity that chooses to take up the city’s offer will be responsible for all costs associated with the bridge removal. Interested parties are asked to send a letter, along with funding means, location of bridge placement, means of moving structure and timetable for move. It should be noted that the bridge will be required to be moved in coordination with the bridge replacement project schedule.
Letters of Interest should be sent to: Chicago Dept. of Transportation Division of Engineering Attn: Mr. Luis D. Benitez, P.E., S.E. Suite 400, 30 N. LaSalle St. Chicago, IL, 60602; Or call Benitez at 312- 744-5807.
Proposals must be received by July 13, to be considered for transferal of bridge responsibility.
One thought on “City offers to give away Chicago Ave. Bridge over river”
Only in Chicago