The North Lake Shore Drive Project—an estimated $500 million proposal to smooth out the dangerous S-bend of Lake Shore Drive—has added a new addition to its blueprints: a 70-acre beach jutting into Lake Michigan, according to a Feb. 9 Chicago Curbed article. 

The expensive project has not yet been approved and has been on the table since 2013, but the newly proposed acreage brings up questions of whether it will be environmentally safe and affordable. 

Major upgrades to the beaches on Oak and Ohio streets would be made, along with a man-made island between Grand and North avenues that would reportedly protect the lakefront against erosion.

Though the project has good intentions—fixing the hazardous curve while bringing in extra tourism—it would require pushing beaches into the lake and cushioning them with the 70 acres of new park land. Man-made structures could cause erosion and sand loss, according to an Aug. 31, 2016 Chicago Tribune article. 

Additionally, new entry and exit lanes will need to be built off the drive, which would run beneath a new underpass to clear traffic, according to a Feb. 9 DNAinfo article. The project would require the cooperation of multiple local, state and federal entities such as the Department of Transportation and the United States Army Corps of Engineers and take several years to construct. 

If the project is approved, its supporters need to be transparent with Chicagoans on the environmental impact on Lake Michigan. Last spring, Lake Michigan rose to a near-record level high and beaches shrunk due to erosion, according to a May 17, 2016 Chicago Tribune article. After a record low depth in 2013, the lake rose four feet in three years. Because these lake levels are unpredictable, officials need to ensure upkeep is consistent. 

A project such as this has been pitched before, albeit on a smaller scale. Loyola University proposed a $6 million lake fill project in 1987. The project included a 16-acre extension into Lake Michigan, which would be protected by a rock and concrete seawall, according to an Oct. 1, 1987 Tribune article. Similar to the North Lake Shore Drive Project, neighborhood associations and officials backed the Loyola proposal. However, a study made a strong case for significant damage to the environment if Loyola went through with the project. 

Such evidence makes it hard to support a project that does not seem environmentally sound. Also, the price tag could be used to solve more important problems affecting Chicagoans. These include CTA restoration for lines such as the Orange, Pink and Green and safer street construction in the South and West sides. 

Upholding the “Chicago Lakefront Design and Connection with its Northern Neighbor” public mandate—implemented in 1836 and promising to keep Chicago forever open, clear and free—is important and necessary. However, if this project is supposed to be beneficial for the city, Chicagoans should be informed of the environmental costs and financial resources being used and have the opportunity to vote on whether to proceed.