Page 83 of 171

Meeting readers

January 19, 2012 / / 0 Comments

I was at the Streets for Cycling Plan 2020 meeting last night in the Garfield Park Conservatory. I was walking behind someone towards the meeting room and he turned to me and said, “Are you Grid Chicago?” (I realize he may be reading this.)

I said, “Yes,” and he immediately said “I read it every day. Thank you.”

I thanked him for reading. I like it when people tell me they read that blog and they appreciate what John Greenfield and I are writing. It definitely lets you know that (in addition to the comments that people leave) that the work we’re doing is important.

Anyway, I never know what to say to people who let me know they read Grid Chicago. I used to ask what their favorite article is and no one seemed to know how to respond so I stopped asking. To this reader, I asked, “Do you comment?” Also a lame question.

Sorry!

This photo of a bus with double articulation has nothing to do with this post. I didn’t have a relevant photo ready to go. 

Apparently Chicago needs NATO/G8 conferences to solidify itself as a world class city

January 19, 2012 / / 0 Comments

Photos of people participating in Occupy Chicago, back in October 2011. Photo by Ryan Williams. 

It wasn’t a diverse economy, a tech startup community, several well-known universities downtown, the world’s best collection of architecture, or any of that other crap that we need for others to pay attention to us. Where am I coming from?

From the Beachwood Reporter’s Steve Rhodes:

“Almost everyone agrees that having these two summits in our city is a great opportunity to solidify our rightful place as a world city,” Ald. Joe Moreno wrote on Huffington Post explaining his votes in favor of the new ordinances.

I’m not sure which part of that declaration is worse: “Almost everyone,” “great opportunity,” or “solidify our rightful place as a world city.”

It’s okay to say no to ordinances. Not every ordinance needs to pass, even with “concessions” after some “great open-mindedness” from Mayor Emanuel. Then the City Council tried to hide from the public:

“They wouldn’t let Occupiers into the council chambers. First they claimed it was a capacity. So I went up to the mezzanine and photographed empty seats and came back down to the 2nd floor. When I showed them the evidence they were lying, the cops reconvened then announced that the mayor simply refused us inside.”

This city is good enough without these two conferences. Ones that no one asked for.

My commentary on these kinds of issues is supremely bad, and I’m very mad at this city council for its endless string of rubber stamping. I didn’t start paying attention until the parking meter lease deal. 

The remap process is a sham

January 17, 2012 / / 0 Comments

Photo of the January 11, 2012, hearing at DePaul Student Center by Bob Segal. 

I’m having a terrible time understanding how the Chicago redistricting is supposed to work, and how it should work, but I’m having an easy time understanding what is happening: citizens are having no part in the process.

Though most city hall press coverage this week has focused on the mayor’s attempt to restrict the right to protest, alderman will also vote to remake Chicago’s political landscape this Thursday. The specific dimensions of the newly remapped wards, however, remain unknown to the public.

In one of the worst public planning processes I’ve ever seen, the City Council has engaged in a nefarious cover up of a process that slices and dices neighborhoods into self-serving political and racially-based boundaries.

I’ve gathered information and my thoughts into my wiki.

Others’ thoughts

Citizens of the 36th Ward For A Fair Ward Map

What is Conversation Cycling?

January 17, 2012 / / 0 Comments

Mikael Colville-Anderson posted a link to this photo set called Conversation Cycling (his photo above). The concept of Conversation Cycling is simple:

Build a bikeway so two people can cycle side-by-side to have a pleasant chat. 

I want this for Chicago. When you ride with friends, how would you prefer to ride: yelling ahead in our narrow bike lanes or conversing to the side? This is sometimes possible on the Lakefront Trail, but not always: the Lakefront Trail’s maximum width is the same as the standard with for cycle tracks in Europe!

Bike lanes in the United States, when they’re available and not being parked in, are not even wide enough for one person to ride without danger of being doored. It’s not surprising this is the case. In addition to how we prioritize the movement of automobiles and the placement of parking before pedaling, the national minimum width for a bike lane is 4 feet (without gutter), or 5 feet when next to parked cars or with a gutter.

I gathered some hard evidence: My handlebars are 28 inches wide. The door of my roommate’s car is 32 inches wide. 28+32 = 60 inches, or 5 feet. And that’s without a buffer. Essentially, bike lanes as we’ve built them are not compatible with the rest of the street.

Two Department of Revenue workers cycle side by side, meeting the edges of the bike lane, on Armitage Avenue in Lincoln Park. Photo by Mike Travis. 

Door zone bike lanes are not unique to any American city. Illustration by Gary Kavanagh. 

A group cycles on Damen Avenue in and out of the bike lane. Photo by Eric Rogers. 

Crashes by bike or by foot at different intersections

January 16, 2012 / / 0 Comments

While working on a private web application that I call Chicago Crash Browser, I added some code to show the share of pedestrian and pedalcyclist crashes. The site offers users (sorry I don’t have a web server that can make it public) a list of the “Top 10” intersections in terms of bike crash frequency (that’s bike+auto crash). You can click on the intersection and a list will populate showing all the pedestrian and pedalcyclist crashes there, sorted by date. At the bottom of the list is a simple sentence that tells what percentage pedestrian and pedalcyclists made up at that intersection.

I’m still developing ideas on how this information may be useful, and what it’s saying about the intersection or the people using it.

Let me tell you about a few:

Milwaukee Avenue and Ogden Avenue

I mentioned in my article Initial intersection crash analysis for Milwaukee Avenue that this intersection is the most bike crash-frequent.

23 crashes within 150 feet of the center, 2005-2010

82.61% bike crashes **

17.39% ped crashes.

Ashland Avenue and Division Street

28 crashes within 150 feet of the center, 2005-2010

46.43% bike crashes

53.57% ped crashes **

Milwaukee, North and Damen Avenues

46 crashes within 150 feet of the center, 2005-2010

39.13% bike crashes

60.87% ped crashes **

Halsted Street, Lincoln and Fullerton Avenues

38 crashes within 150 feet of the center, 2005-2010

42.11% bike crashes

57.89% ped crashes **

Montrose Avenue and Marine Drive (Lake Shore Drive ramps)

11 crashes within 150 feet of the center, 2005-2010

90.91% bike crashes **

9.09% ped crashes

Why do you think some intersections have more of one kind of crash than the other?

People walking at Milwaukee-North-Damen.

The Chicago Crash Browser can be made public if I have a host that offers the PostgreSQL database. Do you have one to offer?