Page 83 of 173

The first raised crosswalk I’ve seen in Illinois

March 17, 2012 / / 0 Comments

The raised crosswalk, a view looking northeast, from the sidewalk. 

Forest Park was a client of mine in 2012 via my work for Active Transportation Alliance; they’re a technical consultant for cities that had grants from the Communities Putting Prevention to Work program. I visited the village with one of their staffers to identify great locations for bike racks (that also included advice on their existing rack inventory, and suggestions for exactly which models to buy).

We would drive around town and then stop and walk a lot. One place where we did a lot of walking was in their downtown, on Madison Street (the same Madison Street as in Chicago). I was pleasantly surprised that their signage reflected the “stop for pedestrians in crosswalk” law, replacing the now-irrelevant “yield for pedestrians in crosswalk” signs. And to top it off, they had talking and lighted signals at some of the crosswalks. I do not support any widespread installation of these: I think they help move our culture in a direction that perpetuates the low respect we have for pedestrians. I believe there are other ways to enforce driver compliance that do not require this kind of equipment.

Forest Park has installed one of those ways: it’s a raised crosswalk (also known as a speed table). It looks like a speed hump, but is much wider, has a flat top, and carries a marked crosswalk (see my article on Grid Chicago “What is an unmarked crosswalk?“). It causes drivers to slow down and has an added – subjective – benefit of intimating that the driver is entering a “protected space”, one for people on foot and that it should be respected. They bring the roadway up to the pedestrian’s level instead of dipping the sidewalk down to the driver’s level.

I don’t know of one in Chicago, but three guys are working to get several installed in a Logan Square traffic circle redesign.

Note: If you are interested in knowing exactly which models of bike racks to buy, learn more at Simple Bike Parking, or contact me directly. I may charge a fee.

The raised crosswalk as seen from a car moving westbound. 

No more drive throughs, please

March 12, 2012 / / 0 Comments

People drive their cars in and out of the parking lot for Micro Center, Joann Fabrics, and other stores in this strip mall on Elston Avenue. This design is almost inherently unfriendly to bicycle and walking transportation. But it doesn’t have to be. 

One reason that makes dense, urban areas pleasant and pleasurable is their walkability, variations in land uses, and architectural designs. When you walk down Belmont Street at Sheffield and encounter a new business or restaurant every 25 feet, you’re interested. Interested and curious in what others are doing, what new food you can eat, or what you will experience.

Photo of Belmont Street shopping and graffiti by Oscar Arriola. 

The opposite of this is Elston Avenue, between Ashland and Western Avenues. This stretch is marked by curb cuts, driveways, and seas of parking. Add in the lack of a bus route or nearby ‘L’ station, and you’ve got an environment that’s downright hostile to users of sustainable transportation modes.

I am still doing research for my article on the “pedestrian street” designation. In my research, I’ve learned a lot about the Zoning Board of Appeals, Special Use Permits, and drive throughs. I still haven’t been able to locate studies or reports about the effects drive throughs have on traffic or neighborhoods.

Just in the past 5 days, I’ve found out about the following news:

  1. The McDonald’s at Western Avenue and Milwaukee Avenue (1951 N Western Avenue) is seeking a special use permit. For what, I don’t know. It could just be a rumor. This is the same McDonald’s whose drive through someone so desperately needed to access and almost hit me with their SUV (see image below).
  2. Nodarse Family, LLC, is seeking a special use permit at 1646-1663 N Western Avenue for “the establishment of a one-lane drive-thru facility to serve a proposed 1-story restaurant”.

When I look at Street View for the 1646-1663 N Western location I see several homes and an empty lot with a car parked in it. The address seems to be a mistake, as 1663 is across the street. And even though this is a residential area, it’s zoned B3-2*.

In Mayor Emanuel’s “interest” (more like a selective, here not there, interest) for transparency, I’d like to see information that’s easier to find and process. For news from Zoning Board of Appeals, a blog-like website that lists all permits being considered and permits recently issued would be very helpful. I could subscribe via RSS and get notified of special use applications.

What’s a special use permit?

A special use permit is needed when the developer doesn’t have the right to build something that requires a special use permit. Like establishments for day laborers. Or drive throughs. Or businesses that sell liquor. Or a pawn shop. Speaking of pawn shops, Nodarse Family, LLC, owns the property 2826 N Milwaukee, for which the owner is seeking a special use permit to open one. This is in the 35th Ward, the same ward whose Alderman seems to have it out to build as much parking as can be built. You can see these applications on the ZBA’s agendas.

I’m not a fan of drive throughs.

B3-2: “Community shopping – destination oriented, no limit on size of commercial establishment. Allows dwelling units above ground floor.”

Google Maps is annoying sometimes

March 11, 2012 / / 0 Comments

I was looking up traffic counts on the Chicago Traffic Tracker website and saw that the Halsted Street bridge over the Chicago River just north of Chicago Avenue is missing. It’s shown as a gray line with the text “Halsted Street (planned)”.

This is not the most accurate message. The west side sidewalk is still open to foot and bicycle transportation, as I pointed out in my Grid Chicago article, The Halsted Passage. I wonder how it got in there.

I’ll report this as a problem, but I’m wary of it actually being updated to show that people on foot can still cross the river here. I’ve used Google Maps’s Map Maker tool once, and I didn’t like the experience. My correctly-made adjustment of a street was questioned and I was asked to revert my change. I refused and eventually my change was approved… because it was correct. I guess that someone used Map Maker to (incorrectly) modify the street at this part. This street segment in Map Maker should be designated something close to a “pedestrian walkway” instead of a bridge for automobile, bus, and bicycle traffic.

The Google Maps walking directions for walking from Division Street to Chicago Avenue don’t show the option of using the sidewalk, which is entirely possible (I did it again this week).

Why food and drinks cost more downtown

February 27, 2012 / / 0 Comments

The Metropolitan Pier and Exposition Authority is a quasi-governmental body created by the Illinois legislature, similarly to how it created the Chicago Transit Authority. The authority is also known as McPier. McPier is able to add 1% sales tax to the sale of food and drinks in three areas in Chicago, apparently to support the operations of Navy Pier (a place I avoid) and McCormick Place. I’m writing this post because of an article I read on Crain’s Chicago Business about Chicago having the highest restaurant tax rate that failed to describe the area in question.

The main area is downtown, although the boundaries extend far beyond downtown. I first came encountered the tax as a manager of the Jamba Juice at 1322 S Halsted Street (at Maxwell Street) in the University Village development on UIC’s south campus. The other two areas encompass Midway (MDW) and O’Hare airports (ORD). I haven’t mapped them to see exactly how much land beyond the airports the areas encompass.

The downtown area is described in 70 ILCS 210, section 13, as follows:

(b) (3) that portion of the City of Chicago located within the following area: Beginning at the point 150 feet west of the intersection of the west line of North Ashland Avenue and the north line of West Diversey Avenue, then north 150 feet, then east along a line 150 feet north of the north line of West Diversey Avenue extended to the shoreline of Lake Michigan, then following the shoreline of Lake Michigan (including Navy Pier and all other improvements fixed to land, docks, or piers) to the point where the shoreline of Lake Michigan and the Adlai E. Stevenson Expressway extended east to that shoreline intersect, then west along the Adlai E. Stevenson Expressway to a point 150 feet west of the west line of South Ashland Avenue, then north along a line 150 feet west of the west line of South and North Ashland Avenue to the point of beginning.

View Metropolitan Pier and Exposition Authority boundaries in a larger map. I created this map by following the directions in the block quoted text above. Do not use this map to determine if your business is required to collect and remit the McPier tax. It’s not an accurate map: I didn’t measure 150 feet from any street line – I guessed.

Also interesting: all drinks (alcoholic and sodas) and food sold on boats that arrive at or depart Lake Michigan shores within the area described above are subject to the tax. And more interesting is that sales at stores whose principal income is from drinks (alcoholic and sodas) and food for off-site but immediate consumption are also subject to the tax. You can supply the Illinois Department of Revenue with your sales tax information.

I like what Bonnie McGrath said in the Chicago Journal last year:

Is this fair? Why should we South Loopers–not to mention the other neighborhoods near downtown–have to pay extra for restaurant food? What exactly are we getting that other Chicago residents don’t get that we have to pay an extra tax?

I’d also like to know why McPier needs additional revenue to supplement the millions (maybe billions?) it revenue it receives from vendor fees, events, rents, and other sources in the operation of Navy Pier and McCormick Place.

McPier also gets a cut of hotel room bookings.

Dealing with the four-wheeled foe

February 23, 2012 / / 0 Comments

My comment on the Streetfilms post. 

First, Streetfilms’s Clarence Eckerson posts a video showing Mazda’s support for the movie “Lorax”, which is based on the Dr. Seuss book about destroying the environment.

Then, I commented on Bikes Belong’s partnership with Volkswagen that was announced almost a month ago but I had just found the news yesterday.

It’s about as crappy as Bikes Belong partnering with Volkswagen.
In January 2012 they announced a “two-year partnership to help develop biking-friendly communities, foster healthy lifestyles and create a cleaner environment.”
I thought Volkswagen’s job was to market its cars, but it seems now it will market its goodwill which must have a calculable impact on increased car sales.

Bike Portland and road.cc both wrote about it. One commenter, Hart Noecker, wrote on Bike Portland:

Agreed. They recognize their oncoming irrelevance and are trying to re-image their brand while still promoting unsustainable automobiles that incentivize McStripmall sprawl.

And “9watts” replied:

As someone who has long felt that VW offered some of the most fuel efficient cars available, and was therefore to be lauded, patronized, etc. I’m inclined to agree with Hart. VW is really good at selling cars, and their commitment to fuel economy (which is a far cry from what we need now: a phaseout of car-dom, which isn’t going to come from the car industry anymore than a phaseout of coal consumption is going to come from the electric utilities) is only skin deep.

Crumbs for bikes, and a slick PR move that might even help them sell more cars. Never underestimate the middle class’s eagerness to swallow feel-good nostrums.

Today it seems the pact is getting attention again, brought to the forefront by the Mazda + Lorax (Universal films) deal – at least among a few people I follow on Twitter. Hopefully for its inanity. Car manufacturers, the bull in the china shop as Mikael of Copenhagenize talks about it, have been shutting down bicycles as a mode of transportation for decades. They’ve even thrown support behind making jaywalking criminal.

The Volkswagen deal with Bikes Belong is nothing more than buying goodwill. If there was a store for companies looking to improve their environmentally friendly image, partnerships with cycling advocacy organizations would be in aisle one.

As they are a company interested in making money by selling cars, I’d like someone to help me understand if there are any other reasons they should promote cycling (which they admit reduces congestion and lowers a traveler’s impact on the environment). Maybe they want to start selling bikes?

Car culture is carnage culture. The way out is a balanced transportation system that focuses the highest investments into sustainable and efficient modes, and one that educates system users on the costs and benefits of each mode, for every trip. Photo by ATOMIC Hot Links.