In news less well received by residents and local businesses than the Soviet-style copy here lets on, the City is going forward with removing all parking from one side of Clark Street from Montrose to Winnemac in favor of an extension of bike lanes.
Why Winnemac and not Foster or Bryn Mawr? Who knows!?! [Eds: We suspect it's likely because the change won't affect Andersonville and powerful businesses along the corridor. As a result, Alderwoman Manaa-Hoppenworth won't have to hear from constituents.]
But in Uptown through Winnemac? All good!
Readers will recall that the Clark Street Corridor planning process started back in 2021 when the City, sitting on more than $10 million in TIF funds from the Clark-Montrose TIF, decided that a formal study was necessary to determine best uses for the funds.
Various public meetings ensued, and Chicago's very loud biking advocates swamped the meetings and online to advocate for ... BIKE LANES! Surprise!
We heard some scathing things from readers about the plan and process, as well as complaints about the tenor of bike advocacy at meetings and in online voting, but we (and our readers) were pooh-poohed as dinosaurs who just didn't care about safety.
With this new announcement, we hear businesses and residents along the strip are not at all happy about the change and feel they will suffer as a result of the elimination of parking. This stretch is in the midst of a rebirth as a functioning commercial district, and losing parking will inevitably stifle growth and dissuade entrepreneurs.
Now of course the large chunk of money that was earmarked for the TIF is supposedly gone, disappeared into City coffers, but money for bike lanes must be there somewhere in the City's pockets. And the stretch affected includes the new Black Ensemble Theater development, which will also be looking for TIF soon... Happy St. Patrick's Day!
Studies indicate that increased walkability is a boon to business
ReplyDeleteAs an Uptown resident with three young children I welcome increased walkability and hope that the project is extended still further
Eager to see this project completed!
> In news less well received by residents and local businesses than the Soviet-style copy here lets on
ReplyDeleteYou posted this article on Facebook and the vast majority of commenters are happy about this change.
Can you substantiate the claim that this isn't a well received project? Perhaps with some quotes from the mystery residents/businesses?
There’s more than enough automobile infrastructure in this city. A more walkable, bikeable city is a welcome improvement
ReplyDeleteBusinesses and residents are being reengaged about the proposed changes. The new data is being presented from the Matt Martins offices.
ReplyDeleteI attended many of the meetings for this project over the last several years. They were attended primarily by residents in the immediate area (I saw many of my neighbors at each of them) and folks were overwhelmingly in favor of this change. To portray this as something that most residents are opposed to is simply out of touch.
ReplyDeleteWhy not spend this money to give it to landlords so people who Are working hard can have adorable housing? So many live paycheck to paycheck just to pay rent to have a place to live.
ReplyDeletethat's a tax break or affordable housing, not investment from CDOT
DeleteGreat news!
ReplyDeleteReally excited to have a more welcoming neighborhood. This is great news! Bring on my local neighbors who enjoy being our neighborhood rather than driving through it.
ReplyDeleteUptown resident here who is super happy with the project! I'm not sure why folks feel entitled to leave their personal property, cars, clogging up public spaces.
ReplyDeleteGo live in the suburbs if you want to drive and park a car!
ReplyDeleteIf I had to guess, they are only going to Winnemac because they want to do something better further north, like a woonerf or fully pedestrianizing Clark Street. Overall I'm really happy to see more progress towards improving safety on Clark Street. I was doored/almost killed on this section of Clark twice, and I know a lot of other people have similar experiences. I avoid pretty much all of Clark because it's simply too dangerous to ride.
ReplyDeleteThis was a foolish way to frame these safety improvements. CDOT does a good job explaining why they're doing this, and I am looking forward to it. My wife and I look forward to finally being able to bike on this section of Clark and look forward visiting these businesses as often as other areas with safer bike infrastructure.
ReplyDeleteNot to pile on but I (Sheridan Park resident) also support this change.
ReplyDeleteReading most of the comments here it is clear critical thinking is dead
ReplyDeleteAnd self-centered narcissism is alive and well. Putting dedicated bike lanes on major commercial arteries is stupid. It increases vehicular traffic and backups, which increases pollution in our neighborhoods. It is a safety hazard because emergency vehicles can't pass backed up traffic in the street narrowed by curbed bike lanes, putting people's lives and property at risk. Come on people! Think beyond your own selfish whims. Put the bike lanes on secondary streets like Greenview where they will actually be safer.
"It is a safety hazard because emergency vehicles can't pass backed up traffic in the street narrowed by curbed bike lanes, putting people's lives and property at risk." This person has a point. At 1:15 in this video, you can see the protect lanes on Clark south of Montrose causing a massive delay for an ambulance driver! Just kidding. ; )
Deletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fGQKDAAfNkY
Clark is not a "major commercial artery." You act as if this is a 4-lane road being reduced to 2 lanes to accommodate bikes. The "self-centered narcissism" can be directed toward those who drive everywhere in a city with some of the best public transit in the nation and a growing bike infrastructure to match.
DeleteI say this as someone who drives more often than I should. With Divvys every few blocks, changes like these give me more confidence to grab a bike without the fear of getting run over.
You know where this has been done to great success, in major cities more dense than our neighborhood? NYC, London, Paris
DeleteMore bikes actually by definition means less vehicles?? I don’t see how this basic math is confusing. I’m not critically thinking, I’m just thinking
DeleteUnfortunately, some are oblivious to the needs of those of us with severe health problems. I am unable to walk even a half block without having to stop and catch my breath. I only frequent businesses if I can park really close. I know where I won't be shopping/dining.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately they didn't do successive readings like they claimed...they did snapshots of certain days...had they run testing for a couple weeks straight they would've seen that the parking spots are at full capacity at night to support local businesses...like black Ensemble theatre, restaurants & bars up and down the street...when you take away that parking you take away revenue from the businesses that are working to keep the neighborhood unique...this post won't matter, cuz the city is going to do whatever it wants...but when certain local businesses start closing down that have been there for years, and no one knows why...this may be the final straw Unfortunately...but again if bikes are more important, then that's what the neighborhood wants, and this a minority voice, and that's what they should get...but hopefully they will get out to support local in their neighborhood and not keep going to Andersonville & Wrigley...when you have wonderful & diverse places out your back door...
ReplyDelete> Reading most of the comments here it is clear critical thinking is dead
ReplyDeleteAlright, lets examine your claims. First, your claim that putting dedicated bike lanes on major commercial arteries is stupid because it increases traffic and backups.
This study looked at the data, you can view it here: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4055703
This study used actual, real world traffic data in Chicago to model out an additional 25 miles of bicycle lanes. On most routes, including Clark, traffic either stayed the same or decreased. Here is the map of streets plotted out for you:
https://i.imgur.com/2IG9Ccf.png
As you can see an overwhelming majority of Clark Street had either a reduction in travel time, or travel time remained the same. Only in very small strips of Clark St near Old Town and closer to the Loop did travel times increase.
This is not to say that it did not increase traffic anywhere, at all. But the study found that the absolute WORST case scenario travel time downtown increased by 9.4%. That isn't an average, but the upper bound. In fact the paper points out "Notably, under most bike lane plans, the total system-wide driving time decreases compared to the status quo."
So overall, you're actually looking at a decrease in travel times on average and the absolute worst case scenario in the loop is an additional 9.4% in total travel time.
Next you claim "It is a safety hazard because emergency vehicles can't pass backed up traffic in the street narrowed by curbed bike lanes, putting people's lives and property at risk."
Here is a good study looking at response times on routes that have had lane reductions: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590198224001441
Again they used real world data from Cedar Rapids, Iowa. "In the final fixed effects model, there was insufficient evidence to conclude that lane conversion status (before vs after) had an impact on emergency response rates."
In fact, one of the routes actually had a significant reduction in travel times.
Personally, as someone who will be purchasing a home in the next few years. I would much rather see more bike lanes installed in whatever future neighborhood we move to rather than the preservation of traffic lanes.
This is great. I in fact hate driving and parking. Please create an infrastructure that encourages people to NOT drive and get around by public transit.
ReplyDeleteThe soviet style line is also just painful. Your propaganda angle is beyond transparent.