How can we increase non-car infrastructure on the NW side? Any Ideas? I mean this 'Safe Streets' is an initiative in Chicago. I don't want my neighborhood left behind.
Posted Jul 29, 2014, 5:10 PM UTC
425
What's a short list of "non-car infrastructure"?
5
Specifically, walking and cycling.
3
Better sidewalk space and more crosswalks are always great but I have to agree with u/Glennus626 on some issues. 99% of people on bikes just roll through intersections like there is no one else around them. We cater to them but in reality the pollution and congestion issues are not going to change. With regards to the crosswalks that are clearly marked with white lines and a sign saying you must stop for someone in a crosswalk, good luck not dying trying to cross Milwaukee Ave at Cuyler at any given time.. I have been clipped a couple times there.
3
I almost got hit twice today while biking. One decided to turn right through a red without looking up and the other decided to stop at a red light and then back up directly at me to park. Neither signaled. But fuck it, drivers don't break laws. It was my fault for existing . People get so bitchy about bikers breaking laws but for every deserted area stop sign I roll through I see 15 cars blow through busy ones. But that's ok
3
I think another thing is more signs pointing out not to bike on sidewalks.
2
I think one has to understand (as I now do) that the NW side is a divided community. You have some who want to make the area more like the city with bike paths and denser living structures.
Then you have others who want the area more suburban in style. Thus they fight against bike paths and apartment buildings.
I don't see either side as wrong or right (although some are rather rude/nasty). I'd honestly write off trying to fix up the areas that do not want to be fixed. Maybe concentrate on 6 corners for bike paths and pedestrian-only zones, but let Gladstone Park be its own and just fix their streets.
2
I mean, there are laws in the city, and if the 'suburban' leaning city dwellers don't like it, then perhaps they need to live where their attitudes match the laws - and not drag citizens back to earlier times.
I mean the city is the city. Neighborhoods are nice and all, but as far as safety/enforement of laws, that should not be governed by neighborhood. Being in the city means that you take the good with the bad. i.e. access to trains, population density, pedestrian rights, cycling space, planes overhead, traffic etc... . Its quite inconvenient.
But again, that's where we live. The fact that non-city attitudes and zoning thoughts get to drive anything in the city is unfortunate.
One huge point I keep going back to is that if a car blows through a stopsign and hits something, that "thing" will be worse for the wear, and the driver will most likely walk away from that crash. However.... If a bike blows through a stopsign and hits something, the cyclist does not have that steel cage around them, and may not walk away.
On a less serious note, Another option might be to let Gladstone Park secede / kick them out into their own suburb....
2
I hear you, and I am in support of bike lanes in Milwaukee.
Unfortunately, the mayor himself hasn't really pushed an effort to put them there, as his concentration is mainly on the central parts of the city. I've been told that he's left the bike lane issue in the 45th to our own devices...and while many would want paths, many more actual residents of that area simply do not want them.
I think what would change is when new blood moves into the area, and thus the NIMBYs wake up one day finding themselves in a small crowd surrounded by folks who say "put it in my back yard!"
For now, I say we concentrate the non-car thinking south of Foster.
1
Some sidewalk space has been lost as roads are widened. I would like to see developers, especially at corners, be require to leave more space for pedestrians. The SW corner of Montrose and Central is so tiny and has lots of pedestrian activity!
Another way to encourage more walking is to develop all of the little commercial areas so that they take care of frequent needs. So dry cleaner, drug store, coffee shop, small grocery etc. People can go further out for a new TV or car, etc.
2
You bring up an excellent point. Look at all of the vacant store fronts we've got on streets like Irving Park, between say Central and Narragansett, or even further south like Belmont ave., all up and down.
Some of that may be because it was a very specific ethnic group (mostly polish) for the longest time, and they're pulling up roots and heading to the northwest, southwest and west suburbs, but there's next to no foot traffic to support anything anymore. I've seen people try to make a go of having a store or food joint on both streets, and it's almost always a flop. You've got the constant problem of parking (although this far west it's more of an issue of people not wanting to pay a parking meter, and who can blame them at these prices?), and the sidewalks are narrow and sometimes unfixed.
2
I think they should just have two lane side walks. one for pedestrians and one for bikes, but that is too easy.
why would you want to put a bike in the street with motorized vehicles.
even if a bike hits a pedestrian and even thou death is possible, it is lower than a car hitting a bike.
2
i'll probably get downvoted, although this isn't r/Chicago directly, but I avoid areas of the city that are big on going out of their way to make things fancy for bicyclists.
Now, Let me qualify my statement: everyone who observes any bicyclists with any regularity in this city has to admit that they're not a safe or law abiding bunch. People seem to forget that when you ride a bicycle, you have to follow the rules of the road as though you were an automobile.
What's that? red light? No problem, let me fly up on the sidewalk and cross the street at the crosswalk. What's that? It's 5am and the sun's not quite up yet? let me just ride the wrong way down the street. Don't even think of complaining if I nearly take your door off, after all, I own the road! Hand signals when I'm turning at an intersection? I'm too busy pretending to be Lance Armstrong!
I'm all for pedestrian improvements, and I think the city just taking the time to fix cracked sidewalks would be a big help.
Yes, a lot of bicyclists suck, but I think that's a bad reason for not building the infrastructure.
There's no licensing requirements, even though we have to share a road with them. I've never seen one ticketed, despite erratic, terrible behavior. Building infrastructure aimed at a group of people who are not really held accountable for dangerous behavior isn't really sound policy.
Hell, the city could make them take a course and pay a licensing fee, since they're always claiming to be hard up for cash. Where does anyone make money off of bicyclists in the city's economy to justify the millions it'd cost for new lanes, worse traffic and more accidents every year?
My frustration is that (among other things), this conversation becomes a debate between cars and anyone else. We all get offended that the 'other guy' is not seeing us as responsible, blah blah blah. I am looking for safer streets.
Lets start using any of the cross walks across Milwaukee (between I/P and Montrose) or god forbid using a cross walk across Cicero. -- Have you ever tried to use any of them and see if any cars cede the right of way? Good luck with that.
You have a huge straw-man here Glennus626. There are stupid people all around... What does it matter if they are driving or on a bike? In my experience, Your example of irresponsible cyclists is also appropriate to apply to motorists... -- Oh you're making a left? I will squeeze into the parking lane and speed up, god forbid there is anyone walking on the street that I can't see, but I get to the stop light 'first'.
Bottom line -- Our streets are not safe, due to inattentive people, and bad infrastructure.
Sure, I will grant you all of that. There are certainly a ton of terrible drivers. I guess at the end of the day it's a money issue for me above all the rest. Like I said, bicyclists don't pay a licensing fee (or go through a class that might reinforce safety at a beginner level and beyond), yet we're talking about spending a lot of dough to redo the streets, mess up parking lanes, add to the overall traffic, etc.
I'd like to see some unbiased study that shows bicycle lanes actually add to overall safety for bicyclists since, as you mentioned, motorists are going to disregard them anyway in many situations.
Do the taxes bikers pay just get sent to space?
no, but you could make certain assumptions without looking like a fool, i.e. most bikers are probably renters, and thus pay fewer taxes associated with property and living in this fair city of ours (now, i'm talking about the die hard bicyclists, not the weekend rider who takes his kid to the park). The die hard bicyclists, for the main part, probably don't own a car and thus don't pay for registration, stickers, parking meters, etc etc etc.