Despite NIMBY pushback to Wood PBL plan, LaSpata says the bikeway is moving forward
chi.streetsblog.org/2022/02/08/neighborhood-g...
chi.streetsblog.orgPosted Feb 9, 2022, 6:34 PM UTC
9380
chi.streetsblog.orgNIMBYS in this thread: "I want Chicago to be like Houston 🤬"
16
More protected bike lanes please.
14
It comes down to the next election. The NIMBYs will find someone to run against LaSpata, someone who might come out and say he/she will abolish the bike lane an make Wood about cars.
If locals vote and keep LaSpata in, then the NIMBYs lose, and will either back off or move out of the area.
A cool thing though is if LaSpata wins and the neighborhood backs up the path, then it could start getting other Wards to think about similar projects.
10†
If La Spata wins, yes — that would be a vote of confidence. Considering current sentiment, however, I don’t think that’s much of a threat.
4
Ok, I’ll ask: why does a residential street the dead ends NB @ Milwaukee need a mere mile of protected bike lane anyway? There seems to be no intra-city bicycle infrastructure plan or vision. All of the ward specific plans create a patchwork of usable lanes that reemphasize the notion that cycling is not a legitimate form of urban transportation. My general view of protected lanes as just being a trap of trash, potholes, and the occasional rideshare/delivery vehicle boxing you in, notwithstanding, this seems per formative and a waste of financial resources and energy.
3
Wood actually connects via Wicker Park Ave
2
The project received 67 votes.
LaSpata told CBS he’s planning to move forward with the Wood protected lane. “There’s a variety of interests you want to balance. What I would never want to do is to repeal a decision that was made by my constituents
Last night the Wood project was discussed at a virtual public meeting of the East Village Association, which represents the area bounded by Division, Damen, Chicago, and Milwaukee avenues. Once again, some residents argued that there had not been enough outreach to residents along Wood Street and that the 67 votes cast to support the initiative in the PB election were not sufficient to reflect the will of the ward. One attendee even claimed that LaSpata intentionally only advertised the election to cyclists, which is a particularly dubious notion in light of the fact that ‘L’ stops were canvassed.
A representative of the East Village Association said the group plans to petition the Chicago Department of Transportation to kill the Wood Street project. Attendee Erin Groble encouraged others to to get in touch with him by email to help with distributing flyers against the bike lane.
2†
Are there any dependable numbers on how many people cycle to work every day? Any studies done by season?
2†
The census (ACS) used to track it. 1.5 percent is a ballpark average for the city. 15 percent is about the highest you'd see, around Pilsen IIRC. The census just uses its same questions every year to keep things standard. I believe it asks for your primary means of transportation in the last 30 days. How people answer may vary on when they took the census, but an early responder to the census in March could cause some undercounting for the rest of the year. Divvy use tends to fall by half after the time changes, and to 1-10 percent of average on the worst days, but pops right up once the weather clears.
You've also got places like the Lakefront Trail that see 1200 cyclists an hour during rush, more than some streets see in a day.
That doesn't quite answer your question. But things improve significantly when it's better protected from traffic versus when it's not
3
The 1.5% figure is from the census?
1
ACS. Can't recall the year. On mobile
1
[deleted]
1
do Paulina next
1
This project is all bullshit. If you lived over here you'd know this stretch of Wood has many speedbumps and stop signs already. To claim that cyclists are in danger here is an outright lie and shameful.
-3
The speed bumps are all north of Milwaukee. This project is south of Milwaukee
3
Wood, south of Milwaukee has speed bumps. Been there for years.
-1
No, the pavement is just really bad. Check streetview. Quit gaslighting
1
Don't need to. I live on the block. Go gaslight yourself now. Marklar.
-1
They're just straight fucking up traffic all over the place. Logan Blvd is a cluster fuck by target now. Now Paulina will just be fucked more.
-4
Bikes rule cars drool, sorry folks thems the rules
-6†
La Spata fucked up more than he realizes. It’s not about the bike lanes or changing Wood Street. It’s about ignoring long-standing channels of communication and community involvement. He knew who he should reach out to, and he ignored them. There was an understanding on both sides that if something of this magnitude comes up, he’d consult with the community groups. He ignored that. The ends do not justify the means.
-6
The use of "NIMBY" over opposing a bike lane is a stretch.
-8†
NIMFY?
23
MILFY?
-1†
It’s not really a stretch if you understand what a NIMBY is.
14
And a fair bit biased for a headline
7
The opponents of Wood St say they didn't find out about it until the last minute. There's nothing stopping residents on Wolcott from saying the same, and before you know it, it's the Narragansett protected bike lane, even though Wood St is the one that got upgraded with bike markings seven years ago.
Meanwhile, drivers on Wood rarely follow state law and hardly ever pass with more than three feet of space (it's a narrow street, but they pass anyway). They behave in whatever way is convenient for them that instant and don't actually care about the issue more broadly. It's hypocritical, and that earns them the label NIMBY.
6†
Wood Street, from everything I’ve seen, is one of the better bike streets. Even John Greenfield said he didn’t see the need for this. Pick your battles — this isn’t a good one.
1†
Oh so they conform to a very specific and narrow version of the NIMBY idea. Got it.
-6†
No, it's perfectly in line with the NIMBY acronym of "Not In My Back Yard" vs. YIMBY which is "Yes In My Back Yard".
Basically NIMBY opposes everything that is considered as an "improvement" on local safety standards or anything that isn't car orientated.
YIMBY is pro-public transit, want's more mixed use zoning, against single family homes, wants more bike paths, and want's cars to be less prioritized in re/designs of streets.
The YIMBY stuff is in the city and the NIMBY stuff is out in the suburbs. Spread more YIMBY stuff tho.
-2†
[deleted]
-8†
I'm baffled as to how Greenfield's blog is allowed to be posted on here but CWB isn't.
0†
And if you’re against La Spata’s abuse of power, please sign this petition: https://www.ipetitions.com/petition/keepwood2way?fbclid=IwAR3ftdk7V7BZhIjSBrpUKDXPRGpGFjLzpIG-JteJoloS3pTMz9nXOsDdKqE
-9
The fact that the EVA didn't know about the PB process, which has been going on for three years in the 1st Ward, is an indictment of their leadership.
6
Incorrect
-2
no
1
I understand that streetsblog is an incredibly biased news source, but calling people nimbys in the headline is just in pour taste. They could have left that word out completely and the headline would have still worked just the same. Now it just makes them look like elitist d-bags. Especially since they never even use the word nimby within the actual article, so it was added just for shock value.
-19†
The “elitist d-bags” are the ones opposing the bike way.
If they don’t want to be called NIMBY’s they shouldn’t be NIMBY’s
16
To play devil's advocate, hypothetically, if someone were to propose that Wood St instead was expanded into a 4 lane roadway, would people that oppose it also be nimbys?
4†
No, car culture is a NIMBY attitude.
1†
So someone that is against infrastructure upgrades would not be a nimby, unless those upgrades don't benefit cars, then they are a nimby. Got it. Sounds pretty discriminatory and hypocritical to me.
5†
Streetsblog isn't the NY Times or PBS. They're an internet blog who has a point of view. While I hate shitty news sources I don't think every single website needs to be held to traditional journalistic standards. Blogs/companies/whatever can have their own opinions.
13
I understand that, and they can have their own opinions. And they shouldn't need to be held to traditional journalistic standards, but they should still be held to professional standards. If this blog used any other derogatory term to describe any other groups of people, it would be looked down upon.
Especially since it seems many people aren't necessarily opposed to the plan, they are just opposed to how it came to fruition. Being opposed to a public official going forward with major plans without proper discussions does not make one a nimby.
I'm all for this plan, but I would still be pissed if I had no say in it.
3†
Unfortunately Pretty much zero news is held to traditional journalistic standards these days.
1†
That's just like saying "I don't like Trains.com because it has too many Trains." And "NIMBYS" stands for "Not In My Back Yard" which is a completely appropriate name for them especially when opposing a bike lane.
1†
They aren't arguing in good faith, which I think is qualifies them as NIMBY. They want to rile up a bunch of people and call for a do-over because they feel aggrieved it happened on their street. Some even think it's a good idea, just not on their street, which is definitely NIMBY. The tactic is to delay, delay, delay.
For the ones complaining about the process: La Spata has already shown willingness to reform the PB voting. They claim that is their aim, but oh, by the way, they also want to cancel this project too. You don't see them calling for a revote on improved lighting under the Blue Line (73 votes).
So now to spend $325k you need a majority of community involvement? How can you even quantify that level?
This isn't that radical of a plan! Wood is an established and well-known N-S bike route. You'll still be able to access Wood and residential parking is preserved. I think many Chicagoans would love for a way to reduce non-local vehicle traffic on their blocks. Furthermore, the business owner in the CBS article saying it would negatively impact business provides no proof or examples of such happening elsewhere.
This is just anti-bike grumbling under the pretext of being disenfranchised.
Honestly, it’s not. EVA has never been anti-bike, but La Spata’s “ends justify the means” tactics are despicable. He knew exactly who to turn to for community involvement and he conveniently left them all out.
What's not in good faith?
There was a participatory budgeting vote that was very poorly publicized, as evidenced by the fact that only 200 people out of about 50,000 showed up to vote. You either needed to receive a flyer from him at a rail station when distributed at limited times in the day, or be a subscriber to his campaign emails.
There was zero input from the community groups representing East village and wicker Park and the affected residents in East village and on the block.
Essentially, a bunch of the aldermans supporters from Logan square (and a couple from further south) voted this in and the alderman is taking the position that is the will of the people.
If you want bike infrastructure, petition CDOT for citywide planning. Running a bike lane down Wood Street, without hard protection, for a very short distance, seems like a rather silly use of aldermanic menu money meant to do things like resurfacing streets, replacing trees, ETC. And I'm a cyclist in favor of proper infrastructure citywide.
What's not in good faith? Well, most of your points...
You're making the turnout denominator larger than it is in actuality. 11,961 voted in 2019 in the 1st Ward alderman election and low local government participation is well documented.
These hyper-local community groups, who are supposed to know what's going on in their ward, had no idea about PB? Did they know and fail to notify their members? This process isn't exactly new.
I'm sorry, I didn't see where there was a map of the voters who voted for each project and because they might be in a different part of the Ward, their vote should count for less? Must we now resort to block-by-block PB?
The menu item specifically refers to it as a protected bike lane.
Unfortunately, as it stands, we're at the mercy of our ward map and the alderman. I too wish CDOT would do what is proper and coherent vs. what is convenient, but faux-outraged people like these and the alderman that do their bidding prevent that.
Using municipal election turnout instead of eligible voters to gauge what percentage of people turned out for a vote is bad faith, no?
Fact is the eligible population for la spatas participatory budgeting farce was over 50,000. Only 200 voted. And of those 200, this project only garnered 67 votes.
Even if we use 11,961 as the denominator, 200/11,961 it's an extremely piss poor turnout and evidence of an undemocratic process.
11,961/50,000 is a weak turnout
200/11,961 is abysmal.
And in the wards where the alderman chooses not to do PB, it's zero.
From accounts, this appears that this is the third time La Spata has done PB. These people have had no issue with the process, through ignorance or otherwise, so long as the PB funds were going to repaving streets and fixing alleys (not that these things are unworthy). It was only after the money was being spent on a bike lane on *gasp* their street that they suddenly care about the process. Hence, bad faith.
This is my ward, and my first thought on reading about this was: I was supposed to be voting on something?
Shame on you for not magically knowing he held a vote.
If you donate some money to his campaign he'll put you on the mailing list so you'll know next time
The ward newsletter is free.
PB Chicago also tweets reminders if you want to get involved next time!
https://mobile.twitter.com/pb_chicago?lang=en