4 ms·
It frustrates me how much this is creeping into local politics, and how counterproductive it is. Just last night I attended a public meeting regarding a major
by haswell 2y ago
It frustrates me how much this is creeping into local politics, and how counterproductive it is.
Just last night I attended a public meeting regarding a major infrastructure project to improve Lake Shore Drive in Chicago. The project was billed as “redefine the drive”, but over a 10 year period of planning and studies, the near-final proposal was whittled down to a series of incremental improvements to some of the major pain points along LSD. Actually a lot of good stuff.
Transit and anti-car activists in the city were understandably upset as each proposal that actually prioritized transit (e.g. adding dedicated bus lanes) were eliminated the further the project went. Why? For a list of reasons far too long to dive into here, but chief among them there are major practical issues because of the history of that corridor and the sheer impact of upending one of the most traveled roads in a large city. They have to please the Illinois DOT, Chicago DOT, Chicago Parks, various other departments, meet specific requirements to qualify for federal funding (without this, the project dies), etc. Bottom line: as much as I want LSD transformed into a transit corridor, I understand why this may never happen, and almost certainly won’t happen in one fell swoop.
But a subset (not all) of the activists were just there to shit on everything. I was in one group conversation where a woman kept telling one of the planners how terrible this was and how mad she was, but when pressed for specifics she couldn’t articulate why. This kind of activism is a pure distraction. It closes the minds of people making decisions and makes it harder to have substantive debates about the issue.
To be clear, I have major issues with how the project has unfolded and shared those concerns with project leadership. It felt like a good conversation and they thanked me for having a perspective I could articulate. I don’t have much optimism that the conversation will change this project, but I now have rapport with some of the city/state leaders.
With very few exceptions, going in screaming undermines whatever it is you’re supporting. Dialogue is all we have available to change people’s minds, and true change comes from shifting collective consciousness, not by screaming the loudest. This is not to say there’s no place for anger. Anger is a signal/fuel that drives us to action. But operating from that place of anger by definition puts you at a disadvantage. Rational conversations do not happen when rage is involved.
- hammock 2y ago> I want LSD transformed into a transit corridor How is this not already true? There are scores of Lake Shore Express buses every day on routes like the 134, 135, 136, 143, 146 and 147. The Lakefront Trail has a well-maintained, grade-separated bike path that runs the entire length, alongside a running path the same (and at place the bikes and runners are also grade-separated). LSD is in need of many improvements, especially car-related ones, but to claim that it is not a transit corridor strikes me as disingenuous. It is more a "transit corridor" than perhaps anywhere else in the city
- haswell 2y ago> There are scores of Lake Shore Express buses every day on routes like the 134, 135, 136, 143, 146 and 147. Yes, and during busy periods, it’s often impossible to get a bus because they’re stuck on the drive, and when you do get a bus, you sit with the rest of the congestion. Watching your incoming bus disappear from the bus tracker is a regular occurrence, and people regularly plan for 30-60 minute delays because it’s impossible to know if today is a 20 or a 60 minute trip. This is a significantly worse transit experience than areas of the city served by the L or even other inland bus routes. Most of the early proposals for the project specifically focused on dedicated bus lanes with a goal to encourage more bus use by ensuring people can actually get buses and those buses can actually get from point A to B. The proposal they’re moving forward with makes incremental improvements but falls far short of the original goals and what many Chicagoans and their representatives have been pushing for. > The Lakefront Trail has a well-maintained… Yes, I ride it daily. There are numerous danger zones where accidents regularly occur due to mixed bike, pedestrian and vehicle traffic. In just the past two weeks, I’ve encountered three cars on the bike trail, and this happens regularly. Improving these zones is one of the major wins in the proposal. There are also major stretches that are just on the other side of a single guard rail, and riding those stretches involves breathing massive amounts of exhaust. Some of the improvements incrementally improve this, but there had been hopes that they’d reroute the trail in those area to improve safety. But there just isn’t enough space in many cases. > but to claim that it is not a transit corridor strikes me as disingenuous Maybe you misunderstood the comment? The project started with a goal of expanding public transit and improving safety for pedestrians and cyclists. Right now, LSD is a highway meant for cars that some buses run on. I live by the red line so I can get north/south easily. The same cannot be said for people living right on the lake. This is a once in 100 years type of project, and was seen as an opportunity to revamp public transit along the lake. This is why they spent 10 years trying to figure out how to put bus lanes in, and it’s not because it’s currently a good option for buses. It’s also why people got really upset about the direction it’s going, and thus my original comment. > It is more a "transit corridor" than perhaps anywhere else in the city Do you live here and use public transit on LSD regularly? Because this is just demonstrably not true. Yes, there are some bus routes that use the drive. The effectiveness of those routes varies wildly, which is one of the driving reasons behind the project.