urbanpln, are those reports available online? I ask because it looks to me like pockets of the Green Line corridor are actually already transitioning in terms of income and race. The Census tract at the heart of North Kenwood went from 1% to 7% white over the last decade; most tracts in Greater Bronzeville saw their white populations double, triple, or quadruple, albeit from very low baselines; and Woodlawn north of 63rd and east of Cottage Grove looks to be about 20% white now ("now" being 2010), roughly double a decade ago; even south of 63rd and east of Cottage Grove, the white population increased three- and four-fold, albeit, again, from much lower baselines. There's also serious white-ification happening in the northern half of East Garfield Park, where places I would have guessed would be 98% black, at least, actually have white populations of 4-7%.

Now, the racial politics of all this are obviously complicated, and gentrification doesn't *require* white folks, of course, but given the consequences of segregation, an influx of white people does *suggest* that there will also be an influx of investment. And given that gentrification the North, near South and near West sides is continuing even in the midst of a still-not-great economy, why wouldn't those other trends also hold up?

For the record, I am an African American. The study is listed on their web site but when you type in the link it fails. You can try to contact them for a copy or let me know if you don't have any luck and we can work it out.

Those numbers of demographic change are really hard to figure out. While there has been increases in racial change, the absolute numbers are not that much and over the past 5 years some of that new population has moved out. I can't prove that fact yet but, talk to any alderman in those communities and they will tell you that some of those new residents left. They left because the amenities never came and the crime got worse.

There were also quite a few foreclosures in these areas. If you drive around Douglas, North Kenwood, Oakland, Grand Boulevard and Woodlawn you will see plenty of projects that stopped before completion. I also know a ton of developers that lost everything and the land was taken by the bank. Many of the developers who survived have told me that it will be a long time before demand to live in these areas come back.

The UI Labs proposal will very likely go to Michael Reese. Chances are that U of I will prefer a suburban campus-type environment, and the only places you can get enough land together for that kind of thing are on the South or West Sides.

I'm personally hoping for something more like Mission Bay in SF, which is urban and has a street grid but with low-mid rise buildings and lots of public space.

Should this type of development proceed on the South Side, this will have implications for transit as well, possibly kickstarting one of the many proposals we've seen over the years (Gray Line, Gold Line, Cottage Grove streetcar, Lakeshore Drive busway, etc).

The Big Green Limousine ... I was just thinking about that the other day.

While I'm not confident that any of those particular proposals will ever see the light of day I think the UI Labs on the Reese site combined with the large investments being made by the city in HP and at McCormick could provide some leverage. Rahm may be able to twist Metra's arm into providing a rapid transit solution at least as far as HP.

Considering it is operated by the same company that runs Citi Bike here in NYC, I have high hopes that the explosion of use and popularity bike share has had here will transfer well to Divvy. The one time I used Citi Bike it was a great experience...other than poor coverage in North Brooklyn.

I said possibly. :haha:

King would be a good place to set up BRT, too. There's lots of different options.

I wasn't talking about Divvy because I had a uniquely horrible experience getting my account working with them. I use the phrase "uniquely" because it actually took their Director of Marketing getting involved to sort things out, which I'm fairly certain is not standard operating procedure for them.

I originally signed up on June 2nd. I didn't get a working key from them until yesterday, and then only after getting two other keys and lots of run-around from their phone staff.

But, all that aside, I've now used it several times and plan to use it to commute to work (there's a station across the street from my home and one a block from my office) most of the time. The more stations they add, the better it will be.

They will also probably iron out all the one-off kinks and bugs like the one you experienced over the remainder of this year and will probably have it running like a well oiled machine within a couple of months.

Some quick-and-dirty phone photos of the Divvy station on Wood, near Milwaukee:

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-3...702_105230.jpg

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-O...702_105251.jpg

And here we have some of the map graphics they’re using for Divvy—while I like the colors, I think this map’s a good example of why you don’t see more black backgrounds that often on maps intended for public navigation. While I don’t have trouble seeing or identifying anything, I feel that like this is a graphic that looked great on the screen and (with the exception of that Divvy blue) doesn’t quite pop in print:

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-S...702_105320.jpg


L'esprit de l'escalier edit: I should also note that, from what little I’ve seen of Divvy-riders in Wicker Park, op[ening up cycling to a wider variety of people’s had positive effects. Cyclists here, particularly along Milwaukee, tend to be rather aggressive—I never biked on Milwaukee, but as a pedestrian I often found myself more threatened by cyclists than motorists; I have a friend who refuses to bike on the street due to the macho-types who tend to dominate traffic here. Since Divvy, I’ve seen more obvious urban biking novices pedaling along on their Divvys. They’re slower than the regular bikers, and tend to be more observant of traffic laws. In my couple of days interacting with cyclists on Milwaukee there’s already an improvement.

Unfortunately, the maps appear to have been made by out-of-towners. Downtown they show the midblock alleys (like MapQuest did a decade ago) and don't show the grade separations. Planning to ride along Wabash and then turn onto Illinois or Hubbard? Oops.

Well they technically are connected, but obviously riding down stairs isn't the best idea. I did see people lifting Divvy bikes up the steps by the IBM building to reach Wabash. They look heavy, but I've never carried one. Probably should have been more clearly indicated though.

Midblock alleys and gangways should be shown though. You can ride a bicycle through them and they are a legal solution to not going the wrong way down a one way.

I just wish their online station map had the Bike Paths feature enabled.

Speaking of bike share, this is pretty awesome.

Wondering why they aren't going to put stations in Rogers Park? Lots of people that live there don't have cars. My friend bikes from Rogers Park to River North everyday for work.

Also, since this concept is so new I'm trying to figure out what it should be used for. I mean is it for people that don't have bikes? If you already have a bike what would you use it for?

Some funny quotes from local NIMBY groups about the Ashland BRT project, from dnainfo.com

The WAR ON CARS has begun! :haha:

I'll use it for commuting. I own three bikes, but I live on the fourth floor of a walk-up, so it's nice to not have to worry about that for commuting. I can also use it for running errands both during my work day and on my own time. If I took a bike to the office I'd either have to leave it tied up somewhere, or shuttle it in and out of my building, which takes too much time to be practical. It's also nice to be able to bike somewhere and not having to worry about a bike once I'm at my destination. For example if I want to go somewhere after work that's further than I'd want to bike, I can still ride to the office and I could ride home, or just take the "L" and not worry about it being rush hour and a no-bike time for ridding, while also not worrying about leaving my personal bike away from home.

It's just very flexible. It's also very convenient to visitors, or suburbanites. As they add more stations, the utility of it will become much more apparent - you can ride a bike somewhere then walk somewhere else, ride a train somewhere else, then ride a different bike home. There are still time when having your own bike is preferable - like a full, day-long trip - but for errands and mixed-mode travel, these bikes could be very helpful.

I think if you read the City's press releases, it's pretty much an openly declared war on cars - and I don't mean that in a bad way.

Correct, by Alta's GIS people in Portland. We're somewhat lucky to have a different arrangement here, wherein Arlington Transportation Partners handles marketing and Alta Bicycle Share only does operations.

The black background definitely looks better on a backlit computer screen than behind a glass panel -- it'll be tough to read behind a dirty panel on a long winter night.

You usually crush my dreams, but now you got me excited about the possibility of a new rail line... albeit a low probability during these economic times. I always run to the 53rd Street thread for updates on any potential new high rise proposals. Throw in the Obama library and we are destined to connect Hyde Park with a heavy transit rail line.

^ Rail seems unlikely, but King was one of the BRT routes suggested by the MPC report a year or two ago.