The Chicago Suburb That's Trying To Kill the Car (politico.com)
HughPickens.com writes: T. R. Goldman writes at Politico that downtown Evanston, Illinois—a sturdy, tree-lined Victorian city wedged neatly between Lake Michigan and Chicago's northern border, is missing one thing — cars. Or, more accurately, it's missing a lot of cars. Thanks to concerted planning, new developments are rising within a 10-minute walk of two rail lines and half-a-dozen bus routes and the local automobile ownership rate is nearly half that of the surrounding area. According to Goldman, the whole point of the suburbs, reinforced by decades of local zoning laws and developers' plans for a car-centric lifestyle, was that you weren't supposed to live on top of your neighbor, that there was supposed to be plenty of parking everywhere you went and that you weren't supposed to walk anywhere.
"But Evanston had a different idea: What if a suburban downtown became a place where pedestrians ruled and cars were actively discouraged?" writes Goldman. "Beginning in 1986, a new plan for Evanston embraced the idea of a '24/7' downtown, pouring resources into increasing the density of its downtown—a density that also meant decreasing residents' reliance on automobiles. As a compact city, Evanston couldn't compete with the vast sprawling parking spots of the Old Orchard Mall. It had to build a different sort of appeal."
Evanston has gained recognition and reputation for efforts related to sustainability, including those by government, citizens, and institutions and one thing that Evanston does to reduce the number of cars is let individual car owners rent their idle cars to other drivers through an online service. The service is being provided by a San Francisco-based startup called Getaround, and it's facilitated by a two-year, $475,000 federal research grant to the Center for Neighborhood Technology that's being implemented by the Shared-Use Mobility Center. Getaround claims that a car owner can make as much as $10,000 a year by renting out a vehicle and that renters can get a car to use when they need one for as little as $5 an hour.
Sharon Feigon says the new program is designed to test different models for car sharing in communities with different economic characteristics — ranging from low to moderate income communities in the city to more suburban areas like Evanston. "We'll also be surveying people about their use to better understand how it works and whether it actually leads to some people selling their cars, whether it reduces carbon dioxide emissions and vehicle miles traveled," says Feigon. "Car owners can make a little money and feel good that their car is in service to others. We expect 10,000 people will use the service over the two-year test period.''
"But Evanston had a different idea: What if a suburban downtown became a place where pedestrians ruled and cars were actively discouraged?" writes Goldman. "Beginning in 1986, a new plan for Evanston embraced the idea of a '24/7' downtown, pouring resources into increasing the density of its downtown—a density that also meant decreasing residents' reliance on automobiles. As a compact city, Evanston couldn't compete with the vast sprawling parking spots of the Old Orchard Mall. It had to build a different sort of appeal."
Evanston has gained recognition and reputation for efforts related to sustainability, including those by government, citizens, and institutions and one thing that Evanston does to reduce the number of cars is let individual car owners rent their idle cars to other drivers through an online service. The service is being provided by a San Francisco-based startup called Getaround, and it's facilitated by a two-year, $475,000 federal research grant to the Center for Neighborhood Technology that's being implemented by the Shared-Use Mobility Center. Getaround claims that a car owner can make as much as $10,000 a year by renting out a vehicle and that renters can get a car to use when they need one for as little as $5 an hour.
Sharon Feigon says the new program is designed to test different models for car sharing in communities with different economic characteristics — ranging from low to moderate income communities in the city to more suburban areas like Evanston. "We'll also be surveying people about their use to better understand how it works and whether it actually leads to some people selling their cars, whether it reduces carbon dioxide emissions and vehicle miles traveled," says Feigon. "Car owners can make a little money and feel good that their car is in service to others. We expect 10,000 people will use the service over the two-year test period.''
So, you can rent a car for as little as $5/hour (and presumably, rent your own car for a similar amount), and you can earn $10k/year renting your car?
Which suggests you are renting your car out for 2000 hours a year (~6 hours a day)...
Somehow, I don't think so.
Also, there is the question of insurance (remember, the same problem people who hate Uber insist is a deal-killer?).
"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
The Chicago Suburb That's Trying To Kill the Car
Just let out the clutch real fast without giving it enough gas.
Better known as 318230.
and it's Communism & Socialism to have healthcare for all. Yet in the usa some people us the jail / prison system to be there doctor for the stuff that ER does not cover at a ever higher cost then the cost of the ER.
Did you learn that logic at the same government run school that taught you grammar and spelling?
I lived in a city that thought they were being smart by discouraging car traffic. They made large stores like Walmart undersize their parking lots on purpose to make it frustrating to find parking. They turned all tertiary roads into cul de sacs. They even timed the signals to create maximum traffic. All they accomplished was making traffic really bad. Nobody stopped driving. There are some basic facts that these nuts don't seems to understand:
1. Most people do not want to live with common walls. It's an incredibly stressful way of life.
2. Most people do not want to live in high density urban centers. People want some space of their own.
3. You can't do things like shop by taking the bus or train. Who's going to carry your groceries, the bus driver?
4. People with children want space for them to play outside without having to be constantly vigilant. That means a private yard.
I'm happy for these people to make their places unlivable. They are driving up my property values.
That number is meaningless. You want the number of accidents per person per unit of distance travelled. And here, because Americans ride in their cars much more than Europeans, we do not look so bad.
(Too lazy to struggle with WolframAlpha to give you a link here myself.)
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
I really do like Evanston... been working here for almost 14 years and I've gotten a chance to see the building boom in downtown during that time. It really is more of a city than a suburb. There's plenty of suburban sprawl too... many tree-lined side streets with a garage for every house, and lots of cars parked along said streets. It's just downtown that is building up so dramatically. The only limit to outward spread is the fact that there's a great big lake along the entire eastern edge of town, a great big city to the south, and already-sprawled suburbs to the north and west.
For many of us that commute to Evanston for work or for entertainment, a car is still a necessity. The surrounding suburbs, and even parts of the city, lack a convenient public transportation method to get there efficiently - multiple slow buses or interchanges between bus and rail. And the big parking lot along the lakefront, also known as Northwestern University, pulls in many cars like mine that have to travel along congested streets. Streets that are poorly plowed at best in winter. I'm fairly certain Evanston has just one snowplow that they loan out to Chicago at the first sign of snow.
The most car-unfriendly development in recent years has been the new system of bike lanes. I'm all for making it safe, convenient, and desirable to use a bicycle to commute and would love to see a bike lane on just about every street. But they decided in some downtown areas to put the bicycle lane next to the curb, between the sidewalk and parked cars. While this is great for helping bicyclists avoid being "doored" by oblivious motorists exiting vehicles, it means that when I make a right turn across a bike lane I have to somehow have kept track of potential bicyclists over the last block and be able to see through the SUV that is inevitably parked at the corner in order to make sure I'm not cutting off or running over a rider.
It really doesn't help that too many cyclists in Evanston are just plain batshit crazy (far more so than those I've seen in Chicago). Speeding along side streets or main streets with no regard for stop signs and little regard for stoplights. Often clad in spandex, hunched over the handlebars as if they're racing to the end of the next stage.
No kidding. I went to England and they didn't even know which side of the street to drive on.
You are welcome on my lawn.
You're way south of us. That means far more light. In December/January, most days get no direct light at all, because while there's technically daylight, the sun is so low that almost anything can block it.
We're one of the windiest places on Earth. In the continental US, windspeeds like those found in Reykjavík (which peak BTW in late winter / early spring) are only found in the windiest parts of the Rockies and a couple other small isolated locales. Last winter there wasn't a single period that went more than three days without a windstorm, most very strong. One windstorm had 60m/s (130mph) winds at my land. Want to bike in that?
Our "winter", if you want to define it as the period in which you're likely to freeze your butt off , risk getting caught in a snowstorm, bike across ice, things of that nature, lasts for nearly half the year.
Really? So what clothes suit 60 m/s winds while biking on a smooth sheet of ice?
"Oh, goodness. Look at my wrist, I have to go." "But what about your clothes?" "I don't love these."