BRT Opponents at North Side Hearing Frustrated by Open-House Format

IMG_9364
An aerial view of the hearing at Pulaski Park. Photo: John Greenfield

Tuesday’s South Side hearing for the city’s bus rapid transit plan had light attendance, with about 50 people, most of whom seemed to be proponents, showing up to check out materials, talk with CTA staffers and leave comments. Wednesday’s open house, held at Pulaski Park, 1419 West Blackhawk in Noble Square, had a bigger turnout, with about 130 people and, according to attendees, there was a more even split between supporters and opponents. The latter included members of Roger Romanelli’s anti-BRT group, the Ashland-Western Coalition.

When I arrived near the end of the event, Romanelli seemed upset, and he angrily confronted me after I snapped his picture, insisting that I couldn’t photograph him without his permission. I later learned that another member of the coalition was aggressively approaching attendees inside the open house, asking them to sign a petition against the plan. When a BRT staffer told him to stop, the AWC member cursed him out. One person I spoke to about Romanelli’s agitated state theorized that he was frustrated because the open-house format did not allow the coalition members to state their case against the project in front of the crowd with a microphone.

IMG_9371
Roger Romanelli, center, talks with Ted Orosz from New York’s MTA about the Select Bus Service. Photo: John Greenfield

Suzi Wahl, a BRT opponent who calls herself an ally of the coalition, said she was also unhappy with the format. “It’s not really a hearing,” she said. “A hearing to me is public commentary in front of each other so we can hear and reflect on what each other says… I mean, this is interesting, but it’s more a dog-and-pony show. It’s presented as a done deal, with all these display boards.”

Wahl added that, despite the opportunities to talk to CTA staff, fill out a comment sheet, add Post-it notes to a giant “roll plot” map of Ashland, and provide testimony to a court reporter, she felt there wasn’t enough opportunity for public input. “The most important form of input is what we hear and say from each other as a community, and there’s no opportunity for that, other than, of course, speaking to each other one-on-one.”

However, CTA spokeswoman Lambrini Lukidis responded that the event was, in fact, a hearing. “We’ve used an open house-style format in the past,” she said. “We did it with 95th Street when we were talking about the new terminal. That was the format that we used for that, and the [Federal Transportation Administration] accepts it. They like it in a lot of instances, especially like this one because… when you have a huge document, like an environmental assessment, we have to break it down for people. We can’t expect that everybody’s going to get online and read a 300-page document and appendices.”

IMG_9374
An attendee ads a comment on a Post-it to the giant map of Ashland. Photo: John Greenfield

She argued that having the opportunity to speak individually with a CTA staffer can actually be more useful than asking your question in front of an audience. “If you’re waiting to speak with the microphone you might be listening to 15, 20 people comment and never get your question answered,” she said. “And that’s the goal of this, we want people to get their questions answered so they can form an opinion and give us that opinion in writing on the record so it can be part of the formal environmental assessment.”

Lukidis noted that the BRT plan, which includes converting two of the four travel lanes on Ashland to bus-only lanes and prohibiting most left turns, is far from finalized. “This isn’t the final, detailed plan,” she said. “We move into that much later and we want feedback on just a broad vision. Talking about left-hand turns and which ones will come back and which ones will go away permanently, that’s something that we’ll decide on much later. But we want these comments to determine where we would use certain mitigations, so that sort of detail will come, and people will have another opportunity to comment as well.”

Attendee Josh Rosenbluh said he was happy with the way the event was set up. “This is an incredibly informative experience, because there are posters all around here, there are these giant maps going across tables, so you can see the intersections, there’s videos,” he said. “There’s at least a dozen people, maybe more than that, from CTA who are answering questions about everything, so I’m just incredibly impressed with the presentation.”

  • ahblid

    Well IMHO, setting back BRT for a decade would be a good thing; not a bad thing. And my opposition to BRT has nothing to do with the left turn issue at all.

    My opposition comes from the hefty costs of BRT and it’s lack of carrying capacity for those costs. Yes, BRT looks all rosy if one compares the startup or capital costs of BRT to the capital costs of light rail (LRT) which is what so many claim makes BRT better than light rail.

    The problem is that no one thinks long term. No one looks at what the long term operating costs of buses do to the numbers after 20 years.

    On average in this country it cost transit agencies 60 cents per passenger mile in 2012 to move people by LRT. It cost transit agencies 90 cents per pax/mile to move people by regular bus and BRT.

    And those higher operating costs are what always cause BRT to lose the cost battle long term.

    If regular buses aren’t cutting it and carrying the passenger load for the area, then it’s time for LRT or heavy rail.

  • JacobEPeters

    I tried explaining to the owner of Orlando Glass & Trim how Les Schwab Tires in Portland, Oregon partnered with the streetcar to market how dropping off your automobile near a transit line allows you to still get to work reliably while your car is in the shop. He responded, “this isnt Portland”, which is odd, since Noble Square and East Village feel a lot like the Northwest District of Portland. AWC has closed the ears of businesses that could benefit from well designed BRT through misinformation and fear-mongering, and that is truly unfortunate.

  • JacobEPeters

    Left turns are not an all or nothing prospect. By limiting left hand turns the road can move smoother, but eliminating them entirely will cause its own set of issues. There is only a study, not a plan, and our response to the study can be highlighting where left hand turns are important. To me that is at the entrance to industrial districts and at most diagonal streets. I have put my thoughts in a comment card, because it would be disappointing if the benefits of BRT were scrapped altogether.

  • JacobEPeters

    The issue is transporting people along Ashland, that is not simply “about cars and auto use”.

    I am not going to trash La Pasadita because of their anti-BRT stance. I am curious how they think 2 lanes of car traffic is integral to their business when most of their late night business is from people FAR too intoxicated to drive, and those walking in the doors from the CTA station a block away.

    We need community engagement that identifies where shared loading zones can be located, so that trucks don’t block Ashland for deliveries like they do now, and clear communication of how people power the economy regardless of their mode of transportation.

ALSO ON STREETSBLOG

Support Better Ashland Transit? Your Voice Is Needed to Counter BRT NIMBYs

|
Roger Romanelli’s well-organized anti-bus rapid transit group the Ashland-Western Coalition is rallying their troops to oppose the CTA’s plan, so BRT supporters need to provide a show of strength as well. The transit authority recently released the long-awaited environmental assessment of their plan to create fast, efficient, ‘L’ train-like bus service on Ashland Avenue, and […]

Debating Bus Rapid Transit With the Ashland-Western Coalition

|
Guest contributor Lindsay Bayley lives with her husband in the Noble Square neighborhood, steps from the future Ashland bus rapid transit corridor, and is a year-round bicycle commuter. She works as a senior planner with the Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning (CMAP), specializing in parking policy. The views expressed here do not represent CMAP’s stance […]

Ashland Bus Rapid Transit NIMBYs Cling to Anonymity

|
After I wrote about a June 25 meeting of the anti-bus rapid transit group the Ashland-Western Coalition, Roger Romanelli, executive director of the Randolph/Fulton Market Association, emailed me with some objections. “You incorrectly name me as the leader of the Ashland-Western Coalition, and I seek a retraction,” he wrote. “Our group is a volunteer coalition, […]