The Chainlink

Barrington (Hills) Anti Bike Campaign

Anyone heard about the campaign below or seen this sign?

Website is - http://www.dontchangebarringtonhills.com/

Views: 6450

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Tominator on July 14, 2014 at 11:57am

Two separate towns. Barrington is the town. BH is a huge area without a central business district of any kind. Just houses on 5-acres.

Jose A. Terrazas said:

Wait, are Barrington and Barrington Hills opposites? I'm riding the B2B Honor Ride in " Barrington" this August. Should I be wary of Bucolic Characters?

Permalink Reply by Madopal (16.5 mi) on July 14, 2014 at 12:20pm

I gotta say, in that picture below...it looks like the folks who own that land along the road are doing such a good job of using it for something other than keeping their distance from a road which they need.  It'd be a darn shame for eminent domain to be used for public roadways to damage such a worth while use of land.  Where else would they be able to park their Bobcats?

I also am loving the "don't make the road wider, keep it a quiet country road for OUR CARS only, not a quiet country road that is the exact type that attracts cyclists eager to escape death...we want idyllic, but not TOO idyllic" argument.

Reboot Oxnard said:

Who owns the road in the image below? This is Haegers Bend Road in Barrington Hills and the answer is that it is private property. The property that the bobcat is sitting on actually extends all the way to the middle of the road. Indeed, the neighbors actually pay property taxes on the road. The plan involves rebuilding this road to handle more and heavier traffic, including adding 8 feet of width (including a bike lane) and converting the road to a major north/south artery.

Permalink Reply by Jose A. Terrazas on July 14, 2014 at 12:26pm

Thank you, saw the post and was like " hold up, wait a minute..."

Tominator said:

Two separate towns. Barrington is the town. BH is a huge area without a central business district of any kind. Just houses on 5-acres.

Jose A. Terrazas said:

Wait, are Barrington and Barrington Hills opposites? I'm riding the B2B Honor Ride in " Barrington" this August. Should I be wary of Bucolic Characters?

Permalink Reply by h' Zerocats on July 14, 2014 at 1:09pm

How does this work exactly? You draw lines around an area and decide who can and can't pass through it and by what mode of travel? Every little feifdom decides separately what sort of infrastructure there will be, no potential for an area or regional plan with consistency from place to place?

I have no say in what happens 2 blocks from my home because there's a ward boundary in between?

Is it inappropriate for me to get involved in a campaign to shape the way Wrigley Field is developed because I don't live on the corner of Wilton and Waveland?

Also... odd framing of Barrington Hills as being single-mindedly against this project.  No single BH resident actually wants bike lanes? Not a one?

 


 
Chitown_Mike said:

I read about 1/2 the responses here and while some are humorous, I will agree with those that say those that don't live out there don't really have a say.

Permalink Reply by Gecko on July 14, 2014 at 1:14pm

You should really research the definitions of the phrases you're discussing before you start spouting off nonsense just to disagree with people.  Wikipedia defines suburban sprawl as such:

"Urban sprawl or suburban sprawl describes the expansion of human populations away from central urban areas into previously remote and rural areas, particularly resulting in low-density communities reliant upon heavy automobile usage."

Therefore, my previous statement stands, and actually you proved it further by noting the 5-acre zoning.  Barrington Hills is a suburb of Chicago, so by definition it is suburban sprawl, no matter how you look at it.  5-acre zoning anywhere would contribute to sprawl by its very existence.  If you're only allowed 1 single-family home every 5 acres, then the more people who move there, the more sprawling the area would become.

Tominator said:

Not really, I mean, they have 5-acre zoning. That tends to keep the sprawl down.



Julie Hochstadter said:

Totally.

Nick G said:

I'm laughing at the "free of suburban sprawl" thing.  Barrington Hills IS suburban sprawl!

h' 1.0 said:

Our mission is to protect the rural, equestrian, and bucolic character of Barrington Hills, free of traffic and suburban sprawl.

Permalink Reply by Julie Aberman (Hochstadter) on July 14, 2014 at 1:22pm

I just updated the title to include "Hills". Didn't realize it's a neighboring Village.

Permalink Reply by Chitown_Mike on July 14, 2014 at 1:43pm

I just agree with what other said, I don't think the people of BH will give a hoot what someone with a 606 zip code says.  I partly agree with that notion, especially in the case that it seems they own that land they are wanting to pave over.  I honestly don't have an answer on how far something should be before it can't be said to no longer affect someone.  If they were to gate their community what say can I have?  I don't pay taxes out there or venture out very often so if they did something that they felt bettered their community, so be it.

I wouldn't expect someone from BH to wander in the Norwood Park East neighborhood where I live and demand they add more speed bumps or put up paid parking meters because it will regulate traffic speeds, increase revenue from the area, and make it safer (in their opinion) for the community.  

Living in Chicago means, IMO, that you have a direct say in things that happen in Chicago, like your 2 examples.  You do have a say, you're a Chicago resident, but unless you have property in BH it could be considered hard for a politician to justify listening to you since you aren't a constituent of his/her (or a voter, because lets be honest, this is Illinois still), or paying property taxes.

As a cyclist I'd love to see that area have increased cycling infrastructure, but not at the expense of the property owners out there.  If that was public land then I'd be all for the widening and cycling lanes, because my state taxes pay for that so I have as much "right" to it as they do.

Could they have worded their disagreement with the potential increase in road width?  Sure, I feel they lashed out an at easy stereotyped group citing incidents from a few bad apples.  If their PD took these issues more seriously and ticketed cyclist breaking the laws, then I am sure they wouldn't have the complaints they have (or brown stains on the lawn).

I probably should have phrased it as everyone has a say because you're free to say what you want, but what the politicians will listen to probably won't include people from Chicago.

h' 1.0 said:

How does this work exactly? You draw lines around an area and decide who can and can't pass through it and by what mode of travel? Every little feifdom decides separately what sort of infrastructure there will be, no potential for an area or regional plan with consistency from place to place?

I have no say in what happens 2 blocks from my home because there's a ward boundary in between?

Is it inappropriate for me to get involved in a campaign to shape the way Wrigley Field is developed because I don't live on the corner of Wilton and Waveland?

Also... odd framing of Barrington Hills as being single-mindedly against this project.  No single BH resident actually wants bike lanes? Not a one?

 


 
Chitown_Mike said:

I read about 1/2 the responses here and while some are humorous, I will agree with those that say those that don't live out there don't really have a say.

Permalink Reply by Richard Stiers on July 14, 2014 at 1:48pm

Not to worry, the B2B Ride does not touch Barrington Hills. It goes through Barrington, Lake Barrington and North Barrington. Friendlier areas. Less horse hockey on the side of the road.

Jose A. Terrazas said:

Wait, are Barrington and Barrington Hills opposites? I'm riding the B2B Honor Ride in " Barrington" this August. Should I be wary of Bucolic Characters?

Permalink Reply by h' Zerocats on July 14, 2014 at 2:26pm

I think Tominator was being facetious?

Nick G said:

You should really research the definitions of the phrases you're discussing before you start spouting off nonsense just to disagree with people.  Wikipedia defines suburban sprawl as such:

"Urban sprawl or suburban sprawl describes the expansion of human populations away from central urban areas into previously remote and rural areas, particularly resulting in low-density communities reliant upon heavy automobile usage."

Therefore, my previous statement stands, and actually you proved it further by noting the 5-acre zoning.  Barrington Hills is a suburb of Chicago, so by definition it is suburban sprawl, no matter how you look at it.  5-acre zoning anywhere would contribute to sprawl by its very existence.  If you're only allowed 1 single-family home every 5 acres, then the more people who move there, the more sprawling the area would become.

Tominator said:

Not really, I mean, they have 5-acre zoning. That tends to keep the sprawl down.



Julie Hochstadter said:

Totally.

Nick G said:

I'm laughing at the "free of suburban sprawl" thing.  Barrington Hills IS suburban sprawl!

h' 1.0 said:

Our mission is to protect the rural, equestrian, and bucolic character of Barrington Hills, free of traffic and suburban sprawl.

Permalink Reply by Jose A. Terrazas on July 14, 2014 at 3:03pm

NICE, Thanks

Richard Stiers said:

Not to worry, the B2B Ride does not touch Barrington Hills. It goes through Barrington, Lake Barrington and North Barrington. Friendlier areas. Less horse hockey on the side of the road.

Jose A. Terrazas said:

Wait, are Barrington and Barrington Hills opposites? I'm riding the B2B Honor Ride in " Barrington" this August. Should I be wary of Bucolic Characters?

Permalink Reply by skyrefuge on July 14, 2014 at 3:15pm

I read through some of the Barrington Hills Village Board minutes, and it appears the situation is slightly different than dontchangebarringtonhills.com would lead you to believe. Shocker, I know! FYI, I'm not a Barrington Hills resident, though I live in a nearby suburb, and occasionally ride through their village (never in a group, and never 2-abreast). Here is the chain of events that has really brought the village to this point:

1) In July of 2012, the Village decides they want to repave/rebuild Haeger's Bend Rd., simply because it's in poor shape. They apply for STP (federal) funding via the McHenry County Council of Mayors (MCCOM). The only planned change to the existing road is the addition of 3' gravel shoulders.

2) Sometime later, MCCOM denies federal funding, but advises that chances of receiving funding will be greatly increased if bicycle facilities were included in the reconstruction plan (as that's part of the FHWA "Complete Streets"-type rules).

3) In 2014, Barrington Hills prepares to resubmit the funding request to MCCOM, this time with bicycle facilities (a 4' wide shoulder) included in the plan.

4) Chaos ensues.

So the only "outsiders" insisting on bike lanes are the people being asked to pay for the lion's share of the project. If Barrington Hills wants the road reconstructed, there is no one stopping them from keeping it at the existing width without shoulders; the catch is simply that they'd have to pay for it out of their own pockets.  (and given the arguments made by DCBH.com about "owning to the middle of the road", it seems they ought to have no problem with that!)

It all seems rather silly to me. As the residents of Barrington Hills know, their roads, with their slow speeds and very light traffic, simply make for very attractive bicycling. The lack of shoulders up 'til now has done nothing to diminish that attractiveness, so it's difficult to see the addition of shoulders attracting any more bicycles. If anything, it'll make it less-annoying for drivers to get where they're going by eliminating the (small) amount of time when a car has to wait before passing a bicycle.

So from a logical perspective, I would assume that the DCBH.com argument is really about property owners losing a 7' strip of their property, and invoking cyclist-hate is simply a trick they're using to drum up enthusiasm.

However, the players involved don't seem to be entirely logical. For some shining examples, see the Public Comments from last month's town meeting, including the woman who was so mad she followed a "pack" of cyclists for quite a distance while talking on her phone and taking photos, or the one citing "brawls among bikers and drivers" in Chicago once bike lanes were added there: http://www.barringtonhills-il.gov/pdf/public_comments/2014/05_2014.pdf (unfortunately the pages in the PDF are a bit jumbled, but it kind of fits with the way their arguments are jumbled!)

I can say that from my times riding in Barrington Hills, the drivers have all been very courteous and safe, so I had no idea there was this hate bubbling beneath! This has all led to a special meeting on Wednesday night to hash things out (big enough to be highlighted on the BH website front page!) How very exciting!

Permalink Reply by Far'arned Retrogrumpalunkus #63 on July 14, 2014 at 3:26pm

So, if they want federal funding (the rest of us) to pay for their repaving then they have to bring their roads up to modern standards.  If they don't want to do this they can pay for their own damn repaving.

Seems fair to me. 

RSS

Groups

© 2008-2016   The Chainlink Community, L.L.C.   Powered by

Disclaimer  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service