Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by David P. on March 30, 2013 at 1:43am

Lisa,

Smug superiority will only be required if you bring irony.

Lisa Curcio 4.0 mi said:

To return to smug superiority--just so long as we don't have to eat there!

David P. said:

Why don't we 'celebrate' the opening of the Avondale Olive Garden by creating a Chainlink (Olive) Bar Night around it? Ha! We can petition for helmet hooks by the door. If enough people show up at once we can skip the nonexistent bike racks and just park in a car-parking spot.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Paul on March 30, 2013 at 4:14am

I had been wanting to ask the question whether the "railroad towns" are fair game when bashing suburbs.  I'm from downstate; but often when I want to go somewhere I take Amtrak into Chicago (sort of like the old southern expression "If you want to go to hell, you have to go thru Atlanta). I'm most familiar with the BNSF to Aurora and the UP and Milwaukee West.

It seemed to me that the railroad towns - Lagrange, Naperville, Franklin Park, and anything along the Illinois Prairie Path Main Stem - have the best of both worlds.    I especially like getting off in Naperville and biking via the Illinois Prairie path to either the Forest Park CTA or to Elgin and back.  Even Naperville which is pretty far out seemed very bike friendly.

Adam "Cezar" Jenkins said:

Some suburbs, like mine are "railroad towns". They were developed before the sprawl during the 1800s as railroad brought commuters to them. I like in "downtown" Mokena, and it's reasonably bike able. I'm within riding distance of most everything I need, and in walking distance to parks, libraries, and a few food places.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jared on March 30, 2013 at 4:34am

Naperville and Schaumburg seem to be the first suburbs people talk about when they criticize the suburbs.  There was virtually nothing in Schaumburg except farms until the 1950s, though Naperville is much older in origin (but I'm under the impression most of what is today Naperville is fairly recent). 

Paul said:

I had been wanting to ask the question whether the "railroad towns" are fair game when bashing suburbs.  I'm from downstate; but often when I want to go somewhere I take Amtrak into Chicago (sort of like the old southern expression "If you want to go to hell, you have to go thru Atlanta). I'm most familiar with the BNSF to Aurora and the UP and Milwaukee West.

It seemed to me that the railroad towns - Lagrange, Naperville, Franklin Park, and anything along the Illinois Prairie Path Main Stem - have the best of both worlds.    I especially like getting off in Naperville and biking via the Illinois Prairie path to either the Forest Park CTA or to Elgin and back.  Even Naperville which is pretty far out seemed very bike friendly.

Adam "Cezar" Jenkins said:

Some suburbs, like mine are "railroad towns". They were developed before the sprawl during the 1800s as railroad brought commuters to them. I like in "downtown" Mokena, and it's reasonably bike able. I'm within riding distance of most everything I need, and in walking distance to parks, libraries, and a few food places.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Justin B Newman on March 30, 2013 at 4:55am

It's possible that when looking for a home two years ago, I expressed to my lovely wife that I simply could not live in Naperville. That said, one could argue that Naperville itself has been a victim of sprawl. It has a nice central downtown, close to Metra. The downtown has most everything a person would need to live, and in fact quite a number of people live within walking distance of it. The sprawling suburban Naperville, though, is a different story.

Astute readers will note that Naperville's Olive Garden is out on Highway 59, whereas downtown Naperville is home to a variety of independent italian restaurants.

Jared said:

Naperville and Schaumburg seem to be the first suburbs people talk about when they criticize the suburbs.  There was virtually nothing in Schaumburg except farms until the 1950s, though Naperville is much older in origin (but I'm under the impression most of what is today Naperville is fairly recent). 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jared on March 30, 2013 at 5:11am

Victim?  Didn't Naperville purposely choose to annex the land that is now sprawl?  If Naperville didn't annex the land someone else would of and it would probably look pretty much the same.

Justin B Newman said:

It's possible that when looking for a home two years ago, I expressed to my lovely wife that I simply could not live in Naperville. That said, one could argue that Naperville itself has been a victim of sprawl. It has a nice central downtown, close to Metra. The downtown has most everything a person would need to live, and in fact quite a number of people live within walking distance of it. The sprawling suburban Naperville, though, is a different story.

Astute readers will note that Naperville's Olive Garden is out on Highway 59, whereas downtown Naperville is home to a variety of independent italian restaurants.

Jared said:

Naperville and Schaumburg seem to be the first suburbs people talk about when they criticize the suburbs.  There was virtually nothing in Schaumburg except farms until the 1950s, though Naperville is much older in origin (but I'm under the impression most of what is today Naperville is fairly recent). 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by william on March 30, 2013 at 5:40am

I dont see how Naperville is "bike friendly" besides short 5 mile loops in boring forest preserves and maybe the MUP along the West Branch (and being close to the IPP). And maybe you can ride around the downtown commercial/residential area, but that's no more than a mile or two. Other than that, look out for the SUVs that are gonna run you over because they've rarely see a bicycle on the road and freak out. 

The only people that are living car-free and ride bicycles daily in Naperville would be underpaid Hispanic dishwashers. Cheers to them for being awesome. But I wouldnt call this environment a bicycle friendly place. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Far'arned Retrogrumpalunkus #63 on March 30, 2013 at 5:53am

I find it just the opposite.  Riding in the burbs I'm always amazed by how much LESS aggressive  entitled, and uncaring for bicycle rider's life & limb the auto drivers are compared to the city. 

william said:

I dont see how Naperville is "bike friendly" besides short 5 mile loops in boring forest preserves and maybe the MUP along the West Branch (and being close to the IPP). And maybe you can ride around the downtown commercial/residential area, but that's no more than a mile or two. Other than that, look out for the SUVs that are gonna run you over because they've rarely see a bicycle on the road and freak out. 

The only people that are living car-free and ride bicycles daily in Naperville would be underpaid Hispanic dishwashers. Cheers to them for being awesome. But I wouldnt call this environment a bicycle friendly place. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by william on March 30, 2013 at 7:20am

I dont think personalities change all that much from the 30 miles from Chicago to Naperville. The difference is whether drivers are used to a cyclist in the street. My experience out there was I was an anomaly, an obstacle, a hazard, a object of contempt and pity -- much more so than in the city. I've never been honked at, given the finger, cursed at while at the same time being waved through at every stop sign and intersection and given so much space. It's like someone from Los Angeles driving in the snow for the first time vs. a driver from Chicago that regularly drives in the snow. Who's going to handle their shit better? I wouldnt say drivers in the suburbs are less friendly -- they just dont know how to share the road because they rarely have to. 

But no matter. My point still stands: Naperville is not exactly going to win Bicycle Friendly awards anytime soon. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Tony Adams on March 30, 2013 at 7:42am

That has been my experience also - generally. In the city, perhaps especially on the south side(?) there are a LOT of selfish, distracted and otherwise hugely dangerous drivers. While it is true that in the 'burbs a lot of the drivers are not expecting bikes, the larger problem in the 'burbs is that the roads themselves are less amenable to biking. One can't "take the lane" on the four lane sections of River Road for example and expect to live to tell the tale.

James BlackHeron said:

I find it just the opposite.  Riding in the burbs I'm always amazed by how much LESS aggressive  entitled, and uncaring for bicycle rider's life & limb the auto drivers are compared to the city. 

william said:

I dont see how Naperville is "bike friendly" besides short 5 mile loops in boring forest preserves and maybe the MUP along the West Branch (and being close to the IPP). And maybe you can ride around the downtown commercial/residential area, but that's no more than a mile or two. Other than that, look out for the SUVs that are gonna run you over because they've rarely see a bicycle on the road and freak out. 

The only people that are living car-free and ride bicycles daily in Naperville would be underpaid Hispanic dishwashers. Cheers to them for being awesome. But I wouldnt call this environment a bicycle friendly place. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Thunder Snow on March 30, 2013 at 11:21am

It's interesting that Naperville was singled out here as being particularly bike-unfriendly.  The League of American Bicyclists has named five "bicycle friendly communities" in Illinois this year:

http://www.bikeleague.org/programs/bicyclefriendlyamerica/#map

Chicago & Evanston both get Silver awards.

The three Bronze recipients: Urbana, Schaumburg and--you guessed it--Naperville.  I've never ridden in any of the three Bronze winning towns, but Naperville must be doing something right.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Far'arned Retrogrumpalunkus #63 on March 30, 2013 at 11:30am

They (the ubiquitous they) allow people to say just about anything they want on the internet.   Bags of salt are required when reading anything.    

When I am emperor of the world there will be accountability...

Thunder Snow said:

It's interesting that Naperville was singled out here as being particularly bike-unfriendly.  The League of American Bicyclists has named five "bicycle friendly communities" in Illinois this year:

http://www.bikeleague.org/programs/bicyclefriendlyamerica/#map

Chicago & Evanston both get Silver awards.

The three Bronze recipients: Urbana, Schaumburg and--you guessed it--Naperville.  I've never ridden in any of the three Bronze winning towns, but Naperville must be doing something right.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Anne Alt on March 31, 2013 at 1:07am

Especially on the south side? That varies quite a bit, depending on the neighborhood.  Distracted drivers? There are plenty of 'em all over the city.  Selfish? Same applies, especially in Lincoln Park and the Gold Coast, where I've had many of my worst experiences with drivers who feel they're entitled to the whole road.

I've had plenty of positive experiences riding in Beverly, Morgan Park, Pullman, East Side, Chatham, Avalon Park, Wrightwood, Ashburn, Roseland, West Pullman, Little Village, Bridgeport, Kenwood, Woodlawn......  but don't get me started about Mount Greenwood.  In terms of driver attitudes, I'd consider Mount Greenwood the worst south side 'hood for a cyclist.

Tony Adams 6.6 mi said:

That has been my experience also - generally. In the city, perhaps especially on the south side(?) there are a LOT of selfish, distracted and otherwise hugely dangerous drivers.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 5
• 6
• 7
• 8
• Next ›
• Page