The Chainlink

I'd been waiting to get my Divvy membership until stations popped up near me. I work in the suburbs, not downtown, so I mainly want a membership in order to more easily get to and from the train on those days when I don't feel like riding 22 miles roundtrip to work.

I finally bought my membership on Monday when I saw new stations opening up closer and closer to me. I was thrilled earlier today to read on Divvy's Twitter feed that a station is going up very close to me, on Addison and Pine Grove.

And then I read this: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-divvy-bike-sharing-lawsuit-2....

I'm furious. What can I (we) do to counter these NIMBY types? I think it's entirely unfair that a couple of cranky people can ruin bikeshare for my neighborhood.

Views: 5055

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Write in to Mr. Smith poste haste (e-mail in article) and let him know you want it as badly as these folks don't.. Good journalists are always looking for the opposing viewpoint.

Just because they've filed a lawsuit doesn't mean they will win.  The article states that the rack is in the public way.  They may have no leg to stand on and are just hoping that by huffing and puffing the city will avoid the confrontation and remove or relocate the rack.

It might help if you can provide some input.  How far is it from the owners' building? Can you document traffic flow in the area?  If it's busy enough to warrant a Divvy station, perhaps there's already plenty of foot traffic and trash that needs to be cleaned up.  Do the bikes get used (are there frequently open spaces)?  You might be able to do that remotely using the Divvy app. Is there a lot of commercial space in the area?  Maybe there is an alternative location the city could use where the neighbors would appreciate it more. I agree with h' that the journalist who wrote the article might be the best way to get your voice heard, unless you know a lawyer who can write a friend of the court brief for you pro bono. :-)

They'll lose. 

They have a long way to go with that lawsuit.  Public support for the station in a way that the city is aware of it might be a contributing factor to a decision to fight rather than give in and move it.  The other motivation for the city to fight is that if they give in they will be flooded with these types of lawsuits, and it will be cheaper to respond to one and--one hopes--win by having it dismissed than to repeatedly respond to lawsuits.  All of you social media types, let the city know you want the station there!

+1

Lisa Curcio 6.5 mi said:

They have a long way to go with that lawsuit.  Public support for the station in a way that the city is aware of it might be a contributing factor to a decision to fight rather than give in and move it.  The other motivation for the city to fight is that if they give in they will be flooded with these types of lawsuits, and it will be cheaper to respond to one and--one hopes--win by having it dismissed than to repeatedly respond to lawsuits.  All of you social media types, let the city know you want the station there!

+2  Speak up everywhere you can in support of that station - to the journalist who wrote the article, your alderman, Divvy, on social media, etc.  Encourage other folks who want that station to do likewise.

Brendan Kevenides said:

+1

Lisa Curcio 6.5 mi said:

They have a long way to go with that lawsuit.  Public support for the station in a way that the city is aware of it might be a contributing factor to a decision to fight rather than give in and move it.  The other motivation for the city to fight is that if they give in they will be flooded with these types of lawsuits, and it will be cheaper to respond to one and--one hopes--win by having it dismissed than to repeatedly respond to lawsuits.  All of you social media types, let the city know you want the station there!

Thanks everyone for the suggestions! Sorry, I was a little hyperbolic with the title of this post; I erroneously thought that the NIMBYs actually managed to block the station from being installed (hadn't stopped by, but I looked at the Divvy map and didn't see a marker for the station). I walked past it this morning and saw that the bicycles were indeed there in all their lovely baby-blue glory. You are all probably right that this lawsuit will do nothing but embarrass the people bringing it forward, but in the meantime I have contacted the author of the article and my alderman, and posted about it to my Facebook page. I will keep on spreading the word. Thanks again!

Unfortunately, this isn't a new issue to bikeshare programs.  At least in NY the judge rejected the injunction.  But then again, Mr. Kolin is a lawyer, lets hope he doesn't know the right judge...

 

http://gothamist.com/2013/04/30/west_village_nimbys_file_futile_law... 

 

But I can see their point, look how obtrusive these docks are!! Jeez!  :)

I like that the majority of the comments on the Trib site are positive. 


Amanda W said:

You are all probably right that this lawsuit will do nothing but embarrass the people bringing it forward....

They are lawyers.  "Embarrass" is probably not in their vocabulary. :-)

(With my sincerest apologies to all the nice biking lawyers on The Chainlink.)

Also notable that the attorney president of the condominium association filed the lawsuit in the name of a corporation pro se which means no attorney filed the lawsuit.  Corporations need attorneys to file lawsuits.

Just wanted to let everyone know that we saw this and are monitoring, too. Our pro-team Divvy will do what we can to help out, of course.

Thanks much,

Ethan Spotts, Active Trans

RSS

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

Disclaimer  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service