brt current conditions analysis

1

Ashland Avenue current conditions: Phase 1 of Bus Rapid Transit impact study

July 2014

Produced by Metropolitan Planning Council Team Lead: Emily Egan

Chris Hale and Jennifer Xia Under the guidance of Yonah Freemark and Kara Riggio

2

Table of Contents

Purpose of this report…………………………………………………………………………3

Bus Rapid Transit on Ashland Avenue…………………………………………….4 Focus on transit-oriented development………………………………………....4 Corridor of heavy movement………………………………………………………4 A note on methodology and other sources……………………………............4

The study areas………………………………………………………………………………..6 Community descriptions of the study areas……………………………………………7 Ashland………………………………………………………………………………...7 Halsted………………………………………………………………………………..10 Western……………………………………………………………………………….10 Physical development indicators………………………………………………….…….14 Building permits……………………………………………………………………...14 Year of construction for new buildings………………………………………….15 Number of houses sold and market values……………………………….…...16 Economic development indicators…………………………………………………..….23 Business licenses………………………………………………………………….…..23 Employment data……………………………………………………………………24 Social development indicators……………………………………………………………26 Crime………………………………………………………………………………..….26 Vacancies……………………………………………………………………………..26 Walkability…………………………………………………………………………..…27 Placemaking survey……………………………………………………………..…..29 Conclusion…………………………………………………………………………..…………33 Appendix A: Instructions for future research……………………………………………34 Appendix B: Technical summary and data sources…………………………………..48

3

Purpose of this Report This report examines the current conditions along Ashland Avenue in Chicago, IL in order to provide insights into the effects of the Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) line proposed for Ashland. This report captures and analyzes information on the physical, economic and social characteristics of Ashland Avenue and two comparison corridors today in order to provide a baseline of information about the situation today, and provide information that will be used for comparative use in the future, so as to understand how the implementation of the BRT line impacts the surrounding neighborhoods. In a metropolitan region such as Chicago, efficient and reliable public transportation is essential. Many studies related to the effects of transportation investments focus on highway infrastructure, heavy or light rail. Few studies have focused specifically on BRT and even fewer studies focus on BRT within North America. The proposed Ashland BRT provides an important opportunity to study the impact of BRT in this country and understand how this mode of transportation may affect the surrounding communities. While this report references common community metrics such as population, demographics and income, it does not focus on these. Much of the data needed to review these categories are captured by the decennial Census or the Census’ American Community Survey (ACS) and past data will be available into the future. Because of that, this report purposefully focused on data that may not be readily available in the future. Additionally, because the study areas are relatively small and are reviewed over a short period of time, the changes might not be captured well by ACS data. The data used in this report were collected and analyzed from March to July of 2014. One aspect of this report looks at trends or patterns of development that are already occurring. Although the Chicago Transit Authority (CTA) announced the proposed BRT along Ashland prior to that date, the project has not undergone a significant amount of work or been officially approved. Therefore, the authors of the report believe that the timeline for the data collection and analysis remains indicative of conditions that are unrelated to BRT. Speculative development relating to BRT has not yet occurred at the time of this report. Three different development indicators are included in this study; they are physical, economic and social. Each indicator uses different data and metrics for evaluation. The physical development indicators include data on building permits, construction permits for new buildings, and the number of houses sold and their market value. The economic development indicators include business licenses and employment data. The social development indicators use data gathered on crime, vacancies, walkability and a placemaking survey of each intersection included in the study. This study shows that development in all three indicators is the highest in the northern sections of the study areas. Also, the eastern comparison area of Halsted Street shows more development than that of Western and Ashland. This relates to higher rates of development in the north and eastern sides of Chicago. It is expected that the Ashland

4

BRT will have the greatest influence on development in the southern quadrant of the study area. This report will be most insightful years after construction on the Ashland BRT line has begun. Ultimately, a final analysis will be done that compares the initial findings of the Ashland corridor outlined in this report to conditions after BRT implementation using the two comparison corridors as counterfactuals. This report has been created with this in mind. Additionally, instructions for future data collection and analysis are provided in Appendix A. Future researchers should pay particular attention to the development of the Southern portions of Ashland Avenue in comparison to the Southern quadrants of the counterfactual areas.

Bus Rapid Transit on Ashland Avenue The Ashland BRT project will eventually span 16.1 miles on Ashland Ave. and will be developed in two phases. Ashland was chosen for the BRT line because of its heavy ridership, street design, dense population, connectivity to other modes of transportation, proximity to jobs and more. This report focuses on phase one, which spans five and a half miles between West Cortland Ave. and West 31St. St. Focus on Transit-Oriented Development Another major tenant of this report is studying BRT in the context of transit-oriented development (TOD). In 2013 the city of Chicago passed a TOD ordinance. This ordinance provides incentives to development projects that are in areas that qualify as TOD zones (generally within 600 or 1,200 feet of rail station entrances). These incentives include decreased parking requirements, increased floor area ratios, increased maximum building height and decreased minimum lot area per unit. By encouraging development in areas that have high-quality transportation options, such as BRT stations, residents have more options for services within easy accessibility. Additionally, more destinations are within walking distance, reducing the need for commuting by car and increasing opportunities for walking. This means positive impacts for individual health and the quality of our environment. Creating a vibrant and walkable neighborhood is difficult but the proposed Ashland BRT provides an opportunity for Chicago to plan for and create policies that support it. It should be noted that TOD can occur in a way that is line with the current characteristics of the neighborhood. Small-scale development can preserve the feel of a community as well as provide more housing and retail options. Corridor of Heavy Movement The Ashland corridor is one of the busiest outside of the Loop. In 2013 the Ashland bus line (number 9) had more total boardings than any other bus route With 9,842,224 riders, it accounted for 1.8 percent of all CTA bus travel. Around 30,000 people use the route daily.

5

Within a quarter-mile of the whole Ashland there were 53,286 jobs in 2011. 30,563 of these jobs were located within the study area used in this report (the quarter-mile corridor around the BRT phase 1 route). People who work along the Ashland corridor live in all parts of Chicago and the surrounding region. And people who live along the corridor commute to other parts of the city and region to work. The corridor is also an important transit route for many people who neither live nor work along Ashland but commute via Ashland Avenue. A Note on Methodology and Other Sources This report is a data-driven, quantitative examination of the physical, economic and social development of Ashland Avenue. It uses descriptive statistics and first-person surveys as the main methodologies. The manner by which the data were taken in and deciphered, as well as the manner in which the surveys were conducted, are described in depth in the report text and in the associated appendix. Many BRT studies focus on qualitative stories about the challenges of implementing BRT. There have been several anecdotal reports of the success of BRT lines and their impact on surrounding neighborhoods, and numerous feasibility studies and planning reports make the case for BRT based on expected outcomes. However, there are few rigorous quantitative studies measuring the impact of BRT. That said, there have also been numerous studies examining the impacts of other modes of transit, particularly light rail systems. Many of these studies have been carried out in North America and other countries, however, frequently they focus narrowly on land and property values as an indicator of development. The data-driven quantitative methodologies of several studies used to inform the methodology used by this report are:

Hook, Walter, Lotshaw, Stephanie and Weinstock, Annie. More Development For Your Transit Dollars: An Analysis of 21 North American Transit Corridors. Institute for Transportation and Development Policy. X Print. McMillen, Daniel and McDonald, John. Reaction of House Prices to a New Rapid Transit Line: Chicago’s Midway Line, 1983-1999. Real Estate Economics V32 (2004) 463-486. Print.

Naranjo, Durfari. The Impact of Bus Rapid Transit System on Land Prices in Mexico City. Lincoln Institue of Land Policy. 2013. Print

Perk, Victoria and Catala, Martin. Land Use Impacts of Bus Rapid Transit: Effects of BRT Station Proximity on Property Values along the Pittsburgh Martin Luther King, Jr. East Busway. Tampa, FL: National Bus Rapid Transit Institute Center for Urban Transportation research and U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Transit Administration. FTA–FL-26-7109.2009.6, 2009. Print.

6

Targa, Felipe. Examining Accessibility and Proximity-Related Effects of Bogota’s Bus Rapid System Using Spatial Hedonic Price Models. Diss. University of North Carolina, 2003. Chapel Hill. Print.

United States. General Accounting Office. Bus Rapid Transit Projects Improve Transit Service and Can Contribute to Economic Development. Washington GAO, 2012. Print United States. General Accounting Office. Bus Rapid Transit Shows Promise. Washington GAO, 2001. Print.

The Study Areas Ashland Avenue This main study area includes the neighborhoods within a quarter mile (a distance generally considered to be walkable) of the first phase of the Ashland Ave. BRT. This 5.54-mile corridor along Ashland Ave. is bounded on the north by W. Webster Ave.; on the south by W. 33rd St.; on the east by N. Larrabee St. and S. Loomis St. respectively; and on the west by Woods St. Because this study area spans a large section of diverse communities, it is further divided into three sections: North (3A), Central (2A) and South (1A), divided by W. Kinzie St. (between 3A and 2A) and W. 16th St. (between 2A and 1A). Figure 1 illustrates these study areas. Figure 1: Study areas in Chicago

7

Comparison corridors In order to provide a counterfactual, in order to determine the effects of the Ashland BRT project on surrounding areas, this study has identified two parallel corridors, to the west and to the east, which are used for comparison. By tracking changes that occur on those streets in parallel to the evaluation of Ashland, the broader impact of the BRT project—not just of city changes in general—can be determined . The Western Ave. corridor is the first area serving as a counterfactual. This area is formed by a quarter-mile buffer area around Western Ave. and is bounded on the north by W. Palmer St.; on the south by 34th Street; on the east by Leavitt St; and on the west by Rockwell St. The division lines for these three sections are along W. Kinzie St. and W. 16th St. The Western Ave. counterfactual areas are labeled on Figure 1 as 3W, 2W, and 1W. Halsted St. is the second counterfactual corridor. This area formed by a quarter-mile buffer around Halsted St. and is bounded on the north by W. Webster Ave.; on the south by W. 33rd St.; on the east by N. Larrabee St., S. Jefferson St. and S. Wallace St.; and on the west by N. Sheffield Ave. and Morgan St. The division lines for these three sections are along W. Kinzie St. and W. 16th St. The Halsted St. counterfactual areas are labeled on Figure 1 as 3H, 2H and 1H. In addition, in an effort to better evaluate the changes along Ashland Ave., the city of Chicago as a whole is used as a comparison when appropriate.

Community descriptions of the study areas South Ashland (1A) This study area is largely contained within the Lower West Side Community Area, a neighborhood also known as Pilsen. This neighborhood is majority Latino and a major center for Chicago’s Mexican-American community, though recent trends in Pilsen indicate a decline in the Latino population. Before Mexicans made up the majority of Pilsen’s population, the area was home to many Eastern European immigrants and their children—especially Czechs, Poles and Lithuanians—who in turn had replaced the earlier Irish and German residents. Because of this pattern of older immigrant groups being replaced by newer ones, Pilsen is sometimes described as an immigrant gateway1). Since the 1930s, the average share of foreign-born population in the neighborhood has been 35.29 percent, the second-highest share in the city after Albany Park (35.54 percent).

1 Masterson, Kathryn. Chicago Tribune. The New Pulse of Pilsen. 2004. Accessed: http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2004-04-30/news/0405010078_1_neighborhood-mexican-murals

8

The very southern tip of the study area extends into the Bridgeport and McKinley Park neighborhoods, south of the Chicago River. Both neighborhoods have significant Latino populations, but also large White and Asian (predominantly Chinese) populations.

The study area is located somewhat south of the Illinois Medical District (IMD) but healthcare jobs are still a major employer in the area. The Ashland corridor also runs past the Anthony Marano Company, a major wholesale distributor of fresh produce. Despite the area being predominantly Latino, the workforce in the study area is diverse, with Latinos, Whites, Asians and African Americans all represented in significant numbers. The unemployment rate in Pilsen was at 13 percent in 2010.

Central Ashland (2A) The Central Ashland study area runs through the middle of the Near West Side and contains parts of the Illinois Medical District. The Near West Side is a diverse community area undergoing change and containing several distinct neighborhoods. Between 2000 and 2010, a large number of new housing units were built in the wider community area and there were significant increases in the White and Asian populations, along with a 43.6 percent increase in median incomes. The study area includes pockets of African American residents as well as a diverse population in the University Village area. A large portion of the study area is non-residential.

Much of the population living within the study area resides in the University Village/Little Italy neighborhood. The area was once an important center of Italian-Americans in Chicago (although it was diverse, with other ethnic groups such as Greeks and Jews also represented). The building of the University of Illinois at Chicago in the 1960s displaced a large part of this community.

The IMD dominates the employment statistics, as more than half of jobs in the study area are in the health care and social assistance fields. Construction is also an important employer. Manufacturing jobs once made up 12 percent of local jobs but have declined from an estimated 1,877 jobs in 2002 to just 650 in 2011.

The study are is also home to Whitney Young magnet High School, the first public magnet high school in Chicago and one of Illinois’ best performing schools. Planned developments for the area include the new “Vertiport” (a landing pad for helicopters and tiltrotors) on IMD land and an overhaul of the IMD CTA Blue Line station.

North Ashland (3A) The North Ashland study area is mostly within the West Town Community Area, with a small part extending into the Logan Square Community Area at the north end.

Like the Near West Side, West Town is made up several identifiable neighborhoods, such as East Village and Noble Square, which lie on opposite sides of Ashland Ave. Parts of

9

the study area are within Wicker Park and the Wicker Park-Bucktown Chamber of Commerce falls in the study area.

At the heart of the study area, at the intersection of Ashland Ave. and Division St., is the Polonia Triangle—historically the center of Chicago’s Polish “downtown.” The notable novelist Nelson Algren used the area as the setting for some of his works, focusing on the stories of the Polish underclass (e.g. The Man with the Golden Arm). In the 1960s and 1970s, a significant number of Puerto Ricans and other Latinos moved to the area while many Polish residents migrated to the suburbs or other parts of the city, especially places along the newly built Kennedy Expressway.

The study area (and wider area) is largely inhabited by a mix of Latinos and Whites with a small pocket of African American residents and a few Asians. Gentrification is evident in much of West Town and the Ashland Corridor is no exception.

Figure 2 illustrates the current land use in the three Ashland Ave. study areas.

10

Figure 2: Ashland Avenue land use 2014

11

South Halsted (1H) The South Halsted study area falls within Bridgeport and the Lower West Side. Historically Bridgeport has been important in Chicago politics as the home of five mayors, including both Daleys.

Originally an Irish-American neighborhood, the area has been home to many ethnic groups and remains diverse, with roughly equal parts Latinos, White and Asian residents. The area once known as the Lithuanian “downtown” is at the south end of the study area (from which Lituanica Avenue takes its name), although most Lithuanians moved away after the 1950s. Bridgeport also had a notable Italian-American community.

The South Halsted study area has a high proportion of manufacturing jobs (around 30 percent).

Central Halsted (2H) This study area includes most of UIC’s East and South campuses and passes through the heart of the West Loop. It includes Greek Town, which maintains a distinct identity with its Greek restaurants. Part of the study area covers the western edge of the Fulton River District and some of the study area falls to the East of I-90/94, an area sometimes called West Loop Gate, where Presidential Towers are located. Proximity to the Loop and transport facilities, like Union Station and Ogilvie Transport Center, has contributed to significant development in the area over recent years. As a result of its location at the edge of downtown, Central Halsted has the largest number of jobs of any of the study areas.

North Halsted (3H) The study area covers three community areas—West Town, the Near North Side and Lincoln Park. Neighborhoods in this study area include Goose Island, Ranch Triangle and Old Town.

Goose Island was declared a Planned Manufacturing District (PMD) in 1990. Although there are around 1,000 manufacturing jobs in the study area, they make up a fairly small proportion of the total of 16,000 jobs. Some hope that Goose Island will become a tech hub and see a growth in high tech manufacturing and service jobs2.

The study area also contains the area that was formerly occupied by the Cabrini-Green Homes. This public housing community contained 15,000 people at its peak. Demolition of the housing project began in 1995 and continued through 2011. Redevelopment is ongoing with the aim of creating a mixed-income neighborhood.

2 LaTrace, AJ. Goose Island Becomes Chicago’s Emerging High Tech Hub. Chicago Curbed. 2014. Accessed: http://chicago.curbed.com/archives/2014/02/24/overnight-goose-island-becomes-chicagos-emerging-tech-giant.php.

12

South Western (1W) The South Western study area lies at the western edge of the Lower West Side—an area sometimes called the Heart of Chicago but also sometimes included as part of Pilsen. The west of the study area borders on South Lawndale. Like South Ashland, the area’s population is largely Latino and like South Halsted, manufacturing jobs make up a significant proportion of jobs in the area (28.6 percent in 2011).

Pilsen and the Lower West Side are well known for their murals, examples of which can be found in this study area.

Central Western (2W) This study area covers the western edge of the Near West Side. It includes the neighborhood west of the IMD, known as Tri-Taylor. This neighborhood has a diverse population and is situated at the border between largely African American, Latino and White populations (East Garfield Park and North Lawndale to the west, South Lawndale and the Lower West Side to the south, the West Loop to the east). Many UIC students live in the area.

This area has a mixed population, and the highest proportion of African American residents of any of the study areas. However, the population that works in the area contains fewer African Americans and more Latinos than the resident population.

North of the Tri-Taylor neighborhood, the study area has a mostly African American population. This neighborhood between Western and Ashland is called West Haven.

North Western (3W) The North Western study area runs through West Town and ends in Logan Square. It passes through the neighborhoods of Wicker Park and Ukrainian Village.

Although the study area is some distance from the Humboldt Park Community Area, the Humboldt Park neighborhood is usually considered to extend into the study area (sometimes this neighborhood, east of the park, is distinguished as East Humboldt Park). The eastern half of “Paseo Boricua” is in the study area and one of the two large Puerto Rican flag sculptures that mark this stretch of Division St. can be seen from the intersection of Division St. and Western Ave. The share of the population that is Puerto Rican in this area has been in decline for some time, but the neighborhood still maintains a strong ethnic identity with murals, restaurants and an annual Puerto Rican parade.

Logan Square is somewhat similar to West Town, with a mixture of White and Latino residents and a trend of gentrification. Like West Town, it was historically home to many Eastern European immigrants, especially Polish and Jewish people.

13

Figure 3 provides an illustrated overview of the ethnicity of residents living in the study areas described above.

Figure 3: Race and ethnicity demographics in study areas 2014

14

Physical development indicators

Physical development is analyzed through data collected on building permits, construction of new buildings, the number of houses sold and the market rate price for residential properties sold. Building permits The of Chicago’s Data Portal provided the number and location of building permits in Chicago from 2006 to 2013. GIS was used to map the building permit distribution throughout the city and analyze how many were recorded within each of the study areas. The following maps and charts showing that data. Figure 4 below shows the trend of Halsted having more building permits overtime than both Ashland and Western. All three study areas decreased the number of building permits received in 2012 but has shown an increase since then. Figure 4: Building permits issued in Chicago from 2006 - 2013

Figures 5, 6 and 7 show the same information, but compared among the northern, central and southern quadrants. It is clear that the Northern study areas show more building permits than the central study areas and many more than the southern study areas. Ashland is similar to Western in the northern and central study areas, but has more building permits than Western in the southern study areas.

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Building permits recorded in study areas

Ashland

Halsted

Western

15

Figure 5: Northern study area building permits

Figure 6: Central study area building permits

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Building permits recorded in northern study areas (3A, 3H, 3W)

North Ashland

North Halsted

North Western

0

100

200

300

400

500

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Building permits recorded in central study areas (2A, 2H, 2W)

Central Ashland

Central Halsted

Central Western

16

Figure 7: Southern study area building permits

Year of construction for new buildings The city of Chicago’s data portal also provides information on permits awarded for construction of new buildings. This data was mapped for the study areas and then analyzed over time. Figure 8 shows a dramatic decrease in new construction for all study areas in 2007. This trend mimics greater Chicagoland and national trends. However, watching this data overtime should provide insight on which study area recovers to the pre-recession levels of new construction permits the fastest. Figure 8: Construction of new buildings in Chicago from 2006 - 2010

0

50

100

150

200

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Building permits recorded in southern study areas (1A, 1H, 1W)

South Ashland

South Halsted

South Western

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Total new buildings constructed in study areas

Ashland

Halsted

Western

17

Number of houses sold and market values Data on the number of homes sold and their market value was collected using the website www.truila.com. These data were collected for all properties sold within the last nine months. GIS was used to map these properties in the study areas. The following maps and charts display the data. Figure 9 shows all of the houses sold within nine months of May 2014. It is clear that Western has a higher rate of house transactions, but that may be due to the fact that it has a higher ratio of residential in the study area than Ashland and Halsted. Figure 9: Homes sold in Chicago from August to May 2014

Figures 10, 11 and 12 show the same data as described above, but broken down by the northern, central, and southern quadrants and compared across the study areas. All three northern study areas have higher numbers of houses sold than the southern study areas.

270

280

290

300

310

320

330

340

Ashland Halsted Western

Homes sold in study areas within nine months of May 2014

18

Figure 10: Homes in northern study areas sold in Chicago from August to May 2014

Figure 11: Homes in central study areas sold in Chicago from August to May 2014

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

North Ashland North Halsted North Western

Homes sold in northern study areas

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

Central Ashland Central Halsted Central Western

Homes sold in central study areas

19

Figure 12: Homes sold in southern study area Chicago from August to May 2014

Figure 13 shows the assessed market value for the houses sold within the Ashland study area. This figure illustrates the higher property values, per square feet, for houses located in the northern quadrant.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

South Ashland South Halsted South Western

Homes sold in southern study areas

20

Figure 13: Value of homes sold in study area from August to May 2014 by square foot

Figure 14 shows the selling price per square foot for homes sold within nine months of May 2014. It compares the three different street across the northern, central, and southern study areas. This chart illustrates the fact that homes sold for higher prices in the northern, study areas and significantly higher than the southern study areas.

21

Additionally, it is clear that homes located in the Halsted study area sell for higher prices per square foot than both Ashland and Western across all sections of the study areas. The study area that should be monitored closely in this metric is the Southern study area of Ashland. With the implementation of BRT, there is the most room for development within that study area. Figure 14: Average cost per square foot of homes sold in study areas August to May 2014

$0

$100

$200

$300

$400

$500

$600

Southern study area Central study area Northern study area

Average cost per square foot for homes sold within nine months of May 2014 (excluding

condos)

Western

Ashland

Halsted

22

Figure 15 shows information similar to that of Figure 14. However, in this chart, the list price is not shown in comparison to square feet. Figure 15 again illustrates the higher prices in the northern study areas of all three streets, but shows Halsted as the highest in only two of the three study areas. This could be due to the medical district and many businesses located in the central Halsted study area. Figure 15: Average listing price for homes sold from August to May 2014 in study areas

$0

$100,000

$200,000

$300,000

$400,000

$500,000

$600,000

$700,000

$800,000

Southern study area Central study area Northern study area

Average list price for homes sold within nine months of May 2014

Western

Ashland

Halsted

23

Economic development indicators Business Licenses In order to measure business and commercial transactions in the study area, data on business licenses was gathered and analyzed. This information was gathered from the city of Chicago’s Data Portal and then mapped using GIS. Figure 16 shows all of the current business licenses within the study areas. This map should be compared overtime in order to understand the changes in business licenses within the study areas Figure 16: Active business licenses in Chicago 2013

24

Employment data Understanding where employers and employees are located in is crucial to understanding how to connect the two more effectively. By gathering data on the commuting habits of Chicagoans from the decennial Census and ACS and mapping it, it is clear that few residents live and work in the same place. Figure 17 and 18 Figure 17: The percent of jobs filled by local residents in Chicago community areas

25

Figure 18: Percentage of Chicago community areas jobs filled by local residents

26

Social development indicators

The last category of indicators in this report measure quality of life and social development. Included in this category are indicators on crime, vacancies, walkability and placemaking. Crime Figure 19 illustrates the violent crimes, nonviolent crimes, and homicides in relation to the study areas. Figure 19: Crimes and study areas in Chicago 2013

27

Vacancies Vacant buildings not only hurt economic development, they can decrease the comfort and safety of the neighborhood. Collecting information on the vacancies within each study area is way to measure the vibrancy of a neighborhood. Figure 20 illustrates vacancies as they were reported from 311 calls from 2001 to 2003. These vacancies should be compared to the number of vacancies after the implementation of the BRT. Figure 20: Vacancies in the Chicago study areas 2001 to 2003

28

Walkability As a proxy for connectivity, Walk Scores (www.walkscore.com) were collected for each planned BRT station in the Ashland corridor and the respective intersections in the two comparison areas. Walk Scores measure the walkability of specific addresses by analyzing walking routes and distances to nearby amenities, and consequently are driven by choice and proximity of amenities. Figure 21 and 22 show the data collected from walkscore.com for each intersection all of the study areas. South of Grand Avenue Western is the least walkable study area. Ashland and Western decrease in walkability dramatically in the southern study areas. Figure 21: Walkability rating for each intersection in Chicago study areas 2014

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Walk Score by intersecIon

Ashland

Western

Halsted

29

Figure 22: Walkability rating for each intersection in Chicago study areas 2014

Placemaking survey The survey was designed to grasp the qualitative characteristics of a place that are not captured by the other indicators in this study. These qualitative characteristics include sociability; access and linkages; comfort and image; and uses and activities. Each characteristic is associated with street activity or intersection amenities, and the data collected serve as indicators for the quality of life in each study area. The intersections selected for the survey are those that would be chosen for bus stations along the proposed Ashland BRT. The corresponding intersections in the comparison areas were also included. There are fourteen intersections selected for bus stops along Ashland Avenue which means that 42 intersections were surveyed for this report. The methodology for the survey and an example is provided in Appendix A.

30

Figure 23, 24 and 25 show just one section of the survey, which recorded the number of people present along the intersection over a three minute time span. This was recorded along each intersection and is displayed in charts by the corresponding street. This portion of the survey illustrated here measures the vibrancy and activity within the area as well as provides insight to some of the demographics of the population using the space. Figure 23: People recorded at intersections along Ashland study area 2014

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

W Cortla

nd St

W North Ave.

W Division St.

W Chicago Ave.

W Grand

Ave.

W Lake St.

W M

adison

St.

W Ja

ckson Blvd.

W Harrison St.

W Polk St.

W Roo

sevelt Rd

.

W 18th St.

W Cermak Rd

W 31st P

l

Number of people recorded at Ashland intersecUons

Men Women Children Elderly

31

Figure 24: People recorded at intersections along Western study area 2014

Figure 25: People recorded at intersections along Halsted study area 2014

0

5

10

15

20

25

W Cortla

nd St

W North Ave.

W Division St.

W Chicago Ave.

W Grand

Ave.

W Lake St.

W M

adison

St.

W Ja

ckson Blvd.

W Harrison St.

W Polk St.

W Roo

sevelt Rd

.

W 18th St.

W Cermak Rd

W 31st P

l

Number of people recorded at Western intersecUons


0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

W Arm

itage Ave.

W North Ave.

W Division St.

W Chicago Ave.

W Grand

Ave.

W Lake St.

W M

adison

St.

W Ja

ckson Blvd.

W Harrison St.

W Polk St.

W Roo

sevelt Rd

.

W 18th St.

W Cermak Rd

W 31st P

l

Number of People recorded at Halsted intersecUons


32

In addition to the placemaking survey, pictures were taken of each intersection included in the survey. This provides visual documentation that has been archived for future use and comparison of the physical infrastructure and activity of each intersection. Figure 24 and 25 are just two examples of the pictures taken to document the street scene of each intersection included in the survey. Figure 26: Ashland Aveenue and CLybourn St. intersection 2014

Figure 27: Halsted St. and Roosevelt St. Intersection 2014

33

Conclusion

While collecting and analyzing data used in the physical, economic and social development indicators few surprises occurred. The housing prices are higher in the northern study areas than in the southern study areas. Similarly, the walkability for the Western and 31st St. intersection is weaker than those in more northern intersections.

However, the data collected and analyzed in this study is just the first step in documenting the effects of BRT. It is crucial that the current conditions are studied and documented now in order to better understand and compare the data the future. By collecting this data, more comprehensive and quantitative study of this of this effective and reliable mode of transportation, will be available in the future.

The authors of this study predict that the proposed Ashland BRT would affect physical, economic and social development along the Ashland Avenue corridor positively. An increase in property values would occur due to the proximity to convenient transportation options, fewer vacancies and crimes would occur because of the vibrancy and activity of the space and there would be more opportunities for small businesses and local employers.

Additionally, the Ashland Avenue southern study area presents unique opportunity for these types of changes. Because it is currently one of the more underdeveloped study areas, it is in a unique position to benefit the most from the BRT. This study area in particular should be followed as the proposed BRT becomes implemented and operational. Furthermore, the effects of BRT could expand into neighborhoods beyond the half a mile buffer that makes up the study areas. Development beyond the study areas should also be taken into consideration.

It is possible that there will be some future conditions that will influence development that are impossible to predict. Empowerment zones, TIF districts, new schools are just a few. However, this report still serves a critical role in understanding how those influences change the development patterns along Ashland Avenue and the greater Metropolitan region.

34

Appendix A: Instructions for future data collection

Vacancy and building permits data

This data is accessible from Chicago’s Data Portal. https://data.cityofchicago.org/ Search for “vacant” and download the file “311 Service Requests - Vacant and Abandoned Buildings Reported” as a CSV file. Search for “building permits” and download the file “Building Permits.” Once downloaded, the files need to be cleaned up for geocoding and filtered by year. Make sure all values are formatted as numbers and headings contain only alpha-numeric characters and underscores (no spaces). Filter for the relevant year and copy this data onto a separate sheet or workbook. Once the data has been geocoded into GIS, the number of vacancies and building permits, and total value of the building permits for each area need to be added to the descriptive data Excel workbook.

GIS Instructions

Add the building permit/vacancy data to “geocoding_basemap”.

Select “Display XY Data” as shown below.

35

Make sure the X field is longitude and the Y field is latitude. You will probably get a message to say the table does not have an Object-ID Field, click “OK.”

The data should display on the map and a layer will appear in the Table of Contents. Export the data into the original data folder and add the exported data layer to the map. See the image below. Once this has been done, open the attribute table of the building permit layer. Switch to view only the selected rows as shown below.

36

Go to “Select by Location” under “Selection.” Set the target layer as the building permit layer and the source layer as “all_study_sections” (this shape file should already be on the base map, otherwise it can be found in the original data folder). Using the select tool, select one of the study area sections. Check the box “Use selected features” and then click “Apply.”

37

This should then select all the data points inside the study area and those rows will appear in the attributes table as shown in the image below.

38

From here, scroll along to find the column containing the estimated value of the building permit and select that column.

Right click and select statistics as shown below.

39

This should open a window that shows the sum value of the building permits. Add this figure and the count into the data workbook.

Houses sold (and prices)/Residential Market Value This process takes approximately four hours for each section of the study area, approximately twelve hours total.

Process 1) Go to http://www.trulia.com/ 2) Create a profile 3) Go to ‘Buy’ dropdown and select ‘Chicago Recently Sold Homes.’ 4) Go to ‘Map’ and draw the map of the study area described above. 5) Save the search by selecting “Save Search” button, then rename it

appropriately. 6) After the study area is selected switch to the ‘List.’ 7) Go through the entire list (be sure to hit next) and hit the star maker in

order to make it a favorite 8) Go to your profile and select “My Saved Homes” 9) Select to view 50 per page. Choose Export to Excel 10) Export the other pages to excel and combine them. 11) Be sure to delete all of the saved homes before repeating this process

for the next area.

40

Business Licenses This process should take less than an hour total.

Process 1. Go to https://data.cityofchicago.org/ 2. Enter in “Business Licenses” into the search box. 3. Select the one that is a dataset. 4. Select “Export” in a CSV format. 5. Use only the name, business license number

Instructions for Collecting Walk Score Data

Walk Score (www.walkscore.com) measures the walkability of any address by analyzing hundreds of walking routes to nearby amenities, including restaurants, coffee, bars, groceries, parks, schools, shopping, entertainment and errands. Points are awarded based on the distance to amenities in each of these categories, with maximum points given to amenities within a five-minute walk (a quarter-mile), fewer points given to more distant amenities and no points given for amenities that require more than a 30-minute walk. Each category is weighted equally, then points are summed and normalized on a 0-100 scale. Walk Score also incorporates a measure of pedestrian friendliness by analyzing population density and road metrics (e.g. block length or intersection density). In sum, Walk Scores are driven by choice and proximity of amenities. See below for general interpretations of Walk Scores.

Walk Score Description 90-100 Walker’s Paradise Daily errands do not require a car

70-89 Very Walkable Most errands can be accomplished on foot 50-69 Somewhat Walkable Some errands can be accomplished on foot 25-49 Car-Dependent Most errands require a car

0-24 Car-Dependent Almost all errands require a car Source: walkscore.com

The Walk Scores of individual addresses are updated every 6 months on a rotating basis but there are no scheduled dates for rescoring.

Walk Score does have its shortcomings due to its inability to capture certain variables that one might perceive as important to walkability, including infrastructural and environmental issues. These uncaptured variables include quality of sidewalks, amount of time required to wait at lights, the degree to which streets are well-lit, traffic volume, the number of pedestrian-car accidents, the street-level temperature, crime and weather. It also does not differentiate between types of amenities. For example, a

41

supermarket and a small convenience store that are both located within a quarter-mile of a given individual address receive the same number of points, despite the differences in their quality and type. Further, proximity is a key driver of Walk Score, despite the fact that proximity does not always translate into walkability.

Method

1. Go to www.walkscore.com. 2. Type the intersection of interest into the search bar. Usually, the search engine will

correctly pick up an abbreviated version of the intersection (e.g. “Ashland & Cortland, Chicago, IL”), but occasionally will require a longhand version (e.g. “North Ashland Avenue & West Cortland Avenue, Chicago, IL”).

a. Note: West Cortland Ave. ceases to exist east of North Racine Ave. Thus for the Halsted & Cortland intersection, we use West Armitage Ave., as it is the nearest east-west cross street.

3. Double check that the search engine has returned the correct intersection by checking the bolded address at the top of the page and the intersection at the center of the map.

4. Pull the Walk Score given in the light blue box at the top left corner of the page. See below for a screen shot.

42

Instructions for Conducting the Placemaking Surveys General Method

The survey should be conducted by a team of two research assistants (RAs): one to primarily fill out the form, and the other to assist in counting, timing, taking photos, etc. The RAs may switch roles at any time. The RAs should reach a consensus on each item before proceeding to the next item. RAs should carry out the survey from one corner of each intersection (preferably the same corner for each intersection) and take into consideration everything that is visible for up to one block. One of the RAs will take pictures of the intersection to document the conditions. The survey should be conducted during the day.

The survey will be conducted at each proposed BRT stop along the Ashland corridor from 31St. St. to Cortland Ave. and the corresponding intersections along the Western and Halsted corridors (or closest equivalent). Those intersections are: Cortland (Armitage and Halsted), North, Division, Chicago, Grand, Lake, Madison, Jackson, Harrison, Polk, Roosevelt, 18th, Cermak and 31st.

The survey team should feel safe at all times. If you have any concerns you should feel free to stop the survey and leave the area.

Headings

Intersection: Note the intersection and corner from which the survey was carried out, e.g. “ASHLAND & DIVISION, NW Corner.”

Date/Time: Give the date and time. Use the time when the survey was begun, e.g. “6/2/14, 12.30”. To the nearest five minutes is adequate.

Temp/Weather: Note the approximate temperature as well as notable weather conditions, e.g. “60 degrees, very windy, overcast.”

RA: Record the name of the RA filling out the survey.

Counts

Men, Women, Children, Elderly: Count the number of people over a timed three-minute interval. Do not double count, i.e. if a person is counted once already under “Children” or “Elderly,” do not count them again under “Men” or “Women.” Count all people who are outdoors and visible within one block. Include people who are working such as street sweepers, police officers and construction workers. Include people who are on private property if it is open to the street (e.g. outdoor seating for cafes and bars). Do not include people driving, and count cyclists separately.

43

Use your best judgment as to ages. Children include anyone under the age of 15, elderly anyone over the age of 65. Do not ask people for their ages. If unsure make a note in the comments.

Also make a note in the comments of any reason for an unusual count (such as a large group walking through an otherwise quiet intersection). Comments can also include other significant observations such as whether most people are passing through or stationary, whether the count includes loitering or homeless people or if there is an event or activity going on at the intersection.

At busy intersections keeping a count can be difficult. Use the blank space to make a tally and total at the end of the 3 minutes. Cyclists are especially difficult to count as they often enter and leave the intersection quickly. At busy intersections it is a good idea for the RA keeping time to also be responsible for counting cyclists.

Restaurants/Cafes/Bars: Include all eating and drinking establishments that are visible from the intersection corner within one block. Do not include street vendors, but make a note of them in the comments.

Liquor Stores: Include only stores that have the primary function of selling alcohol.

Grocery Stores/Pharmacies: In the comments you may wish to make note of whether stores are big box, chains, local or ethnic.

Retail Stores: Retail stores include all stores that primarily sell goods such as book stores, clothing stores and electronics stores. Do not include stores that provide services such as hairdressers, unless they obviously have a significant retail aspect. In the comments make note of any ambiguous cases and notable features of the stores (e.g. “several of the stores were dollar stores”).

Entertainment Facilities: Include movie theaters, bowling alleys, arcades, gyms, recreation centers, sports venues and concert venues. Do not include cultural attractions such as art galleries or museums. Do not include any establishment already covered such as bars or cafes.

Double Counts: In most cases an establishment should only be counted once. Try to determine its primary function. For example a bowling alley that sells food or has an attached bar is probably primarily an entertainment facility, but a bar with arcade games would probably be counted as a bar. If the establishment clearly has two separate functions it can be counted under both – for example a bar that has an attached liquor store or a restaurant with an attached grocery store. Consider whether the roles of the establishment seem separate or whether one is subordinate to the other. For example look at how the place describes itself and advertises itself.

44

Sociability

Stewardship (rank): Rank how clean the area is. Take into account unartistic graffiti, broken pavement, trash, maintenance of green space, cigarette butts, clogged drains and broken windows. Include in comments any impressions about cleanliness, including whether the area is neglected or has “grit.”

Welcoming (rank): Take into consideration any attempts to make the intersection feel welcoming as well as the general atmosphere.

Cooperative (Y/N): Shared space includes parks, plazas and communal areas. Do not include private space unless it is clearly accessible to the general public.

Interactive (Y/N): If there is shared space, consider whether it could be used for programming purposes. You should not answer yes to this question if you answered no to the previous question.

Welcoming (Y/N): Look for any signs, information kiosks, neighborhood maps or street light banners.

Access & Linkages

Counts: Any rail connections can be included in the comments. Count all bus shelters, but do not count stops without a shelter. Count each Divvy station visible within a block.

Readable: Report missing and unreadable street name signs. There should usually be four street signs at the intersection. Unreadable includes any sign that cannot easily be read because of graffiti or vandalism, but also because the sign is obstructed from view (in this case consider whether the sign is viewable from a relevant position not necessarily the street corner you are standing at). You should be able to read the entire street name as well as the block number that comes below the name. (e.g. 800 W). In ambiguous cases make a note in the comments. The comments can also be used to make note of additional wayfinding signs.

Walkable: Report the number of crossings that are not controlled by a street light. Crossings that require the pedestrian to activate the walk sign should be considered controlled. Uncontrolled crossings are ones where there are only stop signs. Include cases where there are lights but they are not operating as a controlled crossing (when flashing red light functions as stop signs). In unusual cases make a note in the comments.

Accessible: Indicators of accessibility include wheel ramps, detectable ground surfaces and other ADA infrastructure. Mark yes if any of these are present.

Comfort & Image

45

There is significant overlap in the different aspects of image. It is reasonable to take into account graffiti when judging both the attractiveness and safety of an area. Attractiveness may also be ranked higher because of green features like trees. Also try to think about non-visual factors, such as noise and smells.

Safe (rank): Consider how safe the intersection feels. Take into account negative loitering, and evidence of neglect. Base the rating on the experience of being at the intersection, rather than any prior knowledge of the area or its reputation.

Green (rank): Consider the quality and quantity of green features such as trees, grass, flowers and bushes. Also consider other environmentally friendly features such as solar-powered lighting.

Attractive (rank): Take into account murals, art, sculptures, how store fronts look, cleanliness and graffiti. Think here about what noises and smells there are. However, attractiveness does not have to be the same as cleanliness. Consider the character of the intersection and take into account contrasting ways an intersection can be attractive (green and peaceful vs. lively and bright; artsy and “lived in” vs. clean and maintained).

Safe (count): Count of any street lamps or other lights that are broken/out (this may not be possible to tell during the day). Include traffic lights and walk signs if they are broken or do not light up.

Clean (count): Count the total number of trash cans, recycling receptacles or equivalent objects in sight of the corner. Do not include dumpsters or private waste receptacles. Make a note in the comments of special features.

Sittable (count): Count of bench and seats should be an estimate of the total seating available (a bench that can sit three should be counted as three). Do not include benches that are part of bus shelters or any outdoor seating for cafes/bars etc. Do not include anything ledges, walls or street furniture that can be used as a seat/table but is not designed for that purpose. Unusable tables and seating (e.g. broken or filthy) should not be counted but a note should be made in the comments.

Attractive (count): Count sculptures, art work and fountains. Do not count items that will be included in the celebratory section – statues of individuals, commemorative plaques, memorials, honorary street names and ethnic flags.

Uses & Activities

Active (rank): Take into consideration people coming and going, the activity of people in the intersection and the general atmosphere. However, do not take into account the amount of motor traffic. Work going on in the intersection can be considered, but

46

construction work or industrial work that is visible but away from the intersection should probably not be considered “active.”

Useful (count): Count all the newspaper dispensers and mail boxes that are visible within one block. Include only items on the street, not inside of buildings.

Celebratory: Include statues of individuals, commemorative plaques, memorials, honorary street names and ethnic flags. If an item does not fall under one of these categories but seems relevant, include it as a comment. Murals are often celebratory but should be counted under the “attractive” count.

General Comments

Please include any brief comments that you consider important. This could include features that were not included in any of the counts but seem important (Schools, Hospitals, Government Buildings) or the context of the area (e.g. part of the UIC campus). You may also want to describe aspects of the neighborhood not captured already in the survey – such as a strong ethnic identity or a high level of diversity.

It is likely that you will come across situations that are not explicitly covered in the instructions and will have to use your judgment about how to proceed. This comment section (as well as the specific comment space) is a good place to make a note of any decisions you have made about how to record a particular item. Where uncertainty exists over a count, this can also be mentioned.

See example placemaking survey below.

48

Appendix B: Technical summary and data sources

Figure 1: Study areas in Chicago

Data gathered from City of Chicago Data Portal Accessed May 2014.

Figure 2: Ashland Avenue land use 2014


Figure 3: Race and ethnicity demographics in study areas 2014

Figure 4, 5, 6, and 7: Building permits issued in Chicago from 2006 - 2013


Building Permits issued in Chicago from 2006 to 2013 Study area 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

South Ashland 159 111 120 147 124 148 120 116 Central Ashland 199 207 177 267 202 196 149 200 North Ashland 477 506 487 385 374 370 338 431 South Halsted 181 187 169 154 152 122 145 151 Central Halsted 432 397 352 303 276 299 314 337 North Halsted 420 448 421 450 491 413 353 418 South Western 102 104 92 125 91 119 86 79 Central Western 250 216 170 174 224 152 131 144 North Western 529 484 388 415 378 348 357 445 City of Chicago 45414 45638 40846 39999 38960 35553 34,705 34,965

49

Figure 8: Construction of new buildings in Chicago from 2006 – 2010

Data gathered from city of Chicago data portal. Accessed May 2014 https://data.cityofchicago.org/

Figure 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 and 15: Homes sold in Chicago from August to May 2014

This data was captured from Truila. Accessed May 2014 http://www.trulia.com/

50

Figure 16: Active business licenses in Chicago 2013


Figure 17 and 18: The percent of jobs filled by local residents in Chicago community areas and Percentage of Chicago community areas jobs filled by local residents Data from Census’ On the Map http://onthemap.ces.census.gov/ from 2011 Accessed April 2014

Employment data from Census' On The Map Chicago 2011

Community Area Employed

in Living

in Employed in and Live in

Jobs filled by locals

Residents working locally

Rogers Park 9,724 22,568 927 9.53% 4.11% West Ridge 9,632 23,969 1,315 13.65% 5.49% Edgewater 9,381 24,923 952 10.15% 3.82% Lincoln Square 6,487 19,227 562 8.66% 2.92% Uptown 12,081 23,879 1,234 10.21% 5.17% Lakeview 18,373 53,406 2,194 11.94% 4.11% Lincoln Park 24,424 31,523 1,588 6.50% 5.04% Near North Side 146,962 38,971 7,474 5.09% 19.18% The Loop 370,957 14,956 5,407 1.46% 36.15% North Center 9,875 17,942 608 6.16% 3.39% North Park 4,726 6,529 159 3.36% 2.44% Albany Park 5,163 16,850 459 8.89% 2.72% Irving Park 9,489 20,801 646 6.81% 3.11% Avondale 11,934 14,648 450 3.77% 3.07% Logan Square 14,282 32,381 1,063 7.44% 3.28% West Town 29,707 39,291 2,533 8.53% 6.45%

51

Near West Side 109,709 24,626 3,463 3.16% 14.06% Forest Glen 4,347 8,881 262 6.03% 2.95% Jefferson Park 4,449 12,546 236 5.30% 1.88% Portage Park 9,912 24,328 959 9.68% 3.94% Hermosa 3,599 6,985 191 5.31% 2.73% Belmont Cragin 9,217 25,034 730 7.92% 2.92% Humboldt Park 8,293 16,063 369 4.45% 2.30% East Garfield Park 2,431 5,983 98 4.03% 1.64% West Garfield Park 1,833 5,189 28 1.53% 0.54% North Lawndale 5,760 9,247 274 4.76% 2.96% South Lawndale 12,131 15,077 705 5.81% 4.68% Norwood Park 13,573 17,210 772 5.69% 4.49% Edison Park 2,723 5,290 108 3.97% 2.04% O'Hare 50,558 5,183 431 0.85% 8.32% Dunning 6,268 18,354 501 7.99% 2.73% Montclare 2,062 4,635 87 4.22% 1.88% Austin 15,884 31,388 1,254 7.89% 4.00% Near South Side 13,287 9,900 252 1.90% 2.55% Armour Square 2,668 4,575 545 20.43% 11.91% Bridgeport 6,242 11,829 581 9.31% 4.91% Lower West Side 15,160 10,306 726 4.79% 7.04% McKinley Park 4,649 5,149 104 2.24% 2.02% Brighton Park 5,107 11,765 413 8.09% 3.51% Archer Heights 8,404 4,620 233 2.77% 5.04% Garfield Ridge 12,075 13,756 653 5.41% 4.75% Clearing 3,075 10,010 206 6.70% 2.06% West Elsdon 2,065 5,805 93 4.50% 1.60% Gage Park 3,858 9,748 211 5.47% 2.16% New City 11,444 10,651 683 5.97% 6.41% Fuller Park 1,293 735 12 0.93% 1.63% Douglas 23,876 5,953 286 1.20% 4.80% Grand Boulevard 2,224 6,713 117 5.26% 1.74% Oakland 278 1,985 6 2.16% 0.30% Kenwood 1,213 6,596 89 7.34% 1.35% Hyde Park 24,429 10,200 3,093 12.66% 30.32% Washington Park 500 3,313 9 1.80% 0.27% Englewood 1,783 7,543 106 5.95% 1.41% West Englewood 1,497 10,361 69 4.61% 0.67% Chicago Lawn 6,929 15,228 355 5.12% 2.33% West Lawn 6,444 10,676 239 3.71% 2.24% Ashburn 7,471 15,541 260 3.48% 1.67% Auburn Gresham 2,701 13,470 209 7.74% 1.55% Greater Grand Crossing 3,594 9,397 179 4.98% 1.90%

52

South Shore 4,284 15,542 422 9.85% 2.72% Avalon Park 2,417 3,317 61 2.52% 1.84% South Chicago 2,412 8,098 202 8.37% 2.49% Chatham 6,135 9,549 275 4.48% 2.88% Burnside 542 821 0 0.00% 0.00% Calumet Heights 2,361 4,529 55 2.33% 1.21% East Side 1,264 7,266 222 17.56% 3.06% South Deering 4,698 4,590 72 1.53% 1.57% Pullman 1,699 2,403 33 1.94% 1.37% Roseland 3,384 12,258 240 7.09% 1.96% Washington Heights 2,026 8,037 90 4.44% 1.12% West Pullman 1,062 9,482 45 4.24% 0.47% Riverdale 1,315 1,288 8 0.61% 0.62% Hegewisch 2,085 3,975 95 4.56% 2.39% Beverly 3,706 10,476 284 7.66% 2.71% Mount Greenwood 2,887 9,340 247 8.56% 2.64% Woodlawn 2,122 6,873 160 7.54% 2.33% Morgan Park 2,683 8,322 195 7.27% 2.34%

Figure 19: Crimes and study areas in Chicago 2013

Data gathered from city of Chicago data portal. Accessed May 2014 https://data.cityofchicago.org/

55

Figure 20: Vacancies in the Chicago study areas

Figure 21, 22: Walkability rating for each intersection in Chicago study areas 2014

The walkability data was obtained from walkscore.com in March 2014.

56

Figure 23, 24, 25: People recorded at intersections in study areas 2014

All of the quality of life and placemaking survey data was collected in the field by the authors from May to July 2014. Hard copies of the each intersection survey are available.

Ashland Avenue intersection survey results

Street Name W Cortlan

d St

W North Ave.

W Division St.

W Chicago

Ave.

W Grand

Ave.

W Lake St.

W M

adison

St.

W Ja

ckson Blvd

.

W Harrison St.

W Polk St.

W Roo

sevelt Rd.

W 18th St.

W Cermak Rd

W 31st Pl

Men 1 11 26 21 9 23 12 7 19 11 12 24 11 19 Women 2 7 20 24 10 11 10 9 17 14 26 24 12 19 Children 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 2 Elderly 0 1 4 4 0 1 0 1 5 0 1 4 0 0 Cyclists 10 5 4 4 4 5 3 1 0 10 2 8 3 1 Resturants_Cafes_Bars. 0 4 6 1 1 1 4 0 0 0 2 5 0 0 LiquorStores 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 GrocerStores_Pharmacies 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 Retail 0 1 7 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 Entertainment 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Financial_Institutions 0 1 2 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 0 0 Stewardship 2 3 3 3 3 2 3 4 4 3 3 2 2 2 Welcoming 2 3 2 2 2 2 3 1 3 2 2 2 2 2 Cooperative N N Y N N N Y N N N Y N Y N Interactive N N Y N N N N N N N Y N Y N Welcoming N N N N N N N N N N N N Y N Bus Shelters 2 0 4 2 2 2 2 0 1 0 1 0 3 1 Divvy Stations 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Bicycle racks 0 0 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 Readable 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 Walkable 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Accessible Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Safe 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 4 3 3 3 2 2 Green 1 2 2 2 2 3 3 4 3 2 2 2 2 1 Attractive 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 4 4 2 2 2 2 2 Safe 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Clean 1 2 2 4 1 2 3 4 3 3 1 2 1 1

57

Benches_Seats 6 9 0 6 0 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 Tables 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Attractive 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Active 2 2 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 Newspaper 2 7 4 8 4 1 2 4 0 3 0 5 3 0 Mail boxes 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 4 1 1 0 1 0 0 Celebratory 0 0 1 2 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 Comments

SSA decorative trash cans and

com

mun

ity watch person

1 Giant USA

flag

Three sign

s were presen

t but obstructed from

view

RUSH

med

ical

One

Chu

rch, UIC, p

olice blocking

traffic northbo

und an

d directing traffic

Extra lights alon

g walking

path area. V

ery ba

d street (p

otho

les) north of the

intersection

Mayan

calen

dar symbo

l

solar/wind po

wer clean

ene

rgy info.

all of the

peo

ple were by th

e cta stop

58

Western Avenue intersection survey results

Street Name W Cortlan

d St

W North Ave.

W Division St.

W Chicago

Ave.

W Grand

Ave.

W Lake St.

W M

adison

St.

W Ja

ckson Blvd

.

W Harrison St.

W Polk St.

W Roo

sevelt Rd.

W 18th St.

W Cermak Rd

W 31st Pl

Men 7 11 9 18 6 3 22 15 9 13 10 4 13 0 Women 3 10 7 14 2 2 8 10 7 2 6 1 22 0 Children 0 1 0 1 0 0 4 7 3 4 7 1 4 0 Elderly 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 Cyclists 1 6 4 1 4 0 2 1 1 0 3 1 4 0 Resturants_Cafes_Bars. 3 4 1 2 0 0 4 1 0 1 2 0 4 0 LiquorStores 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 GrocerStores_Pharmacies 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 2 0 Retail 3 3 0 1 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 12 0 Entertainment 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Financial_Institutions 1 1 0 1 2 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 2 0 Stewardship 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 Welcoming 3 2 2 3 3 2 2 3 3 2 2 2 3 1 Cooperative N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Interactive N N N N Y N N N N N N N N N Welcoming N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Bus Shelters 1 2 2 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 3 1 2 0 Divvy Stations 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Bicycle racks 2 0 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 Readable 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Walkable 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Accessible N Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Safe 3 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 2 2 3 3 Green 2 2 2 2 3 3 2 2 2 3 2 2 2 3 Attractive 2 3 2 3 3 2 3 2 2 0 2 1 2 2 Safe 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Clean 2 1 0 3 0 0 2 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 Benches_Seats 0 6 72 0 0 0 18 0 0 0 9 0 3 0 Tables 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Attractive 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 Active 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

59

Newspaper 6 4 3 2 4 0 0 0 3 0 1 0 4 0 Mail boxes 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 Celebratory 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 Comments

Seating Area with tables and

cha

irs conn

ected to a resturant

Ice cream ven

dor, one

flag, p

ainted

pots for plan

ts.

ICE CR

EAM M

AN, SPE

CIAL WASTE CA

N COVER

S PR

OVIDED

BY SSA

West h

aven

military acade

my

60

Halsted Street intersection survey results

Street Name W Arm

itage Ave.

W North Ave.

W Division St.

W Chicago

Ave.

W Grand

Ave.

W Lake St.

W M

adison

St.

W Ja

ckson Blvd

.

W Harrison St.

W Polk St.

W Roo

sevelt Rd.

W 18th St.

W Cermak Rd

W 31st Pl

Men 13 19 11 4 15 7 13 26 15 26 14 10 3 10 Women 14 20 4 5 11 4 7 25 7 30 18 6 4 12 Children 3 0 0 3 2 0 1 2 0 2 2 0 0 1 Elderly 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 Cyclists 6 3 6 8 17 0 6 7 5 6 4 4 1 4 Resturants_Cafes_Bars. 5 1 3 1 4 1 0 3 0 0 4 1 2 3 LiquorStores 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 GrocerStores_Pharmacies 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 Retail 3 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 3 Entertainment 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 Financial_Institutions 3 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 Stewardship 3 3 2 2 3.5 3 3 3 3 4 4 3 3 3 Welcoming 3 3 2 2 3.5 2 3 4 3 4 3 3 2 2 Cooperative N Y Y N N N N N Y N Y N N Y Interactive N Y Y N N N N N Y N Y N N Y Welcoming N Y Y N N N N N N N N N N N Bus Shelters 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 Divvy Stations 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 Bicycle racks 0 2 0 5 2 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 2 0 Readable 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 Walkable 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Accessible N Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Safe 3 4 2 2 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 Green 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 2 2 2 2 Attractive 4 4 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 4 3 2 2 Safe 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Clean 1 2 0 0 1 1 4 3 0 5 3 1 0 1 Benches_Seats 0 40 6 6 0 0 0 0 0 50 80 0 3 0 Tables 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Attractive 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 3 0 1 0 0 0

61

Active 3 4 3 3 4 3 3 3 0 4 3 4 3 3 Newspaper 0 5 0 1 3 0 4 3 0 3 0 2 0 4 Mail boxes 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 Celebratory 0 0 0 1 1 0 2 1 1 2 1 0 0 0 Comments

PLANTER ON SIDEW

ALK

APP

LE STO

RE L STO

P, PUBLIC ARE

A W

ITH FOUNTA

IN

ONE CE

LEBR

ATO

RY SIGN HIDDEN

BEH

IND BEN

CH

PAINTED ON STO

RE FRO

NT FO

R DEC

ORA

TION OF AN EMPT

Y BU

ILDING

UIC FLA

G

BY UIC, U

IC FLA

GS

Figure 26, 27: Images of study areas captured in the field by authors, 2014

brt current conditions analysis

Documents