Questions and Answers (Q&A) Forgotten Chicago Forum
Have a question about a specific element in Chicago's history? Ask Away!
Ardmore & Melvina
Posted by:
Kchi
()
Date: August 03, 2013 11:05AM
I was traveling west on Ardmore off of Milwaukee Ave and whe I got to the 6200 block at Melvina the street narrowed to one lane. What is strange that is that what would normally be a lane was covered with grass anfd barriers to warn drivers. This strip was only alongside one house from the alley to Melvina. Once you cross Melvina Ardmore resumed as two lanes.
Does anybody have any information as to why the street is blocked as this looks like a safety hazard?
Does anybody have any information as to why the street is blocked as this looks like a safety hazard?
Re: Ardmore & Melvina
Posted by:
WayOutWardell
()
Date: August 03, 2013 12:00PM
I know exactly the spot you're talking about. I wonder if it's not a means to discourage and/or slow down traffic that would use Ardmore as a shortcut between Milwaukee and Nagle.
There was a similar three-color concrete cone barrier at Keeler and Irving, to prevent cars from entering the one-way part of Keeler.
On Historic Aerials, that bump-out on Ardmore shows up in the 1962 photograph.
There was a similar three-color concrete cone barrier at Keeler and Irving, to prevent cars from entering the one-way part of Keeler.
On Historic Aerials, that bump-out on Ardmore shows up in the 1962 photograph.
Re: Ardmore & Melvina
Posted by:
PKDickman
()
Date: August 03, 2013 02:30PM
Curb bulbouts have become a common part of CDOTs lexicon. The are supposed to have a "traffic calming" effect and shorten the distance pedestrians have to cross in front of traffic, but mostly they use them to get enough length to shoehorn in an ADA compliant ramp.
But this one seem to have a much weirder story.
According to the plat map, that was originally a deeded lot. It was taken by the city in 46/47 to widen Ardmore, but apparently it was never done.
A 1955 trib article had the people complaining about it. According Ald Immel (the alderman in '55) it was an artifact of the original subdivision. Back in those days motor fuel tax money was not available for side streets and to pave it would have meant a special assessment for the property owners.
I guess they didn't want to pay, because it is still there.
But this one seem to have a much weirder story.
According to the plat map, that was originally a deeded lot. It was taken by the city in 46/47 to widen Ardmore, but apparently it was never done.
A 1955 trib article had the people complaining about it. According Ald Immel (the alderman in '55) it was an artifact of the original subdivision. Back in those days motor fuel tax money was not available for side streets and to pave it would have meant a special assessment for the property owners.
I guess they didn't want to pay, because it is still there.
Re: Ardmore & Melvina
Posted by:
Kchi
()
Date: August 06, 2013 11:21AM
Thank You PK! I found the article, and I would like to use the word unbelievable, but this is is Chicago so nothing is too hard to believe. Part of the headline, reads Solution Baffles the City?
So we have a known hazard that goes all the way back to 1893, and was written up in the paper in 1955. Here we are in 2013 and the "City That Works" sees no problem or hurry in fixing it.
The article indicates that the problem is that Motor vehicle tax money could not be used and the property owners would need to be assessed.
So in 68 years, a proposal could not be passed changing a law to allow the money to be used on a non arterial street and the city cannot or will not force an assessment!!!!!!
This is the same city that was able to send bulldozers and tear up Meigs field overnight. This is the same city that you would have to think over the last 68 years must have had equipment repaving Ardmore and Melvina but could not tear up a grass strip!!!!!!!!!!!!
This is a city that is not shy about raising sales taxes, doubling our water bills, annually raising the property tax for schools and if you read the Tribune will soon be raisng our property taxes due to a 1 BILLION shortfall, but they could not find the money to pave a one block section.
We deserve what we get by accepting and voting in the politicians we do!
So we have a known hazard that goes all the way back to 1893, and was written up in the paper in 1955. Here we are in 2013 and the "City That Works" sees no problem or hurry in fixing it.
The article indicates that the problem is that Motor vehicle tax money could not be used and the property owners would need to be assessed.
So in 68 years, a proposal could not be passed changing a law to allow the money to be used on a non arterial street and the city cannot or will not force an assessment!!!!!!
This is the same city that was able to send bulldozers and tear up Meigs field overnight. This is the same city that you would have to think over the last 68 years must have had equipment repaving Ardmore and Melvina but could not tear up a grass strip!!!!!!!!!!!!
This is a city that is not shy about raising sales taxes, doubling our water bills, annually raising the property tax for schools and if you read the Tribune will soon be raisng our property taxes due to a 1 BILLION shortfall, but they could not find the money to pave a one block section.
We deserve what we get by accepting and voting in the politicians we do!
Re: Ardmore & Melvina
Posted by:
Jeff_Weiner
()
Date: August 06, 2013 10:17PM
As a retired CDOT employee, I'm not surprised. Some neighbor hoods would kill to get a big bulb-out like that, but Rahmbo is only interested in reducing staff to save money. Like my old haunt, down to two traffic engineers to deal with timing and coordination of 2,905 signalized intersections!
Re: Ardmore & Melvina
Posted by:
tomcat630
()
Date: August 11, 2013 06:33PM
Google maps shows it clear.
I'm willing to bet the homeowners like it and would not want it changed. As a barrier to short cutters flying through residential areas.
At this point in time, why bother paying the $?
I'm willing to bet the homeowners like it and would not want it changed. As a barrier to short cutters flying through residential areas.
At this point in time, why bother paying the $?
