The Psychology of Traffic and Obesity

  • Dr. Tanya Berry says the thing that most often kept people from walking was the feeling that there are too many cars on the street. (Photo courtesy of Nathan Johnson, iWalk)

Researchers tell us one way to stay trim is to walk more often. But that’s hard in some neighborhoods – maybe sidewalks are bad or there’re no stores to walk to. Shawn Allee found one researcher who thinks what really stops us … is actually in our heads.

Transcript

Researchers tell us one way to stay trim is to walk more often.

But that’s hard in some neighborhoods – maybe sidewalks are bad or there are no stores to walk to.

Shawn Allee found one researcher who thinks what really stops us … is actually in our heads.

Dr. Tanya Berry researches physical activity, and she surveyed people living in Edmonton, Canada.

She calculated how trim or fat they were, then she logged details about their neighborhoods, things like how many stores are nearby and how many cars pass through the area.
Berry says the thing that mattered most, and kept people from walking was a subjective feeling that there are too many cars on the street.

“There was too much traffic in their neighborhoods, it made it difficult to walk, so they chose to jump in their cars and contribute to the traffic problem.”

Berry says her research team will look at how buildings and streets can be designed to make pedestrians feel there’s less traffic than there actually is, and maybe feel more comfortable walking down the street.

For The Environment Report, I’m Shawn Allee.

Related Links

Rolling Out a New Tire Program

  • This is a mock-up of what the proposed label would look like (Photo courtesy of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration)

Back in 2007, Congress told the
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration to come up with
new fuel efficiency labels on tires.
Mark Brush reports on when we might
see those labels in tire shops:

Transcript

Back in 2007, Congress told the
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration to come up with
new fuel efficiency labels on tires.
Mark Brush reports on when we might
see those labels in tire shops:

It’s been 2 years, and the government is still working out how to get this labeling program going.

Right now, if you walk into a tire shop, it’s hard to compare tires on how fuel efficient they are. There’s no official standard yet.

But that should change soon. The new tire labeling program is expected to roll it out in the next few months.

Dan Zielinski is a spokesman for the Rubber Manufacturers Association. He says they support a labeling law because it’ll help competition.

It could give tire makers something to brag about.

“’It will be an incentive to say ‘my tire is better because,’ or, ‘my range of tires here are better because.’ It offers the consumers better performance on certain criteria. And I think that will drive the market even before the consumer demand does.”

A more fuel efficient tire will only get you a couple of miles per gallon more. But, put those tires on the 200 million cars and trucks driving the roads these days, and that could add up.

For The Environment Report, I’m Mark Brush.

Related Links

Phantom Traffic Jams

  • A phantom traffic jam is when everyone slows down or stops, but starts to go again inexplicably (Photo source: Crazytales at Wikimedia Commons)

According the the last report from
the Texas Transportation Institute,
traffic congestion in the US causes
more than four-billion lost hours stuck
in traffic and nearly three-billion
gallons of wasted fuel. Lester Graham
reports mathmeticians have found – on
paper – one type of traffic jam looks
something like a bomb going off:

Transcript

According the the last report from
the Texas Transportation Institute,
traffic congestion in the US causes
more than four-billion lost hours stuck
in traffic and nearly three-billion
gallons of wasted fuel. Lester Graham
reports mathmeticians have found – on
paper – one type of traffic jam looks
something like a bomb going off:

Phantom traffic jams are frustrating. You know the kind – traffic slows downs or completely stops, and when you finally get to the end, there’s no wreck, no closed lane – nothing.

Mathematicians at MIT say these phantom jams are a lot like detonation waves produced by explosions.

Morris Flynn is the lead author of the report published in the online edition of Physical Review E.

“You have a single person who taps on their brakes. The driver behind them will over-react, hit their brakes just a little bit harder than the person in front. And this disturbance is just cascaded all the way back so that eventually you get this very rapid deceleration.”

And, phantom traffic jam.

Solutions: more lanes on the highway, and automated signs that warn drivers about slowed traffic ahead.

Or, get more people on mass transit.

For The Environment Report, I’m Lester Graham.

Related Links

The Logic of Parking Rate Hikes

  • Cyrus Haghighi owns a food and gift shop in Chicago's Andersonville neighborhood, which has become a retail hot-spot in recent years. Haghighi worries suburbanites will avoid his shop once Chicago hikes its parking prices. (Photo by Shawn Allee)

Nobody likes to pay more than
they need to for parking, but a lot
of cities are bumping up the price
lately. Chicago’s going with one
of the biggest hikes. In most
neighborhoods prices are doubling,
and they’ll jump again and again
for years to come. Shawn Allee wondered what might happen to
businesses when parking gets pricier:

Transcript

Nobody likes to pay more than
they need to for parking, but a lot
of cities are bumping up the price
lately. Chicago’s going with one
of the biggest hikes. In most
neighborhoods prices are doubling,
and they’ll jump again and again
for years to come. Shawn Allee wondered what might happen to
businesses when parking gets pricier:

I’m in a neighborhood miles from Chicago’s glitzy downtown, but there’re still
plenty of shops, restaurants and furniture stores to attract shoppers up here.

One problem the neighborhood has is parking.

Until recently, it only cost 25 cents per hour to park here. As you can guess, the very
cheap price for parking has meant very few parking spots available for people who
are driving through.

Now, the neighborhood’s going through a change. It’s bumping up to 75 cents per
hour, and in a few years it will cost 2 dollars per hour.

So, I’m here to see what businesses think will happen to their bottom line once this
price increase for parking comes through.

I’m gonna start at this grocery store.

It’s called Pars Grocery – the sign here says it serves up Mediterranean food, teas,
and gifts.

The owner’s Cyrus Haghighi.

Haghighi: “So of course nobody would come and it would be too expensive for them
to spend too much money for the parking, and I don’t know why they’re doing this
– it makes everybody worried.

Well, that’s one owner who thinks the parking price increase is going to scare
shoppers away.

But I went around the neighborhood to get some other opinions, and I’m now at
another store – the Andersonville Galleria.

I have a clerk here.

His name is Rafe Pipin

Rafe what do you think of the parking price increase?

Pipin: “With the parking meter rates being a quarter an hour now, what happens a
lot of times is that store employees or managers take up the parking on the street
and stay there all day, whereas this may might provoke them to look for parking
further away. So they wouldn’t have to feed higher meter rates all day and open up
space for people visiting the neighborhood to do some shopping.”

Okay. We have two opinions.

One, higher prices will scare people away.

And, another that higher prices might free up space for more paying customers.

Who’s got it right?

Well, I put this to a kind of parking guru.

His name’s Donald Shoup, and he teaches at UCLA.

I’ve told Dr. Shoup about how tight parking is in this neighborhood and where prices are
headed.

“The higher prices that drive away some people will attract other people who are
willing to pay for the curb parking if they can easily find a space. Well, who do you
think will spend more in a store or leave a bigger tip in a restaurant? Somebody
who will come only park free or someone who’s willing to pay the market price for
parking if they can easily find a vacant space?”

Dr. Shoup says cities often make parking too cheap.

He says this discourages public transit.

Plus, it wastes gas because meters fill up fast, and shoppers keep driving around to find
the few empty ones.

Shoup says politicians just don’t want to increase fees.

In Chicago’s case, the city privatized parking meters, so the city made one tough decision
that will last 75 years.

Shoup says there’s a better way – set aside some of the parking money and spend it in
neighborhoods that generate it. Donald Shoup says some people still won’t like parking price increases.

But he says there’s plenty of fuss at first, but then people eventually chuck over the
additional money and forget the increase ever happened.

For The Environment Report, I’m Shawn Allee.

Related Links

Living Near the Polluting Fastlane

  • Researchers have found that breathing the air near busy streets can actually be markedly worse for your health than the air that's even just 200 yards away from that busy street. (Photo by Karen Kelly)

A lot of people like to wake up with a morning run.

But where you choose to exercise can have a big impact on

your health. Karen Kelly has the story:

Transcript

A lot of people like to wake up with a morning run. But where you choose to exercise can have a big impact on your health. Karen Kelly has the story:


In downtown neighborhoods like mine, in Ottawa, Canada, most people walk to work.


And there are two ways to get there – take one of the main drags like Elgin Street…


(sound of traffic)


Or, take the foot path along the Rideau Canal – just two blocks away.


(sound of quieter path)


Now, if you’re in a hurry, you might choose the busier, more direct route. But researchers at McMaster University in Hamilton, Ontario have found if you do that, you’ll be sucking in a lot more pollution.


Brian McCarry is an air quality expert who led the study.


“If you’re back from a major road – typically 200 yards from a major road – then the air pollution is about 10 times less than if you were on that major road.”


Now, it sounds like common sense – you’re near traffic? You’re going to breathe in exhaust.


But McCarry says they were surprised by the difference in pollution between the busy street and a quieter street even one or two blocks away.


“I think what we’re really surprised by is the impacts of cars and trucks along major roads, and how quickly that impact, or the concentrations, disperse. When you are actually driving around seeing this, you go ‘wow, that’s amazing.’”


Now, usually instruments that measure pollution are stuck in one place. What’s different about this study is that they piled their instruments into a van and measured the air quality while they were driving. So they saw the number of particulates surge on the highway – those are tiny particles that come out of our tailpipes – and then quickly drop off when the van goes into a quiet neighborhood.


McCarry says those particulates, along with oxides of nitrogen, are bad for our lungs and our heart, and can be deadly for someone who already has health problems.


“It’s not just the dying, but there are many people who do show up at their doctor’s complaining of not feeling well, of having headaches, shortness of breath, and then there are a number of people who don’t show up at their doctor who just simply don’t go to work because they don’t feel very good during these high ozone events.”


And for those of us driving on highways?


McCarry says the air quality there is horrible. He says keep your car windows closed and use the recirculate button to avoid bringing in more pollution.


The same goes for people who live near these roads: close your windows during rush hour.


I talked to some commuters who live in my neighborhood and asked them if pollution influenced their decisions.


“Even though I live right downtown, what I tend to do is find a route that actually skirts the city completely.”


“If I can avoid main streets, I will go out of my way to do that. It’s not necessarily first and foremost an environment thing but I do appreciate good air quality and I also like the scenery of the canal and the pathways in Ottawa.”


These findings on air pollution have led to some changes.


In Hamilton, Ontario, they passed a no-idling law and plan to build future bike paths away from major roads. Plus, they and Toronto replaced their old street sweepers –
that kicked up toxic dust – with new ones that remove dust completely.


That’s attracted interest from some American cities.


But while there are many changes that cities can make, researcher Brian McCarry says these findings can help all of us make healthier choices.


For the Environment Report, I’m Karen Kelly.

Related Links

Traffic Jam on the Tracks

  • This Canadian National train waits for a signal in South Holland, Illinois. South Holland, like Chicago itself, is criss-crossed with rail lines. South Holland would likely see fewer CN trains move through its town, should CN’s buyout of the EJ & E Railway get federal approval. (Photo by Shawn Allee)

American drivers hate getting stuck
in traffic jams. Well, they don’t get much
sympathy from railroads – they’ve got traffic
jams of their own. There’s one place in
particular where the train’s run so slow it
can take a day to move a train of chemicals,
furniture, and cars just a few miles. One
company tried to buy its way out of the problem.
Reporter Shawn Allee explains how that blew up
into a fight all of us might pay for:

Transcript

American drivers hate getting stuck
in traffic jams. Well, they don’t get much
sympathy from railroads – they’ve got traffic
jams of their own. There’s one place in
particular where the train’s run so slow it
can take a day to move a train of chemicals,
furniture, and cars just a few miles. One
company tried to buy its way out of the problem.
Reporter Shawn Allee explains how that blew up
into a fight all of us might pay for:

If you buy a new car or build a new house, there’s a good chance the stuff to build it
sat in a Chicago-area rail yard for a while. Railroads from the East Coast, the West
Coast, the South, and Canada all converge there. Trains in Chicago compete for
track, so they practically crawl.

Canadian National Railway doesn’t like it, and PR guy Jim Kvedaras, says no one in
America should like it either.

“Everything anybody eats, drinks, wears, lives in, moves by rail somewhere in its
production chain. If we, as the transportation provider, can offer a better service for
customers, the ultimate that contains their cost structure with the ultimate beneficiary
being the consumer.”

Kvedaras says Canadian National has a fix. It would buy a competing rail line that
runs a loop around Chicago. The company would shift trains to that less-congested
track.

The deal needs federal approval, but before that happens, Chicago-area towns are
fighting over it.

Those along the current route tell horror stories of living with too many
trains. Suburbs along the proposed by-pass route don’t want those hassles in their towns.

One place that would benefit by train traffic moving away is South Holland.

Mayor Don DeGraf says a quick car ride shows why he supports the deal.

“We’re approaching the intersection where it’s not at all unusual where we have a
train blockage.”
Shawn Allee: “Speaking of the devil, look right ahead.”

Mayor DeGraf: “It’s right up in front of us. It’s a daily occurrence.”

Allee: “I mean it’s not moving.”

Mayor DeGraf: “No, it’s just standing there. And the reason is very simple: there’s just no place for
these trains to go.”

DeGraf says inconvenience is the least of his worries.

“It becomes almost like the Bermuda Triangle, where you can’t go from one side of
town to the other side of town. So we rely on a neighboring community to give us
additional fire protection for situations like we’re experiencing right now, where a
train’s blocking the crossing.

South Holland is just one of sixty-six towns that could benefit from Canadian National’s buyout of
the by-pass route.

But dozens of towns are fighting the deal. One is Frankfort.

Frankfort gets just a trickle of rail traffic, but it might get four times as many trains
going through town.

Resident Ken Gillette’s backyard is right next to the by-pass route.

“Here I buy a house out here and ten months later, this is gonna go through. I
actually had told me wife, she wanted the house and I says, one day, those tracks
could be sold and there’d be hundreds of trains going by there every week and sure
enough that’s what happened.”

Allee: “Did you guys have some serious discussions after that?”

Gillette: “Oh yeah, not good ones, you know.”

Other Frankfort residents have similar stories. It’s little wonder the town wants the
government to stop Canadian National’s buyout deal.

Mayor Jim Holland says Frankfort’s not just being selfish. He says suburbs will want
protection from traffic hazards, and Canadian National’s offering to pay a fraction of
the cost.

“It’s assumed that the American taxpayer will eventually have to pay for the
overpasses, the extra gates and such that will be put on the railroad. And that’s
mostly United States tax dollars that pay for those.”

There’s no perfect ending to Chicago’s rail traffic mess. Even when companies like
Canadian National want to fix the problem themselves, everyone pays.

We’ll likely pay to soften the blow to towns that will see more trains passing through.
But we also pay higher transportation costs if too many trains sit idle.

For The Environment Report, I’m Shawn Allee.

Related Links

Co2 Crops Not Tops

  • Theories that crops, such as the corn in Illinois, will benefit from increases in CO2 might not be as good as predicted. (Photo by Scott Bauer, courtesy of the USDA Agricultural Research Service)

Carbon dioxide emissions from our cars and factories are the number one
cause of global warming. Scientists have long theorized that more of
the gas in the atmosphere could actually help farmers grow bigger
plants. But new research from America’s Breadbasket is challenging
that assumption. David Sommerstein reports:

Transcript

Carbon dioxide emissions from our cars and factories are the number one
cause of global warming. Scientists have long theorized that more of
the gas in the atmosphere could actually help farmers grow bigger
plants. But new research from America’s Breadbasket is challenging
that assumption. David Sommerstein reports:


Lin Warfel’s a fourth generation farmer in east-central Illinois. His
fields are flat and endless, the soil chunky and black and just about
the best in the world. An Interstate highway groans on one side of his
cornfield:


“In my career, early on, there was no Interstate past my farm.”


As traffic increased over the years, Warfel noticed a strange
phenomenon. The crops closer to the Interstate grew bigger than those
further away:


“They respond to the carbon dioxide. They can stay greener longer than
plants out into the field.”


OK… so, here’s a high school biology reminder: carbon dioxide, along
with water and sun, is an ingredient in photosynthesis, which makes
plants grow.


Increasing carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is also the biggest cause
of global warming. So scientists thought, huh, more carbon dioxide in
the atmosphere, bigger crops. They even coined a term: the “carbon
dioxide fertilization effect:”


“The effects of CO2 on crop yields are fairly well-understood.”


The Department of Energy’s Jeff Amthor has studied this stuff since the
1980s:


“We would expect that by the year 2050, that the increase in CO2 alone
would probably increase yields by about 10 to 15% in soybean, wheat and
rice relative to today’s yield, with nothing else changing.”


Other things are changing, like hotter temperatures and more drought.
But the predominant thinking has been that the increased carbon dioxide
will moderate those negative factors, maybe even outweigh them. A
recent study by the American Economic Review concluded U.S. agriculture
profits will grow by more than a billion dollars over the next century,
due to global warming. Most of this is based on experiments done in
controlled, greenhouse conditions, but new research done in real fields
is challenging the assumptions:


“Where you’re standing is what we refer to as our global change
research facility on the south farms of the University of Illinois.”


That’s biologist Steve Long. He runs what’s called the SoyFACE project
at the University of Illinois in Champaign-Urbana. Here, Long can
actually pipe carbon dioxide gas out to the fields, and grow real crops
in an atmosphere of the future.


Long strolls out to one of 16 test plots and stop at a white pipe
sticking out of the ground:


“This is one of the pipes where the carbon dioxide actually comes up
and then it will go out into the field here.”


The carbon dioxide pipes circle a plot about the size of a tennis
court. They release the gas over the crops. Computers monitor the air
to keep the concentrations steady:


“And the current atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide is about
380 parts per million. We’re raising that to the level which is
expected for the year 2050, which is about 550 parts per million.”


Long has grown the crops of 2050 for 5 years now. His results
shocked him. The plants did grow bigger. They survived longer
into the fall, but the yields were 50% lower than expected. And
pests thrived. The Western corn rootworm, for example, laid
twice as many eggs:


“Japanese beetle, which eats quite a lot of the leaves of soybeans, do
twice as well under these elevated CO2 conditions. They live longer. They
produce many more young. The yield increases we’ve seen could start to be
counteracted by those increased pest problems.”


Long’s results found supporters and critics when published in
Science magazine last summer. Some researchers say extra CO2
could hurt agriculture more than it helps because weeds become more
aggressive.


The Department of Energy’s Jeff Amthor co-wrote a paper challenging the
interpretation of Long’s data. But he agrees more work needs to be
done in real-life conditions:


“The bigger questions that are now before us are the interactions of CO2 with
warming and change in precip, changes in weed communities, changes in
insect communities, changes in disease outbreak. There are a lot more
questions there than there are answers.”


Amthor says what’s at stake is our future food supply.


For The Environment Report, I’m David Sommerstein.

Related Links

Gao Reports Food Safety at High Risk

A government watchdog agency is adding to
its list of high-risk problems that the federal
government is failing to fix. Lester Graham reports
that keeping up with transportation demands and keeping
food safe are issues being added to the high-risk list:

Transcript

A government watchdog agency is adding to
its list of high-risk problems that the federal
government is failing to fix. Lester Graham reports
that keeping up with transportation demands and keeping
food safe are issues being added to the high-risk list:


Every two years the Government Accountability Office
identifies areas where the government is putting people or
tax money at risk.


This time the GAO identified three new high-risk areas.
First is financing transportation needs. Government
funding is eroding as traffic congestion is growing. The
second is protecting defense technologies from espionage.
The report says outmoded methods don’t work in a high-tech
world. The third high-risk area is food safety. The
report says the current fragmented federal system causes
inconsistent oversight, ineffective coordination and
inefficient use of resources.


The GAO says the government needs a better system to detect
and respond to food problems, such as the recent E. coli
bacteria contamination of spinach. Congress and the White
House pay attention to the GAO’s high-risk report, although
solutions to the problems often take years to develop.


For the Environment Report, this is Lester Graham.

Related Links

Highway Debate Dividing Communities

  • Landowners who are opposed to the beltway say no matter which route it follows, it'll be cutting through prime farmland. Proponents of the beltway say the highway is needed to support the already fast-growing suburbs. (Photo by Rebecca Williams)

As suburbs grow, politicians and city planners often promote new highways as a way to ease congestion and encourage more economic growth. Rebecca Williams reports on the struggle between local officials who want to encourage that growth and people who worry a new highway will fuel more sprawl:

Transcript

As suburbs grow, politicians and city planners often promote new highways as
a way to ease congestion and encourage more economic growth. Rebecca
Williams reports on the struggle between local officials who want to
encourage that growth and people who worry a new highway will fuel more
sprawl:


The Census Bureau says commutes to work are getting longer in the nation’s
biggest cities. Demographers say that’s because people are moving
out farther and farther from their jobs in search of more house for the
money or a quieter way of life. More people moving out to the fringes of the suburbs
means more pressure on two-lane roads and more congestion.


New highways are one of the tools local officials reach for when traffic
gets worse. People living in the fast-growing suburbs west of Chicago have
been debating a proposed new highway nicknamed the Prairie Parkway. The
four-lane beltway would connect these outer suburbs.


Jan Carlson is the Transportation Commissioner for Kane County, about 40
miles from downtown Chicago. He’s been looking forward to the beltway since
plans were unveiled five years ago:


“If you listen to the complaints, as I do, of people stuck in traffic and if
you consider the many economic advantages that moving that traffic brings to
us, it appears to me that the greater good is to move forward with the
project.”


Carlson says he knows new highways can rapidly speed up development in an
area, but he points to census data that show his county and others nearby
are already among the fastest-growing in the nation without a new highway:


“I am not one of those who subscribes to the theory that if you don’t build
it, they will not come.”


Jan Carlson says the new highway will make the local economy stronger,
bringing in much needed jobs to the suburbs, but many people are strongly opposed to the
beltway. Marvel Davis lives on a farm that’s been in her family for 170 years. Some of
her farmland lies within a corridor that the state has set aside for the proposed beltway.


“I tell people that’s the way sprawl happens. You think, well I’ve lost
that field to the farm, so the first guy that comes along and offers you
$50,000 an acre, your temptation is going to be pretty great, isn’t it?”


Davis says even though construction on the beltway isn’t expected to begin
until 2009, she’s seen a lot of new buildings spring up. She says it’s true
the area’s already growing, but she thinks the prospect of a new highway
might be encouraging more growth:


“So which comes first, the chicken or the egg? If word goes forth this
road’s going to happen and you come in with all kinds of developers, it’s
almost like a self-fulfilling prophecy.”


And urban planners agree it really is a chicken and egg relationship. It’s
hard to say which comes first. Highways speed up the pace of growth. And
growth causes a need for more highways.


Bill Klein is the director of research with the American Planning
Association. He says new highways do ease traffic congestion, but only for
a short time, before those highways get packed with people driving out to
their new homes in the suburbs.


“It’s very difficult to build your way out of sprawl. The more highways you
build, the more sprawl you get. Intellectually we’ve known this stuff for a
good long time but sometimes the political will to do anything about it is
the bigger problem.”


In the case of the Prairie Parkway, there is a political heavyweight in the
parkway’s corner. US House Speaker Dennis Hastert has been promoting the
concept of an outer beltway in his district since he went to Congress in the
late 1980’s. Just last year, Speaker Hastert earmarked 207 million dollars
for the beltway in the federal transportation bill.


Landowner Marvel Davis suspects the beltway might not go forward if it
weren’t for the Speaker’s support. She says if someone could show her the
beltway was in the country’s best interest, she’d support it.


“But if I’m going to lose my farm and my community to make a few people
multimillionaires then I’m not willing to do it.”


Marvel Davis says she knows she could make a lot of money if she sold her
land to developers, and she did actually sell more than 100 acres recently.
But she sold it to her county’s forest preserve for half of what she could
get from a developer.


Even though it’s years away, the promise of a new highway is sharply
dividing these communities. Whether or not they see growth as a good thing,
almost everyone agrees a new highway will speed up the pace of that growth.


For the Environment Report, I’m Rebecca Williams.

Related Links

City Debates Use of Urban Park

Big city residents expect a lot out of urban parks. They want open space, things to do there, and literally, a place to breathe. But if the park’s beautiful, it’s bound to attract out of town visitors, who might make it crowded. Shawn Allee meets one man who wants to expand the welcome mat in his park:

Transcript

Big city residents expect a lot out of urban parks. They want open space, things to do
there, and literally, a place to breathe. But if the park’s beautiful, it’s bound to attract out
of town visitors, who might make it crowded. Shawn Allee meets one man who wants to
expand the welcome mat in his park:


Grade-schoolers are busy romping around Chicago’s Grant Park. At first blush,
it doesn’t seem odd at all, but the sight surprises Bob O’Neill, a local parks advocate:


“When you think of a park, a lot of times you do think of children. Grant Park actually is
underrepresented in that demographic.”


But O’Neill wants to change all that and get more children in the park. One way would
be to bring one of the city’s biggest tourist attractions here. The Chicago Children’s
Museum lures half a million children each year, but its success has caused growing pains.
It’s outgrown its space on an isolated, tourist trap on Chicago’s lakefront and O’Neill
wants the museum’s kids in Grant Park.


“As they grow up their memories will be having gone to, and interacted with, and learned
from a premier children’s museum in Chicago’s front yard, surrounded by the high rises,
and using the outdoor space. I think it’s wonderful.”


O’Neill sees it like this: city high rises are an efficient use of land, but museum visitors
from the suburbs never see that. So, if the museum’s in the park, maybe kids will fondly
remember the urban landscape, but when he pitches this idea of moving the Children’s
Museum:


“You might think that a toxic waste dump was proposed for Grant Park on its north end,
not a children’s museum.”


And what’s got him stumped most is who opposes it, namely, local parents.
Vicky Apostolis is one of them. She’s bringing her daughter to a field house for an art
lesson:


(Daughter) “I made a flower…”


Apostolis says, when her neighbors got wind of the museum’s move, they sprung into
action. Before long, they’d gotten the local alderman and civic groups to oppose the plan.


For Apostolis, this park’s enormity is misleading. Developers are building more high
rises here, and each one will house hundreds of additional kids. She says, if you add the
museum’s visitors, the neighborhood will be awash in children and the park will be
overcrowded. Apostolis says people are drawn by the quality of life here, and this quiet
stretch of park is part of it:


“Everyone who has a family who has children, they know the value of going to a safe,
secure location that we can take our children, we can trust the people around there.
And there’s not a lot of car traffic either, that’s safe to get to.”


Apostolis says, if half a million annual visitors arrive, she and her daughter might get
squeezed out:


“We have tourist attractions all over the city of Chicago, which are perfect – we love
tourists. However, we also want our neighborhoods, too.”


But parents groups aren’t the only ones watching this fight. Preservationists and urban
planners are taking note, too. Land-use expert John Crompton says Chicago should take
a hard look at the proposal:


“If these things are good things, and they obviously are, then they should find their own
niche in the world and not take it from parks.”


Crompton says green space is always on the defensive in public parks. There’s pressure
to fill it with something, say, a sports venue or, maybe, a museum:


“They see it as inexpensive land, and since it’s
leisure, we’ll put it there. I think that’s a totally wrong mindset. This is very expensive
land, it’s a very scarce and precious resource downtown, and in a hundred year’s time, what will
people think of us giving this up?”


Bob O’Neill is confident no one has to give up anything. After all, the museum would be
underground. But the parents fear out-of-town kids would still crowd the park, especially
in the summer. Again, O’Neill says it’s worth a try:


“The more that we can have children experience a downtown urban environment and all
the good and even some of the bad that goes with that, the better.”


On the other hand, the park’s high rise neighbors say they’re already living the urban good
life and they resent sacrificing today’s urban garden for a more crowded one in the future.


For the Environment Report, I’m Shawn Allee.

Related Links