The Chainlink

Hopefully you've heard by now that CDOT will begin construction this week on the city's first protected bike lane: Kinzie Street from Milwaukee Avenue/Desplaines Street to Wells Street. 

 

Full story on Steven Can Plan. 

 

I want to know what you think about this.

  • What do you feel will need special attention?
  • Is this the right or wrong location for such a facility? Why?
  • Are you going to thank/congratulate Rahm, Gabe, and the CDOT Bicycle Program?
  • Will you use it?

 

Cycle track and protected bike lane naysayers, this isn't the post for you. But if you've ridden in protected bike lanes before, then I welcome your constructive comments and criticism based on your actual experiences. 

Big intersection

The new beginning. Looking southeast at the intersection of Kinzie/Milwaukee/Desplaines. 

Views: 3734

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I think you should ponder the fact that if there were public input here protected lanes wouldn't be built, because the public drives cars, thinks bicycles are stupid, and doesn't want the roads clogged up with bollards.

Steven Vance said:

I think commenters on this discussion should be more worried about where CDOT plans the next 24.5 miles. At the June MBAC, Bicycle Program Coordinator Ben Gomberg said that the first 25 miles of protected bike lanes has "already been assessed" and "will be done right away."

 

Without. Public. Input.

 

The next 75 miles will apparently be decided by the new "Streets for Cycling Plan," or I've also heard it described as the Bike 2020 Plan. Mark de la Vergne of Sam Schwartz Engineering will be leading the creation of this plan. It will "obviously" include public meetings and involvement. 

I wrote about this on Steven Can Plan.

There may be differing opinions here about the right way, but the laws are the laws.  Pretending cyclists live in a gray area doesn't actually make it so.

 

And let's take the passing on the right example - it's illegal for cars.  It's antisocial behavior on the LFT, as the right edge is marked for pedestrians.  It's improper behavior on the CTA escalators when they're jam-packed during rush hour (standees on right).

 

The fact that we drive/bike/walk on the right means that people simply aren't watching or expecting someone to pass them on the right.  My point being, trying to make exceptions for bikes is not going to work unless there is a much more holistic approach.

To date I have no reason to be distrustful of Ben Gomberg, but I certainly agree with Steven that we should all be paying attention to the future protected lanes. 

 

Elihu Blanks said:

Well listen guys this is a great lane for everyone to enjoy. There are too many of us to agree to what riding the "correct" way (however this is) is. I think this is why we have a government to govern what is "correct" and punish what isn't "correct".

 

Therefore, I think the next step is for someone to get hurt in these 100 miles of new road, everyone get upset (driver, bikers, peds, etc...), legislation be passed that makes bikers have to get bike plates, etc... and tickets be issued for our breaking the laws. Then it become our decission if we're willing to risk our lives and driving records, creditability, etc...

 

You may not want to hear this but it makes since to me that the city, state or fed would like to make a little more revenue by placing requirements on bikers and issuing tickets for our errors.

 

Either way I think we'll be ok you just make the best decission keeps you from being that biker who caused the world to change.

 

Riding Over Adversity...

I drove along it this past Monday evening at about 6:45, and there were I'd say about ten people walking on it, in several different groups.

ad said:

Out of curiosity, what time of day are people riding the cycle track and seeing a bunch of people blocking or using it as a sidewalk??

I've been riding it east during my commute every weekday since it opened (so between 8:45 to 9 usually) and I think I've only ever seen four or five people (besides constructions workers actually working on it or the road itself) ever walking in it during that time frame.  And even on those occasions, the track is more than wide enough that I easily just went around them after an "on your left" shout-out.  I take a different route home, so not sure what it's like heading west during the evening rush.   

Not saying peds are not/never a problem at other times during the day, but this just hasn't been my experience when I've been using it so far.   

Jeesh.  Gonna be a long road here for sure...

Will V. said:
I drove along it this past Monday evening at about 6:45, and there were I'd say about ten people walking on it, in several different groups.

ad said:

Out of curiosity, what time of day are people riding the cycle track and seeing a bunch of people blocking or using it as a sidewalk??

I've been riding it east during my commute every weekday since it opened (so between 8:45 to 9 usually) and I think I've only ever seen four or five people (besides constructions workers actually working on it or the road itself) ever walking in it during that time frame.  And even on those occasions, the track is more than wide enough that I easily just went around them after an "on your left" shout-out.  I take a different route home, so not sure what it's like heading west during the evening rush.   

Not saying peds are not/never a problem at other times during the day, but this just hasn't been my experience when I've been using it so far.   

I love this protected bike lane.  It makes a huge difference in feeling safe while commuting.  The first time I rode through, I had no idea where I was supposed to ride but once it was completed it became clear.  Being next to the sidewalk even made me feel safe enough to pickup some speed without fear.  I do hope that the tests are going well and that the city will approve building more.  Specifically, we need to put some downtown so that we can safely get around without fear of being run over by aggressive taxi drivers and commuters who have no respect for life. I think it would work great on a major street like State, Ashland, or perhaps even Western.

Law where created to serve people -NOT the other way around.

 

The law is stupid.  To hell with the law. 

 


Carter O'Brien said:

There may be differing opinions here about the right way, but the laws are the laws.  Pretending cyclists live in a gray area doesn't actually make it so.

 

 

I agree that laws are dreated to serve people. Becasue I think if there were no laws; when I was hit by a van, on my mortorcycle, the owner of the parking lot that the van came out of when he couldn't see me on the street becasue it was constructed against the law, would not have corrected his mistake and many more people would be in a month long coma!

 

Laws are created to sere US the people against us the people from hurting Us the people. This is why we follow them. I didn't like waking up and not knowing what would happen next in my life.

 

Therefore, if the law says stop; I may bitch and moan but it is probably best that I stop; rather than injure someone else or myself.

 

This dosen't mean I'm an angel who stops at all the signs but I should and maybe a ticket or two would make me reconsider my actions and do more than less for our lives...

 

...Always Forward,

Laws are created to serve people, but they ultimately derive their power from consent of the governed.  I agree there are plenty of laws that don't meet this standard (the racist/class war on drugs comes foremost to mind), but basic rules of the road need to work for all of us - it's not like this is a Jim Crow situation here.

 

The law is broken, so let's fix it.

 

I do think stop sign intersections are a gray area/opportunity for bikes - in a car I come to a complete stop.  Always.  Cycling, no, I at least slow down, but IMO it's largely more important to respect right of way, especially when it's pedestrians and fellow cyclists.  If that means not stopping so I can go through an intersection with a vehicle, I will, that's easier for everyone.

 

But don't be too quick to throw out "the law" in the larger sense, because we've won quite a few considerable victories.  You can damn well be sure motorists will be hearing loud and clear I'm entitled - LEGALLY - to my 3 feet of space, to not share bike lanes with cars, etc.

 



James BlackHeron said:

Law where created to serve people -NOT the other way around.

 

The law is stupid.  To hell with the law. 

 


Carter O'Brien said:

There may be differing opinions here about the right way, but the laws are the laws.  Pretending cyclists live in a gray area doesn't actually make it so.

 

 

I think Steven means that there does not seem to be any input from the bike community-- and being that Steven is well-connected to planners and the folks in the bike program, one can infer that the decision-making is so top-down that not even the bike program is directly involved.


I share his dismay that the stakeholders are not only not part of the process, but that we are relegated to hoping an industrious reporter covers the story, or that the topic is on the agenda at a monthly MBAC meeting so we can get little shreds of information.

 

Dr. Doom said:

I think you should ponder the fact that if there were public input here protected lanes wouldn't be built, because the public drives cars, thinks bicycles are stupid, and doesn't want the roads clogged up with bollards.

Steven Vance said:

I think commenters on this discussion should be more worried about where CDOT plans the next 24.5 miles. At the June MBAC, Bicycle Program Coordinator Ben Gomberg said that the first 25 miles of protected bike lanes has "already been assessed" and "will be done right away."

 

Without. Public. Input.

 

The next 75 miles will apparently be decided by the new "Streets for Cycling Plan," or I've also heard it described as the Bike 2020 Plan. Mark de la Vergne of Sam Schwartz Engineering will be leading the creation of this plan. It will "obviously" include public meetings and involvement. 

I wrote about this on Steven Can Plan.

CDOT seems to have a substantial # of bike ringers, so I'm optimistic - Dr. Doom's assessment that a public input session would just be derailed by naysayers is sadly grounded in the reality I've experienced.  People seem to be very motivated to show up at meetings where they want to bitch about things, especially things involving change.

h333 said:

I think Steven means that there does not seem to be any input from the bike community-- and being that Steven is well-connected to planners and the folks in the bike program, one can infer that the decision-making is so top-down that not even the bike program is directly involved.


I share his dismay that the stakeholders are not only not part of the process, but that we are relegated to hoping an industrious reporter covers the story, or that the topic is on the agenda at a monthly MBAC meeting so we can get little shreds of information.

 

Dr. Doom said:

I think you should ponder the fact that if there were public input here protected lanes wouldn't be built, because the public drives cars, thinks bicycles are stupid, and doesn't want the roads clogged up with bollards.

Steven Vance said:

I think commenters on this discussion should be more worried about where CDOT plans the next 24.5 miles. At the June MBAC, Bicycle Program Coordinator Ben Gomberg said that the first 25 miles of protected bike lanes has "already been assessed" and "will be done right away."

 

Without. Public. Input.

 

The next 75 miles will apparently be decided by the new "Streets for Cycling Plan," or I've also heard it described as the Bike 2020 Plan. Mark de la Vergne of Sam Schwartz Engineering will be leading the creation of this plan. It will "obviously" include public meetings and involvement. 

I wrote about this on Steven Can Plan.

^ and they're held in place by coat hangers....amazing.

I've attended as many "public hearings" as anyone here and I know how completely useless they can be.

Howver, I'm not sure how this discussion got reduced to "a public input session" -- my (and presumably Steven's) frustration is a little broader than that-- it ought to be at least possible to clue us in on what's planned, and what's being factored into teh decisions on where protected lanes should go.  The confusion over the Stoney Island lane is one example-- the back and forth over whether it was cancelled was ridiculous.
Why are we groping around in the dark?


Carter O'Brien said:

CDOT seems to have a substantial # of bike ringers, so I'm optimistic - Dr. Doom's assessment that a public input session would just be derailed by naysayers is sadly grounded in the reality I've experienced.  People seem to be very motivated to show up at meetings where they want to bitch about things, especially things involving change.

h333 said:

I think Steven means that there does not seem to be any input from the bike community-- and being that Steven is well-connected to planners and the folks in the bike program, one can infer that the decision-making is so top-down that not even the bike program is directly involved.


I share his dismay that the stakeholders are not only not part of the process, but that we are relegated to hoping an industrious reporter covers the story, or that the topic is on the agenda at a monthly MBAC meeting so we can get little shreds of information.

 

Dr. Doom said:

I think you should ponder the fact that if there were public input here protected lanes wouldn't be built, because the public drives cars, thinks bicycles are stupid, and doesn't want the roads clogged up with bollards.

Steven Vance said:

I think commenters on this discussion should be more worried about where CDOT plans the next 24.5 miles. At the June MBAC, Bicycle Program Coordinator Ben Gomberg said that the first 25 miles of protected bike lanes has "already been assessed" and "will be done right away."

 

Without. Public. Input.

 

The next 75 miles will apparently be decided by the new "Streets for Cycling Plan," or I've also heard it described as the Bike 2020 Plan. Mark de la Vergne of Sam Schwartz Engineering will be leading the creation of this plan. It will "obviously" include public meetings and involvement. 

I wrote about this on Steven Can Plan.

RSS

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

Disclaimer  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service