Kinzie. It's what's next.

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by dan brown on December 9, 2011 at 11:07am

all good points today and I hope the city will take note (don't we have a CoC rep here). In my experience, the green toppings over the road surface in bike lanes are always slippery when they are wet and it gets cold like today (or colder). Even when they are dry and the sun hasn't risen high enough to melt the frost they can be slippery and I either ride just off of them or use quite a bit more caution. others ?

 

DB

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Kevin C Dormant on December 9, 2011 at 11:10am

If that happens, the responsible thing to do as "share the road" users will be to select a route other than Kinzie.

JeffB said:

[snip]

 You think drivers don't like these lanes now, wait until bikers start taking the normal lanes because the bike lanes are too risky.

Kevin C said:

The presence of motor vehicle traffic on the roads provides the benefit of clearing portions of the pavement and creates dry patches (or at least a uniform surface) where the bulk of the tire tracks have passed over the same spots. Without that "clearing" effect, portions of the protected bike lane east from Des Plaines (on the downhill portion) were kind of a slippery mess today, containing hidden strips of ice created by bike tires. This is going to be an engineering/riding challenge this winter.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by JeffB on December 9, 2011 at 3:58pm

Yeah, but it just seems ironic that if we get a whole network of these types of lanes to protect us, that they'll make us less safe any time it snows (and for any sub-freezing time period after a snow).  This is of course the pessimistic outlook; this winter will be the first test of the system.  I'm skeptical, but hopeful that I'm wrong.

Kevin C said:

If that happens, the responsible thing to do as "share the road" users will be to select a route other than Kinzie.

JeffB said:

[snip]

 You think drivers don't like these lanes now, wait until bikers start taking the normal lanes because the bike lanes are too risky.

Kevin C said:

The presence of motor vehicle traffic on the roads provides the benefit of clearing portions of the pavement and creates dry patches (or at least a uniform surface) where the bulk of the tire tracks have passed over the same spots. Without that "clearing" effect, portions of the protected bike lane east from Des Plaines (on the downhill portion) were kind of a slippery mess today, containing hidden strips of ice created by bike tires. This is going to be an engineering/riding challenge this winter.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Kevin C Dormant on December 9, 2011 at 4:17pm

Here's the thing about infrastructure. A great deal of time and effort is spent every year in the bike advocacy community to apply for and procure grant money for the construction of infrastructure. The conventional wisdom is that infrastructure will make people feel safer when riding and increase the mode share of bicycles in the city. Many (well some anyway) people rode before there was any infrastructure, even painted bike lanes. People breathlessly proclaim that the Kinzie protected bike lane has enjoyed mode share of >50% on days when this was counted. I don't know, and no one has said, that the Kinzie protected bike lane has increased the number of riders, or has simply attracted the pool of existing riders to a particular street. I think the 8-80 access to transportation cycling is a noble goal, but I do think it's an ideal which is unlikely to be achieved. I'm not opposed to infrastructure. I'm simply indifferent to it. I think more riders on the streets (and on more streets) makes everyone safer. 

JeffB said:

Yeah, but it just seems ironic that if we get a whole network of these types of lanes to protect us, that they'll make us less safe any time it snows (and for any sub-freezing time period after a snow).  This is of course the pessimistic outlook; this winter will be the first test of the system.  I'm skeptical, but hopeful that I'm wrong.

Kevin C said:

If that happens, the responsible thing to do as "share the road" users will be to select a route other than Kinzie.

JeffB said:

[snip]

 You think drivers don't like these lanes now, wait until bikers start taking the normal lanes because the bike lanes are too risky.

Kevin C said:

The presence of motor vehicle traffic on the roads provides the benefit of clearing portions of the pavement and creates dry patches (or at least a uniform surface) where the bulk of the tire tracks have passed over the same spots. Without that "clearing" effect, portions of the protected bike lane east from Des Plaines (on the downhill portion) were kind of a slippery mess today, containing hidden strips of ice created by bike tires. This is going to be an engineering/riding challenge this winter.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by djm on December 30, 2011 at 12:44am

The protected bike lanes arent taxi-proof — I observed a taxi eastbound on Kinzie intentionally drive over the dividing posts to get into the bike lane and pass stopped traffic to the next intersection.  I was so startled I didnt get the medallion.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Anne Alt on December 30, 2011 at 10:37am

I'll be watching out for guys like this and hoping to get their #s if I see any, or, even better, a photo of the offender in the act.

djm said:

The protected bike lanes arent taxi-proof — I observed a taxi eastbound on Kinzie intentionally drive over the dividing posts to get into the bike lane and pass stopped traffic to the next intersection.  I was so startled I didnt get the medallion.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Anne Alt on December 30, 2011 at 10:40am

I think it's both.  If infrastructure attracts more riders, then drivers will get used to seeing riders and interacting with them, and that will make streets a bit safer, which will attract more riders.  And so on...

Kevin C said:

Here's the thing about infrastructure. A great deal of time and effort is spent every year in the bike advocacy community to apply for and procure grant money for the construction of infrastructure. The conventional wisdom is that infrastructure will make people feel safer when riding and increase the mode share of bicycles in the city. Many (well some anyway) people rode before there was any infrastructure, even painted bike lanes. People breathlessly proclaim that the Kinzie protected bike lane has enjoyed mode share of >50% on days when this was counted. I don't know, and no one has said, that the Kinzie protected bike lane has increased the number of riders, or has simply attracted the pool of existing riders to a particular street. I think the 8-80 access to transportation cycling is a noble goal, but I do think it's an ideal which is unlikely to be achieved. I'm not opposed to infrastructure. I'm simply indifferent to it. I think more riders on the streets (and on more streets) makes everyone safer. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by John Wirtz on December 30, 2011 at 11:08am

^+1

I think the infrastructure is a necessary first step to starting the positive cycle (no pun intended) of more riders --> more safety --> more riders that Anne described

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Mike Zumwalt on January 2, 2012 at 5:16pm

Only halfway salted or cleared today. But if it wasn't bad enough to ride out of the painted bike lane now we need to ride out of the "protected" lane past parked cars in the only remaining lane meant for cars.

FAIL.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steven Vance on January 3, 2012 at 12:00am

Even if Kinzie has "stolen" riders from Grand, Lake, Washington, or another street, it's shown the attractiveness of what people think is a place that is safer and more comfortable to ride. One segment on one route where many people don't need to go won't be enough to build cycling numbers. A network will do that. 

Anne Alt said:

I think it's both.  If infrastructure attracts more riders, then drivers will get used to seeing riders and interacting with them, and that will make streets a bit safer, which will attract more riders.  And so on...

Kevin C said:

Here's the thing about infrastructure. A great deal of time and effort is spent every year in the bike advocacy community to apply for and procure grant money for the construction of infrastructure. The conventional wisdom is that infrastructure will make people feel safer when riding and increase the mode share of bicycles in the city. Many (well some anyway) people rode before there was any infrastructure, even painted bike lanes. People breathlessly proclaim that the Kinzie protected bike lane has enjoyed mode share of >50% on days when this was counted. I don't know, and no one has said, that the Kinzie protected bike lane has increased the number of riders, or has simply attracted the pool of existing riders to a particular street. I think the 8-80 access to transportation cycling is a noble goal, but I do think it's an ideal which is unlikely to be achieved. I'm not opposed to infrastructure. I'm simply indifferent to it. I think more riders on the streets (and on more streets) makes everyone safer. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by David on January 3, 2012 at 7:24am

I'm one of the riders who has shifted to riding Kinzie quite a bit.  However, that's pretty much 100% due to the plates over the bridge and has nothing to due with the protected bike lane.  If the bridge grating at Chicago or Grand were covered in the bike lane, I'd go right back to riding Kinzie just once in a blue moon.    I've loved PBL's in other cities but am kind of ambivalent about the Kinzie implementation.  But I really, really hate the bridge gratings.

I'm just a single data point, but I'm really curious how common my experience is.  This is really important stuff because it's not just building a network that's important, it's actually understanding what makes people feel safer.   A bike route only feels as safe as the most dangerous link in the route.   CDOT has a long history of building bike routes with really scary intersections interspersed (think Damen-Elston), which really defeats most of the purpose of the bike lane. 

Steven Vance said:

Even if Kinzie has "stolen" riders from Grand, Lake, Washington, or another street, it's shown the attractiveness of what people think is a place that is safer and more comfortable to ride. One segment on one route where many people don't need to go won't be enough to build cycling numbers. A network will do that. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Far'arned Retrogrumpalunkus #63 on January 3, 2012 at 7:52am

It is interesting what different riders feel are more important regarding what makes a route good.

For me the bridge plates are a non-issue. I really don't care about the plates and would actually prefer the bare grid over steel plates -although the new fiberglass ones are much better.  The steel plates are crap as far as I'm concerned as they are slippery in the dew of the morning and tend to collect condensation quite a bit over the river with the moisture below and being colder than the surrounding air at times.    The bare grate might be funny-feeling but if one lessens up the death-grip on the bars and lets the bike's fork geometry of rake & trail do its thing (assuming no faulty headset bearing issues) it's a non-issue.  Then again I run 26" wheels with 1.9" wide tires.   If I ran skinny 700's or 27's I would probably be singing a different tune.  

I am also a high-mileage motorcyclist and learned to deal with bridge grates in the 70's so the mystery of dealing with them is long-solved for me.  IMHO they aren't much different on a well-maintained bicycle with non-ridiculous tire choices. 

What bothered me most about Kinzie before was the fact that it was an unmarked "multi"-lane free-for-all before without any delineation paint lane markings. Cars were constantly overtaking slower cars on the outside and cabs would just dart on and off the road to drop off or pick up fares.  The definition of where lanes started and stopped were pretty much negotiated by traffic as they went along.  Negotion for lane position between two 2500lb cars is one thing.  Negotiations between a 2500lb car and a lightweight rider who isn't in a steel cage is a bit one-sided.  This was perceived as very unsafe for me.

It felt like I was riding on a billiard table with a bunch of randomly moving balls and hoping one wouldn't bounce over against the bumper where I was riding or just scream by passing other traffic and buzzing me.    This whole thing was even worse at the pinch-point of the bridge where more-or-less 3 lanes of crazy traffic at times would attempt to cram into a slim 2 and bikes were pretty much left to fend for themselves against the outside trusses.  You could see the scars of where cars and trucks have slid by the steel on the bridge and would contemplate how it would feel to get between that rock and a hard place. 

No thanks.  I took the route only rarely and only when there was very light traffic.  I always found a different way where there was room to live.

I'm one of those folks who used to take a different route (the few times I am down there as I pretty much avoid going downtown if I can help it) but now I'm all for using the resource of Kinzie when it fits into my route.  

David said:

I'm one of the riders who has shifted to riding Kinzie quite a bit.  However, that's pretty much 100% due to the plates over the bridge and has nothing to due with the protected bike lane.  If the bridge grating at Chicago or Grand were covered in the bike lane, I'd go right back to riding Kinzie just once in a blue moon.    I've loved PBL's in other cities but am kind of ambivalent about the Kinzie implementation.  But I really, really hate the bridge gratings.

I'm just a single data point, but I'm really curious how common my experience is.  This is really important stuff because it's not just building a network that's important, it's actually understanding what makes people feel safer.   A bike route only feels as safe as the most dangerous link in the route.   CDOT has a long history of building bike routes with really scary intersections interspersed (think Damen-Elston), which really defeats most of the purpose of the bike lane. 

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 27
• 28
• 29
• 30
• 31
• Next ›
• Page