Slightly whiny and jaded report from CBS2's Derrick Blakley and comments from the never-bike-friendly Rob Johnson.
The Dearborn bike path reconstruction project to cost 1.2 million dollars.
"The concrete curbs make it much more difficult for vehicles to be able to enter and obstruct the bike lane," said Jim Merrell of the ATA.
"The Dearborn bike lane is being upgraded from Polk Street to Kinzie and cost almost $1.2 million. The city says around 800 cyclists use the Dearborn Bikeway for the p.m. rush, which comes out to $1,500 per cyclist."
The money comes from a federal grant, not local taxes, but as Derrick Blakley notes and Rob Johnson smugly agrees, 'they are your tax dollars.'
Gee, they must never rework any roads for vehicular traffic ever?
I heard the live radio promo Friday evening on AM78 and Rob Johnson was really playing it up to the vehicle drivers how much of a waste of taxpayers money this was and not necessary for the added safety of cyclists. IMO, Rob Johnson is getting in the John Kass cyclist lovers category.
They must drive an S.U.V. perhaps.
I heard the live radio promo Friday evening on AM78 and Rob Johnson was really playing it up to the vehicle drivers how much of a waste of taxpayers money this was and not necessary for the added safety of cyclists. IMO, Rob Johnson is getting into the John Kass' cyclists lovers category.
Yes, the article is negatively biased, but I am so happy to hear that they are upgrading the Dearborn lane. It was starting to get a little rough in many places. Good to hear.
Another absolutely stupid 'upgrade.' Painted bike lanes are enough. Was there ever an incident of a car crashing across those plastic bollards? Who needs to thread his way down a narrow 4' lane, lined with 8" concrete walls? With no room to maneuver? And filled with broken bottles and debris? I'm discontinuing my ATA membership; did they ever poll their members on their swing away from the principles and philosophy of Effective Cycling?
No one is forcing you to ride in the PBL. Ride in the street if you want Forester's "Effective Cycling". But a lot of riders feel safer with a concrete curb between them and the traffic. Not everyone rides like you.
Well actually...they ARE. On streets with PBL's I AM forced to ride there. Have you ever tried riding out in the remaining street where Protected Bike Lanes have been installed? Absolutely no shared space; cars are wedged in curb-to-curb. So you either ride the PBL, or 'take the lane' and piss off drivers even more, by blocking them as you ride at 12-15mph.
As Effective Cycling contends, bike lanes are the invention of the car industry...to keep us out of their way. So drivers don't have to slow down and allow for cyclists in their midst. The League of American Bicyclists, ATA, and other bike organizations used to promote Effective Cycling and the 'Share the Road' philosophy. Taught classes and everything on how to ride safely on roads, mixed in with car traffic.
But these organizations were taken over by lawyers and representatives of the car and construction industries. Building bike paths became the future of biking in the US. And thanks to ATA, one by one, great biking streets in Chicago such as Dearborn, California, Clybourne, etc are being ruined with unnecessary and expensive PBLs.
I take your point. Do you think that bike lanes as a whole are a net negative? I can see arguments both ways, but I do like them, particularly the buffered ones.
Well I side with Effective Cycling...roads were built for VEHICLES of all types: sedans, SUVs, pickups, station wagons, 18-wheelers, motorcycles, scooters...and bicycles. Even horse-drawn carriages. We should all get along.
Normally we do. Cars do not crash into other cars; pickups do not side-swipe SUVs...and bicycles normally ride unscathed. I've ridden in Chicago for 40 years, and also out to San Diego from here...completely untouched.
So yes I think bike lanes of all types are negatives..for two reasons. One is that they instill a sense of false security to cyclists...and make them feel less safe riding roads. And two, because as a tax payer, I object to the waste of public funds...when that money could be better spent improving the ridability of our road system, and improving the width and paving on road shoulders.
> Normally we do. Cars do not crash into other cars; pickups do not side-swipe SUVs
Are you joking?
Vehicular cycling is the best solution where there is not too much fast car traffic. There it works great! But mixing very fast cars with relatively slow bicycles doesn't work so well. Have you tried moving to the left lane to make a left turn on one of our high-traffic, high speed, suburban 4-lane streets? It's definitely not for the faint of heart or the inexperienced.