tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7682899986857040901.post380060180967049525..comments2023-07-01T10:21:32.918-05:00Comments on Chicargobike: Chicago’s “Streets for Cycling” Bicycle Plan Is Not Streets For Families (Yet)Chicargohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03166650767505966551noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7682899986857040901.post-46547207709817527192012-05-28T22:20:54.196-05:002012-05-28T22:20:54.196-05:00Great - show up and bring some friends if you can,...Great - show up and bring some friends if you can, and make sure the designers from CDOT understand your concerns. The more input they get the more they will be able to design a system Chicagoans will be able to really use. If you can't make it to a meeting you can write them a note at streetsforcycling2020@gmail.com .Chicargohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03166650767505966551noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7682899986857040901.post-4832232179806669222012-05-28T22:04:06.037-05:002012-05-28T22:04:06.037-05:00"If the lanes are safe, well-designed travel ..."If the lanes are safe, well-designed travel spaces, they won’t need catchy names; they’ll just get used by everyone all the time. The ones that feel safe to a grandparent going shopping or a mom with three kids headed to the park will be a success; the others will be a waste of funds and public goodwill, with or without banners." absolutely!<br /><br />I avoid taking anything but side streets when I'm biking with my kids in our cargo bike. This makes a lot of trips very difficult. I hate riding on Milwaukee---currently a very heavily-bike-use street with bike lanes and sharrows. I ride on it by myself because I can be nimble enough to avoid being doored etc on a street with heavy, fast moving car traffic, but I almost never ride on it with my kids. Even sticking to neighborhood side streets though, at least every couple days someone roars past me at way over the speed limit, irritated that a bike has invaded their path of travel because I'm picking my way around potholes when they zoom up behind me. Even within the boulevard lanes around Logan Square drivers will blow past bikes with inches to spare. Anyone who thinks this is "family friendly" doesn't have a family they are riding a bike with...<br /><br />Going to try to make at least one of these meetings!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7682899986857040901.post-2383138171467940302012-05-28T19:16:22.916-05:002012-05-28T19:16:22.916-05:00Well, that they will be mostly neighborhood greenw...Well, that they will be mostly neighborhood greenways is quite an assumption to make, considering CDOT's relative silence on the matter. They claim to "prefer" them, but the image they use is an intersection with sharrows and pedestrian islands, so it's unclear how they are defining neighborhood greenway/bike boulevard. There were no images of big serpentine bumpouts for cars to negotiate as cycle lanes move directly past, for example. A truly traffic calmed area to ride would be great, but this requires a greater commitment to inconveniencing automotive road users than I have perceived so far. If neighborhood greenways/bike boulevards in the full sense of the term are planned, and people too scared to ride their bikes today will want to take their kids on them, CDOT has my full support. Especially if the routes are too inconvenient for the bus drivers as on Hirsch to choose them, too.<br /><br />The geographic distribution considering population density is not equitable even using CDOT data - the heat map they used showed a hot spot in or near West Lawn/Brighton Park/Gage Park/Chicago Lawn and this is even more supported by a population density map of children in Chicago (which is arguably an even more important measure) visible at <br />https://docs.google.com/file/d/0ByL61Yi6-ZS0NjBkNTQ3MmItZjJiOS00NThjLTgxODktNDVmMDYyZDNiYzQ0/edit?hl=en_US<br />but these Southside high density population areas are among the least-served in the Streets for Cycling plan. In fact, one of the few blank areas NOT served by lanes within a 1/2 mile appeared to be in the middle of this high population density area. Unless I'm reading something wrong, the data does not appear to support the argument.<br /><br />Considering existing ridership gets us into a chicken-or-egg argument that I think is not relevant. There is existing ridership in areasthat are now more conducive to comfortable bicycling. For example, cyclists in the high ridership north may be traveling to the only protected cycletrack in the city, the Lakefront Trail, and commuting to the loop. If Archer Ave were as desirable a route as the LFT wouldn't you see more riders in Little Village? Make the network serve an area well and they will come, I think.<br /><br />Thank you for your really thought provoking comments; there is a lot to be gained now from having this discussion. It would be exciting to see your thoughts about the plan- Is there a particular strong or weak point you think is worth mentioning? <br /><br />I hope you will also use the opportunity to discuss these issues at an upcoming meeting, and perhaps bring some friends who don't bike or a Dutch friend with you. The next one is Thursday night at the Gary Comer Youth Center at 7200 S Ingleside Ave.Chicargohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03166650767505966551noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7682899986857040901.post-90069349822572238042012-05-28T10:57:10.196-05:002012-05-28T10:57:10.196-05:00According to the network map (http://www.chicagobi...According to the network map (http://www.chicagobikes.org/public/Citywide%20SFC%202020%20Network.pdf), half the miles shown in the plan (320 miles total) are neighborhood bike routes. I assume most of these will be neighborhood greenways, but who knows? Regardless, low volume streets are family friendly, but obviously not 100% fool proof (as shown by your crash on Hirsch). The geographic distribution looks equitable to me, especially when considering population density and existing ridership.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7682899986857040901.post-24742552294688978832012-05-28T10:32:24.938-05:002012-05-28T10:32:24.938-05:00Let me add, page 21 of the PDF of the plan is the ...Let me add, page 21 of the PDF of the plan is the only mention of greenways, and the image shows sharrows. The child hit this week on Hirsch was on a similar low traffic street, though perhaps a school bus wouldn't have taken it if it were traffic calmed. <br />Routes for children to take to school using this type of traffic calming seem to be concentrated almost exclusively in the north of the city, which seems inequitable to me as well.<br />I agree with your comment, that neighborhood greenways should be considered more, but I think the most benefit comes from a main network of protected spaces that people feel confident enough to put their children on.Chicargohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03166650767505966551noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7682899986857040901.post-43173152135909939342012-05-28T09:56:23.277-05:002012-05-28T09:56:23.277-05:00Neighborhood greenways / bike boulevards were ment...Neighborhood greenways / bike boulevards were mentioned only in passing at the CDOT meeting, while they were describing the 320 miles of neighborhood bike routes in general. It seemed that very few miles of neighborhood greenway are planned in comparison with sharrows, etc. I would be very happy to see bike boulevards, neighborhood greenways, 30 km zones, play streets, or other forms of traffic reduced bicycle spaces ,but CDOT really didn't emphasize them. Ask them about them!Chicargohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03166650767505966551noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7682899986857040901.post-82527628694788784432012-05-28T07:39:08.257-05:002012-05-28T07:39:08.257-05:00You seem to have discounted the local bikeways (i....You seem to have discounted the local bikeways (i.e., neighborhood greenways or bike boulevards) as an acceptable bicycle facility type for slower riders.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com