PB39th Ward 2024
#SpendSomeTimeIn39 Participate to the 39th ward's PB!
Protected bike lane for Elston Ave - Carry forward Project from Cycle 4
Elston Avenue is a main diagonal artery that bicyclists take everyday to get to work. It provides easy access for residents to bike to neighborhoods like Logan Quare, Wicker Park, Irving Park, etc..
Converting Elston's bike lanes in both directiosn into protected one-way bike lanes will save lives and encourage more people to use the bike lanes. The vast majority of Chicago's bicycle crow does not use these lanes, because it is just too dangerous to bike on them today.
It would mean, we move the bike lanes right next to the sidewalk and move the car parking into the street. Today, it is set up in the opposite manner.
This has already been done on Milwaukee Avenue - another diagonal street that a lot of bikers use - https://chicagocompletestreets.org/streets/bikeways/barrier-protected-bike-lanes/
List of Endorsements
Report inappropriate content
Is this content inappropriate?
17 comments
Conversation with Robert Szczesniak
These so-called protected bike lanes are dangerous when placed next to parking. Cars in the street cannot see bikers in the lane - making any driveway or intersection a game of chance if the a car is going to turn on top of you. Through no fault of the driver. This also creates a lot more pedestrian traffic as people move to/from cars. More chance to have pedestrian/bike collisions. Also, cars parking along these lanes tend to crowd into the lane to get farther from moving traffic. So while being separate from moving cars - the cost is increased risk from car doors, turning cars, cars parking blocking bike lanes, and pedestrians.
As someone that regularly bikes through out the city, I avoid streets with this type of bike lane because they are more dangerous.
You bring up some valid concerns, but nothing that can’t be mitigated with proper design of the road (if visibility of turning cars is an issue, then we might limit parking and turn radius near driveway entrances). I appreciate your concern for pedestrian and biker safety, but research shows that protected bike lanes are safer for all road users (pedestrians, bikers, drivers) than the painted lanes we currently have on Elston. It’s nice that you feel safe enough to bike throughout the city. For what it’s worth, I do too. But I can’t in good conscience bike with my family on Elston because the current road design is just too dangerous. That significantly limits how many places we can get to by bike. I imagine there are other people who would opt to bike for some trips if an arterial like Elston was made accessible to people who are less confident biking in the street than you and I. We should make biking more accessible for everyone.
Of course this always comes down to good design, we've all experienced the bad at some point.
The risk of doorings and right hooks in a protected bike lane are valid, but those risks exist in the current configuration as well. These potential hazards are low-speed in nature and likely will not cause fatalities.
However, in the current configuration a motorist can hit a cyclist from behind at over 30mph, which is almost certainly fatal. Even a poorly designed protected bike lane is safer in this respect.
Also, in the current configuration pedestrians have to cross both lanes of traffic AND the bike lanes in one go. There is nothing preventing a car from using the bike lane to pass a car that stopped at the pedestrian crossing. The most recent CDOT design standards eliminate this risk when the bike/parking lanes are switched because there will be a pedestrian island in place of the nearest parking spot to the intersection to improve visibility and give peds multiple chances to cross and rest.
I don't think research has been conclusive. ATA and groups are citing old studies or results about how cyclists/pedestrians feel instead of evidence of reduced collisions.
Jan Heine, editor-in-chief of Bicycle Quarterly, wrote, “Any barrier that separates the cyclist visually from other traffic effectively hides the cyclist. This is counterproductive to safety. Moving cyclists out of the roadway altogether, on separate bike paths, is even more dangerous, because drivers don’t look for (or cannot see) cyclists off to the side.” He continued, “On streets with frequent intersections, separate paths only make cycling less safe. I wish those who advocate for them would look at the data and stop asking for facilities that will cause more accidents.”
https://www.forbes.com/sites/dianafurchtgott-roth/2022/09/08/bike-lanes-dont-make-cycling-safe/?sh=72122f7b4ca8
A 2019 study of Denver found separated lanes increase collisions.
Also, Effective Cycling by John Forester is an great resource.
I just want to point out that the above is an editorial piece written by a employee of the Heritage Foundation, and is not a conclusive peer reviewed study. For one of those I would point to this one published in the Journal of Transportation & Health: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2214140518301488?via%3Dihub
It took data from 12 large US cities over a 13 year period, and showed "the evidence suggests that high-bicycling-mode-share cities are not only safer for bicyclists but for all road users". This is a much more legitimate source to look at when making policy decisions.
Thank you for finding a credible source, Benjamin.
You are just quoting from the headline, can you post the full article?
I want to agree with other commenters that the main concerns of cyclists not being visible in the current protected bike lanes is not because cyclists are separated from traffic but because other parked cars are blocking other drivers view. The solution is not to make the bike lanes more dangerous, but to make intersections safer for bikes and pedestrians by reducing parking and other obstructions around intersections (ex: https://nacto.org/publication/dont-give-up-at-the-intersection/protected-intersections/). This solution above is obvious to anyone thinking critically about the problem of road safety, and arguing for reducing cycling infrastructure (instead of how to actually make our roads safer) is not arguing in good faith for safer roads.
Study after study has shown that not only do Protected Bike Lanes increase the safety of the cyclist, they increase the overall safety of the roadway for all users. Please peruse the following 3 studies, one done by the Feds, one by States and one by cities, to allay any concerns about the impact of PBLs.
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)
https://highways.dot.gov/safety/proven-safety-countermeasures/bicycle-lanes
National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO)
https://nacto.org/publication/urban-bikeway-design-guide/cycle-tracks/one-way-protected-cycle-tracks/
American Association of State Highway Transportation Officials (AASHTO) - the association for State DOTs like the Illinois Department of Transportation, AASHTO is notoriously pro-car and anti-everything else.
chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://transportation.org/active/wp-content/uploads/sites/7/2023/01/separatedbikelane_pdg-min.pdf
I'm not arguing against these design elements, just that what is actually built reflects them. Look at all the pictures and diagrams in there and then ride the Chicago separated lanes and tell me they are the same. Most of those design manuals recommend to eliminate the parking, if not there is a large separation between the parked vehicles and lane. Elimination of parking, more full curbing, maintenance plans, proper spacing between parked cars and bike lane - these are all things that are being poorly implemented. Then if poorly design is implemented or good designs are poorly built, we are worse off than before and wasted an opportunity.
Also - there is the maintenance issue. These lanes need specialize snow clearing equipment, so can be unusable for a big chunk of the year. Debris accumulates and is rarely cleared out. Leaving bikes to ride in additionally narrowed lanes or on the sidewalk.
I strongly believe that this proposal should be evaluated. Elston is an important street for bike commuters on the NW side, and it's a link from the Northbranch trail to the rest of the city. However, it is not a protected bike route and cars drive over 30mph. Currently, cars use the bike lane to pass on the right, which is dangerous for everyone. Installing a protected bike lane or switching the parking lane would not only make the road safer for cyclists, but it would decrease the crossing distance for pedestrians at intersections. It would also reduce speeding and reckless driving because motorists would have parked cars closer to the travel lane and would feel their speed more.
This also benefits the people who live near and shop on Elston by reducing noise and the pollution caused by speeding drivers, as well as making it easier to cross elston.
I think that this is extremely important especially on a road such as Elston which I use every day to get to work. At the end of the day bicycles should be less treated as "vehicles" and more as pedestrians on wheels. If someone proposed having pedestrians walk in the street it would be considered ludicrous, therefore bicycles should be separated from vehicular traffic as much as possible as well.
Secondly, Elston is extremely important for cycling in the city of Chicago becuase it is a diagonal street with connections to many other popular bike routes (notably: Milwaukee, Dickens Greenway, and the 606 trail). Increasing the connectivity of protected bike infrastructure enables more people, of all ages and abilities to comfortably and safely access more of the city. We should judge cycling infrastructure by whether or not you would feel safe enough letting your child or elderly parent ride on a given stretch of road alone, and should always be striving for that to be a larger area.
Concrete protection should be the bare minimum on any bike lane in the city. For cyclists, it removes the risk of getting hit by a fast moving car and greatly lowers the risk of dooring. For drivers, it makes driving less stressful because bikes are separated from the car travel lanes. For pedestrians, it makes crossing the street less stressful because it lowers crossing distance. This improvement would benefit everyone who uses Elston.
This will be a valuable addition to the bike network, and does not require removing parking or a major redesign of the road.
Soon the 606 trail will extend across the highway and end at Elston, so this will serve many people each day who are moving between neighborhoods.
This will also collect bike traffic from other streets, making traffic more predictable and less congested beyond Elston.
This will be a valuable addition to the bike network, and does not require removing parking or a major redesign of the road. Thanks
https://cortiezclothing.com/product-category/sweatshirt/
I commute down Elston every day to get to work, and I firmly believe this would bring nothing but benefits to the community. Cyclists would be safer while riding in the street. Furthermore, cars are forced to go slower due to the narrower passage.
The protected bike lanes on Kedzie are an amazingly successful example of protected bike lanes. Parking spots remain the same, while keeping cyclists safer at the same time.
Add your comment
Sign in with your account or sign up to add your comment.
Loading comments ...