The Chainlink

Driver's license required in Lake Forest to ride on a limited number of roads

http://www.cityoflakeforest.com/ps/pd/ps_pd2b4a.htm

Only a duly licensed motor vehicle operator with a valid motor vehicle operators license in their possession may operate a bicycle upon the streets in the central business district between 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m.

No bicycle shall be operated upon the streets designated below, but shall be ridden upon the sidewalks where available, unless the operator of such bicycle is a duly licensed motor vehicle operator and has a valid motor vehicle operators license in their possession. Such streets include:

  • Waukegan Road
  • Route 41
  • Green Bay Road
  • Western Avenue from Westleigh Road north to business district. (a) Franklin to Thomas on east side.
  • Sheridan Road
  • Deerpath from Waukegan Road east to Oakwood Avenue
  • Deerpath east from Western Avenue to Lake Road
  • Westleigh Road from Route 41 east to Sheridan Road
  • McKinley Road
  • Old Elm Road from Route 41 to east limits
  • Route 60

I have a question for those attorneys that might be familiar with Illinois bicycle law.

Is it legal for a community to require that a cyclist must be a licensed driver in order to operate a bicycle on the roadway?

Looking at it another way, should a cyclist lose their permitted right to the road because they do not have a valid driver's license?

In October of 1998 in Boub v Township of Wayne, the Illinois Supreme Court decided that bicycles are permitted, not intended users of the road.

"In sum, there are no affirmative manifestations here that Wayne Township intended-rather than simply permitted-bicyclists to use the road and bridge where the accident occurred. We have no quarrel with the proposition that bicycle riders are permitted users of the road and bridge involved in this case; we do not believe, however, that they must also be considered intended users of those facilities, within the scope of section 3-102(a) of the Tort Immunity Act. There is no question of fact on this record, and summary judgment was appropriately entered in favor of the defendants."

Intended versus permitted status is a big deal in the State of Illinois.  If bicycles were intended uses, then the government entity would be liable for maintaining the roads in a condition that made cycling safe.  Since bicycles have been deemed permitted, it's ride at your own risk.

The attorneys here can tell me if I misinterpreted the supreme court decision.

By raising the bar for use of this very specific set of roads by cyclists, does the City of Lake Forest ordinance inadvertently give a restricted class of cyclists status as intended users of the road? 

Would the city then be held to a higher standard with regard to maintaining the roads in a safe condition for this restricted class of users?  

 

 

Views: 1395

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by spencewine on June 7, 2012 at 12:18pm

I'd be more than happy to help plan, organize, and participate but I also live in Chicago. I would think that someone that lives in Lake Forest, rides their bike regularly there, and/or has a stake in the local government there would be a better point person. Any takers? I could help in organizing the city contigent.

 
h' said:

Put it in the chainlink calendar, and please speak up as to what sort of help you need planning it.

spencewine said:

I think it's time for a Critical Mass - Lake Forest edition. Let's see how the law holds up in court.

Permalink Reply by Kevin C Dormant on June 7, 2012 at 12:24pm

Put me down for "I don't give a rat's ass what Lake Forest does with its roads."

Permalink Reply by spencewine on June 7, 2012 at 12:26pm

Will do.

Kevin C said:

Put me down for "I don't give a rat's ass what Lake Forest does with its roads."

Permalink Reply by millenial removing Bernie tattoo on June 7, 2012 at 12:50pm


Jared said:

I never really considered Lake Forest hostile to cyclists.  Is this law even enforced?

Probably not. Old Elm/Everett is a good east-west route, you'll see plenty of roadies on it, I've never had any trouble from cops.

Permalink Reply by John S. on June 7, 2012 at 12:51pm

I certainly understand your sentiment on this subject Kevin. 

However, when one municipality successfully restricts the rights of cyclists, others soon follow.


Kevin C said:

Put me down for "I don't give a rat's ass what Lake Forest does with its roads."

Permalink Reply by Anne on June 7, 2012 at 12:52pm

For several years the communities in and around Lake Forest, including Lake Bluff, Riverwoods, Bannockburn, etc, have had many, many residents complain about scofflaw cyclists - riding 4-5 abreast, running lights, etc. Large group rides (Judson, etc) have been pullled over en masse. Enforcement is at the discretion of the Hat in the Car; a single rider crossing against the light at Old Elm and Waukegan has been stopped, as have large groups.

Jared said:

I never really considered Lake Forest hostile to cyclists.  Is this law even enforced?

Daniel G said:

If Lake Forest maintains these roads 100% on their own dime, they can restrict them to clown cars of +12 occupancy with pink stripes only for all anyone cares. But they don't, and not even close, so they don't really get to make laws like this. Roads never really belong to the towns they lie in, regional thoroughfares like Sheridan especially so. On the other hand, who cares. If Lake Forest thinks its downtown can do just fine without cyclists or their money, then they can go ahead and try to make an environment hostile to them. I say focus on the city, because most of these suburbs are beyond help anyway. City of Chicago is not yet a good cycling city, and there's really no time to waste in making it one.

Permalink Reply by John S. on June 7, 2012 at 1:02pm

I'm glad that cyclists, single or in groups are pulled over for breaking the law. 

Either obey the law or get off the road. 

Anne said:

For several years the communities in and around Lake Forest, including Lake Bluff, Riverwoods, Bannockburn, etc, have had many, many residents complain about scofflaw cyclists - riding 4-5 abreast, running lights, etc. Large group rides (Judson, etc) have been pullled over en masse. Enforcement is at the discretion of the Hat in the Car; a single rider crossing against the light at Old Elm and Waukegan has been stopped, as have large groups.

Permalink Reply by Dean Bekken on June 7, 2012 at 1:41pm



spencewine said:

I think it's time for a Critical Mass - Lake Forest edition. Let's see how the law holds up in court.

 

En Mass!  I will bring my Learner's Permit ; ]

 

Permalink Reply by John S. on June 7, 2012 at 1:44pm

James,

It is on a nice trail that goes right through the parking lot of the Metra station in LF.  This trail connects to other trails that take you as far north as the Wisconsin state line or as far south as the Metra station in Wilmette.

Lake Forest is a beautiful suburb, with low speed limits (25 mph) a low population density (fewer cars), and many shaded, tree lined streets. 

There are two paved trails that run right through LF.  The metra station trail mentioned above is number one.  The other runs parallel to hwy 41 and runs from 176 to Lake Cook rd.  This trail will also connect to the trail above via a trail that runs along 176.  The 176 route trail will take you east to Lake Bluff/Lake Forest or west to the Des Plaines River trail.

Based on your requirements, this bohonk exurb exists very nicely :)

James BlackHeron said:

Unless it on a nice trail, or nearby a Metra station these bohonk exurbs don't even exist IMHO.  

Screw 'em.

The black squiggly lines on the map below are all bike trails.  The blue line just shows some of the bike paths and connecting paths going through LF.

Permalink Reply by Chuckchuck on June 7, 2012 at 3:56pm

They want you to have your license so they can ticket you period.

Permalink Reply by Mike Fiasco on June 7, 2012 at 4:09pm

I guess the requirement for having a drivers licence is for the cops to issue tickets.

 

This bums me out though.  I have a friend who does not have a drivers license due to a medical condition.  He's a responsible adult who bikes all the time.  The Lake Forest city council won't allow him on certain roads at certain times?

 

Also, this assumes teens under 16 on bicycles  are not welcome on these roads.

Permalink Reply by Mike Schwab on June 7, 2012 at 6:22pm

No motor, no license required.

   (625 ILCS 5/6-101) (from Ch. 95 1/2, par. 6-101)

    Sec. 6-101. Drivers must have licenses or permits.

    (a) No person, except those expressly exempted by Section
6-102 [out of state], shall drive any ***motor*** vehicle upon a highway in this State unless such person has a valid license or permit, or a restricted driving permit, issued
under the provisions of this Act.

 

    (625 ILCS 5/11-1516)
    Sec. 11-1516. Low-speed bicycles.

(d) Except as otherwise provided in this Section, the provisions of this Article XV that apply to bicycles also apply to low-speed electric bicycles and low-speed gas bicycles.
(Source: P.A. 96-125, eff. 1-1-10.)

RSS

Groups

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

Disclaimer  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service