After parking complaints from locals, a West Side protected lane is being changed to a buffered lane

The Chicago Department of Transportation recently installed protected bike lanes on Independence Boulevard in Lawndale, an underserved community on the city's West Side. 24th Ward Alderman Michael Chandler signed off on the design a year ago. But after locals complained that they felt unsafe exiting their cars in the new "floating" parking lanes, and that the new configuration makes church and residential parking more difficult, Chandler blasted the lanes at community meetings and demanded that they be changed to allow curbside parking.

CDOT will be repainting the lanes this winter to convert them to buffered lanes, which do not provide a physical barrier between cyclists and moving cars, at an estimated additional cost in the low $10,000s. I talked to CDOT deputy commissioner Scott Kubly to get his perspective on the issue, and learn about the department's strategies to avoid this situation in the future:

http://gridchicago.com/2013/state-of-independence-the-protected-bik...

Keep moving forward,

John Greenfield

Views: 843

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Anne Alt on January 8, 2013 at 4:27am

Archer and Vincennes are complex ones for the planners.  I know that Archer is more complex due to the mix of zoning/property usage.

Does anyone on the planning team have an update about Archer?  I know several people who would *love* to see bike lanes there.

Tony Adams 6.6 mi said:

This whole thing is particularly frustrating for those of us on the southwest side who still don't have any kind of bike lanes on most of Archer despite the fact that it does get used by a lot of riders and that there are no viable alternatives due to a tangle of the canal, the interstate, the airport, intermodal facilities and other rail lines.

Permalink Reply by Juan Primo on January 8, 2013 at 5:21am

It sounds like Michael Chandler cost the city lots of money by not being consistent with what he supports.  If he was a supporter of the plan, then he should have been comfortable with the plan that he is supporting.

 

The story makes it look like Chandler was supporting something - perhaps something that Rahm is enthusiastic about - and then backed off when he actually bothered to listen to his neighbors that he represents.  Having no spine - either to the planners or his neighbors, cost the city (that's me) $10,000.

 

Whatever - but this is idiotic:

 

Perhaps the community is over-served with the $10,000 do-over.  It's just not getting the right service from their Alderman.

Permalink Reply by Anne Alt on January 8, 2013 at 6:09am

I agree that the MBAC meeting schedule is not conducive to people with regular day jobs.  However, there were weekend meetings for S4C.  They weren't all on weeknights.  Also, the weeknight meetings lasted until 8 or 9 p.m.  It wasn't perfect, but they did attempt to accommodate different schedules.

Cameron 7.5 mi said:

The way the CDOT schedules meetings makes it very hard for people with day jobs and any moderately long commute to offer input. Consistently holding MBAC meetings at 3:00 means that few commuters will ever attend. The Streets for Cycling Plan 2020 neighboorhood meetings were at 6:00, making them difficult for people who commute out of their neighborhood to get home in time for. I left work early to attend one of the Streets of Cycling Plan meetings and was one of the few Loop office day job commuters there, despite being in a neighborhood full of office job commuters. The meeting I went to was domenited by retired people and stay at home parrents because that's who was home in the early evening.

Anne Alt 2-10 said:

Manny - I was a community outreach volunteer for the Streets for Cycling Plan 2020.  In most areas of the city, getting residents to come out, get information and offer their thoughts on the plan was a challenge.  There was publicity about the meetings, but most residents did not attend.  The plan was developed through input from those who did attend.

Permalink Reply by John Greenfield on January 8, 2013 at 6:09am

I agree that this handicap parking space treatment looks pretty odd. On the other hand, folks who use wheelchairs may want or need to exit their cars curbside. Can you think of a better design for the protected lane that would accommodate this?

Permalink Reply by Juan Primo on January 8, 2013 at 6:44am

Perhaps protected lanes do not work with handicapped parking.  The rider on Independence is not protected and in fact he has to make an unusual manouver to accommodate the handicapped parking place. 

Permalink Reply by John Greenfield on January 8, 2013 at 6:49am

The bike lane is curbside and protected in the segments before and after the handicap spot.

Permalink Reply by Juan Primo on January 8, 2013 at 7:09am

But the lane is not protected at this random place.  Surprise!  Now we're putting you into the traffic.  Surprise! Now you're inside the parking land and have to look for doors on the left!

 

We have a patchwork of "protected lanes", bollards, and bike lanes that are not very easy for drivers or cyclists to figure out.  Patchwork is not a plan.

Permalink Reply by Anne Alt on January 8, 2013 at 8:06am

I understand your point about timing, and agree that later evening neighborhood meetings would have been better.  Please understand that I'm not trying to pick a fight about this.  Just trying to shed a little light on the realities of public meetings.

One of the biggest issues is a lack of large enough venues being open and available after 8:00, especially since public library budget cuts reduced hours at nearly all neighborhood libraries - often one of the more suitable and neutral venues.  Parks are often a good option, but hours have been reduced there, too, and there are a limited number of fieldhouses with large meeting rooms that are open in the evening.  Anyone who has tried to book a location for a public meeting in the last couple of years without paying $$$ has probably run into this harsh reality.  Some churches may welcome meetings, but most people don't consider them neutral territory, and some may not come if it's not their church.

However, in the bigger picture, scheduling isn't always the issue in non-participation.  I've organized and/or attended meetings for many different organizations over the years.  Even with a membership group, the percentage of people who actually come and participate is usually small, regardless of when meetings are scheduled.  The percentage is even smaller when you're talking about a community meeting.

Just my $0.02 from being involved in many different projects and groups over 20+ years...

Permalink Reply by John Greenfield on January 8, 2013 at 8:45am

I think it's a lot harder to get people to come out for meetings about bike facilities in neighborhoods where there isn't currently a lot of cycling. I attended several sparsely-to-moderately attended Streets for Cycling meetings on the South, West and Far Northwest sides. The only meeting held in a neighborhood that already has a lot of cycling, Lincoln Square, was packed.

Permalink Reply by Tony Adams on January 8, 2013 at 8:56am

Another example of the chicken/egg problem!

John Greenfield said:

I think it's a lot harder to get people to come out for meetings about bike facilities in neighborhoods where there isn't currently a lot of cycling. I attended several sparsely-to-moderately attended Streets for Cycling meetings on the South, West and Far Northwest sides. The only meeting held in a neighborhood that already has a lot of cycling, Lincoln Square, was packed.

Permalink Reply by Anne Alt on January 8, 2013 at 9:07am

Absolutely.  And my example about lack of meeting venues available in the evening is one of city budget cuts having many unintended consequences.

Tony Adams 6.6 mi said:

Another example of the chicken/egg problem!

John Greenfield said:

I think it's a lot harder to get people to come out for meetings about bike facilities in neighborhoods where there isn't currently a lot of cycling. I attended several sparsely-to-moderately attended Streets for Cycling meetings on the South, West and Far Northwest sides. The only meeting held in a neighborhood that already has a lot of cycling, Lincoln Square, was packed.

Permalink Reply by We all have an inner Beast... on January 8, 2013 at 8:06pm

Thank you for your reply, John.

I really appreciated it.

 

Respectfully,

 

Manny

John Greenfield said:

Manny,

From the Grid Chicago post, here's what CDOT Deputy Commissioner Scott Kubly had to say about the issues you bring up:

I called Kubly for his take on what happened with Independence. “We had talked to the alderman about the lanes a year ago and discussed them at several public meetings for the Streets for Cycling Plan 2020, including meetings at Garfield Park and Douglas Park,” he says. “But there were folks who hadn’t been tracking the project who had a number of concerns. I think we will definitely try to engage the local alderman more in the future. All parties could have done a better job of communicating.” He adds that the premature ticketing, likely done by a combination of police and Department of Revenue staff, was also due to crossed wires.

“This has been a good learning experience for us,” Kubly says. “In the future we’ll make sure there’s no ticketing until the lanes are completed. And we’re learning how to better communicate what the changes to the roadway are. We might have temporary signage and put flyers on windshields explaining how to use the floating parking lanes. When we installed the new [two-way protected] bikes lanes on Dearborn it was a reaction to what happened on Independence. We spraypainted ‘parking’ on those parking lanes to make it obvious where to park.”

Noting that the Lawndale residents seemed to view the new configuration as a hassle with no upside for them because they see little demand for bike lanes in the neighborhood, I asked Kubly how CDOT plans to avoid this scenario in the future. “We need to communicate that this is actually a benefit for all users,” he says. “People perceive protected lanes as bike projects but, pure and simple, they’re safety projects. We’re trying to find alternative uses for excess right-of way so we can slow cars and make it safer for everyone.”

Kubly says CDOT plans to make more of an effort to get the word out to community stakeholders about its bike lane proposals, pay more attention to special uses like church parking in the design process, and work harder to educate the public about the function and benefits of the new street layout. “You can turn this into a bad experience or a good experience. We’re choosing to do the latter.”

RSS

Groups

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

Disclaimer  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service