Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Lisa Curcio on February 28, 2013 at 9:31am

Ah, Kevin, you might have opened the flood-gates of vitriolic argument. 

However, I will jump in.  IMO, they are not more common because they are not part of our transportation culture.  This is pure speculation on my part unsupported by facts or research.  My main reason for this opinion is that they work in places where they are a part of the transportation plan but give us fits here because we are unfamiliar with them. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Tricolor on February 28, 2013 at 9:51am

If you have a two way bike path on a two way street the outside bike lane will always be running opposite to the direction of road traffic.  It's as unsafe as riding the wrong way down a busy street.  On a one way street like Dearborn to avoid this the two way bike lane would need to be on the left side of the street, which goes against the established of slower traffic to the right and passing on the left.

The solution is to separate bike paths and other street traffic with a significant gap.  Preferably a curb which Chicago isn't able to do yet.  But that's expensive, requires buy in (or at least no hostility) from businesses as well as an informed public that won't walk out into the bike lane.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Kevin Mulcky on February 28, 2013 at 9:54am

Here are a couple of the advantages that came to mind:

• You'd basically have only 50% of the cyclists in the "door zone"
• The bike lanes would be easier to maintain - less lines to paint, easier to plow, etc
• If the lanes were "protected" then you'd only need half the bollards, curb, or barriers

Disadvantages:

• Reduced sight lines for vehicles
• Parking problems
• Foreign concept

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Anne Alt on February 28, 2013 at 9:55am

+1  They are much more common in parts of Europe where bikes are a major mode of transportation.

I've used the contraflow lane on Ardmore many times over the years without incident, and I've seen few problems there, because people have gotten used to it.  Next summer, when the volume of bike traffic on Dearborn goes up with the warmer weather, there may be more accidents for a while, but I'll bet that the situation will ease as the summer goes on and everyone gets used to seeing lots of bikes there.

Lisa Curcio 4.0 mi said:

Ah, Kevin, you might have opened the flood-gates of vitriolic argument. 

However, I will jump in.  IMO, they are not more common because they are not part of our transportation culture.  This is pure speculation on my part unsupported by facts or research.  My main reason for this opinion is that they work in places where they are a part of the transportation plan but give us fits here because we are unfamiliar with them. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by M.G. on February 28, 2013 at 10:29am

Do you think that the concept of 2 way bike lanes (specifically Dearborn) will become less foreign as spring arrives and more people come out of hibernation and get back on the road?
 
Kelvin Mulcky said:

 

• Foreign concept

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Duppie on February 28, 2013 at 10:52am

I asked to question to a CDOT consultant, who works nearly exclusively on bike lane design. Here is my interpretation of what he said.

Two way bike lanes (like Dearborn) in Chicago will only be built on one-way streets. Doing this on two way streets (e.g Wells) is considered too risky. Turning automobile traffic will have to look backward and forward when turning off of Wells. And I tend to agree with them. I doubt I would feel very safe on a two way bike lane in a two way street. 

This means that the opportunities for two way bike lanes in Chicago are largely limited to downtown.

As for the argument that they are common in Europe: I grew up in the Netherlands, and I do not recall many two-bike lanes on a two way street in an urban environment. They were pretty common along suburban highways, but that is not what we are talking about here.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Michelle S on February 28, 2013 at 11:29am

I believe that two-way bike lanes are considered old-fashioned or passe in Europe, if I correctly understood Michael Colville-Andersen of Copenhagenize's tweets sent around the time of all the hoopla around the unveiling of the Dearborn bike lane. However, I don't know if that was based on lower levels of safety or comfort or convenience or what, or if that's just his opinion. I personally love the Dearborn bike lane, warts and all. The only real safety issue IMHO is the continuing problem of left-turning drivers ignoring their RED left turn arrow, but that's not a problem unique to two-way bike lanes. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Duppie on February 28, 2013 at 11:52am

That's exactly what I meant by two-way bike lanes along suburban highways. Very elegant solution, but not very practical in urban environments where space is at a premium.

Cameron 7.5 mi said:

From my limited experience ridding in the Netherlands, I remember most roads with a two way bike lane had very few intersections, and at the few intersections the bike path had sort of a round about ringing the intersection and the light timing was such that turning cars and bikes never had to coexist in the intersection. The effort European planners put into intersection design is a big part of why some lane configurations that work in Europe flop in the US.

Duppie 13.5185km said:

As for the argument that they are common in Europe: I grew up in the Netherlands, and I do not recall many two-bike lanes on a two way street in an urban environment. They were pretty common along suburban highways, but that is not what we are talking about here.

• ▶ Reply