"Seattle's 2nd Ave. Bike Lane Getting Speed Humps, Upgrades"

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by mike w. on April 5, 2016 at 7:59am

Cry a lot and then find a parallel route...

Permalink Reply by mike w. on April 5, 2016 at 8:03am

Actually, some would enjoy the challenge of hopping the speed humps, but just wait until someone loses it and crashes over one and watch the lawsuits roll in.

Also, what separated bike lane is safe anywhere near 15mph when peds are nearby? 

Permalink Reply by Yasmeen on April 5, 2016 at 9:51am

Yeah, speed bumps (especially if this is downhill) sound incredibly dangerous. 

Permalink Reply by Yasmeen on April 5, 2016 at 10:24am

Ok, correction, "Speed humps". Hmmm, still, going downhill (and in the rain), this seems like a bad idea but maybe I'm wrong. 

Permalink Reply by Kevin C Dormant on April 5, 2016 at 1:42pm

Along those lines, there's been a conspicuous lack of empirical data on how much safer the protected bike lane on Kinzie (7/25/11) and Dearborn (12/19/12) have made cyclists. I suspect that if they had, we would have heard all about it from CDOT and ATA.

Permalink Reply by Tom A.K. on April 5, 2016 at 10:15am

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_bump

Speed humps are different than speed bumps. Speed humps are a larger hill shape and speed bumps are those abrupt high narrow rubber or asphalt devices usually in parking lots.

The humps being installed in Seattle are the hill shape covering around a twelve foot stretch.

Permalink Reply by mike w. on April 5, 2016 at 6:07pm

Also i'd bet dollars to doughnuts the geniuses behind this plan don't ride bikes.

Permalink Reply by Maurice on April 5, 2016 at 8:23pm

Bikes going 16 MPH "pose risks" and must be slowed by humps.
Cars going 30+ MPH? No problem.

To answer the question in the OP, humps in Chicago bike lanes would just mean that I would ride in the car traffic lane even more than I already do.