The Chainlink

I tried the search feature, and it isn't working.  I'm sure this is a common gripe. But why can't the city do anything about all the cars double parked in the bike lane.  ESPECIALLY UPS, FedEx, and USPS.  I could gather 4 or 5 pictures daily of these guys double parked in an obvious bike lane.

Maybe that is what I should do.  Start stopping and taking pictures with my cell. Then writing to the owners of companies.

"Forcing bikes to quickly merge with traffic is dangerous.  The city has created these wonderfully useful "Bike lanes"  however, we are unable to use them, because you keep parking your delivery trucks in them.  This is not a delivery lane. It is a bike lane.  Please instruct your drivers that this is unsafe, and Illegal."

Now if we could just get the CPD to do something about it.

Views: 5054

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I'm quite sure I described that in my original post. And then humanity evolved, and the bike lane was born due a higher regard for safety.

notoriousDUG said:

You do realize that when they painted the bike lanes the roads did not magically grow, right?  The delivery trucks used to park exactly where they do now and cars and bikes just had to go around them.

You're not getting it.

The area that was the right side of the traffic lane where trucks double parked and cars could get around them is now the bike lane.  There is no right traffic lane on many roads, they are just wide and have room for cars to sneak by a double parked truck.  When the bike lanes are added if a truck were to double park outside of the bike lane it would be quite literally blocking the entire traffic lane and create an even more dangerous situation where cars would either have to pull into oncoming traffic or try to squeeze past in the what is not the bike lane; both of these are far more dangerous to them and cyclists.

Double parking in that space is the best compromise solution to what is a pretty complex issue.

Christine said:

I'm quite sure I described that in my original post. And then humanity evolved, and the bike lane was born due a higher regard for safety.

notoriousDUG said:

You do realize that when they painted the bike lanes the roads did not magically grow, right?  The delivery trucks used to park exactly where they do now and cars and bikes just had to go around them.

Well, Emperor Dug has spoken.  Might as well just lock and delete this thread.  God forbid corporate America is to be inconvenienced in any way. 20 hours a day to deliver isn't enough.  They need all 24. If you turn a corner, and there in your immediate path is the back of a UPS truck, Just stick your arm out, and merge into traffic.  Those cab drivers wont run into you. That guy on his cell phone, will certainly see you, and slow down to let you merge.  Chicago rush hour motorists are all absolutely obedient to the the laws of the rode.  Your just "Scared".  It will be fine. There is nothing to worry about.  They only painted those bike lanes on the road, because they had extra paint, and wanted the city workers to have something to do.

Dug, our example situations are practically identical. In mine, there are two lanes, one of which is blocked by a delivery truck; in yours, the 'shoulder' which pretty much has room for the truck, is blocked. Your attempt to condescend with a remark on my comprehension of the situation is met with chuckles.

The solution to this issue has already been stated. Currently, there are safe routes for all four parties at issue: the vehicles have a driving lane, bicyclists have a biking lane, there is a parking lane for cars, and there are loading zones for trucks within that parking lane.

If these loading zones are not large enough, then the delivery companies need to discuss this with the business owners on that block together with the city to figure out a better arrangement. Those zones that exist already should not be put to waste simply because they need to be a few feet (assumption) longer.

The only con I can think of off the top of my head to this is that those few feet might cause that block to lose a parking spot. Parking throughout the city is an ongoing problem and a huge sore spot for everyone, including people who are against biking lanes, so I don't really want to go into that part of the discussion because it will go off-topic. Personally, I don't think one lost parking spot is a huge loss. It's impossible to find a parking spot in Wicker Park anyway, with or without biking lanes, loading zones, or hell, fire hydrants.

This option allows for everyone on the road to be safe. Drivers don't have to worry about if/when that bicyclist in the bike lane is going to try to merge. Bicyclists don't have to worry about whether the driver sees them and if they'll let them in. It allows delivery trucks to follow the parking laws and not be in anyone's way. It allows businesses to still get their packages at the time they need them. Vehicles needing to park are taking their chances to find a spot in the first place.

The more flow we can incorporate into Chicago's streets, the better off everyone will be. Removing obstructions from all road users' paths is safest and most effective.

notoriousDUG said:

You're not getting it.

The area that was the right side of the traffic lane where trucks double parked and cars could get around them is now the bike lane.  There is no right traffic lane on many roads, they are just wide and have room for cars to sneak by a double parked truck.  When the bike lanes are added if a truck were to double park outside of the bike lane it would be quite literally blocking the entire traffic lane and create an even more dangerous situation where cars would either have to pull into oncoming traffic or try to squeeze past in the what is not the bike lane; both of these are far more dangerous to them and cyclists.

Double parking in that space is the best compromise solution to what is a pretty complex issue.

OH, Oh, Oh,  Let me answer for Emperor Dug. 

Here is how it will go... 

Random bullying tactic, or condescending remark, followed by....

blah, blah, blah,  I'm 100% right, you are completely wrong, how dare you question my supreme logic and knowledge of all things.  I am LOKI, I am a god...

And then Christine does an Incredible Hulk on him... "Puny god"...

Christine said:

Dug, our example situations are practically identical. In mine, there are two lanes, one of which is blocked by a delivery truck; in yours, the 'shoulder' which pretty much has room for the truck, is blocked. Your attempt to condescend with a remark on my comprehension of the situation is met with chuckles.

The solution to this issue has already been stated. Currently, there are safe routes for all four parties at issue: the vehicles have a driving lane, bicyclists have a biking lane, there is a parking lane for cars, and there are loading zones for trucks within that parking lane.

If these loading zones are not large enough, then the delivery companies need to discuss this with the business owners on that block together with the city to figure out a better arrangement. Those zones that exist already should not be put to waste simply because they need to be a few feet (assumption) longer.

The only con I can think of off the top of my head to this is that those few feet might cause that block to lose a parking spot. Parking throughout the city is an ongoing problem and a huge sore spot for everyone, including people who are against biking lanes, so I don't really want to go into that part of the discussion because it will go off-topic. Personally, I don't think one lost parking spot is a huge loss. It's impossible to find a parking spot in Wicker Park anyway, with or without biking lanes, loading zones, or hell, fire hydrants.

This option allows for everyone on the road to be safe. Drivers don't have to worry about if/when that bicyclist in the bike lane is going to try to merge. Bicyclists don't have to worry about whether the driver sees them and if they'll let them in. It allows delivery trucks to follow the parking laws and not be in anyone's way. It allows businesses to still get their packages at the time they need them. Vehicles needing to park are taking their chances to find a spot in the first place.

The more flow we can incorporate into Chicago's streets, the better off everyone will be. Removing obstructions from all road users' paths is safest and most effective.

notoriousDUG said:

You're not getting it.

The area that was the right side of the traffic lane where trucks double parked and cars could get around them is now the bike lane.  There is no right traffic lane on many roads, they are just wide and have room for cars to sneak by a double parked truck.  When the bike lanes are added if a truck were to double park outside of the bike lane it would be quite literally blocking the entire traffic lane and create an even more dangerous situation where cars would either have to pull into oncoming traffic or try to squeeze past in the what is not the bike lane; both of these are far more dangerous to them and cyclists.

Double parking in that space is the best compromise solution to what is a pretty complex issue.

I think Mark and Christine's comments are quite telling; you both have obviously never driven large trucks or had delivery/messenger jobs. You both seem out of touch. 

I've driven trucks and most of the time the best parking option is a compromise. If you think the city will exponentially expand the loading zones to meet the demand for every single business address that receives delivery (which is basically all of 'em), your perspective is far from the reality of the situation. I'm all for more loading zones, but I doubt that will happen anytime soon (and I'm especially for more parking enforcement of these zones so that they are not stolen by lazy latte zombies that need their fat and high fructose corn syrup and caffeine dose). 

If you think that making all city-wide deliveries in the middle of the night is even practical, then you're even more out of touch with the massive day-to-day operations that keep our city alive. And if you think that most of these jobs are "corporate" then, well, you really dont know what you're taking about. 

honestly, both of you need to get off your high horse and give the workers a break. we're working as hard as we can, as fast as we can, and trying to do with with as little interruption as possible. Have some empathy. Not everyone works in a cubicle. Some people have to move heavy shit around as fast as possible within the constrains of traffic. Compromise is part of life in the big city. 

And Mark. Chill with the histrionics. Your last post seems like a 7th grader's Youtube comment. Not exactly flattering, y'know? 


Not just the businesses, residences too.
william said:

I think Mark and Christine's comments are quite telling; you both have obviously never driven large trucks or had delivery/messenger jobs. You both seem out of touch. 

I've driven trucks and most of the time the best parking option is a compromise. If you think the city will exponentially expand the loading zones to meet the demand for every single business address that receives delivery (which is basically all of 'em), your perspective is far from the reality of the situation. 

If you think that making all city-wide deliveries in the middle of the night is even practical, then you're even more out of touch with the massive day-to-day operations that keep our city alive. 

honestly, both of you need to get off your high horse and give the workers a break. we're working as hard as we can, as fast as we can, and trying to do with with as little interruption as possible. Have some empathy. Not everyone works in a cubicle. Some people have to move heavy shit around as fast as possible. 

Isn't this the polar opposite of currently accepted traffic planning/traffic calming doctrine?

Focusing on "flow" is all about removing any reasons for cars to ever slow down. I suppose that's fine if the whole system includes ways for cyclists and pedestrians to be protected from the 'flowing' cars, but somebody here in Chicago decided that bikes belong in the traffic flow with motor vehicles, rather than adjacent to pedestrian infrastructure as in Holland or Germany.  Leave the "flow" for the Eisenhower and the Kennedy.



Christine said:


The more flow we can incorporate into Chicago's streets, the better off everyone will be. Removing obstructions from all road users' paths is safest and most effective.

So because I am sticking to my opinion and challenging what you say I am an 'Emperor' of the forum and some kind of a bully?  What about you continuing to disagree with me, how is that different?  Not agreeing with you, or anyone else, and continuing to argue my side of it is not being a bully; it is standing up for my opinion just like you are standing up for yours.  Do you seriously believe that me not agreeing with you and continuing to argue my point when you continue to argue yours is me bullying you?

Back to the issue; how and where do you ride that you round a corner into the back of a truck and have to merge out that fast?  Is it really that hard for you to merge into traffic?  How slow do you ride?

I ride a big heavy bike fairly slow all over the city every day; I am through some of the most congested areas in the city multiple times a week and I have zero issues getting around or dealing with the trucks that are making deliveries in the area but not everyone rides the same.

Listen, I get it, you feel unsafe like that and you seem to be a real stickler for the law and you think that is worth making other peoples lives much harder.  I don't feel it is a danger and I bend the rules of the road myself so why should I not let some poor delivery guy do it?  As much as I would rather have a clear bike lane I'm OK with dealing with a little inconvenience to make somebody's life easier easier.

Also the restrictions you talk about drop more than 4 hours out of the day to deliver...



Mark said:

Well, Emperor Dug has spoken.  Might as well just lock and delete this thread.  God forbid corporate America is to be inconvenienced in any way. 20 hours a day to deliver isn't enough.  They need all 24. If you turn a corner, and there in your immediate path is the back of a UPS truck, Just stick your arm out, and merge into traffic.  Those cab drivers wont run into you. That guy on his cell phone, will certainly see you, and slow down to let you merge.  Chicago rush hour motorists are all absolutely obedient to the the laws of the rode.  Your just "Scared".  It will be fine. There is nothing to worry about.  They only painted those bike lanes on the road, because they had extra paint, and wanted the city workers to have something to do.

They are not the same, even though there is room on the road unless it is stripped with another lane there is not actually a lane there.  In other words lots of streets that cars treat like they have two lanes of travel only actually have one and people are driving somewhere that is not actually a lane.

You don't want to talk about how much extra room would have to be added to a loading zone for trucks but that one thing right there is the whole issue; the amount of parking it would remove from a busy commercial zone. 

Let's use Wicker Park as an example: You're average UPS truck is going to need 2 cars worth of space, possibly more depending on the specific truck.  It makes deliveries all up and down the streets there; there would need to be loading zones on every block. 

A food service truck is going to be 2-3 cars long and require extra room for the ramp or lift gate they load/unload with. A truck like that stops at every restaurant in the area several times a week if not every day; now that adds up to 4 spaces gone for each loading zone just on size but then you also need the room to maneuver a truck that size into a parking spot which means the truck is going to have to encroach on the other side of the road and you also now have a large vehicle with limited visibility backing up in the bike lane! Sounds not so safe for anyone to me...

Now you get to the beer truck or the freight truck dropping bikes of at Rapid Transit...  Well even a short trailer is going to be 30' which is 3 cars gone without taking the tractor into consideration.  Beer trucks are even longer, usually a 40' or longer trailer.  Neither of those are capable of backing into a spot without almost double the clear space or getting into oncoming traffic; some of them can't even make some side street turns and have no hope of getting into an alley.

So yeah, in order to get the space you want we would be talking about removing at least half the street parking on Damn, North and Milwaukee in Wicker Park; you think it's hard to find a spot now?  And on top of all that it makes for less safe streets because of the trucks parking.



Christine said:

Dug, our example situations are practically identical. In mine, there are two lanes, one of which is blocked by a delivery truck; in yours, the 'shoulder' which pretty much has room for the truck, is blocked. Your attempt to condescend with a remark on my comprehension of the situation is met with chuckles.

The solution to this issue has already been stated. Currently, there are safe routes for all four parties at issue: the vehicles have a driving lane, bicyclists have a biking lane, there is a parking lane for cars, and there are loading zones for trucks within that parking lane.

If these loading zones are not large enough, then the delivery companies need to discuss this with the business owners on that block together with the city to figure out a better arrangement. Those zones that exist already should not be put to waste simply because they need to be a few feet (assumption) longer.

The only con I can think of off the top of my head to this is that those few feet might cause that block to lose a parking spot. Parking throughout the city is an ongoing problem and a huge sore spot for everyone, including people who are against biking lanes, so I don't really want to go into that part of the discussion because it will go off-topic. Personally, I don't think one lost parking spot is a huge loss. It's impossible to find a parking spot in Wicker Park anyway, with or without biking lanes, loading zones, or hell, fire hydrants.

This option allows for everyone on the road to be safe. Drivers don't have to worry about if/when that bicyclist in the bike lane is going to try to merge. Bicyclists don't have to worry about whether the driver sees them and if they'll let them in. It allows delivery trucks to follow the parking laws and not be in anyone's way. It allows businesses to still get their packages at the time they need them. Vehicles needing to park are taking their chances to find a spot in the first place.

The more flow we can incorporate into Chicago's streets, the better off everyone will be. Removing obstructions from all road users' paths is safest and most effective.

notoriousDUG said:

You're not getting it.

The area that was the right side of the traffic lane where trucks double parked and cars could get around them is now the bike lane.  There is no right traffic lane on many roads, they are just wide and have room for cars to sneak by a double parked truck.  When the bike lanes are added if a truck were to double park outside of the bike lane it would be quite literally blocking the entire traffic lane and create an even more dangerous situation where cars would either have to pull into oncoming traffic or try to squeeze past in the what is not the bike lane; both of these are far more dangerous to them and cyclists.

Double parking in that space is the best compromise solution to what is a pretty complex issue.

Pot, meet kettle.

You're even worse than I am bud.

Mark said:

OH, Oh, Oh,  Let me answer for Emperor Dug. 

Here is how it will go... 

Random bullying tactic, or condescending remark, followed by....

blah, blah, blah,  I'm 100% right, you are completely wrong, how dare you question my supreme logic and knowledge of all things.  I am LOKI, I am a god...

And then Christine does an Incredible Hulk on him... "Puny god"...

Christine said:

Dug, our example situations are practically identical. In mine, there are two lanes, one of which is blocked by a delivery truck; in yours, the 'shoulder' which pretty much has room for the truck, is blocked. Your attempt to condescend with a remark on my comprehension of the situation is met with chuckles.

The solution to this issue has already been stated. Currently, there are safe routes for all four parties at issue: the vehicles have a driving lane, bicyclists have a biking lane, there is a parking lane for cars, and there are loading zones for trucks within that parking lane.

If these loading zones are not large enough, then the delivery companies need to discuss this with the business owners on that block together with the city to figure out a better arrangement. Those zones that exist already should not be put to waste simply because they need to be a few feet (assumption) longer.

The only con I can think of off the top of my head to this is that those few feet might cause that block to lose a parking spot. Parking throughout the city is an ongoing problem and a huge sore spot for everyone, including people who are against biking lanes, so I don't really want to go into that part of the discussion because it will go off-topic. Personally, I don't think one lost parking spot is a huge loss. It's impossible to find a parking spot in Wicker Park anyway, with or without biking lanes, loading zones, or hell, fire hydrants.

This option allows for everyone on the road to be safe. Drivers don't have to worry about if/when that bicyclist in the bike lane is going to try to merge. Bicyclists don't have to worry about whether the driver sees them and if they'll let them in. It allows delivery trucks to follow the parking laws and not be in anyone's way. It allows businesses to still get their packages at the time they need them. Vehicles needing to park are taking their chances to find a spot in the first place.

The more flow we can incorporate into Chicago's streets, the better off everyone will be. Removing obstructions from all road users' paths is safest and most effective.

notoriousDUG said:

You're not getting it.

The area that was the right side of the traffic lane where trucks double parked and cars could get around them is now the bike lane.  There is no right traffic lane on many roads, they are just wide and have room for cars to sneak by a double parked truck.  When the bike lanes are added if a truck were to double park outside of the bike lane it would be quite literally blocking the entire traffic lane and create an even more dangerous situation where cars would either have to pull into oncoming traffic or try to squeeze past in the what is not the bike lane; both of these are far more dangerous to them and cyclists.

Double parking in that space is the best compromise solution to what is a pretty complex issue.

YES!

Thomas Bruzan said:


Not just the businesses, residences too.
william said:

I think Mark and Christine's comments are quite telling; you both have obviously never driven large trucks or had delivery/messenger jobs. You both seem out of touch. 

I've driven trucks and most of the time the best parking option is a compromise. If you think the city will exponentially expand the loading zones to meet the demand for every single business address that receives delivery (which is basically all of 'em), your perspective is far from the reality of the situation. 

If you think that making all city-wide deliveries in the middle of the night is even practical, then you're even more out of touch with the massive day-to-day operations that keep our city alive. 

honestly, both of you need to get off your high horse and give the workers a break. we're working as hard as we can, as fast as we can, and trying to do with with as little interruption as possible. Have some empathy. Not everyone works in a cubicle. Some people have to move heavy shit around as fast as possible. 

RSS

Groups

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

Disclaimer  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service