The Chainlink

Protected Bike Lane or Parking Lot?

Guess this driver can't tell the difference.  This was taken tonight at 8:35PM on Kinzie (near Clinton)

Views: 737

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by h' Zerocats on September 27, 2012 at 12:54am

Are there any overt visual aids that should have been a giveaway to the driver?

Or is this maybe a design/signage failure?

Permalink Reply by Far'arned Retrogrumpalunkus #63 on September 27, 2012 at 6:39am

Howard has a very good point here.  The "protected" lanes are so new and strange that I'm sure there is a lot of confusion for some drivers -especially those not from the area.  

Chicago parking signage is very confusing sometimes with "No Parking" signs at almost every space and a confusing long paragraph of exceptions under it that has to be read carefully to fully understand the "exceptions" of when you CAN use that "parking space" marked invariably with large  a no-parking header.    After a while I bet a lot of drivers start to block out the "No Parking" part and look right beyond it to the exceptions.  It sort of waters down the phrase "No Parking"  IMHO.

One of the MANY reasons driving sucks so bad is that finding parking is so confusing and difficult in this town.  And while that may not be a bad thing I have to say that on the rare occasions when I do drive at least half of the time when I park I'm not quite sure if it is a legal spot or not.  I read the sign 3 times and wonder about the writing skills of those who created it.  And the exceptions are often convoluted:   Parking only on days with a Y at the end, waxing moon and with mercury rising... 

Better, less-confusing signage is part of the answer.   Green pavement on bike lanes everywhere would clear it right up. 

h' said:

Are there any overt visual aids that should have been a giveaway to the driver?

Or is this maybe a design/signage failure?

Permalink Reply by Jared on September 27, 2012 at 8:25am

Shouldn't there be more barriers so that cars can't even get into the bike lane area?

Permalink Reply by Lisa Curcio on September 27, 2012 at 8:35am

See John Greenfield's interview with Mike Amsden for CDOT's thoughts on green paint and bollards:

http://gridchicago.com/

Permalink Reply by BruceBikes on September 27, 2012 at 8:38am

In the picture, I can see a No Parking Tow Zone sign on the light pole just in front of the car.  Clear visual aid, or no?

h' said:

Are there any overt visual aids that should have been a giveaway to the driver?

Or is this maybe a design/signage failure?

Permalink Reply by Far'arned Retrogrumpalunkus #63 on September 27, 2012 at 9:04am

Green paint seems to be relegated "only in conflict zones."  The city is getting cheaper with the "protected" lanes with regards to using more bollards and more paint/green pavement.

Mike Amsden, project director with the Chicago Department of Transp...

"We’re getting cheaper as we go along. Nowadays we’re using fewer bollards.  And our designs have become a lot more uniform, whereas on Kinzie was the first time we ever did it so we had a lot of striping that we don’t do anymore. For example, now we’re only using green paint at conflict points, not at every intersection. We don’t use it at, like, four-way stops anymore, where you should inherently not have a conflict."

 

 

I'd like to see green-colored pavement utilized for all bike-specific areas where autos are not supposed to go, with green w/ white stripes or something like this for conflict-zones.   It would really clear things up -but I guess the funding just isn't there for this. :(  

 

As always, peds, bikes & ped/bike-infrastructure is relegated to  5th or 6th-class road-users. 

 

With regards to confusing automobile "No Parking" signage:

 

 

 

 

 

Lisa Curcio said:

See John Greenfield's interview with Mike Amsden for CDOT's thoughts on green paint and bollards:

http://gridchicago.com/

Permalink Reply by Anne Alt on September 27, 2012 at 9:11am

Seems like the signage part of the bike lane equation needs a bit of fine tuning.

Permalink Reply by Doug Haynes on September 27, 2012 at 9:51am

What is unclear about any of those signs?  They are all pretty clear on when you can/cannot park to me.

James BlackHeron said:

Green paint seems to be relegated "only in conflict zones."  The city is getting cheaper with the "protected" lanes with regards to using more bollards and more paint/green pavement.

Mike Amsden, project director with the Chicago Department of Transp...

"We’re getting cheaper as we go along. Nowadays we’re using fewer bollards.  And our designs have become a lot more uniform, whereas on Kinzie was the first time we ever did it so we had a lot of striping that we don’t do anymore. For example, now we’re only using green paint at conflict points, not at every intersection. We don’t use it at, like, four-way stops anymore, where you should inherently not have a conflict."

 

 

I'd like to see green-colored pavement utilized for all bike-specific areas where autos are not supposed to go, with green w/ white stripes or something like this for conflict-zones.   It would really clear things up -but I guess the funding just isn't there for this. :(  

 

As always, peds, bikes & ped/bike-infrastructure is relegated to  5th or 6th-class road-users. 

 

With regards to confusing automobile "No Parking" signage:

 

 

 

 

 

Lisa Curcio said:

See John Greenfield's interview with Mike Amsden for CDOT's thoughts on green paint and bollards:

http://gridchicago.com/

Permalink Reply by Steven Vance on September 27, 2012 at 9:54am

Here're some tips for the driver, some clues that this isn't a place to park: you have to cross a hashed area, with solid white lines on both sides, and a line of plastic flexible posts to get to your parking space. That's highly unusual right? 

I think more should be done, though. 

But hey, I bet if we made them raised bike lanes (something the Bike 2015 Plan calls for but for all intents and purposes, it seems the City has no interest in doing them) people would still climb a curb to park their cars on them. 

Permalink Reply by Far'arned Retrogrumpalunkus #63 on September 27, 2012 at 10:03am

It's awfully nice of the city roads people to put this road-marking and bollards here to keep traffic, especially those careless bicyclists who don't pay attention, out of the door/unloading zone of parked cars...

Steven Vance said:

Here're some tips for the driver, some clues that this isn't a place to park: you have to cross a hashed area, with solid white lines on both sides, and a line of plastic flexible posts to get to your parking space. That's highly unusual right? 

I think more should be done, though. 

But hey, I bet if we made them raised bike lanes (something the Bike 2015 Plan calls for but for all intents and purposes, it seems the City has no interest in doing them) people would still climb a curb to park their cars on them. 

Permalink Reply by blair on September 27, 2012 at 10:26am

Green paint, bike symbols, signs and bollards - seems pretty straight forward to me.  I've sent CDOT a few dozen photos of cars parked in this specific bike lane.  Nothing but the automated "we got your email" response.

Permalink Reply by Far'arned Retrogrumpalunkus #63 on September 27, 2012 at 10:56am

Hanlon's Razor

Cameron Puetz said:

While I'm usually one of the first to criticize the singage on Kinzie, it would seem that there are plenty cues (the bollards being a major one) that you should not have a car there. Although after having a discussion with the Gilt Bar's valet who was pulling cars through the bollards to combine the bike lane and parking lane into perpendicular parking spaces I've decided that there is a group of drivers who will play stupid about the protected lane to make their life easier.

RSS

Groups

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

Disclaimer  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service