Sun Times: "Two Wheel Trouble."

A little more focus on supposed animosity between drivers and cyclists than necessary, but otherwise decently-researched article if one can look past the little tweaks for max. sensationalism:

http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/14787906-418/two-wheel-trouble-b...

Views: 2453

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Anne on September 3, 2012 at 10:08am

Not a bad article, but of course the comments are horrible. My mistake for reading them!

Permalink Reply by Gene Tenner on September 3, 2012 at 10:15am

The more articles on these issues the better. It broadens the discussions and increases.the solutions.

Permalink Reply by Anne Alt on September 3, 2012 at 10:33am

Absolutely.

Gene Tenner said:

The more articles on these issues the better. It broadens the discussions and increases.the solutions.

Permalink Reply by Leah Jone on September 3, 2012 at 3:09pm

I'm avoiding the comments. I'm certain someone says that I'm a fat b*tch who should have been killed in my crash, so I'll leave it to my imagination.

For my interview, I stood with the reporter and photographer for an hour at Halsted and Chicago and pointed out the different decisions cyclists were making with every cycle of lights. Depending on buses, trucks, right on reds, etc.

When he asked me about animosity, I said that everyone needed to spend some time in the others mode of transportation and refused to be goaded into saying anything outrageous. I haven't watched the video (can't stand to listen to my voice on tape).

The photographer on the story is a bike commuter when he's not in the field taking photos. And Chris is the reporter that I met with and he spent a lot of time trying to understand what happened and how it could be improved.

Anne said:

Not a bad article, but of course the comments are horrible. My mistake for reading them!

Permalink Reply by Gene Tenner on September 3, 2012 at 3:13pm

Thank you, Leah.

Leah Jone said:

I'm avoiding the comments. I'm certain someone says that I'm a fat b*tch who should have been killed in my crash, so I'll leave it to my imagination.

Permalink Reply by Julie Aberman (Hochstadter) on September 3, 2012 at 5:41pm

Anne you should know by now :))  

Leah, thanks for sharing your story. You are one of two people I know who had crashes right there.  


Anne said:

Not a bad article, but of course the comments are horrible. My mistake for reading them!

Permalink Reply by Anne Alt on September 4, 2012 at 1:01am

Thank you for taking the time to give that interview.  Anything that we in the cycling community can do to promote better understanding can make a difference in the long run.  Your point about spending time in the other person's mode of transportation is an important one.

I've used that approach in choosing how to ride near and communicate with different types of drivers.  I try to see whether an approaching cab has a passenger and use that information to help predict where the cab will go so I can avoid a collision.  If I see a bus approaching from behind and there's no obvious indication of whether the driver is pulling over for a stop, I wave, point to the bus stop, then shrug.  Usually the driver figures it out and gives a clearer indication, then I respond accordingly so we can each get where we need to go.

This doesn't solve the problem of collisions like yours, but it's helped me avoid many potential collision situations.  Trying to communicate with drivers in a friendly, non-confrontational way often helps.  I use turn signals when possible. That often seems to encourage drivers to do likewise.  I also thank drivers when they've obviously waited instead of swinging a door open in front of me.  Positive reinforcement can make a difference.

I  wish there was a solution that worked for all potential collisions.  At locations like Chicago and Halsted, the combination of intersection design and conventional standards for stoplight cycles may not fit today's traffic patterns.  Asking CDOT for a better solution makes sense.

Leah Jone said:

For my interview, I stood with the reporter and photographer for an hour at Halsted and Chicago and pointed out the different decisions cyclists were making with every cycle of lights. Depending on buses, trucks, right on reds, etc.

When he asked me about animosity, I said that everyone needed to spend some time in the others mode of transportation and refused to be goaded into saying anything outrageous. I haven't watched the video (can't stand to listen to my voice on tape).

The photographer on the story is a bike commuter when he's not in the field taking photos. And Chris is the reporter that I met with and he spent a lot of time trying to understand what happened and how it could be improved.

Permalink Reply by Erin Vogel on September 4, 2012 at 6:50am

"Halsted and Chicago Avenue — one of the most crash-prone intersections for cyclists in Chicago" -- Yikes. I definitely suspected that -- but I never knew it for sure until I read this article. I take Chicago east from West Town whenever I ride my bike to work. I haven't had any major problems yet, but I haven't been biking that route for very long because I've only lived in my new neighborhood for a few months. Today I did almost lose my balance in between the cars squashed together on the narrow bridge after Halsted. That's always the worst part of the trip. Anyone have any suggestions for better routes?

Permalink Reply by Far'arned Retrogrumpalunkus #63 on September 4, 2012 at 6:54am

THIS

I have always been shocked and dismayed by the way this city lays out intersections.

Granted, we are a LONG way from 8-80 infrastructure but what little infrastructure we have is very inconsistent and often just strands a cyclist in a danger zone when it gives up trying right before an intersection and then on through until the other side.   

Intersections, and the jockeying that goes on right before and after them, are the most dangerous places for cyclists on the street.  But the infrastructure is the weakest there.

The city could go a long way with putting in right turn ONLY lanes (not a right-hand through-intersection passing lane) immediately preceding every intersection.   Road diets to keep roads from getting a "belly bulge" in areas where it adds an extra lane only to give ZERO room for cyclists in these areas.  

The worst part about this is that elsewhere there seems to be decent infrastructure that leads many bicyclists into a false sense of security -only to dump them into a dangerous situation when the infrastructure suddenly ends when it is most needed. 



Cameron Puetz said:

One of the major problems with both intersections mentioned in the article is that the bike lane disappears for a brief stretch and an additional car lane is added. This leads to a dangerous mix of aggressive drivers trying to pass on the right and cyclists who are trying to not get squeezed out. Addressing this poor (and somewhat unique to Chicago) intersection design would probably do more for cyclist safety than protected lanes.
Permalink Reply by Erin Vogel on September 4, 2012 at 7:31am

Good point, thanks. When I ride to work, my start point is Chicago and Ashland and I usually end around  Chicago and Franklin. A friend of mine just suggested I take Grand instead, but he said that route is only slightly better.

Permalink Reply by Erin Vogel on September 4, 2012 at 7:48am

Sigh. That's what I figured.

Permalink Reply by Crazy David 84 Furlongs on September 4, 2012 at 7:56am

James BlackHeron wrote this:

I have always been shocked and dismayed by the way this city lays out intersections.

Granted, we are a LONG way from 8-80 infrastructure but what little infrastructure we have is very inconsistent and often just strands a cyclist in a danger zone when it gives up trying right before an intersection and then on through until the other side.   

Intersections, and the jockeying that goes on right before and after them, are the most dangerous places for cyclists on the street.  But the infrastructure is the weakest there.

The city could go a long way with putting in right turn ONLY lanes (not a right-hand through-intersection passing lane) immediately preceding every intersection.   Road diets to keep roads from getting a "belly bulge" in areas where it adds an extra lane only to give ZERO room for cyclists in these areas.  

My comment:

How true.   The City has "consistent" policies for Bike Lanes and the like, they just don't actually seem to be thought out clearly.  For example, Diversey has Bike Lanes, then suddenly they end and then they start up again a mile later.  Yes, they have "share the road" signs for that "missing" mile, but the Bike Lanes go to "no where".   And this is not the only example.   The new protected lanes that start on Roscoe end at Belmont where the Bicycle rider is just dumped out on 4 lane in each direction, getting ready for several bad intersections Belmont.  At least they could have linked Roscoe to California.  That would not have been that hard...

RSS

Groups

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

Disclaimer  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service