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: 2452

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Adam Kitzmann on September 5, 2012 at 10:27am

You Can't, sorry, should have clarified the route a bit more. Usually I turn onto Kinzie at Green to avoid Halstead and take the Kinzie Bikelane to the job in River North. For me it's a great way to avoid the six corner stop at Grand/Halstead/Milwaukee and all the crazy that is Grand or Chicago from Western to basically Milwaukee 

Lisa Curcio said:

Where does one cross the river?

Adam Kitzmann said:

Not sure if this has been covered yet, but don't take Grand, Hubbard is the best, fastest and safest way to get from the Ukie Village area to River North / Downtown IMO. And they have repaved as of a couple years ago most of that stretch. 

Erin Vogel said:

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 5, 2012 at 10:37am

I work in River North too, so this should work for me. I appreciate the suggestion! I'll try it next time for sure.

Permalink Reply by Don on September 6, 2012 at 2:51am

By the way:  "Told of the complaints about Halsted and Chicago, city transportation officials say that the yellow lights there — as well as all others in the city — are set according to federal standards based on the speed limit and that changing them would open up the city to lawsuits in the event of crashes."

 

What a crock of shit.  We all know the reason that they're not messing with yellow lights is it'll hurt revenue from the red light cameras.  

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2010-03-22/classified/ct-met-yel...

"Most Chicago yellow lights last three seconds, the bare minimum recommended under federal safety guidelines. In the suburbs, yellows generally stay on for four to four-and-a-half seconds."

 

This is the real reason the city won't touch yellow light timing:

http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/30/3055.asp

"Straight through violations drop 92 percent after yellow lights are extended by one second in Loma Linda, California."

Permalink Reply by dan brown on September 6, 2012 at 3:50am


Don - sadly I agree with you 100%. Chicago always has been and always will be about the money.

 

Funny - when they (CoC) say "....changing them would open up the city to lawsuits in the event of crasheschanging them would open up the city to lawsuits in the event of crashes..."  that reeks of

$$$ and then your argument (red light camera revenue) also does. So either way the motivation is

the almighty dollar; not safety of the citizenry.

 

And even though there may (or may not be) a red light camera there now; I believe there will be

soon. It's just a matter of time (IMHO) before many many more intersections will have them.

And with IPASS and GPS (OnStar) units in increasing numbers of cars; it's just a matter of time

until speeding tickets can be auto-generated based on GPS data. It's been thrown out of court

thus far (fine print in a fly by night car rental agency's contract); but for sure the lawmakers will persists

until they prevail.

 

DB

 


Don said:

By the way:  "Told of the complaints about Halsted and Chicago, city transportation officials say that the yellow lights there — as well as all others in the city — are set according to federal standards based on the speed limit and that changing them would open up the city to lawsuits in the event of crashes."

 

What a crock of shit.  We all know the reason that they're not messing with yellow lights is it'll hurt revenue from the red light cameras.  

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2010-03-22/classified/ct-met-yel...

"Most Chicago yellow lights last three seconds, the bare minimum recommended under federal safety guidelines. In the suburbs, yellows generally stay on for four to four-and-a-half seconds."

 

This is the real reason the city won't touch yellow light timing:

http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/30/3055.asp

"Straight through violations drop 92 percent after yellow lights are extended by one second in Loma Linda, California."

Permalink Reply by Mike Zumwalt on September 6, 2012 at 6:09am

I've had 2 wrecks in the past 2 years not involving a car. 

It's the usual thing with me seeing a car(s) approach an intersection BEFORE me so I slow/stop and they both look at me and/or wave me through. 

Permalink Reply by David of the North (David606xx) on September 7, 2012 at 7:39am

Here's one from the Comments section that needs to be repeated loud and often:

"I just wanted to point out that this article reports a 240% increase in ridership but only a 38% increase in accidents, 20% of which are simply due to new reporting rules. 

This means that bicycling is actually 64% safer than it was in 2001. Look at the numbers and then tell me you have a problem with bike lanes. The headline should be 'bike lanes save lives and prevent lawsuits'. 

Anyone with bad things to say about the responsibility of bicyclists because of these numbers isn't merely wrong, they are also incorrect. 

Just saying."

Permalink Reply by Will on September 7, 2012 at 7:53am

It's almost funny when drivers complain about cyclists disregarding the rules of the road. I see cars blow through red lights at almost every intersection.

A particularly egregious example, yesterday I saw an Infiniti blow through a red light at Congress and Wabash, going about 50 mph. I was just feet away from him, crossing the intersection on foot, and there was no way he was going to stop for me or anyone else.

I can't remember the last time I saw a 4,000 pound bicycle run a stop light at twice the speed limit.

Permalink Reply by Derek on September 7, 2012 at 8:02am

I'd like to see a 4,000 lbs bicycle.

Will V. said:

I can't remember the last time I saw a 4,000 pound bicycle run a stop light at twice the speed limit.

Permalink Reply by Tricolor on September 7, 2012 at 8:51am

You get a wicked sense of speed changing from 290 to Congress, assuming this guy was headed East.  I generally go that way coming back from points west and after 4-12 hours on the interstate to have it turn into a street with traffic signals with no off ramp or other cue to indicate you are on a new road is a pretty dangerous design.  Maybe some day Wacker Drive will re-open and that whole mess can be avoided.

Then again I saw a cab do roughly the same thing you describe on Jackson at Wabash during lunch today, which is rare compared to all the pedestrians that ramble across Wabash against the light.  Normally I'm quicker to consider pedestrians responsible based on what I see downtown.

Will V. said:

A particularly egregious example, yesterday I saw an Infiniti blow through a red light at Congress and Wabash, going about 50 mph. I was just feet away from him, crossing the intersection on foot, and there was no way he was going to stop for me or anyone else.

Permalink Reply by Crazy David 84 Furlongs on September 7, 2012 at 9:13am

My Comment:

"Pedestrians responsible"?   I guess so, but that's really "car thinking".   A Car or Truck or Bus running a red light has wholly different consequences than a Bicycle or Pedestrian "running" a red light.   And they should be held to different standards.   When, do you recall, is the last time that a Pedestrian ran a red light and struck someone and hurt of killed them?   When was the last time a bicyclist ran a red light in Chicago and struck and killed a pedestrian.  The answer is that both are very rare events.  Normally, if someone is hit and hurt with a bicycle or pedestrian that failed to follow the rules, it is the person who failed to follow the rules.  If it is a car, the smaller vehicle (or pedestrian) is the one with the greater damage.    

I have had this discussion on the expired meter with many "Car Types".   The standards for Cars are different than for bicycles and the standard for pedestrians are different than for bicycles and cars.   Placing them all in the same "box" and expecting the same compliance rules is silly and inefficient.  

Rational Changes

Stop Signs mean STOP for cars.

Stop Signs mean YIELD for Bicycles 
Stop Signs mean modified YIELD for pedestrians

Traffic Signal

Red means stop for Cars and Bicycles

Red means Yield for Pedestrians

Amber means stop if not in intersection for cars.

Amber means stop for bicycles

Amber means yield for Pedestrians.

As for the 4000 pound bicycle.... I am big but I am not that big.  That's off by a factor well greater than 12...


Tricolor said:

Then again I saw a cab do roughly the same thing you describe on Jackson at Wabash during lunch today, which is rare compared to all the pedestrians that ramble across Wabash against the light.  Normally I'm quicker to consider pedestrians responsible based on what I see downtown.

Permalink Reply by Gene Tenner on September 7, 2012 at 9:21am

Warrant issued for cyclist accused of killing pedestrian - A felony warrant is out for the bicyclist police say killed a pedestrian.
http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=news/local/san_francisco&a...

David crZven said:

My Comment:

When was the last time a bicyclist ran a red light in Chicago and struck and killed a pedestrian.   

Permalink Reply by Crazy David 84 Furlongs on September 7, 2012 at 9:30am

Yes.  San Francisco.   At an intersection at a bottom of a hill by a bicycle going 35 MPH through a Yellow Light.   Cities with Big Hills do allow bicycles to reach speeds not seen in Chicago.   And at 35 MPH a bicycle can start to get dangerous.   But when"s the last time you have seen a rider at sustained speeds of even 25 MPH in Chicago?  

RSS

Groups

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

Disclaimer  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service