Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Andrew on June 9, 2015 at 2:46am

Just voicing a question that struck me early Saturday morning as I watched an incredibly heterogeneous group of people on the newly-opened 606.  I'm a fan of competitive cycling from Grand Tours to local Cat5 Saturdays and I don't think anything I wrote marginalizes anyone.

One of things I really like about the 606 is that it's for everyone, and that definitely includes Bloomingdale Boonens.  Have fun and ride/run safe!

Permalink Reply by Yasmeen on June 9, 2015 at 10:20am

Yeah, I'm not a huge fan of the "Lakefront Lance" label as if wearing a kit somehow changes how someone rides a bike.

Permalink Reply by Juan 2-3 or more mi. on June 8, 2015 at 7:38am

The first impression is much like the lakefront trail with families and their strollers mindlessly taking the whole width of the trail. It is efficiently ridable only in the early am and late evening.

Permalink Reply by Donald P Kingston on June 8, 2015 at 11:43am

I rode east to west and back and think it's pretty nice. I asm sure after a week or two traffic will slow. A great way to travel off the street.

Permalink Reply by Shawn Evans on June 9, 2015 at 12:11am

It was empty when I got on it in the morning at Drake, but that didn't last.

Lots of walkers in the middle of the path.

I got to work a whole minute early.

Many, many people have asked for separate walk and bike paths on the lakefront. A shame no one ever listens to the people. Could have made separate paths here (who needs landscaping?)

I think I read that, in the Netherlands, the only multiuse paths are in parks. REAL parks, not in a trail called a park. Why do we continue to accept substandard design?  Dearborn is bad, this isn't any better.

Let's call it "The 666"

Permalink Reply by Jaik S. on June 9, 2015 at 2:13am

What about the six or so Parks that are directly connected to the trail? Those aren't real? You want a park, but no landscaping...it may be that you're thinking of a parking lot, not a park.

The problem with creating separate bike paths and walking paths would be that people walk and ride where they can. If a car isn't present in a bike lane, then people will walk. If you are blocked by traffic, obstacles or otherwise on a street, you take a sidewalk for a few moments. 

Permalink Reply by Shawn Evans on June 9, 2015 at 3:45pm

You can connect parks, without being in a park. Look at any map. Sacramento connects Douglas Park to Humboldt Park, but it's still separate from them. Oh yeah, it's a street. Hmmm, I wonder if a bike path could do that. Apparently, it boggles the minds of the 606 designers.

"If a car isn't present in a bike lane, then people will walk." ??? You mean pedestrians will fill an empty bike lane? The only places that happens are where the bike lane is next to the ped lane. Like on the 606. It doesn't happen to on-street bike lanes. Because they're s-e-p-a-r-a-t-e--d.

It all comes down to the design. They could have done a far better job of designing the trail for all users, but decided not to.

They took $50 mil from the feds to make a bike path (and $45 mil from other sources), and created a mess.

Permalink Reply by Jaik S. on June 10, 2015 at 12:02am

You sure that never happens? You've never seen someone walking in a bike lane?

Recent news.

Rather than be upset about the new trail and parks that were put in, I will enjoy them along with other people. 

Permalink Reply by Shawn Evans on June 10, 2015 at 11:33pm

'Recent news' is about someone crossing a street with a bike lane, not walking in a bike lane.

And you'll enjoy the new trail? Frankly, I don't see how anyone can. How can bike riders enjoy constantly going around walkers, while oncoming cyclists are doing the same? I had more near-misses in 2 days on the 606 than I've had in 2 months on surface streets full of cars, etc. Then there are the bikes coming from behind, going around you when you're trying to pass walkers. It's crazy. And how can pedestrians enjoy the trail with bikes constantly zipping past them mere inches away? Wouldn't ground-level sidewalks be far more stress-free?

The bike money from the feds paid for the trail, so there should be a compromise: Ban pedestrians from 6-9 AM and 4-6 PM. They can still use it 12 hours (9AM-4PM and 6PM-11PM). Kicking people off the trail will also give those bike cops something to do.

Ban walkers? The horror! Consider: Bikes are banned from sidewalks in Chicago, and from CTA trains from 7-9 & 4-6. And as I said, the trail was built for bikes. It's only fair.

Permalink Reply by David Altenburg on June 11, 2015 at 3:25am

Well said. I've taken the trail for my commute all week, and it is easily my favorite part of my commute, crowds and all. 

Permalink Reply by David P. on June 11, 2015 at 3:47am

Shawn,

Since you are unable or unwilling to enjoy it, I will enjoy it for you :) I took it on my way home yesterday. Lots of people out, which felt great. You are wrong on one point, though - the trail was built for people, not bikes. Lots of people are peopling it!

Permalink Reply by Filka Bean on June 11, 2015 at 6:39am

Hey yous don't get it: Shawn read the Reader article and is trying to help prevent gentrification...  Good for you, Shawn!  I'm telling all my well-heeled friends what a disappointment the 606 has turned out to be and they should keep cyclng the north shore like they've been doing!

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
• Next ›
• Page