Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Kevin Mulcky on October 6, 2011 at 5:59am

It sure would be nice if the access points corresponded with the forthcoming protected bike lanes.

 

Was there any talk about not allowing bicycles?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steven Vance on October 6, 2011 at 6:05am

You should make that comment officially (about linking with forthcoming protected bike lanes) - instructions are at the end of the article. Design will start after the framework plan is created. The design team will be creating the access points; but the location of forthcoming protected bike lanes may not be determined in time. 

No, there was no talk about allowing bicycles. There was a lot of talk about how people moving fast (on bicycles) and people moving slow (on foot, children on bikes) would interact, and how the BTrail can be designed to set expectations for "appropriate" or "safe" travel speeds - it's in the article. 

Kelvin Mulcky said:

It sure would be nice if the access points corresponded with the forthcoming protected bike lanes.

 

Was there any talk about not allowing bicycles?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steven Vance on October 6, 2011 at 7:15am

I should add that ALL public meetings and charrettes for this project have been held at times when most people aren't working - that is, weekends and evenings.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Kevin Mulcky on October 6, 2011 at 7:46am

I kinda think it'd be nice to have a space of reflection in the city, free of vehicles. If there will be new bikes lanes being constructed nearby that make the B-Trail redundant as a commuter corrider, I'd love to have a space in the city constructed with a quiet ethos in mind. 

But, because of the B-Trail's linear nature I think it makes sense a commuting corridor. If I'm to believe that there's going to be 100 miles of protected bike lanes constructed in the near future, its hard for me to picture that the B-Trail and protected lanes wouldn't connect together as part of the larger network.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steven Vance on October 6, 2011 at 8:49am

Thank you for describing your experience here. I should clarify: When I was there, I didn't hear people discussing that they wanted bikes off the trail, and this was addressed in the presentation (it's in the article).

After the presentation on Tuesday, one member of the audience stood up to talk about the connection to Elston. Luann Hamilton explained that CDOT is only acquiring the property to the Metra tracks, while the project scope ends at Ashland. 

Sidenote: To get to Elston, a bridge or tunnel over or under the Metra tracks would have to be built. 

Cameron Puetz said:

In one of the small groups I participated in at the Charrette last weekend there a few people pushing to not allow bikes on some portions of the trail, but idea didn't gain much traction due to most of the funding coming from CMAQ grants. From the presentations following the small group break out sessions on Saturday and Sunday, opinions on bikes seemed to range from begrudging acceptance because they brought so much funding in, to enthusiasm about the trail serving as a commuting corridor.

The issue of extending the trail to Elston to tie into the bike lane there, instead of ending the trail at Ashland was brought up by several people at the Charrette.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steven Vance on October 6, 2011 at 6:29pm

Hmm, I like that idea. I'll snap some photos next time I'm on Cortland under the highway to get a better of what's going on there. 

A few commenters on the article are saying that the Bloomingdale Trail would be better off as a crosstown (rail) transit route. Does anyone have an idea about this? Link to comment. I think it's a great place to install such a line, but the time for that came and went. The organization is happening around a park and multi-use trail. I wonder if anyone at CTA, RTA, CDOT had ever considered this in the past 13 years during which people have been talking about the Bloomingdale Trail idea. 

Cameron Puetz said:

A more feasible solution would be to use the existing rail bridge over Ashland, and then build a path in the space under the Kennedy that is currently used to stockpile light poles to connect the bike lane on Cortland to the Bloomingdale Trail. This would provide a route to both Elston and one of the few bike friendly river crossings in the area. It's frustrating to see routes come so close to linking up, but have a short, dangerous section separating them.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Michelle S on October 7, 2011 at 7:51am

I'm surprised that the easternmost point of the BT is being considered to be Ashland, given the map that they've posted on their BT site, shown below. It would be a huge shame if they don't extend the BT to the important cycling street Cortland, either on the east or west side of the river. I'm pretty sure that Cortland/Racine link/Armitage-toward-the-east will have protected lanes by the time the BT is done, and to just dump eastbound bicyclists out onto the craziness of Ashland to make their way to Cortland would be nuts.

 

Finkl is on its way out. How about the city/alderman require the future developer to provide a public park at water's edge at the confluence of the BT/Cortland/river to serve as a grand entrance to the BT from people arriving from the east (or an ending destination for those arriving from Humboldt Park)? There are great views from there of the skyline, currently visible over the mountains of scrap metal. We’ll see which ward that ends up in after the boundaries are redrawn in the next few months. . . .

 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Juan 2-3 or more mi. on October 7, 2011 at 10:33am

I am going to miss seeing all those sparks.

Michelle Stenzel said:

Finkl is on its way out. . . .

 

• ▶ Reply