Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Thunder Snow on October 27, 2011 at 6:52am

Don't forget Skokie, which will share the honors, if the state and federal funding gods are with us.  The planned bike lane down Church Street runs from Lawler Avenue in Skokie to Chicago Avenue in Evanston, almost connecting the Evanston lakefront to a spot about a mile east of the North Branch Trail in Harms Woods.  The protected bike lane seems to fall a little short on both ends, but would be a huge improvement on east-west bike travel nonetheless.

Some details, mostly of funding sources and a map or two, here in a very hefty 25 Mb pdf (don't say I didn't warn you) that was presented by Evanston city staff to the mayor and aldermen.  TIGER III Grant info appears pp. 19-37. 

Thank you, Barb Cornew & ATA, for speaking on behalf of all of us at the meeting.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Active Transportation Alliance on October 27, 2011 at 7:40am

Excellent point..go, Skokie too!

 

Ethan, Active Trans

Thunder Snow said:

Don't forget Skokie, which will share the honors, if the state and federal funding gods are with us.  The planned bike lane down Church Street runs from Lawler Avenue in Skokie to Chicago Avenue in Evanston, almost connecting the Evanston lakefront to a spot about a mile east of the North Branch Trail in Harms Woods.  The protected bike lane seems to fall a little short on both ends, but would be a huge improvement on east-west bike travel nonetheless.

Some details, mostly of funding sources and a map or two, here in a very hefty 25 Mb pdf (don't say I didn't warn you) that was presented by Evanston city staff to the mayor and aldermen.  TIGER III Grant info appears pp. 19-37. 

Thank you, Barb Cornew & ATA, for speaking on behalf of all of us at the meeting.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Thunder Snow on October 27, 2011 at 10:06am

Jennifer,the protected bike lane cordons off a part of the road itself, using bollards and parked cars to keep motorists off the bike lane (though it doesn't seem entirely successful on Kinzie, eh Mr. Postman & Ms. Delivery Driver? but I digress).  The off-street path is just that--a separate road just for bikes and/or other non-motorists (think the Lakefront Path or the stretch of Sheridan Road around Fort Sheridan, where the bike path/sidewalk is separated from the road by a curb and strip of lawn).

Jennifer said:

What's the difference between a "protected bike lane" and an "off-street bike path" with some kind of physical barrier, such as a guardrail or raised curb? I've already seen a few of the latter here and there.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by John Wirtz on October 28, 2011 at 1:45am

I think raised lanes might be better in many cases, but they would also be much more expensive.  They would also still take away the "drivers' space," at least in urban environments.

Jennifer said:

What is "the road itself"? I thought the whole point of "complete streets" was to include such facilities in the design of "the road itself."

 

Basically, I'm wondering if, psychologically, what some drivers resent is "us" taking "their" space, which then, in their minds, justifies them taking it back (which is evidently quite easy to do). Might it not be better to raise these so-called protected bike lanes a few inches above street grade and install curbs and perhaps guardrails? I understand the arguments based on transit equity, but in practice, it isn't working.

• ▶ Reply