We read in Bike Traffic the publication of the Chicagoland Bicycle Federation, that the Chicago Area Transportation Study (CATS) was hosting a workshop at its downtown offices. The topics up for discussion were grade separations and at-grade crossings along bicycle travel corridors. They had invited Denver’s bicycle planner James Mackay to show his excellent set of slides depicting good and bad examples of situations that cyclists face as they travel through various cities around the world. We attended this workshop wondering who else (and how many) would attend. As it turned out, registration was so large that the meeting had to be repeated over two days.
As we have explained before (in the October 2001 issue of Conscious Choice) the Chicago Area Transportation Study is the federally funded organization responsible for planning a transportation system for northeastern Illinois that is, "economically efficient, environmentally sound, provides the foundation for the nation to compete in the global economy, and will move people and goods in an energy-efficient manner." The Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act that authorized the CATS was signed into law in 1991; since then the CATS has recognized the importance of nonmotorized transportation, a realization that led to this "Soles and Spokes Design Workshop."
James Mackay has been designing and conducting workshops on intersection design for the last ten years. He is a recognized expert in road safety and usability for all modes of transportation and pedestrian activity. Mr. Mackay is originally from Wheaton, Illinois, and has served on the boards of the Illinois Prairie Path (the trail we chose for last September’s ride), the Chicagoland Bicycle Federation, and the Illinois Rails to Trails Conservancy. He is currently the secretary of the Bicycle Technical Committee on the National Committee for Uniform Traffic Control Devices. We were impressed with his credentials, as they reflect the degree to which our nation has begun to see cycling and walking as realistic alternatives to motorized transportation.
Who cares about making intersections safe for pedestrians and cyclists? Here is a partial list of attendees at this meeting: Bolingbrook Park District; Chicago Park District; Wheaton Park District; Rockford Park District; cities of Buffalo Grove, Bloomington, McHenry, St. Charles, Hoffman Estates, Naperville, Oak Park, Orland Park, and Rockford; the villages of Bartlett, Cary, Glenview, Homer Glen, Lemont, Plainfield, Richton Park, and Streamwood; Illinois Department of Natural Resources; Center for Neighborhood Technology; County Forest Preserves Districts; League of Illinois Bicyclists; Chicago Department of Transportation; and several engineering firms. The point we make here is that planning for safe walking and cycling is no longer on the back burner in communities throughout the Chicagoland region.
Mr. Mackay reminded us that bicycle travel routes work well until they cross busy highways, or railroads, or rivers, or other barriers. Without carefully planned crossings, these routes result in islands that cyclists are unwilling to leave. Underpasses and overpasses can solve this problem but they are very expensive to build and are best acquired by piggybacking onto other projects — it is more cost effective to include bicycle and pedestrian accommodations into a larger scale transportation project than it is to retrofit.
This, of course, is the premise of the road project notification form that the League of Illinois Bicyclists has on its Web site (www.bikelib.org). The league hopes that you will tell them what you need in your community to make the roads being built or modified more bicycle-friendly so that they can tell the road planners. Check out this Web site. You’ll find the proposed projects for areas in and around the Chicago area.
It is an accepted fact that cyclists and pedestrians prefer bridges to underpasses. Poorly planned underpasses may result in apprehensions about personal security and nuisance behavior. Such factors as drainage, lighting, approach geometry, and clearances needed for bicycles and maintenance vehicles are just some of the considerations essential for a well-planned underpass. Bridges work well to provide a crossing over a difficult corridor, but, again, careful planning is essential. We saw slides of some beautifully planned bridges and underpasses in various towns in the United States and in Europe as well as some examples of very poor planning. At-grade crossings are less expensive to build, but crossings without signals are very dangerous. In reality, there are relatively few such intersections in the Chicagoland area — we have stoplights at most major intersections. However, crossing treatments in Europe are generally considered better planned than those in the United States. Pedestrian- or cyclist-activated beacons are used in Europe and they are easily recognized and cost effective. Other devices, such as traffic-slowing road humps, work well if the crossing corridor traffic is not too fast or too heavy. These are just a few of the ideas presented at this meeting.
Both Florida and Oregon have some examples of very well-planned overpasses, underpasses, and at-grade crossings. The Department of Transportation Web sites for both Florida and Oregon have some good relevant information.
We were excited to see the high attendance at the workshop. We hope this will encourage you to participate in any way you can to support the efforts of those working to make biking and walking safer and more fun in the Chicagoland area. Of course if you don’t get out your bike and ride, you won’t be very motivated to do this. As always, we encourage you to get out your bike, ride, improve the environment, and above all, stay healthy.