A visual metaphor for our transportation priorities
On November 30th, the "Windy City" proved true to its reputation as Lake Michigan washed over the bike/ped path - known as the Lakefront Trail - wedged between the freeway and the lake. In this photo, we see cars passing by the lake on an elevated highway, safe from the crashing waves. A lone cyclist is simultaneously enveloped by them. The video continues (link at the bottom) showing this cyclist falling over and nearly being swept into the lake as it retreats.
Pedestrian and cyclist access to natural resources like picturesque waterfronts is certainly, under normal circumstances, a desirable thing, even if this tight shot indicates that this section is far from a typical outdoor "green space" with traffic whizzing by a few feet above and away. However, it also demonstrates a vexing problem with the way urban forms prioritize certain mode choices over others. Here, the least weather-vulnerable modes of transportation are kept the safest from inclement weather. Single occupants of 3,000lb motor vehicles can travel through this area safely and rapidly, given the absence of apparent congestion. At the same time, due to the design of this corridor, the more vulnerable cyclist, depending on skinny tires and only a helmet for protection, is also more exposed to the hazards brought on by the lake, with no elevated pathway or barriers to keep them from being swept into the water.
Separating bike/ped paths from vehicle traffic doesn't automatically make active transportation safer or more comfortable. Corridor design must be as intentional about, as invested in keeping cyclists and pedestrians safe as it is for cars, if more people are going to choose these more beneficial modes going forward.
Source: https://twitter.com/abc7chicago/status/1333419397495615488?s=27
Hi Jude, thanks for sharing this image. I love the metaphor that you draw from it. I agree with your assessment of how cities prioritize different modes. Even in cities where bike paths and pedestrian walkways are valued, the design and placement of these paths are still not always the most ideal or safest for travel. I've started to look more critically of plans that place importance in implementation of active transportation networks. It's obviously essential to implement these networks to create a robust and efficient transit system, but it needs to be done with taking into consideration the safety of pedestrians using the network. Like you pointed out, if we don't do that, individuals are less inclined to use these alternative forms of transit.
ReplyDeleteThis really is a great summation of initial efforts to incorporate bicycling into the travel mix--good intentions and (often) poor execution. It reminds me of the "commuter" bike paths along the river in my former town, Missoula, that turned to slushy mud in the winter, or the times the Eastbank Esplanade has closed due to high water (https://bikeportland.org/2011/05/31/high-water-on-willamette-creates-serious-safety-hazard-on-esplanade-53879 AND https://bikeportland.org/2017/03/23/portion-of-esplanade-path-might-have-to-close-due-to-high-water-222592).
ReplyDeleteI saw this video on Twitter a few days ago and just had to shake my head. It's really such a stark example showing where we put our priorities when it comes to transportation. Goes to show that good intentions are just that if policies are not implemented properly or with enough thought. Perhaps there wasn't enough funding to construct a barrier for the bike path, which as you point out, is much more vulnerable to this kind of weather than cars. Also I love how the headline subtly puts the responsibility for this situation on cyclists and not on the city for building this dangerous path.
ReplyDeleteHey Jude,
ReplyDeleteI love that this visually sensationalist image from twitter inspired your thoughts here. I had never considered whether active transportation networks were more or less exposed compared to cars, I've only really considered whether they were exposed unsafely TO cars. However, like you said, under normal circumstances picturesque access to natural sights is preferable. I do not personally bike so I can't attest to that, but as someone who walks almost everywhere and got into planning specifically because of walkability, it's interesting to consider how safety from the elements is a factor. I can't think of where I have been exposed to anything like in the tweet you included, but being from LA, the sun is of course a constant element to be considered. I am currently staying with my sister in Long Beach, CA and she has just purchased her first home in a lower-income part of the city which has very noticeably fewer trees, even by Southern California standards. I have gone on almost NO leisure walks since I have been here because of how unpleasant I find the lack of shade. I'm even borrowing my sister's car to drive to nearby places I would normally happily walk to. This is all to say, walking and biking networks of course deserve their own pleasant aesthetics, but lack of perceived safety/comfort is an important factor for mode choices.
And Symeon, thanks for your last point there! I was so distracted by the image that I didn't pick up on the obvious victim blaming of the cyclist!