On Thursday the Chicago Tribune yet ran another editorial about construction on the Kennedy Expressway inconveniencing drivers that calls for some discussion. That reminded me that I'd been planning to update Streetsblog readers about a similar editorial last December that we'd asked the newspaper to correct. Let's talk about one, and then the other.
What's the statute of limitations for blaming bike lanes for traffic jams?
In December, I razzed Chicago Tribune Editorial Page Editor Chris Jones pretty hard after he ran an editorial linking bikeways to Kennedy Expressway construction-related surface street congestion, and then turned down my suggestion that the article be modified.
"[On] many of the former alternate routes, such as Elston and Milwaukee avenues, [the Chicago Department of Transportation has] reduced... vehicular capacity by adding bike lanes," the Trib editorial board stated. "Those roads don’t offer any meaningful relief from a clogged expressway anymore. Few alder[persons] want to talk about that, but everyone who uses a car to get around town from time to time knows it’s true."
It seemed safe to assume they were talking about the relatively recent installation of protected bike lanes on those streets, particularly stretches where the bikeways are shielded with concrete. But after the editorial came out, CDOT spokesperson Erica Schroeder confirmed my suspicion that, as a rule, those PBL projects didn't actually reduce the number of lanes for drivers on Elston and Milwaukee. "The motor vehicle capacity has remained generally the same after the installation of [protected] bike lanes because no travel lanes were converted or removed."
When I politely asked Chris Jones to edit the piece accordingly, he declined. "No retraction forthcoming," he wrote tersely. "Always happy to get letters though."
Indeed, about a week after the editorial ran, the Tribune ran letters to the editor from Amber Wilson and Anthony Nicholson asking that the piece be updated to reflect the fact that the protected lanes didn't reduce vehicular capacity. "The car lanes remain the same, and the bike lanes — bikes are vehicles! — are now inviting more bike traffic than before," Wilson noted.
Jones still didn't modify the editorial, and didn't have much more to say about his rationale. But the day after the letters ran, he tipped his hand by "liking" and retweeting the following Twitter reply to Streetsblog Chicago about the Elston/Milwaukee situation from @brianbell98, presumably Brian Bell.
Jones' retweet indicated Bell correctly guessed that what the Tribune editorial board was talking about. That is, when they wrote that CDOT installing new bikeways on Elston and Milwaukee "reduced... vehicular capacity," they were talking about work done a generation ago, when the department first painted non-protected bike lanes were on those streets.
In fact, it's true that before there were any bikeways at all on these streets, Elston did have, and Milwaukee may have had, four mixed-traffic lanes, which likely meant higher driving speeds and more crashes. Here's an aerial of the 1000 North block of Elston from 2002 shared on Twitter by @tnertz, showing four "car lanes" and no bikeways.
Google Street View shows that CDOT had striped paint-only bikeways on this stretch of Elston by at least 2007, as you can see below.
As for Milwaukee, the Cook County Aerial Image from 1998 below shows CDOT had already painted non-protected bike lanes on that avenue in West Town by then, and there were generally only one mixed-traffic lane in each direction. Before that, Milwaukee may have also been a four-lane "stroad" like Elston, but the Cook County aerials available online don't go back that far.
So it does appear Brian Bell was right that the Tribune editorial was talking about non-protected bikeways when they wrote that CDOT "reduced... vehicular capacity by adding bike lanes" on Elston and possibly Milwaukee. Even so, the Tribune blaming those paint-only bike lanes installed so many years ago for recent Kennedy construction-related traffic congestion was silly for a few reasons.
First off all, non-protected bikes lanes don't really prevent motorists from illegally driving, standing, or parking in the bikeway, as you can see from the white van in the above aerial, blocking the inbound bikeway. That is why physical protection is so important.
And that's particularly true if you're talking about frustrated drivers stewing in surface-street traffic jams while trying to avoid expressway congestion. Some of them will almost certainly drive in paint-only bike lanes in order to (unlawfully and dangerously) pass stopped vehicles on the right.
Second, it was reasonable for Streetsblog and CDOT to assume the Trib was referring to the more recently installed protected lanes, rather than the painted bikeways put in on Milwaukee at least 26 years earlier. After all, 1998 was a long time ago. Back then, Cher's Auto-Tuned Eurodisco song "Believe" was first tearing up the charts.
Third, there's the editorial's statement that "Few alder[persons] want to talk about" Elston and Milwaukee having had more travel lanes in the past, when they offered "meaningful relief from a clogged expressway." Maybe they're not talking about it because back in 1998, current City Council members like Ald. Carlos Ramirez-Rosa (35th) who was 10 years old, and Ald. Jesse Fuentes (26th) who was even younger, weren't old enough to drive?
So the Tribune's blaming bike lanes installed decades ago, for gridlock created by drivers fleeing Kennedy construction in the modern era, is sort of ridiculous. It's kind of like if I was to say the following. "Ever since they tore out the streetcar tracks on Michigan Avenue, transit doesn't offer any meaningful relief from traffic congestion on the Magnificent Mile anymore. Few alders want to talk about that, but everyone who rides a bus to get around town from time to time knows it’s true."
"Please spare a thought for woebegone suburbanites"
Yesterday's Tribune editorial was less problematic, and actually raised some good points, so less deconstruction is needed. But, once again, there are a couple points in this piece, "An ode to Chicago’s unappreciated suburban commuters," that could use a little discussion and/or correction.
The editorial mentioned an interesting news item I hadn't noticed before, a WGN story titled, "Contractor blames IDOT for 113-day Kennedy construction delay." It discussed a memo from a construction company indicating that the Illinois Department of Transportation delayed the project by 32 days by ordering the contractor to reopen express lanes for Democratic National Convention VIPs.
The Tribune wrote, "[Suburbanites] who... saw the news about the Kennedy construction delay debacle [likely] felt put upon and frustrated — but not surprised. After all, suburban commuters are just supposed to take it."
Let's give the Trib the benefit of the doubt that the "it" suburbanites are supposed to take refers to Pace buses and Metra trains.
No? Well, to their credit, the editorial board noted that folks in the 'burbs who do the right thing by taking transit to the city instead of driving to Chicago are facing their own challenges. In particular, there's the ominous $770 million Chicagoland transit fiscal cliff projected for 2026, when the federal COVID-19 subsidy will run out. The paper noted that would lead to less transit service and higher ticket prices.
Still, this line from the Tribune seemed a little off: "[Suburban Metra] fares increased last year." Streetsblog Chicago's suburban transit specialist Igor Studenkov confirmed that statement isn't necessarily accurate.
Metra's new fare structure, which began in February 2024.
"It's only true in the sense that monthly pass prices have increased with the elimination of the Super Saver pass, which was $100 for all fare zones, making it cheaper than all other options," Igor explained. "Current monthly fares start at $75 for Fare Zones 1-2 and 2-4 zones, and go up for fare zones 1-3 and 1-4, to $110 and $135, respectively."
Fellow suburban transit whiz "Star:Line Chicago" also pointed out that the fare changes didn't make all suburban Metra fares go up – some got cheaper.
The editorial correctly noted that suburban commuters help fuel the downtown Chicago retail and commercial real estate economies, and more foot traffic makes Loop streets feel safer. "The more suburbanites, the better," they said.
"If the Trib editorial board wants more suburbanites to come downtown to hang out and spend money, they should be supporting #RevenuesAndReform to allow Metra to run more trains seven days a week," Star:Line Chicago responded. "Sorry to say, but that does require investing more in operating our regional transit network."
Did you appreciate this post? Streetsblog Chicago is currently fundraising to help cover our 2025-26 budget. If you appreciate our reporting and advocacy on local sustainable transportation issues, please consider making a tax-deductible donation here. Thank you.
