motorman

Staff from Minneapolis Public Works met with the North Minneapolis Bicycle Taskforce (NMBT) to discuss the plan to improve the Northside bicycle facilities. It will begin as soon as possible with the correction signage and lane markings then engagement with property owners that have expressed a hardship. The lane correction will connecting lane markings that are intermittent, adding no parking signs in area that need them, and to restore the eastern half of Plymouth to ‘Share the Road’ and move the lane on the bridge over I-94 away from the gutter pan. I welcome these actions as an intermediate step towards what I hope to occur next year. As I posted previously, there needs to be more protected passage for riders with emerging skill. Fortunately, this plan will address three-out-of-the-four issues I have with the Northside lanes.

Make your voice heard
Public Works staff informed us that the rationale behind the changes in parking restrictions on these lanes is a direct result from complaining property owners. To no fault of the City staff, this is how many issues receive attention. These squeaky wheels received grease until a more comprehensive approach could occur.

As the NMBT works with the City and the community to discuss the importance of the bike program and as some begin to receive tickets for disobeying parking restrictions additional complaints will come into City Hall. It is very important for this (and for all bike facilities) that you make sure that elected officials understand that these facilities are used and need to remain. We have the highest percentage of people that bike to work in the country. It is my expectation that within the year we have the highest percentage of bike commuters that is also the most vocal.

Links to Minneapolis officials

• Minneapolis Mayor
• Minneapolis City Council
• Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board
• Hennepin County Board

Remember those who have or are serving in the Armed Forces tomorrow.

This year, the City of Minneapolis added four new on-road bicycle facilities to the Northside. These facilities fill a major gap in the overall city system and result from a coordinated prioritization from the North Minneapolis Bike Taskforce (NMBT). Coupled with Mayor Rybak’s decision to move these projects forward in the capital program, the City installed these lanes three years earlier. These facilities connect the parkway system in the west and north to the river and into downtown and bridge the largest remaining gap in the City’s system.

The new on-road lanes on Plymouth, 26th and 42nd Avenues and North 2nd Street form the skeleton that can accommodate additional capacity for the area in the coming years. Since these are the first on-street lanes for this part of town, it is critical to get it right. As I have stated in a number of previous posts, the installation of bicycle facilities lowers the barriers for new users. And as previously detailed on this site, people will use these facilities and the bicycle community grows.

At this point it is appropriate to divulge that I am a proud member of the NMBT and endorse these routes as the first on-road lanes for this area of the City. However, the installation does not meet my approval.

The Northside lanes total more than 8.5 miles of new well-intentioned facilities of dedicated lanes or share the road treatments that attempt to make it easier to move through the Northside on a bicycle. However, I give a grade of “incomplete” for these facilities based on lack of continuity and unsafe conditions in multiple spots. The City would need to complete four improvements to the system to receive a final grade and provide a quality facility. I explain these conditions below in order of importance.

(1) Remove the lane from the gutter pan
I have spent many years discussing bike facility design. In these years, I cannot recall ever seeing an acceptable design that pushes the bicycle into the gutter pan (with one exception described below). On Plymouth Avenue between Emerson and Third, the bike lane is four feet wide to the curb and has on 22 inches on the asphalt pavement. This limited width is further restricted by the payment conditions where there is a healthy trenched pothole between the bituminous roadway and the concrete gutter pan. At one point east of Lyndale and one point west of Third the bicycle lane payment marking straddles the two pavement types and across a storm water catch basin. If bicyclists followed the arrow he or she would run right into the existing trench.

There is one exception to the use of the gutter pan. This occurs when the gutter pan is specifically designed to accommodate the bikeway. In Minneapolis, we have it on University Avenue. This treatment is a six-foot wide concrete gutter pan that creates a safe environment for bikes to travel.

(2)Extend the marked lanes on Plymouth to the river
The solution to this condition on Plymouth is to extend the three-lane treatment that is on the western portion of the corridor all the way to the Mississippi River. I no longer believe that a share the road treatment is an acceptable option. I think of the less-skilled, less-comfortable bicyclist will gravitate to off-road facilities or low volume routes. It is more likely that the a new rider will be more comfortable on the Theo With/Victory Memorial route along the western city border to travel north-south then travel a comfortable connection into downtown. Right now, the treatment from the parkway to Humboldt Ave along Plymouth provides this route. It is at Humboldt that it all goes wrong. The majority of the traffic volume and the most complex roadway intersection occur on the east half of Plymouth. I am certain that a rider that is trying the commute for the first time will not repeat the attempt after he or she encounters this half of Plymouth.

For those who are not familiar with the area let me break it down for you. As you travel east-bound, there is a comfortable 5+ foot continuous bicycle lane to travel, at Humboldt Plymouth curves north. At this bend the view of the bicyclist is first a sign stating at the bikeway is ending and then up ahead is an intersection of Fremont and then Emerson. These road form a one-way pair (Emerson travel is north, Fremont travel is south) and is one of the primary routes though this area of town for both motorists and transit. Metro Transit Route 5 is on of the most frequent and most used transit route in the system.
This buses make a left turn onto Plymouth, stop (with the vehicle angled) in mid-block, and then turn at Emerson to the south (which become Seventh Street) and into downtown. The travels lanes on this one block of Plymouth expand to three eastbound lanes to accommodate the volume that comes off Fremont to Seventh and the right two lanes allow for right turns onto Seventh. In addition to right-turn permission, the middle lane also allows traffic to proceed along Plymouth. A bicyclist must navigate through angled stopped buses, move to the middle lane and avoid any turning traffic that might not respect the bicycle right to proceed along Plymouth.
When the rider successfully conquers this area the bike lane marking move into the gutter pan (see Number 1 above) and there are now two lanes for vehicle travel in both directions. As you travel east from this point the condition continue to deteriorate until you are between Second and the River Parkway where there is only a few share the road sign, poor payment conditions and traffic speeds that exceed the posted signs. If the rider is successful to traverse this portion of the corridor he or she is greeted with an off-street facility at the River which will take you into downtown.

There are too many other barriers to riding – the American car culture, lack of time, the need for lockers and showers, weather, etc. – that the infrastructure should not add to these barriers. I do acknowledge that all bike streets are bike streets and bike facilities on selected roads can project to an uninformed traveler that bike are only allowed in designated areas. However, Plymouth (with its link to the off-road network) is a critical gap that needs additional consideration to create safe travel for those who need and desire the additional protection a well designed bike facility provides. I also acknowledge that changing the roadway from four travel lanes to three will reduce motor vehicle traffic. My response is that there are adequate alternative to absorb this reduced capacity. Traffic is like water, it will find the path of least resistance, and with major arterials and highway suck as Olson Highway, West Broadway/Golden Valley Road, Interstates 394 and 94, Washington, Lyndale, Fremont/Emerson, and Penn within a mile or intersecting the avenue it makes the case to accommodate the bicycle first on Plymouth.

(3)Stripe the lanes continuously
In a number of areas the striping of the lanes is inconsistent. In some areas where the City was not willing to remove parking it removed the lanes. In other areas, it simply seems as if the striping truck stopped for a stretch and continued on further down the road. I have concerns with regard to the first observation that parking needs to be preserved at the peril of the bike lanes, although I can understand the need for balance. I do, however, feel that if there is an on-street parking problem, maybe the facility should not have gone on that avenue. Especially with these lanes that hug the curb and gutter intermittent marking force the rider to move into traffic as it avoids parked cars. If the markings are removed entirely then a bicyclist would ride in the same position (about 7 feet from the curb) during the entire run of the avenue to avoid parked cars and would keep the same line of travel. Addressing the second issue is simple. Send the stripers back out and finish the job.

One improvement I am not suggesting, though, is stripping in marked share the road areas at business districts such ad 42nd and Thomas and 42nd and Fremont. Simple share the road treatments will suffice considering the need business parking.


(4)Prohibit parking in the marked lanes
There are a number of areas where motor vehicles park in the bike lanes. This occurs for the following reasons, one – the lanes is not marked at that point (see Number 3 above), two – the vehicle owner disobeys the marking and parks, three – there is a lane without any “No Parking” signs to restrict use, or four – the City permits parking. Parking in the bike lanes defeats the purpose of installing the bike facilities in the first place. If there is a lane there should be no parking permitted, end of story.


There is hope!
Minneapolis Public Works staff knows that these lanes are not satisfactory and have committed to fixed them. The NMTF will meet on November 8, 2006 with Public Works staff to begin to develop a plan to fix the Northside lanes. It is great to see that Public Works staff will not be satisfied with inferior bike facilities in any part of the City. I will keep you posted on the progress.

For those interested, I have had to spend the last two months of free time reconstructing my garage. This activity has interfered with my time to write to this site. Rest assured, I have a new post on new bike lanes (complete with pictures), but it will be a few days to complete. Thanks for your patience. Ride hard while the weather is good; ride harder while it is poor!

On a ride along the 29th Street Greenway (the long way home), I rode through Saint Louis Park. This is a growing first-ring suburb west of Minneapolis. It is home to the 29th Street Greenway and Cedar Lake trail extensions that connects longer regional rail-trails to those within Minneapolis. This trip, in early July, was troubling to me. The City of Saint Louis Park had replaced the former trail controls and markings (stop signs for trail users and painted crossing) with obnoxious signs that I took to say “how dare you consider riding you bicycle through this area.” In short, these new signs protects the right of crossing motorized vehicle traffic to flow unencumbered from the need to cooperate with crossing non-motorized vehicles that use the commuter way. These actions, that I have discovered, are Saint Louis Park’s response to a crash between a motorist and a bicycle that severely injured the bicyclist. Unfortunately, the city’s actions have further strengthened the position in the public eye that bicycling is a less legitimate form of transportation than the motor vehicle and have placed them in greater danger. These actions of the Saint Louis Park need to be reversed and in its place the City needs to implement a program that places the responsibilities to operate a vehicle (both motorized and non-motorized) to all operators.

Why is this so important?
In my opinion, the single reason is safety. I would expect that Saint Louis Park officials would say they are acting on behalf of public safety, but I will explain how their actions are actually increasing the danger to the non-motorized users of the trail.

We teach driver not to anticipate.
The culture of the United States is long in its preference to the driving public. At a young age we are taught to stay away from cars and trucks when we walk to school or the park. “Look both ways and run like hell” was the unofficial motto for my neighborhood. The reason every mother on patrol voiced this was to keep their tikes from becoming road kill. Rightfully so, but what this has inadvertently created is a mentality that once you climb behind the wheel, it’s “watch out, I’m on the move and it won’t be my fault if you do not get out-of-the-way.” What frustrates me with this way of thinking is that the car is one type of vehicle on a complex transportation system with a number of rights but also responsibilities.

To ensure greater safety for all who travel on the transportation system, our public policy should focus on changing this sense of entitled and unobstructed passage for a motor vehicle. In the long-term, given all the factors that lead to global warming, American obesity, and over consumption of finite resources, encouraging transportation alternatives is imperative to sustainability. Change is difficult especially changes in one’s mode of travel and it will be next to impossible if the other mode is less safe then strapping into to the cockpit of a multiple-ton Hummer.

What has Saint Louis Park done anyway?
By the actions of the city, Saint Louis Park has put the burden of traffic safety on the non-motorized public along a major commuter route. Given the nature of the crossings, these actions will make bicycling along this popular trail more difficult and less safe. The 29th Street Greenway extension connects the Southwest Regional trail to the west with the Minneapolis bicycle trail system to the east. This rail-trail essentially travels parallel to Trunk Highway 7 (about 500 ft or less to the south of the highway). Because of the proximity to the highway and limited arterial routes (Beltline Blvd and Wooddale Ave) crossing this trail, navigating to the other side of the trail is complicated without some assistance. The crossings are four-lanes where a number of vehicles stack up to wait for the semaphore at the nearby highway intersection. With this stacking, especially during the morning and evening rush, it is difficult to see all lanes of traffic and if one can see them it is rare that the all are clear at the same time. The city has removed the painted crossing marking on the pavement, so that cars are not reminded exact location of the trail crossing. To complicate matters the city has kept or added “Trail Xing” signs.

What does the law say?
In Minnesota, bicyclists (like a pedestrian) have a right to use marked crossing if the bicyclist waits for a break in the traffic. When in the marked crossing, crossing traffic must stop and provide safe passage. This puts responsibility on both with expectation of reasonable interaction. What the law also includes is an allowance for “[l]ocal authorities [to] prohibit the operation of bicycles on any sidewalk or crosswalk under their jurisdiction.” Saint Louis Park has posted signs that explain to users “[t]hat this crossing is not a crosswalk State law requires all trail users to stop and yield to vehicles.” With Saint Louis Park’s actions they are within the letter of the law (in my amateur lawyer opinion), but instead of placing responsibility on both modes, it shifted the entire burden to move across the roadway to the non-motorized party.

Why are Saint Louis Park’s actions so wrong anyway?
By shifting the burden to safely cross to the bicyclist or other trail users, Saint Louis Park has reinforced the notion that bicycling is not a legitimate form of transportation, rather a recreational activity where users can wait for the more important motorized traffic. This reinforcement increases the risk to the bicyclists that is already out matched to the larger, faster motoring public that was not trained to expect mid-block crossings. With no expectation of seeing crossing traffic at the trail head and the lack of protection of the painted crossing and confusion of the other posted signs, the bicyclist must take additional risk to make it through the crossing.

So, in summary, the city of Saint Louis Park has created a mid-block trail crossing where it explicitly instructs the trail users to yield to all traffic and informs them that traffic will not stop. In the other direction the city has notified the motorized public in writing to disregard the “Trail Xing” sign that would typically be placed at the locale of a sanctioned crossing. The driver can be puzzled by the actions of the trail users when it slows to obey what it believe to be a trail crosswalk(since most likely didn’t receive the written direction to disobey) while the trail user is confused on whether to proceed on not.

Some might say that there are not enough bicyclists to matter and that they will always lose in the crash with a car. While I agree that the latter is true the first is not. As those who typically read this site know, Minneapolis has the largest bicycle mode share in the country for cities of our size. One of the reasons is the ease of travel along our rail-trail system. The use of these systems continue to grow so the number of bicycles crossing will continue to increase, which increases the volume of risky bicycle crossings. This increases the chance that another tragic crash will occur.

Saint Louis Park does have a game plan
I applaud the city efforts to install medians, reducing lane widths, and the exploration of separated grade crossings. But, these changes (especially grade separations) will take a number of years to implement. Short-term attention is needed to increase safety. More importantly, these physical improvements do not relieve the need for better education on how all modes should interact on our transportation system. The city needs to act quickly to make these crossings more predictable and safer.

What should Saint Louis Park do?
The City of Saint Louis Park should resist continuing down the easy well-worn path. It should capitalize on this opportunity to lead the region down a new path to improved mode integration and cooperation. Behavioral change requires time for sure, but with appropriate leadership it could begin, as Saint Louis Park’s action will remind all users of the transportation system that there are others with similar rights and responsibilities. Which can lead to a safer system for all users.

To lead this effort Saint Louis Park should:
(1) Reverse its decision to prohibit non-motorized crossings on its streets.
(2) Restore the trail-crossing markings on the pavement.
(3) Replace current signs with ones that call out responsibilities for both motorized and non-motorized traffic in all directions.
(4) Reissue your special alert statement so that it reflects the new procedure. Fifth, conduct public notice events where volunteers, police, and/or community service officers deploy to these crossings to bring increased awareness to everyone’s rights and responsibilities.

Contact me if you need me to elaborate further on the four points or if you need assistance organizing volunteers, I am available to help.

A colleague again led me to a new website Bikely.com. This is a wiki with google maps that users can trace out their favorite rides. I mapped out my route that I rode in the four-part Bike Minneapolis series.

Take a look at the Bikely site and I will attempt to use it on good routes in the future.