Showing posts sorted by relevance for query Jefferson Bike boulevard. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query Jefferson Bike boulevard. Sort by date Show all posts

2014-08-05

Jefferson Bike Boulevard Illustrates Frustrating Pace of Change

Well, if you've been in bicycling in Saint Paul over the last decade, you have probably been following the Jefferson Bicycle Boulevard fiasco-triumph, which began sometime around 2008 when the NTP project funding landed next-door in Minneapolis.

Here's how I recapped the situation when the proposed project was finally passed two years ago:
... for various reasons the proposed bicycle boulevard down Jefferson Avenue has for few years now been seen as controversial. The project has gone through a few different iterations, and finally now, after a huge number of community meetings involving hundreds of people, and after the city's Public Works department has spent countless hours doing research and analysis, a compromise plan has emerged that seemingly everyone can mostly agree about.

This plan isn't perfect. For example, it doesn't include any diverters that are common in bicycle boulevards elsewhere. These kinds of diverters do a lot to move 'through' traffic onto adjacent streets, while making sure that pedestrians and bicyclists can safely cross the busier streets that have higher traffic speeds (such as Cleveland and Cretin Avenues). You can see for yourself how these kinds of diverters work in South Minneapolis, where they seem to have not caused any kind of automotive apocalypse.
Anyway, the final St Paul proposal got rid of these kinds of traffic calming treatments in favor of traffic circles, which you will find elsewhere in the city.

As it turned out, the City Council stripped or delayed many of the proposed traffic circles from the project. And then bids for construction came in too high, which further delayed construction for the Jefferson Boulevard (which has been signed as a boulevard for years already).

[A traffic circle in a place that probably doesn't need it.]

Finally, Real World Progress

That's why it was delightful to see actual concrete construction on Jefferson this last week. Finally after years of wrangling, hair pulling, elections, FOIAs, shenanigans, and endless histrionic community meetings, two small innocuous flower-planted traffic circles will be built along less important parts of an East-West street that might marginally slow down speeding cars.

Here's the conclusion of my piece, expressing all my hopes and dreams for this street:

In five years, nobody living nearby will think bicycle boulevards are a big deal. Neighbors will actually like the traffic circles once they are built. They'll blend into the background of the city and grow flowers. Ideally, Jefferson will subtly shift into a more quiet beautiful safe street for all types of people. Ideally, it'll be a place where even my mom would feel comfortable riding a bicycle and getting exercise on her way to the Highland Grill without feeling like she's 'in the way' of a pickup truck speeding down the hill.

I still think this can come true, though I wish this project wasn't the very definition of half-assed bike infrastructure.

Mainly, what these small concrete circles signal to me is how painstakingly slow the current rate of change has become in our cities. While this one project has been kicked to death like a sleeping dog, other cities around the country (including the one next door) have built orders of magnitude more miles of higher quality bicycle infrastructure, literally lapping sleepy Saint Paul.

How Much Consensus?

[Copenhagen.]
From one perspective, deliberation is a good thing. We want changes to our city to be aired out, vetted, and presented to the community. We want our officials and engineers to have to answer questions about plans and projects.

But there's a difference between transparency and consensus. I'm reminded of Gil Peñalosa's speech this year at the Saint Paul Transportation Summit (which I wrote about earlier on streets.mn).

I urge you to watch the entire speech, but here's one of the things that he said when discussing a pedestrianization of Nyhavn, a key shopping street in Copenhagen:
Change is difficult, of course. And it doesn't happen by consensus. When they were thinking of making this [Nyhavn] pedestrian, people in these restaurants said "Oh, if the cars don't park in front of my restaurant, we're going to go broke." You have to listen to everybody.

But at the end of the day, what is the general interest? Change will never happen by consensus. If you want change to be unanimous, you have to water down change so much, it's not going to be change any longer. So listen honestly, and then make a decision. Do you think any of these restaurants go broke? 10,000 people buy more food than 83 cars.
So, it's about changing mindsets. And this is why all of us are here.

One of the things that I really enjoyed about Peñalosa was how he didn't settle for platitudes, but challenged Saint Paul leaders with difficult problems. He said that we needed to stop retreating from winter weather, that we needed to compare our city to world leaders rather than Midwestern followers, and he said that we needed to prioritize rather than accommodate non-motorized people.

But this challenge, to move past the desire for continual consensus, is a difficult one for the typically Midwestern mindset. The glacial pace of change on projects like the Jefferson Bicycle Boulevard only serves to highlight this problem.

There are lot of questions that emerge from Peñalosa's advice. How can the city accelerate meaningful change (that conforms with our city vision for the future), without becoming Robert Moses-like despots? How much consensus do we really need?

These are all political questions, but the answers to them do not have to remain in the back rooms and community meetings. I believe that there are plenty of ways to change people's mindsets about sticky problems that don't necessarily need to take the form of elaborate engineering construction or high-blown skyscrapers.

Meanwhile, a couple of traffic circles are popping up in Saint Paul. Soon they'll fade into the background, fill with flowers, and the tempest in the teapot will be forgotten.

[There goes the neighborhood.]
Update:

Apparently the two bike boulevard projects (Griggs and Jefferson) are far over budget. This will really makes it far more difficult to build any kind of support for future bike projects in the city.

Here's the quote from today's paper:
Two bicycle boulevards on Jefferson Avenue and Griggs Street, which once were projected to cost $1.52 million, are $900,000 over budget.
[...] City staff said the Jefferson and Griggs projects were put out to bid twice -- in the fall of 2013 and spring of this year -- and both times came back over budget.
They said costs went up over the course of four years. A bidding process for the Jefferson project, budgeted at $1 million in 2010, was repeatedly delayed as a result of lengthy public discussion and neighborhood opposition in the Mac-Groveland area.

2011-08-08

Reading the Highland Villager #42 (August 3rd - 17th Edition)

[Basically the problem is that the best source of Saint Paul streets & sidewalks news is the Highland Villager, a very fine and historical newspaper. This wouldn't be a problem, except that its not available online. You basically have to live in or frequent Saint Paul to read it. That's why I'm reading the Highland Villager so that you don't have to. Until this newspaper goes online, sidewalk information must be set free.]

Total # of articles about sidewalks: 11
Total # of articles about sidewalks written by Jane McClure: 9



Headline: Mannillo challenges endorsed Tolbert in Ward 3; Candidate takes issue with conduct of DFL endorsing convention
Reporter: Kevin Driscoll

Short short version: The runner-up for the DFL endorsement in Ward 3's (Highland Park's) city council race is going to stay in the race. Article includes list of alleged convention shenanigans [all of which are par for the course... DFL endorsement conventions are political equivalent of a trained cat circus. -Ed.]

Headline: City's seemingly yearly exercise in fiscal belt-tightening begins; State's unexpected $12 million cut in LGA has St. Paul scrambling for more cost savings
Reporter: Jane McClure

Short short version: The recent budget agreement cut $12M from St Paul's Local Government Aid money. The city has a hiring freeze in place. Article includes no other details. Article includes the fact that “next year could be worse.”

Headline: Inpatient facility, five single-family lots proposed for Bush site
Reporter: Jane McClure

Short short version: People in the Summit Hill area are nervous about how a new clinic for people with eating disorders will impact parking in the neighborhood. [In other news, mosquitoes bite your legs more often at dusk. -Ed.] An old empty building is being turned into the latest Emily Program clinic at the corner of Osceola and Grotto [in a fancy fancy part of town]. Includes anonymous quote from one neighbor woman about the increased use of the back alley: “steam is coming out of my ears.”

Headline: Jefferson Ave. traffic diverter may come to a vote Aug. 17 [Note the use of the noun 'traffic diverter' in place of the noun 'bike boulevard'.]
Reporter: Jane McClure

Short short version: The latest in the [interminable, frustrating, asinine, petty, petulant, Neanderthal] debate over the Jefferson Bike Boulevard. The [see previous list] Mac-Groveland Community Council is going to make a recommendation [they recently abstained from taking a side on the issue, if my Pioneer Press headline was correct]. The issue of whether or not to build traffic medians [like the ones along the Riverlake Greenway on 40th over in Minneapolis, which somehow got built without a great deal of hair-pulling and Soucheray-inspired car politics hystrionics] will come to a vote this month in all likelihood before the City Council. [The issue poses a political pickle for the Council, as it challenges the typical turf-centric stance that the Council likes to adopt, whereby each Council Member is allowed to effectively 'veto' projects in his or her own ward. Because outgoing District 3 CM Pat Harris does not approve of the pedestrian median, will the rest of the Council go against his wishes? Will the political lobby of the transportation non-profits such as TLC be able to outweigh the voices of Harris, poopular car columnist Soucheray, and assorted NIMBY neighbors? Stay tuned! Same time, same channel. -Ed.] Article includes tedious detailed history of Cleveland Bike Boulevard issue, including the [infamous farcical]test phase.”

Headline: Wild Onion's suit against city for patio license moved to federal court
Reporter: Jane McClure

Short short version: The owners of the [terrible] Grand Avenue bar / club Wild Onion have sued the City of St. Paul over the allegedly unfair enforcement policies over liquor licenses. The $50K suit is now in federal court. Article includes tedious detailed history of Wild Onion's patio liquor license issue, including the [infamous farcical] 90% consent petition requirement.

Headline: Council awards STAR funds for bike repair shop, other local
Reporter: Jane McClure

Short short version: A bike shop at Lexington and Hamline called “Youth Express” got a $8,500 grant for renovation from the city. Because of the money a bike mechanic will get a full-time job. Other things also got grants, including two churches and a handicapped-accessible apartment building. Some people did not get grants.

Headline: Public lines up on both sides of House of Hope fence issue
Reporter: Jane McClure

Short short version: A garden with a rabbit-proof fence built by a [large] Summit Avenue church is being challenged by ex-members of the Heritage Preservation Commission. Fence qualities found particularly egregious include its size, its “cedar and galvanized steel composition.” Article includes quote from CM Carter III stating that he will not make the church tear down the fence. [I do hope that this issue becomes a perennial evergreen Highland Villager bit, extending this debate for many many years into the future. -Ed.]

Headline: Editorial: What would Jefferson Say?
Reporter: Michael Mischke

Short short version: [Typically embittered] editorial from Publisher Mischke on how the bike boulevard, and the larger “so-called Bike Walk Twin Cities initiative” are destroying America, undermining the “values of self-sufficiency, self-government, and individual responsibility” and likely have [Thomas] “Jefferson rolling in his grave in Monticello.” Article includes [odd] claim that Publisher Mischke doesn't “have a dog in the fight over the addition of the traffic diverter.” [Article is accompanied by a rather neutral editorial cartoon featuring a bicycle and a debate.]

Headline: Federation begins renovating former brewery offices, rathskeller
Reporter: Jane McClure

Short short version: [After all these years] the old Schmidt Brewery is being restored by the West 7th/Fort Road Federation. It will be ready by next year. Includes admittance that the air inside the rathskeller was “dank.”

Headline: Despite service cuts, taxes are expected to rise in Ramsey County
Reporter: Jane McClure

Short short version: See above headline, earlier story on LGA.

Headline: With cleanup under way, city eyes 2012 reopening of Jimmy Lee fields
Reporter: Jane McClure

Short short version: The land for the proposed ball fields near the Jimmy Lee rec center is being cleaned up. The fields will be open by next year.

2012-08-14

All or nothing: The Value of Doing It Right The First Time

[White plastic things!]
Riding in downtown Minneapolis last week, I was pleased to discover a shining white row of plastic things along the First Avenue cycletrack. Until this moment, I’d never realized how happy a bunch of white plastic thin two-foot long thingies could make me. Now they routinely visit my dreams, dancing like the broomsticks in Fantasia, and I’m starting to worry about my sanity.

Am I turning into a crappy plastic objects fetishist? Recently in China, a woman started a DIY traffic calming movement by tying a sex doll to a tree at a dangerous intersection. I guess the idea is to get (horny male) drivers to slow down and pay more attention. I’m envisioning a future where I run around the city disbursing traffic cones with a a “real girl” doll strapped to my back so that sexually unsatisfied men don’t run me down with their cars.

[Maybe we could get Sexworld to sponsor the next 1st Avenue pedestrian improvement?]
For those who don’t know, the First Avenue cycletrack is Minneapolis’ first quasi-bona fide cycletrack. A cycletrack is viewed by many as the gold standard of bicycle infrastructure. It’s a bike lane separated from moving traffic not just by a stripe of ‘bike lane’ paint, but by some sort of barrier. For example, you could separate cyclists with row of parked cars, a change in elevation like a curb, a row of plastic white thin things, or all of the above. Cycletracks are common in northern European countries with very high rates of bicycling. Many people (particularly those uncomfortable riding in street traffic) find them to be quite wonderful if done well.

That’s why I was happy when Minneapolis announced a few years back that they were going to build a cycletrack down First Avenue. Despite the protestations of business owners concerned about delivery trucks, the city went ahead with the project.

There was only one problem. They did a half-assed job. Instead of a clearly marked and separated bike lane, they just applied some paint between the parked cars and the curb. They also made the parking lane time-sensitive, so that during rush hour the row of parked cars disappears entirely. (That’s normal on many streets.)

The problem was that, without a some sort of clearly marked area to inform people where the cycle track was, nobody really knew what to do. People parked right in the middle of the bike lane, so the city put up more signs. People still parked in the middle of the bike lane, so the city put up some flashing electronic signs that makes First Avenue seem like Las Vegas in a kaleidoscope. 

Even the current signage funhouse doesn’t always work. You’ll still find people parked in the middle of the bike lane, people who are presumably illiterate or wearing two pairs sunglasses with a sombrero pulled down over their eyes or something. Until those plastic thingies appeared the other day, even the most ardent bike activist would admit that the First Avenue cycle track was a quasi-fiasco.

Minneapolis isn‘t alone in being reluctant to commit to the whole posterior. I’ve covered St Paul’s biggest bike debacle, the Jefferson Avenue bike boulevard, like a blanket in January. It's not a heartwarming story. And the way that it turned out, this bike boulevard should be probably only be labeled a “bike boulevard,” in the same way that Velveeta isn't really cheese.

[The Jefferson Avenue "test median.]
The problem is that the Jefferson project lacks many of the definitive features of a Portland-style bike boulevard (e.g. traffic diverters or traffic calming devices of any kind). And not only did the city approve a watered-down a plan, they built it in a "trial" manner. Instead of simply building a decent pedestrian median (designed to help calm the bicycle street and make it safer to cross busy roads), they built an ugly partially-effective "test median," and then placed a sign next to it encouraging people to call in and complain (which they did). Instead of just doing a good job the first time, St Paul's plan was to do half a good job, and then proceed with it slowly, painfully, displaying all the grace of a circus clown.


[Ha.]
... or get off the pot

I don’t want to be too hard on the Twin Cities. Both of these projects were something new. Both projects were politically difficult. Change is hard! Changing behavior takes a long time. Shifting prioities away from a slavish obsession with the automobile is what they call “a process.” That means that it doesn’t happen all at once. Getting people to bike and walk more is a matter of developing habits literally one step at a time.

At the same time, when faced with a difficult problem, cities are often tempted to compromise. Planners and city leaders end up torn between the politics of compromise and well-designed engineering. It seems that, much of the time, cities make so many compromises that they undermine the very thing they were trying to do in the first place. Sometimes, the perfect is the enemy of the good. Sometimes, you either do it right or you make a complete mockery of the very notion of urban planning. Sometimes, either you build a decent cycletrack that everyone can understand intuitively, or you compromise and construct a bicycle bewilderment with cars parked willy-nilly underneath a flashing LED circus filled with fine print. Then, two years later, you go back and gradually add in some thin white plastic things that you should have installed in the first place, and everyone on the street goes “Oh! That’s what its supposed to look like.”

I know which I prefer...


Update:

A report on white plastic things in Portland that got hit by cars and destroyed. TWICE. 

2011-01-24

Big Saint Paul Bike Boulevard Meeting Tonight

This is important. We need to show up there! (I'm going...)

Jefferson Bike Blvd. Test Median - Important Meeting

7:00 pm

Greetings Saint Paul Bicyclists,

If you are going to attend one meeting all year, please make it this one. On Monday, January 24 at 7 p.m. at the Edgcumbe Recreation Center, 320 S. Griggs, the Saint Paul Public Works Department and the Macalester-Groveland Community Council will share the results of the test median on the Jefferson Bike Boulevard. It is incredibly important that bicyclists show up to support this project, not only for the sake of the test median, but to show support for the bike boulevard concept. As many of you are aware, this has been a hotly debated project and we need your support.

For more information on the project, visit our website atwww.saintpaulbicyclecoalition.org or contact me or Andy.

Warm regards,

Dana DeMaster

Co-chair, Saint Paul Bicycle Coalition


2012-04-16

Reading the Highland Villager #59

[The Villager lingers on a stoop.]
[Basically the problem is that the best source of Saint Paul streets & sidewalks news is the Highland Villager, a very fine and historical newspaper. This wouldn't be a problem, except that its not available online. You basically have to live in or frequent Saint Paul to read it. That's why I'm reading the Highland Villager so that you don't have to. Until this newspaper goes online, sidewalk information must be set free.] 


Total # of articles about sidewalks: 12
Total # of articles about sidewalks written by Jane McClure: 10


Headline: St Paul releases ‘unworkable’ plan for limiting spread of student rentals [Surprisingly critical headline for the Villager. Are they becoming more of a journalistic gadfly? Is Jane McClure the next big muckraker?]
Reporter: Jane McClure

Short short version: Story on the latest development in the plan to reign in the unending creep of St Thomas students through the neighborhood near St Thomas. The proposed ordinance, which will be up for debate at the planning commission on the May 4th meeting, would restrict the number of homes that would allow “students” to live in them that can be in the area from St Clair to I-94, and from the river to Snelling Avenue. [NOTE: I am on the commission, btw.] Article points out that the ordinance is almost single handedly the impulse of CM Stark [who is otherwise really good on transportation / sidewalk /bike and walk issues. note that for some reason it’s OK to discriminate against Tommies. Imagine if they passed an ordinance that restricted the number of African-Americans or Mormons that could live in an area. Are Tommies the last remaining discriminable group in America? –Ed]. Story highlights the heated debate that occurred when the planning commission passed the proposed ordinance. Article quotes Commissioner Oliver: “It’s not a student problem, it’s a housing supply problem.” Article includes the phrase “tenuous legal territory.”  Anyway, I will have more on this soon. It's the next big St Paul debate. Who woulda thunk it? -Ed.]

Headline: City approves revised plan for Jefferson Bikeway; but not before removing three new traffic circles
Reporter: Jane McClure

Short short version: Report on the recent city council meeting where the Jefferson bikeway was approved. [See also: my liveblog of the meeting.] Article details CM Tolbert’s removal of the traffic calming traffic circles. Includes quote from transit for liveable communities (TLC) head Barb Thoman” We’re disappointed.” Includes description of the testimony by “a dozen bicyclists and Macalester-Groveland residents” who were upset with the changes, particularly stuff about public process. Article ends with an anti-bike boulevard quote [seemingly put there for balance] and a short history of the project.

Headline: Developer unveils plans for 20-unit apartment at Grand-Finn; some neighbors raise concerns over size of five-story building
Reporter: Jane McClure

Short short version: Description of proposed new development at Grand and Finn that would house “as many as 80 students of the University of St Thomas.” [There goes the neighborhood! –Ed.] Article includes the phrase “neighbors expressed concerns about … disruptive student behavior.” Two homes on Grand would have to be torn down. Article includes at least two quotes from neighbors saying things like “family neighborhood” and “stick out like a sore thumb.” The developer’s last name is “Merry.”

Headline: Hopefuls wish upon STAR funding [Worst headline pun this fortnight?]

Reporter: Jane McClure

Short short version: Article on the projects that are competing for a $5.5M pot of city development tax money. Projects include the Saints stadium, the Schmidt brewery, Selby avenue streetscaping, an affordable housing project on University Avenue, and assorted other renovations and building projects.

Headline: Lucky’s to reopen Ran-Ham gas station
Reporter: Jane McClure

Short short version: The gas station and corner store at Randolph and Hamline across from Cretin Durham Hall is going to re-open under the name “Lucky’s.”

Headline:  BZA takes a shine to variance for Summit Ave. solar panels [Is this a pun? I guess it is.]

Reporter: Jane McClure
Short short version: The Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) approved the variance for the person that put solar panels at the back of their yard. Somehow these solar panels aren’t controversial. [I can easily imagine the public meeting, where lots of people being their testimony with the words “I’m all for solar energy, but…” –Ed.]

Headline: Flood of comments delays vote on great River Passage [Best pun this fortnight?]
Reporter: Jane McClure

Short short version: Lots of people have opinions and questions about the plan for the big park along the Mississippi river. The parks commission is going to push back their vote to May 9th.

Headline: St Paul grants noise variances for late-night light-rail work
Reporter: Jane McClure

Short short version: Contractors building the train can work at night sometimes.

Headline: Coleman veto puts the icing on cupcake [A more obvious pun, yes. Probably 2nd best of the issue?]
Reporter: Jane McClure

Short short version: Article on the [excellent] highly politically odd [and bureaucratically science-fictiony] resolution to the Grand Avenue cupcake situation, which involved the icty council and mayor collaborating to allow the business to open despite th concerns of the neighborhood about parking. Article includes quote from Mayor Coleman: “St. Paul is open for business.” [Note: this is the same exact phrase that Scott Walker used when he was elected governor of Wisconsin. –Ed.]

Headline: Thirteen homes eyed for Crocus’ New Hill
Reporter: Jane McClure

Short short version: A development proposal was shown to the public. There will be thirteen single family homes in the spot where Visitation school used to be. Neighbors are concerned about what the homes will look like, and want an “architectural control committee.”

Headline: Editorial: Last-minute changes to Jefferson Bikeway ride roughshod over citizen participation process
Reporter: Colleen Williams-Freier

Short short version: Guest editorial [in place of Editor Mischke's usual screed] on the Jefferson bike boulevard [fiasco?] resolution. Writer "expresses ... frustration" with the final CM Tolbert-sponsored last-minute plan [which stripped out the three traffic circles], mostly on the grounds of un-democratic process, the extensive public engagement / public process work that went into the penultimate compromise plan. Includes the question: "How dare he ignore people's work since 2008?" Includes phrase: "This is not an acceptable way to govern a city." [Interesting that the Villager would publish an editorial that is now 180-degrees opposite from where they were previously on the bike boulevard. The rather incendiary reporting from Villager was one of the reasons that the bike boulevard became such a ridiculous political hot button in the first place, was it not? Anyway, now they're angry about Tolbert's 'ward-boss' type backroom deal thing. -Ed.]

Headline: Editorial: Meeting the neighbors: UST student finds reason for hope
Reporter: Michael Orth

Short short version: Guest editorial by a St Thomas student, reprinted from the Tommie newspaper. It's about his attendance at a neighborhood group meeting, and how awkward but somewhat satisfying it was. Editorial attempts to find a way to achieve peace and reconciliation between Tommies and NIMBY-Tommie neighbors. Says things like: "the vast majority on both sides are seeking a positive relationships -- one that fosters a healthy and vibrant community and supports productive dialogue." [Haha. Well, young peeople are supposed to be idealistic, aren't they? If they can solve the great Tommie/anti-Tommie battle, maybe there is hope for Israel/Palestine? -Ed.]

2012-04-04

Last Minute Amendment Strips Traffic Calming from Jefferson Bike Boulevard

[The Jefferson "test median", circa 2010.]
The story of the St Paul Jefferson Avenue bicycle boulevard is long and ugly, and is finally (maybe) coming to an end tonight. There's a meeting down at city hall this evening, where the City Council is going to most likely pass a compromise plan that strips out a lot of the traffic calming circles from the project.

The Story So Far

The problem is that the idea of bicycle boulevards are relatively new to a town like St Paul. They're streets designed to give pedestrians and bicyclists priority, to calm traffic speeds down to the point where only 'local' traffic is using it. They're intended to create spaces where auto speeds are far closer to bicycle speeds. In theory, boulevards are designed so that cars drive around 20 miles per hour, a speed at which any collision is very unlikely to result in the death or injury of small children, grandmothers, cyclists, or people out walking their dog. In theory, these kinds of streets would be seen as an amenity in the neighborhoods where they're constructed, as they create calm, quiet, walkable neighborhoods, accessible by car, that raise property values and quality of life for nearby homes and people.

Anyway, that's the theory. In the actual real world of Highland Park, St Paul, traffic calming that creates safe quiet streets is perceived as a quasi-fascist assault on the inherent freedoms of the automobile individual. (Or, at least that's true if you get your news from Soucheray.)

That might be exaggerating just a hair, because actually the project has received a lot of support and/or ambivalent shrugs. But for various reasons the proposed bicycle boulevard down Jefferson Avenue has for few years now been seen as controversial. The project has gone through a few different iterations, and finally now, after a huge number of community meetings involving hundreds of people, and after the city's Public Works department has spent countless hours doing research and analysis, a compromise plan has emerged that seemingly everyone can mostly agree about.

This plan isn't perfect. For example, it doesn't include any diverters that are common in bicycle boulevards elsewhere. These kinds of diverters do a lot to move 'through' traffic onto adjacent streets, while making sure that pedestrians and bicyclists can safely cross the busier streets that have higher traffic speeds (such as Cleveland and Cretin Avenues). You can see for yourself how these kinds of diverters work in South Minneapolis, where they seem to have not caused any kind of automotive apocalypse.

[An innocuous bike boulevard traffic diverter in Minneapolis.]


[Another Minneapolis boulevard diverter. Incidentally, neither of these diverters have caused the collapse of freedom and democracy.]

Anyway, the final St Paul proposal got rid of these kinds of traffic calming treatments in favor of traffic circles, which you will find elsewhere in the city. Traffic circles are a good compromise, I guess, because they do a nice job of 'calming' through the use of actual concrete that slows down speeds and makes streets safer for pedestrians and cyclists. Not only that, but traffic circles have little gardens on them! These circles have the potential to turn Jefferson Avenue into the kind of space where your kid might play football (as I did growing up with my brothers and sister on St Paul's Portland Avenue).

The Last Minute Deal

Or at least, that's the hope. I've heard that the proposal, passed unanimously through the Transportation Committee and the Planning Commission, is going to be semi-gutted by a last minute amendment during the City Council meeting this evening (5:30 - 6:30, roughly). From what I've heard, the new last minute deal will strip out all but two of the traffic circles from the project, while getting rid of the pedestrian crosswalk signage at the two busy streets, Cretin and Cleveland Avenues. This last minute deal will leave only two real traffic calming treatments on the Western portion of the bicycle boulevard: the traffic circle at Davern street and the one at Finn Street (which isn't scheduled to be built until 2017).

[The Public Works plan showing two of the traffic circles that won't be built under the new deal.]


To my mind, the last minute deal raises two key questions:

  • Should the council ignore all the public process that's happened so far, in favor of a backroom deal that has never seen the light of day? 
  • Is a bicycle boulevard without much traffic calming still a bicycle boulevard? 

I don't really know the answers to these questions. On the first, I want badly to say "No!" I want to say that the council shouldn't throw over a whole bunch of public meetings in favor of a few opinions of a few decisions makers.

But, on the other hand, most public processes are fraught with problems. If you hold a community meeting on some issue, the people that are most likely to show up are people with a lot of time and/or money on their hands. Those are the people with a voice, that provide "community input."

Meanwhile, not attending the meeting are many other people who almost never participate - people who rent, people with more than one job, young people, people with language barriers. Elected officials need to make decisions with the entire community in mind, not just those people with expensive homes and lots of hard-to-get phone numbers in their phones.

The second question is just as difficult to answer. To my mind, bicycle boulevards are a no brainer. They are streets that don't really mess with the status quo, as people can still drive around their neighborhoods, park on their streets, use their driveways, etc. But they're also streets that really emphasize and welcome the modes of transportation (bicycling, walking) that are the future of our cities. If St Paul wants to attract young people, or be safe for families, or be a place where old people can get around with dignity, they need to build streets that place people first. They have an opportunity to do this right now, basically for free, and it's too bad that it seems like they're going to do a half-assed job of it.

I guess something is better than nothing, here. But I really don't understand why the city cannot pass a common-sense measure that will improve the lives of almost all of the people who live here. Really the only people who 'lose out' when you build a bicycle boulevard are people who enjoy driving too fast through residential neighborhoods. Should we really make public decisions with them in mind?

In five years, nobody living nearby will think bicycle boulevards are a big deal. Neighbors will actually like the traffic circles once they are built. They'll blend into the background of the city and grow flowers. Ideally, Jefferson will subtly shift into a more quiet beautiful safe street for all types of people. Ideally, it'll be a place where even my mom would feel comfortable riding a bicycle and getting exercise on her way to the Highland Grill without feeling like she's 'in the way' of a pickup truck speeding down the hill.

That's the hope. I fear that today's vote will be somewhat different. It'd be nice if the City Council would pass a plan that really calmed traffic along this route. It'd be nice is St Paul embraced a healthy future.

The council meeting is tonight at 5:30 in the basement of City Hall. Show up and testify if you agree!



 [A traffic circle amenity welcomed by its neighbors in Portland, OR.]


[A traffic circle amenity welcomed by its neighbors in Portland, OR.]

2011-01-27

LiveBlog from the January 24th Mac-Groveland Community Council Transportation Committee Meeting

[The "test median" that was installed at the Jefferson and Cleveland intersection from August 24th to September 24th, 2010.]

6:58pm: I walk up the street toward the Edgecumbe Recreation Center, thinking I'm going to attend a vital meeting about bicycling in Saint Paul, my home town, thinking I'm going to be attending a meeting that will make or break the future of bicycling in this city, that will help determine whether or not I live in a town that encourages or discourages alternative non-fossil-fueled transportation, that cultivates humane lifestyles, that catalyzes healthy people and healthy lifestyles and healthy cities and communities, that says: "Yes, you can bicycle safely down the street even though you're not a 20-something daredevil, even though you're a mother and maybe overweight and maybe don't feel 100% comfortable on a bike," a city that says everyone is welcome on this street, we're going to take the huge leap of faith and let .1% of our public space be for people NOT in cars, and that's O.K., that's not a revolution (99.9% of car-culture is enough!) and that bike boulevards are not Molotov cocktails thrown haphazardly at SUV dealerships...

I think about this as I walk through the lovely January evening air past the outdoor hockey rink, past the dad teaching his daughter to skate by having her push a metal folding chair, past the sound of hockey sticks slapping down onto the ice, along the snowbank'd sidewalks, down Saint Paul's quiet dark snowy streetlit Griggs Avenue towards the community meeting about bicycling, perhaps the farthest thing from most people's minds in this cold climate...

7:02pm:
The room is packed. Somehow the meeting has already started. People are standing near the entrance, collecting there looking lost.

I push my way into a seat near the front, right next to a very concerned looking woman who is currently testifying about parking problems near her home.

As it turns out, the discussion is about adding a restricted permit parking area near a school in Highland Park.

7:05pm: A blonde woman begins complaining about parking enforcement giving tickets during holidays.

7:06pm: The meeting's moderator, who sits along a pair of white plastic tables with about nine other not entirely happy looking people at at the front of the room points out that there shouldn't be any enforcement of parking permit zones on holidays. He does this to no avail.

7:08pm: The committee members at the tables look bedraggled, soft spoken. More than two arms are crossed. As people file into the room, they don't seem to be getting any happier. The atmosphere in the room already seems testy.

7:12pm: Discussion of school parking permit zones comes to an end. It's agreed that someone in the audience (the blond woman?) will start a neighborhood petition to instate a permitted parking zone near the school, at which point the Mac-Groveland Community Council Transportation Committee (MGCCTC) will take up and study the motion, perhaps to recommend it to the city, at which point it will have to go through a number of city council committees. The process seems impossibly lengthy, and its difficult to see anyone receiving short-term satisfaction.

7:14pm:
At this point, the moderator “Jay” suggests ending discussion of the parking situation, and further suggests that those concerned might want to leave the meeting to make room for all the bicycle advocates standing in the aisle. This happens. A dozen people leave, a dozen people sit down. Chairs are found, arranged, and sat upon. Now the only people left standing are a group of a half-dozen Macalester students with bike helmets who arrive a bit late to the party. They look lost.

7:16pm: Now comes the moment of truth. We get to the bike boulevard median situation.

Jay makes a great deal about how the meeting today is just to report the findings from a study that was done on the the “test median” at Cleveland and Jefferson. (This is a long story, and I won't go into it here.) He then introduces two men from the city of Saint Paul public works department, Paul Saint Martin, traffic engineer, and Dave Something (?), traffic engineer. Both are 40-something bearded white men wearing button up shirts with pens in the pockets.

7:17pm: Paul Saint Martin, who seems to be in charge, briefly introduces himself, and then introduces Dave, who does most of the talking.

7:18pm: Dave, wearing brown, ends up pointing to a pair of pages of information that represent the findings of the study, and then goes about explaining them in some engineering-type detail.

He explains that the “test refuge” had two goals. First, it was intended to promote bike and pedestrian activity along the Jefferson bike boulevard, by allowing for an easier crossing of the street at the busy Jefferson and Cleveland intersection.

The second goal, he explains, is to divert through traffic on Jefferson, to reduce the number of cars that are using Jefferson as a through street, to restrict the traffic on that street only to local traffic, i.e. people who actually live there.

[One of the primary functions of the "test refuge" was to piss off drivers and make them log on to the internet.]


7:24pm: Dave then goes to great pains to emphasize that he is just sharing information, and not taking comments. I begin to understand that this meeting is not, in fact, an epic showdown of anti- and pro-bicycling forces meeting in a public arena and struggling to the rhetorical death etc. Rather, it is an objective reporting of facts ascertained by a careful neutral engineering-type study of facts neutral innocent bystander (or something like that).

7:26pm: The details of the study come next, and are delivered in the a dry fashion typical of numbers. You can read them for yourself here. There are two main components to the study. First, they looked at how the median affected traffic and speeds along Cleveland, Jefferson, and neighboring streets. As it turns out, the refuge didn't affect either very much.

Much to my surprise, average speeds on Cleveland didn't change more than 1 or 2 mph, and the 85% speed changed even less. (Of course, the median wasn't in fact a true median, and was instead a series of orange plastic things placed in the road. The median refuge had neither very effective calming qualities, nor aesthetic merits, both of which would surely exist with a real bona fide median. Which goes to show you, IMHO, that this kind of half-assed experimental approach is like "pissing into the wind," so to speak.)

The other part of the study involved gathering comments about the (inelegant and ugly) test median refuge boulevard, and, as you might imagine, many of these comments were negative. The split was about 60 / 40 weighted against the change, which actually to my mind seems pretty good considering its “test” status. Also, for some reason, the comments were then filtered through some sort of address matching process, whereby only those within a ½ mile of the intersection were counted. Also surprisingly, these results were practically identical to the larger sample.

7:36pm: "Jay" the moderator gives the two Transit for Livable Communities engineers, both 30-40 something men with beards but without glasses, a chance to talk about the test, and Tony Hull, TLC transportation specialist, briefly takes the floor to explain a few things about the concept of bike boulevards in general and this test median in particular. He keeps it very brief.

7:37pm: Now, the denouement! At this point Dave takes questions about the process.

Questions include:

7:38pm: Q: [older man with white hair] What about snow? The snow makes the street even narrower, and it will be impossible to turn the corner! Have they talked to bus drivers and snow plow drivers? Ambulance drivers? I'm not convinced it will “calm” anything!

A: [Dave.] Hm. We're talking to the fire department and the snow plow drivers. We might have to tweak the turning radius on the corners.

7:39pm: Q: [middle-age woman with black hair.] Was there any “due diligence” in counting the number of pedestrians using the median? Is this a good use of taxpayer money?

A: [Also Dave.] It's a “chicken and egg” kind of thing. Pedestrians and cyclists won't use it until we build it, so we can't wait for more pedestrians to come to justify building a median.

Man from the crowd: [Helpfully.] I live very close to the median and saw a lot of people using the refuge.

7:41pm: Q: [Middle-age woman with black hair, a different one.] There was no testing done on the alleys. Many cars are now driving down my alley, and my children play in the alleys. It's dangerous! Also, cars slow down at the median, but then just speed right up near Wellsely Avenue so its even more dangerous because they're speeding!

A: [Dave: no answer that I can remember.]

7:42pm: Q: [Another black coated woman with black hair.] What about snow removal when it snows a lot like in December when there is 3 feet of snow?

A: [Sparrows playing violins.]

7:43pm: Q: [Older woman in blue sweatshirt with white hair.] Instead of spending money on the median why not put up a stop sign? That way bikes can blow through it, cars can blow through it, and pedestrians can dance in the street.

A: [Chuckles pervade the room.]

7:45pm: Q: [Earnest bike-type fellow.] Will there eventually be a similar refuge on Cretin? That street is just as busy.

A: [Dave again.] Probably, if all goes well, and if the city decides to go through with the project. Cretin is scheduled for re-paving in 2014, and that's when we'd probably do it.

7:47pm: Q: [Someone.] Are there other plans or ideas that would allow for left turns off Cleveland?

Q: If a neighborhood streeet is one that has less than 500 cars / day (as was mentioned during the earlier wonky part of the presentation), and Jefferson already has less than 500 cars / day, why even bother with all this? Were the speed limit differences statistically significant?

7:50pm: At which point Tony Hull, TLC transportation and traffic calming guru tries to explain about bike boulevards, about how they involve a series of improvements and changes (e.g. roundabouts) designed to allow for efficient and safe cycling that, if done without also diverting car traffic, may have the opposite effect of increasing rather than decreasing auto traffic on the street, which is why the left-turn diverting medians may in fact be the crucial component of the entire bike boulevard concept..

This answer, however, resembles the waving of a red flag as seen by a bull, or a bucket of chum as smelled by a shark, and people just start to get more upset until Dave, the Saint Paul traffic engineer, diffuses the fracas by saying: “Don't worry. We killed all of those improvements anyway,” which strikes me as the single most absurd moment of the evening, where there is seeming pride taken in the fact that this boulevard would be, all in all, a half-assed attempt. (The half-an-ass approach being typical of Twin Cities state-sponsored cycling infrastructure, the “Minnesotan Way,” so to speak.)

7:52pm: Q: What about the county? Isn't Cleveland Avenue a county state aid highway?

A: [Dave, proudly.] The county pretty much ignores us, and we can do whatever we want, so that's not a problem.

7:57pm: The meeting comes to a close as one of the Mac-Groveland people tells everyone where they can get more information (macgrove.org).

8:01pm: As folks start to chat amongst themselves, and as the Macalester students begin to leave, not having any idea what had just happened, we start to chat, and the poor MGCCTC asks us nicely to leave the room as they have other business to attend to and would very much like to go home at Nine. We exit into the hallway where there are many youth and fathers in various states of wearing and not wearing hockey gear, and where it does indeed have that musky dank hockey smell that is a not-totally-displeasing combination of sweat and ice.

Whereupon I chat with folks from the Saint Paul Bike Coalition about various matters of the day, and someone decides that the city is “kicking the can down the road” and we all agree that the test median was a stupid idea to begin with, that they should, as the Nike ads say, “just do it” rather than dicking around all this time with test signs and websites and orange plastic crap and unnecessarily pissing off car-centric neighbors.

[Saint Paul's patron saint, Joe Soucheray, purses his wrinkly lips alone in a dim office contemplating ways to run over bicyclists with his SUV while on his way to inspect the tools in his garage.]

Update:

More links courtesy of CTC:

Less interesting recap of same meeting by Jeff Zayer.
Explanation of project by Ride Boldly.

2025-07-28

Dedicated Bike Funding Remains Minuscule

[The $1M Jefferson Avenue bicycle boulevard as it passes an elementary school. You're welcome to complain about bike lanes if your complaint is that they are not good enough. The only trace of the bike boulevard is the tiny green sign next to the stoplight.]

For some reason, bicycles and bike lanes cause drivers to lose their minds. There are a lot of reasons for this, most having to do with what I call the "windshield perspective", the way in which many people are unable to view a city street from outside an isolating motor vehicle. There are way too many examples to list -- see the latest Evan Ramstad column -- but the recent, welcome Minnpost piece about a Star Tribune op-ed is an attempt at a corrective that, if anything, actually understates its case! 

Cities and counties rarely have meaningful capital funding specifically dedicated to for bicycle projects. As Keefer points out, the amount of money is small: around $2.5 million a year in Minneapolis, which laps all other Metro area cities in this regard. For capital costs, bicycle project funding is often pitted against other worthy causes like playgrounds, rec centers, fire stations, or bridges in disrepair. (Despite being the smallest costs, bike rarely do well in those scenarios.) 

[Transit funding, here dwarfed by highway funding, is far larger than bicycle infrastructure funding (as it should be). The 'MPO' dot here is the "regional solicitation" step I refer to.]

One of the few bike-specific funding steams that exist is part of the regional solicitation, unallocated Federal transportation dollars that are directed to MPOs. (See the Northeast Hennepin / 1st project I wrote about today at streets.mn for an example of this money at work. Even there, the bike lanes are part of larger pedestrian and transit improvements.) 

In the Twin Cities, our leaders decide to use some of that Federal money for bike-specific projects, while many other metro area do not. Most recently, there was $40 million for a two-year period divided amongst 11 projects in the seven-county metro, chosen out of 50 applications. (The list of winners appears below.) Meanwhile, other countries spend a billion dollars a year on bicycle infrastructure; most notably the Netherlands, where their national and local budgets include spending $1.2 billion over 7 years.  

[Here's the Federal/State bike-specific funding for the entire metro area for 2023-2024.]

A  detail at the end of the short piece illustrates this very well. Keefer writes:

Minneapolis has a robust bike infrastructure built out through city, state and federal initiatives. The city was one of four communities that received funding through the 2008 Federal Highway Administration’s Nonmotorized Transportation Pilot Program – a total amount of $25 million that was spent in the region over a 10-year period.  

I wrote my dissertation on this project. That amount of money, dedicated to bike infrastructure, was impossibly rare back when it arrived in 2005. That’s what made it so special and important; because the money was specifically for bicycle infrastructure (and nothing else) it allowed Minneapolis and a few other cities to begin bicycle planning and develop new treatments and designs. If the money had just been part of a larger transportation pot, as it almost always was before that point, bike infrastructure could have been watered down or folded into a highway or road expansion. 

[Here's what that $25M (over eight years) bought you in "Minneapolis Area" and four other cities.]

Bike infrastructure funding is a rounding error compared to even a minor highway project, let alone a major one. To offer an extreme example: at the most recent TAB meeting, someone mentioned that a proposed interchange at Highways 65 and 10 in Blaine will cost $250,000,000. That’s likely a low estimate; the cost could grow immensely. That fact that commentators, angry drivers, or columnists focus on bicycles as examples of wasteful spending is laughable.  

One further note:

Here is some data about the NTPP money from a post-mortem study that came out in 2014, showing where the money went. 

[The map of “Minneapolis” is particularly funny: it shows a large “bicycle boulevard” infrastructure project in St. Paul, for example, which was funded here along Jefferson Avenue, pictured at the top of this post. If you go there today, you’ll see almost no sign of the >$1 million bike infrastructure investment. In some places, you’ll see no sign of bike infrastructure at all!]

[Different cities spent the money in different ways.]