76th Street

The meeting December 18th, where H.R. Green Consulting presented their recommendation to the Community Services and Planning Commissions was disappointing. There was quite a bit of discussion directed toward bike paths and sidewalks. Unfortunately, much of that discussion was instigated by me. The Community Services and Planning Commissions’ interests appeared to be mostly directed at just how much parking to give cars along the trails. It appeared to me that they were happy with the minimal consideration given to walkways and on-street bike paths.
A trail is more than just a trail. Just like a freeway is more than just a freeway. It is economic development. Bikes ways and trail ways also have economic impact on the development (or redevelopment) in the case of Richfield). With Minneapolis, the number two biking city in the nation to the north of us, it is unwise not to embrace a bike culture to attract young professionals.
The short-sited self-involved commentary by community members attending meetings fails to understand it is not just about what they want, but what will attract young professionals to the neighborhood. 
Those that think we can use our “suburban charms” will find the attractions of the new “suburban” development that once in enticed young couples in the 40′s and 50′s to move here, have long disappeared and we can not compete with younger sexier newer suburban developments further out. We need to create that new model for ourselves based more on Minneapolis than Lakeville.

So back to writing about the developments on 76th/Pleasant and 76th/Lyndale. It will be interesting what the developers will have to offer as far as “Green Housing” practices, that is what are the materials the development is made of, what kind of energy conservation and usage does it have, etc… Some can add on to the cost of the development, but can the developers or the city get grants to defray the costs? One developer did mention it during the community meeting but unfortunately it was quickly passed over.

December 18th at the Richfield Community Center. This is a combined meeting with H.R. Green Consulting presenting to BOTH the Community Services Commission and the Planning Commission. If this is like the last meeting with the Transportation Commission expect this to be lightly attended. If only they could make community meetings more interesting than “Pimp my Ride” and “American Idol” we might get people to attend…

A couple of interesting PDFs on the Technical Guidance for Bikeways put out by Mn/DOT
Mn/DOT Bikeways Facility Design Manual
MnDOT Bicycle Modal Plan

From MnDOT Bicycle Modal Plan

3-2.0
Shared use paths, greenways, and state trails must be designed for users other than bicyclists. The design should take into account others on shared use paths such as inline skaters, adult tricycles, bicycle trailers, recumbent bicyclists, and wheelchair users. The dimensions and operational characteristics of bicyclists are important, other user types that are allowed to share the same space as bicyclists should be integrated into the initial planning stages and the design and selection of a bikeway type.

4-2.1 Consideration of Geometric and Operation Factors
Intersections and Driveways
Intersections and driveways are roadway features that require extra consideration and care as they relate to bikeways, and provide opportunities as well as potential difficulties for designers of bikeways. Since bicyclists generally want to reach the same destinations as motorists, these features provide access to those destinations. They also present potential locations for conflicts between motor vehicles and bicycles. Most bicycle crashes with motor vehicles occur at
intersections.

4-3.3 Standard Bicycle Lanes
A bicycle lane is a portion of a roadway designated by striping, signing, and pavement markings for the preferential or exclusive use of bicycles. These one-way bicycle facilities are appropriate for roads with an urban (curb and gutter) cross section. Bicycle lanes carry bicycle traffic in the same direction as adjacent motor vehicle traffic.

I was also shocked to hear H. R. Green Consulting tell the Transportation Commission that people who lived on 75th Street were concerned about not having parking and that they intend to make space for parking  with bump-ins along 75th Street. I was at that November 28th meeting and only one woman voiced her concern. There was another resident who lived on 75th that said he thought the trail and bike paths were good ideas and that not having on street parking was not a large problem on his street due to everyone having driveways. He also said that he had discussed this with several neighbors and they liked the trail nor had issues with the parking. That testimony they curiously left out by H. R. Green Consulting at the commission meeting.

This was an interesting meeting. Well, actually it was as fun as watching paint dry. But it was informative. H.R. Green Consulting made a presentation to the Transportation Commission. It pretty much confirmed my fears. No on street bike path, but not only that, it appears that the sidewalk is the “trail” a “multi-use” trail for walkers, joggers, skateboarders, rollerbladers, baby strollers, wheel chairs and biking since it is not provided on the street.

Calling it a city sidewalk a trail is a bit like calling I-35E a parkway. oh, wait… it is called it a parkway.

H.R. Green Consulting holds the view that 75th Street is too narrow to have bike lanes and that since the mission of the Three Rivers Park District (formerly Hennepin Parks), which is behind this trail, is to create a multi-use trail AND because there has to be a street for cars – the bike paths have got to go.

First problem – the “Trail” (sidewalk)

The problem with that is the belief that sidewalks are safer than streets for biking. Bicycle side paths such as the one on 75th have proved so dangerous that even the US government instructs that they be used in only the few locations where their dangers are insignificant. The problem is not just pedestrians; urban sidepaths cause difficult and dangerous car-bike conflicts at every driveway and intersection. How so?

A car backing down a driveway will slow down at street level before entering expecting fast moving vehicles. This is not the case for a sidewalk. Not seeing pedestrians the car will back out past the sidewalk to the street .

A car is more likely to see a bicyclist in the street when making a right hand turn but is less likely to see the bicyclist up on the sidewalk entering in to the street when making the turn.

Sidewalks which have been later re-designated as cycle paths may contain various obstructions including bus stops, pillar boxes, telecommunications cabinets and pedestrians.

Cycle paths are generally less frequently cleaned of debris and snow/ice than roads.

Contrary to intuition, cyclists riding on bicycle paths (now called “shared use paths”) have a higher crash rate than cyclists riding on roads, although not as high a crash rate as cyclists riding on sidewalks (Aultman-Hall and Kaltenecker 1998). The risk of injuries on paths compared to roads has been calculated as 40%, 80%, and 260% higher (Moritz 1998, Aultman-Hall and Kaltenecker 1998, Kaplan 1976). Some of the increased risk may be explained by the greater likelihood of inexperienced cyclists to use paths or sidewalks (Aultman-Hall and Adams 1998). However, the studies of bicycle club members, who are much more experienced than average cyclists, reveal a higher crash rate on paths even for these riders.

Second problem – 75th Street with no bike lanes

Bike lanes usually makes both cyclists and motorists feel more comfortable, and, by allowing motorists to pass with less delay at a greater distance, may reduce bad feelings on both sides.

Bike lane stripes serves the same engineering purpose as any other lane stripe, and should be employed under similar circumstances–to delineate travel paths that could otherwise be ambiguous, providing for more predictable movement.

Bike lane stripes may also provide better protection against hijacking roadway space by re-striping it for additional traffic lanes.

Bike lane strips remind motorists that bicycles belong on the road, and to expect them there.

So what to do….

Take a page from the California Highway Design Manual – CHAPTER 1000
BIKEWAY PLANNING AND DESIGN

H.R. Green Consulting says that there just is no room for an on-street bike path. There is 60 feet available to work with. H.R. Green Consulting wants the city to create a 26′ road leaving 14′ on north side and 10′ on the south for boulevards and Trail. 10′ of the boulevard on the north side would be made into a trail leaving the boulevard at 14′. So that is a 14′ and 10′ boulevard, amazingly generous by any standard, and given that the south side does not have a sidewalk, its just green space (city property) adjacent to the home owners property. No sidewalks, no nothing.

However, lets say we want to go crazy and add say two bike lanes. One going east and one going west. Crazy. They are proposing 6′ bike lanes on 76th Street. The California Highway Design Manual calls for a 5′ bike lane minimum with curb. So lets say we want to be stingy and go with two 5′ bike lanes times 5′ equals 10′ we subtract that from the boulevard equally leaving 9′ and 5′ boulevards. Still a nice chunk of city boulevard space.

Now did I mention that the road surface without bike lanes is 22′ on 76th Street?
So the road surface on 75th Street as planned is 26′ and if we do another crazy thing like reduce it to… say… 22′ that gives us 4′ to give back to the boulevards. Split equally again the boulevard are now 11′ and 7′ – amazing.

Again, if we take a page out of the California Highway Design Manual we could even squeeze an extra foot of usable space for the bike lanes by blending street with the curb.
So in the end we have from north to south:

Trail 10′ | Boulevard 11′ | Bike Lane 5′ | Roadway 22′ | Bike Lane 5′ | Boulevard 7′ = 60′ total

Why couldn’t H.R. Green Consulting do the math? …and hell I’m not even getting paid.

At the November 28th meeting, in addition to showing bike path placement they also showed sidewalk placement. In a city of empty nesters that strongly oppose sidewalks, some because they do not have kids and don’t care if someone else’s kids have to use the street to get around, or others, because they hold on to an antiquated notion that no sidewalks = suburban living at its finest and only poor people walk (they do not know there is a tread in new suburban communities for sidewalks by young couples), I suppose I should be grateful for the pitiful few sidewalks proposed the the street scape plans. However the most egregious proposal of them is to only put sidewalks on one side (the north) of 76th street from Nicollet to Cedar. The statement by H.R. Green Consulting was that it wasn’t needed and that the neighbors there “valued” green space. I disagree, the value of the sidewalk – and green space, is in the whole of the 76th street project not just one section.

It would be insane to let the individual property owners decide whether they want a sidewalk in front of their property or “green space”, you would have the sidewalk starting and stopping making it worthless. In a sense that is what is happening here. They are devaluing the asset of the sidewalk by cutting it short to placate one or two people in the east section.

Privatizing of Public Space
The other problem I have with this is the give-away of public land. The road is being narrowed and the land is being handed over to private property owners. Yes the city will still own the land, which also means they will not be tax assessed for it as well. What a deal! The Richfield walkers and kids loose out and some complainers get tax free land.

If the city wants to make it fair, the city should bring back an option it dropped early on, it should move the green space to a center median which keeps it public (and I think looks very sexy). They could then move the road closer to the houses since sidewalks are not valued there.

The real story – Sidewalks are needed
If you ever have walked or biked that area, like I have, you will see that there is a real need for sidewalks on both sides of the street between Nicollet and Cedar even for so than between 35W and Nicollet. There are two major parks many kids walk and bike to, (Washington and Roosevelt) and two churches (Assumption and House of Prayer Lutheran Church) along that south section. I think H.R. Green Consulting’s assessment that a sidewalk isn’t necessary on the south side is incorrect and would be very sad for the community if that comes to pass.

So the scoop on the bike trail status after the last city meeting November 28th is – no bike trail. That is, there will be a bike path on 76th Street but not on 75th Street. Which means no bike trail at least connecting Minnetonka to the Mississippi River, which is what they are toteing this bike trail for. What they are doing on 75th Street is “saying” that there is a bike path without actually making one or making room for bike paths. The road way on 76th Street is 38′ wide with 12′ of the being designated as bike paths. The road on 75th Street is 26′ wide total with no space designated for bike paths. There is simply no room for bikes on this road with cars. Their stated reason – there isn’t enough traffic to justify a separate bike path – does not fly with their logic for deciding to narrow the road in the first place, which is as a traffic calming measure. If there is no traffic on that street why does it need to be calmed? Obviously it does need calming since it is being used by cars looking for a way to bypass congestion on 76th Street at Best Buy. So it does need a bike path.

It was interesting listening to some of the neighbors complaining about bikes even suggesting that they were toy of the rich and Richfield will never be THAT fancy. Again, biking is a very viable mode of transportation, and Minneapolis, the second biggest biking city in the nation is right next door. Richfield is biking distance to downtown and has a large business community that biking can access long 494, if Richfield is going to attract young professionals to live here, we need to make it attractive for them. It is a good community development decision.