speed traps on sidewalks?

A link from Ed's blog pointed us to a list of speed traps in Ann Arbor.

The interesting point, from a carfree perspective, is that some of the traps include police vehicles parked on the sidewalk and in bus loading zones.

Huron Parkway Ravine. They sit on the sidewalk along the concrete tieback walls.
Fuller near Mitchell Field. They do it Cali style and sit in the bus loading zone.

While cycling on the multi-use path on the north side of Fuller, our path has occasionally been blocked by a police car sitting in the driveway of the community pool.

Has anyone else run into a situation like this? Is it necessary for police to block NMT facilities in order to enforce speed limits?

transportation enhancements funding threatened & bike commute tax break considered

Every blike blogger and her brother have mentioned this recent threat to trail funding, but League of American Bicyclists has a good summary.

Basically, Congress told states to return some of their transportation budget (after checking on this, we found that "no take-backs" is not actually a constitutional right). Governors have to decide what programs will be cut in the next few weeks, and bike paths and lanes are an easy target. Follow the link above for more information on contacting the decision-makers with appropriate please and threats.

Fortunately, Ann Arbor sets aside city funds for cycling improvements. But massive cuts to State bike budgets will certainly have a regional impact.

At the same time, the Bicycle Commuter Act has been introduced in Congress. This act would allow employers to offer bike commuters commuting incentives similar to transit riders. Maintenance, bike gear and riding clothes would be not be taxed up to a monthly maximum ($105 ofr transit riders).
Dingel, Stabenaw and Levin are not currently supporting the bill, so drop them a note of encouragement via the above link.

capital improvements plan; alternative transportation projects

In preparation for the city's budgeting process, the draft version of the Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) is posted on the city website. Here is a list of the "Alternative" Transportation projects in the report:

Bandemer Park Pedestrian Tunnel
Bicycle Facilities Development*
Geddes Ave. Non-Motorized Path (Gallup Park to Huron Pkwy)
Huron River Multipurpose Trail*
Northeast Area Non-Motorized Trail
Platt Road Sidewalk (Huron Parkway to Washtenaw)
Plymouth Road Rail Station
Sidewalk Gaps
South Main Street Non-motorized Path (AA-Saline to East Stadium)*
Washtenaw Avenue Non-Motorized Path*

* item carried over from previous CIP

The Bandemer Park Pedestrian Tunnel is interesting in that it appears to have replaced the Gallup Park/Arboretum Railroad Tunnel from the 2005 CIP. Both projects were designed to get cyclists across the tracks. The Gallup/Arb tunnel must have been cut, despite its "Important" priority, since it construction was scheduled to start in Spring of 05. That doesn't bode well for the Bendemer tunnel, which has a lower, "Derirable" priority.

The South Main Street Non-motorized Path is recently controversial because of potential putting infringement. We were surprised to see that this project was also in the previous CIP. Since then it has been re-prioritized from "Desirable" to "Urgent", increased from $650k to $1 million, and moved up from a planned construction start in 2011 to 2008. Momentum is building on this one, but so is golfing resistance.

The Plymouth Road Rail Station is, of course, the terminal station for the North-South rail line. We griped about this location before, and the description from the CIP, "Passenger platform, covered pedestrian walkway with ADA compatability," isn't exactly inspiring, but it looks like the Mayor is serious about getting this train rolling. The design stage is scheduled to start in July of '09.

The CIP draft is scant on project descriptions, but it is worth looking over to get some familiarity with up-and-coming carfree projects.

Ypsi [heart] bikes

As mentioned "in brief" in the AANews, WBWC will host a little non-motorized get-together at the Corner Brewery in Ypsi on Thursday, Feb 22. The event includes a showing of "Still We Ride", the Critical Mass movie, as well as updates and info on upcoming NMT projects and events in Ypsi. The News is quick to point out that these projects "would be funded by grants from groups outside of Ypsilanti."

Upcoming Ypsi events include a Safe Routs to School training session on March 13 and "Get Active Ypsi", a month of fun events that encourage Ypsians to get 30 minutes of exercise every day which is very easy if you walk or bike to work). The events coincide with Ann Arbor's Curb Your Car Month.

bike lanes and sidewalks slated for stadium blvd.

The AANews announces proposed construction on E. Stadium between Main and South Industrial. On-street bike lanes and a sidewalk on the south side of the street are included in the improvements. The project, slated for 2009, will make a mess of traffic, but the NMT improvements will be great. From the article:

Already there are ideas about a pedestrian connection from South State Street up to the East Stadium Boulevard overpass, as well as sidewalks along both sides of the bridges and walk-throughs below.

The city also plans to add a "path for pedestrians and bicyclists" along the west side of Main from Stadium to Ann Arbor-Saline Rd. That project would start sooner at a cost of $1.5 million. We're generally opposed to mixing bikes and pedestrians, but at least there are few driveways to cross along this stretch. We're also not exited about the prospect of a pedestrian bridge.

Engineers will consider whether a pedestrian bridge would fit the area and perhaps whether safety islands in the middle of East Stadium Boulevard would help pedestrians crossing it on football Saturdays, Nearing said.

In our walking experience, pedestrians avoid climbing stairs at all costs. We much prefer safety islands.

All in all, this is a great set of NMT improvements in an areas that is decidedly pedestrian-unfriendly, along with sorely needed bridge improvements. Despite the expected traffic delays during construction, everyone should be happy with the project- except for the Ann Arbor Golf and Outing Club.

Members are worried that, at worst, new sidewalks would mean realigning one or more holes on the course, which, in a domino effect, might mean changing the entire layout of the course, said Tony Werderitsch, board president of the club.

The proposed path might affect the course, as well as game day parking that the Club makes a nice wad of cash from during football season. And of course, the club is concerned about pedestrian safety:

A sidewalk along the club's periphery might encourage people to cross either Main Street or East Stadium Boulevard in the middle of the block, Werderitsch said.

Thanks for the concern, but the sidewalk not a threat to walkers, the auto traffic is. Surely there are a plethera of ways that the Club could better express their interest in pedestrian safety than opposing this project.

Federal committee approval of sharrows

bikecommutetips points out that sharrows have gained Federal acceptance:

At its just completed winter meeting held January 17-19 in Arlington, Virginia, the National Committee on Uniform Traffic Control Devices voted 35-0-3 to endorse the shared lane marking ("sharrow")...

Yeeehaw!

We know that you've probably been on the edge of your seat, biting your nails over this vote as you check in, with great anticipation, on the meeting notes of the National Committee on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (NCUTCD). But don't roll out the barrels just yet. Approval was granted by the Bicycle Technical Committee (BCT), but it still needs to be reviewed by the Federal Highway Administration (FHA) before being included in the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). A list of acronyms like that suggests that we're still in for quite a bureaucratic ride.

WTF is a sharrow?

Why should you care? Well, Ann Arbor is one of the few cities to use these shared-use arrows. You can find them on State, Liberty and other downtown streets already. And while the freshly approved non-motorized plan focuses more on bike lanes, it does call for the expansion of sharrows to more streets that are too narrow for exclusive bike lanes.

Getting the sharrows in place was difficult because they aren't included in AASHTO standards. If the sharrow gets the thunbs up from the FHA, the officially approved status will make them easier to implement. In Ann Arbor, that means we won't get the run-around from engineers who are sticklers for AASHTO guidelines. It also means that sharrows might be used in other communities, increasing visitors' awareness of what the symbol means when they visit our fair city.

We like sharrows because they are generally cheap and easy to implement with a proven impact on road position and behavior for cyclists and motorists. Others don't take to the new symbol because they feel it is cheap way out of providing bike lanes or just another road symbol to confuse road users, or both. We can see the argument, but prefer policies and designs that encourage cars and bikes to work together on the road. Encouraging the "seperate but equal" bike lanes tends to support motorists' perceived right to bully cyclists who are not riding, in the motorists mind, appropriately.

monday night smackdown: bike lanes vs. parking

AANews revs up the public's ire in preparation for the Monday night public hearing on the proposed non-motorized plan by pitting the sacred cow of parking against the holy grail of NMT infrastructure, bike lanes. The NMT plan, prepared by Norm Cox of the Greenway Collaborative, recommends removing on-street metered parking on some streets to make room for bike lanes.

So, Batman, as an innocent child plummets toward the gaping maw of the volcanic furnace, the pendulum laser-saw of death takes aim at the love of your life. Who will you save? Rene Geff offers up the most obvious solution, explaining "I would be willing to sacrifice parking ... to get bike lanes, but it has to be replaced somewhere else." The plan actually does call for adding parking on other streets to make up for the loss.

We don't generally advocate for parking supply increases. Instead we would like to see more effort towards efficient use of existing parking and more emphasis on encouraging non-car options. However, as our downtown relies on a lot of out-of-towners for financial support and we don't offer much in the way of inter-city alternatives, now does not seem the time to cut back on the overall parking supply.

After he finishes wagging the parking-vs-bikes dog, Gantert does touch on an issue raised by cycling groups. WBWC has been working for some time to remove signs promoting sidewalk cycling routes. City staff has spent a lot of time looking for reasons they can't get rid of them while agreeing that they are not a good solution. According to the article, City Transportation Guru, Eli Cooper, pointed out that the green ad white signs are advisory, note regulatory. The implication (perhaps more from Gantert than Cooper) is that no one is forcing cyclists to use the sidewalk. But, consider other green and white, advisory signs like highway exit signs and signs directing one to public parking. We generally assume that this advice is coming from someone who knows better than we do. We do not usually question whether the green and white advice is guiding us into situations that are proven repeatedly to be the more dangerous option.

We encourage you to show up and speak at Monday. But we also encourage you to read the original report before taking the bait that the News has laid.

internet round-up: crazy bike infrastructure

We try to keep posts focused on the Ann Arbor area, but it's good to step out of the box once in a while to gain some perspective. Here is a little collection of bike infrastructure projects that have stepped way outside the traditional sidewalk vs. road paradimgn of cycling infrastructure.

A few years back, significant effort was put into the idea of a bike tunnel under the railroad tracks near Depot St. That is about as radical as Ann Arbor has gotten. Sure, big expensive projects may not be the way to spend our litmited NMV budget, but what if we were to dream big? Are any of these options worth considering in our fair city?

Bicycle Lift currently operating in Norway assists cyclists on ascending steep hills. Need a little boost up Hospital Hill or Broadway St?

Water-cooled bike path designed for Qatar beats the heat with a solar-powered water-misting system on a shaded bikepath. Ann Arbor doesn't have the heat to warrant this kind of project, let alone the oil money to pay for it. Still, simply providing cover from rain, snow, and sun makes cycling and walking a lot more attractive.

Elevated bike wind-powered bike highways have yet to meet a city with the forward-thinking leaders and deep pockets required for implementation. They system provides a tailwind making cycling "90% more efficient" in the weather protected corridors. Connect North and Central Campus, a bike express route to Ypsi running above Washtenaw, ...maybe not.

The McDonalds Cycle Center in Chicago is one of the few dream resources that came to fruition. The center offers secure parking, repair service, rentals, lockers, showers, and towel service, as well as hosting tours, classes and other events. Certainly a big city can more easily support big projects like this. Maybe we could start smaller by getting the YMCA to offer a "Shower Pass" and some bike lockers.

But innovative does not have to mean expensive. Check out this commissioned bike lane in Montreal.

bikers vs. pedestrians: scuffles over scraps

The New York Times posted an op-ed on bike-ped conflicts in NYC (login required). The writer, a previous Department of Transporation assistant commissioner, blames the battle on a lack of policy and infrastructure recognizing cyclists as legitimate road users.

Ann Arbor faces similar problems where incomplete bike lanes, mixed messages on where to ride (sidewalk bike route signs, mixed use arrows, University-endorsed sidewalk biking) and street perceived to be unsafe by cyclist lead to sidewalk cycling, bike-ped conflicts, and, eventually, pedestrians cursing "those damn bikers!"

The solution presented in the op-ed is in three parts:

First, we need to establish a clear hierarchy for the use of city streets. Pedestrians come first; we started out as a walking city and it will be our greatest strength going forward. This means bikers must yield to pedestrians — even errant ones. Biking is a superb form of transport we should encourage. Drivers must yield to bike riders — even errant ones.
Second, we must enforce the rules. Police officers should write summonses specifically for “failure to yield” by bike riders (and car drivers). ...
Third, let’s advance the network of bike lanes citywide. I’d even re-introduce physically separate bike lanes. ...
Finally, we need to recognize that our economic and physical well-being are advanced when more people are able to enjoy our streets.

An write-up on streetsblog breaks that op-ed down to argue that cyclists and pedestrians are wasting their efforts in-fighting over the scraps of the transportation budget, instead of recognizing their similar position of disregard and organizing to petition for safer, less auto-centric streets.

While the Good People of Ann Arbor do make an effort to advocate for pedestrians and cyclists (WBWC, getDowntown, and this blog are examples), we still have our share of Letters to the Editor regarding renagade cyclists. Over on Arborupdate, divisions are even forming between yard-rakers and bike-riders over how to manage leaf pick-up in bike lanes.

Of course we'll always have some level of within-group conflict: helmet vs no helmet, power-walkers annoyed with meanderers, law abiding cyclists cursing J-walkers, the list goes on. But hopefully we as a community can keep the larger vision of working to improve policy and infrastructure for all carfree folks.

Ypsidixit on winter biking

Our favorite Ypsi cyclist, Ypsidixit, is toughening up and waxing poetic on her plans for her winter bike commute. She is fortunate to have the Gallup Park trail as a large section of that ride. This leads us to wonder how well-maintained that trail is in the winter. Anyone know?

Thursday night bike/ped meetings

The planning commission meeting scheduled for Thursday night includes reconsideration of the Nonmotorized Plan, part of which will entail discussion on signs peppered throughout town encouraging cyclists to use the sidewalk. WBWC has been advocating the removal of these signs for some time now. City staff recently issued an official response to this request.

The staff's response was a straight-forward "yes, but no". The staff has determined that while signs encouraging cyclists to use the sidewalk are a bad idea and increase pedestrian-cyclists conflicts, they must remain for now. They defer to the legal/engingeering excuse:

Sidewalk Bike Route signs are a traffic control device and as such they have the potential to be scrutinized in accident litigation. Removing all of the signs immediately without any change in the physical conditions is not aligned with sound engineering practice.

The response continues to point out that, while the 1992 Bicycle Master Plan repeatedly recommends eliminating such cycling routes, the city will not do so until other accomodations are made for cyclists, because it isn't safe to ride on the road.

There have not been any changes to the environment where these signed routes remain. The traffic speed and density remain high and the physical space is insufficient to define a shared or separate facility for bicyclists.

We see two problems with this argument:
1) The signs contradict all other bicycle policy goals of shared use. They directly contradict other signs downtown indicating that sidewalk cycling is illegal. They suggest that it is safer to ride on sidewalks even though studies repeatedly show this riding location to be more dangerous than on-street. Thus, we think the signs are at best confusing, and at worst a serious safety risk.
2) The response states that the signs cannot be removed until other accomodations for cyclists are made, then states that there is no way to provide other accomodation given the limited road space. The response also completely overlooks the importance of education and enforcement in making roadways safe for cyclists. The response seems to imply that the city cares enough to maintain the current, questionable safety of cyclists, but not enough to actually find an effective solution.

Cyclists may be torn over the issue, especially since many Ann Arbor cyclists do use the sidewalk. But keep in mind that this is not an effort to ban sidewalk cycling, only to stop encouraging it through signage. Pedestrians are more likely to see this issue in terms of blatent apathy to their safety.

Email from WBWC recommends:

if you didn't get a chance to attend the last Planning Commission meeting, please consider attending and saying a few words on this subject. Many of us who spoke at the last meeting will be at the WBWC meeting this week, and it's really effective when a number of people actually show up and speak on a given topic.

which brings us to the next announcement. WBWC is also meeting on Thursday night at the Ecology Center and will vote on board positions. Their email indicates that they'd much rather you speak at the Planning meeting. But if you've always wanted to get involved with WBWC, they are open and welcoming to everyone.

bike lanes on pontiac trail

It appears that the city council has approved new bike lanes on Pontiac Trail from Barton Drive to the Ann Arbor railroad, as we have received reports that the initial markings have already been layed. A bike lane currently extends north of Barton Drive and this section falls just short of connecting the existing lane to Broadway. The lane will also nearly connect cyclists to the wooden decked path that provides non-motorized access along Barton Drive going west.

Responding to a concerned citizen's report that the lane striping was mismarked resulting in a too narrow bike lane, the city's transportation program manager, Eli Cooper writes,

Given a 6 inch wide bike line stripes, we wind up assigning one full
foot of the thirty-four foot width to bicycle lane lines. Therefore, if
the citizen's measurement was only to the inside edge of the marking it
should have only shown 4' 9''. In any event as a result of the input,
we had field staff double check the preliminary markings and make sure
we had full width bicycle lanes in this corridor. I understand some
minor adjustments were made as part of our inspection process, partly as
a result of the citizens' concern and input. Please thank him or her for
bringing this issue to our attention.

It appears that the city is making an effort to meet the AASHTO standards for cycling lanes. We applaud the keen eye and effort that raised this issue and are glad to see a swift response by the city. We further hope that the city stays on top of these details as the bike lane network continues to grow.

In related news, researchers in Texas have determined that marked cycling lanes improve safety. They point out that on roads with marked cycling lanes, cyclists are more likely to stop at stop signs and less likely to ride on sidewalks. Without marked lanes, cyclists were also more likely to ride "dangerously close" to the curb. "'Bike lanes reinforce the concept that bicyclists are supposed to behave like other vehicles, and make life safer for everyone involved as a result,' Hallett said."

On the other hand, they argue that the marked lanes are safer because motorists don't yield as much space when passing cyclists.

Without a marked bike lane, [motorists] veered away from bicyclists, crossing into the next motorist lane nearly nine out of 10 times.
With a striped bike lane, six of 10 motorists swerved, but those who swerved only encroached about 40 percent as far.

The article does not address how researchers justify the the association of improved safety with cars yielding less space when passing cyclists in the under-sized bike lanes that the researchers also advocate. Fortunately, Ann Arbor seems more interested in providing cyclists with adequate road space.

a tribute to autumn: the gallup park trail

If you are looking for a nice ride to enjoy the fall colors, or just debating whether to bike or drive between Ann Arbor and Ypsi, Ypsidixt offers up a convincing argument for taking the trail through gallup park before the leaves fall.

The prettiest part was the tree by the Gallup dam: a huge red torch of fire. Other beauty spots included a twig-littered part of the path by St. Joe's, leaves falling through the air on the secret path, and a realization that the EMU campus is distinguished by its really nice array of sculpture.

We wonder if Y might consider writing a weekly weather report for carfree ann arbor? Maybe if we changed our name to be more inclusive?

Cycling in Ypsi

The Ann Arbor News had a nice piece on how easy it is to get around Ypsilanti by bike along with quotes from local cyclists. They also point out the improved bike access between Ypsi and A2 via the cross-county bike path. Bob Krzewinski says,"A lot of people don't realize that you can hop on your bike right now, and, pretty much, when you're on the west side of Ypsilanti ride on bike paths pretty much all the way into Ann Arbor''It seems that, if they continue along this path, Ypsi could easily outpace Ann Arbor in the race for the Bike Friendly Community (BFC) platinum level. The League of American Bicyclists runs this program that acknowledges community efforts to accommodate and promote cycling with bronze, silver, gold and platinum rankings. In 2005, Ann Arbor was awarded a bronze level. It would be great to see someone from Ypsi submit an application this year.