Bicycle Infrastructure

Roads - Rails - Sidewalks - Bikeways
alexschief
Union Depot
Posts: 360
Joined: November 12th, 2015, 11:35 am
Location: Philadelphia

Re: Bicycle Infrastructure

Postby alexschief » October 18th, 2018, 8:01 am

EOst wrote:
October 18th, 2018, 6:50 am
Lasalle is excellent news. Is it the full missing link from Grant to Franklin? Just a few years ago the protected bikeway analysis said "lane removal is not feasible."
"lane removal is not feasible" is a state of mind

MNdible
is great.
Posts: 5775
Joined: June 8th, 2012, 8:14 pm
Location: Minneapolis

Re: Bicycle Infrastructure

Postby MNdible » October 18th, 2018, 8:56 am

Ignoring reality is also a state of mind.

xandrex
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1348
Joined: January 30th, 2013, 11:14 am

Re: Bicycle Infrastructure

Postby xandrex » October 18th, 2018, 9:11 am

If the gap between Grant and Franklin is finally fixed, that would be a major win.

I am very comfortable riding in traffic, taking the lane, etc. But I literally stopped biking on this street, because I had several encounters where cars literally hit me with their mirrors, harassed me, honked at me, etc. That stretch is a death trap.

MSPtoMKE
Rice Park
Posts: 498
Joined: June 20th, 2012, 8:15 pm
Location: Loring Heights
Contact:

Re: Bicycle Infrastructure

Postby MSPtoMKE » October 18th, 2018, 10:57 am

Looks like I was wrong about eliminating a lane, they hadn’t striped the center lane when I saw it last night, so it was hard to tell what the layout would be. It looks like they just narrowed lanes, so there is no bike lane buffer. So not great, but still an improvement I’d say. I hope folks who park on LaSalle are good at parallel parking, it is pretty tight! Oddly, some blocks have a line dividing the parking lane from the bike lane, some do not, so maybe they aren’t done yet? I assume the timing of this was due to all but one southbound bus route moving back to I-35W on Monday.
My flickr photos.

Silophant
Moderator
Posts: 3767
Joined: June 20th, 2012, 4:33 pm
Location: The Gateway

Re: Bicycle Infrastructure

Postby Silophant » October 18th, 2018, 12:38 pm

Lanes were also painted on 17th Ave SE from University to 5th.

DanPatchToget
US Bank Plaza
Posts: 640
Joined: March 30th, 2016, 1:26 pm

Re: Bicycle Infrastructure

Postby DanPatchToget » October 18th, 2018, 6:46 pm

Is there a reason the Minnesota River Bluffs LRT Trail doesn't continue on the railroad ROW west of Flying Cloud Drive to Downtown Chaska? Who owns the ROW now?

mattaudio
Stone Arch Bridge
Posts: 7892
Joined: June 19th, 2012, 2:04 pm
Location: NORI: NOrth of RIchfield

Re: Bicycle Infrastructure

Postby mattaudio » October 19th, 2018, 9:10 am

It looks like that's where property ownership switches from Hennepin County RRA to Chaska EDA and private ownership.
https://gis.co.carver.mn.us/publicparcel/

That said, it's ridiculous that there's not even a multi-use path alongside Chaska Blvd (Old 212 / TH 61) or Stoughton Ave. Let's all write letters to the City of Chaska encouraging them to make this critical link to their historic downtown.

DanPatchToget
US Bank Plaza
Posts: 640
Joined: March 30th, 2016, 1:26 pm

Re: Bicycle Infrastructure

Postby DanPatchToget » October 19th, 2018, 9:36 am

Also ridiculous about this trail route:
-They still haven't taken care of the washout just east of 101, and its been how many years since that short segment has been closed?
-There's no bridge or even some form of protection crossing 101 besides a trail crossing sign. I crossed there a couple weeks ago and will never do that again until there's a bridge or lights. When this was still a rail line a bridge crossed over 101, but I'm guessing it didn't meet modern height requirements and/or the bridge was in bad shape. Still, its pretty easy to build a trail bridge where there was already a bridge.

nBode
Union Depot
Posts: 323
Joined: August 20th, 2013, 3:25 pm
Location: University of Minnesota

Re: Bicycle Infrastructure

Postby nBode » October 19th, 2018, 11:16 am


SurlyLHT
US Bank Plaza
Posts: 625
Joined: February 21st, 2017, 3:50 pm

Re: Bicycle Infrastructure

Postby SurlyLHT » November 14th, 2018, 3:11 pm

The Third Avenue planters are destroyed next to Convention Center. By that I mean a few of them are shattered. I've noticed them knocked over often, but not destroyed. I'm glad they're there. I mean if the cars are hitting the planters would they hit me if they weren't there? Overall, I don't know how effective they are given that they've been trashed.

Ohiosotan
City Center
Posts: 25
Joined: April 15th, 2016, 7:31 am

Re: Bicycle Infrastructure

Postby Ohiosotan » November 18th, 2018, 2:27 pm

New bike lanes on LaSalle just south of Grant: not buffered like north of Grant and pretty narrow especially when a food truck is parked in front of Lakes & Legends. I'll take it I guess.

Ohiosotan
City Center
Posts: 25
Joined: April 15th, 2016, 7:31 am

Re: Bicycle Infrastructure

Postby Ohiosotan » November 18th, 2018, 3:38 pm

Rode the whole stretch just now. Couple of things: the old sharrows are awkwardly positioned in the right lane and bike lane with half of the symbols all rubbed off from car tires and the highway bridge section shouldn't have cyclists shift to the right. Not that much at least: add a buffer and/or widen the bike lane here. Aside from the smashed mirror I was able to navigate without leaving the bike lane, so I give it a C- and that's still an improvement over the previous sharrows.

Nicollet south of 15th would still be perfect for bike lanes to Franklin: plenty more space to work with for buffered or wide bike lanes.

DanPatchToget
US Bank Plaza
Posts: 640
Joined: March 30th, 2016, 1:26 pm

Re: Bicycle Infrastructure

Postby DanPatchToget » November 27th, 2018, 3:35 pm

Rode the "bike lane" (is that the right term?) along 66th Street from Southdale to Highway 77. Is it better than what is used to be? Yes. Could it be better? Definitely. Its basically a wide sidewalk with one half designated for bikes and the other half designated for pedestrians. Like all sidewalks, there is the issue of motorists coming from side streets stopping in the middle of the path (you should've seen the look on a woman's face as she came out of Pleasant Avenue and saw me barreling toward her SUV). Crossing side streets is a little bumpy, but at least its better than going over the huge bumps that I'm used to seeing biking on sidewalks. On a few random segments the bike lane abruptly ends; anyone know why that is? And then there's the roundabouts where you have to slow down and wait to cross or you merge onto the road before the roundabout and get through the roundabouts a lot faster.

Its definitely not built for speed, and its not as good as a regular bike lane on the road. With all that space you would think they could've easily built protected bike lanes.

Multimodal
US Bank Plaza
Posts: 660
Joined: March 4th, 2016, 7:55 am
Location: Oh, no, the burbs!

Re: Bicycle Infrastructure

Postby Multimodal » November 27th, 2018, 6:58 pm

It’s called a “shared use path”, and it seems to be something suburbs and the county are embracing. I suppose it makes sense in some places where you need a bike route for safety, but you’ll never see a lot of bike traffic (like out in distant, low-density suburbs), but it was definitely a compromise in a first ring suburb along a county road.

My understanding is that, further east, where there is more room, it turns into bike lanes separate from the sidewalk. This was a compromise because of the lack of space.

It probably seemed like a valuable compromise when the design was approved however many years ago. But as we get more good bike infrastructure, people may push back harder against designs like this. I’m sure it was a hard-fought battle.

FWIW, Mr. Copenhagenize guy, in his latest book, says two-way bikeways like this, on one side of the road, end up as failures over time. But being as it is mostly single family homes (I think?) on the other side of 66th in this area, I suppose there aren’t a lot of destinations there.

DanPatchToget
US Bank Plaza
Posts: 640
Joined: March 30th, 2016, 1:26 pm

Re: Bicycle Infrastructure

Postby DanPatchToget » November 27th, 2018, 8:04 pm

Unless they're changing it, or its only on the westbound side (I only biked on the eastbound side), there was only a very short segment of bike lane just west of Richfield Parkway. I didn't see any other bike lane along 66th.

This county sure is persistent on half-baked pedestrian and bike infrastructure. I wonder what they're objections were to an actual bike lane?

Multimodal
US Bank Plaza
Posts: 660
Joined: March 4th, 2016, 7:55 am
Location: Oh, no, the burbs!

Re: Bicycle Infrastructure

Postby Multimodal » November 27th, 2018, 9:26 pm

Go here:
https://www.hennepin.us/66street

Scroll down to Public Involvement, and look under “2018 Open House” where it has 2 PDFs with the plans.

I see now that you were talking about the cycletracks, and not the shared use path. The PDFs have more details. I believe the idea was that having trees between the bikeway and the street provided more protection. And I’m just guessing here, but perhaps the unified bikeway/sidewalk was meant for easier/cheaper snow plowing.

User avatar
Anondson
Capella Tower
Posts: 3972
Joined: July 21st, 2013, 8:57 pm
Location: Where West Minneapolis Once Was

Re: Bicycle Infrastructure

Postby Anondson » January 4th, 2019, 2:29 pm

Simple request for help.

Does anyone have access to importable, up to date, map data of all the bike trail routes in and connecting to Minneapolis?

I commissioned Overview Design to create a wooden map of Minneapolis. See their stuff here. https://overview.design/

My custom request was to put in a unique layer that highlighted the major trail network (I’m excluding the abundant amount of bike lanes). The look would be something like what Overview made for a custom map of the Chicago Marathon. Hennepin County has a decent bike map online but the data didn’t seem to be publicly downloadable.

We’ve got a good amount of the trail network, but it looks like some trails aren’t in public datasets, like the extension of the river trail north of Graco. The Bassett’s Creek Trail. The regional trail south of Nokomis into Richfield was an odd one we couldn’t find.

Anyone have a good source for up to date data on fully separate bike trails I could pass on to the creator?

SurlyLHT
US Bank Plaza
Posts: 625
Joined: February 21st, 2017, 3:50 pm

Re: Bicycle Infrastructure

Postby SurlyLHT » January 4th, 2019, 3:28 pm

I use this web site a lot. Click the Open Cycle button in the corner to see all of the bike maps. You might be able to finnd Open Cycle maps on other sites as well. It even as the Theo Wirth single track trails!

https://www.gmap-pedometer.com/

Multimodal
US Bank Plaza
Posts: 660
Joined: March 4th, 2016, 7:55 am
Location: Oh, no, the burbs!

Re: Bicycle Infrastructure

Postby Multimodal » January 21st, 2019, 7:38 am

“How much does public input count in bike systems?”

https://finance-commerce.com/2019/01/ho ... e-systems/

The article falls victim to the same thing NY & Chicago did: they didn’t explain the parameters that go into choosing a site, so saying a city put bike share stations at the same place as only 5% of residents’ requests provides little information without context.

In general, my impression is that cities give residents the impression they are starting from scratch when asking for input, when really the city is just looking to tweak a plan to best fit the neighborhood. If “public input” meetings were more about education first, and then asking for tweaks from the public (with lots of context and explanation of parameters), then citizens would feel more engaged. Just my 2¢.

User avatar
sdho
US Bank Plaza
Posts: 746
Joined: August 17th, 2013, 12:54 pm
Location: The Urban Hometown®
Contact:

Re: Bicycle Infrastructure

Postby sdho » January 21st, 2019, 9:24 pm

DanPatchToget wrote:
November 27th, 2018, 3:35 pm
Rode the "bike lane" (is that the right term?) along 66th Street from Southdale to Highway 77. Is it better than what is used to be? Yes. Could it be better? Definitely. Its basically a wide sidewalk with one half designated for bikes and the other half designated for pedestrians. Like all sidewalks, there is the issue of motorists coming from side streets stopping in the middle of the path (you should've seen the look on a woman's face as she came out of Pleasant Avenue and saw me barreling toward her SUV). Crossing side streets is a little bumpy, but at least its better than going over the huge bumps that I'm used to seeing biking on sidewalks. On a few random segments the bike lane abruptly ends; anyone know why that is? And then there's the roundabouts where you have to slow down and wait to cross or you merge onto the road before the roundabout and get through the roundabouts a lot faster.

Its definitely not built for speed, and its not as good as a regular bike lane on the road. With all that space you would think they could've easily built protected bike lanes.
Old posts -- but this is a protected bike lane, by the broader way it's been defined. For example, it is similar to the protected bike lanes in Minneapolis by gopher stadium or Hennepin/Lyndale -- a distinct area, at the same grade as the sidewalk. This is arguably better than both of those, because it is one-way by design, improving crossing safety.

I don't know that anyone is building PBLs on the street with the posts, like they do for retrofits. They are ugly, difficult to maintain, and many feel they don't provide as much protection as a curb.

First off, want to note a few things that will still improve:

1. Most street crossings will improve with the final lift of asphalt
2. Some gap areas -- specifically downtown Richfield and the area from Nicollet to Portland will be filled in 2019 construction
3. Pavement markings will be in at all intersections, and roundabouts, which makes it more obvious to motorists where they'd be in conflict.

As for the inherent nature of why this design is:

1. The earlier concept had it at the back of curb, like a Copenhagen bike lane or something like the Washington Ave bike lanes. That was considered untenable both because people were concerned children would be too close to traffic (could tip over into travel lane) and because it was so difficult to clear of snow. With the combined pavement, they can run an alley plow down the whole thing and clear it quickly.

2. On-street bike lanes were not as supported by bike advocates and community members, due to traffic volume. It was felt it would be used by a small percentage of very strong riders, but not by the community at large. Of course, very strong riders may absolutely still use the travel lanes of 66th.

3. The bike facility dead-ended at Oliver due to overwhelming community opposition to making 66th even one inch wider west of Penn. County was unwilling to consider 3 lanes in this section, although traffic volumes suggest that would be fine. Instead, they did squeeze in that 8' sidewalk/MUP to provide *something*

4. The County had an extremely strong desire not to redo any of the 2008 pavement around the Portland Avenue roundabout, so that is a notable, annoying gap. I hope that at some point we get a small project to replace the sidewalks.

5. I asked repeatedly about why we couldn't have level, sidewalk/cycletrack-grade crossings across minor streets. County staff felt strongly that it was unsafe for the motoring public to have to decrease their speed as they turn across the facility -- since a level crossing would make a de fact speed bump. I disagree.


Return to “Transportation”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: maxbaby and 3 guests