05/28/92 Agenda & Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

these features the risk is significantly greater—and that with or without these features bicycles can be expected to use the facility anyway. 5)Exclusive Bikeways vs. Multi-purpose trails. Some of the presenters expressed concern about off-road facilities being shared with other users(esp.pedestrians). This concern is parallel to the"separate bikes from cars"philoso- phy. In both cases,the concerns are justifiable—when traffic volumes are high enough. However,when visibility is good,the trail is wide enough,and user density is quite low dual paths just aren't cost effective. Most of the long recreational trails existing or planned were designed for multipurpose and most off-road facilities in rural or suburban arreas are very adequate for biker/pedestrian coexistence. For lake loops and river trails which tend to quickly become very popular it does make sense to anticipate future addition of a second path to separate bikers and skaters from pedestrians or other slow modes. 6)Ideal vs. practical solutions to problems. While it is possible to envisage a grid of bike paths on independent rights-of-way with bridges,tunnels,and underpasses to completely separate cyclists from cars and every other user,the costs would be totally prohibitive. Many of the elements of an"ideal"system are not justified by today's cyclist volume. Increasing the volume of bike usage is dependent on upgrading our facilities. To be cost-effective,the upgrading must be evolutionary and prioritized. It must start off with a careful assessment of current status of facilities and cyclist volume(current and anticipated). Connectivity and safety are the most critical issues (to attract more users).Bridges and tunnels are very expensive to construct but may be easy to justify for connectivity and safety on a high volume facility. Paved shoulders and bike lanes represent the most"bang for our bucks"and hence the quickest way to achieve a continuous grid of bikeways. Many Visions There was a lot of talk about`visions' for trails/bikeways. A metro-wide system of interconnected greenways was exciting. Many pieces are already in place. The`character' of these is would be quite recreational rather that transportational—although some transpor- tational use would occur as well. There were also visions of urban bikeway systems with a grid of connector routes and continuous bicycle arterials. Visual`apparentness' and omnipresence were considered very important. The existing roadway system for motorized vehicles is an excellent model for a bikeways system. Another`vision' compatible with this is a roadway system made generally friendly for biking by virtue of bike lanes,paved shoulders,and wide curblanes or by virtue of low car speeds and volumes. Another`vision' is that of a total transportation system integrating bikeways,bike amenities(bike storage and transport,showers,etc.),buses,light rails,etc. Networking Imperative Organizational issues received a lot of attention. Many speakers underlined the need for networking and/or coalitions. The layers of organizations plus the large number of agencies/advocacy groups at each level make this extremely challenging. The networking is necessary to make each agency's trail programs mesh or connect with that of neighboring areas. Networking is necessary to establish broad plans and attain the broadest possible public support for them. The new federal legislation for funding trails,bikeways,and alternate transportation may provide the greatest incentive of all for getting the various groups together to develop broad plans. The spoils of these legislative measures will go to those who have gotten their act together by having a well-written logical bikeways plan (that is not pie-in-the-sky). Legislative Measures Will Create New Opportunities Federal legislative initiatives pumped a great deal of interest,even excitement,at the conference. It is obvious that this will not provide the facilities each city or county needs. However,where an area clearly establishes priorities and has a project benefitting the largest number of communities and citizens,they should be the clear winners. Connectivity and continuity have been mentioned as major criteria. Hopefully the awarding agencies will be more concerned about the merits of a proposal than about any underlying politics. I 'Happy Trails to You'is a regular insert provided to the members of the Friends of Parks and Trails in St.Paul and Ramsey County. For further information contact Bill Frank at 438 Iona Lane,Roseville,MN 55113,484-5068