Bikeway action plan. Bicycle Friendly Community Workshop March 5, 2007 Rochester, MN

Transcription

1 Bikeway action plan Summary The was held on March 5, 2007 at the Rochester Mayo Civic Center. The workshop was hosted by Rochester-Olmsted County Planning Department in collaboration with the League of American Bicyclists (LAB). As part of its Community Outreach Program, LAB extended the opportunity to Rochester to host one of six Bicycle Friendly Community Workshops throughout the country during The workshop was led by Andy Clarke, Executive Director of the League of American Bicyclists (LAB) and a nationally recognized bicycle advocate. By way of background, in 2006 the LAB awarded the City of Rochester an Honorable Mention designation under the LAB Bicycle-Friendly Community recognition program. The league recognized Rochester s past efforts to develop safe and effective bicycling facilities, and the potential Rochester has to move up to a higher designation with targeted efforts in the area of on-road facilities, education and encouragement. This workshop along with improvements implemented in the last year should help to achieve a higher designation in future. The goal of the workshop was to bring together community leaders and interested citizens to explore how to improve bicycle safety and effectiveness in Rochester. The workshop was well received by local residents, professionals and community leaders. Participants included state, county and city elected officials, land use and transportation planners, bike shopkeepers, bicycle advocates, urban designers, and city and county public works officials. More than 50 individuals participated in the workshop and helped in the preparation of a Preliminary Action Plan that will serve as a guide for short term priorities that will enhance bicycle travel in Rochester. What s good About Rochester Bicycle Facilities? As part of the participants were asked what they found to be positive about bicycling facilities and opportunity in the Rochester Area. The list included the following: Grade separated interchanges with bike facility Rivers bike trails system in Rochester is very high class 1

2 Medium size city with minimum congestion and safe road conditions for bicyclists Bicycle friendly topography Safe city for bicycling activity Very good coordination between responsible agencies for bicycle and pedestrian activities Good number of bike shops in the community Well maintained roads suitable for bicycling Transit system includes bike racks on buses Good enforcement as for as bicycling activity is concerned High level of health awareness among residents Vocal cycle advocates Respectful motorists towards alternative mode of transportation Accessible destinations Strong downtown What s Not So Good The following comments reflected what participants felt were areas where improvement was needed to improve conditions for bicycling in Rochester Workplace infrastructure such as bike storage/lockers, showers is lacking Lack of secure parking and on-street bike parking Lack of bike rental services Some of the most direct routes involved busy streets, such as TH 14 There are gaps in bike network that should be closed Lack of on-street bike lanes Some City street surface is not suitable for biking Unsafe downtown for biking due to on street parallel and angle parking Traffic speed on residential streets Bicyclist presence on the road by motorists More ride family events Mixed use challenges on trails Improved connections with regional trails Signals School bike parking/security Crossing of major streets Bikeability in Rochester The workshop offered a hands-on opportunity to assess bicycle facilities in the downtown area of Rochester. Five locations were selected by local professionals in consultation with the workshop coordinator as representative of the 2

3 challenging issues for bicycling in downtown Rochester identified by participants. The selected locations were: The confluence of the river trail system east of Mayo Civic Center 6 th Street SW and Broadway Avenue area 1 st Street and 1 st Ave SW and the area around the Peace Plaza Streets connecting to the intersections of Broadway with 2 nd and 3 rd Streets SW The area around Methodist Hospital along West Center St and 2 nd St NW The workshop participants were divided into five study groups to examine bikeability, on and off road conditions for bicycling, the effect of on-street parking (both parallel and angle), importance of the study locations to serving key destinations, and the effect of vehicular traffic at each location. Each groups had 45 minutes to inspect and discuss possible improvements at its assigned site. Following the field visit, each group presented their findings to the workshop participants. A summary of findings from each group follows: Group 1: Confluence of River Trails east of Mayo Civic Center The group found the river trails system very attractive for bicyclists. No major concern was identified by the group. However, the group suggested signage improvements for trail users. Group 2: 6 th St SW and Broadway Group 2 surveyed the area including the intersections of 6 th Street SW with Broadway and 1 st Ave SW. It also looked at the suitability of bike facilities along 1 st Ave SW from Soldier s Field to 2 nd Street SW, including the suitability of the corridor for an on-road bike lane facility relative to road appropriateness, existing on-street parking, vehicular through traffic, and importance of the corridor to reaching key destinations. The group found the intersection of Broadway and 6 th Street suitable as a bicycle/pedestrian crossing. On the east side of Broadway there is a pedestrian facility along the west side of Zumbro River that is not designated for use by bicyclists. In order to use the river trail along this section of the Zumbro River, a bicyclist on 6 th St is forced to go south on 1 st Ave SW for a distance of 2 to 3 blocks into Soldier s Field Park in order to access the designated trail for bicyclists on the east side of the river. The group found pedestrian facilities along 1 st Ave and 6 th Street and on both sides of Broadway are good, and felt that 6 th Street is a suitable bike route for an experienced rider. The group concluded that 1 st Ave SW would be a suitable location in the south part of downtown for a bike lane facility because of its width and low traffic 3

4 volume. There are some safety concerns due to the angle parking. It was suggested that parking concern could be addressed by providing back-in headout type parking on 1 st Ave. The group felt that having bike lane facilities along 1 st Ave SW would open up access to many destinations in CBD and could provide a connection from downtown to the river side trail system. It was also suggested that the sidewalk on the west side of 1 st Ave could be considered for shared use because of its width, though further study would be needed to determine if such shared use would pose a serious threat to pedestrian activity. Group 3: 1 st Ave and 1 st Street SW Area The group identified concerns about the lack of bike parking and facilities for bicycling in the Peace Plaza area. The group thought the area provides ample opportunity for pedestrians but is limited for bicyclists because of the current city regulations that restrict bicycle activity on sidewalks or plaza areas in the Central Business District. By making changes in City regulations to allow bicycle activities in plaza or wide sidewalk areas in the CBD, there would be a significant opportunity provided to enjoy the amenity of the Peace Plaza area by the bicycling community. Group 4: Broadway and 2 nd /3 rd Street SW Group 4 looked at the intersections of Broadway with 2nd and 3rd Streets South. They found that Broadway itself is inappropriate for bicyclists due to high traffic volume and the narrow lane widths. However, the group identified that Broadway in this area has very wide sidewalks facilities that possibly could be used to accommodate some level of bicycle traffic in the vicinity of 2 nd and 3 rd St. Bicyclists traveling east or west along 2nd St. approaching the intersection with Broadway do benefit from somewhat wider outside travel lanes, but the area was considered generally unsafe for bicyclists due to high traffic volumes and parking on both sides of 2 nd Street. Although traffic lanes on 2 nd Street are wider, there is not enough room for striped bike lanes. On the west side of 1 st Ave SW along 2 nd St the street frontage is used by the city transit system as a hub area, making 2 nd Street unattractive as a location for bike lanes or to designate 2 nd Street as a bike route. While there are traffic signals on 2 nd Street at both the Broadway and 1 st Ave SW intersections that provide some sense of safety for bicyclists and pedestrians, the group thought that additional pavement markings alerting drivers to the presence of bicycles may be useful to further improve the safety of these intersections The intersection of 3rd St.SW and Broadway is not controlled by traffic signal, which was removed many years ago to improve the traffic flow along Broadway. The neck of the intersection on both sides of 3rd St. has been bulged out to narrow the intersection in an effort to "calm" approaching traffic and reduce the 4

5 crossing distance for pedestrians and reduce accidents. The section of 3rd St. on both sides of Broadway contains a low volume of traffic, but because of the lack of traffic signal at the intersection and the heavy traffic volume on Broadway, the group saw the intersection as an unsafe route for bicyclists and pedestrians at present. It was suggested that a pedestrian controlled traffic signal could be installed to improve safety. The group also identified the diagonal parking along the westbound one-way section of 3rd St. on the west side of Broadway as a problem, which could be improved if the parking were reversed to provide back-in parking. If changes were made to make 3 rd St a more attractive route this could conceivably become a convenient entrance/exit route linking downtown to the bike trail along the Zumbro River; however there may be better locations for this. The group concluded their survey by noting how much easier and more costeffective safe cycle routes are to come by if they are given more priority in the initial development or reconstruction of street corridors.. Sadly and needless to say, this is not the case in our auto-centric way of building things; and this is a part of our problem in so many ways. Group 5: West Center Street and 2 nd Street NW Group 5 visited the area south and north of Methodist Hospital. The group felt that 2 nd Street NW is suitable for a bike lane facility because of its width, low traffic volume and very few conflict points. West Center Street has less suitability for an on-street bike lane facility. While 2 nd Street NW was felt to be suitable for bicyclists, pedestrian crossing is difficult and poses some threats. West Center Street provides safer pedestrian crossing compare to 2 nd Street NW. On-street parallel parking poses a threat to the bicyclists on both West Center Street and 2 nd Street NW. However, the on-street parking impact on 2 nd street NW is less than the West Center Street. The destinations from the Methodist Building are Mayo Buildings in the Central Business District, Central Park, Starbucks, Soldier s Field Park and river trails. Both 2 nd and West Center Streets provide ample pedestrian facilities. Ability to change Behaviors The workshop coordinator shared the Portland case study with workshop participants as an example of changes that can occur when there is commitment to improving non-motorized travel. For example, daily bicycle traffic in downtown Portland has grew from 2,855 daily trips to 10,192 trips between 1991 and There were annual increases in bike traffic ranging from 25% to 257% while the growth in auto traffic was essentially unchanged during the same time period. Portland s populations is 530,000, and according to the most recent Census 1.6% to trips to work are made on bicycles. They have built 260 miles of bicycle 5

6 trails and lanes, and bicycling as a mode of transportation to work doubled between 1990 and 2000 according to the Census. Rochester is not Portland but has a great potential to improve and enhance bicycle utilization. Some facts about Rochester that suggest opportunities to attract additional bicycle or pedestrian travel if safe and attractive facilities are provided include: 22% of Olmsted County residents are under 15 (driver permit age) 11% of Olmsted County residents are 65 and older 7% of Olmsted County households lack a motor vehicle 11% of minority households lack a motor vehicle 4,340 adults have sensory or physical disabilities that may affect their ability to drive 75% of the existing housing units in Rochester are within ½ mile of a shopping center or neighborhood commercial use 99% of existing housing units in Rochester are within ½ mile of an active use park or playground 87% of existing housing units are within ¼ mile of a regular service transit route Bikeway Action Plan The strength of Rochester lies within its recently adopted Long Range Bikeway Plan. The plan has included a range of implementation strategies on education, engineering, enforcement, and encouragement. During the workshop, a Bicycle Action Plan was developed by the participants that if implemented will help to make Rochester more bicycle-friendly in the future. The priority ideas proposed by the workshop participants included: Improved Signage and more Bicycle Parking Signage identifying appropriate routes for bicycling and designated local loops should be provided More parking for bikes needed at various popular destinations. Addressing the angle parking issues in the downtown area to accommodate bike lane facilities Think Bike in New Development Projects Monitor new development to insure barriers to expanding the system are not created and to identify opportunities to improve the system Traffic calming in downtown for bicycling safety Keep expanding network of bike lanes and trails 6

7 Public education to promote share the road messages BFC Workshop Follow-Up Meeting March 24 th forum should be the first of an ongoing effort to reach out to the public to promote greater use of bike as mode of transportation Utilize forums and other ideas such as surveys to gather more ideas from the public who could not attend the BFC workshop on how to make Rochester a more bicycle-friendly community. 1 st Ave Access Study The workshop recommended preparation of a study to accommodate bicycle and pedestrian facilities on 1 st Ave north of Soldier s Field Park. The scope of study should include the following: Address the issue of connectivity of the river trail system with the downtown area via 1 st Avenue SW Examine engineering solutions to address barriers to the creation of bike lanes on both sides of the road, such as changing the existing angle parking to a back-in / head out parking arrangement. Examine what additional improvements beyond 1 st Ave would be needed to make it a key link to major destinations in the downtown and how it could be connected to the trail system along Cascade Creek and in Kutzky Park Neighborhood. Intersection Improvements Examine engineering solutions for bicycle and pedestrian friendly intersections Look at modifying traffic signals allowing bicycle phasing Promotion and Encouragement Identify possible hosts or promoters for local rides and events targeted to teaching bicycling skills Work to develop facilities that would accommodate loop rides Work with local hotels to provide bikes to their guests Identify and encourage Bike rental businesses Underwrite and promote cycling skills classes Institutionalize Safe Routes to School planning and implementation 7