Roadways and Sidewalks Subcommittee Meeting
September 13, 2006
Present: Rob Christensen, Ted Curtis (Public Works), Trevor Harris, Jack Jenson, John Riddick (co-chair), Robert Ross (Communications), Steve Saitta (Parks and Rec), Frederick Schmidt, Richard Stone (Public Works), Ian Thomas (co-chair).
Absent: Christi Hopper, Robert Johnson, Kristina Kaylen, Rachel Kaufman, Amanda Perry, Mark Stone, Mark Virkler.
Opening/Minutes: At 3:40 pm the meeting began. Ted Curtis, the city’s senior planner for nonmotorized transportation, introduced himself. He has a background in aerospace engineering and ran TrailNet in St Louis, the largest organization of its kind in the nation.
The minutes of the July and August meetings were approved.
Intersection Reports (Trevor Harris): Mr. Harris presented his report on the subcommittee’s tour of intersections. It is broken into 3 separate reports. Mr. Ross has posted these to the city’s web site for the committee. Mr. Harris noted that not all of the intersections are on the list of 7 for which proposals are being solicited. Several members felt that money might not be well spent on an intersection that is slated for improvement. Mr. Stone said that that isn’t necessarily a problem – they can do “phased improvements” in some cases. Also, if improvements to an intersection are six or seven years away, it may still be worth it to make some improvements now. Some improvements, such as installing ped heads and painting crosswalks, can be done relatively quickly and cheaply.
Mr. Curtis said that the reports will be useful to identify priorities and help refine the process. There was then some discussion of general design guidelines. Mr. Curtis said the FHWA has a 3-day course on bicycle-pedestrian that they could come to Columbia to teach, and if there is interest he would look into it.
A discussion of the process of spending federal money ensued. (Projects must be approved by CATSO, and approval can take time). Mr. Thomas asked how the other pilot cities have faced this. Mr. Riddick said he had just spoken to city officials in Minneapolis. In their case, since the city did not get the money, the various municipal governments must apply to the non-profit. The Minneapolis people were hoping that much of the money would come into the city government. Mr. Harris said he had spoken with people from Marin County that he had met in Amsterdam. His understanding was that they would spend the bulk of their pilot money on a single project, a trail in an abandoned rail corridor that would serve a large portion of the county’s population.
Mr. Thomas suggested that the subcommittee members review the reports for the next meeting.
Mr. Stone said that the system is live, at:
http://www.gocolumbiamo.com/PedNet_Project/nonmotorized-concerns.php
He said the concerns that have been reported to date come from a variety of people. Mr. Curtis heard about the initial surveys that PedNet had done. It was agreed that the surveys could be reviewed and the specific concerns extracted and entered as concerns. There was consensus that this should be done by staff or volunteers rather than ask the survey respondents to do it. The respondents would then be notified that their data was incorporated. Mr. Schmidt said it would be nice to do something with the actual route data. This was discussed a little bit.
Bike Racks: Mr. Riddick circulated a report summarizing what he has learned about other cities’ programs (attached, Appendix). He said they could be business or residential, and that most cities only paid when the land was private if there was public access. Mr. Curtis said that racks and parking absolutely need to get done, that Columbia needs to move ahead. His concern about a reimbursement program is the time it takes to negotiate and discuss cost sharing arrangements. The cost is quite minimal, he said, noting Minneapolis’ $40,000 per year, and the city could just pay for them. Mr. Saitta said that benche3s are a big issue, and he was also involved in a 1980’s plan to install bike racks downtown. Many of those racks are gone, having lived their 20 year expected life. The city has been replacing them with the new ones that have the U shaped bar welded to a tube that slips over parking meter shafts. He said there has been lots of back and forth over the benches—they are wanted, then people want them moved, etc. He said that regardless of how a bike rack plan worked, it would surely have to go through the SBD people. Several committee members felt that the sharing, while burdensome, is useful because it involves the property owner or tenant. Mr. Riddick mentioned some other benefits of having a program. The city works ith a list of approved vendors, giving some control and standardization (continuity). He said that New York City is looking at requiring indoor parking (inside buildings). Mr. Saitta inquired about racks in the city garages. Mr. Schmidt said that they are either adequate, or else there is some yellow striped area where you can park. While not elegant, it’s pretty good.
There was some discussion of whether a program should apply to new businesses/properties in addition to existing. Some felt yes, others no.
Several noted that the problem is how to encourage businesses to build usable parking. Mr. Schmidt circulated photos of bike racks behind the Macy’s (the Famous Barr) on Ash Street—the racks are at the farthest corner of the parking lot, quite a few minutes walk from any entrance. Mr. Stone went through the problems of plans being reviewed and then the work being reviewed to ensure that it followed the plans. He felt it should be Parking Inspection. Mr. Riddick mentioned another problem with strict numerical quotas—Sam’s Club has 200 bike parking spaces, but since they sell in bulk few bicyclists will shop at Sam’s. The packages are too large to manage on a bicycle!
Mr. Schmidt noted that council referred a review of the bike parking requirements to the bike/ped commission, which will review it on the 20th. The committee agreed to wait for their review.
Tour of Public Works Operations Facilities: Mr. Stone described the proposed meeting as informal discussion rather than presentations. He said it would be good to talk to the operations people, so that the committee could gain an understanding of how they work, and so that they could gain a better understanding of bike/ped issues. The meeting was set for Sept 20 at 2:00.
Parking is limited, he said, so he encouraged travel by bike or on foot, or car pooling.
Mr. Stone said that as many people as want to, should come to the meeting. We should let interested people know.
Agenda Builder: Items for future meetings were discussed.
• Intersection Reports
• Overall Planning for the project
Closing: At 4:55 the committee adjourned.
Future meetings are:
• Sept 20 2006 – 2:00 pm – Tour of PW Operations, Grissum Building (1313 Lakeview, behind Bus Loop 70 near intersection with College Ave.)
• October 11 2006 3:30pm – regular meeting, regular place (4th floor conference room)
Appendix
Bike Rack Cost Sharing Programs: Minneapolis has a bike rack sharing program through which the City picks up 50% of the cost of bike racks installed -on private- property-but-are accessible to the public. A business wishing to install racks contacts the City and receives advance approval. The business then purchases the Rack from an authorized back rack vendor and pays its 50% share. The vendor bills the City for the balance. The share includes installation of the rack if needed. Many racks are installed by the purchaser.
Total cost to the City is approximately $40,000 per year.
The City's web site cites the 2000 census that Minneapolis ranks third nationally for the number of bicycle commuters behind Tucson and San Francisco. It is interesting to note that both Tucson and San Francisco have significant natural barriers to bicycle commuting. Daytime temperatures during the Spring, Summer, and Fall in Tucson are frequently well hi excess of 100 degrees during the day. San Francisco, of course, has very hilly terrain. It is encouraging that these two cities rank so high in bicycle commuting.
In addition to the racks, Minneapolis has an extensive bicycle infrastructure. According to documents found on the City's web-site, Minneapolis had over 54 miles of off-street trails, 26 miles of on-street bike lanes and plans for an additional 19 miles of off-street trails and 25 mails of additional on-street lanes.
The city of Calgary in Canada also has a rack sharing program which reduces the cost of racks of private land by 50%.
Many cities have rack programs through which the City will pay 100% of the cost of installing racks on public property at the request of citizens including Seattle, Boulder, Houston, Olympia, WA.
Houston, Seattle, Boulder, Olympia and many other cities promote bicycle commuting through web sites. Houston lists organizations that have bike racks for public use.
Meeting Minutes
September 13, 2006
