Results from the District 1 Community Workshop
Summary
The District 1 Statewide Bicycle Planning Study Community Workshop was held at the the 1123 Mesaba Ave, Duluth, 55811 from 4-6 PM on March 15, 2012. Approximately 20 people participated in the workshop.
Findings
Workshop participants completed a S.W.O.T. (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats) analysis of bicycling facilities in our State. Following the S.W.O.T. analysis, participants worked in small groups to organize their responses in themed categories. The themes were prioritized by the participants, unless otherwise noted, with theme prioritized as #1 being the most important.Strengths
Theme (noted as Priority #1): Many Trails Already Great Trails
- MN support for trails in all forms. Funding, by way of fed, state, DNR and local
- Trail development between communities in my county (Masabi Trail)
- City-led development of cross-Duluth on and off road trails
- Snow removal along Duluth’s lakewalk is generally prompt and thorough Extended recreational trails: Gitchi-Gummi, Mesabi, Sunrise, Prairie, Hardwood
- Minnesota has many miles of paved bike trails
- Lots of local bike trails
- Lots of statewide long-distance rails-to-trails bike trails
- Excellent trail system in Twin Cities
- Trails are being made that are scenic/paved/safe
- Trails are being made
Theme (noted as Priority #2): Active Planning
- Focus on connectivity of trails: statewide and across cities
- Planning
- Bicyclists are currently recognized as a “vehicle” under state statute thereby allowing them to operate on most roads
- There is recognition that trails need to serve both recreation and transit, and the routes to serve these purposes are often different
- Progressive, central office supports bicycling
- Currently trying and working cooperatively with multiple government entities to provide multi-agency projects, example Hwy with bike trail
Theme (noted as Priority #3): Good Attitude
- Childhood education on biking
- Fairly supportive political environment
- There is great enthusiasm for non-motorized transportation in Duluth
- It is healthy
- Going in the right direction
- Strong bicycling culture in urban to metro area
- MDH and MnDOT working together/SRTS
- Plenty of local bike shops and clubs
Growing # of bike owners - Lots of national press
Theme (unranked by participants): Strong Education
- Safety as areas are built or maintained – safety is upgraded
- Many decent paved roads with adequate shoulders or low traffic
- Shoulders on roads not directly going through towns
- Many newly developed or maintained roads/bridges are taking bicycling into consideration
- MnDOT roads generally much easier to travel by bike than comparable WI roads
Theme (unranked by participants): Beautiful Area
- Room/space/property is available – room to grow
- MN landscape
Weaknesses
Theme (noted as Priority #1): Policies/Guidelines/Standards Not Bicycle Friendly
- Policy contradiction with redesign funding and promoting bike lanes. Ex: Woodland Ave
- Very strict state-aid rules reduces flexibilities
- 4 lanes – no flexibility on projects, eg. Woodland Ave
- Inadequate enforcement of traffic laws – vehicles cutting off cycles, too close
- Disconnect between highway design engineers and bicycle advocates. Note: Miller Hill Mall and I-35 construction in Duluth – no accommodations for bicyclists
- State-aid standards often are anti-bike
- Bike map useless – inaccurate, outdated, insufficient information
- Rumble strips cutting into shoulders
- Old guard (MnDOT staff) who do not support or consider bicycling as a legitimate mode of transportation
- 12” foot lanes
- 4 lane roads
- There is a lack of policies to accommodate/encourage active living
- As a traffic engineer, there are hard engineering realities not considered by complete streets design
- Parking for bicycling guides
- New developments often do not include shoulders or sidewalks
Theme (noted as Priority #2): Funding
- Tire and tube tax for trails
- Takes lots of money to build a bike trail
- Lack of funding
- Inadequate funding for ped-bike
Theme (noted as Priority #3): Inadequate Infrastructure
- Trail lighting
- Many of most obvious E-W routes in Duluth are difficult to travel by bike
- Need more trails especially in outstate urban areas
- Many miles of paved bike trail remain unconstructed and disjointed and funding is tight
- Lack of connectivity between existing trails and bikeways
- Crossing major roads that run through communities
Funding to implement plans - Maintenance of trails
- Conditions of roads in Duluth area are poor in some areas – bad for biking
- Need trails around shopping malls
- With some exceptions (ie. commuters from Lakeside-Duluth) bike commuting in Duluth limited to young and/or strong
- Major highways going through communities do not accommodate bicycles
- Maintenance on existing facilities
- Trail lighting
Theme (unranked by participants): Inadequate Education
- Attitude of general public. Biking is not a mainstream form of transportation. Public does not support biking
- Inadequate education about how to ride a bike safely – “wear a helmet” doesn’t cut it!
- Drivers are rude/dangerous to bike riders
- Public perception that bicyclists don’t belong on the roads – share the roads
- Adult education specifically for new riders
- Respect of other transportation users
- Inadequate education for drivers about rights of bicycles
Theme (unranked by participants): Inadequate Enforcement
- Inadequate enforcement of laws – bicyclists running red lights, etc
- Some highway engineers still have a culture of treating bicycle facilities as an annoyance
Theme (unranked by participants): Geography/Distance
- Lack of space for bike facilities in public spaces (ROW limited)
- Increasing sprawl and unfriendly road network in suburban areas
- Too many gaps in road network – barriers to cycling due to unsafe conditions on one segment, eg. Hwy 61
- Large areas of maintenance and upkeep
Theme (unranked by participants): Mapping
- Lack of community involvement/support
- Mapping = not all users are internet people
- The interface between urban/local systems and regional systems
- Marketing
Opportunities
Theme (noted as Priority #1): Systems Change Within MnDOT
- Take advantage of existing development, construct and overlay projects
- Vision is key – easier to get support with a plan
- Better integration of all modes throughout MnDOT
- Standardizing the engineering of bike trails
- Integrate SRTS/active transportation into RDC/MnDOT yearly program contracts
- Improve road conditions on main bike routes
- Incorporate bike pathways when ever new rd way reconstruct occurs
- Limited resources in the future means we can not just build our ways out of our problems, allows for more create solutions
- Include bicycle accommodation on all major road construction projects: ensure no degradation of current access. ie: Munger Trail extension in Lincoln Park at 27th Ave W
Theme (noted as Priority #2): Network/Collaboration
- Tap into grassroots movement towards biking/active living and accompanied funding streams
- The public is supportive of paved trails and signed routes – especially empty nesters
- Work with other state agencies, counties, cities, MPOs, RDCs on data development
- We can easily convert 1 lane on every interstate to bicycle only
- Bicycle advocates must listen to the professional opinions of traffic engineers – collaboration
- Developing a web based bicycle mapping application
- Cooperative opportunities with LUG and other agencies/associations: a) funding; b) planning; c) maintenance; d) trail adoption
- Early engagement of LUG on planning resurfacing/construction project so bike/ped facilities are included
- Existing rail road ROW that are set aside. These need to be protected from development for non-transportation uses
- Partnering with numerous MN groups: GMRPTC, DNR, counties, cities, any associations
Theme (noted as Priority #2.5): Outreach/Education
- Active living has support and is a growing movement
- Bring forth these ideas into the schools and have the children be active in planning sessions
- Educate public on benefits of bike transportation
- Communicate clear guidance on what activities are allowed/can fit where
Theme (noted as Priority #3): Funding
- Raise revenue for bike projects through bike tags/plates
- Policy: require that any roadway that receives state/fed funds must make some accommodation for bikes
Theme (noted as Priority #4): Amenity/Facilities
- Younger generation interested in more than cars
- Trail lighting
- Plan now so we are all positioned for land acquisition and construction when funds allow
- Connect to park amenities
- Covered bike parking and bike-specific amenities
- Advocate property benefits of bike facilities
- Development – commercial, retail, residential along trail corridors
- Meeting user needs: trail heads, water, bathrooms, etc. planning multi-agency facilities
- Amenities adjacent to trails and distances to them
- Public art plaza space municipal/city centers
- Promotion of the existing facilities
Theme (noted as Priority #4.5): Trail expansion
- Finish Gitchi Gami Trail on N. Shore Lake Superior
- Support for expansion of trail systems continues
- Trail systems, local tourism – build on it!
Theme (noted as Priority #5): Specifics [Ungrouped]
- Have info on “bike map” be printable – pdf – not electronic only
- Bike share programs
- Aiming toward the best system in the country
Threats
Theme (noted as Priority #1): Policy
- Developing a statewide policy that works at a local level
- Use of designated (paved) bike trails by snowmobilers and 4 wheelers
- Funding cuts to scenic byways and paved trails are looming
- Planning and bicycle studies written without engineering involvement
- State-aid standards used against the possible accommodation of bikes on any facility
- Fragmented planning process between towns/counties/state
- Most MnDOT engineers come from UofM: there is a lack of focus on any transportation engineering programs not directly related to highways
- Project phasing: phase projects in such a way that they must be completed
Theme (noted as Priority #2): Public Opinion
- Belief that bicycling is only for recreation
- Private property owners who won’t cooperate
- Public may not support some biking initiatives
- Public and political backlash against bicycling
- Homeowner opposition to trail facilities
- Peoples opinions on transportation
- Adjacent land-owners are strongly critical of new paved trails
- Attitude of public that roads should be for cars and public money should not be spent for bike trails
Theme (noted as Priority #3): $
- State of the economy
- Many cities are cash strapped and can’t afford to add bike lanes and improve roads
- Road entities are against adding shoulders or bike lanes due to $ or public outcry
- Funds for paved shoulders
- Funding – where will it come from?
- Funding challenge
- The need to mitigate wetlands: costs $, takes time, “throws the plan for a loop”
- It’s considered too costly (by engineers/ politicians) to make some bike accommodation
- Funding
- Cuts in funding on national and state levels
- Reductions in federal support for non-motorized transit
- Funding
Theme (noted as Priority #4): Communication
- User interface: must be simplistic/minimal
- Lack of communication between local/state projects
- Support for biking but various groups aren’t “one” – fragmented, and working on separate items
- Theme (noted as Priority #5): Maintenance
- Data management and maintenance
- Maintenance issues
- Maintenance for trails
Additional comments may also be provided to Greta Alquist through March 30, 2012.