The Complete Streets bill is made up of H.F. 2801 and S.F. 2461.

Per the bills – and general definition of Complete Streets from a national policy perspective – Complete Streets considers the needs of all users moving along and across roads, intersections, and crossings in a manner that is sensitive to the local context and recognizes that the needs vary in urban, suburban, and rural settings.

In the case of Minnesota’s Complete Streets legislation, Complete Streets applies to every road construction, reconstruction, or rehabilitation project funded partially or completely by the state.

Federal bills to create similar consideration for federally-funded road projects is still pending as S. 584 and H.R. 1443. Minnesota’s Senators – Amy Klobuchar and Al Franken – have both signed on to S. 584 as co-sponsors. H.R. 1443 is currently co-sponsored by Reps. Keith Ellison (MN-5) and Tim Walz (MN-1). Minnesota’s other Congressional representatives have not yet signed on as co-sponsors. While this is not necessarily a sign that they do not support the legislation, if you live in Districts 2, 3, 4, or 6, consider writing a letter of support to your Congressperson.

If you want to speak out for or against various plans surrounding cycling in the Twin Cities, a few more opportunities are upcoming:

• Public Hearing for Bryant Avenue S Bicycle Boulevard (Minneapolis) – This will be happening on February 9 at Bryant Square Park in Minneapolis. The plan is to connect the Loring bike path on the north and 58th Street on the south. Some of the boulevard will be via bike lane sharrow markings.

• Public Hearing for 5th Street NE Bicycle Boulevard (Minneapolis) – This will be happening on February 10th in NE Minneapolis. The plan is to connect the University Avenue bike path on the north and the 5th Street Pedestrian Bridge over I-35W on the south. Some of the routing will be via bike lane sharrow markings.
• Feedback for Highway 96 Resurfacing Plan – Feedback is ongoing for the plan to resurface Highway 96 next summer. After recent hearings, the current plan will stripe lanes at 11′ (standard lane width is 12′) to provide additional paved shoulder width for bike and peds – but only if support can be gained from the communities of Dell, Grant, and Stillwater Township. Dellwood has formally objected at this point, so advocates are asking citizens of the three communities in favor to contact their city councils in support.

Winter is the big time for these meetings, as plans need to be solidified in time for road construction season. Cyclists should come to meetings to learn about plans and advocate for or against, depending on their feelings about each.

The committee is urging the project to include provision to widen the shoulder to approximately 5ft (current is 2-3ft) and reduce the drive lane to 10.5ft (currently 12 ft).

MNDOT is scheduled to present their design plan on Monday, January 11, during a meeting at 7:00pm at White Bear Lake City Hall in downtown White Bear Lake.

MNDOT is a state agency, and thus highly influenced by a show of support for a plan or suggestion. The White Bear Lake Bike/Walk Committee is asking as many cyclists as are able show for the event. Once the design is final, the lane configuration on Highway 96 is unlikely to change for another 10 years!

• A curve and downhill leads up to the tunnel.
• Prior accidents have occurred in or near the tunnel, although they have not necessarily been well-tracked by Three Rivers Park District.
• Kids like to play in the tunnel.
• The lane has a dashed line, not a solid, which suggests to people that using either lane is ok.

The issues with the sight lines leading to the tunnel is almost undoubtedly an engineering issue. But issues like kids playing in the tunnel on a bike path, and the discussion of making the lane line solid not dashed so people know to stay in the lane? Those aren’t engineering issues. I would argue those to be inherent issues of bicycle paths. People should KNOW to stay in their lane and use caution if needing to go around someone in their lane – this is just common sense. And of course kids like to play in tunnels. Tunnels are FUN. I suspect all the signage in the world isn’t going to change that tendency – or cause parents to police their kids much better.

I’ve said it 3.2 billion times: People want to act as those bicycle trails conform to different traffic rules than roads – and they do, in the sense that there are likely to be MORE hazards, rather than fewer. Lane placement and visibility remain key, as does bicycle control.

Knowing what I do of legal issues, I smell an upcoming lawsuit for facility deficiency leading to wrongful death, due to the engineering issues. But the bulk of issues identified in the Star-Tribune article aren’t engineering issues – they’re just reality.

MPR focuses on the helmets, but this really isn’t about helmets. Even the most strident and yelping helmet advocate will admit (if forced) that helmets are not magical. They help, certainly, in the event of impact, but they’re still plastic and styrofoam.

A more important factor in this accident, I think, is that one rider came out of their lane while turning, creating the head-on situation. Head-on crashes – whether cars or bikes or anything else – have greater consequences than rear-end collisions, because both objects have momentum towards each other. This is elementary physics.

I don’t know this tunnel well, and don’t know if there’s really design flaw or if it was user error. Following rules of lane usage – on roads and on trails – is really critical for the safety of all users of a throughway.

My sympathy goes out to the family of the victim, as well as to the other rider involved.

• Motorists trying to leave fireworks tend to be cranky about the traffic.

• The Stone Arch Bridge is closed to bicycles during the fireworks and after.
• Traffic patterns and bicycle routing near Harriet Island in St. Paul will be odd, and they usually close part of the river path for fireworks.

Get some friends and go down to the Big Rivers Trail near the confluence, sez me. You can watch fireworks from about 6 shows there, and it’s quieter for the escape.

I really don’t have anything in for Edina. The articles covering their attempts to try to be bicycle-friendly just make it so easy.

Apparently, a bike lane is more detrimental to property values than a lot of on-street parking in front of a home:

“I just don’t know how anyone can justify having a bike trail in my front yard as an asset to my home,” she said.

Of course, as we might expect, there’s so much more to quibble about:

The street is so busy that residents sometimes have trouble backing out of their driveways.

In that case, on-street parking is likely to block the view when backing out more than a bike lane. Also, if the lane is supposed to be great encouragement to cyclists, the traffic flow of the street is likely to discourage that right back down.

The goal of most of the proposed improvements to W. 70th is to calm traffic and have it move at a more appropriate pace. Surely that helps beautify a street and improve living conditions?

As I’ve said in the past, I think the idea that bike lanes automagically create bicycle-friendliness is wrong. All you have to do is read some of the quotes of the Edina people in the articles to prove my point.

This year? The only part of the sidepaths I’ve seen plowed appear to have been cleared by neighboring property owners.

My suspicion, which I have yet to confirm, is this is one way to help deal with budget shortfalls and an anticipated drop in state aid to communities.

Given that Minneapolis is doomed to be especially impacted by the drop in state aid, I wonder if we’re looking at the end of the regular clearance of commuter byways such as the Midtown Greenway?

I’ve found that the city police (both Minneapolis and Saint Paul) are very aware of the traffic rules as they apply to cyclists. When cleaning up an accident on Summit Avenue once, I had a Saint Paul police officer lament the poorly designed bike lane (which was a direct contributor to the injury accident in question; I was not the accident victim but a witness).

If only some of the suburban departments would learn from them. But that’s a different lament for another day.