CDOT just adopted what is basically Complete Streets policy.  How relevant, considering they’re our neighbor, and that a Complete Streets Resolution is set for tomorrow night’s City Council agenda. If Complete Streets are important to you in Topeka, please call the city clerk’s office 368-3940 by 5 p.m. Tuesday, November 24 to sign up to speak for item 7B. Then, ride your bike to the city council meeting, and carry your helmet in with you.

Republished from BikeDenver.org

(Courtesy Alliance for Biking and Walking) – October 30, 2009

After more than two years of meetings and drafting language, Bicycle Colorado announced that the Colorado Department of Transportation’s (CDOT) Transportation Commission has adopted a groundbreaking statewide Bicycle and Pedestrian Policy.

According to Bicycle Colorado, “The new policy directs that, ‘…the needs of bicyclists and pedestrians shall be included in the planning, design, and operation of transportation facilities, as a matter of routine…’

Division of Transportation Development Director Jennifer Finch stated, ‘This is a change in philosophy for the Department [of Transportation].’

The policy was moved by Commissioner George Krawzoff and seconded by Commissioner Steve Parker, leading to unanimous votes of support from all 11 commissioners.

Praise for CDOT’s Bicycle and Pedestrian Coordinator Betsy Jacobson’s diligent work on the policy was heard from Bicycle Colorado, Ms. Finch, and the Commissioners. Bicycle Colorado’s Executive Director Dan Grunig said, ‘We have passed positive bicycle legislation and overturned bike bans, but passing this policy may be the biggest step we’ve taken towards bicyclists being treated as legitimate road users.’

TWO YEAR PROCESS

Bicycle Colorado worked with CDOT for a number of years encouraging a formal bicycle and pedestrian policy. The Commission instructed CDOT staff in 2007 to begin evaluating its bicycle and pedestrian policies and practices. They convened a series of stakeholder meetings to determine areas to be addressed in policy and procedures. The resulting policy is a product of the input of all the stakeholders representing other state departments, local governments, and user groups. CDOT staff did a thorough job, gathering input from all their internal departments and divisions throughout the process.

NEXT STEPS

Adoption of this policy is a big step but there is still work to do. Implementation is the key to the policy’s success. Executive Director Russ George and the Executive Management Team will issue a Procedural Directive in the next couple of months detailing implementation plans.

The Directive will guide CDOT departments on how to incorporate bicyclist and pedestrian needs into road design, maintenance, transportation planning, education, etc. It will also detail the circumstances when projects may opt out of the policy and how that decision will be made available to the public. Bicycle Colorado will continue to participate in the process to ensure positive results for bicyclists.

Read the story on the Alliance for Biking and Walking website here.

Read the policy here

One of the biggest stumbling blocks we run across in Topeka (and everywhere else) when trying to convince council members and other decision makers to embrace more bike-friendly roadways is the dreaded money question.  ”That’s all well and good, but how do we pay for it?”

Even in Portland, Oregon, a city where one cannot swing a dead cat without hitting a cyclist (or three), the same concerns dominate the discussion.  However, there are some great resources to consider, and to bring to the attention of lawmakers when having this conversation.  The following is a post which originally appeared on portlandtransport.com directing advocates for cyclist friendly streets towards some excellent strategies to bring to the table when it comes time to address the money question:

As the “Portland Bicycle Plan for 2030″ moves toward City Council adoption, the question that moves front and center is “how do we pay for it?”

The estimated price tag runs into hundreds of millions of dollars over 20 years – but is still small in comparison to our other transportation investments. In a discussion on Bike Portland, editor Jonathan Maus lamented that

“… this is about a game of politics and money and so far it looks like bike people are simply being outplayed… which is too bad because we all agree bikes are the best investment and they have the most beneficial impact on our city.”

I do agree that bikes have the greatest potential to reshape our transportation landscape at the lowest cost – and have vocally said so as the plan moved through the Planning Commission, even to the point of saying that I would give priority to bicycle funding over Streetcar funding (but I also believe that they will very seldom be in direct competition).

So if we need to play a better game, what are the lessons we can take from Streetcar and other transportation initiatives that have been successful in attracting funding?

Here are some thoughts gleaned from what I’ve observed over the last decade advocating for a variety of transportation projects:

Federalize the Effort

Roads and Transit have dedicated federal funding from the Highway Trust Fund (gas taxes are the primary source of these funds, but Congress is now getting into the habit of supplementing this with general revenues as gas tax buying power declines).

This is a critical factor, because elected leaders will quite rationally invest local dollars where they will leverage new money into the community. If $40 of local funds will bring in $60 of “New Starts” federal money for Light Rail, guess how hard leaders will work to find that $40.

Where is the advocacy for a Federal bike funding program? None existed for Streetcar, so we helped create a national Community Streetcar Coalition (former Lake Oswego Mayor Judie Hammerstad chairs it) with over 60 cities looking at streetcar investments advocating for federal involvement. This resulted in the creation of the “Small Starts” program from which Portland just received $75M for the Streetcar Loop project – the first Federal Transit Administration Streetcar grant.

For cycling, we won’t need to invent a national advocacy organization – the League of American Cyclists has existed for more than a century. Portland advocates need to get busy with the League to plot a congressional strategy for a dedicated funding program for bicycle infrastructure. Then let’s get our projects in at the front of the line.

[BTW - why is there no one from the USA's premiere cycling city on the board of the League?]

There’s an interesting immediate opportunity emerging here. Transit projects have previously been allowed to use Federal funds for bike and pedestrian improvements that help get folks to the transit line, but those improvements had to be relatively close to the transit line. Now, under the auspices of the joint urban livability effort between HUD and the US DOT, the definition is being expanded. According to a proposal in the Federal Register (PDF, 59K), FTA is seeking comment on extending the ‘catchment area’ distances to one half mile for pedestrian improvements and 3 miles for bicycle improvements.

How much of Portland’s proposed bicycle network is within 3 miles of proposed high capacity transit corridors? A lot. Portland advocates should:

1. Immediately comment favorably on the FTA proposal. (I have)
2. Get out their compasses and figure out the 3-mile envelope around the Milwaukie LRT and Lake Oswego Streetcar corridors (the next two projects that will seek FTA funding). Let’s try to get all the improvements in those areas matched 60/40. Yes, you’ll have to convince TriMet and others to expand the project definitions and help assemble more local match, but as I said before, local leaders are all about bringing home more Federal dollars.

Regionalize the Effort

The history of transportation funding in this region suggests that Portland-specific efforts are always met with a degree of skepticism at JPACT. Projects that reach all parts of the region do better.

It’s not a random occurrence that the most recent Light Rail project, and the next one, both touch Clackamas County – it’s “their turn”. It’s also not coincidental that the next Streetcar line in the pipeline will go to Lake Oswego.

Portland advocates need to work with the rest of the regional and get cycling projects moving all over the region. Metro’s Intertwine effort is an ideal framework for this.

This will also help with the Federal effort. JPACT travels back to DC and speaks with one voice to the Congressional delegation, and that voice better talk about bikes if we want to be successful in creating a significant Federal funding program.

Localize the Effort

Every successful rail transit project has a local stakeholder committee, including prominent representation from businesses along the alignment. We are beginning to see this kind of advocacy around major trail projects (Sullivan’s Gulch, North Portland Greenway) but we need to deepen this and get it going for more projects – probably in ways that are less about linear corridors and more about local networks. Can we get a stakeholder group formed for strengthening the bike network in a whole neighborhood or sector of a the City?

And we MUST make the connection between good cycling environments and property values. Local Improvement Districts (where property owners levy a fee on themselves to pay for a portion of the project) are the cornerstones of Streetcar project funding. We need to get an economist hired to do a serious study correlating bike traffic volumes with property values NOW.

What Else?

Watch the evolving landscape. Some kind of carbon cap-and-trade system is in our future. Let’s position bike projects as effective investments for offsets. Transit leaders are already thinking about this.

Lottery Funds. TriMet has successfully lobbied to use bonding capacity from the State Lottery to fund first the West Side extension and now the Milwaukie line. The Governor and Legislature have also allocated $100M of Lottery bonding capacity to non-road transportation (”Connect Oregon”) in each of the last two sessions. Can we convince the Legislature to use some Lottery bonding for bike projects?

Think about how we sell this to the public. I made the comment during the Planning Commission work session that my family pays (happily) about $250/year for the library levy. That helps fund about a $50M annual budget (for the whole county). We need about $25M (for Portland) annually to build out the bicycle plan. If citizens will vote to fund the library, how do we convince them to vote to fund cycling at a comparable level?

So what are we waiting for?

Indeed.

Reprinted from SFGate

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/04/14/MNGB6P8R1U1.DTL#ixzz0NzoEjjPF

Join CRITICAL MASS for a fun monthly ride that tours some of the local art openings in Topeka. It’s way more fun on a bike!

Meet at the Boobie Trap Bar parking lot at 6th and Washburn at 6pm, and we’ll decide a route from there.

Check it out on Facebook

And every Friday from here on out – if there’s not an event on Facebook, that doesn’t mean there’s not a ride.  Let’s make it a habit.  See you tonight!

Join us on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=220630500236

On Tuesday, July 7th, the Topeka City Council voted 5-3 to approve $15,000 to provide the city’s part of a $75,000 expenditure to hire a consultant to create a citywide biking master plan. The mayor then vetoed the expenditure calling the expenditure “unnecessary.” To override the veto requires 6 votes and seems unlikely as the only council member absent, John Alcala, indicated he was against the measure, saying the expenditure was not budgeted and that it would be irresponsible to approve the expense.

Let’s look at some of the facts: Topeka’s Heartland Visioning plan calls for the development of bike paths and trails in Topeka — so, support of Topekans is well-established. The major says he supports the Visioning process, but argues that the city personnel can do the study. Ok, Mr. Mayor, please tell us who on the staff is going to do it! Who has the extra time to take on one more task? Name the person who has the expertise, and can do a comprehensive study in 3 to 4 months (that’s how much staff time you can buy for $15,000)? We will stand by to hear the name and when they plan to complete the study. I believe this is a political cop-out. You’re saying, “I support the idea, but not enough to really make sure it gets done.”

2) Topeka need a comprehensive plan. Too often this community takes a piecemeal approach. A little here and a little there. Suddenly we look around and we wonder how we got where we are.

3) The actual creation of bike lanes and comprehensive commuter biking network can be funded in many instances quite inexpensively, sometimes by restriping streets. The 1/2 cent sales tax cannot be used to build bike trails. Ordinance 19257 states the sales tax is ” for the purpose of paying the costs of certain improvements within the city exclusively for costs of maintenance and improvements of existing city streets, gutters, curbs, sidewalks, alleys and street lighting…” So do not worry about spending the sales tax money on this cause. We still need to find the funds, but not from this source.

4) The matching funds will not be there next time. The mayor is giving up $60,000 of federal funds. And don’t think that we are doing the taxpayers a favor! This money is going to be spent. Maybe Wichita, Manhattan, Lawrence, or some city in Colorado will benefit from our short-sightedness. Next time we will have to come up with the whole $75,000. We can probably float some bonds.

What to do? There are 30 days to override this veto. We need to let our council members know that we disagree with the veto and that we want the study to be funded. Those that are currently not in favor, Jack Woelfel, Bob Archer, Richard Harmon, and Art Alcala need to hear from you. If you know them, or are in there district please talk to them and let them know how you feel.

Ralph Krumins

Joe at the Southwest YMCA has decided to go car-free for a month, to get a better idea of traveling by bike in Topeka.  It’s an awesome effort – and he’s blogging the whole thing!

He includes great updates as he learns the ways of commuting:

Yesterday I came home from work and had to turn around and go to our church’s music practice and my wife said, “Hey aren’t you going to change into some shorts?” I said, “No, actually it worked great riding in these jeans today!” Famous last words. At about 37th and Gage I discovered why the Mormon missionary I saw on his bike the other day had the right leg of his long pants tucked into his sock. So anyway, jeans and bikes without the chain guard can make for an interesting fashion statement. (That’s how I played it off at church last night; they weren’t buying it.)

He’s also looking up the actual rules and regulations on cycling in this city – which is turning out to be a fascinating resource for me!

My wife had to make a rescue run Thursday night. I rode from my house to Fairlawn Heights Wesleyan Church (http://www.gmap-pedometer.com/?r=2969038) for worship team practice at 7:00 P.M, and as practice started to go a little long I would check out the window periodically and see it just get darker and darker. At 8:30 I thought I could make it. At 8:45, I still had hope. But at 9:15 I had to call for help. “Laura, can you drive the truck here and pick me up?” This got me to thinking about doing a little night riding. What kinds of gear would I need for my bike? What do the laws say about riding a bike at night? Is riding at night even crazier than riding on a busy street in Topeka during rush hour? Well, I did come across some laws for what you need for riding at night. Here they are:

8-1592

Chapter 8.–AUTOMOBILES AND OTHER VEHICLES Article 15.–UNIFORM ACT REGULATING TRAFFIC; RULES OF THE ROAD 8-1592…..

So, seriously, check out his blog on CJOnline.com.  Definitely worth a read.

6pm, 6th and Washburn – see you there!

From the Omaha World-Herald. Sounds like their ride is much like ours!

Mention the cycling event “Critical Mass,” and it may bring to mind images of hundreds of bicyclists fouling up automobile traffic in Seattle or San Francisco. But Friday afternoon in Omaha, “Critical Mass” involved five guys — six if you include the reporter assigned to cover it — enjoying a pleasant, half-hour bike ride through north and downtown Omaha.

“Critical Mass” is a mass bicycle ride held on the last Friday of the month in hundreds of cities worldwide. Typically two to four times as many Omaha cyclists take part in the monthly local event, regulars said. But turnout suffered on a weekend dominated by a concert in Memorial Park, the Omaha Summer Arts Festival and high temperatures approaching 90 degrees.

“It’s hard riding alone,” said Tyler Magnuson, 20, of Omaha. “Cars can be very violent towards bikers … It’s very empowering to be in a group of people.”

Often such events are attempts to call attention to how unfriendly some cities can be to bicyclists. And while some of the Omaha riders said they were interested in raising awareness of two-wheeled traffic, most of Friday’s participants said their primary interest was getting together for a bike ride.
Advertising

“I don’t consider it a political activity,” Magnuson said. “It’s just something you do.”

Riders described “Critical Mass” as typically leaderless and informal. The unorganized nature and lack of a formal political agenda keeps riders from having to notify police of a political gathering, particularly in foreign countries not under the protection of the First Amendment.

The bicyclists assembled in Gifford Park, just south of 33rd and California Streets. Things were supposed to kick off at 5 p.m., but the riders chatted while waiting for stragglers.

There was no pre-planned route. There never is. Someone suggested they ride downtown to the Summer Arts Festival and the Old Market, and no one argued. The group pulled onto 33rd Street and peddled north. The small band of cyclists took up the whole northbound lane.

The group hung a right onto Burt Street and sped past the district headquarters of the Omaha Public Schools, where participants waved and said hello to a young man riding a bicycle in the opposite direction. Riders described a community among cyclists, sharing the common experience of being shouted at or treated rudely by motorists.

They went north on 24th Street to Nicholas Street and then east, still occupying the eastbound lane. Behind them, a line of vehicles stacked up. One by one, the drivers of cars and trucks gunned their engines and sped past them as the opportunities arose, but no vulgarities were shouted, soda cans thrown or middle fingers extended, which, they said, is not always the case.

A couple of months ago on North 72nd Street, a motorist zipped up from behind and bumped one of the “Critical Mass” cyclists, knocking him to the ground. He was uninjured, but the bike was wrecked. The police were called and the matter settled when the motorist paid for a new bike.

On Friday evening, the group rolled south, first on 14th Street then 10th. Near Dodge Street, a line of cars got caught behind them, but again, no gestures or shouts. The ride ended near 11th and Farnam Streets. Some cyclists stayed for the Arts Festival; others continued to ride alone.

This “Critical Mass” was the first for Stephen Horn, 69, of Blair, and probably his last. He enjoyed the ride but would rather not put himself in a position where he has to depend on the good sense of drivers. He prefers bike trails.

“I don’t like putting my life in someone else’s hands,” he said. “I think there’s a lot of crazy people driving cars, frankly.”

Contact the writer:

444-3106, andrew.nelson@owh.com

Join us at 6pm at 6th and Washburn!