RECORD
OF MEETING
BICYCLE
AND PEDESTRIAN ISSUES TASK FORCE
DATE/TIME/PLACE:
Thursday, August 11, 1994, 5:30 - 7:15 PM, CDTC Offices
IN ATTENDANCE:
Emily H. Goodman (citizen member), Jerry Mueller (Green City
Transportation Council), Katrina Neugebauer (Troy Architectural Program), Don
Odell (Albany County Planning Department), Don Robertson (NYSDOT - Region 1),
Ivan Vamos (Hudson River Valley Greenway Communities Council), Russell Ziemba
(Rensselaer County Environmental Action), Steve Allocco (CDTC)
DISCUSSION SUMMARY
Regional Bicycle
Network: The Task Force reviewed copies of the draft
network map (enclosed for those who did not attend the meeting), considering
the question of how the network should influence planning and investment
decisions. The network presented two
basic problems for the group: it
arguably designates too many facilities to appear "selective," and
without any sort of prioritization, there is a real question of what the group
feels the most important facility types or locations are within it.
As the group discussed
these issues, what seemed to evolve was a place for the network in the planning
process which does not entail the network's having the "rule of law"
with regard to the treatment of specific facilities. In this place, the network could serve a
number of functions:
1. Identify
desirable bicycle travel corridors
The map
presents a system for intra- and interregional travel towards which the region
can build over time. It reflects
consideration of major travel patterns; the need for some "minimal
coverage" of rural areas; and recreational bicycle travel opportunities
both within the Capital District and between this region and others (e.g., the
Adirondack Park, the Hudson and Mohawk River Corridors). It is recognized that it will not always be
feasible to improve the specific facilities marked on the map; in these cases,
the potential to either use "softer" treatments (e.g., "if no
shoulder can be provided along part of a road, put up 'Share the Road'
signs") or provide accommodations on nearby alternatives should be
explored. In addition, the group was
reminded that in rural areas, bicycle treatments also serve as pedestrian
treatments; it was suggested that this point, along with a reinforcement of the
message that policies on sidewalk construction and maintenance need to be
developed and consistently applied, be prominently noted in the Task Force's
next report.
2. Provide a
"model" to get a sense of the magnitude of needed improvements at the
regional level
The Task Force
set forth the idea of using the network to determine what treatments would be
necessary at the regional level based on prevailing standards -- particularly,
the FHWA standards set forth in the Selecting Roadway Design Treatments to
Accommodate Bicycles document (tables from which were distributed at a Task
Force meeting a few months back). A
sense of the total cost -- and time frame -- of accommodating bicycle travel in
the region could be developed in this matter.
This is one of the tasks to be pursued by the CDTC staff in the next
month or so (see "Action Items").
3. Serve as
a long-range plan for bicycle travel
ISTEA requires
that a bicycle and pedestrian transportation plan be developed and incorporated
into the MPO's long-range plan. In turn,
bicycle and pedestrian projects can be pursued using Surface Transportation
Program funds if they are designed pursuant to this plan. The Regional Bicycle Network, by virtue of
its coverage, offers a strong regionwide reference for development of a system
of bicycle accommodations. Coupled with
the other products of the Task Force's work, and enhanced by the inputs of
CDTC's Subcommittee on Bikeway and Pedestrian Planning, this network will
clearly meet the ISTEA requirement for a plan.
4. Serve as
a starting point for local planning
Municipal
bicycle/pedestrian circulation plans tend to include more local roadways than
do plans such as the Regional Bicycle Network.
Still, the regional network provides these local plans with a
"spine" of sorts for their networks, identifying the primary
facilities for both through and local traffic.
Pilot Projects
The group took up the issue of pilot
projects -- proposed projects illustrating application of a range of the tools
it sees as important to enhancing the environment for bicycle and pedestrian
travel. In previous discussions, the
group seemed to be leaning towards developing one or a few free-standing
corridor projects (e.g., the "Downtown Albany to SUNY" corridor); at
this meeting, however, the idea generating considerable enthusiasm was that of using
projects on the current TIP as the pilot projects. As envisioned, the TIP would be reviewed for
projects having some potential for inclusion of bicycle and/or pedestrian
elements; projects meeting this condition would then be examined so as to
determine what treatments would be desirable.
To keep manageable the amount of technical work necessary to do this, it
was decided to limit the examination to projects being designed in the next
three years -- on the TIP tables, this would be those projects shown as having
preliminary engineering work taking place in the 1995-96, 1996-97 and 1997-98
budget years. (This
also seems appropriate given the expected May 1995 date for the next New
Visions conference, at which these pilot projects would be set forth for all
the other Task Forces' consideration for the first time.) Projects either earlier or later than these
years will be checked in a more cursory fashion, to ensure that no critical
opportunities are missed.
In addition to being examined
"by themselves," the TIP projects will be mapped so as to determine
whether relatively small, additional bicycle/pedestrian projects not on
the TIP would if pursued bridge gaps in the bicycle/pedestrian travel
system. Destination treatments and
intermodal connections will also be explored.
Finally, it was suggested that statistics on accidents involving
bicycles or pedestrians could be reviewed as a way of identifying additional
locations in need of bicycle or pedestrian accommodations. The availability and quality of such
information will be investigated by CDTC staff.
ACTION ITEMS
* CDTC to:
* apply FHWA
bicycle treatment tables to Regional Bicycle Network
* start
examining the 1994-99 TIP as a source of pilot
projects
* look into
the availability of statistics on accidents involving bicycles and pedestrians
* start
preparation of a writeup on the Task Force's Phase Two products (bearing in
mind that a "common format" for Phase Two reports is still to be
developed)
* Next Task
Force meeting: Wednesday, October 12,
5:30 - 7:30 PM, Colonie Community Center, 1653 Central Avenue (across from Lake
Electronics). Room assignment to be
announced in future mailing. Meeting
agenda to include presentation/discussion of early results of staff work listed
under "CDTC to:" above.
start writeup
include explan. of context for
network
comment on "14/4 as minimum"
check out accident statistics stuff
note that in rural areas, bike accom often=ped accom
Ivan's comment
on need to have sidewalk policy, coherent and consistently applied
*