Brief Summary of TCCS Meeting (2/15)       Draft

Present:

Christopher Chambers, MSU

Dick Janson, Tri-County Bicycle Association (TCBA)

Heather Burgess, MSU

Janine Sinno, Ingham County Health Department

JR Grulke, MSU

LeRoy Harvey, Moving Our Community Toward Health Coalition, TCCS

Lyndon Babcock, TCCS, Mayor's Task Force on Walking and Biking, TCBA

Matt, Kuhl, MSU

Nancy Krupiarz, MI Trails and Greenways Alliance

Sanjay Bisht, Allen Neighborhood Center

Steve Hayward, Lansing Township

Tim Potter, MSU Bikes

Updates

Purposes of the meeting:

●        Engage in a group process of identifying current and potential bike routes in a community (in this case, E.L.) -- a process that might be used elsewhere in the region.

●        Engage in a mutually-beneficial activity that helps address academic and community goals (in this case, MSU Kinesiology/Parks and Rec.

●        Identify regional resource people, maps, plans, and issues that help understand regional complete street* progress and opportunities.  *(see attached policy statement)

Attendees gave brief overviews of their respective projects and LeRoy describes some of the maps.   (see and on-line list of most maps at www.re-news.net/map)

Nancy brought an update on the Heart of MI Trail system improvements.

Dick brought copies of TCBA Crosstown Bicycle Route Maps and explained that these were designed for novice riders, using existing streets, and suggesting safe routes away from high traffic arteries. 

LeRoy distributed copies of and "East Lansing Bicycling Guide & Route Map) from 2003 provided by Steven Roach of the City of E. Lansing.  He also gave an update on the Hagadorn Road Diet.

Steve Hayward provided an update of Lansing Township Non-motorized Plans.  See http://www.eastwooddda.org/documents/nonmotorized_plan.pdf

Tim shared plans for widening the Hagadorn bridge and the updating of the MSU Collingwood Entrance.

Lyndon shared that another MSU Class is working with the Mayor's Task Force and the City of Lansing (Andy Kilpatrick) to develop Lansing area bike route plans. 

Small Group Activity

Two small groups were provided with copies of the Crosstown Map and the EL Guide & Route Map and asked to identify…

●        most important gaps in the system

●        current favorite routes?

●        types of desired improvements

●        additional questions that need answers

The groups then discussed improvements and placed some of them on the maps along with other suggestions for maintenance.  The maps were given to the MSU class to incorporate into a proposal (due tomorrow) which they will eventually share with the group.

Several issues and questions came up during and shortly after the meeting…

●        What are the latest plans and opportunities for Hagadorn -- and the bridge (Ingham County Road Commission)?

●        What are impacts and possibilities for the Collingwood improvements?

●        What are design standards?  (Steve subsequently provided these references:
http://www.vtpi.org/tdm/tdm69.htm and this  FHWA document called "Designing Sidewalks and Trails for Access Parts 1 & 2  provided here with numerous other items: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bikeped/publications.htm

●        There are 21 reasons for paved shoulders, only 2 are bike-related.

Suggestions for Next Time

●        Share e-mails and announcements with a larger group

●        Take a little more time to research existing related efforts

●        Consider using similar processes to involve residents in identifying safe bike routes throughout the region

●        Continue to share resources and ideas

●        Start a non-motorized advisory committee for the Greater Lansing/MDOT University region

 

Please submit comments, changes, questions, additions, to leroy@leroyharvey.net

See more on Tri-County Complete Streets at www.re-news.net/mocth

COMPLETE STREETS are designed and operated to enable safe access for all users. Pedestrians, bicyclists, motorists and bus riders of all ages and abilities are able to safely move along and across a complete street.  For more info, visit www.re-news.net/cto

ELEMENTS OF COMPLETE STREETS POLICIES

1. The Principle

• Complete streets are designed and operated to enable safe access for all users. Pedestrians, bicyclists, motorists and transit riders of all ages and abilities must be able to safely move along and across a complete street.
• Creating complete streets means changing the policies and practices of transportation agencies.
• A complete streets policy ensures that the entire right of way is routinely designed and operated to enable safe access for all users.
• Transportation agencies must ensure that all road projects result in a complete street appropriate to local context and needs.

2. Elements of a Good Complete Streets Policy

A good complete streets policy:

• Specifies that ‘all users’ includes pedestrians, bicyclists, transit vehicles and users, and motorists, of all ages and abilities.
• Aims to create a comprehensive, integrated, connected network.
• Recognizes the need for flexibility: that all streets are different and user needs will be balanced.
• Is adoptable by all agencies to cover all roads.
• Applies to both new and retrofit projects, including design, planning, maintenance, and operations, for the entire right of way.
• Makes any exceptions specific and sets a clear procedure that requires high-level approval of exceptions.
• Directs the use of the latest and best design standards.
• Directs that complete streets solutions fit in with context of the community.
• Establishes performance standards with measurable outcomes.

2.5 Implementation

An effective complete streets policy should prompt transportation agencies to:

• Restructure their procedures to accommodate all users on every project.
• Re-write their design manuals to encompass the safety of all users.
• Re-train planners and engineers in balancing the needs of diverse users.
• Create new data collection procedures to track how well the streets are serving all users.