urbanMSP

...which is an interesting thing to say since vehicle registration fees in Minnesota are Constitutionally dedicated to roads. And 40% of the MVST now, too. Sure, they're not paying gas tax, but to suggest electric cars aren't contributing ANYTHING is dubious and just plain false.

And if he's talking about "paying fair share", I'm guessing he didn't say anything about trucks...

The argument that Goodman and her allies are using is that the Walker can pick up the full cost and should given that it is in the wealthiest part of town and the pavement is in fine shape.

This is a myopic excuse given the important role this link would play in the regional cycling network. I'm not sure how politics would play into it -- this is in Goodman's ward, right?

The argument that Goodman and her allies are using is that the Walker can pick up the full cost and should given that it is in the wealthiest part of town and the pavement is in fine shape.

This is a myopic excuse given the important role this link would play in the regional cycling network. I'm not sure how politics would play into it -- this is in Goodman's ward, right?

Was this money part of what was to be cut to pay for 4th Precinct "upgrades"? If so, I think that money didn't get re-assigned to the 4th precinct. Was it still cut?

I haven't seen this posted here yet, but the 3rd Ave bikeway "streetscape opportunity plan" has been posted, complete with tentative layouts: http://www.minneapolismn.gov/www/groups ... 150690.pdf

Was this money part of what was to be cut to pay for 4th Precinct "upgrades"? If so, I think that money didn't get re-assigned to the 4th precinct. Was it still cut?

It wasn't specifically (and it was still cut).

A bike trail to link Wirth Pkwy in Minneapolis, through Golden Valley along the Wayzata Blvd. frontage road, to West End in SLP?

http://post.mnsun.com/2015/11/21/golden ... ail-study/

Seeing that this would run by the former Prudential/Target campus, if that site gets residential redevelopment, the trail has potential...

I haven't seen this posted here yet, but the 3rd Ave bikeway "streetscape opportunity plan" has been posted, complete with tentative layouts: http://www.minneapolismn.gov/www/groups ... 150690.pdf

Ok as much as I like protected bike lanes and buffers between pedestrians and the road, why are they narrowing some of these already narrow sidewalks even more? Instead of making some small effort at improving pedestrian accessibility they're making walking more difficult. Do they really need to do this kind of crap to pedestrians at every opportunity? Are they trying to drive a wedge between pedestrians and cyclists? Are they just clueless? It's hard to get excited about improvements when they pit one nonautomotive mode against another.

I haven't seen this posted here yet, but the 3rd Ave bikeway "streetscape opportunity plan" has been posted, complete with tentative layouts: http://www.minneapolismn.gov/www/groups ... 150690.pdf

Ok as much as I like protected bike lanes and buffers between pedestrians and the road, why are they narrowing some of these already narrow sidewalks even more? Instead of making some small effort at improving pedestrian accessibility they're making walking more difficult. Do they really need to do this kind of crap to pedestrians at every opportunity? Are they trying to drive a wedge between pedestrians and cyclists? Are they just clueless? It's hard to get excited about improvements when they pit one nonautomotive mode against another.

Everyone is a pedestrian at some point during a trip, so it's not like Team Ped vs. Team Bike or whatever.

Where do you see sidewalks being narrowed?

There's several portions where they're adding 'movable' planters along the sidewalk. Some of them have street trees there but you can easily navigate around those now. With the planters they're blocking off as much as half the walkable space in some areas. It's not the pedestrians they need to protect the bike lanes from, but in most cases the bike lanes get nothing but a coat of paint as a buffer from cars. And even that disappears every other block for a shared turn lane.

And I know the reality of it isn't peds vs. bikes, but the infrastructure planners sure do like to pit their interests against one another like a sad runners-up cage fight.

I noticed the sidewalk narrowing also in a few places, e.g. in front of the Public Service Center and between 9th & 10th Sts. It's clear that someone directed them to maximize the replacement of greenspace in the plan, and hopefully there will be room to remove some of it in the final plan. Downtown Minneapolis is famously lacking in greenery, and the median on 3rd was certainly attractive. It also was not in any way functional though, so there isn't much rational basis for trying to replace it with either functional or dysfunctional greenery. The planters protecting the bikeways are a really cool element though, and will hopefully not get costed out of the plan.

I too insist on this glass being half empty.

Hey, you asked buddy. Certainly trusting small details to the city has always gone off without a hitch in the past.

Really more responding to regional than you, woofner. You're alright. <3

But really, to some extent I think the focus on straight square footage is misplaced. 3rd Ave will be a way more pleasant street to walk on with the greenery (even with somewhat narrower walks) than it is right now.

Downtown Minneapolis is famously lacking in greenery

It seems like we could solve this problem, while simultaneously significantly improving the pedestrian experience while not costing drivers a thing... By merely tightening up every single intersection downtown. There are parking lanes on both sides of most streets downtown, but parking is not prohibited adjacent to intersections. This is unused asphalt, and could be easily be converted into curb extensions with greenery. Just saying.

Really more responding to regional than you, woofner. You're alright. <3

But really, to some extent I think the focus on straight square footage is misplaced. 3rd Ave will be a way more pleasant street to walk on with the greenery (even with somewhat narrower walks) than it is right now.

So you care more about the messenger then the content. Good to know.

Really more responding to regional than you, woofner. You're alright. <3

But really, to some extent I think the focus on straight square footage is misplaced. 3rd Ave will be a way more pleasant street to walk on with the greenery (even with somewhat narrower walks) than it is right now.

So you care more about the messenger then the content. Good to know.

Nope, I just don't respect you. Anyway, now I'm blocking you for good. Happy holidays!

The final layout for 7th St N (by Target Center) is going before the TPW committee on the 5th.

The original layout had a 6' bike lane. The new one has a strange buffered sharrow right turn lane. Seems like a safety issue to me...

Old layout: http://www.minneapolismn.gov/www/groups ... 151349.pdf
New layout: http://www.minneapolismn.gov/www/groups ... 171333.pdf

Doubling biking rates in Minneapolis could provide economic benefits of approximately $63.5 Million per year: http://www.mplsbike.org/doubling_biking_in_minneapolis

The final layout for 7th St N (by Target Center) is going before the TPW committee on the 5th.

The original layout had a 6' bike lane. The new one has a strange buffered sharrow right turn lane. Seems like a safety issue to me...

Old layout: http://www.minneapolismn.gov/www/groups ... 151349.pdf
New layout: http://www.minneapolismn.gov/www/groups ... 171333.pdf

Whoa...that's actually a fairly major change from the present street configuration in this area. I hadn't heard about this at all before. This obviously affects (not necessarily negatively or positively) anyone who regularly bikes in the area, but also anyone who bikes to Target Field from many points south/west of downtown, particularly if you enter downtown via the Hennepin-Lyndale bottleneck. This won't actually change my route one bit, but the movement from that strange orphaned leg of 9th Street onto 7th Street is now a wide left turn instead of a sort of merge-y motion on green. I don't think it's necessarily worse, but will feel a little different, maybe better.

FWIW I don't think the change between the "old" and "new" layout is terribly significant. If you're obeying traffic signals, which you probably SHOULD do at this intersection, particularly with an event going on, I don't think there's a functional difference in how a cyclist would navigate that half block.

P.S. It's high time that silly orphaned stretch of 9th Street be renamed. 8th Street would make more sense, particularly now that it's being converted to a two-way street.