Kuebler Widening Looks to Hoover up Bond Surplus

The final recommendations for the bond surplus are out and will be decided at Wednesday 's Council Streets and Bridges Bond Subcommittee meeting.

Recommendations seem follow tactics of ad hoc dispersal rather than a strategy of concentration.

Brown Road:  No sidewalks or bike lanes
Shouldn't we be investing more in basic mobility?
Too often this is our baseline.

I have listed the total cost in order to show the larger sense of priorities, so the total is substantially larger than the expected bond surplus.  In many cases the bond surplus is being used to back-fill with completion funding or used as a local match for other funding sources.

Of course these things are political as well as strategic, so some amount of "local pork" and "retail" neighborhood projects will be sprinkled in.  But as I read the list, it is striking how little from Bike and Walk Salem is recommended for funding.  It's almost as if that project never happened.  The selection critierion is independent of Bike and Walk Salem - "provides access to schools, parks, transit." So it doesn't look like the plan is meaningfully directing future investment or strategy.  Instead, the project list looks like an ad hoc response to local politics.  On the surface, there's not much strategy here. (Maybe you see something I don't?  It's hard to see a politically realistic balance that yet advances substantially our investments in basic mobility and non-auto travel.)

Selection Criteria (click to enlarge)

In an alternate universe, it is plausible that the bond surplus would fund a large number of high-priority projects from the new biking and walking plan - maybe even a complete corridor or family-friendly bikeway. In this world we would take greenhouse gas reduction goals seriously, and show a serious commitment to mobility choice and transportation options.

Instead, one capacity expansion project gets the largest share:  Kuebler widening is assigned $3.2M out of just over $8.1M.

And, remember, Kuebler already got a big chunk of the first round of surplus!  With those savings,

Council adopt[ed] Resolution No. 2013-46 authorizing use of Streets and Bridges Bond proceeds to fund improvements at the Commercial Street SE/Kuebler Boulevard SE intersection ($2, 187,000), Fairgrounds Road NE/Hood Street NE intersection ($325,000), and 25th Street SE/Madrona Avenue SE Intersection ($5,000,000).

So that's $2.2M out of $7.5M.  Why, just why?

There might be more bikes parked at the Union Gospel Mission
than anywhere else in Salem on a daily basis.
Many of those who ride and use the Mission's services are Veterans.
Don't we owe them better support for bicycling and
a better set of transportation options?

In a world in which we don't have a complete sidewalk and bikeway system, in a world in which maintaining our bridges and fixing "structurally deficient" ones remains a fantasy, in a world in which we clearly cannot maintain the roads and bridges and sidewalks we already have, why are we expanding any road capacity for cars?

So, I guess those are leading questions.  Still, what do you think about the list?

Primary Recommendations:

Category	Location	Total Cost	Priority
Arterial Safety	Brown Road upgrade (extends existing project)	$2,750,000	first
Pavement Rehab	Eola Drive pavement rehab (extends existing project)	$700,000
Neighborhood bike/ped	RR quiet zone crossing improvements at Woodrow and Silverton Road NE	$1,750,000	not listed!
Neighborhood bike/ped	Court Street wood bridge over Mill Creek	$250,000	not listed!
New Capacity	Kuebler at Commercial dual turn lanes	$4,700,000	this makes things worse!
Bridges	Scour Mitigation for 13th st bridge over Shelton Ditch	$100,000
Neighborhood bike/ped	New and repair sidewalks - inner Salem neighborhoods	$1,500,000	unknown
New Capacity	Widen Kueber, I-5 to Commercial	$5,000,000	this makes things worse!
Arterial Safety	Brush College (north side sidewalks)	$1,435,000	second
Safety	Fixed-Pole Radar signs	$50,000

City Council, January 9th - Words and Rhetoric

There are lots of interesting items related to transportation on Council's agenda this week. Many of them offer meanings that are not clear, though - they sound good, but what difference will they actually make? (How you read them may depend on whether your interpretive charity is feeling "half-full" or "half-empty.")

Central Salem Mobility Study

The City appears to be ready to go out with an RFP and select a consultant for the Central Salem Mobility Study. The proposal is loaded with things good for people who walk and bike! At the same time, some of the things to be studied are things we've talked about a lot, and the recommendation for further study is something of a punt. The upside is more talk gets more people comfortable and on board; the downside is we talk something to death and waste a study on blah-blah-blah.

Still, going from one-way to two-way streets would be huge, doing more for mobility and downtown vitality than perhaps any other single move.

The core of the study will be these three scenarios:

• Two-way Street Conversions - High Street NE/SE, Church Street NE/SE, Cottage Street NE, Court Street NE, and State Street: Analyze the impacts of converting existing one-way streets to two-way for High Street NE/SE, Church Street NE/SE, Cottage Street NE, Court Street NE, and State Street. Some of the key issues to be addressed include vehicle delay, traffic volumes (in primary and secondary study area), impacts to on-street parking supply, impacts to transit operations (current and future), impacts to pedestrian circulation, bicycle facility improvements, turning movement restrictions, and cost to implement. In order to make the most efficient use of limited resources, an initial high-level review will be conducted to determine which street segments are the most viable candidates for conversion to two-way operation. The most viable street segments will then be given a higher priority for further analysis.
• North Salem Big Blocks: Develop possible street configurations to support redevelopment of the north downtown area between Commercial Street NE, High Street NE, Division Street NE, and Market Street NE. At least one configuration will include extending Liberty Street NE to connect from Division Street NE to Belmont Street NE.
• Pedestrian and Bicycle Access - Union Street Railroad Bridge: Evaluate possible options for creating a more direct and safe pedestrian and bicycle connection between downtown and the Union Street Railroad Bridge, and Riverfront Park.

2011 in Review: One Step Forward, but Two Steps Back

It sure feels like we lost ground this year. Nothing seemed to catch fire, and everybody seemed tired. For every project that seemed like a win, there were several blanks, duds, and outright losses. Within a year of sharrows going down on Chemeketa, for example, the downtown sewer project took several out.

In a nutshell, that's 2011 for me.

Mostly, it seemed like it was a discouraging year for people who bike. I feel like a real negative Nellie saying this, but it seemed to take too much of a Pollyanna-ish stretch to suggest it was a good year.

So, was it encouraging for you, did you think the City took two steps forward instead? I would especially love to hear about that! What else was important?

Minto Path Misses Cut for Flex Funds; Brown Road and Cherriots Advance

Today the Department of Transportation released the list of "Flexible Funds" projects advancing to the next round of evaluation, and the Minto Path application failed to move on.

You'll recall the vigorous debate over applying for "flex fund" dollars to finance the Minto trail.

City staff haven't got feedback from ODOT yet, but it seems likely that since the project didn't complete the triangle linking homes and jobs and retail, it was clear to others also that this was a recreation project rather than a transportation project, and not a good fit with the program criteria.

Last week Council authorized a back-up, the City applying for a Federal Highway Administration Transportation Community and System Preservation Program grant.

Other area projects that did make the cut for round 2 are a County one for Brown Road and two from Cherriots, one for Courthouse Square, the other for bus stops.

One of the problems with the Minto Path project was advocates learned about it too late to be able to offer meaningful comment and criticism that might have yielded a useful course-correction. It is unfortunate that the City of Salem for two rounds now will have no projects funded by the Flex Fund program ($42M total so far).

The Vision 2020 Bike/Ped Workgroup will be discussing grant funding, project selection, and lead-times the first week of January. Hopefully the City will see the advantage to longer lead-times and more conversation and debate with a view towards advancing visionary and transformative transportation projects.

City Council, December 12th - More on Minto, Council Goals

Lots of transportation and transpo-relevant stuff on Council agenda for Monday!

Minto Path

You'll recall the vigorous debate over applying for "flex fund" dollars to finance the Minto trail.

The City has identified a new grant source for the trail project, the Federal Highway Administration Transportation Community and System Preservation Program (TSCP). According to the selection criteria, "priority will be given to requests that address livability, especially from a highway perspective." Since this a recreation play rather than a highway alternative or enhancement, I'm not sure how strong the proposal meets this set of criteria, either. Still, since the dollar amounts are the same, City staff also say,

FHWA grant awards will likely be announced in April2012. If the Agency is notified in March that the requested amount of ODOT Flexible Funding will be awarded for the Minto Trail staff will withdraw the FHWA application.

So this is pretty clearly a back-up funding plan.

"Takings" and Right of Way Acquisition

A couple of meetings ago Council discussed condemnation at Lancaster and Market. Monday Council will declare

the public need and the City of Salem's intent to negotiate the acquisition of right-of-way and easements for construction of the Eola Drive NW Corridor Improvements, from Kingwood Drive NW to Gehlar Road NW....[here's a google view]

[Staff further observe] two of the needed acquisitions will impact entire properties in such a way as to require acquisition of the entire parcels...

It seems clear - but to many it may not be - that facilities for walking and biking should proceed in the same manner as facilities for car driving. The City should not have a double standard here. At the same time, perhaps we should consider how we can meet transportation needs by solutions that take up less space - like bikes!

Also, not on Council agenda, but worth mentioning here, there are meetings for the Eola Ridge Park Master Plan. The next one will be Tuesday, January 10, 2011, 6 p.m. at the West Salem Roths. The park potentially connects Burley Hill Drive and Eola Drive. It may be that some of the problems created by the omission of bike lanes on Burley Hill can be mitigated. If you live near there - get involved!

Updates and Check-ins

There's an update on the Stimulus Funding (ARRA) projects. The City got "awards totaling over $13.5 million" and it's interesting to see them all. The most notable for B on B, of course, is phase 2 of the Union Street Railroad Bridge, consisting of $3.5M:

The project has resulted in the encapsulation of lead-based paint, painting, bridge repairs, and installation of security cameras.

On summer days, not just hundreds, but more than a thousand people use the bridge! This will go down as a very good investment, and once connections across Commercial and Wallace are knit, even more will be able to use it.

And there's an update on the Council goals. Some of them are relevant to the bike plan update.

The Downtown Mobility Study is key:

4. Create a bike/pedestrian avenue downtown (possibly High, Church, Chemeketa Streets)
Status: Pending
The draft Bike and Walk Salem Plan proposes Church Street NE/SE, Union Street NE, and Chemeketa Street NE as bicycle corridors through downtown. City Council and Planning Commission held a joint work session on this planning process on October 24, 2011. The Planning Commission opened a public hearing on the proposed amendments to the Salem Transportation System Plan on November 1, 2011, and continued the public hearing to January 3, 2012. Following Planning Commission recommendation, a public hearing will be scheduled before City Council. Implementing bicycle corridors on Church Street NE/SE and Union Street NE will require a traffic engineering analysis to address both the direction of travel and intersection safety. This analysis will be part of the proposed scope of work for the Central Salem Mobility Study.

5. Improve bike/pedestrian connections to the Union Street Railroad Bridge
Status: In Process
Studying how to improve bicycle and pedestrian connections to and from the Union Street Railroad Bridge will be an area of focus undertaken through the upcoming Central Salem Mobility Study. City Council held a work session on November 7, 2011, to better define the components of the study. As a result of this work session, staff is preparing information on potential scope elements to share with City Council. It is anticipated that a Request for Proposal will be issued within the next two months. Following consultant selection in the 3rd quarter of FY 2011-12, staff will bring a report to the Council to refine the scope of services before entering into a contract. The study will take approximately 12 to 18 months to complete.

(I'm surprised to see the study so far out; I had thought that it was already in motion. Informal conversations, however, have suggested that the scope of data gathering and complexity of modeling have introduced difficulty and delay. I hope to learn more about this.)

Other matters

In passing, the intergovernmental agreement between ODOT and the City for enlarging the intersection of Wallace @ Glen Creek should be noted.

I haven't followed Mill Creek Industrial Park very closely, but it is interesting to see a proposal to push the Project Completion Date from December 31, 2011 to December 31, 2014. Probably a consequence of the crappy economy, but you have to wonder also about the future of suburban office/industry parks on a city's periphery.

There was an interesting piece in the New York Times about this. Writing from her new book, Pastoral Capitalism: A History of Suburban Corporate Landscapes, Louise A. Mozingo notes that

suburban offices are even more unsustainably designed than residential suburbs. Sidewalks extend only between office buildings and parking lots, expanses of open space remain private and the spreading of offices over large zones precludes effective mass transit.

Finally, the mixed-use redevelopment project for the Marion Parkade is stalled and City staff recommend that its deadlines NOT be extended. (Here's an update from a year ago.) The City here is pretty clearly signalling dissatisfaction with the development team.

This is on Union, between, Liberty and High, and there's lots of potential for a bike-friendly development, and it will be interesting to see how it goes, though it will almost certainly go slowly now.

Flex Fund Projects Elsewhere Focus on Transportation

The Minto Path Flex Fund application roused a good bit of debate and conversation. Since the question at the center of it was the extent to which it would function as a transportation corridor, a comparison might be useful.

Yesterday Portland's Flex Fund applications came out. One of them is also a segment of multi-use path.

The Sullivan's Gulch corridor follows a rail right-of-way and the Banfield highway. It connects east Portland to Hollywood, to the Lloyd District and downtown. It's a separated facility that clearly connects homes to jobs and business, and is obviously a transportation project, something that makes it easier to make trips by bike instead of car.*

BikePortland lists the other applications, each of which links homes to jobs and business, and many of which have a multi-modal component.

They include:

• safety and intersection improvements along a major arterial
• a bike and ride facility at a major transit center coupled with bus stop improvements
• two bike boulevards in underserved neighborhoods and linking to schools
• three other small projects, including a design component: a staircase, design for a bridge, and a social marketing/encouragement project

* Here again is a map of Salem's separated path system.

The limits of its connectivity should be obvious.

There's not structural (or visionary!) thinking about where people live and where people work and how to connect them easily by bike. Instead, we shoe-horn the bike facilities into the left-overs, odd and little used spaces.

(If you come across news items about other apps, drop them in the comments. It might be interesting to look at more of them in advance of the review committee's winnowing.)

City Council, October 17th - Minto Path, Kinda Stuck in the 1970s

At this point it's flogging a dead horse, but after pulling the Minto Path Flex Fund application from the Urban Renewal Agency* meeting last Monday, the City is back with it - unfortunately they don't appear to have taken the opportunity to improve the project and application.

So to be brief. The key question is whether the path would connect homes to jobs and commercial districts - does it function as a transportation corridor?

(Previous discussion here and here. Map: google bike layer in green.)

What is most disappointing is that the City didn't go out to transportation advocates earlier in the process to solicit feedback that might be useful crafting a proposal that better meets the requirements of the Flex Fund program and Salem's own 21st century transportation needs. The recreational path AND connections to jobs and housing for people who would like greater mobility choice.

What's on the table is old-school. What might have looked visionary in 1975 is pallid in 2011.

* The board of the URA has the same membership as City Council.

City Council, October 10th - Bunting for Flex Funds

Baseball couldn't be any more thrilling just now. The same can't be said of the City.

Rather than swinging for a home run, the City seems intent on bunting for an infield hit. You want to say, "Go big or go home!"

Flex Fund Program

Earlier this week the Flex Fund proposals generated some good discussion and critique.

Alas, none of them hit a transportation tri-modal trifecta. Instead of projects responding to the lure and requirements of this particular funding source, they look like projects bending and twisting in search of funding, awkwardly shoehorned into the grant criteria.

The purpose of the Flex Fund program, a State administered program of Federal road funding, is

to support sustainable non-highway transportation projects...that positively impact modal connectivity, the environment, mobility and access, livability, energy use and the overall operation of the transportation system.

The accent is clearly on transportation. But both of the City proposals are located in parks. A parks project that served transportation needs could be an excellent separated facility for people who walk and bike, but to say the City's two projects are for transportation is a stretch.

The marquee project application is surely the path to Minto Park on the Minto side of the bridge across the slough. People seem generally lukewarm at best to this project as a year-round transportation corridor. As a recreation trail, it's great, but as the map shows, it is not likely to generate significant numbers of new biking and walking trips for errands or work, especially during the winter when it will dark during the commute. For some it will be more attractive than the path along River Road, and they will shift trips to the new facility, but it's hard to see how the path and bridge will be a generator of new trips. This is a Parks project, not a Transportation project.

More information is out on the path between Glen Creek Road and the Union St RR Bridge in Wallace Marine Park:

Design of this project is complete; however, costs associated with both design and construction are exceeding original estimates. The additional costs arise from unanticipated archeological and environmental testing requirements and the cost for pedestrian scale lighting to match the existing lighting on the Union Street Railroad Bridge path system. The amount needed to complete construction is approximately $97,000. Enhancements to the project design (benches, park/trail way-finding signage, landscaping, trash receptacles, etc.) could be included in the project for an additional amount of approximately $47,000. If grant funds are not received, the City will need to identify another source of funding to complete construction of this project (approximately $97,000)....

Adding amenities to the project design, such as benches, park/trail way-finding signage, landscaping, trash receptacles, etc., will enhance the user experience of the completed project. These elements may also make the grant application more competitive.

It is important to remember that the transportation problem here is access across Wallace Road, not connections within the park.

Nevertheless, the Glen Creek trail is a shortcut inside the park - considered as a transportation project it's a solution in search of a problem. And do we really need benches and way-finding there? These seem like superfluous elements added as sweetener to the proposal. Here too, it's really a parks project, and not a transportation project.

Both the Glen Creek and Minto trails are weak on access to housing, jobs, services; weak on access to schools and transit; and weak on connecting to other modes of travel. They do provide access to recreation and help promote an active lifestyle, but this just underscores their weakness as transportation projects. (Slide from September 8th presentation on the Flex Fund program.)

Again, for a fuller discussion see Thursday's note.

Finally, the agenda has new information on a Cherriots application for Flex funds. It appears to have three pieces:

The Salem Area Mass Transit District is committed to correcting the construction deficiencies in the downtown transit mall. The District considers public transportation essential to the vitality and livability of our community. Transit brings jobs, employers and employees together, which benefits the economy. Repairs to the transit mall would greatly enhance our downtown environment.

The Salem Area Mass Transit District is proceeding with a site selection for the South Salem Transit Center. The transit center is the second in a series of strategically located transit centers planned by the District. It will provide convenient connections to routes throughout South Salem with transfers to the rest of the service area.

The Salem Area Mass Transit District is committed to make bus stop improvements. These enhancements will include shelters, bus stop signs, and better ADA access.

Interestingly, this doesn't appear all that multi-modal, either. It would be nice to have bicycle parking and other facilities included in the bus stop project as a way to encourage bike use for trip end connections.

Withdrawing a Mixed Use Zone

You may recall the old Rose Garden site on Portland Road. The motel was leveled and it's now an empty field and focus site for redevelopment. Councilor Dickey proposes to take it out of a special mixed-use overlay zone.

After considering the property is not located on an intersection; its lack of development over the past ten years; and recognizing Important community elements In the Portland/Fairgrounds Overlay Zone would still be in place; the NGRAB [North Gateway Redevelopment Advisory Board] made a motion to recommend the requirements of the Rose Garden Mixed-Use Area be removed from this property.

In light of the difficulties still in fully realizing the North Downtown/Broadway district as a neighborhood full of mixed uses, perhaps it does make sense to loosen requirements on this more problematic site.

Vision 2020 Group Discusses Flex Funds and Signs

At Wednesday's Vision 2020 Bicycle and Pedestrian workgroup meeting we learned about two Flex Fund projects, discussed some signage and wayfinding possibilities, and got an update on the updates to the Transportation System Plan (aka Bike and Walk Salem).

Flex Fund Projects

You may recall the first round of $21M in Flexible Funds and the just-announced second round. The City intends on submitting two applications. (The proposals will go before Council on Monday, so look for more detail in the staff reports when they come out on Friday.)

Here are the project criteria for the Flex Funds program:

A. Connectivity, integration and overall benefit to the transportation system

1. Plans for/contributes to the development of a “seamless” multimodal transportation system.
2. Plans for/connects modes or serves multiple modes.
3. Completes/extends a critical system or modal link.
4. Helps preserve a critical non-highway facility, service or program.
5. Reduces the need for a highway expansion.

B. Environmental Sustainability

1. Plans for/contributes to improved environmental quality (i.e. GHG Reductions).
2. Reduces VMT.
3. Plans for/contributes to the use of sustainable energy sources for transportation.
4. Reduces exposure of the population to air pollution.

C. Community Livability and Sustainability

1. Plans for/contributes to the development of livable communities.
2. Supports/preserves/creates long term employment.
3. Plans for congestion mitigation/mitigates congestion.
4. Enhances the user experience.
5. Plans for/links workers to jobs.

D. Mobility, Access and Health

1. Plans for/expands transportation choices for all Oregonians.
2. Plans for/expands or protects mobility for public transportation dependent users including minorities, senior and disabled, low income and youth.
3. Plans for/extends access to goods and services.
4. Contributes to a healthy, active lifestyle.

The first application is for design and construction of the Minto side of the trail connecting to the Minto-Riverfront Park bridge. Urban Renewal dollars will go towards the bridge, but apparently there's not enough to fund the trail side. According to Project Manager Annie Gorski

The Agency requests up to $1,000,000....The proposed Trail will be twelve feet wide with ten foot buffer, six inch thick concrete surface, and span approximately 3800 linear feet. The Trail and Bridge will be constructed to ODOT design standards, meet ADA accessibility requirements, and include environmentally sustainable design elements, where possible.

Here's a map with the approximate location and extent in red.

The other application is for completion funding on the paved path between the Union Street Railroad Bridge and Glen Creek. It has run into delays and cost-overruns, and requires funding in addition to the original Stimulus amount.

As Jen Akeroyd pointed out in an email to the Vision 2020 group, the proposals play more strongly as recreation projects than as transportation projects. Still, to my mind the Minto-Riverfront Bridge and path meets many of the criteria. Most importantly, it crosses or provides alternatives to big barriers - River Road and the Slough. (Similarly, the Union Street Railroad Bridge crosses the Willamette River, a formidable barrier.)

It is difficult to share the same enthusiasm for the Glen Creek path. It eliminates no barrier, forges no new connection. Really, it's a shortcut, a very nice shortcut, it's true, but it hardly a completes a critical connection. I don't see how it is a good candidate for a Flex Funds application.

Even more disconcerting, just up the block, the City is spending $11M+ on a widening project that will significantly degrade the connection across Wallace Road for people who walk and bike and separate the neighborhood from Roths, the Library, the Transit Center and the Post Office.

This is a $11M crater right in front of a $100K application to complete a shortcut. That's a difference of 100x, two orders of magnitude! A completed path between the bridge and Glen Creek will not come close to compensating for the upstream loss in connectivity at Wallace and Glen Creek.

The City should go ahead and apply for the funds, but golly it would be nice to have strong, visionary projects that clearly meet project criteria.

Tuesday Update - here's the discussion of the three Flex Fund apps and corresponding staff reports on Monday's Council agenda.

Wayfinding and Signage

More exciting and happily non-controversial was a discussion of wayfinding and bike route signage.

The current signing standards use the ODOT sign with three directional slots.

Here's one going west-bound on Chemeketa just as you approach the Capitol Mall. Chemeketa goes under, and into the parking garage, and bicyclists should stay above ground. The signing shows the veer into the turn-around.

And here's the sign going east-bound at 14th and Chemeketa.

It has seemed to many that such a big sign wasn't always necessary and perhaps contributed to sign noise or sign fatigue along routes. And where there's not a route junction, jog, or other deviation, the directional component might be superfluous. City staff were interested in what the group thought about this.

Bill Holmstrom recalled the signage from Vancouver BC, which used modest-sized bike logo on the street name "blade." (Here's more on the BTA blog and BikePortland.)

(Images from BikePortland)

The group rallied around this pretty quickly as a low-cost and elegant solution for those places where it was only necessary to signal a bikeway, not to give additional directions. It also indicated in a low key way the multi-modal nature of a shared roadway. Combined with sharrows on the pavement, this seemed like a great approach to marking.

Additionally, at decision points, bikeway junctions or jogs, or other directional nodes, the larger sign with three slots would be appropriate.

Together this seemed like a very flexible and sensible way for wayfinding and signage.

Do you have additional thoughts or criticism?