This year, the City of Minneapolis added four new on-road bicycle facilities to the Northside. These facilities fill a major gap in the overall city system and result from a coordinated prioritization from the North Minneapolis Bike Taskforce (NMBT). Coupled with Mayor Rybak’s decision to move these projects forward in the capital program, the City installed these lanes three years earlier. These facilities connect the parkway system in the west and north to the river and into downtown and bridge the largest remaining gap in the City’s system.
The new on-road lanes on Plymouth, 26th and 42nd Avenues and North 2nd Street form the skeleton that can accommodate additional capacity for the area in the coming years. Since these are the first on-street lanes for this part of town, it is critical to get it right. As I have stated in a number of previous posts, the installation of bicycle facilities lowers the barriers for new users. And as previously detailed on this site, people will use these facilities and the bicycle community grows.
At this point it is appropriate to divulge that I am a proud member of the NMBT and endorse these routes as the first on-road lanes for this area of the City. However, the installation does not meet my approval.
The Northside lanes total more than 8.5 miles of new well-intentioned facilities of dedicated lanes or share the road treatments that attempt to make it easier to move through the Northside on a bicycle. However, I give a grade of “incomplete” for these facilities based on lack of continuity and unsafe conditions in multiple spots. The City would need to complete four improvements to the system to receive a final grade and provide a quality facility. I explain these conditions below in order of importance.
(1) Remove the lane from the gutter pan
I have spent many years discussing bike facility design. In these years, I cannot recall ever seeing an acceptable design that pushes the bicycle into the gutter pan (with one exception described below). On Plymouth Avenue between Emerson and Third, the bike lane is four feet wide to the curb and has on 22 inches on the asphalt pavement. This limited width is further restricted by the payment conditions where there is a healthy trenched pothole between the bituminous roadway and the concrete gutter pan. At one point east of Lyndale and one point west of Third the bicycle lane payment marking straddles the two pavement types and across a storm water catch basin. If bicyclists followed the arrow he or she would run right into the existing trench.
There is one exception to the use of the gutter pan. This occurs when the gutter pan is specifically designed to accommodate the bikeway. In Minneapolis, we have it on University Avenue. This treatment is a six-foot wide concrete gutter pan that creates a safe environment for bikes to travel.
(2)Extend the marked lanes on Plymouth to the river
The solution to this condition on Plymouth is to extend the three-lane treatment that is on the western portion of the corridor all the way to the Mississippi River. I no longer believe that a share the road treatment is an acceptable option. I think of the less-skilled, less-comfortable bicyclist will gravitate to off-road facilities or low volume routes. It is more likely that the a new rider will be more comfortable on the Theo With/Victory Memorial route along the western city border to travel north-south then travel a comfortable connection into downtown. Right now, the treatment from the parkway to Humboldt Ave along Plymouth provides this route. It is at Humboldt that it all goes wrong. The majority of the traffic volume and the most complex roadway intersection occur on the east half of Plymouth. I am certain that a rider that is trying the commute for the first time will not repeat the attempt after he or she encounters this half of Plymouth.
For those who are not familiar with the area let me break it down for you. As you travel east-bound, there is a comfortable 5+ foot continuous bicycle lane to travel, at Humboldt Plymouth curves north. At this bend the view of the bicyclist is first a sign stating at the bikeway is ending and then up ahead is an intersection of Fremont and then Emerson. These road form a one-way pair (Emerson travel is north, Fremont travel is south) and is one of the primary routes though this area of town for both motorists and transit. Metro Transit Route 5 is on of the most frequent and most used transit route in the system. 
This buses make a left turn onto Plymouth, stop (with the vehicle angled) in mid-block, and then turn at Emerson to the south (which become Seventh Street) and into downtown. The travels lanes on this one block of Plymouth expand to three eastbound lanes to accommodate the volume that comes off Fremont to Seventh and the right two lanes allow for right turns onto Seventh. In addition to right-turn permission, the middle lane also allows traffic to proceed along Plymouth. A bicyclist must navigate through angled stopped buses, move to the middle lane and avoid any turning traffic that might not respect the bicycle right to proceed along Plymouth. 
When the rider successfully conquers this area the bike lane marking move into the gutter pan (see Number 1 above) and there are now two lanes for vehicle travel in both directions. As you travel east from this point the condition continue to deteriorate until you are between Second and the River Parkway where there is only a few share the road sign, poor payment conditions and traffic speeds that exceed the posted signs. If the rider is successful to traverse this portion of the corridor he or she is greeted with an off-street facility at the River which will take you into downtown.
There are too many other barriers to riding – the American car culture, lack of time, the need for lockers and showers, weather, etc. – that the infrastructure should not add to these barriers. I do acknowledge that all bike streets are bike streets and bike facilities on selected roads can project to an uninformed traveler that bike are only allowed in designated areas. However, Plymouth (with its link to the off-road network) is a critical gap that needs additional consideration to create safe travel for those who need and desire the additional protection a well designed bike facility provides. I also acknowledge that changing the roadway from four travel lanes to three will reduce motor vehicle traffic. My response is that there are adequate alternative to absorb this reduced capacity. Traffic is like water, it will find the path of least resistance, and with major arterials and highway suck as Olson Highway, West Broadway/Golden Valley Road, Interstates 394 and 94, Washington, Lyndale, Fremont/Emerson, and Penn within a mile or intersecting the avenue it makes the case to accommodate the bicycle first on Plymouth.
(3)Stripe the lanes continuously
In a number of areas the striping of the lanes is inconsistent. In some areas where the City was not willing to remove parking it removed the lanes. In other areas, it simply seems as if the striping truck stopped for a stretch and continued on further down the road. I have concerns with regard to the first observation that parking needs to be preserved at the peril of the bike lanes, although I can understand the need for balance. 
I do, however, feel that if there is an on-street parking problem, maybe the facility should not have gone on that avenue. Especially with these lanes that hug the curb and gutter intermittent marking force the rider to move into traffic as it avoids parked cars. If the markings are removed entirely then a bicyclist would ride in the same position (about 7 feet from the curb) during the entire run of the avenue to avoid parked cars and would keep the same line of travel. Addressing the second issue is simple. Send the stripers back out and finish the job.
One improvement I am not suggesting, though, is stripping in marked share the road areas at business districts such ad 42nd and Thomas and 42nd and Fremont. Simple share the road treatments will suffice considering the need business parking.
(4)Prohibit parking in the marked lanes
There are a number of areas where motor vehicles park in the bike lanes. This occurs for the following reasons, one – the lanes is not marked at that point (see Number 3 above), two – the vehicle owner disobeys the marking and parks, three – there is a lane without any “No Parking” signs to restrict use, or four – the City permits parking. Parking in the bike lanes defeats the purpose of installing the bike facilities in the first place. If there is a lane there should be no parking permitted, end of story.
There is hope!
Minneapolis Public Works staff knows that these lanes are not satisfactory and have committed to fixed them. The NMTF will meet on November 8, 2006 with Public Works staff to begin to develop a plan to fix the Northside lanes. It is great to see that Public Works staff will not be satisfied with inferior bike facilities in any part of the City. I will keep you posted on the progress.
