In today’s Strib South (February 5th) section there is an article titled “Region’s No. 1 Concern: Transportation”. It discusses the release of a recent survey at the Metropolitan Council’s State of the Region event.
Now, I’m not mentioning the Met Council just ’cause I’m hoping to get former Chamber President Ludescher to weigh in on this topic. However, I am hoping that perhaps current Chamber President Jeff Hasse may participate in the discussion about the prioritization of transportation as a key issue for our leaders.
The Chamber of Commerce has been crying in the wilderness for many years about transportation issues, particularly Highway 19. At the recent quarterly meeting of the Boards of Directors of the Chamber and the NDDC, this year’s strategy for advocacy was outlined. Of particular interest were the number of task forces, studies, and analyses related to transportation that were recently or are soon-to-be completed. Here’s my off-the-top-of-the-head list:
1. City of Northfield Transportation Plan
2. Northwest Quadrant Study (Dakota County?)
3. Comp Plan Transportation Chapter Revision
4. MNDoT Hwy 19 Access Management Study
5. Rice County County Road 1 (Task Force?)
With item #5, I’m hoping to entice Kathleen Doran-Norton to jump back into the discussion. However, I’m also thinking that there may be some other recent or current efforts that I’m not including. Please add them to the pile on the table.
I think it is everyone’s goal to turn these studies, recommendations, and analyses into action steps. What tasks, projects, or efforts should we be checking off our lists as completed by the end of 2008?
John:
I commuted to downtown Minneapolis for four years, and agree there should be a southern corridor, but not at Jefferson Parkway and not to Dutch Road. Not only does this route cross the Cannon River, but it also crosses Heath Creek twice and leads to a dead end at Hwy 19. The land on the other side of where Dutch Rd. ends is in a permanent conservation easement with US Fish and Wildlife. And you rightly mention the difficulty of decommissioning Sechler park, built with special funding and status.
Rice County, MNDOT, Northfield and Bridgewater townships, the cities of Northfield and Dundas spent well over $100,000 to study where the southern corridor should be for the future, and to take action to preserve the right-of-way for that corridor. All agreed to a corridor along the current CSAH 1, over the river and the railroad, to link up to Decker Avenue. Decker is identified by Rice County as a primary north-south corridor in its 2002 transportation plan, and is currently under study in the North-west (Northfield) corridor study sponsored by Dakota County.
A corridor across the Cannon river should connect to east-west AND to north-south access to be most effective. It should support Northfield’s identified high growth area in its southeast corner (246-1-81 corner). It should support Northfield’s identified industrial growth areas on the northwest side of the city. It should support the industrial and commercial growth in Northfield’s southtown commercial area, in Dundas, and the Bridgewater Heights community.
A couple of months ago, I was driving my pick up truck, which I bought when we were building our own place in OK cuz they don’t much deliver where we are, I was dive bombed by a bicyclist as I was coming out of Just Foods.
I suppose it was cuz I was driving a pick up, which gets 20 mpg, but what
she didn’t know was that there is less than 6,000 mp year on it, whereas my
dh’s car gets 28 mpg and it’s got 20,000 mp year. Dive bomb him for goodness sake, and let’s get a proper corridor for it.
Bright,
please tell me how you knew what the dive bomber was thinking? Did they say something? And just what is dive bombing? Did you pull out in front of the cyclist and they rode close to you? I’m not denying it happened, just trying to understand the situation.
I’ll say it again, cyclists need to obey the laws, education and enforcement are the key components to achieve this.
As I was leaving Just Foods on Water Street, headed south, this gril on a bike came out from 6th street and crossed over to my lane, which is not only bad, but I presume illegal for any car, and not only was
she in my lane, but she was headed straight into the center of my bumper with a body language of a dive bomber. I slowed right down of course and looked her right in the eye as she veered off to my right, headed northbound. Her face was fierce and accusing, while I had never even gotten to 10 mph, I am a pokey driver and in no hurry to get anywhere ever, and she just glared at me, and I looked at her like she shouldn’t be trying to commit suicide. A day or two later I read on the internet, and I forget where now, that it was a movement against SUVs and otherAs I was leaving Just Foods on Water Street, headed south, this gril on a bike came out from 6th street like a bat out of h e double hockey sticks, crossed over to my lane, which is not only bad, but I presume illegal for any car, and not only was she in my lane, but she was headed straight into the center of my bumper with a body language of a dive bomber. I slowed right down of course and looked her right in the eye as she veered off to my right, headed northbound. Her face was fierce and accusing, while I had never even gotten to 10 mph, I am a pokey driver and in no hurry to get anywhere ever, and she just glared at me, and I looked at her like she shouldn’t be trying to commit suicide. A day or two later I read on the internet, and I forget where now, that it was a movement against SUVs and other gas guzzlers. She was also dressed so as not to be recognizable, except I did look right into her face as I said. I hadn’t reported it earlier because I believe in their right to demonstrate, although the method is a lacking.
Although she startled me, she didn’t scare me cuz I drive too slow to have
been in danger of hitting her. And I wouldn’t have known what she was really up to, had I not come across the article I mentioned.
Jerry- I agree wholeheartedly on driving manners for ALL vehicles and pedestrians on the road. That is why I noted that in my post. I’m not sure what is behind the general lack of respect for others, whether they are walking, driving, riding, or just waiting. I have a couple opinions, but no definite statistics to support them. It seems there is a general slide in civility across our whole society. Even the humor I see on the few sit-coms I’m exposed to at work seems to center around tearing someone else down. It’s little wonder we see some of the driving behavior displayed that we do. I’m not sure that more education will help, either. We are one of the most educated societies in the world, but I see little evidence of how it is changing our behavior, asside from legislation.
As far as cell phone usage while driving, I think this should be outlawed, just as not using your seat belt. I admit that I have been guilty of this practice, but it always leaves me feeling yucky, like I got away with something this time, but I might not in the future. Just as seat belt use is a life or death situation, I think we need to recognize that cell phone use enters into that, also, but that is just my opinion. I know that past attempts at legislating this practice have been voted down. Perhaps we have not seen enough traffic deaths attributed to it, yet. It seems that that is the criterion that drives certain legislation, rather than common sense.
Perhaps, rather than relying on roadway design only to take care of our problems, we should focus on changing our attitudes toward other people. If we esteem others as more important or at least equal to us, we might be moving in the right direction. This would take care of more than just bad driving habits and road rage. It might even change how we get along with one another in the community we live in.
On the issue of cyclist behavior, I would emphasize two areas for improvement:
Education: We need to educate cyclists better so that they obey traffic laws and do not endanger themselves through behavior such as ignoring stop signs and riding on the wrong side of the street. The Task Force on Nonmotorized Transportation is trying to get this started by bringing in a “League Cycling Instructor” (one certified by the League of American Bicyclists) from the Cities and training local cyclists, including school kids, possibly this spring. Eventually we hope to have locals trained as cycling instructors to educate students and others. (This might be a source of income for the instructors.) It would be excellent, for example, if the colleges offered cycling education each fall for students.
Education of motorists also needs to be improved so that they are aware of the laws that protect cyclists. (In general, I find nearly all drivers to be respectful.)
Enforcement: We need to enforce the existing laws to spur better cyclist behavior. This means having the police ticket those who violate traffic laws. This may not be popular with cyclists, but it’s necessary.
OK, geezer moment here, but back when most of us over 40 were growing up, we sat in the front seat (after loud arguments over ‘who had dibs’) or we sat in the back seat or the bed of a pick-up truck, like so many untethered missiles ready to be launched through the air to our deaths. Safety aside, we could watch traffic, watch how our parents and other drivers interacted and see the pedestrians and bikes in the mix. We walked and rode bikes on a regular basis. We knew that even a small miscalculation could mean our heads smacking into the dashboard as our parents braked or a broken arm as we swerved our bikes and hit a mailbox, tree or the ground.
We learned by trial and error,
Today, my grandkids sit in space shuttles cocoons of safety, facing backward and watching videos. They might as well be traveling in a tank. They don’t ride bikes or walk on a regular basis.
One of the things I noticed on the last walk-to-school effort was that kids seemed to have no clue how to get through the four-way stop intersection. They didn’t know which car would go next or how to make sure they looked a driver in the eye to make sure the driver saw them.
I’m not advocating going back to the ‘good old days,’ but we do need to recognize that we have to do a lot more purposeful education to make up for the stuff we learned by osmosis. Parents have to walk kids through intersections, ride with them and teach them, not just once or twice, but over and over until they get it. And parents have to make sure their new drivers really understand how to deal with pedestrians and bicyclists as well as how to manage the GPS system and iPod dock.
Anne & Bill- I still say education, schmeducation. If education really had any effect on changing behavior, we should be the best behaving society in the world. It is evident that we are not. I think Bill’s reference to enforcement of existing laws for cyclists AND for drivers would be appropose. The problem is how we get that done without every other person being a law enforcement officer. Now that’s a novel idea. Where is peer pressure in all this? Are we so many tolerant hedonistic individuals that we can’t lay down our own “convenience” for someone’s safety? The way I see some people drive would lead me to think that they believe the laws are for someone else and not them. This is the attitude that needs changing.
John, I agree that character is the key, but I’m pointing out that many kids and young adults just never get that foundation in the first place. I’m not talking about adding more classes in school, but adults taking responsibility for teaching their own kids.
And more geezer talk, but every time I flip through cable television and see what passes for ‘reality’ I realize that we may be doomed already. When more kids want to be celebrity personal assistants than teachers or doctors or business owners, we have a problem. And when people believe everything from getting a job to getting a relationship is based on a competition involving destroying others to win, it’s easy to see how traffic etiquette isn’t a priority for many people. They’re thinking about themselves, so nothing else matters.
Personally, I think that non-vehicular options should always be considered and, where they make sense, should be implemented.
I will admit that when I wrote this post, I was thinking of the road network. Although much of the five task forces, studies and analyses that I listed above were about connecting Northfield with the rest of the world, many of them also touch upon connecting different parts of Northfield to each other.
The NIC Transportation Task Force study was mentioned in one of the comments. I know that there are a number of people in town that believe it remains a living and powerful document that continues to have value for the community.
Looking at map that was included in that study, I note the Legend (“Problem Road and Street Segments in the Northfield Area”) at the top. I think that it is another list worth considering:
1. Future T. H. 19 Diversion
2. Proposed Cedar Avenue Extension (320th St. to North Avenue)
3. North Avenue (T. H. 19 to Cedar Avenue)
4. Thye Parkway (Cedar Avenue to T. H. #3)
5. North Avenue (Zanmiller Drive to T. H. #3)
6. Proposed Cedar Avenue Extension (North Avenue to T. H. #19)
7. Jefferson Parkway Extension (T. H. #19 to Armstrong Road)
8. Jefferson Parkway Extension (Armstrong Road to T. H. #3)
9. Jefferson Parkway link (Between completed segment)
10. Jefferson Parkway Extension (Spring Creek Rd. to T. H. #19)
11. Spring Creek Road (Jefferson Parkway to T. H. #19)
12. T. H. #19 & T. H. #3 Common Roadway Segment
Anne- Very well stated on your part, as usual. There must be both informational teaching and demonstrational teaching. I agree that that is an area we adults have missed and let the next generation down.
As I said before, I think you have to reconsider Jefferson as a through-route. Putting the schools, senior center, soccer fields and so much housing on the route, and narrowing the traffic lanes with the center islands, all make this a very unsafe road for anything but local traffic. Look at 246, which runs in front of the middle school and has everyone concerned about the incompatibility of kids and highway traffic now. Adding a second highway-intensive road at the intersection will guarantee endless fights over lowering speed limits, balancing vehicle pedestrian needs, adding traffic lights and police patrols, all compounded by the time ‘bubbles’ of use that the schools and sports fields generate. A safe 50 miles an hour at 10 p.m. on the weekend isn’t safe during the 20-minute weekday morning crush.
First of all, you can complain all you want about bikes or cars not obeying traffic laws or being downright nasty and “dive bombing” a poor defenseless truck driving down the road--but the end result is that a big motorized vehicle will trump a little two wheeled bicycle every time. There are plenty of people with bad manners, poor training or non-existent parenting. What we need is a reasonable transportation option that does not cut-out any of the users--so include the concerns of walkers, hikers, and cars.
And we should all remember what our parents taught us (or should have taught us--for those who did not get this message, listen up) if you are bigger and more powerful you have a responsibility to look out for the weaker, or less powerful--if you hurt them, it is always your fault and I don’t want to hear excuses. Watch out for the little guy (this also means those old fogeys who drive too slow and don’t see too well.) It is OK to complain later that you almost ran over a little kid on a bike and it almost gave you a heart attack--just don’t run them over.
When there are available alternatives they will be used--those that are able will walk or bike when they can (except for David Ludescher, who was born 50 years too late.)
We are in a transition period when we are seeking alternatives to driving anywhere--and we want our tax dollars working for us to give us those alternatives.
We really do need to find a way to educate drivers on how to STOP--your front bumper should be BEHIND the stop sign (NOT your rear bumper in front of the stop sign.) Also, rolling is not stopping. Also, rolling and waving at me to go ahead appears to look like you want me to pull out so you can hit me! Sorry I digress.
One of the reasons people pull past the stop lines is simply because traffic to the left and right are not always visible due to oblique angles or bushes, trees, etc. There is a lot of bad or non existing planning surrounding this area of
concern.
I agree the cell phone is a big contributor. I never have talked on a cell phone while driving and I never will. The mind simply cannot focus on two different things in any one given second.
Bruce: Let me be explicit: Motorized transportation is the Chamber’s priority. All this discussion about bikes and sidewalks does not further a complete transportation discussion. The Chamber would like a full discussion of vehicular traffic, especially on Highways 19 and 1. These are significant “commerce” roads that need attention before significant funds are spent filling in the gaps in bike trails.
David, you’re missing one of the most significant trends in commercial development. If you are building roads and new developments without nonmotorized options, you aren’t just passing up optional amenities, you are effectively taking yourself out of the game. You have to do both. I don’t think I have written about a single development in the last five years that didn’t include some investment in nonmotorized transportation access.
I agree that Hwys 1 and 19 are important for commerce, but companies don’t want the liability of having their trucks on the roads with pedestrians and bicyclists, if they can just as easily locate in communities where they have safer passage. You have amazingly stiff competition out there, so giving the other guys an edge doesn’t make sense.
David, I thank you for supplying a viewpoint from the point of view of the Chamber of Commerce. I appreciate and understand your point of view, but I can’t help but feel that only addressing “commerce” roads and vehicular traffic is somewhat contradictory to a “complete transportation discussion.” I know that Just Foods Co-op, a member of the chamber of commerce and my employer, is very appreciative of its customers and employees utilizing non-motorized transportation whenever possible, and, in my case, almost exclusively. From experience, trying to use our streets and roads (i.e. our current infrastructure) for biking is somewhat similar to trying to fix a broken leg by putting a band-aid on it. I constantly find myself weaving all over the place between our patchwork of trails, streets, and sidewalks. In Riverside park, I occasionally have to ride across the grass just to get to a street that is safe to access Target with. It’s not the most safe, secure or convenient method of getting anywhere, but I can attest that it is quicker than one might think and very cheap.
I should get a picture with my bike helmet too! I wonder if I have one anywhere…
The current approaches to growth seem to require that Northfield accommodate the “car” and thus become a congested suburb. Why can’t a more radical approach to transportation and logistics be considered where the “car” accommodates the urban design ? Is a street car out of the question to get people in and out of downtown and to school ? Sooner or later all big cities get en-snarled with cars and are forced into alternatives , why can’t a small city start off looking at alternatives ? This is also a development issue , if Northfield becomes just like Apple Valley or any other suburb (the place equivalent of a commodity) then what differentiates the community to attract more than an average share of talented people and businesses ?
Don’t need no picture, with a name like Gabriel Rholl, I can just see the
announcing trumpet and the spoked wheel.
David,
Let me be explicit… If that is the chambers priority, then I think folks may have to rethink the support and patronization of Chamber member businesses, that support you.
To cease supporting some of these hardworking small businesses however, would be wrong. Are you sure your focus is meeting their needs?
Commerce is important, but a good infrastructure is equally so.
I really think that your missing the point of a comprehensive transportation plan.
I thought the Chamber was for the common good of Northfield?
I do not think having a “vehicular only” focus is good for the community as a whole. I strongly urge you to rethink your position, and become educated on the master plan. Many of the things your organization is focusing on can co-exist within it.
David,
I can understand the Chamber considering motorized transportation -- separate from public transit -- to be its highest transportation priority, because that has been the standard practice in our culture and that is how most people and goods get around. However, times are changing and I think it is short-sighted to not include a multi-modal approach to transportation. The economic, environmental, and public health reasons for a multi-modal approach are growing in importance each year.
Some time ago I went and looked at what the U.S. Chamber of Commerce says about transportation on its web site, and I was rather surprised and encouraged by what I found. Here is a quote from their page on transportation:
I am struck by their use of the terms “comprehensive,” “multi-modal,” “intermodal” (such as driving and then getting on a train), and”sustainable.” Surely walking, biking, and public transit are part of these categories.
I dug deeper into the U.S. Chamber’s site and found material concerned not only with highways but also with mass transit.
I hope that the Northfield Area Chamber of Commerce will embrace this transportation vision espoused by its parent, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, especially since that vision coincides with the current trend of transportation planning by Northfield area governments.
I entered into the conversation hoping that we could have a discussion about the importance of motorized transportation concerns and its priority to the overall health of our community.
I agree with David Henson, they use the street cars in Italy and Switzerland.
There should also be certain days where handicapped people can drive right to the door of their destination.
The all or nothing approach is Soooo last century.
David you said:
“I entered into the conversation hoping that we could have a discussion about the importance of motorized transportation concerns and its priority to the overall health of our community.”
You were hoping for this conversation by seeing how many people you could alienate with your ridiculous statement in comment #65. This plan makes absolutely no sense.
Personally, I believe the issues Ray Cox raised are important and worthy of devoting resources to. Others have contributed thoughtful comments too.
I can’t believe anyone in the chamber would take your statement seriously.
Jerry:
Let’s talk about the issues Ray Cox raised.
As I said in comment #60, I think that non-motorized options should always be considered and, if they make sense, implemented. I would say the same thing for public transportation options.
However, the Planning Commission is going to be discussing the Transportation Chapter next Tuesday, and considering that I have been interested in this issue for the past five years, and because I have the sense that we’ve not made much progress on the issues identified by numerous task forces, studies and analyses focusing primarily on our motorized connections, it was the needs and/or weaknesses in this area that I was trying to focus on in my post. I was hoping to get feedback on my sense that there are many things that have not been checked off of our “to-do” list in this area and find out if there are some larger and important items that should be added to that list.
Some people, at one point in the process, suggested that perhaps we should start with a “blank slate”. I guess that I would think that this approach would make sense if we’d completed our “to-do” list, or that the information that we had assembled on the subject was many years out of date, or that we were convinced that the recommendations were based on misguided analysis. Although things have changed and perspectives may have shifted, our network of roads remains and, it is my personal opinion, many of the issues also remain.
Are the task forces, studies or analyses currently being or that were recently conducted missing anything? Are the issues identified or the recommendations made by the various groups or reports over the past few years missing anything? Have any challenges or opportunities recently emerged that would dramatically impact the existing and/or future infrastructure?
I would like to believe that we can include it all in our current work. My hope is we can try to get on the same page, as least for a moment in time, and move forward together on a few high priority projects.
Jerry,
You can be angry in your disagreements here but for you to call David L’s statement “ridiculous” and accuse him of deliberately alienating people here is over-the-top insulting.
And indirectly, it’s a harsh message to anyone else who might be inclined to participate, esp. those who might disagree with you.
Can you try again with a different tone?
“One day Alice came to a fork in the road and saw a Cheshire cat in a tree. “Which road do I take?” she asked. “Where do you want to go?” was his response. “I don’t know,” Alice answered. “Then,” said the cat, “it doesn’t matter.”
~ Lewis Carroll
Ross -- I am certain the issues in #60 are real concerns. But people, including I assume yourself, like the human scale of the historic Northfield. One just cannot feasibly walk or bike around the commercial areas of Eagan, Apple Valley or Lakeville. Northfield is at a fork in the road and if people do not demand human scale development for the future then all evidence points to our becoming just like other suburban areas.
As far as commercial concerns go, using the Internet as a coordinating tool, there is no physical reason why a municipal freight terminal could not be set up on H19 to break down freight so Northfield, at the least, would not have to be built to semi-truck scale.
The town cannot grow and accommodate unchecked car and truck traffic and remain human in scale. The is a mathematical fact because a car and truck are many times larger than humans. This is easy to see in Northfield since half the population live on 2 campuses that are only 1 or 2 % of the total land area.
Here is an interesting web site http://www.aashe.net/staffblog/campus-operations/its-official-parking-spaces-outnumber-people that discusses among other things the percentage of the transportation budget directed to automobile transport, 90 plus %, vs the number of people actually driving, 50% . With Northfield, being a college town, with many young kids (and soccer field traffic jams) and having several senior residences one would have to estimate Northfield’s driving public at below 50% of the population.
Maybe Northfield should consider a proportional transportation budget.
Yo, Jerry:
I agree with you that there’s a problem/contradiction in David’s comments #65: He talks about a complete solution, but unlike others here (whose approaches are more open to bikes and pedestrians from the start), he claims “complete” for the Chamber means motorized vehicles first, and doesn’t necessarily include the rest at all — so it’s not really complete.
This would be like a right-wing politician or economist saying a complete economic incentive package would be tax breaks for the rich only, or for the rich first, and if you ever get around to it, maybe others, but don’t count on it.
I agree with the majority here who view “complete” as including bikes and pedestrians from the start whenever possible (and it might be more cost-effective to include them from the start instead of retrofitting things later?).
To find the right tone, here’s my suggestion:
Instead of calling #65 “ridiculous,” try humor:
“David Ludescher, you ignorant slut.”
This will be recognized instantly as an allusion to 1970′s SNL “Weekend Update” (Dan Akroyd/Jane Curtain). Then you’re in like Flynn.
In the SNL skits, it was always the right-wing Akroyd using this line on the liberal Curtain — but turnabout is fair play. Kind of ironic too.
Go for the irony.
Instead of blocking off traffic on weekends, I’d rather see more riverside dining options, with sidewalks and bike paths extended and improved from downtown to Sechlur Park. Then you could eat, watch the kayaks, watch the progress on the construction of the new multi-step falls in the river….
I’m confused. Bly introduced Dan Patch legislation this week, but where are the local resolutions of support from all the government bodies and chambers of commerce and other groups? Where are the rallies and joint displays of support, standing alongside officials from other cities along the line?
Here’s an opportunity to get something started and people are focused on more plans and vision statements and talk, talk, talk.
Ross: After 82 posts, perhaps you can understand why motorized transportation projects don’t get traction in Northfield.
David,
There are two choices… being part of the problem, or being part of the solution.
If you truly believe in this cause, what have you and the chamber done TODAY to move toward your goal?
Posts like that are not going to get it. It is up to organizations like the chamber to step forward and lead the charge.
David H.- I can’t remember the guy’s name, but someone said that when you come to a fork in the road, take it. I guess that without some sort of planning, the Cheshire Cat’s comment is accurate.
John, I could not resist responding to your comment about when you come to a fork in the road, take it. It was a famous quote of Yankee catcher Yogi Berra. Years ago when I lived in New York and was working as a research assistant to the author Roger Kahn, we had a lunch interview session with Yogi in New Jersey. It turns out that the quote actually made more sense than one might think. Yogi was giving directions to his home. He had a circular driveway, so when you reached the fork in the road, either fork would take him to his home!
If Yogi Berra saw a fork in the road, he’d pick it up and eat with it.
Susan- Thanks for verifying that. I was just about to leave from work and I couldn’t remember Yogi’s name. Hopefully, in the whole planning scheme, we will be able to see how allowing for all types of vehicles will be like his driveway- It will get us to the right place. The attitude of looking down upon any person who does things differently than us is what is really counter productive.
Ross launched this transportation discussion with an invitation to David L and Kathleen to participate… and their responses understandably focused on motorized transportation.
He subsequently expressed a willingness to include comments from others related to non-motorized.
I think it’s proving to be frustrating to try to do both.
So let’s focus the discussion on motorized/commercial transportation for a week or so, esp. since the Planning Commission is going to be discussing the Transportation Chapter next Tuesday.
Kathleen’s comments #40 and #51 and Ross’ comment #60 would seem to provide the grist for focusing the discussion.
While I am sure other areas need attention, I am plugging for repairs, resurfacing or whatever you want to call it for Hwy 19, both northeast and west of northfield. It is already in need of emergency repair and I am sure
without looking at any study, it is one of two truck routes that deliver essentials to Northfield. There, I stayed on topic and everything.
Griff,
I accept your request to discuss only motor vehicle/commercial transportation issues, but I do so reluctantly, and before clamming up on some topics I’d just like to say a few more things about transportation as a whole.
I’m puzzled as to why it’s “frustrating” to try to discuss transportation holistically, considering all the modes that people use. It’s certainly more challenging, but it need not be frustrating. I would also argue that it’s necessary.
I’m also concerned that “commercial” transportation, as you describe it, is limited to motor vehicle transportation. The trips made by employees and customers are crucial to commercial enterprises, and they use every mode of transport there is. Perhaps by “commercial” you mean large semi-trailer trucks and fleet vehicles. Obviously those have special needs that need to be met. No one here has said that they do not.
Finally, Ross’s initial post, as you said, mentioned only “transportation,” not the specific mode. That is why I and others mentioned all the different types of transportation. Also, Mr. Hasse has not responded to his invitation to participate in this discussion.
Here’s a thought to consider (but not an answer):
In considering ways to accommodate increased motorized/commercial transportation traffic, it is essential to avoid further dissecting our community into isolated pockets of habitation, in the manner that Highway 3 already bisects the city.
Traffic planning is not my strong suit. I seem to remember Mayor Norquist in Milwaukee advocating a more evenly distributed traffic plan, but not much ever came of it. Have any communities found a way to facilitate traffic growth without high-speed corridors?
Interesting that you mention Milwaukee,Patrick. The last time i was there, maybe 1-2 years ago, some of their MAJOR elevated highways were being torn down, and rebuilt on the surface. The idea was in support of Keeping the traffic moving through business neighborhoods, thereby supporting those commercial districts, rather than flying by, overhead, to the suburbs.
Re: comp plan transportation chapter discussion…….surely NON-motorized traffic is a very important part of that discussion, isn’t it , Ross?
[...] I explained in a comment I made on the Locally Grown Northfield web site, where I first referred to this quote, there are [...]
Griff and Ross, all modes of transportation should be discussed as part of the Transportation Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan and a s part of the Transportation Plan.
I’m not minimizing the challenges we face in improving our road network. We have missed crucial opportunities for building road connections which we now need to remedy and we need to plan for efficient future roads.
BUT, the road network also serves other modes of transportation and how we plan our roads makes the use of non-motorized transportation more or less viable. Where we put streets, how those routes connect, and how they are designed is hugely important for getting around without a car as well as with one.
So, as we consider our transportation network, we need to think holistically, as Bill says, and consider “complete streets.”
A comprehensive plan has to include how semi-tractor trailers (semis) can move in and about Northfield.
Hoorah for Rep. David Bly on adding a bill to restore the Dan Patch line, which had been erased from every map and any consideration in 2002! According to the Northfield News, Senator Dahle is going to add a corresponding bill in the Senate.
So, if this were to happen, what kind of changes would be needed in Northfield’s transportation system?
Where would the station be? Are there sufficient roads, parking, biking and walking trails to accomodate the transit line?
How would it work in concert with a bus-rapid transit line from Cedar south into Northfield?
How would those roads and park-n-rides service Dundas? and folks from the surrounding areas?
What investment opportunities would it bring to downtown Northfield?
Are there places in Northfield which should change to mixed use zoning if there were a transit station?
[...] there are a fair number of bikes in town. During a recent discussion of transportation issues on Locallygrownnorthfield.org, the former president of the Northfield Chamber of Commerce [...]
“A comprehensive plan has to include how semi-tractor trailers (semis) can move in and about Northfield.”
I think a more accurate statement would be that a comprehensive plan has to include how “freight” gets moved into and about Northfield. Everything, including a business park could be kept smaller in scale (and easier to maintain) (and with higher land values) if a cross-docking station (like a coop) were used to deliver freight -- either transferring to dock trucks or some type of local rail freight delivery system. A few businesses in Northfield operate full truckload businesses but most Semis coming in, even to a business park, are only delivering pallet quantities. This would a be a big “change” from how most cities develop but would be easy to coordinate with the Internet and freight tracking. Reducing the overall scale of the city (or keeping the historic scale) would save a great deal in maintenance and set the city apart in terms of livability (including walking and biking).
Anne -- Regarding your post #81, citizens are just as important as gummit folk. Here’s my letter. Feel free to resend it. Or send your own…..
Rep Bly:
Thanks for putting the Dan Patch line back on the map, and to you Senator Dahle for offering a corresponding bill in the Senate.
Be sure to let us know what we can do to overcome opposition or to help you shepherd these bills through.
It was silly to let the Dan Patch go in 2002.
As you consider rail transit, the Citizen’s League has done some thinking about alternate funding sources for transit. We know from the Hiawatha line and the Minneapolis ball park that property values increase exponentially where public funding for infrastructure is spent.
Shouldn’t some of the increased property value that’s created because of public investment return back to the public in the form of supporting maintenance and upgrade of that public investment?
Think about a value-added tax to support transit….or maybe it’s really a fee for property value enhancement???
Kathleen Doran-Norton
Kathleen:
Great, positive contributions.
David Henson:
Nice twist. Thinking outside the box. Helpful stuff.
Griff: No talking about bikes or walkers, but could we talk about making the Cannon River into a cannal? The Erie Cannal was pretty successful in its time, and it has that great song….