Jump to content


Banning Bikes on Roadways During Hwy 40/64 Construction?


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
44 replies to this topic

#1 velo_city

velo_city

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 195 posts

Posted 26 January 2007 - 12:36 PM

It's possible.

Wanna do something about it before it does become a reality?

Read all the info below, write a letter (and it works best coming from each person - not a mass letter).

I don't have contact info for all the muni's involved, but it could be good to let them know too (and, since $$ speaks - let 'em know if you spend $$ while ridin' that bike in their community).

thanks!
velo~



CYCLISTS ARE ASKED TO CONTACT ST. LOUIS COUNTY OFFICIALS TO ENSURE THAT CYCLISTS’ ACCESS TO THE ROADS IS NOT DIMINISHED IN ANY WAY, FOR ANY REASON.

We believe that St. Louis County Highways is considering restrictions of bike travel on key roadways during I-64 reconstruction.

Such a policy would lead to increased car trips.  Coupled with the MODOT Director of Transportation' s objection to financially supporting Metro during this project, this region’s traffic planners could be creating a perfect storm of traffic congestion, where the roadways are clogged with motor vehicle traffic, and any alternatives that could alleviate that congestion have been neglected by MODOT and St. Louis County planners.

While we have not directly heard from the County that they have finalized plans to ban bikes, we do know they are considering it.  We have confirmed that right of way survey stakes on Ladue and Clayton Roads were placed there in relation to St. Louis County ’s plans to alter intersections on those roads in support of increased traffic during I-64 construction.

We believe that we cannot wait any longer for a response. While we wait for St. Louis County to answer our concerns, plans are being drafted.  Now is the time to contact elected officials.  

We hope that cyclists and cycling organizations can be involved in planning congestion mitigation strategies, and believe that we have solutions that can help make the traffic situation more bearable during I-64 construction.  We believe strongly that any restrictions on bike travel are misguided and not in the best interests of the St. Louis region.


Action needed:
Obviously, prohibiting cyclists for any reason on roads such as Clayton, Ladue, Conway, Big Bend, Brentwood, Forsythe etc., would be contrary to the law in all 50 states, including Missouri.  Additionally, by reducing the number of bike commuters, it would lead to INCREASED car traffic and congestion at a time when citizens of the region are being asked to alter travel patterns to reduce congestion.  Contact the public officials below to discuss your concerns.

County Executive Charlie A. Dooley
Phone: (314) 615-7016
Office: Administration Building,  41 South Central, Clayton  (9th Floor)
Mail:   41 South Central Avenue, Clayton, MO 63105
E-mail:  cdooley@stlouisco. com

St. Louis County Council (find your councilperson and contact info here)
http://www.stlouisc o.com/council/

St. Louis County Highways Dept.
General comments: http://www.stlouisc o.com/hwyweb/ feedback. html
Request services: http://www.stlouisc o.com/hwyweb/ svs_request. html


Sample points to include in your letter

As an avid cyclist, I would like to know what St. Louis County is doing to ensure that alternate routes (Clayton, Ladue, Conway, Big Bend, Forsythe etc.) are safe for cyclists when construction begins?  What is St. Louis County doing to encourage people to reduce congestion by biking or other alternative transportation rather than driving?

Does the county have a plan for ensuring that cyclists and pedestrians are accommodated on all roadways, as they are required to under the St. Louis area Long Range Transportation policy, Regional Walking and Biking plan, and federal law?

There are many reasons to promote bicycling during this period.  Common sense tells me that by reducing the number of bike commuters, it would lead to INCREASED car traffic and congestion at a time when citizens of the region are being asked to alter travel patterns to reduce congestion.

In a recent meeting, Executive County Director Charlie Dooley was heard saying “15-20 percent of people need to change their routine for the Highway 64/40 project” to be successful and less painful for all concerned. One way for many to start changing routine is by cycling, or even walking to one’s destination.

I urge project planners to include cycling advocates and cycling organizations, such as the St. Louis Regional Bicycle Federation and Trailnet, in planning for the Highway 64/40 project.  I further urge planners to not only ensure that roadways remain open to cyclists, but to undertake promotes to encourage bicycle travel.

Thank you for looking into this and for your service to the citizens of St. Louis.



WE ALSO URGE CYCLISTS TO CONTACT PUBLIC OFFICIALS WHOM THEY KNOW AND ASK THEM TO CONTACT ST. LOUIS COUNTY OFFICIALS TO ENSURE THAT CYCLISTS’ ACCESS TO THE ROADS IS NOT DIMINISHED IN ANY WAY, FOR ANY REASON.

Issue background

While the St. Louis County Parks Dept. has long been supportive of cycling, the Highways department has had limited support for transportational cyclists.  The County has a policy of installing bike safe drain grates, using curb drain inlets that are better than most, but has put up no signs, produced no maps of favored routes, does not promote bike transportation publicly and has not created a bike plan.  There is no County counterpart to St. Louis City ’s Bicycle Implementation Group.

There are some positive developments:
The County did endorse the St. Louis Regional Bicycle Federation’s application for a federal bike parking project in 2006.  
There have been rumors that a St. Louis County bike plan is in the works, but no one from Trailnet or the St. Louis Regional Bicycle Federation has been invited to take part.  
There are also indications that the County is considering bike parking ordinances as part of a larger business ordinance update, but nothing concrete has occurred.  
The County Executive has signed on to two regional documents that state “all transportation projects must include accommodations for bicyclists and pedestrians unless exceptional circumstances exist”: the regional Long Range Transportation Plan and the St. Louis Regional Bicycling and Walking Transportation Plan.

There are also some troubling developments:
The County’s proposed Hanley Road project, one of the largest in the area at $32 million, does not have any provisions for cyclists and calls to request them by the Bicycle Federation and the Sierra Club have not resulted in any change.
The County has not applied for Enhancements funds for any bicycle projects. By way of comparison, St. Louis City typically submits 2-5 projects during each application cycle.
There is no mention of bicycling as an alternative mode on the County Highways web site.
We are not aware of any bicycle traffic count conducted on the roads in question.  It would be concerning if St. Louis County Highways and Traffic adopted a policy without knowing how many people it affected.

Most troubling:
The acting director of Highways has indicated that he would like to see bikes off the road during the 40/64 project.

#2 stan

stan

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 356 posts

Posted 27 January 2007 - 09:44 PM

I've been thinking about this all day. The same question keeps coming up, do I really WANT to be on the roads during the construction?  I'm not saying I am ok with giving up that right to access but there could be some wicked altercations and I don't personally want to be part of that. I feel for those folks that HAVE to ride to get to work, school, etc.

#3 adonai1st

adonai1st

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 447 posts

Posted 27 January 2007 - 09:49 PM

i don't agree with banning bikes from the road either but i definately will not be on those roads during the construction on I-64. That would be suicidal!

#4 Diogenes

Diogenes

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1081 posts

Posted 28 January 2007 - 12:00 AM

I think that forgetting the roads in question during this time is something everyone can - and must - agree upon.

Please do not insist on "the right" to ride them during these periods, whether during the week or on the weekends.

The prospect for injury or worse will be magnified beyond imagination - not to mention the possibility of bad press all will receive from the actions of a few, whether law-abiders or scofflaws.

#5 JFB

JFB

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 53 posts

Posted 28 January 2007 - 06:58 AM

There are other roads to use.  Bellevue, instead of Big Bend, Litzsinger, instead of Clayton, Wydown, instead of Forsythe.  This construction is going to suck for EVERYONE!!!  Drivers as well as cyclist.

#6 Nik

Nik

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 252 posts

Posted 28 January 2007 - 08:05 AM

View Poststan, on Jan 27 2007, 09:44 PM, said:

I've been thinking about this all day. The same question keeps coming up, do I really WANT to be on the roads during the construction?  I'm not saying I am ok with giving up that right to access but there could be some wicked altercations and I don't personally want to be part of that. I feel for those folks that HAVE to ride to get to work, school, etc.

Some people CHOOSE to ride to work.  That's one less car on the road.  Why should bicycle commuters have to choose alternate routes, sometimes doubling their mileage to get from their house to place of work?

Every rider has ridden Clayton before, even if not during rush hour.  It has wide outside lanes and/or a nice shoulder to ride on, few stop signs, etc.

Diogenes - your statement about everyone MUST forget about these roads is ludicrous.  As bicyclists, we have equal entitlement to the transportation system in this State (and County).  Having that right taken away, even if temporary, sets a dangerous precedence.

For example:  my understanding is that each municipality that relinquishes these roads to the County must pass and enforce local laws to support the traffic mitigation plan drawn up by the county.  What if some of your favorite, cycling-loving (sarcasm) municipalities passed ordinances to ban bikes, in conjuction with the County plan, and then decided to leave them on the books after the I-64 job was over?

Some of you need to start looking outside the box.

KNik

#7 stan

stan

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 356 posts

Posted 28 January 2007 - 09:12 AM

View PostNik, on Jan 28 2007, 08:05 AM, said:

View Poststan, on Jan 27 2007, 09:44 PM, said:

I've been thinking about this all day. The same question keeps coming up, do I really WANT to be on the roads during the construction?  I'm not saying I am ok with giving up that right to access but there could be some wicked altercations and I don't personally want to be part of that. I feel for those folks that HAVE to ride to get to work, school, etc.

Some people CHOOSE to ride to work.  That's one less car on the road.  Why should bicycle commuters have to choose alternate routes, sometimes doubling their mileage to get from their house to place of work?

KNik

I agree that choice is important and is a right, however we have all been riding and, due to road conditions, cars had to wait behind us. Cars waiting is fine under normal circumstances but this will not been normal by any stretch of the imagination.
This also makes me wonder if they will place in very specif guidelines as to when the ban will be lifted. By section of competion or just when they feel like it?

#8 Nik

Nik

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 252 posts

Posted 28 January 2007 - 09:26 AM

View Poststan, on Jan 28 2007, 09:12 AM, said:

View PostNik, on Jan 28 2007, 08:05 AM, said:

View Poststan, on Jan 27 2007, 09:44 PM, said:

I've been thinking about this all day. The same question keeps coming up, do I really WANT to be on the roads during the construction?  I'm not saying I am ok with giving up that right to access but there could be some wicked altercations and I don't personally want to be part of that. I feel for those folks that HAVE to ride to get to work, school, etc.

Some people CHOOSE to ride to work.  That's one less car on the road.  Why should bicycle commuters have to choose alternate routes, sometimes doubling their mileage to get from their house to place of work?

KNik

I agree that choice is important and is a right, however we have all been riding and, due to road conditions, cars had to wait behind us. Cars waiting is fine under normal circumstances but this will not been normal by any stretch of the imagination.
This also makes me wonder if they will place in very specif guidelines as to when the ban will be lifted. By section of competion or just when they feel like it?
Stan, the point is that they can design their road construction taking bikes into consideration.  Your point about cars having to wait behind cyclists shouldn't have to happen if they plan accordingly.  I don't know any stretch of Clayton Road, except way west of 141, currently, where cars may not be able to pass a single cyclist.

#9 stan

stan

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 356 posts

Posted 28 January 2007 - 10:30 AM

View PostNik, on Jan 28 2007, 09:26 AM, said:

View Poststan, on Jan 28 2007, 09:12 AM, said:

View PostNik, on Jan 28 2007, 08:05 AM, said:

View Poststan, on Jan 27 2007, 09:44 PM, said:

I've been thinking about this all day. The same question keeps coming up, do I really WANT to be on the roads during the construction?  I'm not saying I am ok with giving up that right to access but there could be some wicked altercations and I don't personally want to be part of that. I feel for those folks that HAVE to ride to get to work, school, etc.

Some people CHOOSE to ride to work.  That's one less car on the road.  Why should bicycle commuters have to choose alternate routes, sometimes doubling their mileage to get from their house to place of work?

KNik

I agree that choice is important and is a right, however we have all been riding and, due to road conditions, cars had to wait behind us. Cars waiting is fine under normal circumstances but this will not been normal by any stretch of the imagination.
This also makes me wonder if they will place in very specif guidelines as to when the ban will be lifted. By section of competion or just when they feel like it?
Stan, the point is that they can design their road construction taking bikes into consideration.  Your point about cars having to wait behind cyclists shouldn't have to happen if they plan accordingly.  I don't know any stretch of Clayton Road, except way west of 141, currently, where cars may not be able to pass a single cyclist.

Ok, you win. Your prize is in the mail.

#10 Diogenes

Diogenes

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1081 posts

Posted 28 January 2007 - 01:34 PM

View PostNik, on Jan 28 2007, 08:05 AM, said:

Diogenes - your statement about everyone MUST forget about these roads is ludicrous.  As bicyclists, we have equal entitlement to the transportation system in this State (and County).  Having that right taken away, even if temporary, sets a dangerous precedence.
KNik
My, you do have a way with words.
And the real world is...?
Raise the entitlement point from your hospital bed.  Think about harried commuters on roads narrower than US40 and with stop signs/signals, still talking on their cel 'phones, still in their vans/SUVs, still bumper-to-bumper, with the inevitable occasional lapse in observation...  Raise the entitlement point from your hospital bed.
These officials have a responsibility for public safety (riders and drivers) as well as for efficient traffic flow.
You do have a point about a precedent being set; I think that should be addressed for access after the construction.

#11 point to point

point to point

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 429 posts

Posted 28 January 2007 - 06:50 PM

I love living in a city where even cyclists don't think cyclists have rights.

I will keep riding.

Scott.

#12 Slingen

Slingen

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 714 posts

Posted 28 January 2007 - 07:38 PM

View Postpoint to point, on Jan 28 2007, 06:50 PM, said:

I love living in a city where even cyclists don't think cyclists have rights.

I will keep riding.

Scott.


I will be right behind you Scott...or sometimes in front...I'll carry my load!...but I'm not getting off the road....I gotta get to work!  ;)

#13 John_Kuthe...

John_Kuthe...

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1262 posts

Posted 29 January 2007 - 05:59 AM

View PostNik, on Jan 28 2007, 08:05 AM, said:


Some of you need to start looking outside the box.

KNik

To loosely quote a recent movie, there is no box! ;-)

I don't see what you're all worried about, as far as safety is concerned. Cars are gonna be crawling through the narrow windy arteries surrounding I-64 during the shutdowns for construction. It's gonna be reminiscent of the opening of the movie Office Space where the man using the walker is beating the rush hour traffic!
First job of Govt: Protect people from Govt
Second job of Govt: Protect people from each other
But it must never become the job of Govt to protect people from themselves!

#14 rockhound

rockhound

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2740 posts

Posted 29 January 2007 - 11:18 AM

View PostNik, on Jan 28 2007, 08:05 AM, said:

What if some of your favorite, cycling-loving (sarcasm) municipalities passed ordinances to ban bikes,

Didn't they already do this in Grafton (and not because of construction)?  

Aren't those laws still on the books?

Just because you can, doesn't mean you should, unless you happen to work on that stretch of road...otherwise, ride elsewhere.

#15 rudy aka 'maninblak'

rudy aka 'maninblak'

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1244 posts

Posted 29 January 2007 - 12:15 PM

Quote

There are other roads to use. Bellevue, instead of Big Bend, Litzsinger, instead of Clayton, Wydown, instead of Forsythe. This construction is going to suck for EVERYONE!!! Drivers as well as cyclist.

Car drivers will also take those routes. Unless they could be banned, and Litzinger, Bellevue and Wydown dedicated to bike traffic!  Now there's a sweet thought.  Maybe we should try to convince the municipalities what a fair and progressive-minded thing that would be.