Royal Oak’s non-motorized planning efforts should be underway soon.

The Active Transportation Alliance, the Chicago-based group responsible for creating the biking and walking plan is on the Planning Commission agenda for their August 10th meeting (7:30pm at City Council Chambers, City Hall). That should be an hour presentation and it would be great if we could get many interested cyclists at that meeting.

That date is still tentative. The presentation may get moved to a later date, and if it does, we’ll let you know.

But for now, Royal Oak cyclists can add August 10th to their calendar.

The city of Highland Park is currently updating their recreation master plan.

Surprisingly enough, their 1999 plan “promotes the implementation of bike lanes throughout the city in an effort to promote both a linked park and school system as well as non-motorized traffic” (according to the city’s master plan.) We’re trying to find a copy of the original 1999 plan which supposedly have greater details.

Even still, we do have proposed bike lane map, which is fairly good. Our only thoughts are:

• McNichols needs bike lanes. They are specified in the Detroit plan.
• It’s too bad there’s no clear continuing route for Glendale over to Oakland, which is a fairly minor issue.
• We’re not sure why Midland was chosen rather than continuing on Puritan.
• It might be wise adding a connection between Second and Third at the southern city boundary. That would tie together the two Detroit routes. McNichols would tied them together on the northern boundary.
• The railroad should be highlighted as a future shared-use pathway called the Inner Circle Greenway.

What is odd about the city’s master plan is they recommend a single bike lane on the east side of Hamilton. That is not a safe or proper design.

Of course, none of this has been implemented to date. Highland Park has been through some tumultuous times of late. Still, these plans certainly open the door for the future.

Two bills were introduced in the Michigan House yesterday which would require all Michigan road agencies to adopt Complete Streets policies within two years as a condition for receiving transportation dollars.

An excerpt from House Bill 6151

SEC. 10P. (1) AS USED IN THIS SECTION:

(A) “COMPLETE STREET” MEANS A ROADWAY OR AN INTERCONNECTED NETWORK OF TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES THAT ACCOMMODATES ALL USERS OF ALL AGES AND ABILITIES, AND THAT ENABLES ALL USERS TO USE THE ROADWAY SAFELY AND EFFICIENTLY.

(B) “COMPLETE STREETS POLICY” MEANS A STATE OR LOCAL LAW, ORDINANCE, OR POLICY THAT ENSURES BOTH OF THE FOLLOWING:

(i) THE ADEQUATE ACCOMMODATION, IN ALL PHASES OF PROJECT PLANNING, DEVELOPMENT, CONSTRUCTION, MAINTENANCE, AND OPERATION OF ALL USERS OF THE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, PEDESTRIANS, BICYCLISTS, PUBLIC TRANSIT USERS, CHILDREN, OLDER INDIVIDUALS, MOTORISTS, AND INDIVIDUALS WITH DISABILITIES.

(ii) THE CONSIDERATION OF THE SAFETY AND CONVENIENCE OF ALL USERS IN ALL PHASES OF PROJECT PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT. THE DEPARTMENT SHALL PROVIDE ASSISTANCE TO AND COORDINATE WITH LOCAL ROAD AGENCIES AND METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATIONS IN DEVELOPING COMPLETE STREETS POLICIES.

(2) EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE PROVIDED IN THIS SECTION, THE DEPARTMENT, LOCAL ROAD AGENCIES, AND MUNICIPALITIES THAT RECEIVE APPROPRIATIONS UNDER THIS ACT SHALL ADOPT COMPLETE STREETS POLICIES. THE DEPARTMENT AND LOCAL ROAD AGENCIES SHALL ADOPT COMPLETE STREETS POLICIES NO LATER THAN 2 YEARS AFTER THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE AMENDATORY ACT THAT ADDED THIS SECTION. THE DEPARTMENT AND LOCAL ROAD AGENCIES AND MUNICIPALITIES SHALL ADHERE TO THE ADOPTED COMPLETE STREETS POLICY OF THE POLITICAL JURISDICTION WITHIN WHICH THE PROJECT IS LOCATED IN ALL PHASES OF PROJECT PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT.

The bill does carve exceptions, but they seem to be based on the same reasonable exceptions listed in the U.S. DOT recommended bicycle and walking policy statement.

Also, the bill does create a Complete Streets Advisory Council at the state level to “assist local road agencies and municipalities with implementation of Complete Streets Policies.”

House Bill 6152 would update Michigan’s planning enabling act by adding non-motorized transportation, Complete Streets, traffic calming and more as required elements of a municipal master plan.

If passed, this sweeping and profound legislation would clearly put Michigan on the right track by supporting active transportation and building livable communities.

What action can you take? The Michigan Complete Streets Coalition will likely have some recommend plan in the near future and we’ll be sure to pass it along.

First the good news. MDOT recently made the following Transportation Enhancement (TE) awards that should improve bicycling in Metro Detroit.

From MDOT’s press release:

Macomb County

The city of Utica will construct a nonmotorized bridge over the Clinton River to provide accessibility and connectivity to the city of Utica’s portion of the bike trail that will connect the Huron Clinton Metroparks at Metro Beach and Stoney Creek. The project is part of the Macomb County Bike/Hike Master Plan and will allow bicyclists to connect to the Macomb Orchard Trail as well as the Clinton River Trail in Oakland County. The project cost is $452,525, including $303,192 in federal TE funds and $149,333 in matching funds from the city.

Macomb, Oakland, Wayne counties

SMART, in coordination with its community partners, will purchase and install bike racks at several locations in Wayne, Oakland and Macomb counties. The intent is to provide communities with secure bike racks at locations away from bus routes for the convenience of SMART riders who also ride bikes. The project cost is $20,016, including $16,013 in federal TE funds and $4,003 in matching funds from SMART.

Clawson is also getting bike racks installed along 14 Mile Road. Unfortunately they only seem willing to make mild improvements to walkability and even milder ones for bike-ability. Their conceptual plans for their Main Street road diet included bike lanes. Their final plans and implementation did not.

MDOT Five-year plan

MDOT recently released their five-year spending plan. With reduced revenue from people driving less, Michigan cannot provide the full 20% match for federal transportation funding.

This does affect the Transportation Enhancements program. Normally MDOT would provide $12 million in match for TE projects on their roads. That may be reduced to $1 million per year, which means MDOT will undertake fewer TE projects like paved shoulders, bike lanes, and streetscaping on MDOT state trunklines.

However, it also means that local governments will received more TE funding since they provide the match and not MDOT.

It’s also worth highlight this language within MDOT’s plan. This provides useful quote for cycling advocates in Michigan.

Pedestrian and bicycle transportation are on the rise due to increased fuel costs. Injury and fatality statistics are humbling reminders of the importance to design and build safe facilities for multiple modes of transportation and of the importance of education and enforcement.

It may be surprising to some that in Michigan, one pedestrian is injured every three hours and 59 minutes and one bicyclist is injured every five hours and 13 minutes.

In addition, in 2006, 17.9 percent of the 1,002 traffic fatalities in Michigan were bicyclists or pedestrians, whereas nationally, 11.6 percent of the 42,642 traffic fatalities were bicyclists or pedestrians. A reduced [Transportation Enhancements] program would severely jeopardize MDOT’s ability to provide safer pedestrian and bicycle facilities.

This does raise one question.

If 17.9% of road fatalities are non-motorized users, why did the Michigan Office of Highway Safety Planning only allocate 0.36% for non-motorized safety under the State and Community Highway Safety Grant Program in 2009?

Master planning in Hamtramck continues to move forward. The latest is a public survey on parks and recreation within the city.

“Your input will help us determine improvement areas and prioritize them in the Hamtramck Master Plan Update.”

One question asks how important it is for “Providing bike lanes and improving bike facilities.”

Link: Hamtramck parks and recreation survey