Transit Updates for Greater Grand Rapids

[Veloise]

Ok so all the letters to the Press and comments on Mlive are making me nervous about this thing. Is it going to pass? I realize the last Rapid millage request passed, but people seem a lot more skeptical of this one.

I think we can rule out this thing passing in Grandville and Walker, but does anyone think GR and Wyoming (and possibly EGR) will throw in enough oomph to get this thing going? I feel like we've come to far to let this slip through our finger tips.

I don't live in any of these cities so I can't vote, but I'm trying my best to convince everyone I know to vote yes.

Still time to dash off a viewpoint letter. Plenty of fodder and back-up right here in this thread. (Hey, if Mayor Logie can do it...)

[fotoman311]

Those last 2 were helpful, thanks.

A brief look at the numbers shows as follows ...

Of the 63 largest cities (4 ignored as no '90 census data), % of bicycle ridership increased in 32, decreased in 20, and were unchanged (< .02% change) in 11.

Over a 10 year (1990 - 2000) period the increase was small ... maybe .1% or .2%. Grand Rapids fell into this. Using .4% as the median ridership nationwide using 2005 figures, if past trends continue we can expect bicycle ridership to hit 1% in approximately 30 to 60 years.

I figure future trends are speculative at best. Gov't assistance, demographics, population shifts, oil prices, urban policy, and technology are just a few factors. An affordable electric vehicle could really have a big impact.

If you consider Washington DC as a northern city and ignore Seattle due to its moderate climate, the number of northern cities making the top 20 in ridership % is 3. Of interest is the number of southern and western cities showing decreases, maybe because of aging populations.

While I agree in some sense, I think there is great reason to believe that the numbers of bicycle commuters will increase for the 2010 census. Of course, this data won't be available until 2012 or 2013. Gas prices, an increased awareness of bicycling as an alternative to driving, and more people moving back into urban areas that are more conducive to cycling are among them.

We have spent more money on bicycle facilities in the past decade. Portland is a good example of planning and implementing a comprehensive network of bicycle infrastructure resulting a drastic increase in cycling. (4.6% if you look at that sheet, and you can also look at the graph I posted earlier showing bridge traffic.)

When the facilities are there and the bicycle culture develops, it becomes normal to ride a bicycle to get to places that are nearby. We should be investing in these facilities not only for commuting, but for everyday errands as well. You may have a job that's 15 miles away that you cannot bike commute to. But, if the facilities are there, you can ride your bike to the restaurant nearby, or your children can ride or walk to school. One of the speakers at the Bike Summit mentioned that ~20% of the traffic in the morning is parents taking their children to school. (I don't have a source for this, unfortunately.) At a couple of elementary schools in Kentwood, kids are forbidden from riding their bicycles to school by the principal because they might have to cross large arterial roads that are considered unsafe.

But to get back on the topic of transit, combining mass transit opportunities with bicycling opportunities is an important part of increasing accessibility to our mass transit network and serving the most potential riders.

Also, on a different thread of this discussion, I wonder how passage of this millage might affect the development that ICCF has been mulling at Wealthy and Division?? Would being on a major transit route like this with increased traffic passing by make it easier to attract certain types of retailers? And make this spot a more attractive place for potential residents? Would this project count as one development that might be tipped towards reality if this passes?

Edited April 30, 2009 by fotoman311

[arcturus]

But to get back on the topic of transit, combining mass transit opportunities with bicycling opportunities is an important part of increasing accessibility to our mass transit network and serving the most potential riders.

Agreed, just wanted to put bicycle use in perspective.

With a 0.4% commuting share even a twofold increase taking many years still makes it's a very small part of the overall transportation picture. Hopefully the other 99.6% share will be utilized wisely.

[fotoman311]

Agreed, just wanted to put bicycle use in perspective.

With a 0.4% commuting share even a twofold increase taking many years still makes it's a very small part of the overall transportation picture. Hopefully the other 99.6% share will be utilized wisely.

At the same time, even .4% is 400,000-500,000 people riding their bicycles to get to and from work.

Additionally, bicycle lanes and facilities are a small part of the overall transportation budget. Increase that investment and you can increase the amount of people bicycling. It's not like bicyclists are demanding that 10 or 20% of transportation funds be spent on them. Also, one of the great ways to improve bicycling conditions is to fix all the potholed roads, which motorists happen to like as well.

It's not like people were driving their cars all over the place without massive government spending on infrastructure for cars. Now, 30-50 years later, we're seeing some of the side effects of that type of development and subsidization of auto-centered communities manifest itself. A lot of young people don't want to live in the suburbs where they have to drive everywhere. People want livable, walkable communities.

Plus, bicycling also has many other benefits which are externalized and harder to quantify, including better health, mentally and physically, less air pollution, and a closer connection to your community and your surroundings (it's much easier to see things, and wave and talk to people). I don't see people improving their health driving around in their cars.

Edited April 30, 2009 by fotoman311

[Raildudes dad]

The power lines that run about 1/4 mile from Division Ave has a bike trail. It was one of the main items in the Design Charette for the 54th/60th stations. In anycase that line I believe is gonna connect to the South Beltline Trail and goes north all the way to 28th St. I am not sure how far north it runs since I did not grab the Wyoming Bike Trail map at the city offices. If you happen to be around that area I would suggest you pick up a copy if you are interested in biking in Wyoming. They are currently looking at means of putting the map on city webserver but it is a pretty big file so nothing yet. In anycase Kentwood has a trail that runs around 50th street but it ends just before Division. Connecting those two lines is in the plans. Wyoming btw pays for these lines by the means of the Parks Millage.

The trail's south end is at 60th. There are no plans to connect it to the M-6 Trail at this time. I did a feasibility / cost study last fall to make the connection. Relativity easy to do and reasonable cost but no funding source available. It was supposed to go on a "wish list" but I have not heard any more.

[aowwt]

Yeah the southern connection would have to be down by Byron Township, which is not in any way capable of doing it yet. But since the Park that is just south of 60th it would not have to go too far. In anycase I think Wyoming needs to work on getting it connected to the Kentwood Trail that ends at Division then get a better route north of 36th St.

[fotoman311]

The trail's south end is at 60th. There are no plans to connect it to the M-6 Trail at this time. I did a feasibility / cost study last fall to make the connection. Relativity easy to do and reasonable cost but no funding source available. It was supposed to go on a "wish list" but I have not heard any more.

This sounds like a perfect project to be funded by the $50 million dollars the Grand Rapids metro will hopefully get through the Rails to Trails 2010 Campaign for Active Transportation in the next Transportation Authorization bill. The money is designed to go to communities that already have a decent infrastructure network in place, but need extra money to complete the connections to make a more complete non-motorized system.

Edited May 1, 2009 by fotoman311

[Raildudes dad]

This sounds like a perfect project to be funded by the $50 million dollars the Grand Rapids metro will hopefully get through the Rails to Trails 2010 Campaign for Active Transportation in the next Transportation Authorization bill. The money is designed to go to communities that already have a decent infrastructure network in place, but need extra money to complete the connections to make a more complete non-motorized system.

That's the "wish list" I was referring to. Couldn't remember the details - CRS disease

[arcturus]

Plus, bicycling also has many other benefits which are externalized and harder to quantify, including better health, mentally and physically, less air pollution, and a closer connection to your community and your surroundings (it's much easier to see things, and wave and talk to people). I don't see people improving their health driving around in their cars.

With cars you can get to your destination in comfort, can bring along a few people, not get as dressed up on cold days, usually get to where you want quicker, is more suited to the elderly, transports lots of goods and grocery items, ...

[fotoman311]

With cars you can get to your destination in comfort, can bring along a few people, not get as dressed up on cold days, usually get to where you want quicker, is more suited to the elderly, transports lots of goods and grocery items, ...

Certainly, I will not deny that cars have some advantages over bicycles in many situations, especially when you were raised to always get in your car to go anywhere, and your built environment reinforces that, as many neighborhoods built in the last 50 years do. (edit: but even then, you can do it, like this Jenison couple: http://www.woodtv.com/dpp/your_money/Your_..._car_for_a_bike )

However, I will say that in the winter I often ride off to work with much LESS clothing on than I would if I were getting into a freezing cold car (with the exception of my hands and feet), because after about 3 minutes on the bike, my core temperature warms up and keeps me perfectly comfortable.

And it is certainly possible to transport lots of goods on a bicycle that costs much less than a car. http://www.flickr.com/groups/cargobike/pool/

Edited May 1, 2009 by fotoman311

[Veloise]

FYI.

Taking yard waste (branches) to Butterworth.

Heading home from the Hollyhock parade.

These outgrown niece bikes were on their way to the Motion Initiative.

If you can convert one trip a week to pedal power, you'll be better off. (I love weekends where I park the four-wheeler and don't use it until Monday.)

Edited May 1, 2009 by Veloise

[Rizzo]

Silver Line: Leap forward? Unnecessary? The commentators are really hitting this. I'm really shocked by the comment from Barb Van Duren, the deputy city manager of Wyoming. Either she is very far removed from the public or people are really generally positive for this thing. No matter what medium or website the comments follow a very anti-Silver Line.

Sunday's Press will feature an article on the Silver Line. Expect a virtual showing by Kent County Families for Fiscal Responsibility. Friends of Transit expects an onslaught of negativity and urging its members to participate as online commentators to pin down the opposition.

Post May 5, what projects should be planned for? Local sales tax legislation? More BRT? Less transit? Give some ideas and a time line.

Edited May 1, 2009 by Rizzo

[Allison Slater]

I left about 4 responses there, but then the page suddenly refreshed on its own and I see only one, and for some reason the page kept auto-filling my name in as "Anhony." o_O

Never did like the new WOOD site, but I braved it to help out.

[walker]

. . . And it is certainly possible to transport lots of goods on a bicycle that costs much less than a car. http://www.flickr.com/groups/cargobike/pool/

Reminds me of this one: http://www.pasty.com/cam/2002/b1120.jpg

[Allison Slater]

I need to get me one of those things Veloise has.

Also.. this guy wins for using a bicycle to transport goods. Although at this point I don't think the bicycle does much good.

[Veloise]

For those composing an opinion letter to share with the media (as I am), here is a link to the SL campaign website. Good facts there.

http://rapidyes.org/silver-line.htm

I need to get me one of those things Veloise has. ...

A trailer? Hit craigslist. Folks are always unloading theirs after the kiddies grow up. Don't spend more than $50, if that.

[arcturus]

Reminds me of this one: http://www.pasty.com/cam/2002/b1120.jpg

Lol, that seals it, I'm getting a bike for hunting season!

[Rizzo]

Silver Line: Leap forward? Unnecessary? The commentators are really hitting this. I'm really shocked by the comment from Barb Van Duren, the deputy city manager of Wyoming. Either she is very far removed from the public or people are really generally positive for this thing. No matter what medium or website the comments follow a very anti-Silver Line.

Sunday's Press will feature an article on the Silver Line. Expect a virtual showing by Kent County Families for Fiscal Responsibility. Friends of Transit expects an onslaught of negativity and urging its members to participate as online commentators to pin down the opposition.

Post May 5, what projects should be planned for? Local sales tax legislation? More BRT? Less transit? Give some ideas and a time line.

Edited May 2, 2009 by Rizzo

[aowwt]

Not a bad video but now I have a face to go with that idiot.

Here is a good slogan that should have been used, SAVE OUR CITIES VOTE YES ON MAY 5th!

[John E]

Not a bad video but now I have a face to go with that idiot.

Here is a good slogan that should have been used, SAVE OUR CITIES VOTE YES ON MAY 5th!

Eric Larson is a doctor. We may disagree with him on this issue, but he is no idiot.

~John

[aowwt]

He is an idiot and should get into local politics before shouting out his big &&& mouth about stuff he has no clue about. If this fails because of him I am going to get very angry at him. This is a do or die situation for our cities. We have a great philanthogists but they can not spend the amount of money that is required to make this happen. They may even turn away from our people and decide Cleveland or Orlando would be a better place to spend their wealth. I for one do want to see that happen. I feel this being our last hope to keep them interested in our city. We turned down a HUGE gift in the form of the zoo from F&L Meijer. We better not screw up this time.

[John E]

He is an idiot and should get into local politics before shouting out his big &&& mouth about stuff he has no clue about. If this fails because of him I am going to get very angry at him. This is a do or die situation for our cities. We have a great philanthogists but they can not spend the amount of money that is required to make this happen. They may even turn away from our people and decide Cleveland or Orlando would be a better place to spend their wealth. I for one do want to see that happen. I feel this being our last hope to keep them interested in our city. We turned down a HUGE gift in the form of the zoo from F&L Meijer. We better not screw up this time.

Dr. Larson is extremely involved with politics. He sent out a press release on the issue. Just because he is voicing and fighting for what he believes in doesn't make him an idiot just because you disagree with him.

I would like to encourage you to issue a press release and try to get on the local news to state your position on this topic as it seems to mean a lot to you.

Best Always,

~John

[aowwt]

Okay if is so involved into local politics why is voting against something that WILL save our cities. Our cities are facing mounting debt issues like you wont believe. When I see budget shortfalls that make the feds look small by comparison its scary. I say by percentages of revenue that comes in and expenses that come out. The hillarous thing is if actually started looking at how these cities are struggling by he would not be voting no. Its not like there is extra money sitting in the pockets of these cities. They HAVE Zero extra. They are required not only to have a balanced budget, but surpluses in certian accounts. On top of this the state agencies keep on requiring further more things to be done but provide no money to do these items on top of the extra fees that they charge the cities. Frankly I think it would scary to see these cities decide to layoff all of the cops and stop collecting revenue and see how the good doctor likes his way into work.

[Rizzo]

Larson and KCFFR aren't idiots. Opposing this, because you are opposing taxes is cool and that's what they are doing. However, when you promote your positions with outright misconceptions and falsehoods then you cross a line. You can oppose this project, but do it with validity. When you have to go mislead about the cost and details of the project to scare votes -- it shows how politically viable your position is.

The fact that the opposition is reaching this much only makes this project appear more good than bad. This, even though I still have fundamental grievances of the Silver Line.

Edited May 3, 2009 by Rizzo

[GRDadof3]

Interestingly, Eric Larson (Kent County Familes for Fiscal Responsiblity) won't be able to vote on this issue, as he lives in Cascade Twp. But he has every right to come out against it even if he can't vote on it.

My favorite is the person who posted a couple of videos walking around Monroe Center, complaining about the lack of people there, even though the Silver Line doesn't even serve Monroe Center.