I’m the lead organizer for Walk to School Day here in Northfield, Minnesota, again. It promises to be a fun event, as usual!

Here is our press release for this year:

Students at Northfield Middle School and the three public elementary schools will celebrate Walk to School Day again this year on Thursday, October 8.

It promises to be a fun event for many students who have a safe route available from their homes. Not only will they get to walk with their friends, but there will be prizes and recognition as well.

The event is part of the district’s Safe Routes to Schools program, which is designed to help students and communities gain the benefits from increased walking and biking. Those benefits include improved health, a stronger sense of community, and reduced traffic congestion and air pollution.

The event also helps to illustrate the benefits of “complete streets”–streets that are built to accommodate all users, including pedestrians, cyclists, and the handicapped. Unfortunately, all too often streets in our society are incomplete.

Students will receive maps of recommended routes, and adult volunteers will be stationed along the routes during the morning and afternoon travel times. A Northfield police officer will be located at the intersection of Jefferson Parkway and Division St./Highway 246 during both the Middle School and Bridgewater travel times. Bridgewater students who live east and northeast of the school are asked to ride the bus as usual due to concerns with that intersection.

Again this year Walk to School Day is funded through the Safe Routes to Schools grant that the school district and city won in 2008. The $30,000 grant includes money for “encouragement” programs such as Walk to School Day.

The grant has also funded an engineering study of walking and biking routes to the district’s K-8 schools. The study has been completed and will be released soon to the public.

The Northfield Safe Routes to Schools Task Force and Northfield Public Schools are organizing the local Walk to School Day in cooperation with the City of Northfield. Many schools around the world will be celebrating Walk to School Day a day earlier. Here in Northfield, the Safe Routes to Schools Task Force decided that the local school schedule makes October 8 a better day for the event.

Forty years ago nearly half of all kids walked or bicycled to school. Today less than fifteen percent get to school that way, and many are driven to school in motor vehicles. Public health experts believe that reductions in physical activity are partly to blame for dramatic increases in rates of diabetes and obesity in children.

Since 1997, communities around the U.S. have been celebrating Walk to School Day. Around the globe, International Walk to School Month brings together more than 40 countries in recognition of the common interest in walking to school.

In its twelfth year, U.S. participation reached a record high with more than 2,800 events from all fifty states and the District of Columbia registering in 2008. Many more communities held events but did not register. For more information visit the National Walk to School and International Walk to School web sites.

Two recent actions by Republicans have made me think that I should write an opinion piece on why conservatives and libertarians should support nonmotorized transportation. Here are those two Republican actions:

1. Yesterday in his news conference presenting the cuts he is making to the state budget, Minnesota governor Tim Pawlenty made a comment about unnecessary or wasteful spending by cities. He cited as an example a director of nonmotorized transportation for the city of Minneapolis, though in the following breath he noted that the position is federally funded. He was apparently referring to a position funded by the city’s role in the federal Nonmotorized Transportation Pilot Program.

2. Earlier this month the Republican leadership of the U.S. House of Representatives called for eliminating several federal nonmotorized transportation programs. In a list of cuts (pdf) that they would make to reduce the budget deficit, the Republicans included the following programs: Safe Routes to Schools, the Nonmotorized Transportation Pilot Program, and Transportation Enhancements. This is an extreme step, indeed, and not likely to win the hearts of all those walkers, wheelchair users, and cyclists out there.

I learned about the latter action at the League of American Bicyclists web site. See the June 5 post on their advocacy page, which has these good comments from League President Andy Clarke: Read the rest of this entry »

It was about four years ago that I began working as a volunteer bike and pedestrian advocate here in Northfield, Minnesota. There aren’t too many changes that I can point to and say, I helped that to happen. I can only say that some important changes in local planning have occurred, and the local discussion about transportation has shifted to better include all modes of transportation.

Perhaps the most significant result that I’ve helped to achieve is winning a Safe Routes to Schools non-infrastructure grant for Northfield in 2008. (Many people played a role in that project.) A large portion of the grant has paid for a technical/engineering study of walking and biking routes around Northfield’s three elementary schools and its middle school. Now that study is wrapping up, and the public can view the draft of the plan at an upcoming open house.

What follows is a message about the open house prepared by Brian Welch of the City of Northfield.

The results of our study and the proposed Safe Routes to School Plan for Northfield schools will be presented at a Community Open House scheduled for Wed., June 10, 2009 from 6:00–8:00 p.m. in the Bridgewater Elementary School cafeteria located at 401 Jefferson Parkway.

Please join us to understand the findings of our study and proposed improvements to provide safer walking and bicycling conditions for our students, while having the opportunity to provide feedback.  If you have any questions, please contact Brian Welch at 507-645-3027 or Brian.Welch@ci.northfield.mn.us.

A representative from Mn/DOT will be there.  The format will be informal with easels/posters arranged around the room and chairs/tables available for discussions and for the public to fill out comment cards. Possible solutions for the Highway 246/Jefferson Parkway intersection will be included.

[Note: The following appears also as a post at Locally Grown Northfield. Comments can be made there; I've turned them off here. Be sure to note their rules for comment.]

Last August the Rice County Board of Commissioners made a change in their transportation policy that goes against the interests of people who walk, bike, or use wheelchairs in our community. It’s a change that’s detrimental to many of the most vulnerable users of our transportation system, including children, seniors, the poor, and the handicapped.

I’m talking about a change in a fairly arcane and complex policy: the Cost Participation Policy for Cooperative Roadway Construction Projects, which governs the share that the county pays on joint road projects with cities and townships. The policy applies to projects that are part of the county Capital Improvement Plan.

Why should we care about some complex policy? Because it governs the funding for county road projects – which we might also call the public right-of-way – in many of our communities, and because it shapes the way we think about transportation.

The changes made last summer involved the provisions for sidewalks and “bituminous bike paths,” or shared-use paths, along county roads in cities and towns. Previously, the county paid a share of the costs for replacement sidewalks and new and replacement paths – specifically, 55 percent of the cost for municipalities over 5,000 in population, and 100 percent of the cost for those under 5,000. With the change, the county moved these facilities into the “not eligible” category for county funding. In effect, they cut funding of these facilities in their Capital Improvement Plan by 100 percent. The commissioners voted 4-1 for this change last August, with the only exception being Galen Malecha of Northfield at that time. Read the rest of this entry »

I’m overdue to provide an update on what is happening with the Rice County Highway Cost Participation Policy and its funding of sidewalks and paths. At the April 7 County Board meeting, the commissioners decided that their transportation committee, consisting of Commissioners Plaisance and Docken and county highway engineer Dennis Luebbe, would consider the matter at an April 15 meeting.

Prior to that meeting, I mailed a letter (see below) and copies of the old and current cost participation policy to the commissioners. In the letter I asked them to consider  a simple compromise position: moving the sidewalks and bike paths from the “not eligible” for county participation category to the “potential County participation” category. This is essentially the “case-by-case” funding option that has been discussed as an option.

The transportation committee meetings are not open to the public, but last Friday I called my commissioner, Jeff Docken, to ask what action the committee took. He said that they decided to ask the County Board to consider two options at an upcoming meeting: keeping the current policy or changing it to the “case-by-case” or “potential funding” option that I presented in my letter. I believe he said it would be at a work session, probably May 5, but we should keep an eye on the Board’s agenda for its upcoming meetings.

It remains important for members of the public to let their county commissioner know their views on this subject. Please consider contacting them or writing a letter to the local paper. See below for more information, as well as the text of the letter I submitted. Read the rest of this entry »

A correction about the April 7 Rice County Board of Commissioners’ meeting and the highway cost participation policy: this is a work session and the public can speak at 8:30 am for two minues/person. The Board will decide whether to put this item on the agenda of a regular work session (possibly the April 14 meeting). County engineer Dennis Luebbe will present his views on the matter around 9:10, then the commissioners will discuss the matter around 9:40.

A group of us will carpool down to Faribault from Northfield and will meet at Northfield city hall’s parking lot around 7:50 am. I invite those interested to join us.

My apologies for the error. I also encourage people to contact the commissioners about the issue and/or write a letter to the local newspaper.

I wrote the following action alert and fact sheet for an important issue here in my county:

Fact Sheet: Rice County Highway Cost Participation Policy

Summary: Rice County no longer pays a share of the costs for replacement sidewalks and new and replacement shared-use paths (sometimes called bike paths) on county roads in cities and townships. Sidewalks and paths along urban roads serve an important safety function and provide transportation and recreation options for many people, including children, the elderly, and the disabled. While some claim that these facilities are amenities, they are more properly viewed as essential components of a modern urban road.

On Tuesday, April 7 the County Board of Commissioners will revisit this issue. Please contact your county commissioner and/or write a letter to your local newspaper at your earliest convenience. (See contact info below.) Read the rest of this entry »

I read a chapter from the book Traffic, by Tom Vanderbilt, that has changed some of my views on traffic engineering methods. Chapter 7 of that book concerns  new approaches to urban design and traffic engineering that have been used in the Netherlands and elsewhere. In some cases the ideas and methods are counter-intuitive. The gist: engineering and design for the “traffic world” (vehicles moving at speeds above 20 mph or so) and the “social world” (the world of pedestrians and slow-moving cyclists) require different methods. The social world (such as a downtown area) can benefit from having less of the signs and signals of the traffic world; this can result in lower speeds and safer conditions.

We usually think of signs – such as a sign that tells us to watch for pedestrians – as making a road safer, but in many cases they don’t. What’s more important are design factors such as road width, closeness of buildings and objects to the road, the paving surface (such as bricks or asphalt), and many other elements of the social world that make it different from the traffic world. These can be used to signal drivers (fast-moving cyclists too!) that they’ve entered the social world and therefore must slow down.

I see Mr. Vanderbilt also has a blog titled “How We Drive,” which also looks like a good resource. And remember, we can “drive” nonmotorized vehicles too!

Note: I wrote the post below as a guest blogger at Locally Grown Northfield (LGN). See the LGN post for comments because I’ve turned them off here. The photo above shows a crosswalk at a roundabout in Bend, Oregon. Note the landscaping and the island where pedestrians can stop in the crosswalk. (Photo credit: Bill Ostrem)

In a February 6 post Tracy Davis referred to a short essay by the Project for Public Spaces titled “A Revolution in Transportation Planning.” It’s an excellent piece that discusses the history of transportation planning in the United States – how planners and leaders focused almost solely  on the automobile for most of the twentieth century, often to the detriment of our cities and neighborhoods and our own health, and how they have recently begun to consider all modes of transportation, including transit, walking, and biking. Increasingly, our society is looking at streets as public spaces (it’s the public “right of way,” after all) – spaces that must provide access for all users, whether they are in a car, on foot, in a wheelchair, on a bike, or riding a bus or train. We are beginning to create what some would call “complete streets.”

As I see it, this change is significant enough to be called a “renaissance” of the American street. In this post I’d like to briefly describe some of the groups and organizations working on this renaissance, including those in Minnesota, as well as some of the resources for learning more about it. In doing so I draw on my experience as a pedestrian and bike advocate in Northfield, where I’ve served as chair of the city’s Task Force on Nonmotorized Transportation for the last year and a half. Read the rest of this entry »

I recommend Thomas L. Friedman’s recent book, Hot, Flat, and Crowded: Why We Need a Green Revolution – And How It Can Renew America. Friedman has done his homework for this book, talking with dozens of scientists, business leaders, policy analysts, and environmentalists. He argues that we face five major problems that have reached a crisis point today. As he writes, “The convergence of global warming, global flattening, and global crowding is driving those five big problems – energy supply and demand, petrodictatorship, climate change, energy poverty, and biodiversity loss – well past their tipping points into new realms we’ve never seen before, as a planet or as a species” (p. 37).

Friedman deserves special praise for highlighting the problems of biodiversity loss, or the extinction of species. Based on my reading of science sources over my years of doing test development work, this is a problem that our leaders have not dealt with effectively, and it is being accelerated by climate change.

The strengths of this book are its detail and its wide-ranging inquiry. It does have some weaknesses: Friedman’s tendency to personalize his analysis, as when we learn about his many visits with the global elite at posh spots throughout the world; occasional overly specific detail, as in the section on the future “Energy Internet” or “smart grid”; and his nearly exclusive focus on technological and business-oriented solutions, a focus that many environmentalists criticize.

I did appreciate the fact that he calls for the development of an “ethic of conservation,” even if he has doubts about whether major lifestyle changes are required in the new “energy-climate era.” Here is an excerpt related to this issue:

To become good stewards and good trustees, [according to MIchael J. Sandel, a political philosopher at Harvard], “we will need to rein in our tendency to regard the earth and its natural resources as wholly at our disposal for present needs, wants, and desires. We have to develop new habits and attitudes towards consumption.”

Otherwise, whatever technologies we devise will simply be used to extend our current habits of profligate consumption to the huge, burgeoning middle classes of a hot, flat, and crowded world…. Does [this] mean that we, as individuals, have to edit our lifestyles down to a bare minimum, or get by with much less than the average American upper- or middle-class family consumes today? There is an anticapitalist, anticonsumerist, back-to-nature wing of the environmental movement that believes we should and almost delights in advocating that. By the way, that may be right, and should not be dismissed. My point is that we don’t know yet, because we have not tried even the obvious stuff that we do know would have real effects and would not involve fundamental changes in our lifestyle.

Telling every individual on the planet who wants or can afford a car that they cannot have one would be changing our lifestyle. But banning cars over a certain weight or engine size, or bringing maximum speed limits back down to 55 miles per hour, or banning taxis that are not hybrids – such efforts do not strike me as fundamentally cramping anyone’s lifestyle…. Forcing everyone to ride a bike to work would involve changing our lifestyle. But requiring municipalities to set aside bike lanes running from suburbs to inner cities doesn’t strike me as cramping anyone’s lifestyle (and might make our whole society healthier). [And Friedman goes through a list of many other examples] (pp. 192-193)