DOCSLIB.ORG

Institutionalizing Bicycle and Pedestrian Monitoring

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Institutionalizing Bicycle and Pedestrian Monitoring The Minnesota Bicycle and Pedestrian Counting Initiative: Institutionalizing Bicycle and Pedestrian Monitoring Greg Lindsey, Principal Investigator Humphrey School of Public Affairs University of Minnesota JANUARY 2017 Research Project Final Report 2017-02 • mndot.gov/research To request this document in an alternative format, such as braille or large print, call 651-366-4718 or 1- 800-657-3774 (Greater Minnesota) or email your request to [email protected]. Please request at least one week in advance. Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. 2. 3. Recipients Accession No. MN/RC 2017-02 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date The Minnesota Bicycle and Pedestrian Counting Initiative: January 2017 Institutionalizing Bicycle and Pedestrian Monitoring 6. 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. Greg Lindsey, Michael Petesch, Tohr Vorvick, Lisa Austin, Bruce Holdhusen 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Project/Task/Work Unit No. Humphrey School of Public Affairs CTS #2015071 University of Minnesota 11. Contract (C) or Grant (G) No. 301 19th Avenue South (c) 99008 (wo) 177 Minneapolis, MN 55455 12. Sponsoring Organization Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered Minnesota Department of Transportation Final Report Research Services & Library 14. Sponsoring Agency Code 395 John Ireland Boulevard, MS 330 St. Paul, Minnesota 55155-1899 15. Supplementary Notes http://mndot.gov/research/reports/2017/201702.pdf 16. Abstract (Limit: 250 words) The Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) launched the Minnesota Bicycle and Pedestrian Counting Initiative in 2011, a statewide, collaborative effort to encourage and support non-motorized traffic monitoring. This report summarizes work by MnDOT and the University of Minnesota between 2014 and 2016 to institutionalize bicycle and pedestrian monitoring. The project team established a new statewide bicycle and pedestrian traffic monitoring network with 25 permanent monitoring locations and a new district-based portable counting equipment loan program. Other key accomplishments included Minnesota’s first Bicycle and Pedestrian Annual Traffic Monitoring Report, a new MnDOT website for reporting annual and short-duration counts, and a new Bicycle and Pedestrian Data Collection Manual that local jurisdictions and consultants can use to design manual and automated non-motorized traffic monitoring programs. The project team also included provisions in MnDOT equipment vendor agreements that enable local governments to purchase bicycle and monitoring equipment; established new annual training programs for bicycle and pedestrian monitoring; and contributed provisions in the Statewide Bicycle System Plan and Minnesota Walks that call for bicycle and pedestrian traffic monitoring and creation of performance measures based on counts. Despite this progress, challenges in implementing monitoring remain and continued investment in and support for bicycle and traffic monitoring is needed. 17. Document Analysis/Descriptors 18. Availability Statement Bicycle, pedestrian, traffic monitoring, traffic data analysis No restrictions. Document available from: National Technical Information Services, Alexandria, Virginia 22312 19. Security Class (this report) 20. Security Class (this page) 21. No. of Pages 22. Price Unclassified Unclassified 114 THE MINNESOTA BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN COUNTING INITIATIVE: INSTITUTIONALIZING BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MONITORING FINAL REPORT Prepared by: Greg Lindsey Humphrey School of Public Affairs, University of Minnesota 295C Humphrey School, 301 19th Ave, S, Minneapolis, MN 55455 Michael Petesch Bicycle and Pedestrian Data Coordinator Minnesota Department of Transportation Tohr Vorvick Humphrey School of Public Affairs, University of Minnesota Lisa Austin Planning Coordinator Minnesota Department of Transportation Bruce Holdhusen Research & Implementation Project Development Minnesota Department of Transportation JANUARY 2017 Published by: Minnesota Department of Transportation Research Services & Library 395 John Ireland Boulevard, MS 330 St. Paul, Minnesota 55155-1899 This report represents the results of research conducted by the authors and does not necessarily represent the views or policies of the University of Minnesota or the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT). The authors, the University of Minnesota and MnDOT, do not endorse products or manufacturers. Any trade or manufacturers’ names that may appear herein do so solely because they are considered essential to this report. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We would like to acknowledge and thank the many people in MnDOT and other regional and local agencies who have supported or participated in the Minnesota Bicycle and Pedestrian Counting Initiative and are leaders in the effort to institutionalize bicycle and pedestrian monitoring in Minnesota. Our project management team included Ben Timerson, Mark Flinner, and Joshua Kuhn, Traffic Data Analysis; Amber Dallman, Mary Jackson, and Jasna Hadzic, Office of Transit; and Jesse Pearson and Tim Tabor, Office of Transportation System Management. Their efforts are helping to ensure that engineers, planners, and policymakers have the traffic data required to manage the state’s multi-modal transportation system. Tim Mitchell, Bicycle and Pedestrian Program manager, and Michael Schadauer, Director, Office of Transit, provided unwavering support and identified funds to implement the state’s non-motorized traffic monitoring network. Regional and local partners who are doing the hard work of monitoring bicycle and pedestrian traffic in their communities include: Charlie Moore, Arrowhead Regional Development Commission; Jason Pieper and Nadine Chalmers, Hennepin County Departments of Public Works and Planning; Maren Webb and Kristin Wharton, Moving Matters Program, Sawtooth Mountain Clinic; Thomas Mercier, Three Rivers Park District; Simon Blenski, Minneapolis Department of Public Works; Andrew Oftedal, Minnesota Parks and Trails Council; Andrew Korsberg, Minneapolis Department of Natural Resources; Heidi Schalberg, Metropolitan Council; Gina Mitteco, and Michael Corbett, MnDOT Metro District Office; and Kurt Wayne, Headwaters Regional Development Commission. Lila Singer-Berk, University of Minnesota, provided support and assistance with preparation of final documents. TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................................................1 CHAPTER 2: OVERVIEW OF THE MINNESOTA BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN COUNTING INITIATIVE ...........2 2.1 Bicycle and Pedestrian Monitoring Plan Overview............................................................................. 2 2.2 Permanent Index Monitoring Sites for Non-Motorized Traffic .......................................................... 3 2.3 Short-duration Monitoring Sites ......................................................................................................... 3 2.4 Monitoring Equipment Loan Program ................................................................................................ 4 2.5 Technical Assistance, Collaboration, and Encouragement ................................................................. 5 2.6 Longer Term Plans for Non-Motorized Traffic Monitoring ................................................................ 5 CHAPTER 3: PLAN IMPLEMENTATION AND COUNTER OPERATION .......................................................6 3.1 Installation of Permanent Bicycle and Pedestrian Traffic Monitoring Stations ................................. 6 3.2 Implementation of Short-Duration Bicycle and Pedestrian Traffic Monitoring ................................. 9 3.3 Implementation of Portable Counter Loan Program .......................................................................... 9 3.4 Counter Installation and Operations ................................................................................................ 12 CHAPTER 4: BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC DATA MANAGEMENT, ANALYSIS, AND REPORTING .. 15 4.1 Data Requirements for Managing Bicycle and Pedestrian Counts ................................................... 15 4.2 Spreadsheet Templates for Managing Bicycle and Pedestrian Counts ............................................ 16 4.3 Eco-Counter and Eco-Visio Data Management ................................................................................ 23 4.4 Online, Interactive GIS Map for Accessing Bicycle and Pedestrian Counts ...................................... 25 4.5 Data Analysis ..................................................................................................................................... 26 4.5.1 Quality Assurance/Quality Control ........................................................................................... 26 4.6 Descriptive Statistics ......................................................................................................................... 32 4.6.1 Factors for Data Analysis and Extrapolation of Short-duration Counts .................................... 33 4.6.2 Identification of Factor Groups ................................................................................................. 34 4.7 Summaries of Bicycle and Pedestrian Counts in Minnesota ............................................................ 37 4.7.1 Manual Counts of Bicyclists and Pedestrians ............................................................................ 37 4.8 Template for Automated Bicycle and Pedestrian Counts Annual
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Monitoring Use of Minnesota State Trails Considerations and Recommendations for Implementation
    Monitoring Use of Minnesota State Trails Considerations and Recommendations for Implementation MURP Capstone Paper In Partial Fulfillment of the Master of Urban and Regional Planning Degree Requirements The Hubert H. Humphrey School of Public Affairs The University of Minnesota Tom Holmes Jake Knight Darin Newman Xinyi Wu May 20, 2016 Date of oral presentation: Approval date of final paper: May 6, 2016 May 20, 2016 Capstone Instructor: Dr. Greg Lindsey, Professor Photo credit: www.flickr.com/photos/zavitkovski/6266747939/ Monitoring Use of Minnesota State Trails Considerations and Recommendations for Implementation Prepared for the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Tom Holmes Jake Knight Darin Newman Xinyi Wu May 20, 2016 Advisor: Dr. Greg Lindsey Capstone Paper In Partial Fulfillment of the Master of Urban and Regional Planning Degree Requirements The Hubert H. Humphrey School of Public Affairs The University of Minnesota Monitoring Use of Minnesota State Trails | MURP Capstone Paper Table of Contents Executive Summary 1. Introduction 1 1.1. Project Methodology 3 2. Project Context 5 2.1. Historical DNR Trail Surveys 5 2.2. Project Purpose 7 2.3. Project Scope 7 3. Counting Methods 9 3.1. Duration 9 3.2. Visits 10 3.3. Traffic 10 3.4. Case Study 1: Differentiating Duration, Visits, and Traffic on the Gateway State Trail 12 3.5. Recommendation: Traffic Counts 13 4. Considerations for Automated Traffic Counts 15 4.1 How to Implement Automated Traffic Counts 15 4.2. Case Study 2: Gateway and Brown’s Creek State Trail AADT 17 4.3. Seven Decisions for Program Design 20 5.
    [Show full text]
  • A Study of Bicycle Commuting in Minneapolis: How Much Do Bicycle-Oriented Paths
    A STUDY OF BICYCLE COMMUTING IN MINNEAPOLIS: HOW MUCH DO BICYCLE-ORIENTED PATHS INCREASE RIDERSHIP AND WHAT CAN BE DONE TO FURTHER USE? by EMMA PACHUTA A THESIS Presented to the Department of Planning, Public Policy and Management and the Graduate School of the University of Oregon in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of 1-1aster of Community and Regional Planning June 2010 11 ''A Study of Bicycle Commuting in Minneapolis: How Much do Bicycle-Oriented Paths Increase Ridership and What Can be Done to Further Use?" a thesis prepared by Emma R. Pachuta in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Master of Community and Regional Planning degree in the Department of Planning, Public Policy and Management. This thesis has been approved and accepted by: - _ Dr. Jean oclcard, Chair of the ~_ . I) .).j}(I) Date {).:........:::.=...-.-/---------'-------'-----.~--------------- Committee in Charge: Dr. Jean Stockard Dr. Marc Schlossberg, AICP Lisa Peterson-Bender, AICP Accepted by: 111 An Abstract of the Thesis of Emma Pachuta for the degree of Master of Community and Regional Planning in the Department of Planning, Public Policy and Management to be taken June 2010 Title: A STUDY OF BICYCLE COMMUTING IN MINNEAPOLIS: HOW MUCH DO BICYCLE-ORIENTED PATHS INCREASE RIDERSHIP AND WHAT CAN BE DONE TO FURTHER USE? Approved: _~~ _ Dr. Jean"'stockard Car use has become the dominant form of transportation, contributing to the health, environmental, and sprawl issues our nation is facing. Alternative modes of transport within urban environments are viable options in alleviating many of these problems. This thesis looks the habits and trends of bicyclists along the Midtown Greenway, a bicycle/pedestrian pathway that runs through Minneapolis, Minnesota and questions whether implementing non-auto throughways has encouraged bicyclists to bike further and to more destinations since its completion in 2006.
    [Show full text]
  • Bicycle and Pedestrian Data Collection Manual - Draft July 2015 6
    View the updated report: Bicycle and Pedestrian Data Collection Manual - JULY 17, 2015 The Minnesota Department of Transportation Draft is developing a statewide bicycle and pedestrian data collection program. This manual summarizes main elements of this program, including data collection goals, types of data to collect and best practices for sensor calibration and data analysis. The research phase of the program is expected to be completed in 2016, at which time the manual will be updated and issued as a final document. Minnesota Department of Transportation MnDOT Report No. MN/RC 2015-33 Office of Transit, Bicycle / Pedestrian Section [email protected] www.dot.state.mn.us/bike To request this document in an alternate format call 651-366-4718 or 1-800-657-3774 (Greater Minnesota) or email your request to [email protected]. Please request at least one week in advance. Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. 2. 3. Recipients Accession No. MN/RC 2015-33 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date Bicycle and Pedestrian Data Collection Manual - Draft July 2015 6. 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. Erik Minge, Cortney Falero, Greg Lindsey, Michael Petesch 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Project/Task/Work Unit No. SRF Consulting Group Inc. Humphrey School of Public One Carlson Parkway North Affairs, Office 295 11. Contract (C) or Grant (G) No. Plymouth, MN 55447 University of Minnesota (c) 04301 301 19th Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55455 12. Sponsoring Organization Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered Minnesota Department of Transportation Draft Manual Office of Transit, Bicycle/Pedestrian Section Mail Stop 315 395 14.
    [Show full text]
  • Comments on the Southwest LRT
    #1 From: matt muyres < > Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2018 9:38 AM To: swlrt <[email protected]> Subject: LRT Environmental Terrorism I hope you dont mind that we catalog, document and publish all environmental destruction, eminent domain and the widespread loss of open spaces left....? Ill give you the link soon... You guys are stuffing an aprt complex near the cedar lake regional trail...no room for it...UNLESS...you cut down trees....thats always the development mantra. Good luck, Matt Ms. Kelcie Campbell, Environmental Project Manager Metro Transit - Southwest LRT Project Office 6465 Wayzata Blvd., Suite 500 St. Louis Park, MN 55426 Email: [email protected] #2 From: Richard Adair < > Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2018 3:06 PM To: swlrt <[email protected]>; Ginis, Sophia <[email protected]> Subject: comments on SEA/Amended Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation Comments on the SWLRT Supplemental Environmental Assessment/Amended Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation From: Richard Adair, Note: I am a resident of the Bryn Mawr neighborhood and a long-term observer of the SWLRT project who has attended most of the public meetings over the last 10 years. Most of my comments are directed to the portions of SWLRT near my neighborhood where I feel I have useful information to offer. Section 1.2. Purpose and Need Since the publication of the Final EIS, the following factors have increased the need for this project: a. Increased traffic congestion, especially severe during road construction and after even minor snowfalls. b. A growing residential population in downtown Minneapolis. c. Increasing racial disparities in the Twin Cities in income, home ownership, transit dependence, and incarceration.
    [Show full text]
  • Spatial Analysis of Factors Predicting Bicycle Ridership
    Spatial Analysis of Factors Predicting Bicycle Ridership Andrew Harvey Department of Resource Analysis, Saint Mary’s University of Minnesota, Winona, MN 55987 Keywords: Bicycling Economics, Urban Economics, Transportation Efficiency, Community Health Abstract As cities become more congested and city budgets continue to be strained, both commuters and cities are increasingly looking to bicycles as a viable mode of transportation. At present, bicycle commuting is not very well studied. This study is dedicated to one method that could help target investment helping to increase bicycling as a viable form of transportation in the eyes of the general public. Ordinary Least Squares analysis was applied to variables identified in literature as important factors that potentially correlate with a higher percentage of bicycle commuting ridership. The study area was the extent of Nice Ride Stations located within the City of Minneapolis, Minnesota. Introduction 2017). Despite the comparatively low number of transit miles and comparatively Significance of Research low level of investment in transit infrastructure, transit ridership numbers A majority of American transportation are on the rise (BTS, 2016). Ridership infrastructure has been built for the numbers have increased from below 8 automobile (Bureau of Transportation billion passenger trips per year to over 12 Statistics [BTS], 2016). As of 2013, there billion in 2013 (BTS, 2016). Yet in 2013, were 7,731 miles of commuter rail, 1,622 vehicles driven alone remained the lion's miles of heavy rail (subway like share of the daily commute at 76.5%, and transportation), and 1,836 miles of light at a distant second was carpooling at 9.2% rail (BTS, 2016).
    [Show full text]
  • Above the Falls Master Plan Chapter Four
    SECTION 4 Visitor Demand ABOVE THE FALLS REGIONAL PARK MASTER PLAN PARK MASTER PLAN Minneapolis Park & Recreation Board PAGE 4-1 Demands on parks and recreation facilities continue to intensify. Park and trail usage is expected to increase as the population grows and as the trails network expands. According to the Metropolitan Council Regional Population Forecast, the population in the metropolitan area is expected to increase substantially in the next 10 – 20 years. Further, Minneapolis is expected to grow 15% by the year 2030 to 439,100, up from the 2010 census of 382,578. With an increasing population comes increasing park visitation. According to the Metropolitan Council, use of regional parks and trails will increase 9% between the years 2005 and 2020. This increase is in addition to the almost 10% increase in regional Watching the River Rats water-ski team park use from 1995 to 2005 and a 12% increase in regional trail use within this from park land along West River Road same time period. North is a popular activity. TableRegional 10: Visitation parks estimates and trails by agency in the for operationsTwin Cities and and within Minneapolis are maintenancedestinations fundi forng formulavisitors purposes from across - 2016 the region, state, nation, and world. As shown in Figure 4.1, roughly 201636% Visitation of regional Percentage park and of trail visits in the Twin Agency (1,000's) total 1 AnokaCities County are visits to the Minneapolis3,360.04 system. Above the7.04% Falls Regional Park is one Bloomingtonof eight regional parks (in addition to755.16 ten regional trails)1.58% in Minneapolis.
    [Show full text]
  • Summary of Summer Trail Use and User Surveys Conducted in 1996, 1997 and 1998
    STATE TRAIL USE Summary of Summer Trail Use and User Surveys Conducted in 1996, 1997 and 1998 Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Trails and Waterways Division & Office of Management and Budget Services An electronic copy of this report can be found on the DNR’s World Wide Web home page: http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/trails_and_waterways/ July 2000 2 State Trail Surveys in 1996, 1997 & 1998 CONTENTS Topic Page Executive Summary . 4 Introduction . 8 Methodology . 10 Trail use Market areas . 13 Intensity of use . 15 Trail activities . 28 Use of paved and unpaved trail segments . 35 Trail user experiences and characteristics How users first heard about the trail . 36 Appeal of the trail . 36 Trail ratings (including ratings of a variety of facilities and services) . 39 Priorities for trail improvements . 47 User conflicts and crowding . 49 Tourist expenditures and local economic impact . 50 Trip characteristics . 52 Demographic characteristics of trail users . 53 References . 55 Appendix A — Survey Use Estimates, Confidence Limits, Trail Descriptions and Maps . 56 Douglas Trail, Summer 1997 . 57 Gateway Trail, Summer 1997 . 59 Glacial Lakes Trail, Summer 1998 . 61 Heartland Trail, Summer 1998 . 63 Luce Line Trail, Summer 1998 . 65 Paul Bunyan Trail, Summer 1996 . 67 Paul Bunyan Trail segment near Lake Bemidji State Park, Summer 1998. 69 Root River Trail, Summer 1997 . 70 Sakatah Singing Hills Trail, Summer 1998 . 72 MN Department of Natural Resources 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY INTRODUCTION For the purpose of gaining a better understanding of summer state trail use, nine state trail surveys were conducted between 1996 and 1998 (see map). The nine surveys covered the main summer period from Memorial Day to Labor Day.
    [Show full text]
  • DRAFT 2019-XXX MPOSC Luce Line RT Master Plan MPRB
    Business Item No. 2019-88 Metropolitan Parks and Open Space Commission Meeting date: May 2, 2019 For the Community Development Committee meeting of May 20, 2019 For the Metropolitan Council meeting of June 12, 2019 Subject: Luce Line Regional Trail Master Plan, Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board, Review File No. 50120-1 MPOSC Districts, Members: District C, Margie Andreason and District D, Catherine Fleming Council Districts, Members: District 6, Lynnea Atlas-Ingebretson and District 7, Robert Lilligren Policy/Legal Reference: Minn. Stat. § 473.313; 2040 Regional Parks Policy Plan Planning Policy – Strategy 1 Staff Prepared/Presented: Colin Kelly, AICP, Planning Analyst (651-602-1361) Division/Department: Community Development / Regional Planning Proposed Action That the Metropolitan Council: 1. Approve the Luce Line Regional Trail Master Plan. 2. Require that the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board, prior to initiating development of the regional trail, send preliminary plans to the Engineering Services Assistant Manager at the Metropolitan Council’s Environmental Services Division, for review in order to assess the potential impacts to the regional interceptor system. Background The Luce Line is an existing regional trail corridor that connects the Cedar Lake Regional Trail in Minneapolis through Theodore Wirth Regional Park and then farther west to other regional parks and trails in the Three Rivers Park District System. The portion described in the Luce Line Regional Trail Master Plan (Master Plan) is operated by Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board (MPRB). The Master Plan is the result of nearly two years of community engagement as part of MPRB’s North Service Area Master Planning (NSAMP) effort, a project to create new vision plans for all neighborhood parks on the north side of Minneapolis as well as three regional trails.
    [Show full text]
  • 2020-244 MC MPRB Shingle Creek RT MP
    Committee Report Business Item No. 2020-244 Community Development Committee Report For the Metropolitan Council meeting of October 28, 2020 Subject: Shingle Creek Regional Trail Master Plan, Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board, Review File No. 50218-1 Proposed Action That the Metropolitan Council: 1. Approve Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board’s Shingle Creek Regional Trail Master Plan, including the supplemental information provided in the “Clarification of Submittal of Shingle Creek Regional Trail Master Plan” letter dated September 2, 2020. 2. Require that Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board, prior to initiating any new development of the regional trail corridor, send preliminary plans to the Environmental Services Assistant Manager at the Metropolitan Council’s Environmental Services Division. Summary of Committee Discussion/Questions Colin Kelly, Planning Analyst, presented the staff report to the Community Development Committee at its meeting on October 19, 2020. Council Member Atlas-Ingebretson noted how the design concepts respond directly to community engagement with underrepresented populations. Council Member Lindstrom asked when the recommended improvements in this master plan may be funded and implemented. Kelly responded that three to five years is a reasonable estimate. Council Member Wulff raised some concerns about mixing local and regional park amenities and suggested “drawing a line along the trail” to distinguish regional trail-appropriate facilities from those that are considered local. Facilities outside of
    [Show full text]
  • References (PDF)
    Ames, Gregory P. 1981, November. Recreational Reuse of Abandoned Railroad RiPhts-of-Way: A Bibliooraphy and Technical Resource Guide for Planners. CPL Bibliography, No. 66. Council of Planning Librarians. Chicago, Illinois. Bentryn, Gerard C., and Edward Hay, 1976, March. "How to Get Trails on the Ground." Parks & Recreation. 11(3):28-29,55. Blomer, Craig. 1988, April 11. Personal Interview, Root River Trail Manager. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. Rochester, Minnesota. Brackin, Dennis. 1982, May 6. "Completed Section Converts Trail Foes." Minneapolis Star and Tribune. (Minneapolis, Minnesota). PP. 22. Burwell, David. 1986, Winter, "Viewpoint: Rails-to-Trails ." Wilder- -ness. 50(175):60. Citizens Advisory Committee On Environmental Quality (CACEQ) . 1975. From Rails to Trails. U.S. Government Printing Office.--' Washington, D.C. Citizens League, The Committee on Facility Siting. 1980, October 22. Siting Of Major Controversial Facilities. Citizens League. Minneapolis, Minnesota. Clay, Grady, ed, 1980, September. "1980 ASLA Awards ." Landscape Architecture. 70(5):510-511,518-519. Cleckner, Robert M. 1973, February. "New Switch for Old Railroads." Parks & Recreation. 8(2):20-22,56-58. Collins, Dan. 1988, April 12-15. Personal Interviews, Trail Programs Supervisor. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Trails and Waterways Unit. St. Paul, Minnesota. Cordell, H. Ken, and Lawrence A. Hartmann. 1983. "Assessing Outdoor Recreation in the United States." Trends. 20(3) :42-46. Cranz, Galen. 1982. The Politics of Park Design. Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Cambridge, Massachusetts. Dillman, Don A. 1978. Mail and Telephone Surveys: The Total Design Method. John Wiley & Sons. New York, New York. Drake, Charles R. and Virginia L. 1969. River Valley Echoes.
    [Show full text]
  • Above the Falls Regional Park Master Plan Draft
    DRAFT DRAFT Above the FAlls RegionAl PARk MAsteR PlAn DRAFT FOR PUBLIC COMMENT JUNE, 2013 MINNEAPOLIS PARK & RECREATION BOARD Acknowledgements The Minneapolis Park & Recreation Board is grateful to the many individuals, organizations and agency staff who contributed to this regional park plan. The planning process began in 2010 and continued through early 2013, and included the following outreach: • The Minneapolis Riverfront Development Initiative’s 6 large pubilc meetings and dozens of community events in 2011; • Ongoing collaboration with the Above the Falls Citizen Advisory Committe to help shape the planning process and plan content; • More than 60 meetings with community organizations, and 3 large public engagement meetings dedicated to the plan in 2012 and 2013, including multi-lingual outreach conducted in English, Spanish, Hmong and Lao; • Press releases, web postings and comment cards; and • Ongoing inter-agency coordination through the Riverfornt Technical Advisory Committee: • City of Minneapolis • Hennepin County • Mississippi Watershed Management Organization • University of Minnesota • National Park Service • Friends of the Mississippi River • Minneapolis Riverfront Partnership • US Army Corps of Engineers • Minnesota Department of Natural Resources • Minnesota Historical Society • Minnesota Department of Transportation • Minneapolis Park an&d Recreation Board Images used in this document are property of the Minneapolis Park & Recreation Board unless otherwise credited. More information about this plan and the planning process is available here: http://www.minneapolisparks.org/abovethefalls Notes about this document This DRAFT Above the Falls Regional Park Master Plan (ATF Park Plan) is for public review and comment. Following a 45-day public comment, a final draft will be presented to the Park Board for their consideration.
    [Show full text]
  • 2005-50 Tools for Predicting Usage and Benefits of Urban Bicycle
    2005-50 Final Report Tools for Predicting Usage and Benefits of Urban Bicycle Network Improvements Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. 2. 3. Recipients Accession No. MN/RC-2005-50 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date Tools for Predicting Usage and Benefits of Urban Bicycle December 2005 Network Improvements 6. 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. Gary Barnes, Kevin Krizek 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Project/Task/Work Unit No. Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs University of Minnesota 11. Contract (C) or Grant (G) No. 301 19th Ave. S. (c) 81655 (wo) 102 Minneapolis, MN 55455 12. Sponsoring Organization Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered Minnesota Department of Transportation Final Report Research Services Section 14. Sponsoring Agency Code 395 John Ireland Boulevard Mail Stop 330 St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 15. Supplementary Notes http://www.lrrb.org/pdf/200550.pdf 16. Abstract (Limit: 200 words) This report gives a brief overview of four related small research projects. The full papers resulting from the projects are included as appendices. The four projects were related by the theme of bicycling preferences and behavior with regard to bicycling facilities. The studies were also connected by the fact that they were all based on information from the Twin Cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul, Minnesota. The four reports are: • Effect of Trails on Cycling • Value of Bicycle Facilities to Commuters • Effect of Facilities on Commute Mode Share • Cycling Behavior Near Facilities Generally speaking, the results support the notion that people value bicycle facilities, in that they are willing to incur additional time costs in order to use higher quality facilities.
    [Show full text]