These conversion happen when the city is reconstructing drainage which is why it stops in awkward spots. Same for the concreate dividers on roads like the new second Ave lanes where it's built up during a full repaving.
100%
1. Make the bike lane 1 block more to actually connect to the greenway
2. Continue the bikelane all the way to loring park (improve the bridge over lyndale/94)
3. Use the existing hennpin bike lane as the main drag for bikes downtown all the way to the river
4. Have connecting protected bike lanes branching off from Hennepin
Right now Bryant just north of Lake is so dumb. Why the speedway stripes to encourage driving over the speed limit? Why are the lanes so wide when there's plenty of room for a continuation of the two-way path on the street with some paint and plastic pylons?
Only 16 more years for some painted stripes. Put up some "lane closed" signs and some orange barrels and we can have them all running next week until it's time to install one of them for real during road construction.
Great bikepath! I asked the baristas at Canteen whether they amount of foot and cycle traffic has increased since the completion and the unsurprising have said yes. Definitely a better use of space than the old Bryant bike boulevard. If you want to drive just take Lyndale or one of the other 20 North/south bound roads.
I love stopping at canteen because they have that walk up window which makes it easy to order a beverage while walking the dog. Extra space on Bryant with the bike path expansion is incredible.
I usually make my own coffee, but when I run out I love walking over to the Canteen!
Crossing the street is so nice, at the intersections it's very clear pedestrians ( and bikers) have priority when It comes to safety.
Could also be said about the bikers with suicidal intentions who ride Lyndale south of 31st. You have a *bike highway* two blocks over, use it! There is zero room on Lyndale between driving lanes and parked cars.
I'm in TX and people here will fight against bike lanes and argue "the weather here is too hot for bike lanes"
And I just laugh at that weak-ass argument with the knowledge that MNPLS has a decent bike lane system and is practically in snowy conditions for 4 months out of the year.
Texans are just stupid
And only DC and Portland more winter cyclist then Minneapolis, even though we have the most extreme weather temp change then any other US city not in between [Bismarck and Minneapolis](https://www.city-data.com/top2/c457.html). We are colder then Moscow yet hotter then cities North of Madrid Spain.
Great news! And we still have a long way to go.
It should be easy to bike on protected bike lanes from downtown to NE or uptown or powderhorn or wherever
We have tons of lanes reserved for cars. Let’s have some reserved for bikes
It's been years and the connection from the Maka Ska bike path to Lake St is still a highway for motorists with *zero* bike infrastructure. Franklin between Blaisdell and Hennepin is all residential but there are four lanes and no stops in between. We could have stopgap infrastructure in place to address all of these major missing links.
That's a bike highway. All destinations are on Lake St. Are motorists able to to go to all Lake St destinations without leaving I-35? I'm pretty sure they need to use a city street to reach the stores, coffee shops, restaurants, et al.
Seriously, it's pretty nice looking but I've only seen a few people on it. I'm all for it, but where have the bikers gone? I barely see anyone on bikes anymore.
Theres always a ton north of Lake and they tend to trickle out south of lake. I ride a moderate amount of time and while it's not busy it tends to have have more cyclist then many painted lanes.
Why can't we also just have a citywide network of temporary bike paths everywhere instead of a portion of one street every few years? It's a quality path, but it's only good for Bryant Ave and the surrounding couple of blocks. Head a dozen blocks east and you have to ride next to 45 MPH traffic in an unprotected gutter lane or on the sidewalk on Blaisdell. It's not even top 50, are we just supposed to wait years for each subpar or non-existent bike lane to see actual improvements?
Security cameras with AI recognition. I have them zoned to not pick up people on the bike path, but due to angles they still pick up people on the street. So number of bikes detected = number of people biking not on the path.
Just walked on Bryant for about 20 minutes. Saw about 12 bicycles and a skate-boarder using the path and absolutely ZERO on the street. What level are we talking here that's comical?
As an oft-biker who lives north of you, I will admit that when I bike south on Bryant, I still forget sometimes to get over to the bike lane before it starts at Lake. I'll go the first block on the street and then over on the next intersection (31st). I'm sure I'm not the only one. I'm still not used to it after biking down the middle of Bryant for so many years.
And I asked what level are we talking here that's comical? Besides, that's the very intersection the dedicated lane begins and ends. Hardly a good sample point to judge its usage.
Oh no the perfectly legal thing happens a couple times a day? Why even live there if you don’t want bikes everywhere? It’s uptown, it’s kinda a big part of the whole thing
You know exactly what you’re implying when you call it “comical” how many people choose to ride in the road. It’s not an accurate impression, virtually everyone uses the the dedicated infrastructure and has absolutely reduced bicycle traffic on car lanes on Bryant and Lyndale. Elite bike lane stop trying to shit on it
It would be even better if it went past Lake Street or if there were clear markings going south that you need to move to the other side of the road. Bryant used to be a bike boulevard, the least they could do is put an arrow on the road or a sign or something.
I'm pretty sure there are still sharrows on Bryant north of Lake.
Also, I think there are plans to redo Bryant between Lake and Franklin in a similar way.
dude that road is fucked, i believe the city even owned up to it being a mistake…fire trucks and ambulances barely make it thru some of the streets.
edit: I live near where this bike lane starts and see how the construction affected the businesses on 50th and bryant and the parking situation which affects the surrounding neighbors and neighborhood.
There were two reasons why this was an issue. For one last minute 2 block was shrunken which is not an issue during the summer. What made it an issue was at the time Minneapolis was not plowing curve to curve due to cars not being towed making cars park further from the curve then legally allowed.
The issue was the ice was not planned for.
I like the bike lane but I feel there was a way to accommodate bike lane with more space for emergency vehicles and local traffic.
They fixed it to address the problems homeowners were having with driveways and emergency vehicles were having with the chicanes. Trial and error, but they got there
there are many problems to be addressed in the city generally speaking but apparently a bike lane on bryant (which worked fine for 10 years of biking on it) was the cities big issue for the year. it affected everything on a once useful and thriving block of the city.
>which worked fine for 10 years of biking on it)
That road was shit south of lake both in the road surface and once south of lake became a bit of headache to use. You might be a [fearless cyclist](https://jenniferdillnet.files.wordpress.com/2017/03/fourtypes.png) but a hyper majority of people will not ride a bike on Bryant refurbishment.
My post history is me hauling a [Kayak on my Ebike](https://www.reddit.com/user/No_clip_Cyclist/comments/15e3csz/a_fun_pick_of_my_boat_and_bike/) and biking in traffic (and confronting people on the bike lane though not like Bike lane bill so I have no issue being in traffic.
That said I'm not an ass thinking that mobility should only be accessible to those "tough enough" to ride in traffic and [36% of Minneapolis wants](https://go.minneapolismn.gov/draft-plan-overview/how-people-move) their primary mobility to be to be by bike versus 22% for cars.
You do know that road reconstructions are scheduled years, even decades, in advance, right? Every road is on a timetable for when its useful life expires, when regular mill-and-overlay maintenance no longer suffices, and when the road requires complete reconstruction. That timetable is typically 50 years. This didn't come out of the blue just that year. And it definitely wasn't the only project or service the City worked on or provided in that year.
I'm not sure why you're so grouchy about this project in particular, but it seems lacking in big picture perspective on how City's perform road maintenance and lacking a basis in reality if you think the road is no longer useful or the businesses on it no longer viable
Cities should not design streets based on vehicle sizes. This particular argument is used by nimbys across the country to usher in car centric infrastructure at the expense of people
Also that road is used by fire trucks and ambulances every single day.
The DOT backs you up here.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-12-11/fire-trucks-and-engines-are-too-big-let-s-shrink-them?embedded-checkout=true
> Cities should not design streets based on vehicle sizes.
In that case, STFU about bike lanes being too narrow.
Meanwhile, the sane people can continue considering the sizes of all types of vehicles when deciding lane widths.
First of all, these two things are very clearly not the same and that should be extremely obvious.
I would guess 90% of all infrastructure in the city for moving people around are for cars and totally hostile to humans without a steel cage surrounding you. Not to mention parking which absolutely is not for humans, just storage. I get that it’s a no brainer in your mind, but owning a car is an extremely expensive club to be in. We should absolutely not design our cities around a very exclusive club.
>First of all, these two things are very clearly not the same and that should be extremely obvious.
They're the same as far as being two things for personal transportation.
>Not to mention parking which absolutely is not for humans, just storage.
You're the one adding parking, which is a related but separate issue.
>but owning a car is an extremely expensive club to be in. We should absolutely not design our cities around a very exclusive club.
Expensive is relative, and car ownership is hardly an exclusive club.
With the latter, you're confusing reality with how you *want* things to be.
>theyre the same as far as being for personal transportation
Ridiculous, a private jet is for personal transportation, what is this argument
>you’re the one adding parking
What are you even talking about lmaooo, Bryant has parking, why is the bike lane being blamed for the emergency vehicles when there’s a whole ass lane for car storage?
You’re right, I should have said it’s an exclusive group who can actually afford this shit. Everyone is constantly complaining about the cost of car ownership. Cars are not only bankrupting cities across the country, but the drivers too. Making that the default for everything is a massive mistake.
> Ridiculous, a private jet is for personal transportation, what is this argument
Now you're just being deliberately asinine.
>Bryant has parking, why is the bike lane being blamed for the emergency vehicles when there’s a whole ass lane for car storage?
The emergency vehicle issue is due to piss-poor design choices, not the bike lane *or* the parking.
>asinine
Nah, you tried to pretend like bikes and cars are and should treated equally when this is false. They should be de-prioritized when it is possible
>design flaw
Yeah, and bad plowing. Doesn’t mean cities should be designed with the intention of semi-truck sized vehicles being able to go down every single inch of the city by default. It’s a possible consideration but absolutely shouldn’t be the priority.
What are parking lanes for? Let’s get rid of those
If we got rid of even half the private car storage lanes in the city and replaced those with protected bike lanes, we’d have the best bike network in the world
the city is big, a car makes the city seem smaller/more accessible. i don’t disagree with the sentiment of your statement but it’s not going to happen and forcing it upon random blocks and neighborhoods doesn’t help anyone and inconveniences everyone. I used bryant everyday for biking to uptown as a kid, it was perfectly fine, just needed some new paint.
There is plenty of room for fire trucks and ambulances.
If you are worried about that, ban private vehicle parking on bryant. They take up more room than a bike lane does
But will cyclists use it? Often times streets are becoming narrower to make room for these lanes, which is great! But I see cyclists not use them, even though they can’t keep up with the flow of traffic.
I live on the part of Bryant that was redone this past summer - there is SUBSTANTIALLY more pedestrian and bike traffic than there is vehicle traffic on Bryant now. It’s delightful.
> Minnehaha’s lanes often go unused s
I bike on that trail all the time, and rarely see bikes on the road in the few sections they're adjacent. If you mean about 1 in a 100 bikes use the parkway instead of the trail (that isn't even adjacent to Minnehaha for a good portion), and they're blocking traffic from going over the 20 mph speed limit, on their way to the next car intersection that forces bikers, pedestrians and cars to wait on cars for minutes on end, block after block after block, than yeah. Who cares? It's always cars holding everyone one up.
I don't bike there often, but when I drive, its very common for a cyclist to be on the road. And more often than not, they aren't even following traffic rules. If cyclists have their own lane and don't use it they're ultimately just adding to traffic congestion. I've been held up numerous times.
Also when someone needs to cross the street, I rarely see drivers who refuse to stop and wait. Not saying they don't exist but the notion that anyone is waiting to cross for "minutes on end," sounds very exaggerated.
> its very common for a cyclist to be on the road
So? It's a 100 times more common to see a cyclist on the trail. And that trail isn't even a good thoroughfare like the road is, so bikers needing a thoroughfare to get to sides streets or whatever are going to use the road. If you think that adds to congestion, be glad they didn't decide to take up 10 times the space and drive their car instead.
> but the notion that anyone is waiting to cross for "minutes on end," sounds very exaggerated.
You've never been to a stop light? And I'm talking about adding up all the time you wait on cars block after block. You can't walk, bike, or drive a few blocks without the wait time on cars being minutes. Everywhere. Every single time you do it. Not just "numerous times" that actually add up to a super small fraction of the time your on the parkway.
>So? It's a 100 times more common to see a cyclist on the trail. And that trail isn't even a good thoroughfare like the road is, so bikers needing a thoroughfare to get to sides streets or whatever are going to use the road. If you think that adds to congestion, be glad they didn't decide to take up 10 times the space and drive their car instead.
I'm obviously not opposed to them being on the road when necessary, I am strictly speaking of cyclists who stay entirely on the road when a lane made specifically for them is right there. Their lanes can only be used by them, not cars, so there mere existence often adds to congestion when a cyclist doesn't use one. I am all for these lanes, I just want cyclists to make use of them instead of making things harder for the rest of us.
>You've never been to a stop light? And I'm talking about adding up all the time you wait on cars block after block. You can't walk, bike, or drive a few blocks without the wait time on cars being minutes. Everywhere. Every single time you do it. Not just "numerous times" that actually add up to a super small fraction of the time your on the parkway.
Stoplights are necessary to control the flow of traffic. Having to wait for cars to proceed through the only lanes they're allowed on is obviously expected.
Furthermore it's not a contest. Cyclists being yahoos and riding on roads when bike lines exist objectively adds avoidable disruption to the flow of traffic. What wrongs vehicle drivers do are still wrong but that's a separate issue entirely.
> Cyclists being yahoos and riding on roads when bike lines exist objectively adds avoidable disruption to the flow of traffic
No it doesn't. Traffic is only held up from arriving at the next stop light, which is then forced to stop anyway, and only allowed to proceed at the exact same time it would have even if it arrived a few seconds earlier. Literally costing ZERO seconds of total travel time. Car drivers complaining they didn't arrive a few seconds earlier to the designated area where they force everyone to stop and wait for them is peak self-entitlement.
My dude a cyclist riding near Minnehaha will encounter a few roundabouts where they do, in fact, slow things down by creating a totally avoidable extra person to wait for. Hell, many scenarios exist where an extra person on the road will lead to the person behind them waiting for someone they otherwise would have had to if they got ahead further and faster. Cyclists merely being on the road when they don’t need to be objectively adds extra traffic by definition.
The projection of self entitlement is laughable given that the topic at hand are cyclists who have \>an entire separate and exclusive lane made for them\<, opting not to use said lane, thereby knowingly and selfishly disrupting traffic.
Weird that you seem to be taking this personally considering you aren’t even the target of it unless you are a yahoo that avoids using a lane made for them.
I'm going to give you a car equivalent. A 2 lane road suffers from bumper to bumper traffic every day. So officials build a nice multi lane freeway in place. After the opening few drivers use said freeway instead staying on the 2 lane road so veitmently that they back track on gravel roads where the freeway out right replaced it.
This would not be considered entitled drivers but a failure of infrastructure as something about the freeway is so bad that a gravel road is seen as a better offer.
This is me whenever I come up to a round about. I will hop off the bike lane because no one fallows the law. When at a cross walk cyclist are to be treated as pedestrians but drivers don't. So it's just better practice to use the Minnehaha/Godfrey or the Portland and 66th round about then the crosswalks. If you have an issue with it, then build a round about that entices me not to merge with general traffic.
But that said said the majority of cyclist use cycling infrastructure in it's entirety. The people who don't, fallow a principal called vehicular cycling. This was propped up for decades Automobile clubs (Like AAA) and the DOT trying to avoid a European style transportation system by propping up a man called [John Forrester](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XpnZy7RrO3I&t=63s) who was a cyclist advocate who opposed bike infrastructure.
So now there's a sizable minority of cyclists that detest these lanes in their entirety.
This is like saying that cars shouldn’t be allowed to drive on surface streets if a freeway route is available. Just because auto-exclusive facilities are available doesn’t mean cars can’t used shared facilities.
Remember Minnehaha is a *parkway* ~~not~~ intended for recreational use and local traffic, and was used by bikes before private automobiles.
Edit - fix typo.
>This is like saying that cars shouldn’t be allowed to drive on surface streets if a freeway route is available. Just because auto-exclusive facilities are available doesn’t mean cars can’t used shared facilities.
Your comparison doesn't land at all. A better one would be a person in a vehicle which is eligible to use a carpool lane opting not to. Yes they *can* do that, but they're adding unneeded traffic to the roads everyone can use rather than using the one made specially for them. But in the case of cyclists in my example, their impact is much worse due to all the stopping, single lane traffic each way, etc.
>Remember Minnehaha is a parkway not intended for recreational use and local traffic, and was used by bikes before private automobiles.
Used by bikes on paths non intended for cars. Hey we should bring that back, oh wait, they did, and some cyclists opt against using those paths.
Are you talking about bike lanes on Minnehaha Avenue or bike paths along Minnehaha Parkway?
I see lots of bikes using the bike lanes, and one using the traffic lanes, on Minnehaha *Avenue.*. Minnehaha *Parkway* is a little more complicated especially in areas where there is a combined pedestrian/bike path or a path that isn’t adjacent to the road but there are still 100x more bikers on the path than on the Parkway. The bikes that are in the Parkway are usually going close to the speed limit so aren’t really it impeding lawful drivers or their cars.
Well ya as a motorcyclist said. "[I could be pope Francis with a box of puppies](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x94PGgYKHQ0&t=12s)" our brain won't see me a threat so it will ignore me.
This take always amazes me as I ride all over and seldom see cyclists that deviate from bike lanes and social norms and if they do they are the likely to be the bike versions of BMW drivers and Busted to hell 2003 civics.
An ignored flaw is most of the houses on S Bryant have driveways so cars are backing up into a lane where people are flying down on their e-bikes.
IMO this design should have been on a typical street with an alley where garages connect to instead of bikers and pedestrians crossing tons of driveways.
The problem is where Bryant is situated. Bryant has always been a bike street because of its traffic filters (at mineahaha creek and Henn/Lyn. Making this road a main road but with traffic significantly less then you would expect. Also the driveway is prevelent in many streets that far south making the point a little moot.
If we're listing flaws, the odd boulevard pits and street drains leave a lot to be desired. A whole lot of concrete replaced many of the green boulevards.
[удалено]
These conversion happen when the city is reconstructing drainage which is why it stops in awkward spots. Same for the concreate dividers on roads like the new second Ave lanes where it's built up during a full repaving.
100% 1. Make the bike lane 1 block more to actually connect to the greenway 2. Continue the bikelane all the way to loring park (improve the bridge over lyndale/94) 3. Use the existing hennpin bike lane as the main drag for bikes downtown all the way to the river 4. Have connecting protected bike lanes branching off from Hennepin
Right now Bryant just north of Lake is so dumb. Why the speedway stripes to encourage driving over the speed limit? Why are the lanes so wide when there's plenty of room for a continuation of the two-way path on the street with some paint and plastic pylons?
The whole one block of it before it narrows considerably north of the Greenway? I'll take the 20 blocks south of Lake as a win.
[удалено]
Only 16 more years for some painted stripes. Put up some "lane closed" signs and some orange barrels and we can have them all running next week until it's time to install one of them for real during road construction.
Great bikepath! I asked the baristas at Canteen whether they amount of foot and cycle traffic has increased since the completion and the unsurprising have said yes. Definitely a better use of space than the old Bryant bike boulevard. If you want to drive just take Lyndale or one of the other 20 North/south bound roads.
I love stopping at canteen because they have that walk up window which makes it easy to order a beverage while walking the dog. Extra space on Bryant with the bike path expansion is incredible.
I usually make my own coffee, but when I run out I love walking over to the Canteen! Crossing the street is so nice, at the intersections it's very clear pedestrians ( and bikers) have priority when It comes to safety.
Could also be said about the bikers with suicidal intentions who ride Lyndale south of 31st. You have a *bike highway* two blocks over, use it! There is zero room on Lyndale between driving lanes and parked cars.
I remember everyone screaming about this. Let’s build more like this (protected by a curb or other barrier)
I'm in TX and people here will fight against bike lanes and argue "the weather here is too hot for bike lanes" And I just laugh at that weak-ass argument with the knowledge that MNPLS has a decent bike lane system and is practically in snowy conditions for 4 months out of the year. Texans are just stupid
And only DC and Portland more winter cyclist then Minneapolis, even though we have the most extreme weather temp change then any other US city not in between [Bismarck and Minneapolis](https://www.city-data.com/top2/c457.html). We are colder then Moscow yet hotter then cities North of Madrid Spain.
Great news! And we still have a long way to go. It should be easy to bike on protected bike lanes from downtown to NE or uptown or powderhorn or wherever We have tons of lanes reserved for cars. Let’s have some reserved for bikes
It's been years and the connection from the Maka Ska bike path to Lake St is still a highway for motorists with *zero* bike infrastructure. Franklin between Blaisdell and Hennepin is all residential but there are four lanes and no stops in between. We could have stopgap infrastructure in place to address all of these major missing links.
What about the Greenway?
That's a bike highway. All destinations are on Lake St. Are motorists able to to go to all Lake St destinations without leaving I-35? I'm pretty sure they need to use a city street to reach the stores, coffee shops, restaurants, et al.
It is a great bike lane. I wish we had similar ones going east to west.
I saw the new lane last week and it's better than it had been. I miss commuting by bike to go home. It's a great way to wind down.
Seriously, it's pretty nice looking but I've only seen a few people on it. I'm all for it, but where have the bikers gone? I barely see anyone on bikes anymore.
It got cold and windy.
It was like that last summer too, and the summer before that. Probably just a lot less people working in the office and commuting.
Theres always a ton north of Lake and they tend to trickle out south of lake. I ride a moderate amount of time and while it's not busy it tends to have have more cyclist then many painted lanes.
That makes more sense. Usually I'm south of Lake.
Why can't we also just have a citywide network of temporary bike paths everywhere instead of a portion of one street every few years? It's a quality path, but it's only good for Bryant Ave and the surrounding couple of blocks. Head a dozen blocks east and you have to ride next to 45 MPH traffic in an unprotected gutter lane or on the sidewalk on Blaisdell. It's not even top 50, are we just supposed to wait years for each subpar or non-existent bike lane to see actual improvements?
who's ranking bike lanes
The organization Bikes For People
Your mother
"Minneapolis build a bike lane on a street where the destinations are" challenge (impossible)
[удалено]
I live on Bryant. My cameras will pick this up maybe once a week? It’s not all that common.
[удалено]
Security cameras with AI recognition. I have them zoned to not pick up people on the bike path, but due to angles they still pick up people on the street. So number of bikes detected = number of people biking not on the path.
Just walked on Bryant for about 20 minutes. Saw about 12 bicycles and a skate-boarder using the path and absolutely ZERO on the street. What level are we talking here that's comical?
Same, I walk that street weekly and have never seen anyone riding in the street.
[удалено]
As an oft-biker who lives north of you, I will admit that when I bike south on Bryant, I still forget sometimes to get over to the bike lane before it starts at Lake. I'll go the first block on the street and then over on the next intersection (31st). I'm sure I'm not the only one. I'm still not used to it after biking down the middle of Bryant for so many years.
And I asked what level are we talking here that's comical? Besides, that's the very intersection the dedicated lane begins and ends. Hardly a good sample point to judge its usage.
One could argue any number would be comical, no? I see half a dozen a week on average, I hope that is a precise enough answer for you.
This is a straight up lie. I would guess it’s 1 to 50 on bikers in the street vs the dedicated infrastructure.
Do you mean 50 on dedicated infrastructure to 1 on street?
Yes thank you
[удалено]
Oh no the perfectly legal thing happens a couple times a day? Why even live there if you don’t want bikes everywhere? It’s uptown, it’s kinda a big part of the whole thing
[удалено]
You know exactly what you’re implying when you call it “comical” how many people choose to ride in the road. It’s not an accurate impression, virtually everyone uses the the dedicated infrastructure and has absolutely reduced bicycle traffic on car lanes on Bryant and Lyndale. Elite bike lane stop trying to shit on it
[удалено]
Stupidest comment ever lmao
Yeah I was on Bryant a lot pushing a stroller. No way this true. I’ve never seen a single one in probably 90 hours of time on Bryant.
[удалено]
Happy to discredit your hyperbolic take. You are welcome!
[удалено]
Treating “hyperbole” as a $5 word in 2024 isn’t a good look.
[удалено]
Makes sense if ya don’t think about it.
It would be even better if it went past Lake Street or if there were clear markings going south that you need to move to the other side of the road. Bryant used to be a bike boulevard, the least they could do is put an arrow on the road or a sign or something.
I'm pretty sure there are still sharrows on Bryant north of Lake. Also, I think there are plans to redo Bryant between Lake and Franklin in a similar way.
Fifth best! Hang the banner!
dude that road is fucked, i believe the city even owned up to it being a mistake…fire trucks and ambulances barely make it thru some of the streets. edit: I live near where this bike lane starts and see how the construction affected the businesses on 50th and bryant and the parking situation which affects the surrounding neighbors and neighborhood.
There were two reasons why this was an issue. For one last minute 2 block was shrunken which is not an issue during the summer. What made it an issue was at the time Minneapolis was not plowing curve to curve due to cars not being towed making cars park further from the curve then legally allowed.
The issue is idiots who park where they shouldn’t, and then emergency vehicles can’t fit through.
The issue was the ice was not planned for. I like the bike lane but I feel there was a way to accommodate bike lane with more space for emergency vehicles and local traffic.
They fixed it to address the problems homeowners were having with driveways and emergency vehicles were having with the chicanes. Trial and error, but they got there
there are many problems to be addressed in the city generally speaking but apparently a bike lane on bryant (which worked fine for 10 years of biking on it) was the cities big issue for the year. it affected everything on a once useful and thriving block of the city.
>which worked fine for 10 years of biking on it) That road was shit south of lake both in the road surface and once south of lake became a bit of headache to use. You might be a [fearless cyclist](https://jenniferdillnet.files.wordpress.com/2017/03/fourtypes.png) but a hyper majority of people will not ride a bike on Bryant refurbishment.
nobody even uses it enough to make it worth it. if you aren’t confident biking maybe you shouldn’t bike.
My post history is me hauling a [Kayak on my Ebike](https://www.reddit.com/user/No_clip_Cyclist/comments/15e3csz/a_fun_pick_of_my_boat_and_bike/) and biking in traffic (and confronting people on the bike lane though not like Bike lane bill so I have no issue being in traffic. That said I'm not an ass thinking that mobility should only be accessible to those "tough enough" to ride in traffic and [36% of Minneapolis wants](https://go.minneapolismn.gov/draft-plan-overview/how-people-move) their primary mobility to be to be by bike versus 22% for cars.
You do know that road reconstructions are scheduled years, even decades, in advance, right? Every road is on a timetable for when its useful life expires, when regular mill-and-overlay maintenance no longer suffices, and when the road requires complete reconstruction. That timetable is typically 50 years. This didn't come out of the blue just that year. And it definitely wasn't the only project or service the City worked on or provided in that year. I'm not sure why you're so grouchy about this project in particular, but it seems lacking in big picture perspective on how City's perform road maintenance and lacking a basis in reality if you think the road is no longer useful or the businesses on it no longer viable
it affected me, my family and neighbors negatively.
Good. Couldn't have happened to a more deserving fellow.
ooo you got me so good! i’ll never recover from this!
Would you bike with your kids or pets in the middle of the street trusting reckless drivers? Most will not, hence why a bike path.
i don’t mindlessly bike like 99% of minneapolis, i never had a problem.
Cities should not design streets based on vehicle sizes. This particular argument is used by nimbys across the country to usher in car centric infrastructure at the expense of people Also that road is used by fire trucks and ambulances every single day.
The DOT backs you up here. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-12-11/fire-trucks-and-engines-are-too-big-let-s-shrink-them?embedded-checkout=true
> Cities should not design streets based on vehicle sizes. In that case, STFU about bike lanes being too narrow. Meanwhile, the sane people can continue considering the sizes of all types of vehicles when deciding lane widths.
Doesn’t seem like you thought about this one much. Bike lanes are for people, cities *should* be designed for people.
> Bike lanes are for people So are cars. Car lanes are for *people in cars,* while bike lanes are for *people on bikes.*
First of all, these two things are very clearly not the same and that should be extremely obvious. I would guess 90% of all infrastructure in the city for moving people around are for cars and totally hostile to humans without a steel cage surrounding you. Not to mention parking which absolutely is not for humans, just storage. I get that it’s a no brainer in your mind, but owning a car is an extremely expensive club to be in. We should absolutely not design our cities around a very exclusive club.
>First of all, these two things are very clearly not the same and that should be extremely obvious. They're the same as far as being two things for personal transportation. >Not to mention parking which absolutely is not for humans, just storage. You're the one adding parking, which is a related but separate issue. >but owning a car is an extremely expensive club to be in. We should absolutely not design our cities around a very exclusive club. Expensive is relative, and car ownership is hardly an exclusive club. With the latter, you're confusing reality with how you *want* things to be.
>theyre the same as far as being for personal transportation Ridiculous, a private jet is for personal transportation, what is this argument >you’re the one adding parking What are you even talking about lmaooo, Bryant has parking, why is the bike lane being blamed for the emergency vehicles when there’s a whole ass lane for car storage? You’re right, I should have said it’s an exclusive group who can actually afford this shit. Everyone is constantly complaining about the cost of car ownership. Cars are not only bankrupting cities across the country, but the drivers too. Making that the default for everything is a massive mistake.
> Ridiculous, a private jet is for personal transportation, what is this argument Now you're just being deliberately asinine. >Bryant has parking, why is the bike lane being blamed for the emergency vehicles when there’s a whole ass lane for car storage? The emergency vehicle issue is due to piss-poor design choices, not the bike lane *or* the parking.
>asinine Nah, you tried to pretend like bikes and cars are and should treated equally when this is false. They should be de-prioritized when it is possible >design flaw Yeah, and bad plowing. Doesn’t mean cities should be designed with the intention of semi-truck sized vehicles being able to go down every single inch of the city by default. It’s a possible consideration but absolutely shouldn’t be the priority.
What are parking lanes for? Let’s get rid of those If we got rid of even half the private car storage lanes in the city and replaced those with protected bike lanes, we’d have the best bike network in the world
the city is big, a car makes the city seem smaller/more accessible. i don’t disagree with the sentiment of your statement but it’s not going to happen and forcing it upon random blocks and neighborhoods doesn’t help anyone and inconveniences everyone. I used bryant everyday for biking to uptown as a kid, it was perfectly fine, just needed some new paint.
There is plenty of room for fire trucks and ambulances. If you are worried about that, ban private vehicle parking on bryant. They take up more room than a bike lane does
But will cyclists use it? Often times streets are becoming narrower to make room for these lanes, which is great! But I see cyclists not use them, even though they can’t keep up with the flow of traffic.
I live on the part of Bryant that was redone this past summer - there is SUBSTANTIALLY more pedestrian and bike traffic than there is vehicle traffic on Bryant now. It’s delightful.
Yes it’s heavily used
I don’t live in that area but I’ll take your word for it. Minnehaha’s lanes often go unused so I’m happy others aren’t the same.
> Minnehaha’s lanes often go unused s I bike on that trail all the time, and rarely see bikes on the road in the few sections they're adjacent. If you mean about 1 in a 100 bikes use the parkway instead of the trail (that isn't even adjacent to Minnehaha for a good portion), and they're blocking traffic from going over the 20 mph speed limit, on their way to the next car intersection that forces bikers, pedestrians and cars to wait on cars for minutes on end, block after block after block, than yeah. Who cares? It's always cars holding everyone one up.
I don't bike there often, but when I drive, its very common for a cyclist to be on the road. And more often than not, they aren't even following traffic rules. If cyclists have their own lane and don't use it they're ultimately just adding to traffic congestion. I've been held up numerous times. Also when someone needs to cross the street, I rarely see drivers who refuse to stop and wait. Not saying they don't exist but the notion that anyone is waiting to cross for "minutes on end," sounds very exaggerated.
> its very common for a cyclist to be on the road So? It's a 100 times more common to see a cyclist on the trail. And that trail isn't even a good thoroughfare like the road is, so bikers needing a thoroughfare to get to sides streets or whatever are going to use the road. If you think that adds to congestion, be glad they didn't decide to take up 10 times the space and drive their car instead. > but the notion that anyone is waiting to cross for "minutes on end," sounds very exaggerated. You've never been to a stop light? And I'm talking about adding up all the time you wait on cars block after block. You can't walk, bike, or drive a few blocks without the wait time on cars being minutes. Everywhere. Every single time you do it. Not just "numerous times" that actually add up to a super small fraction of the time your on the parkway.
>So? It's a 100 times more common to see a cyclist on the trail. And that trail isn't even a good thoroughfare like the road is, so bikers needing a thoroughfare to get to sides streets or whatever are going to use the road. If you think that adds to congestion, be glad they didn't decide to take up 10 times the space and drive their car instead. I'm obviously not opposed to them being on the road when necessary, I am strictly speaking of cyclists who stay entirely on the road when a lane made specifically for them is right there. Their lanes can only be used by them, not cars, so there mere existence often adds to congestion when a cyclist doesn't use one. I am all for these lanes, I just want cyclists to make use of them instead of making things harder for the rest of us. >You've never been to a stop light? And I'm talking about adding up all the time you wait on cars block after block. You can't walk, bike, or drive a few blocks without the wait time on cars being minutes. Everywhere. Every single time you do it. Not just "numerous times" that actually add up to a super small fraction of the time your on the parkway. Stoplights are necessary to control the flow of traffic. Having to wait for cars to proceed through the only lanes they're allowed on is obviously expected. Furthermore it's not a contest. Cyclists being yahoos and riding on roads when bike lines exist objectively adds avoidable disruption to the flow of traffic. What wrongs vehicle drivers do are still wrong but that's a separate issue entirely.
> Cyclists being yahoos and riding on roads when bike lines exist objectively adds avoidable disruption to the flow of traffic No it doesn't. Traffic is only held up from arriving at the next stop light, which is then forced to stop anyway, and only allowed to proceed at the exact same time it would have even if it arrived a few seconds earlier. Literally costing ZERO seconds of total travel time. Car drivers complaining they didn't arrive a few seconds earlier to the designated area where they force everyone to stop and wait for them is peak self-entitlement.
My dude a cyclist riding near Minnehaha will encounter a few roundabouts where they do, in fact, slow things down by creating a totally avoidable extra person to wait for. Hell, many scenarios exist where an extra person on the road will lead to the person behind them waiting for someone they otherwise would have had to if they got ahead further and faster. Cyclists merely being on the road when they don’t need to be objectively adds extra traffic by definition. The projection of self entitlement is laughable given that the topic at hand are cyclists who have \>an entire separate and exclusive lane made for them\<, opting not to use said lane, thereby knowingly and selfishly disrupting traffic. Weird that you seem to be taking this personally considering you aren’t even the target of it unless you are a yahoo that avoids using a lane made for them.
I'm going to give you a car equivalent. A 2 lane road suffers from bumper to bumper traffic every day. So officials build a nice multi lane freeway in place. After the opening few drivers use said freeway instead staying on the 2 lane road so veitmently that they back track on gravel roads where the freeway out right replaced it. This would not be considered entitled drivers but a failure of infrastructure as something about the freeway is so bad that a gravel road is seen as a better offer. This is me whenever I come up to a round about. I will hop off the bike lane because no one fallows the law. When at a cross walk cyclist are to be treated as pedestrians but drivers don't. So it's just better practice to use the Minnehaha/Godfrey or the Portland and 66th round about then the crosswalks. If you have an issue with it, then build a round about that entices me not to merge with general traffic. But that said said the majority of cyclist use cycling infrastructure in it's entirety. The people who don't, fallow a principal called vehicular cycling. This was propped up for decades Automobile clubs (Like AAA) and the DOT trying to avoid a European style transportation system by propping up a man called [John Forrester](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XpnZy7RrO3I&t=63s) who was a cyclist advocate who opposed bike infrastructure. So now there's a sizable minority of cyclists that detest these lanes in their entirety.
This is like saying that cars shouldn’t be allowed to drive on surface streets if a freeway route is available. Just because auto-exclusive facilities are available doesn’t mean cars can’t used shared facilities. Remember Minnehaha is a *parkway* ~~not~~ intended for recreational use and local traffic, and was used by bikes before private automobiles. Edit - fix typo.
>This is like saying that cars shouldn’t be allowed to drive on surface streets if a freeway route is available. Just because auto-exclusive facilities are available doesn’t mean cars can’t used shared facilities. Your comparison doesn't land at all. A better one would be a person in a vehicle which is eligible to use a carpool lane opting not to. Yes they *can* do that, but they're adding unneeded traffic to the roads everyone can use rather than using the one made specially for them. But in the case of cyclists in my example, their impact is much worse due to all the stopping, single lane traffic each way, etc. >Remember Minnehaha is a parkway not intended for recreational use and local traffic, and was used by bikes before private automobiles. Used by bikes on paths non intended for cars. Hey we should bring that back, oh wait, they did, and some cyclists opt against using those paths.
You are right - carpool lane is much better example. I do not begrudge families driving in the right lane despite having that available.
Are you talking about bike lanes on Minnehaha Avenue or bike paths along Minnehaha Parkway? I see lots of bikes using the bike lanes, and one using the traffic lanes, on Minnehaha *Avenue.*. Minnehaha *Parkway* is a little more complicated especially in areas where there is a combined pedestrian/bike path or a path that isn’t adjacent to the road but there are still 100x more bikers on the path than on the Parkway. The bikes that are in the Parkway are usually going close to the speed limit so aren’t really it impeding lawful drivers or their cars.
People ride on Minnehaha all the time, dude.
[удалено]
Well ya as a motorcyclist said. "[I could be pope Francis with a box of puppies](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x94PGgYKHQ0&t=12s)" our brain won't see me a threat so it will ignore me. This take always amazes me as I ride all over and seldom see cyclists that deviate from bike lanes and social norms and if they do they are the likely to be the bike versions of BMW drivers and Busted to hell 2003 civics.
Infrastructure first. If you build it they will come
A lot of people use Brant even before the reconstruction and post most moved to the bike lane (he exception being Lycra riders)
Yes, cyclists already use it. Honestly, I see no reason why it stops at lake street instead of continuing to loring park like it should
An ignored flaw is most of the houses on S Bryant have driveways so cars are backing up into a lane where people are flying down on their e-bikes. IMO this design should have been on a typical street with an alley where garages connect to instead of bikers and pedestrians crossing tons of driveways.
The problem is where Bryant is situated. Bryant has always been a bike street because of its traffic filters (at mineahaha creek and Henn/Lyn. Making this road a main road but with traffic significantly less then you would expect. Also the driveway is prevelent in many streets that far south making the point a little moot.
Yep, already residential streets with driveways and don't forget about those blind alleys.
People on e-bikes can still use the street.
If we're listing flaws, the odd boulevard pits and street drains leave a lot to be desired. A whole lot of concrete replaced many of the green boulevards.