CBD Traffic Survey Limited to Select Few!
Earlier today I asked what happened to the CBD Traffic Study announced a month ago. Well, it seems the surveys were sent out to a select few.
The following letter on ‘Downtown St. Louis Community Improvement District’ letterhead was dated July 19, 2005:
The Downtown St. Louis Traffic Circulation and Access Study is being initiated and will be conducted during the summer and fall of this year. The Study is being conducted by the City of St. Louis in partnership with Downtown Now!, the Downtown St. Louis Partnership and the Office of the City Treasurer. Crawford, Bunte, & Brammeier are the consultants who will conduct the study and as a result prepare a plan for implementation.
The goal of the study is to identify measures that would improve vehicular access and circulation through the Central Business District (CBD) while at the same time enhancing the safety and attractiveness of Downtown for pedestrians and improving pedestrian access to street-level retail. The study will result in a plan that is intended to be implemented in conjunction with the installation of new traffic signal controllers in the CBD in late 2005 and in conjunction with the completion of major downtown developments.
As a member of the Downtown Partnership Board of Directors and/or the Transportation Committee, your input on the enclosed survey is important for the study. It would be greatly appreciated if you would complete the attached survey by July 26, 2005 and mail or fax to:
Blake YoudeDowntown Now!1533 Washington AvenueSt. Louis, MO 63103
Fax: 314-588-0951Thank you very much for your attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
Laura Lock
The survey is six pages and divided into two sections — Part I: Identification of Issues and Part II: Feedback on Potential Alterations/Improvements. It is labeled as a “Stakeholder Survey.”
The purpose of this survey is to solicit input that will be used in a study of vehicular and pedestrian circulation and access in Downtown St. Louis and the preparation of a plan to improve access and circulation. Your input will be used to craft measures to improve: (1) vehicular and pedestrian access into and out of the CBD; (2) vehicular and pedestrian movement within the CBD; and (3) the safety and attractiveness of Downtown for businesses, residents, workers and visitors. The study area is bounded by Lucas to the north, Interstate 70/Memorial Drive to the east, Spruce to the south and Tucker Boulevard to the west. Please answer the questions below as specifically as possible.
Part I – IDENTIFICATION OF ISSUES
Vehicular Access To/From the CBD — The ease (or lack thereof) with which motorists, employees and visitors can access the CBD from the regional highway or arterial roadway system.
1) List the Top 2 advantages of the existing system.2) List our Top 2 concerns related to the existing system.3) Comments [blank area]
Vehicular Circulation Within the CBD — The ease (or lack thereof) with which motorists, employees and visitors can circulate within the CBD and access individual sites and/or parking facilities.
4) List the Top 2 advantages of the existing system.5) List our Top 2 concerns related to the existing system.
6) Comments [blank area]Pedestrian Circulation — Ease (or lack thereof) with which pedestrians can circulate, cross streets, and travel safely in the CBD.
7) List the Top 2 advantages of the existing system.8) List our Top 2 concerns related to the existing system.
9) Comments [blank area]Page 2 of 6:
Loading Zones — The sufficiency of existing accommodations for loading and delivery zones, including the utilization of these zones, loading zone regulations and enforcement of regulations.
10) List the Top 2 advantages of the existing system.11) List our Top 2 concerns related to the existing system.
12) Comments [blank area]On-Street Parking — The sufficiency of existing on-street parking accommodations, including the utilization of these parking spaces, parking regulations and enforcement of regulations.
13) List the Top 2 advantages of the existing system.14) List our Top 2 concerns related to the existing system.
15) Comments [blank area]Other Traffic, Circulation and Parking Issues — Please describe any other issues that you believe affect vehicular or pedestrian traffic within the CBD.
16) Comments [large blank area with 12 lines]Page 3 of 6:
Part II — FEEDBACK ON POTENTIAL ALTERATIONS/IMPROVEMENTS
The study will attempt to identify improvement measures that could be employed to enhance access, circulation, safety and walkability in the CBD and to correct existing deficiencies. A list of improvement alternatives (including potential roadway, pedestrian enhancement, traffic control and parking/loading zone modifications will be developed. These measures will be evaluated to determine their ability to address the stated concerns without adversely effecting traffic flow or pedestrian safety within the CBD.
We would like to solicit commentary on previously proposed concepts and solicit suggestions for other enhancements. Measurers to be considered may include but are not limited to the following concepts.
All of the following in the survey are the description of a concept and the question, “Would You View This Treatment As: Positive? Negative?” Check boxes were provided for the positive and negative as well as a comment section.
#17 — A review of the street grid in the CBD for selective conversions of one-way streets to two-way flow (or vice versa):
a) Conversion of Pine Street to two-way traffic flowb) Conversion of 8th Street to two-way traffic flowc) Conversion of 9th Street to two-way traffic flowd) Conversion of 10th Street to two-way traffic flowe) Conversion of 11th Street to two-way traffic flowf) Conversion of Locust Street to two-way traffic flowg) Conversion of Lucas Street entirely to one-way or two-way traffic flow to eliminate isolated blocks of conflicting patternsh) Conversion of Walnut Street to two-way traffic flowi) “Reverse lane” accommodations for selected venues like the Drury Inn on Market Street or KMOV on Walnut Street.j) Others — please suggest:Page 4 of 6
#18 — Improved traffic signal operations, timing and/or coordination:
a) Elimination or addition of traffic signals at selected locations.b) Elimination or addition of turn arrows for selected movements.c) Elimination of “scramble walk” pedestrian signal phases (crossing all four legs simultaneously) in lieu of conventional phasing (pedestrian signals set to “cross with the green”).d) Changing traffic signals to “flashing” operations during expanded hours of day.e) Others — please suggest:#19 — Minor roadway modifications and/or reconfiguration of travel lanes, including changes in pavement markings:
a) Reducing the number of lanes along selected streets (such as Tucker) as described in the Downtown Streetscape Planb) Adding “double turn lanes” for turning from one-way streets onto other streets where safe and appropriate.c) Adding “left turn on red” for turning from one-way streets onto one-way streets where left is the direction of travel.d) Eliminating “right turn on red” at some intersections.e) Adding “right turn on red” at more intersections.f) Others — please suggest:Page 5 of 6
#20 — Changes in/enforcement of on-street parking and loading regulations:
a) Adding more “no parking during rush hour” restrictions for on-street parking on selected roadways.b) Eliminating “no parking during rush hour” restrictions for on-street parking on selected roadways.d) More/better enforcement of parking and loading regulations.e) Adding more parking metersf) Relocating some parking meters.g) Changing the hours of parking meter enforcement.h) Requiring loading zones for all downtown buildings over a certain size.h) Requiring loading zones (with/without time restrictions) for all buildings with loading docks (e.g. Metropolitan Square).) Others — please suggest:Please suggest other improvements or modifications that you think would benefit vehicular or pedestrian movement within the CBD:
Page 6 of 6 asks for the person’s contact information and gives the same address and fax number to submit the survey.
So, what are my thoughts?
Only mailed to a specific list, not made widely available. Figures. Recipients were only given a week to complete the survey. Why not make it available as a PDF document that could be downloaded and printed? I suggest you copy/paste the questions above and take the survey. You can submit to Downtown Now! via their general email address at info@downtownnow.org
But what is missing from the survey? Bicyclists! They are completely concerned about vehicles or pedestrians. While these are important factors the omission of bicyclists from the survey in the CBD is quite telling about priorities. I’m appalled that such a critical survey failed to mention bicyclists even once.
[UPDATE 8/4/05 @ 9:30AM – I got word around 6pm last night that Downtown Now! hand delivered at least one Traffic Survey to a downtown resident & business owner yesterday afternoon. Not sure how many they delivered but it is nice to see such a fast response to this post! Hopefully these organizations will realize they are being watched closely from many people – and we all talk to each other.]
– Steve
Don’t know if you can answer this, but how do you conversate a street?
[REPLY – That would be my sloppy typing. I’ve changed the word “conversation” to “conversion” in #17. Thanks for catching that. – Steve]
I can’t telly ou I am surprised at how this survey was put out. Looks like some good things may come out of it, but many things are going to be left out. Basically they are just making a plan to legitimate what has already been decided.
Did Pablo Weiss get one? How about Jim Cloar?
If I know Barb’s tactics, Steve Stogel, Jack Danforth, Richard Baron, Craig Heller, and the Roberts brothers were likely considered among the select few “stakeholders.”
But loft dwellers? City Grocers? Anyone truly breathing life into downtown? Yeah right.
How else can you reach your foregone conclusions if you can’t control survey respondents. Barb’s letter about a past consultant’s recommendations should tell you whose opinions this administration values– outsiders with boiler-plate designs or insiders financially tied to Room 200.
[REPLY – Well stated! See my update above, I know of at least one person downtown that received a hand delivered survey yesterday afternoon — after this post appeared. – Steve]
Downtown Now! doing another study. Yawn . . .
Downtown Now is nothing more than Danforth money lending a name and some questionable weight to projects that have no basis in good planning. Their own plan, which Tom Reeves is unfamiliar with (and somehow he still has a job) is just an abused monument to (maybe) good intentions bastardized into support for the guys with the plan du jour, no matter how much damage it will cause.
Donwtown Now is compromised. Their opinions have been rendered meaningless by their own hypocrasies. Does anyone really care what they what they say or do or think, except the people they really report to–Room 200, rich developers, whoever they leach power from in a vicarious method?
Of course, it sounds so much better when the media can announce some misguided project has the support of those clowns. But eventually, everyone will know what damage Danforth’s minions have wrought.
Dowtown Now’s aversion to multiplicity and density continues.
Below is a portion of the “Ride Guys” small article that is posted on stltoday.com. A woman from Normandy posed the same questions you have been asking, and after that is the “experts'” opinion and answer. Copying and pasting the link below will take you to the actual article.
Matt
http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/columnists.nsf/alongfortheride/story/9A12958CB4DFCD668625705700322F14?OpenDocument
Q. Why is parking not allowed on Washington Avenue east of Tucker? I can understand if it’s regulated during football games but the middle of the day on Tuesday? Isn’t the object to connect the convention center and hotels with the shops and dining to the west?
– Paul Reise, Normandy
A. Downtown wants all the traffic it can get. That said, Washington Avenue east of Tucker is one of the more heavily driven downtown streets. Cars trying to park in that area would cause all kinds of headaches.
The street’s busy even on Tuesdays.
As an alternative, many of the other downtown streets have metered parking. For a few extra bucks, you can park in one of several garages. We don’t like paying for parking any more than you. But – unfortunately – that’s life in the city.
To clarify the post above, I do not agree with the “experts'” opinions given on stltoday.com. I just thought it was funny and absurd, and somewhat relevant to this ongoing discussion.
Steve,
It looks like you need to educate the “Ride Guys”. As a matter of fact, I think we should have our own little letter writing campaign and set them straight.