Have any questions, comments, complaints, compliments? Send them all our way! Contact John Lindenmayer at [email protected] or (517) 334-9100.
If you are seeking technical assistance for your community such as a presentation on Complete Streets, please use our request form.
5 comments
Comments feed for this article
November 10, 2010 at 1:41 am
Tim Potter
This is great news. I’m hoping that the MSU campus might also be a site for trying a HAWK device in the future; funding is a definite issue. I’ve been told that these are not really recommended for areas where there are lots of peds like we have on our campus as the HAWK would be activated way too much, and that it’s intended use is for areas where peds aren’t expected or more infrequent.
Tim
September 29, 2011 at 4:05 am
Tom
I’m a resident of Ludington, a city of 8000 in Western Michigan. Our City adopted a Complete Streets Ordinance early this year, and many in Ludington had high hopes that the repaving they were doing on seven blocks of Staffon Street would meet the ideals of Complete Streets. This street’s 7 blocks were all within a school safety zone (within 1000 ft. of school property) and also contiguous on the other side with our hospital and other related health care buildings. Many are the times I have seen people in wheelchairs have to use the street, and kids walk on the side of badly lit
September 29, 2011 at 4:15 am
Tom
(cont) areas along the street, blocked by obstacles. The repaving took all summer, and two weeks into the school year, kids walking through construction zones to get to school. When they were done, nearly 5 blocks of the seven were left without sidewalks. Yet, every single driveway in those blocks were repaved. A FOIA found out that there was no incorporation of CS ideas in the planning of this. Our City Manager only signed onto CS just so that the City could get bonuses for grants. At $100,000+ a year, he doesn’t need to walk. It’s sickening.
September 29, 2011 at 1:55 pm
League of Michigan Bicyclists
Hi Tom,
I just double checked and Ludington actually only passed a resolution not an ordinance. There is a big difference. An ordinance is codified law, while a resolution is simply says that the concept is supported. An ordinance has teeth, while a resolution does not.
If you remember the Ludington News story earlier this spring, your City Manager didn’t give a glowing endorsement of actually implementing Complete Streets:
“The resolution requires the city consider making city streets better for walkers and bikers while planning the projects, City Manager John Shay said, but does not require the city to actually make those changes.”
“In exchange, Ludington would receive extra points when it applies for Michigan Department of Transportation grants to pay for road projects.”
http://www.ludingtondailynews.com/news/57830-making-ludington-bike-pedestrian-friendly
I’m going to shoot your message pass a couple folks who have been working on CS in your community.
September 30, 2011 at 2:37 pm
Tom
Thanks for the shooting, and apos for the resolution/ordinance flub. I am running for the City Council this fall and will make sure street projects have STRONG considerations for the non-motorized users in the future if I get there and push for an ordinance with FANGS. My two term incumbent opponent actually spoke glowingly of the work that was done on this street at the last CC meeting. The streets and those brand new driveways do look good, but there was a perfect opportunity to put down sidewalks in the 5 blocks where they tore up the soil inside that school zone. Since 1984, this City has violated their own ordinances (not resolutions) by not enforcing that new construction areas need to install sidewalks. It will continue with our current leadership who (you also have noticed) have shown a lack of consideration for public safety issues, and more for their own self-promotion and qualifying for grants. But this isn’t a paid political message and I have wandered into the realm of self-promotion myself , so I will get off the soapbox. Keep up the good work.