Bob Glissmann, WORLD-HERALD STAFF WRITER wrote:No one who has lived in Omaha for very long would be surprised to hear someone call the city automobile-centric.
Advertising
While you can find exceptions to the rule, most Omahans, if they have to get somewhere, jump in their cars and drive.
Even if their destination is within what reasonably could be considered “walking distance.”
On Tuesday, the City of Omaha will kick off a yearlong process to update its transportation master plan. The kickoff will occur at a 6:30 p.m. public meeting at Mammel Hall, 6708 Pine St., on the south campus of the University of Nebraska at Omaha.
I don't think this is anything we don't already know and agree with. The flame wars start when certain posters imply that those who's main mode of transportation is the automobile, are automatically fat, lazy, polluting, pedestrian killers.
What hope is there for multi-modal transportation in Omaha when planning directors are still posing ridiculous questions like, “Can we afford to continue that kind of total reliance on one mode of transportation?” Â Unreal.
omaja wrote:What hope is there for multi-modal transportation in Omaha when planning directors are still posing ridiculous questions like, “Can we afford to continue that kind of total reliance on one mode of transportation?” Unreal.
While I think that was mostly rhetorical in context, the entire article left me with the impression they aren't and haven't been putting much thought into this plan beyond roadways. I could be wrong...
omaja wrote:What hope is there for multi-modal transportation in Omaha when planning directors are still posing ridiculous questions like, “Can we afford to continue that kind of total reliance on one mode of transportation?” Unreal.
While I think that was mostly rhetorical in context, the entire article left me with the impression they aren't and haven't been putting much thought into this plan beyond roadways. I could be wrong...
That's what I mean though: they have yet to move beyond the theoretical aspect of alternative modes of transportation while the concepts already exist and have proven successful elsewhere. Â They need to stop blabbing about it and just get it started. Â Reform the hopelessly useless "Omaha Metro" system, lay down tracks for dedicated light rail and trolleys, stop widening every street in sight out west, etc., etc.
omaja wrote:What hope is there for multi-modal transportation in Omaha when planning directors are still posing ridiculous questions like, “Can we afford to continue that kind of total reliance on one mode of transportation?” Unreal.
While I think that was mostly rhetorical in context, the entire article left me with the impression they aren't and haven't been putting much thought into this plan beyond roadways. I could be wrong...
That's what I mean though: they have yet to move beyond the theoretical aspect of alternative modes of transportation while the concepts already exist and have proven successful elsewhere. They need to stop blabbing about it and just get it started. Reform the hopelessly useless "Omaha Metro" system, lay down tracks for dedicated light rail and trolleys, stop widening every street in sight out west, etc., etc.
Exactly. It's not reinventing the wheel.
"The right to have access to every building in the city by private motorcar in an age when everyone possesses such a vehicle is actually the right to destroy the city."
Lewis Mumford, The Highway and the City, 1963
omaja wrote:lay down tracks for dedicated light rail and trolleys,
What's really sad is that there's a lot of evidence that the Omaha area once had a trolley network that covered virtually all of the populated metro area, which they tore up in the 1950s.
S33 wrote:I don't think this is anything we don't already know and agree with. The flame wars start when certain posters imply that those who's main mode of transportation is the automobile, are automatically fat, lazy, polluting, pedestrian killers.
The lazy, polluting part was easy. Getting fat wasn't exactly automatic. Still working on the pedestrian thing. They seem to be pretty agile.
S33 wrote:I don't think this is anything we don't already know and agree with. The flame wars start when certain posters imply that those who's main mode of transportation is the automobile, are automatically fat, lazy, polluting, pedestrian killers.
The lazy, polluting part was easy. Getting fat wasn't exactly automatic. Still working on the pedestrian thing. They seem to be pretty agile.
People that are pro public transportation need to make it cool and make people want to ride it. Â Standing on the corner yelling a bunch of |expletive| because I drive a car is no better than the Westborough Baptist peeps...
They "your going to heck" comments are Wayyyyyyyy more destructive than they are effective.
S33 wrote:I don't think this is anything we don't already know and agree with. The flame wars start when certain posters imply that those who's main mode of transportation is the automobile, are automatically fat, lazy, polluting, pedestrian killers.
The lazy, polluting part was easy. Getting fat wasn't exactly automatic. Still working on the pedestrian thing. They seem to be pretty agile.
That's why you gotta bait them. When at a an intersection, you simply wave the pedestrians on by. Then, when they are parallel with the front bumper of your car, step on it. :lol:
JK of course.
Brad wrote:
People that are pro public transportation need to make it cool and make people want to ride it. Â Standing on the corner yelling a bunch of |expletive| because I drive a car is no better than the Westborough Baptist peeps...
I'd ride the he-ll out of it even without the guilt trip, it just doesn't exist. It's actually a very refreshing thought to even think I could conveniently get from point A to B in Omaha without my car - or even get a ride from a bar without a 40 dollar cab fair across town.
My definition of cool - it helps greatly if the transportation system operates from where people live to where they want to go in the straightest line possible, at hours they want to travel, and a frequency that doesn't leave you waiting an hour for the next conveyance.
I can't see a streetcar running from every neighborhood to every employment cluster in the metro. I think it is extremely unlikely that an improved Metro, a streetcar system, or light-rail will eliminate the necessity of a car for most families (and a lot of singles) in Omaha.
I can see a few neighborhoods tied by streetcar with Downtown, Mid-Town, UNMC, and UNO/Aksarben. Every 20-minutes. 5 or 6 am until at least midnight. That might attract 25% of the 50,000 (just a guess) living within a quarter mile of a streetcar line.
Metro's park-and-ride bus looks promising. Until it is overflowing I don't see light-rail with park-and-ride lots at Village Point. I wish.
That still leaves most commutes by car (and SUV). The benefit to those still driving? A few less drivers on the highway. A few less suburban neighborhoods for those who would choose urban living -- assuming the streetcar lines lead to more residential construction. Maybe we don't need to add another lane to I-80, I-680, West Dodge Expressway as soon as we would otherwise.
I'm afraid folks like Streets see us motorists as people who think every transportation dollar must be spent on roads. I'm sure in some cases that is true. I'm not going to apply that assumption to every motorist who posts here.
I attended the cycling specific meeting for the Transportation Master Plan tonight at the Marriott in Aksarben. I thought it was a good informal meeting to introduce everyone to the consultants and give us an idea of what their goals and objectives are for the next year. I would guess there were 30-40 people in attendance. There was a slideshow presentation with a group discussion afterward. Public input will be critical to the success of this plan. Get to the meetings that they will have and to the public workshops that will be early next year. It will be interesting to see what comes out of this plan. I think this is definitely a step in the right direction.
"The right to have access to every building in the city by private motorcar in an age when everyone possesses such a vehicle is actually the right to destroy the city."
Lewis Mumford, The Highway and the City, 1963
StreetsOfOmaha wrote:Ah man. I wish I could have been there.
It would have been great for more people to be there, but I was still impressed with the turnout. I think the more support we can get for this the better. I can't make the meeting tomorrow night, so I will be interested to hear what comes out of that meeting.
I'm extremely happy the City is doing this, even if they are a little behind the curve (what's new?). I'm also very interested to see what comes of this in the short and long term. Since our city leaders seem to know how important this is, how much of a priority will they make this plan and various projects that will come from it? How much of an example will they themselves set as "leaders?".
Can you imagine the mayor, his staff, the City Council, etc. using transit, walking, or bicycling to get to work? Or moving to be closer to work to make those options more feasible?
"The right to have access to every building in the city by private motorcar in an age when everyone possesses such a vehicle is actually the right to destroy the city."
Lewis Mumford, The Highway and the City, 1963
Actually the consultants were surprised that Omaha was doing this. They said we were ahead of the curve for a city of our size. Â :mrgreen: It will be interesting to see how much of this plan gets implemented. I'd hate this to be one of those things we look back at after 10 years and say how great it would have been to have these ideas implemented.
I'd love to be at the meetings, but unfortunately they're too early in the evening to make it after work.  Even my car can't get me there that fast  :;):
It does seem like there is a lot of happy feel-good discussion of this sort (Omaha by Design, etc), but that it never really transfers over to action. Â Buzzwords like "walkable neighborhood" and "balanced transportation alternatives" get thrown around a lot, but when shovels hit the dirt, we end up with strip malls surrounded by moats of parking and bus system that can't even take you home from the bar.
Jason4225 wrote:Actually the consultants were surprised that Omaha was doing this. They said we were ahead of the curve for a city of our size.
Is that like being "smart for a blond" or something? Cities our size be damned. :;):
The consultants were surprised Omaha is doing this? That's a little backhanded.
"The right to have access to every building in the city by private motorcar in an age when everyone possesses such a vehicle is actually the right to destroy the city."
Lewis Mumford, The Highway and the City, 1963
Seth wrote:I'd love to be at the meetings, but unfortunately they're too early in the evening to make it after work. Even my car can't get me there that fast :;):
It does seem like there is a lot of happy feel-good discussion of this sort (Omaha by Design, etc), but that it never really transfers over to action. Buzzwords like "walkable neighborhood" and "balanced transportation alternatives" get thrown around a lot, but when shovels hit the dirt, we end up with strip malls surrounded by moats of parking and bus system that can't even take you home from the bar.
Funny that even "moat" can be a euphemism for a parking lot.
"The right to have access to every building in the city by private motorcar in an age when everyone possesses such a vehicle is actually the right to destroy the city."
Lewis Mumford, The Highway and the City, 1963
Since I am unable to attend any of these public meetings, I e-mailed my input directly to MAPA.
Here is my complete e-mail:
Greetings members of the MAPA staff,
I am delighted that MAPA, as the Omaha region's planning authority, is taking steps now to plan for Omaha's transportation future.
I have been unavailable to attend all of the public meetings. The reason? I am currently in New York completing a master's degree in urban and regional planning specializing in transportation.
As an Omaha native and a young professional hoping to return to Omaha after I complete my studies, I believe that the decisions before Omaha's leaders and leaders in the region are of vital importance to Omaha's future as a livable, sustainable, and competitive urban center.
I am delighted that making Omaha a city with diverse transportation options seems to be a priority. The Omaha Region needs to drastically improve public transit and facilities for pedestrians and bicyclists.
As the draft plan makes clear, we obviously need to continue planning for the automobile - however, this should always be in a context which subordinates automobiles in urban environments and in deed encourages people to ditch their cars for other means of transportation that will hopefully be made much more appealing and enticing.
As transportation planners I know I don't need to tell you how despicable and poor the regions public transportation is - it's truly a source of embarrassment to the region. I also know I don't need to tell you something you already damn well know - that congestion is a fact of life in metropolitan environments. We certainly won't increase transit ridership and bicycle and pedestrian mode-share by widening highways in Omaha's already vastly overbuilt road network - nor would doing so prove an effective means to get people out of their cars and into transit vehicles, on their feet, or on a bicycle.
In deed, congestion can be an invaluable tool in encouraging people to try other means of transportation.
The fact that a new interstate beltway is even being considered in this vision, accommodating the further decentralization of Omaha's population and encouraging more low-density auto-dependent development, frankly is an outrage.
We know what's at stake; it's the very quality of life that we're all so proud of in Omaha. However, "quality of life" is an evolving notion. Automobiles, with their devastating effects on neighborhoods, land use patterns, and the environment have brought about a new ethos among younger Americans; one that devalues automobiles and their associated culture and values walkable, livable areas served by "complete streets" connected to transit.
Let's finally bring Omaha and its region into the 21st century.
  * Focus on vastly improving public transportation by incorporating streetcars, light rail, and bus rapid transit into Omaha's  transportation network
* Develop commuter rail services connecting the urban centers of Omaha and Lincoln and points in between.
* Support Omaha's connectivity to the rest of the country by supporting expanded passenger rail service and securing Omaha's rightful place on future high-speed rail corridors.
* Amend Omaha's codes to encourage mixed use, walkable developments within Omaha's current boundaries and to discourage low-density, single use sprawl.
* Omaha should strive to be an example of functional bicycle infrastructure to the rest of the country with places like Portland, OR and Minneapolis, MN as examples.
* Support implementation of the proposed wayfinding systems for Downtown Omaha and expand it into surrounding areas.
* Pursue a complete re-thinking of the Dodge Street corridor - it should be reborn as a new transit/pedestrian/bicycle greenway: a powerful symbol of Omaha's commitment to sustainable development and vitality at its core.
* Reform parking policy. We need a system that doesn't subsidize private automobile use by virtually guaranteeing a free parking space at the end of most car trips.
* Implement a public bike sharing program like many other cities in North America and Europe
These are just a few suggestions for which I would have voiced my support if I were able to be at the meetings.
Let's "make no small plans" and do the right thing for the future of the metropolitan region.
Thank you for your time and the consideration of this e-mail. I will be eagerly following the news of this plan.
Best Regards,
Aaron J. Detter
Master of Regional Planning, Candidate 2012
President, Graduate Planning Student Association
The University at Albany
Department of Geography and Planning
Arts and Sciences 218
1400 Washington Avenue
Albany, NY 12222
If you are unable to attend the meetings please contact MAPA with your thoughts: lrtp@mapacog.org
"The right to have access to every building in the city by private motorcar in an age when everyone possesses such a vehicle is actually the right to destroy the city."
Lewis Mumford, The Highway and the City, 1963
I gotta disagree with the fact that Omaha has an "overbuilt" roadway infrastructure, even more so when you consider the extensive freeway systems of other cities comparable in size.
Other than that, seems to be quite an effective letter and managed the entire thing without slinging insults and runaway arrogance! It was also a very clever and tactful way of submitting a resume. :)
And S33, about the highway system, as I mentioned in the letter, congestion is an incurable fact of life in metropolitan cities. And in fact, Omaha's congestion is peanuts compared to congestion in other cities.
Transportation planners know that there is no cure for congestion - you can add more lanes but they just fill up (see "triple convergence").
Plus, I am concerned with the philosophical question, "why try to reduce automobile congestion?" What I mean is, if I am part of a cohort of people who value the environment and value the mixed use fabric of neighborhoods and who therefore put forth what is in almost all cases (under the current status quo) an extra effort - and often a hardship - to walk, bike, and take transit, then I am in essence taking my car out of the congestion equation. This creates an ironic relationship of proportionality whereby, even if highway infrastructure is not expanded further, the more people choose other modes of transportation, the more congestion is relieved on the highways and, therefore, the more attractive as a transportation option the highways become (again, see "triple convergence").
Of course, there is often basically a critical mass that is at play where no matter how many people you take off the highways and get to use other modes, the highways will still be just as crowded. This is exactly the scenario that evens the playing field for other modes and makes them competitive options.
Also, I know we're mainly talking about highways, but congestion, and specifically gridlock conditions on surface roads, actually creates the safest possible conditions for cyclists and pedestrians. Plus, if you have transit operating on dedicated right of way, all these alternatives start to look pretty darn attractive from your stationary car stuck in traffic.
"The right to have access to every building in the city by private motorcar in an age when everyone possesses such a vehicle is actually the right to destroy the city."
Lewis Mumford, The Highway and the City, 1963
StreetsOfOmaha wrote:Also, I know we're mainly talking about highways, but congestion, and specifically gridlock conditions on surface roads, actually creates the safest possible conditions for cyclists and pedestrians. Plus, if you have transit operating on dedicated right of way, all these alternatives start to look pretty darn attractive from your stationary car stuck in traffic.
Streets, the dedicated right of way is a key to making mass transit work. Omaha has no transit operating on dedicated right of way. The Metro bus ends up just as stationary as the cars stuck in traffic. That almost makes improvements to Metro a non-starter.
IF Omaha every builds streetcar, the plan needs to include street routes that do not overlap with high-traffic streets. Streetcar on Dodge Street, not a good idea. Streetcar on Farnam, much better especially if steps are taken to move traffic off Farnam onto parallel streets.
This is exactly what makes light rail (and BRT) so attractive and effective - they operate independently from automobile traffic.
That's why, as I mentioned in my letter to MAPA on the previous page, I'd love to see the symbolic "spine" of Omaha, Dodge Street, turned into a greenway corridor with express transit service (LRT or BRT), wide protected bicycle lanes, wide pedestrian promenades, and accommodating cars at a local level. Beyond about 80th Street to the West, it would be a transit, bicycle, and car corridor which accommodates pedestrians but focuses more on those first three modes.
My inspiration for this is largely my experience with Avenue de la Republique in Lille, France.
Here are a couple pictures for reference (not the best).
"The right to have access to every building in the city by private motorcar in an age when everyone possesses such a vehicle is actually the right to destroy the city."
Lewis Mumford, The Highway and the City, 1963
StreetsOfOmaha wrote:That's why, as I mentioned in my letter to MAPA on the previous page, I'd love to see the symbolic "spine" of Omaha, Dodge Street, turned into a greenway corridor with express transit service (LRT or BRT), wide protected bicycle lanes, wide pedestrian promenades, and accommodating cars at a local level. Beyond about 80th Street to the West, it would be a transit, bicycle, and car corridor which accommodates pedestrians but focuses more on those first three modes.
Seriously? You want to take away the 2nd most-used route for commuters (to I-80)? How does that make any sense whatsoever from a planning standpoint?
Of all the roads to choose, you'd take the one that is most useful in its current state rather than trying to transform an alternative one that isn't fully utilized? (Leavenworth-->60th-->Pacific springs immediately to mind, goes all the way from Downtown to as far west as you want to go).
StreetsOfOmaha wrote:That's why, as I mentioned in my letter to MAPA on the previous page, I'd love to see the symbolic "spine" of Omaha, Dodge Street, turned into a greenway corridor with express transit service (LRT or BRT), wide protected bicycle lanes, wide pedestrian promenades, and accommodating cars at a local level. Beyond about 80th Street to the West, it would be a transit, bicycle, and car corridor which accommodates pedestrians but focuses more on those first three modes.
Seriously? You want to take away the 2nd most-used route for commuters (to I-80)? How does that make any sense whatsoever from a planning standpoint?
Of all the roads to choose, you'd take the one that is most useful in its current state rather than trying to transform an alternative one that isn't fully utilized? (Leavenworth-->60th-->Pacific springs immediately to mind, goes all the way from Downtown to as far west as you want to go).
That would help connect UNO's south and main campus too. Â Plus Pacific just has more room to work with. Â And when you factor in that most of Dodge is now highway there isn't much of a chance for it the be ped friendly once it changes from Dodge to West Dodge. Â Pacific has a mix of residential, retail, parks ect. Â It would be an awesome corridor to start with. Â Not to mention having it veer off onto St. Mary's it would run right in to the OM. Â
Dodge is optimized for vehicle traffic while most other arteries are already far more prepared for the mixed transport plan. Â And I do agree that vehicle traffic isn't the best way for a city's population to get around, but in Omaha cars will be the major player for decades to come. Â Getting support behind changing Dodge will be much harder than on Pacific.
Dodge is far and away the ideal choice for light rail: it has the perfect mix of residential/commercial/retail/office space along that would ensure the line would be used both heavily and evenly throughout the day. Â Pacific, on the other hand, is skewed too far toward residential development. Â Another street-running light rail line along Leavenworth/Saddle Creek/Center would be the perfect east-west companion to the Dodge line.
Ideally I think that Dodge east of 72nd should be served by an underground rapid transit line. Â There just isn't the space to accommodate cars, pedestrians, bicyclists, and light rail in that corridor when the City barely manages to squeeze five lanes of traffic and tiny sidewalks there as it is. Â Between 72nd and Westroads, Dodge seems like the perfect candidate for the treatment that Streets is proposing. Â Widen the median to retain the three lanes of traffic (or two traffic lanes and a parking lane), add bike lanes, and run a light rail line in the median (which would go surface after an underground station at 72nd). Â West of the Westroads, the line would transition into a fully grade-separated rail line.
As far as commuters are concerned, the entire reason that the express lanes were built was to seamlessly connect the West Dodge Road freeway west of 120th to I-680, which it does wonderfully. Â If anyone is commuting from West Omaha to Midtown or Downtown via Dodge, they can easily be rerouted via I-80, Â Maple/Northwest Radial, Blondo/Cuming, Pacific/Leavenworth, depending on where they are going. Â There is a finite amount of capacity available on Dodge east of 72nd so there is no point in allowing the entire corridor to fall victim to a particularly horrendous spatial organization, especially not the high profile 72nd-Westroads portion which is pretty pathetic right now. Â Installing light rail along that very stretch would bring about a tremendous renaissance.
omaja wrote:Dodge is far and away the ideal choice for light rail: it has the perfect mix of residential/commercial/retail/office space along that would ensure the line would be used both heavily and evenly throughout the day. Pacific, on the other hand, is skewed too far toward residential development. Another street-running light rail line along Leavenworth/Saddle Creek/Center would be the perfect east-west companion to the Dodge line.
I don't see it happening for a LONG time (if ever), but that probably is the best concept for any light rail/commuter rail in Omaha. Â It would HAVE to be separated from street traffic and have stops spaced far enough apart to make it faster to ride down the corridor than drive (at least during rush hour). Â With a few feeder bus routes branching off to existing residential development, it could be an attractive commuting route for both downtown workers and those in the 84th, and 120th area.
Realistically, I think there is more existing potential in revitalizing older neighborhoods closer to downtown and midtown. Â With projects like Midtown Crossing and the other multi-unit and single-family renovations nearby, a streetcar serving downtown/old market would probably accomplish more. Â With already low traffic on Harney and Farnam, it wouldn't need to be separated from traffic like a light rail line on Dodge St. would.
OmahaBen wrote:Seriously? You want to take away the 2nd most-used route for commuters (to I-80)? How does that make any sense whatsoever from a planning standpoint?
Of all the roads to choose, you'd take the one that is most useful in its current state rather than trying to transform an alternative one that isn't fully utilized? (Leavenworth-->60th-->Pacific springs immediately to mind, goes all the way from Downtown to as far west as you want to go).
Yes. Seriously.
How does it make sense from a planning standpoint? Do you really want to know, or is that just you trying to wrap your mind around the concept?
Thanks omaja and seth for your insights!
Regardless of how likely, ambitious, or expensive it would be, yes, Dodge street is the perfect candidate for major overhaul as a transit/bike/pedestrian/ and yes - auto - greenway corridor --- Precisely for all the reasons it is such a major automobile traffic corridor today!
Plus, as I alluded to earlier, the corridor holds immense symbolic importance as the historic "spine" of the city. In other words, what does it say about our city that this symbolic spine, running through Omaha's most historic neighborhoods and along which are located many of Omaha's key landmarks, has become a wannabe express highway whose sole purpose is to convey cars from the extreme fringe to the business core with as few interruptions as possible - pedestrians and neighborhoods be d-amned?
"The right to have access to every building in the city by private motorcar in an age when everyone possesses such a vehicle is actually the right to destroy the city."
Lewis Mumford, The Highway and the City, 1963
Also, OmahaBen, how is it "taking away the 2nd most-used route for commuters?"
In fact, the reverse would be true. The goal would be to create an even higher capacity commuter route by accommodating a variety of modes.
Is it that hard for you to disassociate the term "car" with the term "commute"?
"The right to have access to every building in the city by private motorcar in an age when everyone possesses such a vehicle is actually the right to destroy the city."
Lewis Mumford, The Highway and the City, 1963
I can easily tell the difference between car and commute. Selling the idea of light-rail on Dodge Street, especially a version that would reduce traffic lanes, isn't going to sell politically in Omaha under current conditions. The cost of subway construction from downtown to 72nd is probably a non-starter as well. Â If you really don't want light-rail, keep pushing the Dodge Street idea. End Rant.
I can see the possibility of Streetcar/Light-Rail on Farnum west to UNO and on private right-of-way further west. But first it would have to be demonstrated that the line between downtown and UNO would draw a) riders and b) new development. And taking a queue from Streets, you would need to reduce the number of cars traveling Farnum.
