Archive for October 27th, 2006

This week, Missoula’s gave some thought to how two of its main streets are going to look in the future. Tuesday was the beginning of the West Broadway Charrette process promised by Mayor Engen as a way for Missoulians to talk out their hopes and fears for that stretch of road along the river from Orange Street to out past Russell. Thursday evening was a chance to look at what’s in store for Russell Street south to Mount Avenue. I’ll start with Russell Street, which won’t even get started until 2010, because it’s an argument for the importance of getting involved with West Broadway early, like it isn’t early already.

Potentially eye-glazing content warning: For those interested in the details of the preliminary preferred alternative, read this paragraph (local knowledge required); to just get the larger point about transportation planning, skip down to the next paragraph. The plan is to make Russell Street into a four lane road with a median that breaks for turn lanes. There will be a stoplight at Wyoming Street and Mount Avenue as well as double lane roundabouts at Third, Fifth and Eleventh streets. Also, there will be sidewalks and bike lanes along the length of the new road as well as a pedestrian underpass for the Milwaukee Trail and connections for the river trail system. The plan calls for making Third Street from Russell to Reserve a three lane road with three single-lane roundabouts though I can’t recall where they all are.

The biggest stink that was being made was about the decision to expand Russell Street to four lanes with a turning lane. The consultants said that it had to be done in order to accommodate the anticipated volumes of cars. Lots of people in the audience expressed concerns about higher speeds, higher volumes and the like, preferring a two-lane Russell Street. (See all the alternatives and potential configurations for bike/pedestrian trails here.) Now, in all fairness, these were folks who have never seen a four-lane road they like. They are, perhaps, reacting with jerking knees. But they have a point in one important respect: arguing that even if the government says a road has to have a certain capacity to meet projected volumes, we the people of Missoula could decide we value something else instead and just opt for the smaller road.

As a philosophical point, that’s true. But, practically speaking, it’s not exactly so. $38 million of the anticipated $40 million price tag for the road work comes with conditions set by the feds. One of those is that the project meet needs and purposes established at the outset of the appropriations process. One of those had to do with accommodating massive volumes that are projected, perhaps in error, by the consultants. So, though the constraints that demand a four-lane road are ultimately arbitrary, they are necessary insofar as they are built into the structure of the project’s mission. This ball was set rolling long before the meeting to which the public was invited.

In fact, through some oddity of bureaucratise, public participation in transportation planning is supposed to be finished by the time that a project gets to what’s called the design phase. In fact, environmental review is the place where all the conceptual work about how many lanes and traffic lights and medians–the real questions of how the road will look–gets done. And even then, many of the constraints that really yield the answers are already given. This leads to the second issue that came up.

Someone in the audience spoke up and said, “I have a business on a corner where you drew a roundabout. How much of my land are you planning to take?” And the consultant answered, truthfully, “Well, we’re still at a conceptual phase here. We can’t work out those details with you yet.” They get worked out when the city negotiates right of way, long after the feds sign off on the environmental review and the conceptual work, as well as the public participation, is done. So she can’t have her say now and she can’t have it later. (In all fairness, the environmental impact statement is supposed to include details on property conflicts so her input should be factored in for what they call “mitigation” but that doesn’t mean she gets to have a say with full knowledge of what her answers entail.)

I see a commonality in these cases. In both, the process was elbowing the public participants out of decisions that are critical to the future of the place where they live and, even, their livelihoods. That’s not what a public participation process is supposed to do but it is often how transportation planning functions. And it’s why it takes a long time to see your say make a difference. But it’s also why people get angry when changes to roads happen: by the time there’s anything solid on the page, you are supposed to have had your say.

That said, West Broadway is at a much earlier stage. The purpose of Tuesday’s meeting was just to demonstrate that something was happening. The real sit down and hash it out business will take place on Nov. 16 when people sit down with maps and markers and lay out what they want the corridor–land use as well as road design–to look like. (Links to the project forthcoming when the project has some sort of web presence.) Of course, that’s been done already in the Northside/Westside Neighborhood Plan, which hasn’t exactly been followed to the letter by the city, but now’s the time to do it again, apparently. And, when it’s done, many of the constraints that will determine decisions about lane configurations and road design will be set, long before anyone gets anywhere near scheduling those projects.

What a city looks like and how its citizens live depend on the roads that run through it but the aesthetic and community values people want to see expressed need to be incorporated in the constraints that engineers translate into design. What’s important to how your roads look are embedded constraints that are in place long before the consequences are evident. But what’s embedded can be changed with sufficient foresight and even more patience.

Missoula has hired someone to help the public get involved–Transportation Information Specialist Amber Blake–so get on her mailing list and get yourself involved. It’s not going to take the engineers out of the way but it eventually will make them obey.

–posted by readbetween


Western Democrat on how the GOP is rapidly becoming the party of the conservative South.

BBC wants to talk with Montana Republican voters. Drop ‘em a line if you’re interested!

DSCC poll shows Tester up by 6 points. Still not over that magic 50-point hump…

Moorcat has part 2 of his endorsements up – Beaverhead County candidates and ballot issues.

Nicole discusses the kind of lying and fear-mongering Burns’ supporters use to try to scare voters away from Tester. Spelling is a problem, too.

Scott has some comments from the trash that hangs out at What’s White in Montana. These are your friends, Conrad Burns.

Shane touts CNN’s “Broken Government.”

A judge ordered the Pentagon to release photos of murder and rape that occurred at Abu Ghraib. Don’t get mad at the messenger; save your anger for the leaders that allowed – even possibly encouraged – such behavior.

Billmon sees desperation in the bizarro GOP attack ads across the country.

Michael J. Fox responds.

Jane Hamsher: Rush’s hatchet job worked; traditional media now question Fox’ motives instead the content of the debate.

Sam Brownback’s obstructs a judge’s nomination because she once attended a commitment ceremony involving two lesbians. Um…can anyone say “witch hunt”?

Rumsfeld to America: “Back off.”

Arms manufactures produce “green” weapons, which also brings us our quote of the day: “We all have a duty of care to ensure that from cradle to grave products are being used appropriately and do not do lasting harm.”

Check out “Folk Songs of the Far Right Wing.”

Yesterday the Montana Supreme Court upheld Judge Sandefur’s ruling that Howie Rich’s terrible trio of initiatives are invalid:

“If the initiative process is to remain viable and retain its integrity, those invoking it must comply with the laws passed by our Legislature,” Justice Patricia Cotter wrote for the court. “We can neither excuse nor overlook violations of these laws, for to do so here would confer free reign for others to do so in other matters.”

Jaime has the blow-by-blow account.

Trevis Butcher, of course, will have none of this. His response? A threat against the justices who decided against him:

“I’m sure many Montanans who were already concerned that we have corruption and problems within our state government certainly will feel that this is just another example of the need for reforms,” he said.

You might remember that one of Butcher’s initiatives was intended to make judicial recall laughably easy.

I take away the opposite conclusion from this decision that Butcher did. The system worked. The courts protected the state from a fraudulent, out-of-state big-money operation from buying its slate of social engineering experiments onto our ballot.

Posted by touchstone

  • Pages

  • Recent Comments

    Miles on A New Shelter for Vets or an E…
    success rate for In… on Thirty years ago ARCO killed A…
    Warrior for the Lord on The Dark Side of Colorado
    Linda Kelley-Miller on The Dark Side of Colorado
    Dan on A New Shelter for Vets or an E…
    Former Prosecutor Se… on Former Chief Deputy County Att…
    JediPeaceFrog on Montana AG Tim Fox and US Rep.…
  • Recent Posts

  • Blog Stats

    • 1,689,881 hits
  • Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

    Join 2,734 other followers

  • October 2006
    S M T W T F S
  • Categories