By Evelyn Pyburn

Yellowstone County Commissioners unanimously rejected the Billings Area Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan, which was presented to them by the City –County Planning Department. Besides the commissioners, the plan goes before the Yellowstone County Planning Board, the Billings City Council, and the Policy Coordinating Committee (PCC) for approval.

As the plan was being presented to the County Commissioners by Alta Planning+ Design, the engineering firm engaged to develop it, Commissioner John Ostlund raised questions about whether they weighed the cost vs benefits of spending so much on building trails for the use of so few people.  He said he has been involved with the issue for many years and has observed that one can drive around the community on a very nice day and not see even ten bikes on the bike trails.  “I can’t find a bike on the bike trails,” he said.

Ostlund referenced S. 32nd  Street W. in Billings, where a bike trail shares the pavement of a very busy thoroughfare with heavy traffic that is often stalled waiting to move forward – with their motors running – while beside them is a  bike lane with not one bike on it, that could be used for more space to improve the traffic flow.

Ostlund said, “I am not going to rubber stamp the plans going forward. I will vote no,” because over the years, “I have asked and asked” about whether this has been reviewed. “It’s a terrible investment. I have never seen anything that spends so much with less benefit.”

Ostlund pointed out that the cost for striping and for signage of a bike trail on city streets, exceeds the cost of striping and signage for the street.

He challenged the practicality of following the federal “Complete Streets” program, which Billings adopted, saying he believes “Complete Streets is a complete failure.”

Elyse Monat, Transportation Planner for the City of Billings Planning Division, said that there have been changes to the plan to make users more comfortable in using bike trails, those routes are identified in the plan as “high comfort.” They involve shared-use paths and provide facilities for pedestrians such as neighborhood bikeways, bike lanes, buffered bike lanes, and separated bike lanes.

Lora Mattox, Transportation Planning Coordinator for the Planning Division, explained the goal of having a bike trail system. “We are trying to make sure people who don’t drive have a means of transportation.”

County Commissioner Mike Waters said that he has noticed trails get the most use in park areas. He added that they do serve “such a small population” and while “it is a lofty goal, we spend a lot of money on them.”

Mattox replied, “We do try to take advantage of the parks .. we are trying to be more diligent in how we plan for these facilities.”

County Commissioner Mark Morse asked about the funding.

Elyse Monat explained the “external funding” they have received in the past, citing a number of federal grants.

Morse responded, “All of it is government tax money.”

Monat conceded that it was, but there is some funding from private organizations—mostly for upkeep.

Morse asked whether they push some of the costs onto private developers.

Monat replied that, “Yes, it is very common that developers will enter an agreement with the city to build sidewalks” and other internal structures in subdivisions to serve the transportation needs.

Mattox further explained, “We have been hearing that people want more connectivity…they want to connect between subdivisions . . . they want to have sidewalk connections.”

Ostlund underscored that sidewalks are not bike trails, and replied, “I like the sidewalks. The Safe Routes to School, if they have a funding source.”

Morse questioned varying data included in the plan regarding attendees at public hearings and surveys. One survey was conducted at the Strawberry Festival where the number of respondents was stated to be 200. Morse asked, “Is this because you had a booth at the Strawberry Festival and anyone who walked by was counted as an attendee?”

Mattox said “We had an interactive poll and we counted them if they participated in it.”

There was discussion about the Billings Area Pedestrian and Bicycle program’s struggle to fund the cost of maintaining the trails. Morse said, “When your own plan says we can’t afford the maintenance. It is time to reconsider building them.”

The Plan sets out several goals of the Billings Area Pedestrian and Bicycle system. An overall objective of the Billings Area Pedestrian and Bicycle program is to reduce reliance on motor vehicles and to contribute to more walking and bicycling.

Most of the funding for bike trail construction comes from the federal government’s Federal Highway Administration

Local property tax dollars fund maintenance and safety improvements. Property owners are also assessed fees when developing new areas of growth, which may include donations of right away for trails.

Constructing bike and pedestrian trail costs between $62,652 to $1,523,144 per mile depending on where it is located and the degree to which safety measures and signage is required, whether it is separated from traffic or paved.

According to data in the master plan the daily average use of shared use paths, in the Billings area, is 3,786. Bike trail usage averages about 467 bikers a day throughout the system, according to plan data.

The Billings trails, over 61 miles of bike and pedestrian path ways, have been constructed including on-street bikeways, paved trails and sidewalks.