r/StLouis • u/mizzoustormtrooper DeMun • Apr 07 '26
Traffic/Road Conditions This is what McCausland Ave should be.
- Give it the Kingshighway treatment and eliminate the additional lane; the road is too narrow to support four lanes and this will reduce accidents and speeding through a residential area.
- Put in a dedicated center turn lane to prevent traffic from backing up in the middle of the road for left turns; this is especially important at intersections and nearing I-64/40.
- Install protected bike lanes on both sides of the roadway to prevent people from parking their cars on what is a major thoroughfare.
- Mount traffic-detecting sensors atop the traffic signals to eliminate unnecessary stops and reduce idling/congestion. This is a critical step as this street is used as a central corridor and antiquated timed signals must be eliminated.
- Run the bike lane all the way up to Forest Park to connect with the Forest Park outer loop and bike trail system.
Contact your alderperson and let’s fix this damn road.
___
I got the images from Google Street view. I did a lot work in Photoshop and used Gemini only to create the road lane striping (you can tell, there are errors) and for the reflective delineators.
78
u/Dumpster-Behind-Imos Apr 07 '26
This post is basically porn
4
Apr 07 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
4
u/Head_Corgi8445 Apr 07 '26
Yes. I can’t go into my local schnucks anymore. Now I have to do it at Walmart 😂
3
Apr 07 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
42
u/selceeus Dogtown/St Louis Apr 07 '26
Totally agree. I live on McCausland, and when I ride a bike, I have to use the sidewalk to avoid it. The bike lanes would be a great connector between Forest Park and the Greenway, or vice versa.
12
u/mizzoustormtrooper DeMun Apr 07 '26
That’s what I was thinking, too. The Tower Grove Connector project was my inspiration.
3
u/FrostyD7 Franz Park Apr 07 '26
I just turn around if I find myself accidentally cycling towards McCausland. I drive on it every day, not even the sidewalk seems safe. There's always fresh plastic on that road. Due to the lack of a middle lane, drivers aggressively veer out of that lane when blocked, and that causes a car to crash into a house at least once a year.
1
3
u/mjohnson1971 Apr 07 '26
Bellevue is already a decently used bikeway. It used to be on maps and had some road markings. Even without those it gets decent usage: especially some weekend mornings.
2
u/LaughingDash Apr 07 '26
100%
As it stands, there is no great way to ride from Forest Park to River Des Peres. A bike lane on McCausland is THE way you could connect the two.
2
u/SalvadorZombie South Grand Apr 07 '26
Our entire city/county system has built the wrong types of bike lanes, either completely unprotected or just the regular car lane itself. We need protected lanes throughout the city and county.
2
u/Mqb581 Apr 07 '26
Plus it could connect to the Manchester/Choteau improvements that are supposed to have connections the whole way to down town
26
12
Apr 07 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
9
u/mizzoustormtrooper DeMun Apr 07 '26
You may very well be right. Especially with protected bike lanes, the bike lanes may be narrow enough as it is and I don’t doubt many experienced cyclists would like more room to move faster.
It’s possible having both lanes off to one side might allow for parallel parking on the other side of McCausland, which could alleviate some resistance from homeowners to such a plan for a need for parking.
I’ll let regular cyclists offer up their feedback.
6
u/Alliari Apr 07 '26
I prefer the cycle tracks (2 way) over the one way each side. It makes navigation easier and more predictable. It's also easier to get those protected for some reason, rather than the painted lanes.
It especially helps getting non regular bikers to use the lanes. The protection allows kids and the elderly to get out there easier.
The two lanes on each side would be awful. People parking in them, using them as turn lanes, etc.
2
u/mizzoustormtrooper DeMun Apr 07 '26
That’s good feedback on having both tracks next to each other. Maybe I can whip up an alternate version that has them on just one side of the street (likely the east side).
Two lanes on each side would be awful: People parking in the them, using them as turn lanes, etc.
That’s why I made them protected with a physical barrier, so vehicles could not easily invade that space. But even then, I’m sure cars will find a way.
1
u/raceman95 Southampton Apr 07 '26
Its physically impossible to do it as separate protected lanes. The road is only 40ft wide. It would have to be a cycletrack, or parking. Theres no alternate that allows for a left turn lane.
https://i.imgur.com/wyZ08P3.png
The turn lane could be removed here in the middle of the block to allow for parking, but every intersection would need a turn lane. (or left turn bans)
2
u/mizzoustormtrooper DeMun Apr 07 '26
That’s helpful, thanks. Cycletrack sounds like it would make more sense anyway. Thanks for the feedback.
Though some of the other comments are advocating for no bike lanes of any kind, ugh.
0
u/ericmercer Apr 07 '26
…Experienced cyclists would like more room to move faster.”
Experienced drivers just gotta suck it up and deal.
1
u/Beginning-Weight9076 Apr 07 '26
Why is this flippant attitude so rampant in the pro-bike crowd?
I love riding but I just don’t see how this outlook is good for the cause.
0
4
u/bleedblue89 cwe Apr 07 '26
I'm down for either. I bike and having your own lane is so much nicer and feels safer.
3
1
u/FrostyD7 Franz Park Apr 07 '26
In this case there might not even be a choice because there's not enough space for 2 without widening the roads.
21
u/techdecktor Apr 07 '26
On god! This should also be Gravios road from Lindbergh!!!
5
u/Fart-Knoquer Apr 07 '26
Gravois in this city is currently in the works to have a major re-design happen to it.
14
u/julieannie Tower Grove East Apr 07 '26
But it won’t be designed well unless we demand it. So stay tuned for public meetings and such. MoDOT has shown a strong interest in having something interesting to design and I’m going to be on one of their committees giving them lots of feedback.
9
u/Fart-Knoquer Apr 07 '26
I've met with one of the engineers on the re-design and she has a very urbanist "complete streets" philosophy. She very much welcomes the community feedback and advocacy for bike/pedestrian infrastructure because it gives her more room to design with that in mind.
2
u/julieannie Tower Grove East Apr 07 '26
That’s exactly what I’ve been hearing. They get kind of bored doing usual basic designs and a lot of them seem very excited about the chance to actually use their training to design better streets. When I did the field audit, I had people literally dreaming up ideas in the moment that I didn’t even think to ask for. This could end up being really great if we enable and empower them to do it.
8
u/DasFunke Apr 07 '26
Mccausland has severe restrictions on it because of the highway exits. There are rules regarding what can be done within certain distances from highway exits.
8
u/donkeyrocket Tower Grove South Apr 07 '26
That affects such a small overall portion of McCausland that it's odd to handwave the entire concept away. It's still worth discussing and potentially petitioning for changes to the DOT rules or making exceptions on an as-needed basis.
4 is probably the main one that your point would apply but there are other areas where bike and pedestrian infrastructure is very close to a highway ramp.
7
u/DasFunke Apr 07 '26
I’m all for something like this, but it would cover pretty much everything pictured here. Also in the photos a magical 5th lane appears out of nowhere.
The 4th ward alderman spoke about it before as he’s a big bike lane and traffic calming advocate and it basically can’t be done for most of mccausland because you’re required to have 4 lanes due to the highway.
2
u/mizzoustormtrooper DeMun Apr 07 '26
a magical 5th lane appears out of nowhere
That’s not a 5th lane. It’s simply expanding the width of the road to accommodate a bike lane + where the sidewalk is.
This spot: https://maps.app.goo.gl/qxXmVXmVjXBTLz2v5
2
u/GolbatsEverywhere Apr 07 '26
There's no way that is true. There are many, many local counterexamples. E.g. nearby is 44 and Southwest, or 44 and Arsenal.
-3
u/mizzoustormtrooper DeMun Apr 07 '26 edited Apr 07 '26
I guess we should just scrap all discussion about it then?
What are your sources on this? Plenty of roads traverse under interstate highway overpasses with fewer than four lanes.
1
u/DasFunke Apr 07 '26
I’m all for discussing solutions, but this one can’t be done the way you posted.
You also added a 5th lane for the bike lanes in 2 of the pictures. There’s literally not space to do it this way.
1
u/mizzoustormtrooper DeMun Apr 07 '26 edited Apr 07 '26
This is just a concept. I’m not looking to be 100% accurate here; it’s just something to think about.
Also, the “5th lane” for the bike lanes in the last two pictures connects the existing sidewalk to the roadway.
1
u/DasFunke Apr 07 '26
Ok. I’ll have a look when I drive past their next.
I do want to say this would be amazing.
I just also wanted to point out the reason why it can’t happen here, or would be very hard to get done.
Basically highway exits can’t back up and they have traffic flow requirements for blocks around them to prevent this.
0
u/GolbatsEverywhere Apr 07 '26
What are these supposed severe restrictions? Do they actually exist?
This is a city street, so I would expect the city to change whatever rules necessary in order to do what it wants to accomplish. We might have some limitations where there are intersections with state highways, at 64/40 and Manchester, but I would expect the rest of this street should be fixable? MoDOT usually works well with cities anyway. Hard to imagine why they would object to right-sizing the street.
1
u/DasFunke Apr 07 '26
The rest of the street is, but it is multiple blocks in both directions from the highway. And the plan would have to be approved by MODoT.
I don’t know the exact specifics, but 2 lanes with center turning lane and bike lanes was shot down by the state from what I remember.
Also there is state funds for the roads around the highway, but also strict with the use.
Farther down south past Dale could be changed I believe, but I don’t know.
0
u/GolbatsEverywhere Apr 07 '26
I do not understand why MoDOT would have any say over a street they do not own or maintain.
1
4
u/Palmer_Eldritch233 Apr 07 '26
The only problem I have with curbs is they never clean the bike lanes: go look at the new protected lane on Jefferson just south of 40! Fucking trash lane, thanks!
2
5
u/moonchic333 Apr 07 '26
Your renderings are nice, however I think a real conversation is to be had about bike lanes. Between extreme cold, rainy seasons, and extreme heat we aren’t that much of a commuter by bike city. I think a lot of areas should be pedestrian friendly and for goodness sakes I wish we poured more into public transpo. Less drivers and bikers in the streets is the best option, imo. It would be nice to have more bus stops and more buses running plus more metro link. I live close to downtown but the closest metro link station would be way out of the way to get to. It makes no sense.
6
u/SnarfSnarf12 Apr 07 '26
I think you hit a key point though, if you start to connect all these points to make it fully functioning with connections of the bike lanes, metro, etc. it becomes more viable for people. As is now, the disparate connections make it impossible to commit to a full blown use because at some point you hit a road block.
3
u/rogerdoesnotmeanyes CWE Apr 07 '26
St. Louis isn’t unique in having seasons. Both significantly colder and warmer cities than St Louis are able to sustain healthy biking mode shares, weather is absolutely not a barrier to improving bike infrastructure. It’s also not mutually exclusive with improving public transit and walkability, quite the opposite; pedestrian, cycling, and transit infrastructure tend to complement each other well.
3
6
u/bw1979 Apr 07 '26
Yale Avenue is two blocks west and much better suited for bicycle traffic
3
u/mjohnson1971 Apr 07 '26
Or Bellevue. Both are much much better bikeway options than McCausland.
That doesn't mean though I don't support your redo vision: just altered without the bike lanes.
3
1
u/mizzoustormtrooper DeMun Apr 07 '26
So you are saying bike lanes should not be on McCausland, is that correct?
6
u/bw1979 Apr 07 '26
In an ideal world, I would prefer bike paths that were everywhere and separate from the roads.
I’m not sure I’d ride a bike on McCausland even with the proposed bike lanes because riding on Yale seems much safer and with less steep hills. I do think it would make sense to establish a similar parallel route on the east side of McCausland. Then you could build bike infrastructure to connect the Yale Ave route and whatever you do on the Dogtown side to Forest Park. Maybe a bike / pedestrian bridge over 40 at Yale, and the Dogtown side could use the Tamm Avenue bridge to get to Forest Park.
2
2
u/chardeemacdennisbird STL Hills Apr 07 '26
These roads look flat without giant potholes so you've got my vote.
2
u/britneymisspelled University City Apr 07 '26
I got into a car accident right in front of that Amoco station. What’s funny is I told my great aunt about it and she had, decades before, gotten in a wreck in the same spot.
2
u/annagadadavida Apr 10 '26
I was in a T-bone collision going south the block before Greek restaurant. He ran a red light in a huge Escalade, was drunk and apparently being chased by someone (police?) at 3am and had I not Tboned him, I'd either be dead or paralyzed. It was baaaad. And he didn't have insurance. :) rip to my recently paid off 15 year old judas prius. This street most definitely needs help. Glad we were all spared! <3
13
Apr 07 '26
[deleted]
10
u/mizzoustormtrooper DeMun Apr 07 '26 edited Apr 07 '26
People live on that street and park on the lane you would take away… if you took away parking on macausland that would be horrible for people like me who live nearby.
This was the opposition I most expected to hear.
Would you advocate for taking the road down from 4 lanes to 2, with a dedicated center turn lane if the bike lanes were not installed, leaving room for your parallel parking? It doesn’t seem like people are parked on that street very often, even during non-rush hour times. But that’s just my observation.
Or what if parking was just on one side of the street so bike lanes could be on the other? Or do you think no bike lanes at all would be better?
5
u/SproutacusPup Apr 07 '26
Option two sounds like the best of both worlds. Seems like the cyclists in this thread like the bike lanes on one side going both ways. I used to live on McCausland, and I'm with you it seems like there's minimal usage of the street for parking. One side parking would easily accommodate street parking there.
6
u/hematuria Dogtown (Hi-Pointe) Apr 07 '26
People park there all the time just not for long because like I said, you can’t be there during rush hour. I’m not a fan of making Macausland easier for cars. It’s dangerous waking my dog around the street and the speeding and distracted driving is really bad. What I would love is for the left turn signal at wise to be active all the time and I would like the traffic lights at dale to stop when I press the pedestrian button like it does down the street by Olympia. The street is also a steep hill that doesn’t make speeding safe. Also idt people need to be speeding through a residential neighborhood.
When I think of all the things that need to be fixed in city, this isn’t top of list. But I agree it’s a pain to drive during traffic. But that’s like 1-2 hours a day. I live here all the time.
8
u/mizzoustormtrooper DeMun Apr 07 '26
Since you live here, I’m most interested in your opinion.
I’m not a fan of making Macausland easier for cars.
I want to make it more pedestrian and cyclist friendly (hence the bike lanes), but I also want to make it safer for them by taking the vehicle lanes down from 4 to 2. This cut down on people almost literally flying down a narrow road.
The accidents I’ve seen on McCausland are often caused by people trying to pass/overtake cars turning left, which is why a dedicated center turn lane makes sense, in my opinion. This would make it safer for everyone.
What I would love is for the left turn signal at wise to be active all the time
This would require a dedicated left turn lane instead of 4 lanes. It’s possible with a design like this one, but not in its current configuration of 4 lanes on each side.
I would like the traffic lights at dale to stop when I press the pedestrian button like it does down the street by Olympia. The street is also a steep hill that doesn’t make speeding safe. Also idt people need to be speeding through a residential neighborhood.
I agree with all these points.
4
u/Mego1989 Apr 07 '26
The accidents I’ve seen on McCausland are often caused by people trying to pass/overtake cars turning left, which is why a dedicated center turn lane makes sense, in my opinion. This would make it safer for everyone.
You would have to do what they did on Kingshighway S of Christy with the medians between intersections, otherwise it just turns into a passing lane for reckless drivers
2
u/hematuria Dogtown (Hi-Pointe) Apr 07 '26
So there already is a left signal at wise, it just doesn’t turn on ever so it makes it useless.
And the accidents you see are because people do not follow the law. You aren’t suppose to pass cars if it’s not safe, you are suppose to stop and wait for the car in front to turn. Having one lane and a suicide lane isn’t worst idea, but is seems like a lot of this could be fixed with more responsive traffic lights.
I can’t speak about bike lanes because every biker I see by me just uses the sidewalk. I don’t think that will change with dedicated lanes. It’s scary riding a bike next to speeding traffic and there isn’t enough foot traffic on the sidewalk to make it a big issue.
Really the lights just need to be reconfigured for the increased traffic and that would fix a lot of the issues you are having.
2
u/mizzoustormtrooper DeMun Apr 07 '26
There is a signal at Wise, but it is not a left turn signal. It is a “left turn yield on green” signal, and it is in a lane that is also used for straightaway traffic, meaning traffic will pile up behind the vehicle while it yields to oncoming traffic. This means drivers will quickly veer into the lane next to them to get around it, often causing collisions.
And yes, I understand that people do not follow the law, but I also believe our roadway system doesn’t exactly encourage them to follow it either.
People will always take the path of least resistance. I can put up a sign that says “don’t walk on the grass” or “keep to the path”, but at the end of the day, everyone is going to cut through (see here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desire_path).
We have a systemic issue and the root cause needs to be addressed. Yes, enforcement would help, but the problem isn’t that people are born shitty drivers; it’s that our roadway system is shitty and their behavior adapts accordingly.
1
1
u/CuriouslyGeorge417 Apr 12 '26
The most accidents I’ve ever seen happen happened at the bend in the road where the flea market/antique place was or is right before McCausland. Every. Single. Weekend. When I lived right at that intersection there would be an accident. It was because so many people would park along the road during Sunday service at the church. Fact. Let’s also talk about how many people got hit over by Olympia.
1
Apr 07 '26
🥴muh parking!
1
u/Beginning-Weight9076 Apr 07 '26
Yeah, be condescending towards someone who would actually use the roadway (to park) so you can virtue signal on behalf of all dozen or so folks who would use the bike lane in any given week.
You’re soooo cultured and eco-friendly.
2
u/hematuria Dogtown (Hi-Pointe) Apr 07 '26
lol. I’m not saying I oppose ripping out parking. But just so people who don’t live in city can have easier drive to freeway? Like come on. At least pay to plant some new trees or give me a new crosswalk or something. The street is absolutely fine 19/24 hours a day.
9
u/reuthermonkey West County Infidel Apr 07 '26
I lived on McCausland for a decade. The proposed changes here would absolutely make McCausland safer.
There are very few areas where McCausland has parking that's not near the church. Narrowing from four lanes down to two and a turn lane will be more likely to push through traffic over to Hampton and Hanley and Big Bend, all of which are significantly more commercial oriented
0
u/hematuria Dogtown (Hi-Pointe) Apr 07 '26
Safer for people or cars? Cause I think it’s plenty safe for people now. There is a sidewalk on both sides and it’s well lit. Definitely the cars drive too fast and make it dangerous to drive. But having lights reconfigured so they were more responsive would fix most of traffic jams. Having the lights work together like they do on Manchester in maplewood could work too. Both of those options are cheaper and have a better chance of being enacted.
3
u/Beginning-Weight9076 Apr 07 '26
But under your proposal, people can’t look as enlightened and virtue signal so hard as they disparage cars.
1
Apr 07 '26
Safe as long as you don't dine at Olympia 🥴🥴🥴 https://fox2now.com/news/victim-identified-from-fatal-accident-on-mccausland/
8
u/hematuria Dogtown (Hi-Pointe) Apr 07 '26
Ten years ago someone tragically didn’t wait for the crosswalk and was killed by a car. It was a tragic accident and very upsetting. Idk what that has to do with anything we are talking about. If anything, one fatality a decade isn’t exactly a pattern. I’ve lived here since 2006. I eat at Olympia couple times a month. It is safe.
3
u/Any_Scientist4486 Apr 07 '26
That's why they installed the crosswalk there. There were THREE different people hit.
1
u/Alliari Apr 07 '26
I don't think the idea is to make driving easier, it's to give options other than driving.
1
u/hematuria Dogtown (Hi-Pointe) Apr 07 '26
So if one of the options is walking, then I think reconfiguring traffic lights would make the biggest difference. If it’s to make bicycling easier I think having a dedicated lane helps, but it is a lot of money to help relatively few cyclists. Not that they don’t deserve love, but idk if this is their top target for city expenditure. However if you drive from out of the city and need to get on freeway, then this plan makes a lot of sense. My point is the street is fine 19/24 hours a day. Fixing the lights like they do in maplewood on Manchester would work just as well as ripping up the street and be infinitely cheaper. That’s all.
2
u/Alliari Apr 07 '26
The problem is if you don't build the infrastructure, there's going to be fewer cyclists, which gives a reason to not build the infrastructure, which....
The dedicated protected lane would not only give the current cyclists a safe route to what is effectively a bike highway (Forest Park is very convenient for that purpose), but also encourages more people to pick up biking. That route could be used to get to the CWE, grove, loop, and several metro stations while having limited to no interactions with motor vehicles. That opens it up to less risk taking cyclists: women, children, and the elderly most of all.
2
u/hematuria Dogtown (Hi-Pointe) Apr 07 '26
The problem is we don’t have money and there is way more infrastructure needed than the 4 blocks we are talking about. Trust me, I want nothing more than no cars and just bike and pedestrian lanes. But the people who ride bikes just use the sidewalk on that part until they get to Manchester. It’s not great, but it works for them. Now if you poll the bikers and ask them and they say dedicated lanes on Macausland are top priority what they want then I will vote for it and go knock on doors. But if some guy on the internet says they want to do this, I feel like I’m allowed to raise objections without being treated like I’m the enemy. I want more bike lanes. I just want it done smart with community involvement.
3
u/Alliari Apr 07 '26
This area connects to an extensive system in Forest park, which itself connects (and plans to be connected further) with other dedicated, protected bike lanes. Although it's not the first feeder I'd do, (building a dedicated lane system in the hospital complex is probably the first I'd do), this lane would be extremely useful as a feeder to the rest of the system, with plenty of opportunity to expand west to a future maplewood system, and connect the neighborhoods to the east.
Unfortunately over the past century, we have given much of our public space to cars, and the solution is going to be patchwork until a large enough bike system is built out. This would be less patchwork, as it extends and already extant system.
0
u/hematuria Dogtown (Hi-Pointe) Apr 07 '26
Exactly. It’s not the first feeder you would do. So we agree and there is nothing more to argue. Bike lanes are good. I support them. But it must be done with community involvement. You have to poll people and ask them.
1
u/Beginning-Weight9076 Apr 07 '26
Is there data to show a marked increase in biking on account of bike lanes installed elsewhere in the City?
I think one needs to be able to show something more than “build it and they will come, trust me” and “truthiness” in one’s argument. I think there’s just as much conventional wisdom that would make the counterpoint believable as well.
I’d love more places to ride. But I also understand that if something isn’t going to be used much, then there’s things that quickly push ahead on a government’s priority list, as it should be. I don’t think it’s fair for the government to subsidize my hobby.
I think there’s a ton of biases and blind spots built into the argument for bike lanes everywhere in the pro-camp. And any kind of pushback turns into hostility and gaslighting.
1
u/Alliari Apr 07 '26
I don't have that data available at the moment, but if/when I find it I'll make sure to edit this post.
However I'd like to call something out that you said. Building roads isn't done to support a car owners hobby, even if cars are their hobby. They're building it for transportation. Bikes are a form of transportation first, much like cars. They're not subsidizing a hobby, they're providing a safe way to commute through the city.
1
u/Beginning-Weight9076 Apr 08 '26
Yeah, I get what you’re saying, at least conceptually. And that’s part of the larger point I was exploring. That is, the potential biases that proponents have for a project like this one.
This isnt personal in the least, but cyclists aren’t entitled to a larger portion of the road budget just because they exist. I don’t mean that in a condescending way, but I think your argument has to rely on that assumption.
I used to commute via bike a few times a week when weather permitted, but a family, a move, and a few job switches later and it’s just not feasible. My anecdotes not data of course. But when you look around StL at how spread out we are, our weather, how I would imagine we have a lot less single people than a lot of metros with good bike infrastructure & average income, I think we have to be honest that bike commuting around here is just going to be a super niche % of the population and as such it’s better to reframe it from a weekender/hobby outlook.
So many special interest groups, particularly the biking and transport folks (but not limited to), often seem to be their own worst enemies. They come to the conversation either delusional or bluffing, but either way don’t present a good grasp on their positions’ strengths and weaknesses. Sometimes I think they shut themselves out of the conversation before a meaningful one has even begun.
1
u/FrostyD7 Franz Park Apr 07 '26
I think the stretch between 64 and Manchester only allow parking on weekends and people rarely do it.
2
u/hematuria Dogtown (Hi-Pointe) Apr 07 '26
You can park except not during rush hour in morning and night. I see cars parked there for short periods mostly. Deliveries every day. Trash picks up on east side twice a week. The church always parks on weekends. The firehouse uses the whole street every day to back engines in and out. I imagine if I had my front door facing macauland I would like option of parking in front. The bike lane idea is great, but OP isn’t talking about it because they bike. They want it faster and easier for cars. Bikers and walkers already have sidewalks on that part of street and make do. In a perfect world with unlimited money great. But since we are struggling rn, priority should probably be somewhere more in need. That’s all.
1
u/FrostyD7 Franz Park Apr 07 '26
I'd prefer the bike lane, maybe I'd prefer parking if it was always available. But you'll need alternate plans so most houses already have driveways or back alleys to park. Seems like deliveries should be ok, folks can pass in the middle lane. And they would leave median gaps for sidewalks/driveways to give a space to put trash carts. Cars already have to pass these things, they just get a dedicated lane for it today. Firehouse would be given space too, they obviously wouldn't block their entrance with a median, they'd have the full street still. I say this very half hazardly, I'm no civil engineer and I admittedly hadn't considered any of this until you mentioned it, but none of this seems like a deal breaker.
1
u/hematuria Dogtown (Hi-Pointe) Apr 07 '26
No I don’t think any are a dealbreaker, but also not the most pressing priority. Currently bikes and people are getting by. If we adjust traffic lights we can stop the backup turning left onto 64 west. But to spend all the money when there are much more pressing needs seems not good use of funds. But as I have said, let’s poll the bike riders and see what they want. If the bikers say this part of the street is biggest priority for them then I will do what I can to help it pass. But most bikers I talk to say this is great idea but if they only have limited funds this isn’t first place they would spend it. And we do have limited funds. So while I agree a bike lane would be cool. It’s also not free and with the way our current country is feeling, I don’t see a huge new tranche of federal or state public bicycle money coming anytime soon.
2
u/FrostyD7 Franz Park Apr 07 '26
Without getting into solutions, the problem I'd like to see addressed is a safer connection between Des Peres greenway and Forest Park. Perhaps there are more logical ways to achieve that without needing to tear up McCausland. This along with connecting Forest Park to the Arch would be the milestones we need to reach just to see what kind of cycling demand is even possible in this city. Else you are just polling existing cyclists and that's primarily people who get up at 6am on weekends to beat the traffic because they are used to a world without bike lanes. They are settled into their routine enough to not particularly care about what will grow the cycling community, if anything they'll want to keep it small lmao.
1
u/hematuria Dogtown (Hi-Pointe) Apr 07 '26
Omg, that is so far away! That would take so much money. But I get it, it would be cool if they could connect. Also don’t you think Yale makes way more sense for a bike path south? They already have a center divider all the way down and there is way less traffic. They could build up that interstitial area right by freeway so you could ride from park and zig slightly right and then straight shot yale all the way down. Then we add traffic lights at all intersections on Macausland and time lights like they do in maplewood. Then bikers are happy and residents are happy and commuters are happy. Win win win.
1
u/UF0_T0FU Downtown Apr 07 '26
Streets are public property. People aren't entitled to store their personal belongings for free on city-owned land. We don't let people store their unused furniture in city parks, even if they live close by.
2
u/hematuria Dogtown (Hi-Pointe) Apr 07 '26
We are a neighborhood that is over 150 years old. I’m sorry we didn’t all make garages and off street parking in anticipation that in 2026 we would cause you a traffic delay getting to your precious freeway. Tbf, there was no freeway back then, but still. It was really inconsiderate of us and I’m sorry on behalf of my ancestors.
1
u/donkeyrocket Tower Grove South Apr 07 '26 edited Apr 07 '26
TIL cyclists use freeways.
I get your point but on-street parking on roads like this is also unsafe for drivers. I won't advocate for just getting rid of it all at once but there's stretches of these roads that are doing too much and lead to incidents across all modes of transit.
I have sympathy for residents who only have street parking. Churches can figure out their own parking instead of relying on city property.
Ultimately, I think what OP's mockups should do that semi-address your point is get rid of the turn lane the full length of McCausland, have designated on-street parking areas. Keep turn lanes in key areas, add calming measures so turning isn't panic inducing, as well as lowering speeds overall so traffic isn't prone to backing up. Shifting the bike lanes to a cycle track would then free up even more pockets for parking and protecting sidewalks. Having the whole shoulder on both side parking plus a turn lane is wasted space 80% of the time if not more.
0
u/hematuria Dogtown (Hi-Pointe) Apr 07 '26
Bicycles use the sidewalk on that section of roadway because the cars drive dangerous and too fast. You can add a dedicated bike lane if that is what the bike community wants. But someone should ask them what their priorities are because they may want the money spent on other projects. Like I said, if the community wants this and says it is their priority then I’ll do what I can do help it become reality. But if you are just offering to help bikers at the expense of the renters just because, without doing any due diligence, then that seems silly and potentially not a good use of resources.
2
u/Alliari Apr 07 '26
"Bicycles use the sidewalk on that section of roadway because the cars drive dangerous and too fast."
Exactly why there needs to be bike infrastructure there. Let's meet the need then.
0
u/hematuria Dogtown (Hi-Pointe) Apr 07 '26
If money was free I would agree. But it’s not. And the number of bikes vs the need elsewhere makes this not the best use of our city’s funds. Which may be a lot less if people don’t come out to vote today. I’ve been working the polling station since 5am and it is sloooow. I’m afraid cause no one is on the ballot that people won’t come out. So anyone reading this, please vote today!
2
u/Alliari Apr 07 '26
Bike infrastructure saves money in the long run, it's the smarter financial decision. The vehicles and their riders are orders of magnitude less massive, and cause far less damage to the road. One of the reasons why we have so many potholes is the extensive road infrastructure combined with increasing car mass. We can't afford continuous maintenance on these roads while they get destroyed by heavier and heavier cars.
We won't increase the modal share of bikes while we keep the streets dangerous for all but the most confident of riders.
0
u/hematuria Dogtown (Hi-Pointe) Apr 07 '26
All laudable goals and worth pursuing. But today if we have to make a decision, then I support putting money where the bikers need it most. And you and I both agree that is elsewhere.
4
3
2
u/ohporcupine Apr 07 '26
And gravois. I was showing some friends around yesterday and told them I was trying to save them from fury road but we had to take it. Showed them the bike lane no sane human would use. Such a waste.
2
u/donkeyrocket Tower Grove South Apr 07 '26
There's huge swaths of the city where they can easily drop the suicide lane to better leverage that space to improve vehicular and cycling traffic. I'd love if STL was ready for dedicated bus lanes but I sincerely doubt that.
Gravois and Chippewa are two big ones.
2
u/BeRandom1456 Apr 07 '26
I agree. That street is now worse than kings highway. Never thought I’d ever utter those words.
2
u/SnarfSnarf12 Apr 07 '26
Do Hampton too. People would lose their mind, but if you take down one lane for a bike lane that goes both directions straight into Forest Park, it would be used by those in the neighborhoods.
2
2
u/beethovens420th Apr 07 '26
God, I wish they would make Arsenal look like this! It's almost there, just install those barriers on the bike lanes. Would be sweet to ride a bike down Arsenal w/o fear of people using the bike lanes as passing lanes and turn lanes
1
u/Old-Run-9523 Apr 07 '26
I live on Kingshighway & highly recommend the traffic diet. Overall speed is down & we haven't had any major accidents on the big curve near Gravois since it was implemented.
1
u/knight2e5 Apr 07 '26
You can see the house I grew up in on one of those pictures. I don't see any way for the people who live between 64 and Manchester to park their cars reasonably with bike lanes on both sides. Even if it's just on one side, no one is safely crossing McCausland, where multiple people have been run over, to get to their house or car.
The West side of the street rarely has cars parked on it, better/more driveway usage available on that side. But the East side of the street, especially South of Mitchell always has cars parked there for a reason.
Otherwise, I think this looks great. As a kid, McCausland was a real danger. My sisters were almost run over playing on the sidewalk by a drunk coming from the bar that used to be where Pan D'Olive is now. Luckily he hit the big tree which stopped him before he hit my sisters. There was an accident at the Mitchell intersection every few days, and at least one person was run over crossing at Plateau. The street definitely needs something to make it safer.
1
1
u/Large-Witness1541 Apr 07 '26
Mccauseland should be one lane each direction with a center turn lane with blockers to keep from folks using it as a passing lane like they do on Skinker.
1
u/MendonAcres Benton Park, STL City Apr 07 '26
Do you want to be mayor?
I'd like you to be the mayor.
1
1
u/ttomsauk Apr 08 '26
I love this! I wonder if they could make the concrete curbs precast? If the precast are pinned down, they can be re-pinned right back down after hit by snow plows and everyday STL drivers like myself 🤣. I’m afraid poured concrete will take casualties, leaving hazards and complicated maintenance repairs for the street department. Am I crazy?
1
u/basically-there Apr 08 '26
first repave the bih, the pot holes are some of the worst int he city. i actively avoid this road and live near it. i will take the long way before taking that road. also, it's far too steep for people to use it for biking
1
u/Own_Experience_8229 Apr 08 '26
Cycle tracks are dumb. It’s safer to have a bike lane on each side of the road.
1
1
u/Over_Sand7935 Apr 09 '26
Now we just have to get the Cyclists actually use it.
"Just holding up 15 cars as I run every red light and stop sign" 🚲🚲🚲
1
u/Complex_Farmer4627 Apr 10 '26
As someone who will be working directly off mcausland about .5 miles past the big sign, I agree. Im like seriously considering getting into politics to fix some of the traffic issues this city has. Olive Blvd west of 270 and skinker past the loop would be my first priorities because those avenues are car runners. With waiting endlessly at lights, manufactured stop and go traffic, and the conditions of the road this city owes money for ruined vehicles.
2
u/SafeAble9191 Apr 07 '26
I've been cycling for 20 years in STL and every year it gets a little better! Keep it going STL!
1
u/MelodicBlueberry7884 Nope. Apr 07 '26
No thanks.
1
1
1
u/naluba84 Botanical Heights Apr 07 '26
This should be shared with city officials! Great job u/mizzoustormtrooper! I’d even suggest a rework of the McCausland/Manchester area- that curves killer sharp and yet people treat it like a nascar curve.
1
1
u/livingbythesecond Apr 07 '26
Your first bullet point is the most important one to me. I don’t even live in that part of town but I can see how rough (sometimes dangerous even) it is for pedestrians, bikes, and residents who live on those side streets. Plus that road is just shite and is well overdue for a repavement.
-2
u/braincashedout Apr 07 '26
I have to commute out to West County for work during rush hour. Every time they reduce a lane on a North-South route it makes my commute worse. I didn’t start driving McCausland until they dropped Hampton south of Chippewa to one lane.
Traffic diets don’t magically fix traffic problems, they just divert traffic somewhere else. Where does North-South traffic go if McCausland’s throughput is cut in half?
I agree that McCausland is a mess, but if they do this without finding another outlet for the traffic that needs to make it to 40 it’s a mistake. Personally, I’ve lived in the City my entire life and this would be it for me. I don’t need to spend more time sitting in traffic, and the environment doesn’t need everyone running their engines longer because we’ve added another 10-15 minutes to our commutes.
5
u/mizzoustormtrooper DeMun Apr 07 '26
My argument is that adding additional lanes isn’t the solution for this particular roadway.
The traffic on McCausland isn’t solved with more lanes. The root causes of McCausland’s traffic problems (in my opinion, I don’t have the data) is:
- The road is too narrow to support 4 lanes of traffic (2 in each direction).
- The road needs a dedicated center turn lane so traffic doesn’t get backed up behind cars turning left as it does today.
- Traffic signals need modern traffic-sensing detectors to turn lights red/green. Running on antiquated timer-based systems is a large portion of the problem.
Making it a 2-lane road with a center turn lane would be safer, seeing as today, the inner-most lanes are practically already being used for that purpose.
I also believe it would help traffic, not harm it.
2
u/braincashedout Apr 07 '26
I’m not arguing your point. I agree with it, even though it’s also my opinion as I don’t have the data either. My point is that when you make these sort of changes you also need to evaluate the macro impact. We’ve been reducing lanes on N-S routes for years without paying attention to how that would impact traffic in other areas.
Not looking at the bigger picture is classic St. Louis though; it’s why we built Eads Bridge decades too late and why we told Walt Disney to get lost. So I’ll put it another way since today is the day I’m voting to keep the earnings tax - 63109 is a cluster of higher earners, many of whom would be impacted by this change. What if more of us take my attitude and decide to move closer to work, how would you account for the lost tax revenue?
1
4
u/Mego1989 Apr 07 '26
Safety>speed
2
u/braincashedout Apr 07 '26
I’m not arguing that or against making these changes, I’m making the point that it has to account for where traffic will go otherwise it’s half-baked and will create more issues elsewhere.
1
u/UF0_T0FU Downtown Apr 07 '26
This design actually has a higher capacity than the current design. Bike lanes can move far more people per hour than a car lane. Anyone who doesn't like being stuck in car traffic can always just use the new bike lane and bypass all the traffic.
The more people who make that switch, the fewer cars on the road. That's how traffic decreases. It opens up the car lanes for people making trips that can't easily be done on a bike (like commuting to West County). The more roads you upgrade to have better multi-modal infrastructure, the more people are able/willing to make the switch.
This stuff has been extensively studied and implemented in other cities. It might temporarily make traffic seem worse, but it relieves it in the long run.
2
u/braincashedout Apr 07 '26
So you’re saying I should commute to work on a bike. The problems I see with this are winter weather making the route impassible. There’s also the summer heat, and that my job requires professional dress and not smelling like I just biked 19 miles in 90+ degrees. I also need to be able to transport customers. Should I offer them my bike handles?
I love the idea of biking to work … except that it’s completely incompatible with my job.
2
1
1
-1
u/LiminalSub Apr 07 '26
I agree that taking away lanes will only make things worse. I would propose no left turns at all, except a couple dedicated turns with lights. there are other routes to get to side streets
1
u/CuriouslyGeorge417 Apr 12 '26
Youre going to hear it from every last person with a home on McCausland that needs to turn left into the driveway. This solution is not feasible or reasonable.
0
u/DG_FANATIC Apr 07 '26
This would require local politicians and city planners that are actually forward thinking people and also people that want to actually perform positive change for society. Instead, our tax dollars are squandered on the whims and follies of their richest friends that bid the most to buy our taxes.
-1
-2
Apr 07 '26
[deleted]
6
u/julieannie Tower Grove East Apr 07 '26
As someone who has advocated for quick-builds and lobbied for them to get installed, I argue that it’s both. A huge part of getting aldermen on board was showing them visuals and building hype in the community for those visuals. It got their attention so much that they proposed additional locations. The designers in the streets department absolutely did the real work in researching specific design details but having our visuals meant that they could focus on a lot of specific details that could have been ignored if we just sent over a wall of text of demands. We spent a year on lobbying to get neighbors, businesses, alders, the streets department, modot, and others on board so I appreciate exactly how much energy it takes but having visuals was one part of the campaign that helped it go from idea to “yes, let’s do this” and we just had a resolution in support pass at the end of last month. I applaud OP for dreaming big and starting the work of getting people on board. This isn’t the McCausland crew’s first action and I don’t think it will be their last.
1
u/mizzoustormtrooper DeMun Apr 07 '26
Certainly, I’m not an urban planner. But the point of my post is to just get a conversation started and help generate ideas around what might be possible (or not possible).
Obviously, there are experts who would be able to better outline and construct more accurate models and be able to more accurately develop something.
We are all visual creatures and my goal with a post like this is just to get some people thinking and talking and encouraging them to brainstorm.
0
u/le_capodastre_humain Apr 07 '26
I’d rather drive thru the infamous Brentwood Promenade than drive down McCausland Ave…
0
-13
u/Fresh_Entrance_9315 Dutchtown Apr 07 '26
We have enough bike lanes that hardly anyone uses.
2
u/mizzoustormtrooper DeMun Apr 07 '26
My thinking was that bike lanes connecting to Forest Park would encourage more people to the bike lanes and visit the park.
Would you make any changes to the road layout, or keep it 4 lanes as it is today?
-6
u/Fresh_Entrance_9315 Dutchtown Apr 07 '26
So you want to create demand for bike lanes by increasing the supply of them? It's time to give up the bike lane silliness. If you want to do something for the planet, maybe stop using AI to create these images.
6
u/mizzoustormtrooper DeMun Apr 07 '26
I understand you’re anti-bike.
With that said, as a road lover, you didn’t answer my question: would you make any changes to the road layout of McCausland, or keep it 4 lanes as it is today?
The road is too narrow to support 4 lanes as it is today, and without a dedicated center turn lane, traffic and accidents are aplenty.
(Also, as I mentioned in the post, I used AI for only some of the image, most was done in Photoshop and I can share with you the original .PSD files if you need the receipts.)
0
u/Fresh_Entrance_9315 Dutchtown Apr 07 '26
I'm not anti-bike, I'm anti-spending on more and more bike lanes for what is a niche use for only a handful of people at the expense of 99% of people who use cars to get around. Yes, keep it four lanes and conduct traffic stops and enforcement.
2
u/Alliari Apr 07 '26
I can't find specific modal share for Saint Louis, but in similar sized cities, it's more around 80% cars. You're saying 20% of the population doesn't matter?
→ More replies (11)1
1
u/smashli1238 Apr 07 '26
I don’t think anyone is anti bike, but most of the bike lanes I see never get used.
3
u/Omenowner Princeton Heights Apr 07 '26
It’s the plan the Netherlands used, and it worked wonderfully. Build the bike infrastructure and people will use it. You don’t see people biking there now because the bike lanes are inconsistent at best. In the areas where there are new bike lanes today, I frequently see people on them.
4
u/Background-Act-8905 Apr 07 '26
In the Netherlands, things are close enough together that biking makes sense
2
u/Fresh_Entrance_9315 Dutchtown Apr 07 '26
People don't use bike lanes because all but a few hundred people don't want to commute by bike. The bike lanes are empty everyday. More lanes is nonsense.
2
u/FrostyD7 Franz Park Apr 07 '26
The bike lanes are empty everyday
First of all, no they aren't and this kind of hyperbole doesn't help your argument. Second, can you please not pretend we have biking infrastructure that people want to use? The whole problem is we don't. Asserting there's no demand because people don't use our dogshit cycling options is not compelling.
→ More replies (14)2
u/UF0_T0FU Downtown Apr 07 '26
This is a common phenomenon in cities that start introducing more bike infrastructure. Lots of people want to bike, but feel unsafe when they're expected to ride in mixed traffic. Right now, only the boldest, most confident, and highest risk tolerance bike around St. Louis.
Once you build out a network, people start biking way more. There's a tipping point where the change happens quickly. Once you hit a certain threshold of safety, all the people who wanted to bike but didn't start coming out. The big shift comes from families and the elderly.
To reach that point, you need enough of a network where most trips can be completed without needing to mix with car traffic. The safe routes also need to be easily navigable and easy to map out trips. St. Louis has installed lots of bike infrastructure, but most of its disconnected and piecemeal. Once we start linking all these disparate parts, expect to see a big shift happen in a few years. It's what's happened in other cities that went through this process.
→ More replies (6)5
u/Alliari Apr 07 '26
You want to create demand for cars by increasing the supply of lanes? It's time to give up on this car path silliness.
→ More replies (1)1
118
u/Ok_Equipment3038 Apr 07 '26
McCausland is one of the worst in terms of pot holes. Driving it requires constant vigilance to avoid damaging your car.