Biking in Baltimore
Since the city used our safety money to help accommodate this event, not to mention what seems to be the stress from city hall away from whats good for the people that live here to out of town tourists.
https://www.baltimorebrew.com/2011/11/08/grand-prix-organizers-owe-city-1-5-million/
[B’ Spokes: Something to think about, be part of the problem or part of the solution. Biking can reduce congestion as well as crashes.]
***************************************************************************************************************************************************
Highlights from Getting There by Michael Dresser
"That year the cost of congestion was $98 billion in the U.S. and $2 billion in Maryland, according to AAA. The study found that the cost of crashes exceeded that of congestion in each of the 99 metropolitan areas in the study — whether large or small."
"AAA estimated that the crash losses amounted to $1,627 for each person in the Baltimore region, compared with $810 for congestion."
Continue reading “AAA puts annual cost of area crashes at $4.4 billion”
Baltimore had a 233% increase in bike commuters from 2000 to 2009 while Portland "only" had a 222% increase. So while our really low 1% bike commuters is nothing compared to Portland’s 5.8% it still shows hope as in 2000 Portland had only had 1.8% bike commuters. So maybe there is hope that in 9 years we will have 5% bike commuters. That is if the City will stop removing bike lanes before giving cyclists a voice in the discussion, without this key ingredient our bike commuter numbers will continue to be low.
Baltimore Brew has some fair coverage of the Monroe Bike Lane removal (boy was that quick) under the headline: Monroe Street bike lane: Gone baby gone.
https://www.baltimorebrew.com/2011/10/24/monroe-street-bike-lane-gone-baby-gone/
From the article:
DOT spokeswoman Adrienne Barnes said today, “We told you – there were some safety issues. And a decision was made to do these things differently. We need to talk to the community folks first [before installing a lane].”
**********************************************************************
Ooooo "safety issues", now I understand what the problem is…. not!
In NYC they tried to play the "safety issues" card as well on the Prospect West Cycle Path and a lot of the points were just absurd and no bases in reality. Which is not to say there couldn’t be legitimate safety reasons for the removal of the Monroe St bike lane but I think if that was the case they would be articulated. The fact they have not been spoken of in any detail has me very concerned.
So because DOT did not talk to the community they chose not to talk to the bike community to correct the error. Ya that will work. [/sarcasm]
-or-
From the article: "I am sure the city never did handle this right. First they put it in without anyone knowing about it. Then they took it out without anyone knowing about it.”
**********************************************************************
Fact check:
From the article: "Councilwoman Belinda K. Conaway, …She criticized bike advocates for not reaching out to the community earlier."
**********************************************************************
Uhhh, that’s DOT’s responsibly, wait, I’m explaining how government is supposed to work to a councilwoman? That’s a big part of the problem here and keep in mind it’s "their" side that turned us away when a problem was discovered, so if you want to talk about not reaching out, look in the mirror.
Anyway, speaking of DOT’s responsibly they are *supposed* to provide routine accommodations for cyclists, which is what they attempted to do here. (See 09-0176R #5 https://www.baltimorespokes.org/article.php?story=20110308133257644 )
To recap what we know about the Monroe St. bike lane:
The pros:
The cons:
Options and alternatives discussed and reviewed:
*********************************************************************************
This issue is not about removal of a bike lane but about the refusal to have public participation to help insure a more favorable outcome (the above needs to be public knowledge for this to happen.) (See https://www.baltimorespokes.org/article.php?story=20111029234335139 )
The issue is you do not have a right to an open government, you do not have a right to participate in transportation decisions that effect your *right* to travel under your own power (motorized travel is a privilege that has to be licensed and that privilege can be revoked.)
Accommodating cyclists has more options then any other mode of transportation. The fact that we lost an accommodation BEFORE an alternative solution could be identified I find offensive as heck.
See our alert: https://www.baltimorespokes.org/article.php?story=20111023225019955
From MBAC post:
Hello all.
On November 3, from 12:10 to 1:20, James Corless, Director, Transportation for America will be speaking at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. The seminar is free and open to the public. There is also free lunch starting at around 11:45. I hope that you can make it! Location information is below.
Bloomberg School of Public Health – Hampton House
624 North Broadway
Baltimore, MD 21205-1901
Room: B14B Auditorium
Contact Information:
Name: Pamela Davis
Phone: 410-614-1580
Email: pdavis@jhsph.edu
I’ll note that I was in NYC when a controversial bike path was installed and the Community Board held a meeting for both supporters and opponents. Can you imagine that? Both sides getting a chance to speak up and make their argument.
If you are interested in a brief rundown of that meeting: https://transportationnation.org/2011/03/11/bike-lane-meeting-gets-hot/