Month: December 2012

Posted on

Seven Jiu-Jitsu Moves for Advocates to Use MAP-21 to Their Own Advantage

B’ Spokes: Currently Maryland is not too good at spending some pools of federal money, mostly these are the ones I would like to see go toward bike/ped issues. But currently that is not much of an issue since O’Malley created Cycle Maryland (www.cycle.maryland.gov/ ) Even so I would like to see more spending on bike/ped educational issues (taking advantage of unspent federal money) and that issue seems to be taking a very long and circuitous route.
So here are some tips for those of you who would like to try and secure some federal funds for your bik/ped project:
https://dc.streetsblog.org/2012/12/11/seven-jiu-jitsu-moves-for-advocates-to-use-map-21-to-their-own-advantage/
The best of luck to you.

Posted on

New Black Box Rule Isn’t Enough to Hold Drivers Accountable For Ped Crashes

Highlight:
All good information. But black boxes don’t always work if it was a pedestrian or a cyclist who was struck.
Event data recorders are part of the airbag safety system. They’re what tells the airbags to deploy. And if the crash isn’t forceful enough to trigger the airbags, the EDR doesn’t record the data.
https://dc.streetsblog.org/2012/12/17/new-black-box-rule-isnt-enough-to-hold-drivers-accountable-for-ped-crashes/

Posted on

Important Frederick Watershed Update!

From MORE

We want to keep everyone up to date on the latest information about the Watershed. Please see several important items below:

First: Be careful – we were just sent pictures of boards that were spiked with razor blades that were found on trails off of Fishing Creek Rd. Other trail sabotage has been found in the past included boards spike with nails and fishing line strung across the trail. If you find anything, DNR has asked for it to be left alone and reported it as follows: “When anyone finds something like razor blades in boards within the Watershed, please do not disturb this important piece of evidence and call the Frederick County Sheriff’s office at 911 as this appears to be a criminal act. If anyone encounters a hunting or natural resources violation, please call 410-260-8888 as this is the number to DNR’s central communication office who will relay any complaints to our NRP officers.”

Second: Another logging operation is underway covering 41 acres. It is taking place east of Gambrill Park Rd and south of Hamburg Rd (see attached map. Note: the black dotted line is Stoner Road). This is impacting trails in the area. As we get more info we will post updates.

Finally: Last week Frederick Department of Public Works (DPW) called a meeting to discuss some watershed issues. DPW oversees the Watershed from the City side. The meeting was with DNR, City staff and representatives from MORE (Joe W. and Phil V.) and PATC (Clyde, owner of the Trail House and also an MTBer) were invited as well. DNR attendees included their Western Regional Manager, the DNR wildlife manager/land manager and 2 DNR Foresters. The City had the head of DPW, the Superintendent of Water Treatment and a transportation planner from the Mayor’s bicycle advisory committee. DPW had two main topics on the agenda:

  • Rerouting an eroded section of the Catoctin Trail north of Delauter Rd
  • The “rogue” trails in the watershed

On the Catoctin trail reroute, the City has wanted us to do this for the past 2 years but DNR approval has been delayed. All is now approved and we are hoping to start corridor clearing in mid or late January. Stay tuned.

On the rogue trails:

  • The continued building of “rogue” trails is a hot issue with DNR and DPW (DNR and DPW define these as any trails built without permission). The DNR foresters who are out on the ground reported seeing changes and new trails cropping up from week to week. They have found and confiscated tool caches.
  • A DNR Forester suggested taking a complete trail inventory of the property so they know what they’ve got on the property and what is in areas that impact endangered or protected species, etc. They are going to look at the cost of hiring someone to do it and give a proposal to DPW. A trail inventory does not automatically “grandfather in” all the trails. It will be a starting point for drafting a recreational use plan.
  • The current Forest Management plan mentions MTB but the city suggested it needs a more comprehensive section on all recreation
  • DNR Forester suggested a committee should be formed to discuss this moving forward with all users groups and interested parties represented
  • DPW said there was a complaint this week from a local resident about mountain bikers shuttling/racing – most likely shuttling only, we guess the racing was just speculation but we are trying to get more information on the complaint. The city has received 3 mountain biking complaints from residents in the last few months. The mayor is personally receiving complaints, so they are on record with the city at a very high viability level.
  • Signage: DPW is going to install more signs with the rules of the watershed (like the new one at Sand Flats).
  • DNR land manager would like to see only the blue trail and a few spur trails off of it but also says the city needs to decide what it wants to do with things on the property
  • Phil/Clyde/Joe emphasized you cannot close down trails without offering better alternatives or trails will be opened back up. Having a single, linear trail (Catoctin) which is considered official is not going to work
  • DNR Regional Manager agrees a single linear trail is not a viable solution
  • All parties we met with agree that mountain biking and recreational uses have a place in the watershed but the hot-button issues need to be resolved or access is at risk.
  • The head of DPW asked us to communicate this message to the MTB community: rogue trail building needs to stop.

Continue reading “Important Frederick Watershed Update!”

Posted on

Traffic deaths at lowest point in 62 years [but …]

By Ashley Halsey III, Washington Post
Deaths behind the wheel of an automobile fell last year to the lowest level since the Truman administration, but there was an increase in fatalities among bicyclists, pedestrians, motorcycle riders and big-rig truck drivers, according to federal figures released Monday.
…
The number of bicyclists killed increased by 8.7 percent and pedestrian deaths were up 3 percent.
“Our culture is beginning to move away from driving and toward healthier and greener modes of transportations,” said Jonathan Adkins, deputy executive director of the Governors Highway Safety Association. “We need to be able to accommodate all these forms of transportation safely.”
…
https://articles.washingtonpost.com/2012-12-10/local/35745525_1_motorcycle-deaths-highway-deaths-seat-belt

Posted on

Maryland Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee October Meeting Minutes

B’ Spokes: two things stand out to me in this report:
1) "He [Jim] noted that many news articles in Prince George’s County complained about the lack of painted crosswalks across State highways. Jim notes that unmarked crosswalks have the same legal distinction as marked crosswalks and that police are empowered to enforce crosswalk regulations regardless of whether the crosswalks are marked or unmarked. He asked if whether an education campaign is needed to explain the duty to stop for pedestrians. "
My sub points:
A) SHA roads are over represented in pedestrian fatalities.
Ref: https://www.baltimorespokes.org/article.php?story=20121219112028588
B) My own observations even when SHA does paint crosswalks they do not (always) use the best engineering standards as required by by state law. (Too many transverse markings (two thin parallel lines) over continental markings (thick bars striping the crossing area.))
Ref: https://www.baltimorespokes.org/article.php?story=20110514223328755
2) "Greg said he attended the annual State Fair in Timonium and said that SHA had a booth there handing out materials including a card explaining the 3 foot passing law. This card originally drew objections from the bicycling community because it explained four exceptions to the 3 foot passing requirement. Bicyclists feared that readers would focus on the exceptions rather than the general requirement and still pass bicyclists too closely. In response the card was revised with the expectation that the original version would not be distributed or publicized. "
Yet three months after this we have MDOT giving the following advice (published to a large audience by a state agency):
"The 3-Foot Passing Law – Motorists are now required to give cyclists 3 feet of clear­ance when pass­ing. The 3-foot law has an exemption for roads that are too nar­row to allow 3 feet of clear­ance safely. In this case, drivers are allowed to pass cyclists with less than 3 feet."
Ref: https://www.baltimorespokes.org/article.php?story=20121215212451386
And: https://www.baltimorespokes.org/article.php?story=20121216123520992
Additionally this is two YEARS after the first poor summary
Ref: https://www.baltimorespokes.org/article.php?story=20101005122814769
One year after we tried to correct this "Safety" card.
Ref: https://www.baltimorespokes.org/article.php?story=20111112163337508
Oh and the link to this card we are trying to correct is STILL valid.
Ref: https://www.marylandroads.com/MHSO/BikeSafety_LawCard.pdf
This is so wrong! Have they no delete file capability?
If you are inclined write:
secretary@mdot.state.md.us <secretary@mdot.state.md.us>;
with a CC to:
governor@gov.state.md.us <governor@gov.state.md.us>;
(Please try to be positive, MDOT has been very supportive of trying to push our 3′ law (a good thing) just the verbiage MDOT has chosen has not been well vetted.)
Continue reading “Maryland Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee October Meeting Minutes”

Posted on

Level of service and maintenance requirements in planning #2: winter maintenance of bike paths

In an effort to help those who are writing and commenting on bike master plans here is some helpful advice from Richard Layman:
"One element frequently left out of bike and pedestrian plans is a discussion of maintenance, and setting level of service standards for maintenance, especially for the winter months, in those parts of the country where snow is likely."
And I’ll add sweeping of bike lanes to that as well.
Read the rest of Richard’s post here: https://urbanplacesandspaces.blogspot.com/2012/12/level-of-service-and-maintenance.html

Posted on

Pedestrian Deaths on Railroad Tracks: The Failure of Design Part 2

[B’ Spokes: The following letter (written to a Baltimore Sun reporter) is interesting as it makes a case that fencing to keep trespasser at bay is not the answer but accommodations for pedestrians is the answer.]
**************************************************************************
By Greg Hinchliffe
I had occasion to think of you as I enjoyed a vacation bicycling in Europe this summer, but it was not because the superb bicycle accommodations and cooperative drivers we encountered were relevant to the supportive writing you have done in your column. No, it was because our travel included a Eurailpass, and we traveled extensively on the Deutsche-Bahn, the amazing German state rail system. Our trips on the high-speed ICE trains reminded me of your passionate writing in support of fences and education after the unfortunate death of the teen-aged girl struck by an Acela train while walking on the Amtrak tracks near Essex.
The thing that struck me about this extensive rail network built amidst a densely populated country, was the almost total lack of fences! Two hundred mile-per-hour trains whoosh by trails, yards, and country lanes, separated from them only by a couple of meters of grass. Unaccompanied children ride their bikes on paths alongside trains far faster and quieter than anything in the US. There were fences alongside pastures to keep livestock off the tracks, and there were noise-barriers in some of the towns, but for the most part, the fences along the tracks were short and/or ornamental, or not there at all. There was even an unfenced spread of grass separating the high-speed tracks from a skateboard park. A skateboard park! Can you think of a location more likely to foster mischief and foolishness?
No doubt this is possible because of extensive education of adults and children alike regarding the dangers of getting too close to the tracks, something for which you have rightly advocated, but I think there is more to it. The reason none of the German citizenry strays off the path onto the tracks is because the path is there in the first place. It isn’t necessary to walk or bike on or near the tracks to get from one place to another, because there is an extensive trail network connecting everything to everything else. They don’t have to walk on the Amtrak tracks to get from Middle River to the school, or along the Light Rail tracks to get from Riderwood to Lutherville. Wouldn’t it be better if we had trails in those two locations, complete with over- and/or under-passes where necessary and, yes, some fences as well? I think this would keep people out of danger more effectively than just bigger fences and more emphatic signs.
This one of the reasons I am such an advocate for “Rails with Trails”. An extensive trail system, including trails along the corridors of active rail and transit lines not only reduces the demand for walking or biking on or near the tracks to get somewhere, but replaces the “attractive nuisance” of the train tracks with the “more attractive benefit” of a trail right next to them. The Rails-to-Trails Conservancy has published several studies regarding Rail-with Trail. I think it’s something MTA and other agencies should explore
Continue reading “Pedestrian Deaths on Railroad Tracks: The Failure of Design Part 2”