Month: November 2013

Posted on

Alert: The State’s new bike/ped master plan missing something important… appropriate levels of funding!

The Context: The number of cyclists are a strong indication of quality of life issues but it’s not just about cyclists it is about people just out walking, kids outside playing, joggers, runners, moms with strollers, retires walking hand in hand… basically getting everyone outside and hopefully getting to know their neighbors. My challenge in this post is I dare anyone to make a good case why Maryland should continue to be below average (which would be a state ranking of 25) on these issues. If being below average is not acceptable then let’s make more of an effort to be at least average.

Overview: While Maryland has done many wonderful things since the first 20 Year Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan but a few things have been overlooked:

Pedestrian fatality rate BEFORE the first Master Plan:
image*

Pedestrian fatality rate AFTER the first Master Plan:
image*

We need to be making progress!

And then there is this:

While efforts to improve conditions for bicycling in the
region have been robust in the time since the 1999 analysis,
the 2004 [the most recent data] value distribution is statistically identical.
https://www.baltometro.org/reports/BikePedLOS.pdf

This is part of that problem:


Jim Titus expressed concerns regarding the
Maryland National Capital Park and Planning Commission –Prince George’s County’s
designation of MD Route 564 as a bikeway was not recognized by the State Highway
Administration. Michael [Jackson Director of Bicycle and Pedestrian Access] stated that because MD Route 564 is a State highway SHA was
not bound to accept M-NCPPC-PG’s designation but recommended that Jim contact SHA staff about his concerns.
From 4/11 Maryland Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee (MBPAC) minutes

For a little background: SHA intermittently removed a bikeable shoulder for bypass lanes around left turns lanes on a designated bike route when for “the same money” they could have centered the striping on the roadway and have comfortable cycling conditions on both sides of the road.

Eliminating a bikeable shoulders should not be acceptable practice by SHA, this needs to be fixed!
We need to be making progress!

And finally:


The levels of walk and bike commuting have increased
substantially over the last decade, though the mode
shares are still relatively small. Statewide, approximately
2.5% of Maryland commuters walk to work and 0.4%
bike to work, ranking Maryland 29th and 37th in the
United States based on the share of workers walking and
bicycling to work.
MARYLAND TWENTY-YEAR
BICYCLE & PEDESTRIAN
MASTER PLAN – DRAFT

After 10 years cycling has gotten “up to” a national ranking of 37th?
We need to do better than this!

Appropriate balance of funding:
First let’s look at the law:


§ 2-602.(3) As to any new transportation project or improvement to an existing transportation facility, the Department shall work to ensure that transportation options for pedestrians and bicycle riders will be enhanced and that pedestrian and bicycle access to transportation facilities will not be negatively impacted by the project or improvement; and

. (4) In developing the annual Consolidated Transportation Program, the Department shall:

. . (i) Ensure that there is an appropriate balance between funding for:

. . . 1. Projects that retrofit existing transportation projects with facilities for pedestrians and bicycle riders; and

. . . 2. New highway construction projects;

While accommodating single occupancy vehicles is desired, really expensive and requires a lot of planning I must point out nobody really wants this:
imageChina after deciding to accomidate cars over cyclists.

Avoiding this and other undesirable outcomes of over accommodating single occupancy motor vehicles is why we have a Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan in the first place. I thank you for the work done so far. But I really have to ask after 10+ years of having a goal of improving conditions for bicycling and walking don’t you think we should be doing better then what I have pointed out?

While I could and should make a strong case how Maryland’s bike/ped funding should be increased by at least 4 fold but instead I will make this incredibly reasonable request…

The ask:

Every year our pedestrian fatality rate is below average or our bicycle modal share is below average there shall be a 10% increase in bicycle and pedestrian funding over the previous year’s funding level. And any money left over stays available. (It may take a couple of years for the localities to be aware of the funds and make the appropriate plans.)

I could go into a lot of detail of what I expect from this action but the main point is there are a lot of low cost solutions** that are NOT done as a matter of routine by SHA so if the low cost solutions are not being done then we need more money for higher cost solutions, it’s their choice. But progress must be made!

If this proposal is unacceptable maybe our funding should be based on the percentage of bike and pedestrian traffic fatalities, since so few bike and walk that shouldn’t be so bad right? So how does only 22% of the budget sound? (The National average is 15.8%)*** As I said, a 10% increase over the previous year is a very reasonable request .

Take action:

Remember to include your address and phone number when writing. Also using your own words has more of an impact than just quoting this article but remember to be polite and say something positive. But just copying and pasting this article is better than not doing anything at all.

Write:
ksylvester@mdot.maryland.gov
governor@gov.state.md.us (Does he know that Maryland became the 4th highest in pedestrian fatalities under his administration and has stayed in the top ten worst?)

And write your representative as they have been looking at the attainment reports for years are they really happy with the progress the state has made? It might be interesting to ask about any designated Bicycle and Pedestrian Priority areas in their district, as that is supposed to be a way to get money into their district to address bike/ped issues.
Find you State representative.
Continue reading “Alert: The State’s new bike/ped master plan missing something important… appropriate levels of funding!”

Posted on

Holiday reader: The war on bikes

[B’ Spokes: I say this is a must read, but a few highlights.]
************************************************
by David Alpert, Greater Greater Washington
"Is it okay to kill cyclists?" That’s the question an op-ed in the New York Times asks. It’s not, but if a spate of other op-eds are any indication, it’s sure okay to hate them and the facilities they ask for in a quest for safety.
…
But studies performed in Arizona, Minnesota and Hawaii suggest that drivers are at fault in more than half of cycling fatalities.
…
legal to kill people, even when it is clearly your fault, as long you’re driving a car and the victim is on a bike
…
To a lot of people, though, the problem in our society isn’t that those who hit and kill cyclists face no consequences; the problem is that those damn cyclists are in the way of driving faster.
…
Except, Caldwell argues, since our transportation system is over capacity, that means we can’t afford to give up a single square foot of asphalt to cyclists or let them slow down drivers. Never mind that you can move more people in less space when some drive and some bike,
…
But, as many have said many times before, if there is a war on cars, why are cyclists the casualties?
…
https://greatergreaterwashington.org/post/20759/holiday-reader-the-war-on-bikes/

Posted on

Why does Anne Arundel hate bikes?

By PAUL FOER, Capital Gazette

A few of the many recent local headlines about bicyclists tell a sad story:

“Annapolis High assistant coach killed after bicycle, van collide in Davidsonville”

“Man hurt in bicycle accident”

“Severn School to honor teacher killed in bicycle accident ”

“Bicyclist struck by car in Arnold released from hospital”

“8-year-old bicyclist struck by car”

And then this rather confounding headline appeared:

“After recent fatalities, safety a concern for Anne Arundel bicyclists”

The story included a paragraph that read: “A recent string of high-profile bicycle fatalities has spotlighted the issue of safety. But despite a growing perception that county trails and roadways are not safe for bicyclists, public officials say the opposite is the truth — and they are working on ways to make these thoroughfares even safer.”

The headline somehow made it seem as if safety only recently became a concern for cyclists. Progress has been very, very slow in coming. I speak as a longtime activist for improving bicycling safety, access, planning and construction who has worked on various committees, and spoken out on the topic for years, decades in fact.

The bottom line is simply that the private automobile is king and woe unto we who brave the roads as we pedal along. I am sick and tired of empty promises, equivocation and foot dragging, so when The Capital reported that “public officials say…they are working on ways to make these thoroughfares even safer,” I had to write this column.
…

Our lack of progress is unacceptable. Bicyclists deserve more respect and better treatment. As but one example among many of this disrespect, the post office in Edgewater has over 50 parking spaces and not a single bike rack. To incorporate the needs of bicyclists requires planning, design, construction and funding along with proper education and stringent enforcement of laws. Anything less is just spinning our wheels.

https://www.capitalgazette.com/opinion/columnists/ninth_ward/ninth-ward-why-does-anne-arundel-hate-bikes/article_309fdba7-c644-525e-a45d-2aa7f9af7ea9.html?_dc=835479391040.2805

Posted on

What would it take to change that?

By Sarah Goodyear, The Atlantic Cities

…

What would it take to change that?

Clearly marked and fully separated bicycle infrastructure might help to do the trick. When survey subjects were shown images of brightly painted protected bike lanes, they had an overwhelmingly positive response. One picture of people riding bikes in a green-painted lane separated from cars by reflective poles got a favorable reaction from 90 percent of the people who saw it, all of whom were registered voters who own bikes but don’t regularly ride.

In contrast, a picture of a lane marked only by white stripes of paint, with cars encroaching from both sides, got an 87 percent negative reaction.

 
Guess which of these people prefer? Images courtesy of People for Bikes.

But the survey reveals the complexity of our emotional response to bicycling. When asked to evaluate a series of messages about reasons to ride bikes, 60 percent responded favorably to the idea that biking makes you feel happier, has significant health benefits, and saves money. The message that biking “is a safe option for everyone” and that safety increases with more riders and better bike lanes, got a favorable rating from only 47 percent of respondents.

…

That seems sort of obvious to Doug Gordon, who blogs at Brooklyn Spoke. “Look at the automobile industry,” he said in the report. “If they really wanted to appeal to people’s safety, they would show crash statistics, survival rates…. You don’t see that any more. You see the car parked in the driveway and the family playing catch.”

https://www.theatlanticcities.com/commute/2013/11/selling-public-biking-political-campaign-style/7544/

[B’ Spokes: Imagine an ad campaign “It’s easier to die in your car in a crash than win the Maryland lottery.” Car ads are designed to sell anything but the horrors of rush hour traffic. Every day on the news, car crashes scattered all over the city and yet people think cycling is dangerous. :/

And Baltimore City please take note, the picture of the bike lane with a 87% negative reaction is a lot better then bike lanes we have been getting. Please, please something better now and then, especially on critical trunk routes.]