Bicycling the Harbor Promenade, yes and no???

From Greg Hinchliffe: Recently Mayor Dixon opened the Inner Harbor section of the Waterfront Promenade to morning bicycling and, last I checked, the world has not come to an end. On last Friday's morning ride with city employees Fred Shoken took Col. Foxx, among others, on a tour of the promenade from Canton Crossing through Canton, Fells Point, and Harbor East to downtown. To my knowledge, no children or pets were maimed or killed. The Bicycle Master Plan discusses opening the outer sections of the Waterfront Promenade to full-time cycling (page 31), although the wording is not as strong as I thought we had included. (It says "could" be opened to cycling at all times, rather than "should" or shall".) This morning, on a lovely morning walk, I noticed that the city has installed many new signs along the promenade listing the "park rules", one of which is: no bicycling. We need to get this fixed, but I don't know how. For one, I have never been able to figure out who "owns" the promenade. Who is the governing body? Rec and Parks, as suggested by the "park rules" sign? The BDC, as in the Inner Harbor? Transportation? Public Works? Peter Angelos? Once we figure out who's in charge here, we need to change this policy. Cycling on the outer promenade is an existing use, both for recreational and commuting use. Cyclists have been safely using the promenade for years. Even large groups, such as the last several year's Tour dem Parks and "Felonious Fred" Shoken's Friday morning ride have used the promenade without incident. The signs can be easily modified without removing them from their posts. We need to restore this cycling facility, certainly before we take the Mayor out on the promenade on a Friday morning. Greg Hinchliffe

Some thoughts: 1. The decision needs to be made by someone in an actual policy-making position. I'm not sure how someone in the planning department has the authority to make this call, regardless of the merits of his argument. We probably need to involve the Mayor, but we should have our ducks in a row first. 2. The bicycle master plan calls for bike use on the promenade, although not very forcefully. From my memory of the preparation of the plan, bike use of the outer promenade was assumed. 3. The promenade is not too narrow to support cycling. Granted, the outer sections are not as wide as the portions near around the inner harbor, but that is because they do not have the heavy pedestrian demand of Harborplace. Most of the Promenade is 10-12 feet wide, wider than the Jones Falls or Gwynns Falls Trails. The few "pinch points" can be regulated, for example with a sign that says "Cyclists dismount and walk next 100 feet". The promenade is regularly used by numerous pedestrians, some of them Quite inebriated, without mishap; surely cyclists are not that much more inept. 4. Gary thinks the easements do not prohibit cycling. Barry makes the well documented point that cycling can be considered a "pedestrian" use. 5. It was always the intention to regulate the cycling with signs such as "Bike Speed Limit - 7mph" and "Bikes Yield to Pedestrians", etc. 6. Biking on the outer promenade is an existing use. It has been used by both commuters and recreational riders for quite a while. Besides the individual daily riders, sections of the promenade have been used by large group rides without incident. Both the Tour du Port and Tour dem Parks have included it on their routes for years, and of course we should not forget the Friday morning Mayor/city employees rides which have done promenade tours at least twice. Barry's email makes some points about restricting existing uses, once again well documented. Eva is checking on this within the Transportation Dept. More to come. Greg Hinchliffe