Summary of public (bike) comments and BRTB Response: Revised Plan It 2035 Goals & Strategies (October 2010)

4 Add a new strategy: “Do not compromise pedestrian and bicycle safety for the convenience of motorized vehicles.”
Response: The intent of this strategy is addressed by two existing proposed strategies: (1) “Invest in cost-effective safety improvements to eliminate hazardous or substandard conditions in high crash locations and corridors (all modes)” and (2) “Improve conditions to enable pedestrians and bicyclists to interact more safely with users of other transportation modes.”
[B' Spokes response: State law basically says do no harm to existing bicycling conditions, that's something that is not always done in the counties with road projects, so something is missing from the strategies.]

5 Add text to this strategy: “Improve conditions to enable pedestrians and bicyclists to interact more safely with users of other transportation modes. Provide specific accommodation for bicycles and pedestrians on all road improvement projects.”
Response: The Federal Highway Administration has a policy recommending that all roadway projects routinely provide safe, accessible accommodations for pedestrians and bicyclists. The exceptions are interstate highways or other roadways where specific safety-related or topographic conditions preclude these accommodations. All agencies and jurisdictions receiving federal funding for transportation projects adhere to this policy. In addition, the Maryland State Highway Administration has its own policy addressing this issue.
[B' Spokes response: Not all road projects are Federally funded so that bit lacks teeth. SHA's policy is no funding for on-road bike accommodations unless part of a trail. So again we have not all that it could be.]

12 Add a strategy: “Create walkable environments.”
Response: This recommendation is consistent with several proposed strategies. For example, under the Safety goal: “Improve conditions to enable pedestrians and bicyclists to interact more safely with users of other transportation modes.” Under Accessibility: (1) “Increase transportation alternatives in all modes for all segments of the population,” (2) “Provide strong funding commitment for building both pedestrian and bicycle facilities that establish linkages among activity centers and provide access to public transit,” and (3) “Improve system connectivity and continuity among all modes. . . .” Also, under the Environment goal: “Enhance the quality of human health by providing multimodal transportation infrastructure and services that support active living and physical activity. . . .”
[B' Spokes response: Strong funding commitment??? [Cough, cough.] OK SHA has been demonstrating throwing money at bike/ped issues (while our pedestrian fatality ranking keeps getting worse and worse) but what about those non-numbered roads that belong to the counties? Someone really should do a study to find out what the problems are... oh wait, someone did, and not just anyone but a team of researchers from the University of California, Davis, Institute of Transportation Studies and they show a lack of a funding commitment. Again we have not all that it could be.]

18 Add text to this strategy: “Sustain and balance capacity in the highway, transit, and rail systems and pedestrian and bicycle networks among urban, suburban, and rural areas.
Response: This strategy is intended to provide a balanced system with respect to capacity throughout the region to the greatest extent possible. However, funding constraints and local preferences may preclude providing choices in all modes in all geographic areas.
[B' Spokes response: Funding constraints that have left over $30M unspent in TE funds alone. Seriously? I wish I had those kind of financial constraints. We have a big problem here that the lower levels of Government are afraid to request changes and the upper levels are like "Nobody is complaining so it must be working."

I lost interest in being involved at this level because all that was done was to white wash the status quo. I don't know about you but I think the status quo is not very bike/ped friendly, yes there have been exceptions, especially in Baltimore City but is the Metro area bike/ped funding result driven? Are there more roads with a BLOS C or better? (Metric for being bike friendly.) Have pedestrian fatalities been going down? How's that Federally mandated bike network coming along? Oh, little to no change since 2001. Seriously, how do we get out of this same old, same old?

Action Plan 2001 defines the vision, goals, and milestones for bicycling and walking in the Baltimore region. The regional plan outlines ten milestones for which the BMC and the BRTB Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Group were to ―prepare a yearly report card or status report tracking the achievement of these milestones and performance measures.These performance measures have neither been implemented nor tracked.
...
In addition to limited resources at the regional level, a lack of institutional support at the state level has hampered the Baltimore region‘s ability to use federal dollars on bike/ped projects. The region is unable to overcome restrictive state requirements, including the high local match required for Transportation Enhancements projects, (50% compared to Sacramento‘s 11.47%.), and modeling and air quality calculation tools that do not allow recognition of the benefits of non-motorized projects.
...
Planning documents in Baltimore express ambitious bicycle and pedestrian goals, but funding programs have not been adjusted to reflect this. As a result, funding tends to flow to traditional highway projects in Baltimore.
http://pubs.its.ucdavis.edu/publication_detail.php?id=1304

On one hand, BRTB hands are tied by State Policy but still I would like to see some effort to achieve the state of the art or at least come close to what other States are doing. If you want to see a change write Terry Freeland, tfreeland@baltometro.org and at least have BRTB make a request to MBPAC to follow recomned funding policies for bike/ped projects. We need something better then what BRTB has done to date.] http://www.baltometro.org/downloadables/PlanIt2035/PlanIt2035_GoalsII_ResponseMatrix.pdf

by B' Spokes

Like most people I live a hectic life and who has the time for much exercise? Thanks to xtracycle now I do. By using my bike for daily activities I can get things done and get an hour plus work out in 15 minutes extra of my time, not a bad deal and beats taking the extra time going to the gym. In case you are still having trouble being motivated; the National Center of Disease Control says that inactivity is the #2 killer in the United States just behind smoking. ( http://www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/bb_nutrition/ ) Get out there and start living life! I can carry home a full shopping cart of groceries, car pool two kids or just get lost in the great outdoors camping for a week. Well I got go, another outing this weekend.
  • Currently 0.00/5
Rating: 0.00/5 (0 votes cast)

Share It!

Story Options

  • Summary of public (bike) comments and BRTB Response: Revised Plan It 2035 Goals & Strategies (October 2010)
  • 1 comments
Login required to comment
From: raris@baltometro.org Subject: RE: BRTB issues Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2010 – your e-mail regarding bike and pedestrian issues has been received. I wanted to give you a response quickly since there is a MBPAC meeting coming up shortly. Issue 1: MBPAC MBPAC - I looked over the mission of the MBPAC online and I am not aware that they make recommendations on funding for bike or pedestrian projects. Just so I understand, what is the source of the recommended guidelines that you refer to? Issue 2: pedestrian deaths, BLOS ratings, TE funds pedestrian deaths - I am not sure of the reference to 4th in the nation, Maryland did rank 5th in the nation for pedestrian deaths in 2008, however that is still far too many deaths. The BMC, with BRTB support, is participating in our 3rd year of sponsoring a “Street Smart” campaign in the region to combat pedestrian deaths, each year Baltimore City has been involved and we continue to work with law enforcement, educators, public works and planning to address this issue. BLOS ratings - The BRTB has not funded an update to BLOS in many years so I am not able to gauge progress on the number of roads meeting a C level. That is still a worthwhile goal and the BPAG annually reviews all projects in the Baltimore Region Transportation Improvement Program to address this goal. The review is made in order to make recommendations to the project sponsors where improvements that benefit biking and walking should be considered as part of the project. TE funds – based on discussions with SHA, there is very little money that is not committed to specific projects. In fact, approximately $1.7 million is uncommitted with $2.3 million in projects under discussion, should they all come to fruition all TE funds will be committed in 2011. Issue 3: TE match TE match – the 50/50 formula established by the state has been a concern to the members of the BRTB, in fact they asked the TE coordinator to present on several occasions to our committees and several members were very critical of the match as it currently stands. The state contends that more projects can be funded this way and are willing, and in fact routinely meet, with sponsors of potential projects to determine if they are likely to be approved once they have undertaken the 30% design requirement. While understanding SHA’s position, some BRTB members still have a concern with the match and feel it is a burden. Issue 4: Tracking performance Tracking performance - Do you still have the article written in 2009 by a transportation researcher? It may have other information that we could benefit from. I was able to locate a copy of Action Plan 2001 and found the section on milestones and performance measures. There has not been an annual report card produced and in fact members of the BPAG are currently updating the Action Plan and are struggling with an efficient way to track and report on the 10 items specified. Even without a report card I can tell you progress has been made on almost all of the items, so I would disagree with measures not being implemented. We currently have a vacancy in the bike/ped position but I hope to have someone on board in early January – this task of tracking these measures and milestones is one we will put on the “To Do” list. While I may not have sounded terribly encouraging, I do appreciate your interest in this topic, it is vital to a vibrant, multi-modal region. As a City resident you are probably seeing many improvements over the last few years – we are working to keep that progress going with the City and all of our member jurisdictions. Please feel free to continue the dialogue and check back with us in the future as we continue work on these topics. Sincerely, Regina Aris Regina Aris, Assistant Director & Manager of Policy Development Transportation Division Baltimore Metropolitan Council