Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

theSuttyman t1_iycjjh2 wrote

Reply to comment by Matt3989 in “With the Central Ave complete street redevelopment and other efforts like it, Baltimore is making wise use of scarce resources in a forward-thinking, fiscally responsible manner to prioritize the needs and desires of its fully invested residents and business owners.” —Michael Scepaniak & David Ho by BmoreCityDOT

The Roland Ave project could have been, and should have been the standard to follow. It’s idiot proof and doesn’t look like someone puked on the pavement. The sign that says it’s the law to stop for pedestrians the sits in the middle of the road works for me every time on eastern. Painting a cross walk green and stoping the use of that sign is mental.

Also… Rapid transit development? The project took six years!! To paint a fucking bike lane on the road?!?

−7

bmore t1_iycmcix wrote

A standard bike lane next to parked cars that kills bicycle riders and increases crossing distance for pedestrians resulting in them being hit and killed as well is the model that should be followed? Brilliant.

Dropping a yield for peds sign that the city runs out of because they're run over so much is the model? Also brilliant.

We should definitely listen to you and not peer reviewed research on what makes safer streets.

11

winnower8 t1_iyd85qn wrote

I use Roland Ave all the time and its fine, but its not ideal. If you're doing a design, do it best. The best is a protected bike lane, like Maryland Ave/Cathedral St. The bike lane is on the inside of the street against the curb. Pedestrians use the sidewalk. Cars park in between the bike lane and the flow of traffic. Traffic flows and there is a buffer between cyclists and cars.

Here's a design: https://nacto.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/NACTO-Design-Guide-Burchfield-Chicago.pdf

I drive somedays, but when I can I ride my bike because of the convenience of North South bicycle corridor in Baltimore. The design encouraged my bicycle purchase. I hope it encourages others.

10

theSuttyman t1_iydbyhl wrote

That’s the design I was referring to, protected by the lane of cars. Used to be configured that way, looks like they changed the configuration back to unprotected in 2018

1

Matt3989 t1_iyda0ci wrote

>The Roland Ave project could have been, and should have been the standard to follow.

We do have a standard to follow, Roland Ave is not it. Best practices for this configuration (Bike lane/parking lane/travel lane) puts the parking between the bikes and the cars, then brings the bike lane adjacent to the travel lane prior to any intersection where vehicles could turn toward the cyclists.

>The sign that says it’s the law to stop for pedestrians the sits in the middle of the road works for me every time on eastern.

As someone who walks a bike across Eastern in a crosswalk with one of those signs twice a day, you are a minority. The Boston Street crosswalks with those signs are even less effective than Eastern's.

>Painting a cross walk green and stoping the use of that sign is mental.

Roland Ave also has green paint, it's pretty universal for bike lanes. Until majority of drivers develop some awareness, it helps trigger them to into "that's not normal, maybe I should pay attention".

>Also… Rapid transit development? The project took six years!! To paint a fucking bike lane on the road?!?

The project was a mess to begin with, welcome to the world of design-build. However, it was a full streetscape, along with significant utility work and a stormwater system that carries a full stream.

7