Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

moderndukes OP t1_ix8qrfe wrote

Quoting the first two paragraphs for synopsis of the soft-paywalled article:

> Work is wrapping up on a $55 million, yearslong upgrade of a major downtown roadway serving Baltimore’s developing waterfront neighborhoods. But the revitalization of Central Avenue’s streetscape has surprised some business operators and residents.

> Many expected a four-lane road, with two northbound and two southbound lanes, plus turning lanes, to ease congestion into Harbor East and Harbor Point. Instead, two lanes will be eliminated, and a protected bicycle path will run between sidewalks and parking lanes.

The article goes on with quotes from businesses aghast at bike lanes. I’m quite happy that the plan is the dieting of Central Ave - it was obviously an old transit street from its width so this is returning it to some part of that usage, and the wide lanes that existed previously made people speed ridiculously in such an area.

98

explodingkneez t1_ix8xxuo wrote

I masturbate to the thought of boomers crying over livable city infrastructure

123

strifesfate t1_ix9j6mk wrote

The conversations about this on Nextdoor will be brilliant.

39

sisqoandebert t1_ix8symc wrote

Thank god. The idea that drivers need two lanes to weave and speed into densely packed city centers is insane.

Used to work down on Fleet between Central and Caroline and the drivers blasting towards the light at Caroline made safe crossing very difficult.

66

okdiluted t1_ix92tys wrote

yeah honestly i'm insanely excited to feel less like i'm about to be obliterated by a car every time i need to bike somewhere around there

43

YoYoMoMa t1_ix93b4n wrote

>Many expected a four-lane road, with two northbound and two southbound lanes

Well they are dumb. Thank God no one listened to them.

>a protected bicycle path will run between sidewalks and parking lanes

Hell yes let's go.

54

todareistobmore t1_ix9a98g wrote

Well, this design is dumb--it's not like it's with the city's power to make MTA participate in making this a transit corridor, but given that they may as well have daylighted the falls rather than make two parking lanes.

4

TerranceBaggz t1_ixd1a5i wrote

The design is not dumb, bike lanes are good especially when they double as traffic calming in dense areas. Making it a transit corridor as well would be even better, but I’d delete the auto lanes for transit, not the bike lane.

3

todareistobmore t1_ixd5is6 wrote

The bike lane isn't the problem, it's putting two lanes of parking there. TBH I don't know the background of the places like Boston St. where there's street parking but only during non-peak hours, but I think it's a lot easier to imagine that being the next iteration of this design than a transit corridor. Just feel like this had the opportunity to be a really forward-looking design in a bunch of different ways and this is disappointing. But then honestly between my office moving out of Fells and the Broadway Market renovation, I hardly ever bike to Fells these days anyway.

2

TerranceBaggz t1_ixd94ak wrote

The point was to have traffic calming. Adding back in a traffic lane defeats that purpose. I’m not sure what you are calling for here to improve it. Could you elaborate? (We know they aren’t adding a BRT lane for a circulator or light rail.

2

todareistobmore t1_ixdb811 wrote

Not entirely sure, tbh. Like I think daylighting the canal would've been great and compatible with both traffic calming and a bike lane (at the expense of parking), but with that and transit off the table I think I'd still rather have the bike lane in the middle of the road like the proposal for 33rd St. Then you could put the parking against the curb but have bumpouts to shorten crossing distances too?

2

TerranceBaggz t1_ixjakhk wrote

It would be pretty awesome to have the water taxi run up the canal into the central part of the city.

2

Unusual-Thanks-2959 t1_ix8u9uh wrote

The "transit" portion was a former canal, with Central Avenue on either side. Pics

48

XanderCruse t1_ix9uzy6 wrote

The funny thing is that Central Ave is never congested; at least from my experience navigating through Harbor East at rush hour.

24

DMelanogastard t1_ixacm3y wrote

Oh nooooo! Surely the bikes going 20mph and the pedestrians going 3mph will generate so much less business than the cars flying by at 40!

17

todareistobmore t1_ix98j8g wrote

> The article goes on with quotes from businesses aghast at bike lanes.

And yet if push comes to shove if the option were two travel lanes or one travel one parking, they'd choose the latter every single time.

13

megalomike t1_ix8wtae wrote

why does every story about fells point quote gia blatterman but not bring up the fact that she laundered money for a mayor who went to federal prison.

88

DfcukinLite t1_ix90qvt wrote

Her and Beth Hawks are the two most insufferable pieces of work in SE Baltimore. They complain about every single thing.

37

SilverProduce0 t1_ix9ia0x wrote

““Everyone is not arriving via mass transit, ride-share or bikes.””

Yeah and not everyone can or wants to arrive via their own personal automobile.

57

strifesfate t1_ix9wpmy wrote

And, really, I'd love to not depend on my car at all. It isn't the city's responsibility to pander to my boomer drive-everywhere instincts. Give me something more convenient and I'll graciously use that.

27

jizzle26 t1_ixaxidr wrote

Induced demand - but for walking, bikes, and transit for once

8

bookoocash t1_ixhjb7l wrote

So many people I know won’t bike because of the perceived dangers involved. If we change the perception, more people will give it a shot. I know I started biking more once the MD Ave track was completed.

2

Cunninghams_right t1_ix98kea wrote

"controversy" as the years (decades?) long plan for complete streets makes small, incremental progress toward 1% of street/sidewalk space being set aside for bikes.

41

jizzle26 t1_ix99z26 wrote

Excellent news for everyone. Yes, even automobile users and business owners will benefit from this Complete Street (except for maybe SH Landsman and Sons scrap yard, who shouldn’t even be on Central Ave to begin with).

26

orioleberd t1_ixavwz4 wrote

They won’t be able to have trucks parked hanging out into traffic lanes like it’s their own private driveway anymore.

9

SilverProduce0 t1_ixb5a0z wrote

I was curious where they were located and saw that exact scene on Google earth street view.

4

bookoocash t1_ixhmj2s wrote

I mean a scrap yard doesn’t really seem like a good fit for that area anyways. I understand they have been there for a long time, but areas and neighborhoods change. I’m sure there is property on the outer edges of the city that is probably much more suitable for a scrap yard than a couple blocks from Harbor Point.

3

TerranceBaggz t1_ixjav62 wrote

It’s really not going to be welcome in the coming years once the redevelopment of Perkins Homes is complete and people move back in.

2

isaalth t1_ix9kuju wrote

People really need to watch more Rick Steves

18

bmore t1_ixa8wd9 wrote

Fully built out, Harbor Point was projected to produce an additional ~700 trips an hour during peak conditions. Assuming pre-pandemic traffic volumes on Central AND that pre-pandemic traffic estimate, the road with the road diet will be far from capacity even in the most congested hours. Suggesting this is somehow a traffic disaster is a joke any reporter should have seen through.

18

jizzle26 t1_ixaxyd0 wrote

It’s almost as if the Baltimore Sun has become a joke of a publication…

9

Mikel32 t1_ix9ok3q wrote

Rode this for the first time this weekend. It was a nightmare. People parking in the bike lane, cars rolling thru or not stopping at all at red lights and stop signs, pedestrians walking in the lanes.

16

SilverProduce0 t1_ix9p1rg wrote

How is the bike lane marked off? Flexposts or just paint?

6

Mikel32 t1_ix9vmd5 wrote

Nothing installed yet. Just painted lines.

7

MyKidsArentOnReddit t1_ix9ukka wrote

I'm not sure what it is now, but I believe the plan is for flexposts eventually.

3

XanderCruse t1_ix9vjzo wrote

I've heard similar stories. Hopefully it'll get better once people are more familiar with the set up but I'm not holding my breath.

6

Doom_Balloon t1_ixbfcxo wrote

They have made similar “traffic diet” changes along Harford road and we get a lot of the same. Add to that the parking lanes along Harford have actually reduced street parking when you factor in floating bus stops, curb ends and bump outs, and dead space carved out by flexposts. We now get constant business and customer parking in the neighborhood which is annoying, but it also leads to assholes flying down side and cross streets trying to get around the congestion on Harford rd. We’ve been fighting to get traffic calming for years on the side streets, in the neighborhoods, instead the worst drivers now see this as a cut through to speed around the badly timed traffic lights.

−2

HopefulSuccotash t1_ixcassv wrote

I live a half block off of Harford in Hamilton and I love the road diet. I safely can cross Harford road on foot with my kids and my dog. The city has also accelerated the process for installing speed humps on side streets.

4

bookoocash t1_ixhj3bl wrote

So sounds like the road diet on Harford Road isn’t the problem, just that you need some traffic calming in your neighborhood. Hopefully your councilperson hears your concerns and you get some infrastructure installed soon.

3

datenschwanz t1_ix95xg5 wrote

This is really just Adam Smith's Invisible Hand™ moving the marketplace. Anyone who dislikes it just hates capitalism and wants the terrorists to win because they hate America.

4

AutoModerator t1_ix8qb0m wrote

Hello there!

Links from the domain present in your post are known to present a soft paywall to users. As a result, some users may have difficulty reading the linked content.

It may be helpful to provide a comment containing a synopsis or a snippet of the major points of the article in order to help those who may not be able to see it.

In accordance with the subreddit rules, please do not post the entirety of the article's contents as a comment.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

3

noahsense t1_ixhiz7f wrote

They just completed a road diet on University Pkwy and it’s been a huge improvement, and I say this as a mostly motorist who occasionally bikes. The road calming has made it less of a racetrack, but has only marginally effected travel time. Win win.

3

TerranceBaggz t1_ixd4o6n wrote

Journalists really need to do better. They write this garbage and any time a bike lane is built it’s a controversy. Yet if a road is widened, not a peep. They need to educate theirselves on urban planning and stop playing things neutral. When you interview an idiot that says wrong things, lies or omits facts like many of these quotes, it’s the journalist’s job to correct them in the article. Hot garbage like this is actually harmful to the city and country as a whole.

2

DeliMcPickles t1_ixa3vou wrote

Seems weird to cut off the loading dock. I'm assuming that it wasn't permitted and so they didn't have to include it.

0

bmore t1_ixa9ywz wrote

Not permitted. However the city had a site visit with the operator months ago that the operator does not mention in his quote and they are adjusting the design to include a formal loading zone. This was shared with the reporter.

11

DeliMcPickles t1_ixag82e wrote

I figured. It seems like for those with current curb cuts, they'd actually reach out.

3

jjenni08 t1_ixakcdo wrote

Baltimore just had its 300th homicide this year. I’m sure there are bigger problems to be concerned with.

−9

sllewgh t1_ixakvad wrote

This is gonna blow your fuckin' mind, but get this- the city of Baltimore is capable of doing multiple things at once.

13

jjenni08 t1_ixatkvg wrote

Sure they can. Hence the reason they have had 300 homicides in one city in one year and road construction is everyone’s concern.

−8

MotoSlashSix t1_ixb0otz wrote

Yeah man wtf with these people?!?! It’s as if there are 578,298 people in Baltimore who still have to deal with traffic or something.

7

TerranceBaggz t1_ixd3ybd wrote

More than half of our population doesn’t own cars. So no 578k people don’t have to deal with auto traffic. That’s the point, focusing on cars and putting them first over everything else is choosing to focus on the wealthiest citizen and more so county residents over city residents. You have to pick one. Building Stroads to get county folk to their downtown jobs as quickly as possible drastically decreases quality of life for the people who live in the neighborhoods that those roads go through (historically, these neighborhoods have been overwhelmingly poor and/or black.)

3

MotoSlashSix t1_ixd9e55 wrote

First, please show me where I said to focus on cars and put them first over everything else?

​

>(historically, these neighborhoods have been overwhelmingly poor and/or black.)

I live in a neighborhood near Central and Monument. My neighborhood's population is 87% black, the average home purchase price here is $55,000 and our median household income is below the median for the city. I kind of get it.

>More than half of our population doesn’t own cars. So no 578k people don’t have to deal with auto traffic.

I'm one of those people who doesn't own a car. The notion that we don't also have to deal with auto traffic is news to me. So you're telling me -- a pedestrian and public transit user 90% of the time and ride share user the other 10% -- doesn't have to deal with auto traffic on my commutes? Please tell me how that works because it sounds wonderful. I was unaware that when I'm walking I don't have to deal with auto traffic. When I ride the bus I don't have to deal with auto traffic? Please share how that works.

But I think you missed the point: Everyone who goes anywhere in this city has to deal with auto traffic -- whether they concern themselves with the murder rate or not. So, yeah, we get, it there were 300 murders in our city, that doesn't change the fact that the rest of us have to go on about our lives. The homicide rate is awful; the other 99.999% of us who are still alive can concern ourselves with the traffic we have to deal with every day while we also concern ourselves with violent crime.

3

DfcukinLite t1_ixb65t1 wrote

I didn’t know Baltimore committed those murders. I thought the accountability fully falls on the people who committed said crime… silly me!

4

jjenni08 t1_ixbxcjf wrote

Wow you people are a sensitive bunch.

0

TerranceBaggz t1_ixjbmom wrote

No one here is being sensitive, but your pointless and obvious comment is just a senseless refrain and nothing more. We all know there are a lot of murders here. But they’re a symptom of larger problems. One of the main factors is social inequity. Improving transit for the poorest people improves their quality of life, which in turn decreases poverty, and lowers crime rates. Bringing up the murders in this city any other issue is even slightly tackled is just stale and pointless.

1

TerranceBaggz t1_ixd3gu4 wrote

Do you think DOT has any control over homicides? Do you know what the #1 factor in social mobility is? It’s transit. If you want to lift people out of poverty and as a result lower crime, you provide transit for the poorest in society. I’ve got news for you, poor people cannot afford cars. It’s why over half of our population doesn’t own a car in Baltimore. You really need to look at urban planning books or at least channels on YouTube and learn why cars are so harmful to cities. Carbrain is a disease, but it’s a curable one.

3

Timmah_1984 t1_ix9irfw wrote

They have a point about the traffic flow being a potentially huge problem with all the development going on. I'm not against bike lanes but it sounds like this was slapped on at the last minute with very poor communication to the businesses and residents it will effect.

−19

SurveyThrowAway393 t1_ixaapqo wrote

Cars are one of the least space efficient forms of transportation… If the goal is to increase the capacity of our transportation system to accommodate development, a roadway that priorities the movement of cars over people is not the solution

10

TerranceBaggz t1_ixd31q5 wrote

There was proper communication. The business owners (of which they only interviewed people in opposition) are just trying to make theirselves look like the victim. The writer of this article and editor wrote the story they wanted to write.

1