07.01.08
Posted in Advocacy, Alerts
by Mark Dieterich at 11:44 am
Construction has begun on the Henderson Bridge. Bicycles will be prohibited from riding in the travel lane (road) whenever the lane is less than 15′ wide. During these restrictions, RIDOT will have signs posted directing cyclists towards an appropriate detour, requiring cyclists to ride over one of the pedestrian walkways. You can read all about the status of the project and latest updates over at the Bike-to-Brown website.
Permalink
06.30.08
Posted in Advocacy, Alerts
by Margherita at 10:23 am
Comments on behalf of the Providence Bicycle Coalition (PBC): Long-Range Plan and TIP
Overall comments
- We commend the program for its honesty in identifying and presenting scenarios for outcomes based on current spending and priorities. This greater transparency is needed to understand the costs of different choices and help the public indicate where we want to make tradeoffs among them. That being said, however, the truth is that the plan remains a listing of disconnected projects, isolated within program stovepipes. It does not provide a coherent and holistic map of the state’s transportation system and alternatives, nor does it include in the cost/benefit discussions the costs avoided by greater reliance on alternative transportation modes or incorporate the currently external costs of pollution, human health impacts, and the physical destruction or degradation of our cities and landscapes. According to its own analysis, more than 60 percent of goals and measures in the last long-range plan were either not met, were considered inadequate to demonstrate progress, or were unsupported by data. Yet most of these measures are retained in the proposed new plan. For one egregious example: the plan states a goal of reducing serious bicycle injuries from 80 in 2001 to 75 in 2015, 71 in 2025, and 69 in 2030 — taking 30 YEARS to achieve a reduction of 11 injuries!! Clearly this says something about the need to rethink how we measure a successful system and suggests we should massively re-orient the plan from an inventory of programs to a set of key strategic outcomes. If more bikelanes and signage were installed in urban areas they would accomplish multiple outcomes — not only providing more support for cycling as an alternative mode, but also reduced traffic congestion and improved air quality; reduced wear and tear on existing roadway infrastructure, including bridges; less negative impact on neighborhoods and more opportunities for local travel; and reduced need for parking.
- Despite its stated goal to the contrary, and despite the public priorities identified in its own survey, the plan still focuses on moving cars, not people and goods. Bicycles, walking, ferries, and transit are given very little attention and fewer dollars. As summarized in Appendix B, the survey showed the public’s top three priorities were 1) commuter rail and sidewalks (tied); 2) bus, trolley, and special needs services; and 3) bike paths and lanes. Moreover, the top incentives for greater transit use were more frequency, availability of commuter rail from outlying areas, and reduced need to transfer (i.e., more one-seat destinations). Yet the overwhelming majority of the funding is allocated to highways and roads. Even within highways, there is no specific focus on the 1.2 percent of roads where 35 percent of the congestion occurs. We recognize that safety, particularly of failing bridges and other essential infrastructure, prevents immediate overhaul of budget priorities. Nevertheless, SAFETEALU does allow re-shuffling of funds; at least 60 percent of each core highway dollar can be used for any project eligible under the law. We ask that DOT and state planning listen to the public’s stated wishes and begin considering how to more effectively combine programs to achieve outcomes that are more than the sum of pots of money.
- We are in this dire situation because of the failure to adequately fund maintenance and even more because of the lack of a vision for what a successful 21st century system could be. What is lacking is boldness and an appreciation that this moment of skyrocketing gas prices and economic downturn is also a moment for change. If we cannot take advantage of this moment now, when the public is fed up and ready to support leaders with ideas, when will we? By the plan’s own analysis, every program is in the “sink” category. Transportation systems and their impacts arguably have more direct and indirect impact on our environment, economy, and quality of life than any other investment we can make. We can choose to operate more strategically — looking at desired outcomes, not programs — recognizing that promoting less vehicle use has the immediate advantage of increasing the life of existing infrastructure while also providing breathing space to shift to other modes, reduces the pollutants responsible for health and environmental impacts, improves overall safety, and begins to offer true choice to citizens. Rhode Island is small and dense enough to build a truly integrated system. It’s beautiful enough for us to care to make that happen — if not for us, then at least for our children.
TIP
- The bicycle program, with the exception of earmarks, will essentially disappear between 2008 and 2011 — this despite the fact that rising gasoline prices and other contributing factors are encouraging more and more commuters to take up cycling as a preferred transportation alternative. Moreover, even the earmarks are heavily oriented to suburban and recreational trails rather than ensuring safety of cyclists on city streets.
- The TIP’s insistence on looking at mass transit as the mode targeted at EJ and ADA communities only perpetuates its stereotype as the alternative of last resort. A system that works for these communities will work for everybody! SPO, RIPTA, and DOT should improve the system to accommodate all users in order to engender widespread public support.
- See comments above regarding lack of consideration for cycling/walking as viable and necessary transportation alternative. For example, the ~$50 million repair and rehab of the Henderson bridge should be re-evaluated. Is this highway to nowhere necessary? Does the bridge need to be configured exactly as it is at present? Current design does not even improve bicycle access.
- Also see comments above regarding disconnect among programs. The example of the I-195 realignment is telling. India Street along the waterfront will have been torn up and re-paved at least 3 TIMES during this process — for the highway construction itself, for the burial of the power lines, and for the construction of the Narragansett Bay Commission CSO interceptor and outfall. How can this happen? Surely the TIP should be the way these infrastructure activities can be coordinated.
- As PBC requested in the TIP discussion last fall, we request that every road project going forward include bicycle and/or pedestrian accommodation. This is the only way to begin shifting the priority from moving cars to moving people. In the interim, we want more signage, more bicycle racks, and more education of drivers and police about the rights and responsibilities of cyclists on the roads.
Permalink
02.11.08
Posted in Advocacy, Alerts
by Mark Dieterich at 11:17 am
I posted this over on the Bike-To-Brown site as well, but it’s important enough to repeat it here. RIDOT has a request listed on the agenda for the February 13th, 2008 meeting of the State Traffic Commission (STC) to:
approve the restriction of bicycles to use the sidewalk area only on the Henderson Bridge.
Naturally, this causes some problems:
- bicycles can’t legally ride on the sidewalks, the railings are too low
- the sidewalks don’t go far enough for people traveling farther East than Massasoit Ave
The meeting is a 10am on February 13th at the State House, Room 203. We should definitely arrange to have one or more people attend.
Permalink
02.04.08
Posted in Alerts
by Mark Dieterich at 12:05 pm
According to a RIPTA ferry report, the high speed ferry service between Providence and Newport will end after the 2008 season.
RIPTA’s Providence/Newport Ferry Service has been a hit since it was introduced in 2000. In 2007, ridership for the five month ferry season was 47,002, the highest ridership in the ferry’s eight-year history.
The federal funding that made this service possible is set to expire at the end of this season. It will be a shame to see, yet another, public transit option fade out of existence. I know that many cyclists enjoyed a day trip to Newport by taking their bikes on the ferry. I know RIPTA can’t afford to fund this service, they are already running with record deficits. Perhaps some private organization will step up to the plate to keep this service running?
Permalink
10.22.07
Posted in Alerts
by Mark Dieterich at 11:32 am
The cyclists over at Bike-To-Brown are tracking what could become a serious problem for cyclists traveling in and out of Providence to and from the East Bay area. As most everyone is aware, the Washington Bridge pedestrian walk way is closed and will likely remain so for many more years. This is diverting cyclists over the Henderson Bridge. RIDOT has now decided to start concurrent work on the Henderson Bridge, including lane closures. Don Rogers over at Bike-To-Brown members concisely stated:
If the single option remaining available to cyclists for crossing between Providence and the East Bay is to become a single lane shared on what many motorists consider to be high-speed freeway, then there can be little option other than large numbers of conflicts and very hazardous conditions for cyclists. There must be proactive and effective mitigation of these conditions to protect life and safety of cyclists and motorists alike.
This is a huge and very dangerous condition that RIDOT is setting up for transportational cyclists, the largest blow I’ve seen in the 10 years I’ve been cycling the Providence area. Close the Washington Bridge to bikes, and we can suffer the rerouting. But restrict the Henderson in this way at the same time, and now the action is effectively ruling that bikes are not a viable transportation alternative to travel between Providence and the East Bay. RIPTA is not a drop-in replacement by any stretch of the imagination.
We are working to determine who we can voice our concern with over at RIDOT and will let everyone know once we have this information.
Permalink