Monday Evening Commute - Clotheslined

Good evening

• According to one report, last week on P Street NW in DC a driver - after honking repeatedly at a cylcist - rammed them from behind and drove away. More proof that there is absolutely no need for the anti-harassment law. 
• A cyclist was injured in Falls Church when they were clotheslined by a downed power line. "He's rather seriously injured; a broken collarbone and a dislocated shoulder," Mary Darne, a witness to the accident, said. "There's not a lot of downed power lines in this area, and most of them are not well marked." [WC: I think that quote may have been botched and they meant to sayt that there are a lot of downed power lines]
• Virginia spent a higher percentage of its Highway Safety Improvement Program money on bicycle/pedestrian programs than every state but 3. Unfortunately, it only took 0.9% to finish that high. And the rest of the rankings aren't very good for Maryland and Viriginia either
  • Transportation Enhancement  - Maryland #47; Virginia #37
  • Surface Transportation Program -   - Maryland #45 (tied at 0.0%); Virginia #37
  • CMAQ - Maryland #32; Virginia #27
  • HSIP - Maryland #16 (tied at 0.0%); Virginia #4
• More on the history of the Coliseum bike racing stadium in NE. 
• Bicycle frieght vehicles are not eligible for CMAQ funding to encourage "the purchase of zero-emission urban delivery trucks" because they don't weigh enough. I guess the good news is that CMAQ is going away being weakened?

Comments

[darren]

"Bicycle frieght vehicles are not eligible for CMAQ funding to encourage "the purchase of zero-emission urban delivery trucks" because they don't weigh enough. I guess the good news is that CMAQ is going away?"

CMAQ isn't going away. It is being watered down by broader eligibility.

Were it going away, I don't agree that it would be a good thing. Also, it's unclear from the story whether or not the ineligibility for the cargo bikes is by virtue of the broad criteria of CMAQ, or the particular requirements of the grant solicitation issued by ODOT w the CMAQ money. i strongly suspect the latter.

[washcycle]

The "good news" comment was sarcasm. But you're right. CMAQ is not going away. I thought it was being rolled into one big pot of money.

[darren]

TE, SRTS, RTP, and my sarcasm detector being rolled into the patronizing "Transportation Alternatives". CMAQ remains as its own distinct pot

[T]

I would like to circle back to my point about Maryland/O'Malley that they talk a big game, but never walk the walk. What's he doing for us? Clearly right-winger McDonnell actually seems like bicyclists more or at least invest more in us. I just can't fathom the bicycling defense for supporting O'Malley aside from saying it's other things folks like him on. It's like we find him to be a mirror who listens and doesn't change.

Onto the other subjects, we really do need an anti-harassment law. It's ridiculous the stuff some motorists have been doing recently. I worry that their frustration with out of towners isn't helping matters. I had a guy cut me off because I was "on the road" and should have been "on the path" down by Ohio Drive. Grr.

[Jim Titus]

@T: If the basis of your comment is the LAB ranking, you should realize that the LAB ranking is ill-suited for detecting who is spending TE money on cycling. I suggest you instead look at MDOT's Capital Improvement plans for the last several years.

The reality is that Maryland spends about 55% of its TE money on bike-ped.

Why does LAB's little tabulation say otherwise?

First, the calculations seem to ignore rail trails, which is alot of where MD's TE money goes.

Second, the data LAB used are basd on a snapshot that is to some extent a figment of when invoices come in for various projects.

Note also: Bike-ped is not the only important state goal toward which TE money can be spent. For the foreseeable future, cleaning up Chesapeake Bay will be a top priority, and our transportation infrastructure is a key source of pollution.