Don't subsidize parking by allowing street parking on new construction in single family residential zones. Landowners should be able to house vehicles on their property. New development & road maintenance should focus on creating safe cycling and walking routes that connect to and expand existing trail networks.
This can be achieved by directing traffic via one way streets, prohibiting parking on one or both sides of the street, and use the available road space for protected bike lanes and side walks.
The goal presented here don't mean much. There is no context. How are we doing today? What's the alignment between these goals and our broader regional goals and objectives? There are no associated SMART (specific, measurable, achievable, realistic, and time-bound) objectives to indicate what specifically we are trying to change or move toward. The terms aren't defined and seem to be using "feel good" language and buzz words versus anything truly meaningful and transformative.
Do you have any comments on the strategies for the "Improve Accessibility" goal?
Do you have any comments on the strategies for the Improve Accessibility goal?
a. Add funding to this goal such as: Increase transportation options appropriate funding ... b. Specify type of conditions as this goal is too vague e.g. highway walkway and thruway conditions. c. No comments d. Add scooters and other modes of transportation e. No comments f. Add governance and communication to list after Improve . g. Add scooters and other modes of transportation h. Add scooters and other modes of transportation
Once we have SMART objectives, can we revisit the strategies and determine which are truly needed, and how much we would need to invest in each to acheive our objectives? What are the risks and opportunities associated with these strategies?
Overall the system lacks coordination and connectivity among all modes of transportation. I think the discussion of the MAGLEV is laughable in Baltimore. For a resident of southwest Baltimore city, it would take me longer to get to the train station than it would take me to get to DC.
In this goal, what is the purpose of the "regional, long-distance bikeway network?" Is this for transportation and commute and not recreation? Is so, this should be stated. This would bias this towards high density residential and jobs locations.
Remove Level of Service studies to measure potential impact of development in urban area. This encourages sprawl and suburban development, which in turn will put more cars on the road for longer distances and thus longer commute times.
Replacement study should be Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT), which aligns with environmental goals.
Although equity was featured in Goal 1, this goal is perhaps more important to view through an equity lens. If we make investments that help that all people get to their destinations quickly, reliably, and (cost) efficiently, we'll have made considerable improvements to accessibility for all.
This can be achieved by directing traffic via one way streets, prohibiting parking on one or both sides of the street, and use the available road space for protected bike lanes and side walks.