On paper,
the recent approval by the Maryland Transportation Authority to allow
bicyclists to cross the Thomas J. Hatem Memorial
Bridge starting on July 1st appears to be a great victory for Harford County
cyclists and a step towards progressive policy decisions in reclaiming roadways
for bike riders around the state. In
reality, however, the seemingly bike-friendly and
environmentally-responsible decision may be
creating more issues than it solves for vehicles and cyclists alike.
The
logic behind the decision to open the bridge to cyclists is simple. Local cyclists have long clamored for a
connection between Havre de Grace and Perryville. The East Coast Greenway, a roughly 3,000 mile
developing trail system between Maine and Florida, has also backed a connection
across the Susquehanna River, as it would provide a vital link for the
developing network.
Using
the Hatem Bridge seems like a no-brainer, and there is no denying that cycling
in Maryland has become much easier and safer in recent years. Campaigns to raise driver awareness coupled
with laws that address bicycle safety and a right-of-way regulation have vastly
improved the cycling experience throughout the state and have led to a rise in
ridership. Harford County’s back roads,
in particular, have become an outstanding backdrop for cyclists looking to log
heavy miles while taking in some magnificent scenery.
The
Maryland General Assembly has certainly done its share to regulate vehicle and
bicycle safety, most recently passing a comprehensive bill - House Bill 214 -
expanding the responsibility a driver has when sharing a road with bicycles,
among other vehicles. Most notably, it
clearly defines that, when passing a bicycle sharing the same road, a vehicle
must exercise caution by giving three feet of distance between the car and the
bicycle. Under conditions in which three
feet is not possible, as is the case with the Hatem Bridge, the driver must
“slow to a reasonable and prudent speed that is safe for existing weather,
road, and vehicular or pedestrian traffic conditions” and “may not endanger,
impede, or interfere with the bicycle [...] or any other traffic using the
highway.”
However,
cyclists looking to extend their rides over the Hatem Bridge after July 1st may
be putting themselves in unnecessary danger when crossing, while drivers caught
on the bridge may find themselves being forced to a crawl when crossing the 1.3
mile expanse.
The
main flaw in this plan is trying to retrofit a 20th century roadway so it
adheres to 21st century road-sharing values.
The Hatem Bridge, opened in August of 1940, was designed as a narrow two
lane road in each direction with no shoulder.
The claustrophobic nature of the bridge makes even the most capable
drivers feel trepidation while crossing.
Adding bicycles to the mix will make the span even more tenuous.
Experienced
cyclists are well aware of the implications of sharing a traffic lane with
vehicles. The fear of trucks and cars
barreling towards them coupled with the impatience of tailgaters as they wait
for a break in traffic to merge can ruin any cyclists’ ride. Cyclists can also expect to hear the
requisite drive-by insults and blaring horns that are commonplace with
shared-lane cycling, since many drivers fail to recognize bicycles as equal in
lane usage on roads.
Drivers,
meanwhile, will not only have to come to grips with trips across the bridge
taking one and a half or even twice as long, as two lanes of traffic are forced
to condense to one, but will also be forced to navigate the strain of a shared
roadway with bicycles on the cramped bridge.
Road sharing with bicycles is stressful enough for an unaccustomed
driver, let alone being forced into it on a narrow bridge.
It
also stands to reason rates of accidents between two vehicles, and, perhaps
more terrifying, between vehicles and bicycles will rise rapidly. Just last year, the Maryland Vehicle
Association released a report on bicycle safety, which stated that “over the
past five years there was a six percent increase in the number of crashes”
between bicycles and vehicles. Of those
crashes, according to the same report, “more than 80 percent of the crashes
resulted in a death or injury”
All
of these factors combined point to a singular rationale that allowing bicycles
to share lanes with vehicles across the Hatem Bridge will ultimately not
benefit either group. Drivers will be
upset with cyclists, and cyclists will be upset with drives. Unless an alternative crossing is developed
that does not pit vehicle and bicycle against one another, such as the plan of
retrofitting the Amtrak rail crossing with a bicycle lane, it stands to reason
that cyclists will still plan to steer clear of a river crossing for quite some
time.
Blog Post by Joshua Marx
Blogger for the Havre De Grace Green Team