FuturEBR

[Mr. Burnham]

Widen the road, add parking lanes, sidewalks and narrow the bike lanes can be done, but some neighbors may be against giving up their property to do it. 

I come from this neighborhood. If the government pays for it we would do it...most of the land would be taken from the green space in the center of the road. 

The big problem for us is that things have been fine for years with regards to this, because the lanes were never actual bike lanes, they were essentially street side walks. Then a few years ago the city just made them bike lanes and then all of the sudden lanes that were once multi-use are no longer so. We don't want the lanes removed, we want them to be multi-purpose again. 

Now what really pisses me off are the people who do not even live here whether it's in our neighborhood or city telling us what we should do. If people who do not live in our neighborhood have a problem with it then okay, that's fine, we can address it as locals and come to a decision. But the moment you start getting people who do not even live in our state?! That's ridiculous. 

I would also like to note that we do not dislike bike lanes. Almost everyone in the Webb Park Neighborhood wants more! We want them on Claycut to cut down traffic. We want some on Broussard to do the same. We want our neighborhood to be easier to travel around. So many people use our neighborhood as shortcuts and then they speed and make it harder for our community to be safe. So yes we want our neighborhoods to be bike friendly and pedestrian friendly, but given the amount of life and activity here we need it to be car friendly as well.

[greg225]

Riegel: Is Baton Rouge pedaling backward on biking?   

Neighborhood controversies may seem trivial to those who don’t live within the affected area. But Business Report Editor Stephanie Riegel says the way the skirmishes play out often speaks volumes about the community as a whole and where its priorities lie.

Such is the case in the Webb Park neighborhood near Mid City, Riegel says, where a group of residents recently launched a campaign to rid Hundred Oaks and Glenmore avenues of their bike lanes.

“You read that right,” Riegel writes. “While the rest of America is trying to add bike lanes and make their cities more pedestrian- and bike-friendly, some in the Capital Region are moving to do away with them.”

The bike lanes in question were established on Glenmore and Hundred Oaks nearly nine years ago, at the request of the neighborhood as a way to calm traffic and reduce the number of motorists who use the streets as cut-throughs. For most of those nine years the lanes achieved that purpose and “we all lived in peace and harmony with them,” as Glenmore resident Gene Groves tells Riegel.

“But in August, a group of cycling enthusiasts raised concerns about the growing number of residents who were parking in the bike lanes, forcing cyclists and pedestrians out into the street,” Riegel writes. “Parking in bike lanes is illegal, by the way. But residents of Glenmore and Hundred Oaks didn’t know this or were under the impression it didn’t matter. You can hardly blame them: The law was never enforced.”

Nevertheless, parking in bike lanes is still illegal, and on a recent Saturday a group called Baton Rouge Moms Demand Safe Streets organized a “chalk-in,” where they exhorted supporters via social media to chalk-in the nearest bike lane. Some activists even called the Baton Rouge Police Department, demanding that officers issue tickets to violators—which the law enforcement agency did.

“The group raised awareness all right,” Riegel writes. “It also raised the ire of many Glenmore and Hundred Oaks residents, who suddenly found themselves under assault for doing something they didn’t know or think was wrong.”

It remains unclear how the situation will play out. This evening, representatives from the Center for Planning Excellence, the Department of Public Works and the Planning Department will join Metro Councilwoman C. Denise Marcelle at a public meeting to discuss the bike lanes, in hopes of reaching a compromised solution. the meeting is open to the public and will be held at 5:30 p.m at Ingleside Methodist Church, 4264 Capital Heights Ave.   https://www.businessreport.com/article/riegel-baton-rouge-pedaling-backward-biking

[cajun]

 

Now what really pisses me off are the people who do not even live here whether it's in our neighborhood or city telling us what we should do.

  Cyclist don't follow the law and the street was never designed to accommodate them anyways.  This was done so the city of Baton Rouge can check one BS item off and claim that they are a "bike friendly" city.  Perhaps they should have consulted with the neighborhoods before they pulled that.  I'm sure they'd have asked for sidewalks if given the opportunity to do so.  

Edited October 6, 2015 by cajun

[cajun]

So wait...are you saying people should have to pay to park outside of their own homes? That's the root of this problem and most of the streets in this part of town do not have sidewalks or the ones we have are in very bad shape so we made bikelanes so people could ride their bikes in our neighborhoods then we find we can not park outside of our homes because it's in the bikelanes. 

 

It's just a crapty situation TBH. 

 

I would love to see more bikelanes, but I would rather see more sidewalks in the older neighborhoods that need roadside parking. 

Neighborhoods like that should have sidewalks if they want them instead of having bike lanes forced onto them.   

I don't see why bike lanes are even needed on a street where traffic moves that slowly and I certainly would not have prioritized their existence on a street that needs both sidewalks and street parking.   

 

 She added that cyclists are no longer welcomed in the neighborhood.

I wouldn't welcome them either if they pulled that crap in my neighborhood.  Let's not pretend it's a huge burden to steer your unregistered, unlicensed vehicle into a lane, where motorized traffic barely moves 30 mph.  

To add a little humor to this discussion...Portlandia's "bicycle rights" clip:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V3nMnr8ZirI

More "controversial" videos on Bicycle Safety produced by former BBC Top Gear hosts Jeremy Clarkson and James May:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yiu1uLgwF1E

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wCCWwjb43jw

Edited October 6, 2015 by cajun

[Mr. Burnham]

Thank God for you Cajun. You speak words of sanity. 

The lanes we have were never meant for bikes, the city went behind us and made them bike lanes. We approved the creation of 'multi-purpose' lanes nine years ago, three years ago the city went behind our back and made them bike lanes. 

The way that bikers have been treating this neighborhood, and the way the city government has handled it is so ridiculous and offensive. 

[cajun]

Thank God for you Cajun. You speak words of sanity. 

The lanes we have were never meant for bikes, the city went behind us and made them bike lanes. We approved the creation of 'multi-purpose' lanes nine years ago, three years ago the city went behind our back and made them bike lanes. 

The way that bikers have been treating this neighborhood, and the way the city government has handled it is so ridiculous and offensive. 

I lost all sympathy for cyclists when someone I know who lives in that area told me that a group of cyclists have been physically confronting motorists and residents in the area and vandalizing private property....all because they feel they shouldn't have to steer around a FedEx truck or the lawn guy's rig on a street with light, slow moving traffic.   Basically they have an unreasonable expectation and demands from a bike lane that probably should never have existed anyways.  If that wasn't enough, some cyclists are apparently choosing to act like the petulant children that they are will set their efforts back even more.  

This is a group that you can't give an inch to.   Most of them will take a mile and then crow like a total jerk about it.   Those types ruin it for those of us that follow the rules and enjoy cycling.   If I'm honest, most cyclist I see either on my bike or behind the wheel of my car refuse to follow the law....so it's rather ironic that they'd be so militant over a parked service vehicle or an empty recycle bin blocking their lane.  

When riding, I call them out when I see others breaking the laws here in Roswell/Alpharetta, but they always just sneer and ride off.  Police do not enforce traffic laws for bicycles and cyclists don't really police themselves.  

Cyclists are not a group that I'd want to encourage on my street and I'm glad to hear that other neighborhoods in Baton Rouge are rethinking their efforts to add bike lanes.   The Baton Rouge bicycle community picked the wrong mole hill to make a mountain out of.   

If the city doesn't remove the lane, other neighborhoods will balk at any proposal to add bike lanes on their street.  If they remove the lane, neither bikes nor motorists would be significantly impacted on a slow moving street like that.  There is a clear answer here, and the more militant cyclists are not going to like it.  

Edited October 6, 2015 by cajun

[Mr. Burnham]

What really is stupid about all of this is that the cyclist are not willing to simply drive around a parked vehicle in a slow moving traffic neighborhood...those speed bumps are too much trouble I guess. 

Having a bikeable city would be great, but the attitude of cyclists here is so entitled and ridiculous...I can't help but feel we should limit bike lanes to green spaces and larger roads. Hell, I think Baton Rouge needs to ask ourselves if we would rather better roads, or more avenues for those vane cyclist. 

Personally I want more bike lanes, but denser and older neighborhoods do not need them. It is our major roads that do. 

[greg225]

Several bike lane projects in Baton Rouge moving forward as controversy continues to simmer in one neighborhood 

While the bike lane brouhaha along Glenmore and Hundred Oaks avenues continues to simmer following a not-so-productive meeting Monday evening with cyclists and neighborhood residents, city-parish agencies are moving forward with multiple projects aimed at creating a looping, continuous bike path throughout the city.

The proposed projects would make it possible to bike from downtown to Ben Hur Road and North Boulevard to BREC’s City Park and Brooks Park. 

Bike lanes on Hyacinth Avenue, North Boulevard and along the Mississippi River are in various stages of development and those projects could go out to bid to firms later this year or early next year, says Tom Stephens, chief design and construction engineer with the city-parish Department of Public Works.

The Hyacinth bike lanes have been in limbo for several years after Baton Rouge received $579,000 in federal funding for them more than five years ago. That money turned out to be about half of the projected $1.1 million for the 4,800 feet of four-foot-wide bike lanes on both sides of Hyacinth Avenue from Glasgow to Stanford avenues.

The Hyacinth plans have been sent to the state Department of Transportation and Development for final reviews, Stephens says. The city-parish could put the project out for bid by April 1. Stephens estimates it would take nine months to one year to complete.

As for the proposed lanes in the median along North Boulevard in downtown Baton Rouge, Stephens says that project should go out to bid later this year. The plans call for a multiuse path in the median from 4th Street to the Expressway Park under Interstate 110. This bike path would connect to the first phase of the Downtown Greenway project that opened earlier this year, allowing for people to bike and walk down Myrtle Avenue from the Expressway Park to the former Lincoln Theatre in Old South Baton Rouge.

Stephens says officials are also hoping to put phase three of the Mississippi River bike lane project out to bid in the first quarter of 2016. Once completed, the project will create a continuous lane along the Mississippi River levee from downtown to Ben Hur Road.

Davis Rhorer, executive director of the Downtown Development District, says the Downtown Greenway project is in phase two after cutting the ribbon on the first phase in May. For phase two, officials are working with the Department of Public Works on the North Boulevard path and are about 60% complete with the plans on the East Boulevard bike lanes. The cost for the combined projects is about $3 million, the funding for which is already in place.

The last leg of the Greenway project would link Eddie Robinson Boulevard to City Park. Rhorer says he hopes to cut the final ribbon on the combined 2.75-mile project in two years.    https://www.businessreport.com/article/several-bike-lane-projects-baton-rouge-moving-forward-controversy-continues-simmer-one-neighborhood

[cajun]

What really is stupid about all of this is that the cyclist are not willing to simply drive around a parked vehicle in a slow moving traffic neighborhood...those speed bumps are too much trouble I guess. 

Having a bikeable city would be great, but the attitude of cyclists here is so entitled and ridiculous...I can't help but feel we should limit bike lanes to green spaces and larger roads. Hell, I think Baton Rouge needs to ask ourselves if we would rather better roads, or more avenues for those vane cyclist. 

Personally I want more bike lanes, but denser and older neighborhoods do not need them. It is our major roads that do. 

It's sad that adults are unwilling to steer around delivery trucks or lawn care vehicles....and resort to childish tactics because they have to share a land. 

Slower residential streets have no need for dedicated bike lanes.  As we've seen, it causes conflict when cyclists can easily keep up with traffic to begin with.  

What the city is doing now (and much of what they are proposing in many new bike lane routes) is a cheap fix that is almost guaranteed to cause more problems.  Collector streets don't need bike lanes.  Streets like Perkins, Jefferson, and Government do.    You aren't getting that without widening the street either.  

Edited October 7, 2015 by cajun

[greg225]

It's sad that adults are unwilling to steer around delivery trucks or lawn care vehicles....and resort to childish tactics because they have to share a land. 

Slower residential streets have no need for dedicated bike lanes.  As we've seen, it causes conflict when cyclists can easily keep up with traffic to begin with.  

What the city is doing now (and much of what they are proposing in many new bike lane routes) is a cheap fix that is almost guaranteed to cause more problems.  Collector streets don't need bike lanes.  Streets like Perkins, Jefferson, and Government do.    You aren't getting that without widening the street either.  

Every year in this parish cars hit cyclist that's why I'm for bike lanes, plus bike lanes been in that area for 9 years at the neighbors request. I understand delivery trucks, mail, trash pickup, and lawn services , but some of those neighbors knew it was wrong to park their cars there.

[cajun]

Every year in this parish cars hit cyclist that's why I'm for bike lanes, plus bike lanes been in that area for 9 years at the neighbors request. I understand delivery trucks, mail, trash pickup, and lawn services , but some of those neighbors knew it was wrong to park their cars there.

Demanding unnecessary bike lanes just to spite a neighborhood that doesn't want them is living up to the stereotypes of cyclists.   This is a street with low traffic and slow speeds. Bike lanes were never needed there.  

People need to be reasonable about removing the lanes.   Doing so would not impact cyclists negatively and would mean the world to the people that live in that neighborhood.  

Or they can keep fighting to jam it down a neighborhood's throat and draw more hostility towards expansion of bike lanes in the future.   Maybe get a couple of more jerk-off cyclist commandos quoted in the paper insulting people of Baton Rouge.   See how much support you get  when you want to add bike lanes where they are actually needed....such as on nearby Jefferson or Government street.  

Unwillingness to remove those highly unnecessary bike lanes will significantly undermine the ultimate goal of making Baton Rouge more bike-friendly.   The worst of the Baton Rouge cycling community has already picked the wrong battle.   Now is not the time to cut off their nose to spite their face.   It's time to be a reasonable adult.   

Edited October 7, 2015 by cajun

[greg225]

Demanding unnecessary bike lanes just to spite a neighborhood that doesn't want them is living up to the stereotypes of cyclists.   This is a street with low traffic and slow speeds. Bike lanes were never needed there.  

People need to be reasonable about removing the lanes.   Doing so would not impact cyclists negatively and would mean the world to the people that live in that neighborhood.  

Or they can keep fighting to jam it down a neighborhood's throat and draw more hostility towards expansion of bike lanes in the future.   Maybe get a couple of more jerk-off cyclist commandos quoted in the paper insulting people of Baton Rouge.   See how much support you get  when you want to add bike lanes where they are actually needed....such as on nearby Jefferson or Government street.  

Unwillingness to remove those highly unnecessary bike lanes will significantly undermine the ultimate goal of making Baton Rouge more bike-friendly.   The worst of the Baton Rouge cycling community has already picked the wrong battle.   Now is not the time to cut off their nose to spite their face.   It's time to be a reasonable adult.   

You have neighbors that don't want and that do want them that's why its a fight if all the neighbors didn't they would be moved, but that's not the case. The fighting will continue if the bike lanes is moved, and the street is only low speed because of speed bumps. Do I think the bike lanes will be moved no I don't because complete street have been implemented.

Edited October 7, 2015 by greg225

[Mr. Burnham]

Every year in this parish cars hit cyclist that's why I'm for bike lanes, plus bike lanes been in that area for 9 years at the neighbors request. I understand delivery trucks, mail, trash pickup, and lawn services , but some of those neighbors knew it was wrong to park their cars there.

We didn't put bike lanes in, we put multi-purpose lanes and were told we could park there. 

[greg225]

We didn't put bike lanes in, we put multi-purpose lanes and were told we could park there. 

They probably meant for bike and pedestrian use that's why they said multi-purpose lanes maybe they should have listed what the lanes are for.

[Mr. Burnham]

You have neighbors that don't want and that do want them that's why its a fight if all the neighbors didn't they would be moved, but that's not the case. The fighting will continue if the bike lanes is moved, and the street is only low speed because of speed bumps. Do I think the bike lanes will be moved no I don't because complete street have been implemented.

90% of the people that live in this neighborhood do not want the multi-use lanes anymore because of the way the cyclists have treated us. The only people that do want the bike lanes are the cyclists. We do not need bike lanes in these neighborhoods because the traffic is so slow already, but we wanted the multipurpose lanes because we care about good living. Pedestrians, cyclists, and drivers live very harmoniously in our area of town, but now those cyclists have a problem with people using the multipurpose lanes for things other than bikes.

Cyclists should be putting all this effort in building more lanes around the city where they are needed and make sense rather than trying to piss off the very people that until now have led the effort for more bike lanes. Anyone else remember 'smarter streets' from last year? Whenever everyone in this neighborhood came out in support of more bike lanes and sidewalks. 

[Mr. Burnham]

They probably meant for bike and pedestrian use that's why they said multi-purpose lanes maybe they should have listed what the lanes are for.

Please do not patronize the intelligence of the people that live here. The people on this street were told the lanes could be used for cycling, walking, running, jogging, AND yes parking our cars. We asked them multiple times to clarify and they told us that yes we could park in the lanes. 

Edited October 7, 2015 by mr. bernham

[greg225]

Please do not patronize the intelligence of the people that live here. The people on this street were told the lanes could be used for cycling, walking, running, jogging, AND yes parking our cars. We asked them multiple times to clarify and they told us that yes we could park in the lanes. 

??? Its no way if it was for bike use and pedestrian use I don't believe for second they said it could be used for parking.

[Mr. Burnham]

??? Its no way if it was for bike use and pedestrian use I don't believe for second they said it could be used for parking.

They did and you have more people than I who know what they told us. You have to keep in mind that this lane had no specifically legal dedication. 

[greg225]

Highland Road residents gear up for looming rezoning battle in new year          

The Protect Highland Road Task Force may have lost its most recent fight to keep a residential development with a higher-than-desired density from being approved by the Planning Commission, but its leaders are gearing up for a large battle in the coming year.

The task force was created earlier this year when residents successfully fought approval of the Heritage Oaks subdivision. But it was unsuccessful last week in persuading the Planning Commission to reject approval of Valhalla subdivision, which is less dense than Heritage Oaks, but still calls for slightly more than one unit per acre.

The subdivision, located on the same tract that Heritage Oaks was proposed, is being developed by Dantin Bruce and calls for 20 residences on 15 acres. Over objections from the task force—which wants residential developments to be limited to one per acre—the Planning Commission voted 6-1 to approve Valhalla on Monday, Dec. 14.

Also at that meeting, the commission voted 8-1 to approve recommendation of an ordinance change that would require any rezoning of a property without the owner’s consent to get a super majority vote—or nine votes—by the Metro Council rather than the seven votes, or simple majority, currently required.

Ron Ross and Wayne Stromeyer, president and vice president of the task force, tell Daily Report they will fight the ordinance change when it comes before the Metro Council for final approval next month. They will also be working to get approval for their effort to rezone from rural to REA1 a roughly three-mile stretch of Highland Road between Siegen Lane and the Country Club of Louisiana, as well as about a mile stretch of Pecue Lane that connects Highland and Interstate 10. The rezoning change would restrict residential developments to one unit per acre. The current rural zoning allows for up to seven units per acre.

Since its formation, the task force has grown to 11 members, including three homeowners associations. Ross and Stromeyer say there are about 250 pieces of property along the stretch the task force is focused on that measure larger than one acre. They add they have now have secured signatures of 87% of the property owners in the area who support their rezoning push.

“We’ve spent months collecting signatures,” Stromeyer says. “It’s a formal petition. We have it documented and we’re trying to get it before the Metro Council now.”

Ross takes exception with the suggestion that he and his neighbors along Highland and Pecue are merely trying to protect their own properties and keep any future residential development from taking place in the area.

“We know it’s going to be developed,” he says. “It just needs to be controlled.”

The additional traffic forced onto Highland and Pecue by high-density residential developments  poses public safety and flooding threats, he says.

“These are real serious concerns that we don’t think have been addressed,” he says.

Getting the rezoning from rural to REA1 is really on the first step in a much larger effort, Stromeyer adds.

“We need some long-range planning,” says Stromeyer. “It’s already gone too far.”  

Stromeyer points to one objective in the FuturEBR master plan for development that calls for the creation of “a robust and meaningful public involvement process that emphasizes long-term consensus rather than project-by-project evaluation and approval.”

“That’s exactly what we’re trying to do,” he says.   https://www.businessreport.com/article/highland-road-residents-gear-looming-rezoning-battle-new-year

[richyb83]

Not much of a head's up for this afternoons meeting...some of us from UP could really make some noise

A MESSAGE FROM THE DDD FUTUREBR OPEN HOUSE North boulevard town square The City-Parish is updating FUTUREBR, the comprehensive master plan for the parish. Please join us today from 4:30PM - 7:30PM at North Boulevard Town Square to share ideas on: Land Use, Transportation, Urban Design and Neighborhoods, Housing, Economic Development, Parks and Recreation. FUTUREBR UPdate >> Plan >>

[Antrell Williams]

I wish I was off in time to make these meetings. I would make sure to voice my opinion. 

[Mr. Burnham]

Damnit. I totally would have tried to go had I known ahead of time. I hope they do one soon. Richy, how do you get these notifications from the DDD?

[cajun]

Someone tell them that the library looks horrible.  

[dan326]

3 hours ago, cajun said:

Someone tell them that the library looks horrible.  

Lol, too late for that.

[richyb83]

11 hours ago, mr. bernham said:

Damnit. I totally would have tried to go had I known ahead of time. I hope they do one soon. Richy, how do you get these notifications from the DDD?

You can sign up for E-mails here....forgot how/when i got on their list lol

https://downtownbatonrouge.org/