MCL 691.1402 GOVERNMENTAL LIABILITY FOR NEGLIGENCE

Each governmental agency having jurisdiction over a highway shall maintain the highway in reasonable repair so that it is reasonably safe and convenient for public travel. A person who sustains bodily injury or damage to his or her property by reason of failure of a governmental agency to keep a highway under its jurisdiction in reasonable repair and in a condition reasonably safe and fit for travel may recover the damages suffered by him or her from the governmental agency. The liability, procedure, and remedy as to county roads under the jurisdiction of a county road commission shall be as provided in section 21 of chapter IV of 1909 PA 283, MCL 224.21. Except as provided in section 2a, the duty of a governmental agency to repair and maintain highways, and the liability for that duty, extends only to the improved portion of the highway designed for vehicular travel and does not include sidewalks, trailways, crosswalks, or any other installation outside of the improved portion of the highway designed for vehicular travel. A judgment against the state based on a claim arising under this section from acts or omissions of the state transportation department is payable only from restricted funds appropriated to the state transportation department or funds provided by its insurer.

Remember that in Michigan bicycles are not vehicles, therefore road agencies can’t be sued for defects in bike lanes or on paved shoulders.

That’s both good and bad. It’s good for countering road agencies arguments that bike lanes raise their liability. They don’t. In fact, they can reduce it. That’s not our opinion. That’s the opinion of the Michigan State Attorney General’s office.

The bad part is this lack of liability removes a motivating factor for keeping them well maintained. Then again, the roads aren’t in all that great a shape either.

Gravel doesn’t count

Last week the Michigan Supreme Court clarified the road liability a little more. They said the Road Commission for Oakland County (RCOC) could not be sued for gravel that accumulated on a road. That gravel allegedly caused a motorcycle crash.

From the Spinal Column:

“Basically the law states that a defect must be in the traveled portion of the road and the higher courts interpretation is that it must be in the road bed itself and the gravel was simply a dusting on the surface of the road that you would see anywhere on a daily basis,” [RCOC attorney Paula] Reeves explained.

Michigan law established that if snow and ice are on a roadway, the RCOC is not liable for any damages. Subsequently the Supreme Court last week issued an opinion stating under Michigan Law the agency is not culpable in this incident since RCOC is responsible for keeping the roadway in “reasonable repair,” and loose gravel on a roadway does not fall under this definition.

“The courts took this logic and extended the law to apply to gravel,” Reeves noted.

This ruling could likely be applied to a bicyclist crashing on gravel in a vehicle travel lane.

Again, this is good and bad for the same reasons mentioned earlier.

However, if reducing the liability means more bike lanes, we’ll take it.

We’ll deal with the occasional gravel.

Related Posts

• Tienken Road plans ignore cyclist safety
• To Metro Detroit Counties: Bike lanes are inevitable
• Clearing snow Copenhagen-style

We agree. As we’ve mentioned before, by default counties cannot manage roads. That must be handled by a separate county government called a road commission. It’s archaic and not cost effective.

House Bills 5125 and 5126 will make it possible to consolidate these separate county governments. While both the House and Senate have passed variations of the bill, the House must approve of the Senate’s legislative changes.

According to a Detroit News article:

The Michigan House has approved measures that would allow county boards of commissioners to take over the powers and duties of county road commissions.

Appointed county road commissions could be dissolved by a majority vote of a county’s board of commissioners. Voters would have the final decision on whether to dissolve road commissions in counties where road commissioners are elected.

Ingham County is looking to absorb their road commission. Macomb and Wayne Counties went through the onerous county charter process which let them absorb their road commissions earlier.

What about Oakland County?

The Spinal Column has thorough coverage on this topic.

“(Oakland County Executive L.) Brooks (Patterson) has no desire to take us over, and if anyone studies the issue, they wouldn’t want to,” [RCOC Spokesperson Craig] Bryson said. We don’t think there would be an immediate response, but there could be in the future.”

One conclusion from reading the article is that some government officials are against it and willing to make rather outlandish claims as to why.

Bryson claims it “By moving the jurisdiction to the counties, it forces counties to raise property taxes to fund roads.” Not true. Roads are paid for through a separate funding stream. If this were the case, why would tax-averse Macomb County absorb their road commission?

County Commissioner Jim Runestad said,”In Oakland County, if (the county board) were to take over the RCOC, it would be highly politicized and the politics would weigh in on every decision.” Every decision? Is that what happens now at the local, state, and federal levels, all of which manage roads without a separate governmental body? Of course not.

The current system of electing Oakland County road commissioners is highly political. The Republican majority chooses a road commissioner every couple years and controls the process. It’s a separate county government that’s fully controlled by the Republican majority, and that is the likely reason why the Road Commission for Oakland County will continue in the near future.

Commissioner Runestead told the Spinal Column, “If there was a change in leadership on the county board, the RCOC’s days could be numbered.”

Related Posts

• Time to combine county government with road commission
• Bicyclists don’t pay their share of road taxes
• ACTION ALERT: Oakland County Complete Streets

Michigan’s transportation system is not getting young people where they need to go.

As citizens under 35, we know that not all of our peers can afford the $8,500 a year it takes, on average, to own a car. Some of us are looking to reduce our carbon footprints. Whatever the reasons, young people want to see a transportation system that gives everyone the freedom to get around, with or without a car. Unfortunately, failed transportation policies have been holding Michigan back.

Every year thousands of us leave for places that have functioning transit, safe biking and walking conditions, and convenient transportation between cities.

They also give support to Complete Streets.

We need to adopt a truly comprehensive “complete streets” policy, so Michiganians do not have to risk their lives to walk or bike.

It’s worth the time to read the entire opinion piece. It focuses mostly on public transit, which is expected since it was released during the recent Detroit light rail/bus rapid transit news.

Still widening highways

One minor correction? It speaks about MDOT widening highways in the past tense. MDOT is still widening highways.

Where did a majority of the transportation stimulus money go in Michigan? Widening an expressway. MDOT plans to spend well over a billion transportation dollars in Detroit over the next 20 years… to widen an expressway. Widening roads are still a funding priority for MDOT and many Metro Detroit municipalities.

Want to lose faith in Metro Detroit’s transportation decision makers? Take some time to review the road projects in SEMCOG’s transportation improvement plan (TIP).

Let’s look at the Road Commission for Oakland County’s 2012 TIP projects. They have $30.7 million in projects of which $21.8 million involves road widening.

Road agencies, SEMCOG, and others don’t like to publicize road widening projects because at the same time, they’re asking for more transportation funding.

They need the funding to continue building sprawl, but that’s not a good sales pitch — especially to millennials.

The Millennial Mayors Congress is also on Facebook.

Related Posts

• Legislation would eliminate 1% bike/walk funding
• Detroit road obesity makes for easy cycling
• What Complete Streets means for MDOT and transportation in Michigan

The entire resolution is on Commissioner Covey’s web site, but the resolution’s actions are:

THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Oakland County Board of Commissioners hereby declares its support for Complete Streets and requests the Road Commission of Oakland County (RCOC) adopt a Complete Streets into its strategic planning process.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Oakland County Board of Commissioners hereby requests the Road Commission of Oakland County to develop a Non-motorized Transportation Plan that will include, at a minimum, accommodations for accessibility, sidewalks, curb ramps and cuts, trails and pathways, signage, bike lanes, and shall incorporate principles of Complete Streets and maximize walkable and bikeable streets within Oakland County.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Oakland County Board of Commissioners hereby requests the Road Commission for Oakland County plan for, design, and construct all transportation improvement projects, both new and retrofit activities, to provide appropriate accommodations for bicyclists,

Oakland County residents take action

While there is some optimism this resolution will pass with all Democrats and a handful of Republicans on board. However, those R votes could disappear. We need to make sure they don’t.

We need residents to contact their commissioner and voice your support for the Complete Streets resolution before the Thursday vote. This is especially important for those with Republican commissioners.

• Full list of Oakland County Commissioner email addresses
• Not sure of your County District? Map of Oakland County districts

Also, in case you missed it, the Ferndale Patch ran an article on Complete Streets last week.

Related Posts

• Oakland County Complete Streets resolution & meeting
• Combining County boards and road commissions
• Transportation key to young staying in Michigan

Oakland County Commissioners David Woodward and Craig Covey are introducing a Complete Streets resolution tomorrow, Monday, August 8th.

From the resolution:

“…increasing active transportation (e.g. walking, bicycling, public transportation) offers the potential for improved public health, economic development, a cleaner environment, reduced transportation costs, enhanced community connections, social equity, and more livable communities. ‘Complete Streets’ can also reduce traffic congestion and reliance on foreign oil.”

No, Oakland County Government does not own, build or manage roads. That is done by the Road Commission for Oakland County (RCOC), a completely separate county government operation for just roads.

(In Michigan, county governments by default can have health departments, cemeteries, courts, airports, parks and more – but they can’t have a road department. Roads are handled by a separate county government called a road commission. In order to consolidate these two county governments, state law needs to be changed and a county needs to become chartered — neither are easy.)

However, Oakland County government does have some pull over the RCOC. They do give them money and every two years they appoint a road commissioner.

We’ve had discussions with Commissioner Woodward over the past few years about a Complete Streets resolution, including making it a prerequisite for those county funds.

We’ve also brought up Complete Streets during the most recent road commissioner appointment process. That seemed to gain traction among the Democratic minority. It will be interesting to see whether Monday’s resolution gets votes from the Republican majority. There’s some discussion that it will.

It also is worth mentioning that we’ve been meeting with the RCOC regarding Complete Streets issues, including bike accommodations. It’s too early to say how that will play out. Current RCOC policy is to not accommodate bicycles on county roads, i.e. no bike lanes, no sharrows, no four-foot paved shoulders.

Complete Streets public meeting in Ferndale

On Tuesday, August 9th both Woodward and Covey are speaking in Ferndale about their resolution. This free meeting is at 6:30 PM at the Ferndale Public Library.

There more event information on Facebook.

Related Posts

• ACTION ALERT: Oakland County Complete Streets
• Combining County boards and road commissions
• Transportation key to young staying in Michigan

According to the Spinal Column:

Milford Township Planning Commission members are reviewing design features as part of the township’s “complete streets” policy to make streets more friendly to pedestrians and cyclists.

This comes after the commission passed a complete streets policy resolution in January, which was then adopted by the Milford Township Board of Trustees in February.

The policy allows the Planning Commission to review all street plans to ensure all public and private street projects, including reconstruction, are built to follow the guidelines of the federal Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) and the American Association of State Highway Transportation Officials to accommodate all users of the rights-of-way or private road easements.

“This allows the township to be more involved in street improvements with help from the county and state planning process,” said Milford Township Building Official Timothy Brandt.

The Township is also looking to “adopt a non-motorized transportation network plan.”

What’s interesting about this development is Michigan townships generally aren’t in the road business. They don’t receive state or federal road funds. They typically rely on their county or county road commission for road design, construction, and maintenance.

And to date, the Road Commission for Oakland County does not support Complete Street designs. How this gets resolved given the Township’s resolution remains to be seen.

One interesting note: the newest Road Commissioner for Oakland County is from Milford. From what we hear, he gets Complete Streets and might help push the organization forward.

An unnecessary exception?

Below is the Milford Township Complete Streets resolution, which includes this interesting exception:

Where non-motorized network improvements are contrary to the community’s intent to preserve areas having or perceived to have a low density pattern of development, being generally void of man-made improvements such as paved roadways, and exhibiting open Fields, farmland or woodlands as common elements of the visual landscape; and,

To us, this looks like unnecessary. Complete Streets are context sensitive. There is no singular design. Low density communities have designs that make sense for that area. Complete Streets are not incompatible with low density development nor open space preservation.

Perhaps this was added to allay fears that it would lead to paving roads and removing roadside trees for sidewalks.

And the Village of Milford?

Milford Township and the Village share the same planner, who has offered to help the Village with a Complete Streets policy. Tow Village Planning Commissioners attended a Complete Streets introduction last fall and “found it to be very informative” but that’s all we know.

Charter Township of Milford
Oakland County, Michigan
Resolution No.:
Resolution to Adopt a Complete Streets Policy

At a regular meeting of the Charter Township of Milford Board held on 2011 at which a quorum of the Board was present, the following preamble and

Resolution was offered by and supported by

WHEREAS a complete street is a safe, accessible, and convenient street for all users regardless of transportation mode, age, or physical ability; and

WHEREAS research has demonstrated that complete streets offer many benefits to communities, regardless of their size and location, including improving public safety and air quality, relieving congestion, fostering livable communities, and bolstering economic growth; and

WHEREAS Michigan recently became the 14U| slate to adopt complete streets legislation by signing into law Public Act 135, which amends Public Act 51 of 1951 governing the expenditure of state transportation funding, and Public Act 134 which amends the Michigan Planning Enabling Act; and,

WHEREAS PA 135 stipulates that before a city, village or township approves any project that affects a roadway or transportation facility under the jurisdiction of another agency, it shall consult with that agency and agree on how to address the respective complete streets policies before approving a non-motorized project affecting a transportation facility whether it is under the jurisdiction of the Michigan Department of Transportation (MDOT), or under the jurisdiction of the county or another municipality; and

WHEREAS PA 135 further stipulates that before MDOT submits its multiyear capital plan to the state transportation commission or a county road agency approves its multi-year capital plan, for any project that affects a roadway or transportation facility within or under the jurisdiction of a city, village, or township, the MDOT or county road agency shall consult with the affected city, village or township and agree on how to address the respective complete streets policies; and

WHEREAS the aforementioned consultation requirements do not apply if neither the agency proposing the projecl nor the affected agency has a complete streets policy; and

WHEREAS the Milford Township Planning Commission previously articulated their support for complete street initiatives or projects through the adoption of the Milford Community Master Plan on February 26, 2009;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that in order to improve the safety and efficiency of the transportation system located within the Charier Township of Milford and to promote the health and economic opportunities of its residents and visitors, it is the policy of the Township to encourage “complete streets” and, in furtherance of that policy,

IT IS ALSO RESOLVED until such time the Charter Township of Milford may adopt a non-motorized transportation network plan, the Township Planning Commission shall review all street plans to ensure all public and private street projects, including reconstruction projects, are built using guidance from the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Accessibility Guidelines and AASHTO (American Association of State Highway Transportation Officials) standards to safely accommodate all users of the right-of-way or private road casement, including pedestrians, people requiring mobility aids, bicyclists, skateboarders, and drivers and passengers of transit vehicles, trucks, automobiles and motorcycles, with [he following exceptions:

• Where their establishment would be contrary to public health and safety or would otherwise be prohibited;
• When the cost would be excessively disproportionate to its need or probable use, or burdensome to total infrastructure cost associated with the project;
• Where the length of the project does not permit a meaningful addition to the nonmotorized network;
• Where the provision of non-motorized facilities is environmentally unfeasible due to natural resource constraints;
• Where non-motorized network improvements are contrary to the community’s intent to preserve areas having or perceived to have a low density pattern of development, being generally void of man-made improvements such as paved roadways, and exhibiting open Fields, farmland or woodlands as common elements of the visual landscape; and,
• Where reconstruction of the right-of-way is due to an emergency.

Resolution Adopted

Related Posts

• Milford Twp: Non-motorized planning session this Saturday
• Transportation key to young staying in Michigan
• ACTION ALERT: Oakland County Complete Streets

That unwillingness is going to make  Complete Streets a bitter pill.

One doesn’t have to look too far to confirm that. Here’s the text they’ve had in the Oakland County’s Oak Routes Map.

The Road Commission for Oakland County is a member of the Oakland County Trails Advisory Council in order to accomplish two goals. First, our goal is to encourage and facilitate the movement of people throughout the county by non-motorized means as a way to promote healthier living and reducing the number of trips required on the road system. Secondly, the Road Commission wants to create the best possible nonmotorized network by contributing technical expertise to the location and design of the pathway system. This will create fewer conflicts with the motorized network and result in the safest possible trails for all users. Accomplishing both goals is in the best interest of our residents’ health, safety, and quality of life.

Yes, they refer to roads as the “motorized network.”

Yes, they are trying to gets bikes off the road.

Some of their best work is in Oakland County townships such as West Bloomfield. West Bloomfield has partnered with the Road Commission to get bikes of the roads and onto side paths, which they call safety paths.

Township officials have acknowledged to us that these paths are not safe for many bicyclists. That said, they’re still committed to building them.

One of their engineers admitted that these paths do not follow AASHTO bicycle design guidelines, but insisted it’s okay because the township only labels them as pedestrian facilities. That doesn’t explain the path’s bike routes signs or much of their safety path documentation.

Given all this, it is a major disappointment that the League of Michigan Bicyclists is giving its 2010 Community Award to the West Bloomfield Parks and Recreation Commission, for among other things, “activities that support making Michigan a better place to bicycle.”  The Commission has been a supporter of this safety path program and calls for more of them in their master plan.

Safety paths are not making Michigan a better place to bicycle.

And safety paths in nearly all cases do not make a Complete Street.

Related Posts

• West Bloomfield: Complete Streets and Safety Paths
• Bicycling safety in Oakland County: It’s not about the money
• Combining County boards and road commissions

Blame the cyclists from the 1890s.

Back then, counties weren’t involved in building roads, but farmers were. That was a problem for bicyclists. These roads weren’t well engineered, didn’t drain properly, and were hub deep in mud during the spring.

But the roads were good enough for horses.

And at that time, a popular sentiment was that county government had no role in building and maintaining roads.

Cyclists began the Good Roads movement and one of their first victories in Michigan (thanks to Edward Hines) was an 1893  state law that allowed the creation of county road commissions. These commissions were separate from county government and had enough autonomy so that they could ignore the naysayers in the farming community and improve the roads.

By the 1920s, according to Horatio “Good Roads” Earle, the cyclist who founded MDOT, the debate over the importance of good roads was over. Even the farmers agreed that building good roads was a good investment.

However, the road commissions that were separate from county government remained.

Unified form of government

All but Wayne and Macomb Counties operate on what’s called a “unified form of government” which is defined by state law. This law allows Michigan counties to hire a county manager to oversee departments for planning, economic development, health, environmental protection, parks, libraries, sewage, airports, garbage collection, human services, and more.

See what’s missing? 

By default, counties can’t build and maintain roads. It requires a separate county government which reports to road commissioners. Under state law, road commissioners can be appointed by the county commission or elected.

In Oakland County, three road commissioners are appointed by the county commissioners, one position every couple years. These part-time road commissioners receive a $10,000 salary and full health care benefits.

New road commissioner

Road Commissioner Richard Skaritt’s term expired last month. Six people applied for his position. None were interviewed.

Instead the Oakland County Commission’s Republican caucus decided to appoint Ron Fowkes. Fowkes is not an urban planner nor does he have much transportation background.  He was a window salesman and former Milford Village councilman. And a Republican.

This shouldn’t be a surprise. All three previous appointments were former Republican Oakland County Commissioners.

As the Daily Tribune reported earlier today, the Democatic County Commissioners weren’t pleased.

“It’s always been our position that appointments to the road commission should be based on merit and qualifications, rather than on political paybacks to Republican former elected officials,” [Commissioner Tim] Greimel said Tuesday.

A Free Press article on this topic included this telling quote from Republican Commissioner Shelley Goodman Taub, “At the end of the day, whoever has the power makes the appointments.”

County Commission vote

I attended last night’s county commission meeting and gave public comment (see below.)

The Democratic commissioners also spoke prior to the vote on Fowke’s appointment.

Commissioner Marcia Gershenson decried the obvious cronyism and the process adding, “We have no input on the road programs the commission implements.”

Commissioner Helaine Zack concurred and said it’s difficult to vote for someone if they’ve never had the opportunity to interview them.

Commissioner Craig Covey said he’d like to know a candidate’s positions on Complete Streets, bicycles, and public transit.

Commissioner Tim Greimel said that they are have a responsibility to the Oakland County electorate to appoint the best qualified applicants. And like businesses, they shouldn’t hire commissioners without interviews.

Commissioner Mattie M. Hatchett responded to Taub’s Free Press quote saying that any decision should be based on the best information they have and what’s best for the county — not just based on the majority vote.

Commissioner David Woodward said he felt reforms were needed at the Road Commission and he’d like to know what their plans are for such things as bike lanes.

Despite the comments, the vote fell along partisan lines. The 14 Republican “ayes” made Fawkes the next county road commissioner in Oakland County.

Ron Fawkes

After giving my public comment, Mr. Fawkes introduced himself and said bicyclists would “have an ear” with him on the commission.

He spoke highly about the new sharrows being installed in Milford Village. I reminded him that Road Commission policy doesn’t allow those on Oakland County Roads.

He suggested perhaps that was an MDOT policy. I noted that it wasn’t.

He said that it often comes down to money. I remarked that the city of Detroit is able to find the grants to get it done.

We’ll see. As many of the county commissioners noted from both sides of the aisle, Mr. Fawkes is a nice guy.

Current road Commissioner Eric Wilson also introduced himself and noted that he’s a cyclist too. He strongly encouraged me to bring these issues before the road commission soon. I reminded him that I already had and got no response.

Still, I will attend one of their meetings soon. Maybe now that a little more light and public scrutiny is being shown on the road commission, it might be more responsive.

Public comments

I gave the following comments before the Oakland County Commission on January 5th, 2010.

Hello my name is Todd Scott.

I serve on the Troy Trails committee, Royal Oak non-motorized task force, Ferndale bicycle committee, and have been on the Oakland Trails Advisory Council since its inception. I also work for the Michigan Trails and Greenways Alliance, however I’m not here representing any of these groups.

I’m here as a resident. I’ve lived in Oakland County for four decades and have been trying to make it bike friendly for two.

I will honestly tell you that Oakland County is not bike friendly. In fact it is not even competitive with other metro regions, not to mention the city of Detroit. In fact, as of this year the city of Detroit has more miles of bike lanes than all of Oakland County combined.

There are many reasons for this, but first and foremost is the Road Commission for Oakland County. They have had an undocumented policy for the past 20 years of not safely accommodating bicycles on their roads. Their policy does not follow best practices as set for by AASHTO, Institute of Transportation Engineers, and the Federal Highway Administration.

Their money and liability excuses for not doing what is safest have been debunked. There is substantial grant funding available to make Oakland County roads bike friendly, but the Road Commission is not applying for it.

I’ve presented this same information to the Road Commissioners and asked what it would take to change their policy.  I was informed by a RCOC employee that my best bet for getting answers is through a Freedom of Information Act request.

And while the recent snow storm response awoke many motorists to issues with the road commission, Oakland County bicyclists have been aware of them for decades.

I am asking you to appoint road commissioners that are willing to abide by the commission’s mission statement of providing safe and convenient roads and of having sensitivity to community concerns.

The mission statement does not say safe and convenient for only those in cars.

We need a road commission that is building Complete Streets – bikeable and walkable streets that help this region retain the Gen Yers and Boomers, while attracting businesses like Google and Quicken.

We need to at least be competitive.

Related Posts

• Combining County boards and road commissions
• Troy opposes transportation investments… again
• ACTION ALERT: Oakland County Complete Streets

As m-bike readers know, the Road Commission for Oakland County (RCOC) has a long history of ignoring the safety of bicyclists. They’ve continued that streak by failing to provide bike lanes in their Tienken Road plans.

We submitted comments to the RCOC a year ago regarding bike lanes on Tienken and provided justification. Those comments were never responded to and altogether ignored based on the latest Tienken Road Environmental Assessment which recommends three vehicular travel lanes and sidewalks.

No bikes lanes. No wide curb lanes. Not a Complete Street.

Our preferred option should be three 11-foot lanes with two five-foot bike lanes (or wider, buffered bike lanes.) That would be a Complete Street and support Safe routes to School.

Why 11-foot lanes? Studies show there is no safety advantage for having 12-foot lanes and they induce speeding.

Former Rochester Hills City Councilman Scot Beaton has gone even further with his suggestions and developed an alternative cross section that includes bike lanes. He’s left his comments at the end of this Oakland Press article.

We must also mention that the RCOC plans failed to include any discussion of bicycling safety despite the nearby parks, trails, and schools. Three has been three bicycling-vehicle crashes in this road corridor since 2006 — all three occurred on safety paths. RCOC’s response? Build more safety paths.

City of Rochester Hills guilty too

Just as the RCOC ignores AASHTO guidelines for bicycle facilities and best design practices, so too does the city of Rochester Hills — which helps explain why it is one of the least safe places to ride a bike in Oakland County based on crash data. Their “safety path” network does not meet AASHTO guidelines. In fact, John LaPlante, a primary author of the guidelines called the term “safety path” an oxymoron. LaPlante said the guidelines were clear that “safety paths” (or the correct term, sidepaths) are rarely an appropriate bicycle facility.

According to the Oakland Press, “Mayor Bryan Barnett said he’s happy with the outcome.”

It’s frustrating that cities like Rochester Hills and others (e.g. Oakland Township, Orion Township, West Bloomfield Township) refuse to follow the national design guidelines. It’s really up to cyclists to turn this around. Taxpayer dollars are being wasted on off-road bicycle facilities that would be much less expensive and safer on the road.

Friends of Tienken Road

And finally, it seems the Friends of Tienken Road are no fans of safe cycling or Complete Streets either. This is the group that fought against widening Tienken to five lanes.

We sent them emails with the regards to bike lane proposal, but they never responded. This is despite that fact that we helped them with their community outreach, paid for their web domain name, developed their web site, and provided free web hosting.

It seems their priority is in limiting the RCOC’s plan to three lanes of motor vehicle travel, rather than bicyclist safety (or responding to emails.)

Unable to attend?

According to the Free Press, “Those unable to attend the meeting may send concerns about the proposal in writing to the Road Commission for Oakland County, Permits and Environmental Concerns Department, 2420 Pontiac Lake Road, Waterford 48328.”

Related Posts

• It’s time for Bikes Lanes on Tienken
• Bicycling safety in Oakland County: It’s not about the money
• Road design class for bicycling comes to Detroit

The comments that the Road Commission wasn’t following best practices for bicycle design and that there were no excuses fell on deaf ears. There was no response.

Bike lanes are an easily dismissed request among the Metro Detroit’s three main counties. At one time all three county road agencies had unwritten policies against providing bike lanes.

But that has to change eventually. The cities of Detroit, Ferndale, and others are setting the example locally while the federal government is providing reinforcement from above.

And just last month Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood celebrated the opening of bike lanes on Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington D.C.

It was hot, sizzling hot, and summertime-in-DC humid. But I wouldn’t have missed it for the world.

I’m talking about yesterday’s dedication festivities to inaugurate Washington, DC’s newest bicycle lanes. And these are not just any bike lanes. These lanes run right down the middle of Pennsylvania Avenue–America’s Main Street–from the White House to the U.S. Capitol.

For too long, walking and biking have been overlooked as important forms of transportation. Now we see local governments answering that call by creating new opportunities for people to take advantage of streetcars, transit, walking, and bike lanes. They’re taking the needs of pedestrians and cyclists into account like never before.

Building bike lanes on county roads is inevitable. When will the Wayne, Oakland, and Macomb Counties stop resisting and start building them?

When will Secretary LaHood celebrate bike lanes opening on county roads in Metro Detroit?

Related Posts

• Oakland County Roads are Not the Safest
• Bike Lanes in Macomb County
• Bicycle crashes increase for 2007