Wednesday brought news of a preventable pedestrian death that occurred when a bus struck a man that was crossing Martin Luther King Boulevard near State Center ("Pedestrian killed in bus crash near State Center", Jan. 5). This is not the first, nor will it be the last, pedestrian death in Baltimore City. To be fair, pedestrians that cross when they don't have a signal indicating that they have the right of way are not entirely blameless for resulting injuries. But the city government can and should do more to address this urgent, and often overlooked, public safety issue.

The problem is not an easy one to solve and includes the outdated, poorly timed system of traffic signals. Rather than protect pedestrians and drivers, the antiquated signals may encourage the running of red lights and crossing against the signal by pedestrians. An updated, well engineered traffic signal system that includes modern pedestrian signaling and crosswalks would be a great start to ensuring pedestrian safety.

The highly dangerous situation that exists for pedestrians crossing MLK Boulevard from State Center is not unique. Michael Dresser wrote another column in November about the city's plan to install a long-sought traffic signal and crosswalk on Charles Street near Penn Station to help pedestrians cross the busy northbound street ("City to install traffic light near Penn Station", Nov. 30). The signal, according to traffic division chief Randall Scott, will be in operation "as early as February but no later than May." Mr. Scott did not pass on the opportunity to burnish his credentials, stating that "We don't want to wait for a tragedy to occur given the need for pedestrian safety."

If the city was as serious as Mr. Scott claims about pedestrian safety, then it would have ensured, prior to the start of construction, that the developer (Whiting-Turner) was not able to close an entire side of Charles Street just south of Penn Station, not to mention multiple traffic lanes, in order to construct a new law school building for the University of Baltimore that may take up to two years to build. Nor would the city insist that the University of Baltimore, a state institution, contribute roughly $40,000 toward the approximately $120,000 cost of the project, which Whiting-Turner should be paying for, considering the life-threatening situation it has created.

Mr. Dresser's November 30 article also quotes deputy city transportation director Jamie Kendrick as promising that the city will put in a temporary sidewalk on the east side of Charles, adjoining the construction site north of Mount Royal. Meanwhile, there is no evidence that the city has begun working, or will ever begin working, on either project. In fact, when asked about the November 30 article, officials refused to give a time frame for completion of either project and seemed to brusquely suggest that pedestrians should be content with the extremely dangerous crosswalk that exists north of Mount Royal and which crosses the entrance ramp to I-83.

The problem of pedestrian safety is symptomatic of some of Baltimore's larger structural problems that prevent the city from growing into the world-class city that its citizens deserve. If government can't protect its citizens from random acts of violence or speeding drivers, then what purpose does it serve? People walking or biking should not be second-class citizens in the progressive, modern city that Baltimore can become.

Brian Patrick Weeks, Baltimore