The "Complete Streets" point brings up a question that's been plaguing
me for awhile: I've been commuting on South Park St. for a few years
and am baffled by the "incompleteness" of it — the bike/parking lanes
stop and start, solid lines were ground off and replaced with dashed
ones (Northbound by St. Mary's), but diamonds and signs remain there,
while Southbound between St. Mary's and Fish Hatch, signs were removed
(currently the most *extremely* dangerous section of my commute is to
"merge" across the Fish Hatch "exit lane").
It would take me a day to map out the stops and starts and confusing
bike/car signage of this street. So my question is: "What's Park St.
*supposed to* (officially, I guess) look like, and how do we get it to
that state?" Thanks!
On Sep 8, 2009, at 11:14 AM, Ross, Arthur wrote:
- - Complete Streets. All streets need to be designed to
accommodate pedestrians and bicyclists. This means sidewalks for
pedestrians and on busier streets space for bicyclists, typically in
the form of bike lanes. Many destinations (shopping, work sites,
doctor's and other offices, etc.) tend be accessible only from
arterial streets.
All of these are needed, none are mutually exclusive. That is,
having a bike path in a neighborhood does not preclude the need for
bike lanes along the nearby arterial street or vice versa.
Incidental projects (bike lanes on an arterial street) have been
easier to accomplish since budget wise they are a small part of a
larger project. Independent projects (bike paths in separate rights
of way from roadways, ped/bike grade separations of highways) have
been more difficult to acquire funding for.
_______________________________________________
Bikies mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org
