When I originally wondered (on this list, to my Alder, and to the City project site) why the city hasn't considered a design that follows the DOT guidelines for lighting a bike and pedestrian path, I never really did get a satisfactory answer. The City may have had this discussion internally, but for whatever reason has not made it a public discussion. If the SW path is going to be given lighting, then let's do it right. The powerpoint presentation on the project web site only off-handedly indicates bollard style lamp posts are a maintenance problem, but doesn't substantiate that concern with facts and figures. If there are valid reasons why DOT lighting guidelines don't make sense from an engineering (physical and social), I'd like to hear them and the city should lobby to have the DOT guidelines updated accordingly. Perhaps a good lighting design would cost more and budgets are tight. Let's not do it wrong just to spend the money in this year's budget and wind up with an inferior (or unsafe) result. If doing it right costs more, maybe the path can be lit in stages, do what you can with the money on hand, leave the rest until later?
_______________________________________________ Bikies mailing list [email protected] http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org
