> Steve Jevning -
>
> I'm sorry to be so negative in my attitude towards the Greenway.  But what
> can I do - I see nothing positive about it.  I am part of the process
here -
> that's the whole point of my contribution in the first place.  I am also
> trying to change minds in my neighborhood, but this is a city-wide
project,
> and needs to be discussed city-wide.
>
> But before I get too negative on you again, I must say I do appreciate
your
> long discussion.  I've been trying to figure out what the purpose of the
> thing is - you explain it pretty well.  I still think you are totally
> wrong-headed in your points - but I can tell you are sincere in trying to
> improve the city.
>
> The main point I have to make is that it makes no sense to build this
> Greenway because the street is already bicycle and family friendly.  I'm
not
> very familiar with the Roosevelt HS area, but I live right next to the
> Bloomington shopping center. I don't know what you've heard about it, but
> the Greenway won't change anything.  The traffic gets a little heavy on
> Bloomington Avenue, but not more than the other major streets nearby like
> Chicago, Portland, or Park.  In any case, changing 40th Street won't fix
> that - maybe a traffic light would make a difference.
>
> I disagree with your comments that a serpentine road, bumpouts, and speed
> tables will not detract from safety, but I don't think we'll get anywhere
> here discussing that.  We'll just have to wait and see how it comes out in
> Kingfield.  Three months without an accident (esp in the Summer) doesn't
prove
> much.  I drove down 40th Street in Kingfield a few days ago - it didn't
seem
> like much had changed yet - for example, I didn't see any curb bumpouts.
By the
> way, could you explain a speed table a little more?  You're right that I
> assumed it was a bump.  Is it like one of those grates by the highway to
> wake you up when you go off the road?  I'm fine with that.  If it involves
a
> rise in the road, I stand by my comment that they are unsafe
>
> I found your comments about adults giving encouragement to kids on wobbly
> bikes pretty funny.  My concern about keeping my 11 year off an official
> bike lane comes from his experience riding on the Lake Harriet bike paths
> one weekend a couple of years ago.  He was terrified - he thought if he
> veered even slightly to the right or left he would get creamed by a fast
> moving rider coming up behind him.  40th Street will never get that
crowded,
> but the concept is the same; fast moving bikes don't mix well with slow
> ones.  Also someone recently made th valid point that 40th Street will
never become a commuter route because of too many hills and stop signs.  But
I still think a designated bike lane encourages fast biking.
>
> I look forward to riding down 40th to the lake next Spring to see all the
> flowers.  But I still get the impression from your posting that the
purpose
> of the Greenway is mostly for image - to encourage the trendy thinking of
> "cars bad - bikes good."  I don't believe our public roads should be
making
> a statement - they should be built to be used.  And 40th Street is already
a
> great road.  As I said in my original posting, I've ridden down the street
> numerous times in the past.  I don't want it ruined.
>
> Mark Anderson
Bancroft
Ward 8
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>

_______________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy
Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more:
http://e-democracy.org/mpls

Reply via email to