tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5666195730630249633.post674716447724099957..comments2024-03-25T17:49:41.408-07:00Comments on Salem Breakfast on Bikes: Second Street NW Plan Minimizes Mobility Choice and doesn't Improve E-W MovementSalem Breakfast on Bikeshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15618055627843335993noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5666195730630249633.post-18505293373940637342011-02-13T23:14:04.611-08:002011-02-13T23:14:04.611-08:00Here's more...from the ODOT page on the bicycl...Here's more...from <a href="http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/HWY/BIKEPED/bike_bill.shtml" rel="nofollow">the ODOT page on the bicycle bill</a>:<br /><br />"The law requires the Department of Transportation, counties and cities to provide walkways and bikeways on all roadway construction, reconstruction or relocation projects. The funding source or amount are not the determining factors; what is important is that pedestrian and bicycle facilities be provided as part of road improvements.<br /> <br />"'Construction, reconstruction and relocation' refers to all projects where a roadway is built or upgraded. Walkways and bikeways don't necessarily have to be provided on projects such as signal or signing improvements, landscaping and other incidental work. Preservation overlays are also excluded if the only intent of the project is to preserve the riding surface in usable condition, without any widening or realignment. Projects where the entire depth of the roadway bed is replaced are usually considered reconstruction projects."<br /><br />Since Edgewater offers direct connections, and Second at present does not, improving bicycle facilities on Edgewater may be preferable:<br /><br />"The "other available ways" must provide equal or greater access and mobility than the road, street or highway in question. An example sufficient to indicate other available ways would be providing sidewalks and bike lanes on a parallel or adjacent street rather than along a freeway. An example not sufficient would be choosing not to provide bike lanes and sidewalks on an arterial street and encouraging use of local side streets that do not include bicycle and pedestrian facilities nor offer the equivalent direct route or access as the arterial street."<br /><br />Widening the bike lane on Edgewater might better fulfill the spirit of the law!Salem Breakfast on Bikeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15618055627843335993noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5666195730630249633.post-82854292428728936202011-02-07T09:11:52.425-08:002011-02-07T09:11:52.425-08:00Thanks for the analysis! Is there a local street ...Thanks for the analysis! Is there a local street you know of, that parallels by one block an arterial, and which is intended to attract more commercial development - that is, whose fronting properties might be zoned other than single-family residential? Winter street between Bellevue and State, through the WU campus, comes to mind - but that's a 99' wide section, isn't it? <br /><br />I've heard informally that there will be a city staff meeting to discuss it this week and that conversations and planning on this will continue at least into March - so hopefully there's time for a course-correction on this.<br /><br />There's a giant parking lot on the other side of Rosemont, even, and while strictly speaking it serves the shopping center only, surely it does/would informally serve nearby businesses on Edgewater and Second! <br /><br />Hopefully, too, city staff will chime in with more information.Salem Breakfast on Bikeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15618055627843335993noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5666195730630249633.post-50119134834218610032011-02-07T07:30:55.512-08:002011-02-07T07:30:55.512-08:00Great article! Not sure why the city is intereste...Great article! Not sure why the city is interested in such a wide street through this neighborhood. It is designated as a "local street" which by the design standards would call for 15' curb/planters and 30' street width. The 30' street width is what we have on Winter and Laurel Streets, and those streets seem to accommodate motor vehicles and bikes pretty well. That width does not allow two cars to pass each other if cars are parked on both sides, but a car and a bike pass just fine. If two cars do meet, one just usually pulls into an empty parking space, driveway or intersection and they will let the oncoming car pass. This acts as a great traffic calming device. Fire trucks routinely travel down Laurel, and there are often cars parked on both sides, yet I have never seen a fire truck get stuck. As long as there are intermittent driveways, intersections, areas of lower parking usage, fire hydrants, etc, there shouldn't be a problem for fire trucks.<br />oh, and we should never build more front-in diagonal parking. Back-in diagonal would be O.K.<br />GaryAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com