Park Ave Ride Audit Group Conference Call Google Doc Work Session Proposed Times

[Zack Barowitz]

In order to finish up the Park Ride Audit Report I am proposing that a group get together on a conference call and all work on the google doc together/simultaneously. This allows for instant "copy flow" and is what professional news organizations do. Basically we'd set up a group call and watch each other's icons crawl over the document like ants.

I can do Monday, Tuesday, or Thursday next week any time from 5:30pm to 9:30.

Who's in?

I've shared the recommendations section below because there might be some disagreement over them (or there might not).

Thanks,

Zack 

Recommendations:

Option #1: Two-way cycle track on the North Side [Deering Oaks side of Park Ave] from _____ to _____.

• This is how it should have been done originally but would have required more specialized engineering than the interns who made the original design.

Option #2: Restore the conventional unprotected bike lane on the East-Bound Side (restore the conventional bike lane on the west side)

• Considering that almost all the hazards (driveways, blue bins, potholes, sunken storm drains) are in the east bound lane, the simple solution would be to eliminate it altogether.

• The west-bound lane (which runs along Deering Oaks) gets more sunlight and snow melt. An on-street lane would be far easier to maintain.

• Eliminating the east bound lane could allow the west bound lane to be widened from 5’ to 6’

• A wider west-bound lane might encourage more salmoning (riding against the direction of traffic in a bike lane), as might having a protected lane on only one side of the street. Salmoning would be safer with a wider lane however, and 17% of riders already salmon on Park Ave. (link to BCM study) 

Option #3: Better Maintenance and Road Repairs

• Many users reported that they regularly encounter hazardous objects and obstacles including recycling bins, bottles & other debris, leaves, unplowed snow, and ice. 

• Better maintenance would alleviate these hazards. However, the facility is challenging from an operational perspective. For example, it is difficult to get people to stop putting their blue bins into the bike lane, or if you can get a plow to fit in the lane it still presents the problem of where to actually put the snow.

• There are several sunken storm drains and manholes that create obstacles for bicyclists..  

• The storm drains and manholes need to be made flush with the pavement so that bicyclists don’t even notice them.

[PBPAC doesn’t favor this option because the design deficiencies (like driveways, narrow lanes, and lack of daylighting) would still be extant.]

--

207-838-6120

917-696-5649
ZacharyBarowitz.com

ATTENTION:
The information in this electronic mail message is private and confidential,
and only intended for the addressee. Should you receive this message by
mistake, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, reproduction,
distribution or use of this message is strictly prohibited. Please inform
the sender by reply transmission and delete the message without copying or
opening it.

[Winston Lumpkins]

Monday after 5:30 works for me! 

I agree that this is the way to finish this report.  

The positive change that our York Street report may have helped move forward is really encouraging: this one needs to get done!

As far as the conclusion goes; I edited option 3 with my personal conclusion: I don't think maintenance would be enough to improve safety for cyclists- if the city wants to keep it, significant improvements need to be made.
 

Edited title + my additions: 

Option #3: Protected intersections, Compliance with Mass DOT daylighting guidelines, Better Maintenance and Road Repairs. 

Parking separated lanes on Park Ave have not succeeded in making cycling or walking safer, and may have made walking less safe.  If we keep them, they must be improved. 

• Daylighting: compliance with the Massachusetts DOT’s separated bike lane guides clear zone/daylighting standards would necessitate the removal of some parking: if we can’t spare that parking, option 1 or 2 should be considered. 

• Protected intersections for both cyclists and Pedestrians

~Winston

Winston Lumpkins IV (he/him/his)

Past Chair, Portland Bicycle & Pedestrian Advisory Committee
https://www.portlandbikeped.org/

winston....@gmail.com
207-408-1508

• 
  

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Portland Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to PBPAC+un...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/PBPAC/CAE741VCQBdz2waEmV0Xb9%2Bu%3DmzJDeuNOzgm1%3Dnu2BO51uKBTBg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Scsmedia]

Monday at 5:30 pm also works for me.  Thursday is no good.  But any suggested addtions that can be made before that would be good.  

Steven Scharf

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/PBPAC/CABaJc7xnB8DXJAO%2BCC9MUiR%2B6enP4hOeTwW1YS4kHQZZFQnqZA%40mail.gmail.com.

[Zack Barowitz]

It looks like tomorrow/Monday is a clear winner. See any and all at 5:30 via the shared Google doc and conference call.

207-838-6120

917-696-5649
ZacharyBarowitz.com

ATTENTION:
The information in this electronic mail message is private and confidential,
and only intended for the addressee. Should you receive this message by
mistake, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, reproduction,
distribution or use of this message is strictly prohibited. Please inform
the sender by reply transmission and delete the message without copying or
opening it.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/PBPAC/1387224986.2763597.1753369595947%40mail.yahoo.com.