BIKE: Pfluger extension project

[Mike Dahmus]

It looks to me like most (or even all) of the options under discussion now 
require crossing the new alignment of Sandra Muraida at-grade, which will 
probably not be a controlled intersection given past experience with the 
city. If controlled at all, I can imagine a nice red stop-sign for the 
bicyclists (and no stop for the cars) as the city's first choice given 
engineering standards. In addition, the route then closely hugs a parking 
loop - meaning that its utility for transportation is going to be 
questionable as people jump out of their cars.

If this interpretation is true, this is a disaster for transportation 
cyclists - similar to the existing facility requiring Lamar corridor 
cyclists to cross Cesar Chavez and Sandra Muraida (existing alignment) as 
pedestrians.

After the Shoal Creek debacle, I'm amazed anybody can be optimistic about 
the result of a consensus-based planning process where the minimum bicycle 
goals are not written in stone (non-negotiable) - in that case, no parking 
in bike lanes; in this case, an attractive-enough design to be better for 
transportation than riding in the lane on Lamar Blvd.

- MD

On 02:31 PM 9/3/2004 -0700, Eric Anderson wrote:
>Bike folks:
>
>Not much discussion recently re: Pfluger extension project underway. Soon,
>first steps to be made to transform our "almost useless (to cyclists)"
>Pfluger Bridge into something that brings us closer to a facility that
>serves "multiple destinations on both sides of the river".
>
>This month, the city appointed Community Advisory Group (CAG) will be
>meeting our second time, to discuss the 7-8 alternatives under
>consideration.
>
>A number of the alternatives can be seen at the COA Seaholm web-page:
>http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/planning/seaholmdraft.htm
>
>At least by our next CAG meeting?, HDR/Roma has promised the updated
>versions would be online.
>
>Thanks to Jackie Goodman, architect Girard Kinney will assist HDR/ROMA
>this next meeting. Girard has steadfastly worked (+ volunteered!) on this
>project for now 13 years, and facilitated the 1997 -IDEA WORKSHOP- where
>the community came up with the double-helix design of the Pfluger Bridge.
>
>I would like to say that of the 20 plus member CAG, 6-8 bicyclists and 3-4
>south austin residents are going to do everything we can to insist on an
>extension that serves transportation cyclists (as well as...).
>
>The -Flyunder Arm- is not my choice for a number of reasons. It should NOT
>be the extension considered for this phase for one reason alone: It is
>viewed as unacceptable by the handi-capped community given its excess
>length, and excessive grade changes (+/- 28 feet!!!).
>
>I will make sure to post the upcoming meeting to this list..., there may
>be light at the end of the tunnel?
>
>Eric Anderson <bikeeric>
>(512)476-7304
>
>--- Thorne <jeffrey.thorne> wrote:
>
> > Here's an interesting bit from Velonews.com which reminds me of the
> > almost
> > useless (to cyclists) bike-ped bridge by Lamar and the "emergency only"
> > designation of the older bridge's sidewalk (not that the cyclist
> > should've
> > been using that sidewalk anyway):
> >
>
>
>
>
>__________________________________
>Do you Yahoo!?
>Yahoo! Mail is new and improved - Check it out!
>http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
>
>_______________________________________________
>Get on or off this list here:  http://BicycleAustin.info/list

Mike Dahmus
mdahmus