BIKE: Link posted to Pfluger "preferred alternative"

[Mike Dahmus]

Eric Anderson wrote:

> Mike: thanks for your continued input.
>  
> Seriously, our back and forth over the last few months has helped me 
> define my position, while providing me fodder to throw at the Pfluger 
> planners. I believe that the current North-South Option 2 as an 
> alternative has so benifitted.
>  
> I substantially agree with all four of your points; I would say, 
> "failing to meet even one of the four will result in a substandard, 
> dysfunctional, and failed facility.
>  
> I do however disagree with the notion that this alignment takes either 
> bicyclists OR pedestrians "out of the way". This is a silly argument: 
> that ending up on the Bowie side of Whole Foods is in any way even 
> slightly more inconvenient than arriving on the Lamar side.

Consider that when the bridge was first built, the new Whole Foods 
complex wasn't even a plan - they were still stumbling about with Target 
and the movie theater. The transportational cyclists the bridge was 
supposed to serve weren't going to the 'new Whole Foods'; they were 
travelling on Lamar Blvd.

And being on the "Bowie side of Whole Foods" is a problem if you can't 
get to the Lamar side without going through an unsignalized crossing of 
either Lamar, 5th, or 6th. Remember - the whole point is that this 
bridge is the replacement for the sidewalks (and riding in traffic) on 
LAMAR; not an amenity designed for the patrons of the Market District or 
Seaholm or whatever else. If people aren't pulled off Lamar, this bridge 
extension is a failure.

- MD