...Then you'll be able to answer your own inane question based on the info Sam provided.
The whole point of bike boulevards is to put bike/ped use on SAFE streets. In this case, the demand for bike travel along the BURNSIDE corridor is accomodated on the nearest safe street, FLANDERS.
If you're not convinced, look at an aerial image, and try to figure out where it's possible to have a safe connection over 405. I'll make it easy for you:
- Everything south of B is angled away and hence the wrong direction
- C, G, and E have freeway ramp intersections - not safe.
- D, H, and I have unresolvable conflicts with the freeway and/or ramps. Impossible to build.
- J and northward are good connections but blocks away - too far given the density here.
- F(landers) fits PERFECTLY. Good location for a bike blvd.
This bridge location is a no-brainer. Thanks Sam for having the courage to do what's right. You rock.
Steve, can you read???
...Then you'll be able to answer your own inane question based on the info Sam provided.
The whole point of bike boulevards is to put bike/ped use on SAFE streets. In this case, the demand for bike travel along the BURNSIDE corridor is accomodated on the nearest safe street, FLANDERS.
If you're not convinced, look at an aerial image, and try to figure out where it's possible to have a safe connection over 405. I'll make it easy for you:
- Everything south of B is angled away and hence the wrong direction
- C, G, and E have freeway ramp intersections - not safe.
- D, H, and I have unresolvable conflicts with the freeway and/or ramps. Impossible to build.
- J and northward are good connections but blocks away - too far given the density here.
- F(landers) fits PERFECTLY. Good location for a bike blvd.
This bridge location is a no-brainer. Thanks Sam for having the courage to do what's right. You rock.