FLCC> FW: CWT e-Notice:

[Rick Manning]

Hi List Readers,

I sent this response (below) to Lawren directly, but thought I should send it to the whole list since he posted his question to the listserv.  Web page referred to below is www.cayugawaterfronttrail.com <http://www.cayugawaterfronttrail.com/> .

 

For those interested in west end traffic issues, you can check out a new web page by Joe Scaglione www.cayugawaterfronttraffic.com <http://www.cayugawaterfronttraffic.com/> .  This is being funded by some trail opponents.  Joe is very concerned about railroad issues, the use of our roads for garbage trucks en route to Seneca meadows landfill, emergency access to hospital, and general increased west end traffic.  We feel that the partial bridge lane conversion we are proposing will not negatively impact any of these conditions.  However we do acknowledge that there are west end traffic and parking issues that need to be handled.  A functional and heavily used trail and better bike-ped facilities in general would provide a viable alternative to driving to West End destinations for many of us who live downtown.  

 

Thanks.

Rick

 

  _____  

From: Rick Manning [mailto:rmannin4 at twcny.rr.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2007 7:07 AM
To: 'Lawren Smithline'
Subject: RE: FLCC> CWT e-Notice:

 

Hi Lawren,

We believe the bridge lane conversion (taking 7’ of right turning lane) will have no negative impact on the current traffic.  It leaves 2 – 12’ lanes with 4’ shoulders, plenty for emergency vehicles passing cars pulled over in both directions.  The problem is at the 89-96 intersection and the whole west end needs to be studied.  Our proposal is removable as required by NYSDOT.  We feel it is a responsible, cost effective and very sensible approach.  Of course not all agree and the notion of taking traffic space for bikes and peds really pushes peoples buttons.  Perhaps this is why the city has built no bike facilities on roads in the past 10 years since the bike plan was completed.

 

The bridge from market to Cass is a nice idea, but very expensive according to our bridge engineers (2.5 million as opposed to the 1 million suggested by Bob Andree), plus would cut off MV Manhattan and sailboat access to Inlet Island, which is a bad idea and would not be allowed by Canal corp.  Our bridge over the Inlet crosses at south end of canal system, so no impact on navigation.  

 

If you want details on this and other phase 2 matters, go to web page and download FAQ.  Let me know what you think after looking it over.

 

Thanks.

Rick

 

  _____  

From: flcc-bounces at icycle.org [mailto:flcc-bounces at icycle.org] On Behalf Of Lawren Smithline
Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2007 8:58 PM
To: flcc at icycle.org
Subject: Re: FLCC> CWT e-Notice:

 

Rick,

What is the progress on Phase II?

Phase II is the part that crosses the inlet.

There is a traffic issue to be resolved on the Buffalo St. bridge,
and there is (or was) an eminent domain process creaking along.
One of affected the property owners published an alternative
in the Ithaca Journal, suggesting construction of a light duty
(i.e. bikes + peds, no cars) bridge further north.  Is that viable?
What other possibilities under consideration?

Thanks.

Lawren

Rick Manning <rmannin4 at twcny.rr.com> wrote:

Cayuga Waterfront Trail e-Notice

April 10, 2007

……………………

 

  

  _____  

It's here! Your new message!
Get new <http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=49938/*http:/tools.search.yahoo.com/toolbar/features/mail/>  email alerts with the free Yahoo! Toolbar. 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://icycle.org/pipermail/flcc_icycle.org/attachments/20070411/28efb977/attachment.html