Submitted by degggendorf t3_10oab5g in RhodeIsland
Excerpt:
“The trails are a combination of on-road and road-adjacent protected bicycle lanes and shared-use trails, neighborhood greenways on low volume streets, and off-road shared use paths,” the spokesperson added.
To make Providence more walkable and bike-friendly, the city’s “Great Streets” innitiative proposed an Urban Trail Network of off-road separate paths, separated on-road trails, and neighborhood greenways.
Gee, ya think enforcing the traffic laws might help? Smfh
Help what, establish dedicated biking lanes?
NO, make the streets safer
That doesn't seem to be part of what this money is going toward.
And honestly, I'd prefer not to send extra money to the police just to have them do the job we're paying them to do now.
Did you read the article?
No, I was going by the title of the post. If that was misleading, not my fault. At the same time, does anyone around here know what that red octagon means at intersections?
A 2-mile stretch of road will somehow be $26 million over budget, and the state will have squandered the entire fund. It's the RI way.
Yippee, 2,720 new speed cameras on the way.
That doesn't seem to be part of this, this looks like it will all be focused on non-car transportation options.
15% for the grease machine to skim of that money leaves us with….
It will be well spent if the improvements fully connect places people actually need to go which can only be achieved by replacing some vehicular lanes and parking spaces.
I fear what happens instead is this money gets spent on surveys, studies, proposals and planners attending meetings where everything that might actually work gets nimby-ed to death. Then, if money remains, random segments of bike lane get built where there is least resistance, and the city remains too dangerous for kids to ride bikes to school.
Providence is one of the more car-centric cities in New England, the downtown is littered with poor land uses such as surface-level parking lots and stroads. That being said, there must be a better path for implementing pedestrian infrastructure. From what it looks like, the urban trail plan is very vague and non-committal; it will likely result in a loop of needless bureaucracy and dreaded "feasibility studies". It will take a lot more than painted bike shoulders to make the city a better environment for pedestrians
I agree, I'm skeptical that this relatively small amount of money will make much of a difference, and the goals described by Reed's office seem awfully lofty for "just" $27m. I look forward to additional info (and, ya know, actual progress).
This line:
> The city intends to use this funding to “advance engineering and systemic construction” of the Urban Trail Network in Providence.
Makes me think that this might be more about creating blueprints for the infrastructure more than actually building it. Like, coming up with the detailed engineering drawings for what a bike and pedestrian friendly section of urban residential street should look like, so the next time a street is being redone that uniform template can be applied. Then car/bike/pedestrian interaction will be predictable throughout the city, and therefore safer and more accessible. Much better than the mish mash of where a bike lane goes in relation to street parking, whether it's differentiated by paint or reflectors or curbing or just shared with cars, how car turn lane crossovers are handled, etc. Defining the Providence Way of handling those things seems like a good place to start.
But ultimately I don't know anything and can only hope this will be managed with some semblance of intelligence.
Why is the Hartford Projects the picture?
Safer by repaving them hopefully…
Not with this money, this is going toward making walking and biking safer/possible across more of the city.
There is different infrastructure money going toward car-centric improvements that I linked elsewhere ITT.
lom117 t1_j6ecp3v wrote
Let's start with the potholes