🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <D1qqv8.HrH@cruzio.com> cycleam@cruzio.com writes:
>In 1991, my efforts  to make it easier and safer to travel on a bicycle 
>between the east side of Santa Cruz and downtown were torpedoed by a political 
>monster. At the time, I was collecting momentum for a simple ramp that would 
>run from Frederick St Park to the upper small craft harbor below. This would 
>make it easy for cyclists to then climb a small hill to 7th Ave where it 
>intersects with the newly striped bike lanes of Brommer St.  
    let's not forget the political context.  it is my subj assessment that
the ramp proposal wasn't glitzy enough attract widespread public support,
or to get passed by the council.  the big impetus for the bike/ped bridge
was that at the time, the city was getting ready to build a "real" B-B
bridge for cars.  i personally pushed the bike/ped bridge proposal ---
to be studied --- because it was a way to give the city council a clear
alternative to the car bridge.  nbd residents latched onto that alternative
because the car bridge would have destroyed the neighborhoods on both
sides of the harbor.

>Instead, I was asked to forestall my charge by those bicycle activists who 
>assured me there was money and political will for a grand bridge that would 
>connect Broadway with Brommer at 7th Ave. 
    i personally think the ramp is a fine idea.  but it wouldn't have
sufficed to derail original the car bridge project.

>In the interim, the agency of jurisdiction has been determined, funds have 
>been appropriated and it has been scheduled to be built. There is, however, 
>*still no connection*. All this at the expense of safe passage to and from mid 
>county. Other important bike projects have suffered as well. 
    it is my assessment that unless further activism occurs, the bike/ped
bridge WILL be built.  but my concern is that it will not be done in an
environmentally sensitive way.  paving the earth for bikes is not much
better than paving the earth for cars.

>The undertakings of which I speak, including the Frederick St Park ramp I 
>favor, have had their monies rerouted to a project that is still years into 
>the future. We still do not know what can be built to connect Broadway with 
>Brommer because the feasibility studies and environmental reports that are 
>necessary still have not taken place.
    it's happening.

>Why can't we, at least  in the interim, build a wheelchair accessible ramp, 
>similar to the one near the Boardwalk train trestle, from Frederick St Park to 
>the upper small craft harbor? A perfect and scenic feed to 7th ave and 
>Brommer, this project could be created in a fraction of the time for a 
>fraction of the cost.
    you didn't respond to my earlier posting about the engineering
difficulties.  i think it's doable, but some claim otherwise.  i don't
think the train trestle design would work at the yacht harbor.  i don't
think the train trestle design qualifies as wheelchair access.  it seems
way too steep.
    which reminds me, i think a bike/ped connection from the boardwalk
to murray/eaton would probably be even more useful than one from frederick
st to the yacht harbor.  but the frederick st idea would probably be more
saleable, because some $$ are already there for the bike/ped BRIDGE.

    now that the bike/ped bridge seems like a real possibility, and the
car bridge seems dead, i would guess that most cyclists would support a
ramp as meeting their needs.

--- don fong