Traffic flow (griping)
Sep. 16th, 2005 11:53 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
magidPedestrian traffic, that is.
The Longfellow Bridge sidewalks on Boston end are horrible. There are stairs down to the park along the river, and after that, the sidewalks dwindle to almost nothing, compounded by putting lightposts in the middle of the little that's left, leaving only the curb to walk on. I swing around the lightpost, which is not an ideal situation. And that end of the bridge is completely inaccessible for someone in a wheelchair, between the stairs and the lack of sidewalk (or curb cut down to the street, not that it would be safe to ride in the street there). This is compounded by Charles St. station construction, which has blocked off most of the path across the end of the bridge; I have to walk either in the street, or through where construction stuff is stored under the bridge, then in the street anyway. They've set up paths for people going from the station to the hospitals and to Charles Street, but if your path isn't that, it's not going to work without some risk.
The construction on the matching (cheap-looking, fairly ugly) Harvard buildings on either side of the end of Cambridge Street is just about done. As part of the construction in the area, they've built out the sidewalks at the intersection with the side street, where the curb cuts are, which also means the loss of two parking spaces. It makes sense, though, because it means the crosswalk isn't blocked, and there's more visibility for people turning onto a busy street. What I don't understand is why the crosswalk itself was painted six feet away from the curb cuts, to be from front door to front door on the new buildings. There are little wooden ramps down to the street, so it's accessible, but it doesn't make sense to build out the sidewalk and put in the curb cuts and not use them. Plus, it kills two more parking spaces.
As I was walking home yesterday, I found that they've replaced the bus shelter near Youville with a new one. Which should be fine, except that the old shelter was just beyond the sidewalk, and the new one takes up much of the sidewalk, forcing people to walk around it, into the line of trees and parking meters. It just seems stupid to waste sidewalk space like this. It's not as bad as one on the way to Sullivan which blocks the sidewalk almost completely, but it still seems stupid. Or is it subtly encouraging people to take the bus rather than walk?
And while I'm complaining, I'd also like to mention umbrellas. I'll preface this with admitting that I have a probably completely irrational fear of having an eye poked out by an umbrella (more irrational for me given that I wear glasses). However. It seems that, just like automobiles, there's a trend for larger umbrellas, even though most are still used by one person alone. It becomes difficult at times to navigate in the rain, with so many personal space circumferences so increased.
The Longfellow Bridge sidewalks on Boston end are horrible. There are stairs down to the park along the river, and after that, the sidewalks dwindle to almost nothing, compounded by putting lightposts in the middle of the little that's left, leaving only the curb to walk on. I swing around the lightpost, which is not an ideal situation. And that end of the bridge is completely inaccessible for someone in a wheelchair, between the stairs and the lack of sidewalk (or curb cut down to the street, not that it would be safe to ride in the street there). This is compounded by Charles St. station construction, which has blocked off most of the path across the end of the bridge; I have to walk either in the street, or through where construction stuff is stored under the bridge, then in the street anyway. They've set up paths for people going from the station to the hospitals and to Charles Street, but if your path isn't that, it's not going to work without some risk.
The construction on the matching (cheap-looking, fairly ugly) Harvard buildings on either side of the end of Cambridge Street is just about done. As part of the construction in the area, they've built out the sidewalks at the intersection with the side street, where the curb cuts are, which also means the loss of two parking spaces. It makes sense, though, because it means the crosswalk isn't blocked, and there's more visibility for people turning onto a busy street. What I don't understand is why the crosswalk itself was painted six feet away from the curb cuts, to be from front door to front door on the new buildings. There are little wooden ramps down to the street, so it's accessible, but it doesn't make sense to build out the sidewalk and put in the curb cuts and not use them. Plus, it kills two more parking spaces.
As I was walking home yesterday, I found that they've replaced the bus shelter near Youville with a new one. Which should be fine, except that the old shelter was just beyond the sidewalk, and the new one takes up much of the sidewalk, forcing people to walk around it, into the line of trees and parking meters. It just seems stupid to waste sidewalk space like this. It's not as bad as one on the way to Sullivan which blocks the sidewalk almost completely, but it still seems stupid. Or is it subtly encouraging people to take the bus rather than walk?
And while I'm complaining, I'd also like to mention umbrellas. I'll preface this with admitting that I have a probably completely irrational fear of having an eye poked out by an umbrella (more irrational for me given that I wear glasses). However. It seems that, just like automobiles, there's a trend for larger umbrellas, even though most are still used by one person alone. It becomes difficult at times to navigate in the rain, with so many personal space circumferences so increased.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2005-09-16 04:54 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-09-16 04:57 pm (UTC)Agreed though that you're tall enough to be less of a problem ;-).
no subject
Date: 2005-09-16 05:01 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-09-16 05:20 pm (UTC)Not irrational. I've been hit in the face by umbrellas a few times. People tend to be completely careless with them, which can be hazardous, especially to us tall folk.
no subject
Date: 2005-09-16 06:07 pm (UTC)ps
Date: 2005-09-16 06:07 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-09-16 07:10 pm (UTC)Even undeployed umbrellas can be a hazard when they're too alrge. I've gotten poked with metal bits of them several times recently when people go blithely swinging them as they walk.
no subject
Date: 2005-09-16 09:14 pm (UTC)I wonder if the planners (or whoever) even think about pedestrians, really. I mean, I can get from here to there, but is it a reasonable path? Otherwise, people are going to use the direct and less safe option.
I haven't yet been hit by an undeployed umbrella, but I have been sprayed by one. ("When is an umbrella like a large, shaggy dog?...")
no subject
Date: 2005-09-16 09:14 pm (UTC)