Re: [MysticCrossing] Re: actual visit to the dam?
- I agree totally Bryce and that's why it's important for the city governments and advocates to be involved before the design process starts. It is my intent to encourage the simple approach you describe. I have advocated this approach all along and think that under Ms Abbot we have a better than even chance of keeping this simple yet effective. A new design of the pedestrian walkway is not needed, we need only copy the design from the Charles as it meets all the requirements. The only issue there is pedestrian controls and that is the only piece of new design needed. The DCR can use this opportunity to have the pedestrian controls (gates) designed under this SEP monies and apply it to both crossings. Really a good deal for them.We all need to continue our advocacy for this Mystic Crossing, the job is not done. Kathy Abbot supports this project and we can be sure that she will hear us. We need to keep our message simple and clear...no talk (now) of the three sisters, no mention (now) of the Master Plan ...just a clean, neat simple pedestrian crossing.As to other paths and their inclusion in the project list of the DCR I have been told that DCR does not have the Capitol Funds to complete the projects they have already started never mind start new projects. Therefore if funding is found and earmarked for a specific pathway by advocates, I feel strongly that DCR will support it...but they can't pay for it.In a message dated 2/19/2004 6:58:37 PM Eastern Standard Time, bryce1@... writes:
The DCR is approaching the project in the way that big government
agencies are used to operating -- meaning dozens of permits, major
public meetings, design consultants, and feasibility studies just to
change a light bulb.Officer Patrick Johnston
Everett Police Marine Division