Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [MysticCrossing] Re: Meeting on the Wellington / Rt 28 Underpass

Expand Messages
  • Jon Niehof
    ... Ken-- I was replying to your message which said lack of ; lacking accommodation for cyclists and pedestrians is in violation of the Paulsen bill. I m
    Message 1 of 8 , Mar 9, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      --- kenmedford <kenneth.krause@...> wrote:
      > --- Jon Niehof <jon_niehof@...> wrote:
      > > And probably illegal under Massachusetts law.
      >
      > Actually, these accommodations are REQUIRED by law, although
      > you'd never know it.

      Ken--
      I was replying to your message which said "lack of"; lacking
      accommodation for cyclists and pedestrians is in violation of
      the Paulsen bill.

      I'm familiar with the Paulsen bill, the new design manual (I
      commented on it), and the Romney 20-year transportation plan
      (which sadly appears to be dead now, as the revised version was
      MUCH better and something I was proud be part of). Unfortunately
      DCR has not adopted the MHD design manual as there is a strong
      resistance to either expanding pavement on parkland or doing
      anything that could be perceived as limiting the carrying
      capacity for high-speed motorists. Nonmotorized transportation
      (whether "business" or "pleasure") gets caught in the middle.
      Commissioner Burrington "got it" (as a cyclist) and I hope
      whomever is the new permanent commissioner will similarly
      understand the balance.



      ____________________________________________________________________________________
      Expecting? Get great news right away with email Auto-Check.
      Try the Yahoo! Mail Beta.
      http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/mailbeta/newmail_tools.html
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.