Quote:
Originally Posted by milomilo
The plan could do with some work to make the pedestrian routes better sure, and Calgary is pretty lazy with how they design overpasses, but I honestly would rather walk a direct route with overpasses rather than arbitrarily following the route designed for cars, and having to wait for minutes at the side of a noisy road for signals. You can dismiss that as just wrong, but it's my opinion.
Almost the whole of the Bow River pathway is grade separated - it's fantastic to be able to walk or cycle through a vast stretch of the city without stopping for traffic. Using your logic though, it would be more pedestrian/bike friendly if none of those grade separations were there and the paths crossed at signaled intersections. It least it would slow the cars down though eh?
Here is a great example of a pedestrian realm overlayed on a challenging environment:
https://www.google.ca/maps/place/Melbour...d646b5d2ba4df7:0x4045675218ccd90!6m1!1e1
There are lots of wide overpasses going between destinations, with long, gradual and, importantly, direct descents to ground level. No one has to wait for the cars or trams, they can just walk where they want to go. |
Really? Do you sea a river flowing beside MacLeod Trail. Context matters. Having an opinion is fine, but I also have no issues telling people when theirs is rather wrong.
Did you read Byebyebaby's analysis? Do you understand shortest path route choice, decay functions and walking vs waiting time perception. I'm unsure how being 5 - 10 meters above the roadway makes it any less noisy (or less exposed from the elements.) No cycle length is so long that you have to wait minutes (not to say it isn't annoying), and fact of the matter is, roadways in inner city areas with smaller block sizes, largely replicate reasonably possible desire lines. In fact, streets often preceded the roadways.
Nice link - as far as overpasses go those look decent. Now let's not confuse pedestrian realm with pedestrian infrastructure. I see a distinct lack of street furniture and shops on those overpasses.
But yes, you are right: In certain areas where there is already a distinct lack of a real public realm and/or no desire* (or understanding of how to) create one, grade separation is fine
if built for pedestrians and cyclists. That design is not. Like already stated, it's quite full of circuity and switchback ramps. It's a far cry from something like
this or even the link you've pasted. I'm a personal fan of underpasses if anything, because the geometry necessarily allows you to remove a lot of the grade the equivalent overpass would need. Good, wide design eliminates a lot of the anxieties related to unwanted human activities. See Canmore's underpass.
* You may notice in the drawings themselves the plans for TOD at the bus loop and the owner of the lot southwest of the intersection. There is also redevelopment interest for the area immediately northeast of the intersection.
But to your point about at least slowing cars down - yeah. Bang on. And that's really the crux of it. Pedestrian signalization reduces intersection capacity. You want to build a safe, liveable, walkable place,
you slow the cars down. But then, you know, you'd be slowing the cars down.
Prev
Linear Mode
