Well, we had a great meeting on routes last Friday morning. Just myself, Ian Webb, Maurice Loridans, and Charles Gerard, but it was very productive, I thought.
I recalled more stuff from the DOTD's Statewide Bike-Ped Master Plan Update meeting down in Lafayette. I described of the specific forms of bike lanes used already around the country, such as turning four lanes into three (at no loss to traffic flow apparently), where one of the lanes is center turning lane, and next to each curb is a bike lane going with the traffic. Assuming there are sidewalks (and we far too often cannot, of course), the bike lanes also create a sort of spatial buffer for pedestrians. I also said they'd mentioned levee-top paved bike paths, and also saw long stretches of them on the way back going through Alexandria. Ian and Maurice had a great old time debating the pro's and con's of segregating cyclists like that, and even the need for bike paths in highland, since Maurice sees it as quite bike-able provided you take care to choose you routes. Ian pointed out that even if bikers don't choose to use bike lanes, just their existence puts cycling for transportation into the minds of drivers and residents as legitimate occupants of the road they should respect and be aware of, but also as a respected, legitimate means of transportation. But Ian and I both agreed with Maurice that the city (and probably state) could use a major public relations campaign that would educate residents on the rights of cyclists.
We also talked plenty about routes. I also got a chance to see Maurice's reaction when he realized what I meant by "capping" bayous we have with cement and drains as we do in Columbia Park.
Ian, you'd just left. What are your feelings on that form?
Charles was there too, of course, no doubt inserting incisive comments throughout. Just can't remember them right now without looking at my notes. he he. CG, I'll get back to that.