What a week for me to go on vacation!
I'm coming in late here, and haven't fully caught up to the current tail
of this thread in my heap-o-mail. However, I did notice the sign that is
posted in error prohibiting bikes from the roadway westbound is still
up, it definitely caught my attention and provoked my ire! I'm glad to
see that Mark has contacted Steve Church at RIDOT already about it;
hopefully the contractor will act quickly to fix it. That's pretty
damaging to have in place, when bikes *should* be in the roadway in that
direction, since there will be more eastbound bike traffic using the
sidewalk, which is too narrow for two-way bike traffic.
For all these sign messages that bikes don't belong in the road, try to
keep in mind that the plan for the finished product of the bridge work
includes dedicated bike lanes in both directions, which will be a clear
enough message at that time that bikes do belong. (Except, of course,
for all commuters and recreational riders heading towards Rumford,
Seekonk, and beyond who will need to merge out of that bike lane, merge
across exiting traffic for the first ramp, and continue on to the second
ramp. Good luck finding much mercy among motorists once that magic paint
is binding you into a channel down the first exit ramp.)
Still... it all makes you wanna go 'Grrrrrr.'
> I think it's the fact that cars are cruising along at 50+ mph! One
> thing that could have made this situation much better would have been
> better enforcement. Crack down on speeding cars! It's ridiculous
> police have just thrown their arms up in the air and completely ignore
> the fact that people use the Henderson like a highway. It's marked at
> 35 mph!
True. But *all* of the design elements of the bridge, from the access
points to the signage to the lane width and sightlines, scream
'freeway.' Ya get your car up there, and ya wanna go fast. It was
clearly built as a 1-mile freeway. Why? Were there expectations that
East Providence would become a freight shipping hub? I don't get it.
Speed enforcement there would definitely be a great thing, but it would
have to be near-constant. Seems to me to be a ready revenue-maker.
I'll keep catching up as I can...
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Brown University Bicycle Commuting List [mailto:BIKE-TO-
> [log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Mark Dieterich
> Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2008 8:08 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [BIKE-TO-BROWN] ... and so it begins
> > Oh. And you can't ride on the sidewalk across the bridge. You have
> to walk your bike the nearly 0.5 mile across.
> Officially, RIDOT was required to post the signs instructing cyclists
> walk. According to Federal regulations, the sidewalk railings are not
> high enough to allow cycling. It was the same way on the Washington
> Bridge, but nobody ever adhered to it, including police on bikes.
> is fully aware that people will be riding over the sidewalk and I
> doubt that there will be any enforcement.
> > For some reason I guess that riding on the bridge is different than
> sharing a road with cars?
> Bike to Brown discussion list:
> Bike to Brown website:
Bike to Brown discussion list:
Bike to Brown website: