Laserfiche WebLink
ATTACHMENT B <br /> <br />Eugene Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan <br />Summary of Public Comments <br /> <br />Themes: <br />The plan will work. Respondents believe the plan will help increase the convenience, safety, and <br />number of pedestrians and bicyclists. Dissenters fall into two camps: either they feel the plan doesn’t go <br />far enough or they think that public money is better spent somewhere else. <br /> <br />To reach the next level we have to try new things. Many comments focused on developing innovative <br />bicycle and pedestrian facilities. Recent installations such as the two-way buffered bike lane on Alder <br />Street are thought by many to increase the comfort and safety of bicyclists. Likewise, the use of stutter <br />flash beacons across high volume roadways is thought to increase pedestrian access and safety. While <br />bike lanes work well for many people, separated facilities will be necessary to attract the majority of <br />individuals who have safety concerns (such as families with children). <br /> <br />Change won’t happen overnight. It will take a concerted effort on behalf of public and private entities to <br />double the percentage of walking and biking trips. Developing programming, infrastructure, and culture <br />all require time. <br /> <br />There will be growing pains. Developing infrastructure that is unfamiliar to local residents will meet with <br />resistance. It will take courage and determination to educate the public and convince transportation <br />users that a new design is the correct one. Stay the course. <br /> <br />If we are serious we must commit funding. The projects detailed in the plan are numerous and will take <br />many years to implement. There is a feeling that lack of funding will negatively impact the <br />implementation schedule and that projects with significant cost (such as bridges) might be eliminated <br />outright. Cities that have achieved a high percentage of walking and bicycling trips have done so <br />because they invested in that outcome. While city staff, local agencies, the private sector, and elected <br />officials will need to be creative throughout the funding process, dedicated funding streams also need to <br />be established. <br /> <br />Summary of comments on the plan’s policies: <br />a.All performance measures need to be quantifiable. The amount and variety of data available <br /> <br />will be a limiting factor. <br />b.Policies should prioritize separation of bikes from automobiles. <br /> <br />c.There is a feeling that on-street parking will impede implementation of this plan where there is <br /> <br />inadequate street width to provide additional bike facilities if parking is left intact. <br />d.Some respondents would like to see more emphasis placed on personal safety. An example is <br /> <br />increasing lighting on shared use paths. <br />e.Implementation of the PBMP will require new and greater funding sources. <br /> <br />f.Enhancement of the pedestrian environment has been underfunded. Pedestrian policies should <br /> <br />emphasize sidewalk infill and dedicated funding streams. <br /> <br />Summary of comments about the plan’s projects: <br />a.Prioritize improvements in the campus area <br /> <br />b.There needs to be a safe, consistent route through the Lane County fairgrounds <br /> <br />