General Concerns
We already have a long, scenic bike space, less than a mile away from the proposed greenway, running parallel to it. There is simply no need for another one, so close... especially as the goal seems to be for people OUTSIDE of the area to use it for cycling.
Why should the “convenience” of having a second bike feature (ie: for able bodied people) trump the convenience and need for people - especially elderly and disabled - to have proper access to their own homes?
The current bike lanes installed onto Dowling are very rarely used by cyclists.
Park of the proposed greenway leads right up to / travels right aside Folwell park. An EXISTING park, that is already under utilized.
At the 3/8/16 Greenway Council meeting:
“I bike on Irving all of the time, it feels safe and secure” – Kendrick Hall of Venture North (A bike shop), voting board member of the Greenway Council.
… if Irving is safe and secure as is, why should 2.8 miles of residents lose frontage access to their homes, lose 2.8 miles of parking (well, ~5.6 miles of parking spaces, as most/all of this has parking on both sides of the street. That’s a LOT of displaced cars), lose home value and sellability, for this poorly planned project?
At least 4 people biked in from this meeting, held in North Minneapolis after dark. They seem to feel safe enough in the current setup for cyclists.
