Hourglass District

[dcluley98]

I have been run over by a GMC Yukon before. Any time you ride a bike, you are taking a risk. 

Re-read my post. "dedicated lanes separated and adjacent to the road."

Emphatically, just for the added emphasis. 

[Jernigan]

All of this is why it was a mistake to include bike lanes in this demonstration project.  It adds a whole social issue that didn’t need to be there and distracted from the mission, in my opinion 

[JFW657]

2 hours ago, dcluley98 said:

I have been run over by a GMC Yukon before. Any time you ride a bike, you are taking a risk. 

Re-read my post. "dedicated lanes separated and adjacent to the road."

Emphatically, just for the added emphasis. 

And emphatically I say - Yes, I fully well understand what you said and what you meant by it.

Now, let me ask you....

1) Which & how many roads are we talking about? A few select ones or all of them?

2) How much MONEY will it cost and who will pay for it?

3) How long would it take to accomplish and how badly would it disrupt traffic during construction?

Consider for a moment the amount of work and money involved in tearing up existing curbs and sidewalks all across Orange and Seminole Counties, paving the new bike lanes, then building/pouring new concrete curbs and sidewalks a couple of feet over. Likely even moving utility poles in many instances.

Then there's the question of instances where moving the new curbs and sidewalks out a couple of feet might encroach on private property. How would that be resolved?

Or.... do you suggest simply taking new bike lane space from existing automobile lanes and thus, narrowing them? If so, how would that affect such things as traffic flow and accident rates? 

To me, the latter option is totally unacceptable. The former option would likely be unacceptable to almost everyone else. 

And I haven't even addressed the question of why the vast majority of tax paying commuters should have to foot the bill for something they'll likely never use and endure all of that inconvenience, simply to benefit such a small fraction of the population.

Please understand, I'm not trying to come off as argumentative or anti-bicycle here, but there are a lot of practical problems that would be created by doing what you suggest and which would need to be addressed.

1 hour ago, Jernigan said:

All of this is why it was a mistake to include bike lanes in this demonstration project.  It adds a whole social issue that didn’t need to be there and distracted from the mission, in my opinion 

Just out of curiosity and not to sound like I'm challenging your comment, what was the mission?

If it wasn't to create bicycle lanes, what was the point?

[Jernigan]

As I understand it, it was to study the traffic impacts caused by reducing the 2 blocks to 2 lanes.   30 days was thought to be long enough for people to change their routes if possible and give a good result on the impact to Curry Ford and surrounding side streets.    A “just do it” approach vs millions spend on consultants and models.

[codypet]

2 hours ago, JFW657 said:

Just out of curiosity and not to sound like I'm challenging your comment, what was the mission?

If it wasn't to create bicycle lanes, what was the point?

It wasn't JUST to create bicycle lanes was my understanding.  It was to minimize mid block crossings and to force traffic to drive the speed limit as well.

[JFW657]

Something else I meant to say in my above post but forgot, I am 100% behind any requirement to add dedicated bicycle lanes on all NEW roads. Also, in any case where old, existing roads are being widened out of necessity with new curbs and sidewalks as part of the project anyway, I am 100% behind any requirement to add dedicated bicycle lanes there as well. 

I just can't get behind narrowing vehicular traffic lanes or tearing up perfectly good sidewalks and curbs for that particular purpose.

But the of course, what I support and don't support matters to nobody but myself. 

[Jernigan]

JFW, I’m curious when you say you aren’t for narrowing vehicular lanes do you mean reducing lanes (ie from 4 to 2) or literally narrowing the width of the lanes?

 

[JFW657]

1 hour ago, Jernigan said:

JFW, I’m curious when you say you aren’t for narrowing vehicular lanes do you mean reducing lanes (ie from 4 to 2) or literally narrowing the width of the lanes?

Well, I'm certain that state highway building codes require a minimum width per lane, so it would mean reducing the number of lanes from 4 to 2 as they did with the Curry Ford road diet.

On a road like Edgewater Dr through their little downtown area, it's a fine idea. But I think roads like Curry Ford just handle too much traffic to be bottle necked. 

[AmIReal]

The width of the lane is based on the speed limit. If you lower the speed you can reduce the width.

[JFW657]

52 minutes ago, AmIReal said:

The width of the lane is based on the speed limit. If you lower the speed you can reduce the width.

To a certain extent. Obviously, you can't reduce lane width to less than the width of the largest vehicle that uses public roadways. But even doing that, if it requires reducing the speed limit to a crawl, would not be acceptable to the vast majority of commuters. 

Anything that would make it even more difficult for busy, working people trying to take care of their daily affairs would be soundly rejected.

And for good reason.

[codypet]

10.5' is about as narrow as you can go.  12' is standard interstate width.   The transportation person I talked to said Curry Ford has 11' - 11' - 17' - 11' - 11'.  If you narrowed the lanes as much as acceptable for AASHTO, you still wouldn't have enough width in the existing road for a AASHTO recommended bike lane.  I was wondering if they could get away with doing away with the center turn lane and have the road like Robinson with bike lanes.  5' (bike) - 3.5' (buffer) - 11' - 11' - 11' - 11' - 3.5' (buffer) - 5' (bike)

[Jernigan]

What’s the speed limit on Robinson where the lanes are super narrow near Howard?   

No reason these 2 blocks couldn’t be signed as 30.

 

[JFW657]

1 hour ago, codypet said:

10.5' is about as narrow as you can go.  12' is standard interstate width.   The transportation person I talked to said Curry Ford has 11' - 11' - 17' - 11' - 11'.  If you narrowed the lanes as much as acceptable for AASHTO, you still wouldn't have enough width in the existing road for a AASHTO recommended bike lane.  I was wondering if they could get away with doing away with the center turn lane and have the road like Robinson with bike lanes.  5' (bike) - 3.5' (buffer) - 11' - 11' - 11' - 11' - 3.5' (buffer) - 5' (bike)

I was wondering the same thing, but with all those businesses and shopping plazas along both sides of the road, it seems like it wouldn't be feasible. 

Plus,  what would we do about turn lanes at intersection traffic lights?

[sunshine]

I think the easier thing to do now is to plant trees and landscaping both side of the road to calm traffic. Eventually create a median with landscape like the Hiawasee section in Metrowest. I mean actual trees and not palm trees or Crepe Mytryl.

[codypet]

You could make the bike lane disappear approaching the intersection, forcing the bike into the lane like Fern Creek @ Colonial or Delaney @ Kaley or you don't put in the turn lanes like Robinson @ Fern Creek.  Having those turning movements would likely force motorists to wait to turn and hopefully everyone would slow down.  You do have a point about people turning left out of the driveways though.

[sunshine]

Before anything is done, can we just get rid of the check cashing, pawn store, smoke shop and questionable gas stations first?

And supposdly, ABC was going to close their door but not anymore.

[HankStrong]

We are you hating on ABC? 

[spenser1058]

12 minutes ago, HankStrong said:

We are you hating on ABC? 

ABC is one of our most successful local businesses. Let's hear it for the Holloways and Bailes' !

Edited May 7, 2018 by spenser1058

[AmIReal]

I know several of us dissed Peppino's "Organic" Kitchen at Bumby and Curry Ford... well, looks like they are closed. Rumor is F&D Kitchen of Lake Mary is taking the space, but I have not been able to confirm that.

[Jernigan]

I’m starting to get skeptical over the whole National Real Estate  group........

[AmIReal]

1 hour ago, Jernigan said:

I’m starting to get skeptical over the whole National Real Estate  group........

I really don't know much about them, but I noted when Peppino's got dinged by the health department one of the issues was they were using plates and silverware.... Why is that an issue. Well, because the property is on septic and did not have the capacity to wash dishes and by code could only use disposable. To your point, yes I agree that may be an issue with the "developer" of the project.

[Jernigan]

Supposedly Peppinos owner sold it and it will be reopening...

My skepticism is with the overall project.  What’s new with the full service gas station?  How’s that working out for them?   And with all the bad reviews for Peppinos, if they are your only tentant in a master plan you are trying to curate, you intervene at some point.    Oh and their promo videos are like their kids or teenagers they hire.

Just a weird vibe.   I’m probably wrong.

[AmIReal]

Yeah, I saw it listed on MLS. I will say NRE seems to be working on their project daily, just slowly. They seem to have bitten off a lot at one time. I wish they would finish Robinson/ Bumby and I'm not sure what is holding up the Foxtail in the hourglass

[popsiclebrandon]

The Italian place they are opening next to their HQ in the Milk District was getting equipment loaded in the other day. Construction didn't look close to finished though so guessing at least a few more weeks.

[Mark Baratelli]

On 5/17/2018 at 7:37 PM, AmIReal said:

I really don't know much about them, but I noted when Peppino's got dinged by the health department one of the issues was they were using plates and silverware.... Why is that an issue. Well, because the property is on septic and did not have the capacity to wash dishes and by code could only use disposable. To your point, yes I agree that may be an issue with the "developer" of the project.

I did a story about this inspection in March and wow Just wow!!! 

The restaurant is only licensed to use disposable cutlery and plates for its guests: they were caught using real dishes and silverware at both inspections. This is related to the restaurant being connected to a septic system. The manager told us they are now using disposable cutlery and plates.

The restaurant did not have a copy of the previous inspection report as required and the required restaurant license was not displayed.

It was found to have 62 seats inside and out when it was only licensed for 27. WTF!?? This was uncovered during its February 14th health inspection. When the inspectors returned  February 27th, it still had more seats than it was licensed for. I spoke with the manager/owner on the phone back then who stated the extra 35 seats were outside on the porch for guests to sit in while they were waiting for an inside table. He also said there were never over 60 seats.

He stated before he moved his restaurant into the space, he was to have over 80 seats. Due to the restaurant being on a septic system and not city sewer, the number of allowed seats was reduced to 27.

The manager said there was a miscommunication between the "local" health department and the state health department. He said he had a verbal agreement with the local health department that if he flushed the septic tank once a week they could have more than the 27 seats allowed.

The restaurant could not show proof of state-required employee training for any employees and the Manager on duty could not show proof of State Food Handling Service Manager certification during both inspections. The owner told us he is the only Manager of the restaurant and while the inspections were happening he was not present. He also said only one employee with employee training must be present and that not all employees have to be trained.