08-13-2018, 08:48 PM
(This post was last modified: 08-13-2018, 08:50 PM by danbrotherston.)
(08-13-2018, 08:21 PM)ijmorlan Wrote:(08-13-2018, 06:51 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: I would argue that keeping a stub open defeats the point of a greenway to the park.
As for Halls Lane, at this point, it's practically a design detail, there are trade offs, closing it is better for the greenway, keeping it open is possibly better for drivers.
Not at all. The stub in question would extend from Hall’s Lane about 12m (literally, no exaggeration; I measured it on Google Maps) north towards (but not reaching) King St. The only traffic on it would be traffic directly to those two small parking lots, which have a total of no more than 20 parking spaces between them. So the traffic levels would be insignificant and would not noticeably detract from the pedestrian experience. Future redevelopment of the properties in question could be required to move their vehicular access directly to Hall’s Lane, eliminating even that small impact.
I think closing Hall’s Lane entirely is probably not workable due to the number of properties relying on it for access. But it is a single lane running in one direction with a low level of traffic so I don’t see it as a problem to have it cross the greenway.
Sorry, I should clarify, I wasn't suggesting closing Hall's Lane entirely, just closing it at Gaukel, and making it two, dead end, two way streets, I agree closing it entirely isn't feasible, it's an important access, but it doesn't necessarily have to be continuous. Whether or not it's worth the effort is a reasonable question, it's very low traffic, but it is still a negative IMO. It would be worth evaluating both options.
As for a 12 meter stub, are you referring to the parking lots right at Halls Lane? I'm not sure why it would be required, those parking lots directly abut Halls Lane, with not even so much as a curb separating them. You could reconfigure them to access Halls lane with a hack saw and a can of paint.
I'd say if those properties were being redeveloped, the parking could be removed entirely in favour of a larger park, but that's another can of worms.