What about other traffic?


To the Editor:

As a relative newcomer to the Apponaug area, I read with interest the Beacon’s front page piece (July 30), by John Howell, about planned traffic changes and the accompanying editorial. I must admit I was largely unaware of the details of the long history of this issue, but I am hardly surprised.

Your editorial states that the new plan will make the village “pedestrian friendly.” Certainly the details of that friendliness are hidden. Will there be pedestrian bridges? Tunnels?

Apponaug village is a worthy destination, with its shops, City Hall, museum, library, and post office. For me, right now, a walk into the village from a short distance up Greenwich Avenue is quite an adventure, especially during high-traffic hours. For my father, who is 91, it is quite impossible, and he has given up that battle. The one safe route requires the crossing light, soon to disappear. Where is the pedestrian friendliness for residents who want to walk into the village?

On a similar note, I am concerned about bicycle safety in the new configuration. I know from long experience that round-a-bouts are very difficult for bikes. I hope bike lanes will be clearly marked by builders, and acknowledged by drivers.

I welcome the new configuration for auto traffic, but I would hope to see some acknowledgement of other types of traffic – types that we should be eager to promote for many reasons.

Warwick has much to do in these areas of pedestrian and bicycle traffic. An example: It is a risky act for me to take my bike onto Greenwich Ave. It seems to me that this road could easily be two lanes, with a center turning lane and two welcoming bike lanes.

I am certainly not a traffic engineer. But I am a walker and a biker, and, as such, am not all that comfortable here.

Michael McNamara



No comments on this story | Please log in to comment by clicking here
Please log in or register to add your comment