-
A modest proposal regarding the Century Boulevard sidewalk
A modest proposal regarding the Century Boulevard sidewalk
At the February
Delegates’ Meeting, a suggestion was made regarding the two gaps in
the chain link security fence separating the Century Village
Boulevard from the (now defunct) Turtle Bay Golf Course: CV itself
should erect a (temporary) barrrier or fence across the gaps.
Unfortunately, there
is no room. The golf course fence is, at most, four inches from the
southern edge of the sidewalk. In places, the fence is even closer,
sometimes bulging over the sidewalk. At the western end of the
eastern gap, a palm tree rubs against the sidewalk. Any construction
would involve time-consuming dealing with the property lines of the
golf course – and with its owner.
The sidewalk itself
needs to be replaced: it is far too narrow, not up to present code,
barely able to handle passing pedestrians, much less walkers,
wheelchairs, and bicyclists. From the guardhouse west to North Drive,
the sidewalk twists around golf course trees, shrubs, and plants that
are continually pushing into, over, and under the fence.
Consider this
proposal: Before, during, or after reconfiguring the southside
sidewalk, build a sidewalk on the north side.
1. The sidewalk
would have to go only to just east of the guardhouse. There,
pedestrians could pass through a security gate, and walk on Ascot
Road to the North Drive. As with the Okeechobee Blvd. entrance, the
Haverhill entrance would have two pedestrian gates.
2. Many pedestrians
from the northern quadrant already walk up Ascot, and cross over Century Blvd. at the bus stop. A sidewalk on the northern side would
allow them to walk up to Haverhill, and avoid crossing the boulevard.
3. The south side
has six palm trees and three light poles which would have to be
dealt with if the sidewalk were widened. The wide grass swath on the
north side has no obstructions: The two FPL power poles and the
street lights are set against the Ascot fence, out of the way, behind
the shrubbery.
4. The rather
dangerous right hand turn onto Haverhill (drivers usually ignore the
three “No Turn on Red” warnings) would see far less traffic.
(Pedestrian push button traffic light controls and signals are
already installed on the northern crosswalk across Haverhill, but the
right turn lane from Haverhill onto the boulevard would would require
additional warning signage.)
5. Perhaps most
important: Century Village owns all the land on the north side. Guess
with whom we would not have to deal.
Sincerely,
Richard Handelsman
Plymouth V
This seems so well researched. Handlesman should be on the Bid Committee if he isn't already, or whatever is the name for the committee chaired by Dom Guarnagia that considers our infrastructure. I go in and out of the Haverhill gate every day and have never noticed ten percent of what Handelsman has made note of. I have noticed one thing, though: Exiting motorists still do not stop for the TWO "No Right on Red" signs. Two in row the other day as I waited to go left, and with one it was a rather close call as cars southbound on Haverhill went really zipping by. They do fly.
ReplyDeleteIt simply amazes me how some drivers ignore the no turn on red signs. I see this happen often and one incident the driver ignoring the sign was almost hit. I am originally from Brooklyn, New York and we are not allowed to turn on any red light. It took me a long time getting used to turning on red in Florida.
ReplyDelete