But:
Joe is right.
The city can't afford *not* to be innovative with transportation plans, E. Wash notwithstanding. As it stands, the E. Wash plan is as retrograde as it gets. It is the kind of plan that caters to suburbanites, the very people who opt-out of Madison's tax base, rather than the people who live, work and keep the faith in the city by paying into its tax base.
$1,000,000 is chump change compared to the destruction this plan will do to the livability and tax base of our neighborhoods.
Everyone, I'd suggest calling your alder....Yes, even the supposed "good" or "progressive" ones on the isthmus, cuz even they are more scared by a more progressive vision of E. Washington Ave than even some of the ahem, moderates.
-Mike Barrett
Joe,
It is not just a delay of funding, nor worry about problems we will never have. Most likely $1 million would have to be reimbursed to the WISDOT for the design study already completed and another $1 million spent to do another design that may not fit in the width of the existing right-of-way. This is money the city really doesn't have right now considering that basic services may well be cut in the next few years.
Is it really true that we can't have a grand entrance to > Madison, a healthier neighborhood, and transportation
sense because we are unwilling to wait for another round > of funding? This seems like too much worry and
we all know what worry is. Worry is the price you pay
for problems you may never have.
It might be argued that we can just reapply and wait for another round of funding in the future. However, there is no guarantee of this because as I said, funding is competitive. Also, more is being done than just reconstructing the street in segment one. The sanitary sewer is being replaced as well. This cannot wait until new funding is obtained. Thus, you incur the cost and disruption to the neighborhoods of ripping up the street twice.
It is also important to remember that the mayors plan is just a concept; there are no detailed plans. That is why a new design at City expense would be required. In addition to seeing if such a design could be made to fit in the right-of-way, there are important operational issues such as how the intersections would function with this design.
Bulb outs are often good for pedestrians and bad for cyclists.
The bulb outs would extend into the parking lane, not the bike lane.
Bike lanes are not needed if the slow lane is wide enough.
While we might like bike lanes because they visibly encourage bicycle traffic, we should not forget that the measurable safety benefit is negligible at best.
The mayor was contemplating eliminating the bike lanes to decrease the overall width of his proposal so there would not be an extra wide slow lane if the bike lanes were eliminated.
Finally, if this design concept cannot be implemented for East Washington Avenue, it could still be brought back for other arterials in the city such as University Avenue. I think we will see this plan again.
Mark Shahan
_______________________________________________ Bikies mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.danenet.org/mailman/listinfo/bikies
_______________________________________________ Bikies mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.danenet.org/mailman/listinfo/bikies
