To The Transport 2020 Commission:
The following are my comments on what I saw at last night's
informational session at the Atwood Community Center:
*WHERE IS THE CONTEXT?
*WHERE IS THE INTEGRATION OF USES & MODES?
And now, I'll elaborate on these two big points:
*Where is the integration with bus transit? Once again, we have a
single-minded, single-issue, overly focused, technocratic tunnel
"vision" for just one mode. Again, where is the inter-modal context?
*Think corridor!!! And not just with rail. The entire bus system
needs to be put on main corridors for more direct routes. The current
system is so gummed up with so many windy detours that it is time
prohibitive for most people. If the bus system doesn't work, then
neither will the rail transit system.
*The on-street segment downtown is an exercise in absurdity. Keep the
train on the existing rail corridor, rather than gumming it up on the
narrow streets downtown. Save that job for the trolley.
*Where is the integration with urban land uses? Some of the station
examples are scary & sterile. We need stations that are fully
integrated into the urban fabric. The existing bus transfer points
are exactly what we *don't* want:
-they provide no integrative function for land uses or transportation modes;
-they are not pedestrian- or bike-friendly;
-they are institutional wastelands;
-they sit in no-man's lands that are so alienating that they breed
crime and fear.
Instead of the typical American planner/engineer's propensity to
create single-use structures, all stations should *integrate* with
other URBAN FUNCTIONS such as retail, office, restaurants,
apartments, etc. Rail must *be* an urban function, integrated with
other urban functions, not a stand-alone entity.
The upshot: Engineers and transit technocrats should have no part in
designing the stations. The design should be the responsibility of
architects, landscape architects, planners, urban geographers and
others who have a proven track record of creating places for people.
That is to say,
INTEGRATE, INTEGRATE, INTEGRATE!!!!!!!!!!
*NO GOERKE'S CORNERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Park & Rides suck. They are just
sprawl inducers, reducing suburbanite guilt while doing nothing for
our regional air and water quality. Regarding:
-Air: most of the air pollution from a motor vehicle occurs in the
first 30 seconds of ignition--i.e., a P&R does not prevent a car from
being used in the first place. Furthermore, cars sitting on a baking
lot emit vast amounts of poisonous, volatile compounds as fuel in
fuel lines evaporates (on some days that can account for up to 20% of
the filth that brings us "non-attainment," a.k.a. dirty air, days).
Thus, providing Park & rides does little to bring down overall air
pollution.
-Water: the enormous parking lots cap off groundwater re-charge
sources and further pollute surface waters with filthy, oily,
particulate-laden run-off.
In response, the planners suggested structured parking as an antidote
to acres of asphalt. But we know structured parking is outrageously
expensive. And the costs, the planner acknowledged, would come out of
the hide of transit service itself. This is a patently self-defeating
measure for any transit system. The planner then argued that without
the parking, there wouldn't be enough people to ride. Tough. I guess
that just means:
-We will have to begin to plan dense, mixed-use, transit-supporting
development. After all, in our newly adopted Comprehensive Plan, TOD
is called for in all new development surrounding stations. This now
has the force of law; it was adopted as an ordinance. A huge parking
lot is *NOT* transit-oriented development,
OR
-Skip the proposed park & ride lot station altogether and just keep
going out to Cannery Square in--*gasp*--Sun Prairie. The developer of
lands along that line actually built to the densities and mixes of
uses to welcome rail transit. How about rewarding a developer (and
residents who bought into the development) who has done the right
thing in advance, rather than kowtowing to the people who are
doing--and continue to do--exactly the wrong thing by moving to
unsustainable places out in sprawl-land?
*Lying with Maps: The planners let slip that several of the mapped
stops will not be built. And the ones that won't get built are in the
highest density (i.e., the most transit-oriented places). In a
separate conversation, a member of the commission explained that bus
service in the area that the rail runs will be cut back so as to not
to duplicate service. Total these two separate conversations up, and
we have a confirmation of suspicions held by many transit advocates
that the ultimate result of the rail system will be a diminution of
overall transit service (bus & rail) to the central city & close-in
neighborhoods. As a geographer, I protest these highly deceptive
cartographic representations. As a transit advocate, I protest any
service cuts to the neighborhoods that are currently using transit in
large numbers.
A couple of general points:
I found the information at this meeting to be entirely redundant of
countless other informational sessions over the past 16 years I've
lived here. Nothing has changed, and obviously no progress has been
made to bring commuter rail here. It seems an interesting coincidence
that no progress is being made and the rail plan is being overseen by
one of the country's largest highway engineering firms. It is even
more interesting that this very same firm can bring a highway from
concept to pavement in a matter of a couple of years.
It was clear from conversations with the consultants that they are
completely unaware of the majority sentiment Madisonians & Dane
Countians have expressed over & over again through our political
process--the leaders we elect, and the plans we create and approve:
We don't want more sprawl, we want a real city! Instead, the
consultants hide behind loaded--and quite frankly,
condescending--words like "balanced approach." Then they go on to
point out examples of bad development as justification for their
plans to build yet more sprawl inducing infrastructure (namely, Park
& Ride lots). HNTB: You just don't get it. Please, stick to building
highways, in Milwaukee.
To the Transport 2020 commission, this plan utterly lacks a sense of
integration with current assets in the community, most notably,
density. Urban density is the only thing that will make rail transit
work.
Before coming to this meeting, I was very much pro-commuter rail. But
I've changed my mind. Until the car-orientated, sprawl-subsidizing
nature of the system changes, I'm against it.
Sincerely,
Michael D. Barrett
2137 Sommers Ave.
Madison, WI 53704
(608)245-1059
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
Bikies mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.danenet.org/mailman/listinfo/bikies
