Scott, You are correct on my intention and suggestion. Robbie, clearly you have enough ammo to try again....I would suggest..and have just done in the earlier post, that you try again...you have significant allies here. Council overides Traffic planning dept all the time..and staff too on many other issues....this is no oil tanker....
Old sayings are often true..."when something doesn't work, try try again" might be the one to use here because the cause (Pedestrian Safety...hell safety for all roadway users) is paramount....thanks for your other successes but I can't say it's ok, don't do anything else. You know it's Madison...we're never satisified with the past successes of course. We always want more and better! I say this as a former supporter and former opponent. In this case..you've got allies...help make it happen. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Send Bikies mailing list submissions to [email protected] To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://www.danenet.org/mailman/listinfo/bikies or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to [EMAIL PROTECTED] You can reach the person managing the list at [EMAIL PROTECTED] When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Bikies digest..." Today's Topics: 1. interesting letter from WiDOT Sec Frank Busalacchi (Robbie Webber) 2. Re: Regional Planning: To sprawl or not to sprawl? Your voice matters! (Robbie Webber) 3. Re: interesting letter from WiDOT Sec Frank Busalacchi] (Eric Westhagen) 4. Re: Bikies Digest, Vol 47, Issue 17 (Troy Thiel) 5. Re: Re: Bikies Digest, Vol 47, Issue 17 (Robbie Webber) 6. Re: Automatic Walk Cycles (Scott Ellington) From: "Robbie Webber" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [Bikies] interesting letter from WiDOT Sec Frank Busalacchi Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2008 13:52:59 -0600 To: Bikies <[email protected]> The full letter can be seen here: http://www.madison.com/tct/opinion/letters/271616 Now, it's not all sunshine and light. He's still emphasizing roads too much, but there were some glimmers of hope as well. Most fascinating was [last sentence most crucial]: "During the last 15 years, the federal motor fuel tax that helps support our personal and economic independence has remained stagnant. A federal gas tax increase would provide the interim funding needed to bring our infrastructure into a new century until innovative new revenue streams can be fully developed. Most promising is a vehicle-miles-traveled, user-fee-based system that must clear technological and privacy hurdles." The WiDOT Secretary is suggesting a VMT tax system! Neuman, your mainstream! -- Note that I am consolidating email addresses (personal and work.) Except for City of Madison business and correspondence, please send all email to the address above. From: "Robbie Webber" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [Bikies] Regional Planning: To sprawl or not to sprawl? Your voice matters! CC: [email protected] Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2008 13:59:28 -0600 To: "Michael D. Barrett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> On Feb 7, 2008 12:18 AM, Michael D. Barrett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Two of the mayor's three CARPC appointees, Alds Larry Palm ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) and Zach Brandon ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) have already gone on record as opposing the smart growth measures. So email them too! Please note that Larry Palm is still on the fence. He has NOT gone on the record as supporting any particular version. In the meetings to come up with the draft criteria, he voted in favor of some of the things we want. He also voted against some of the things we want. Since that time, he's been getting heavy lobbying from the small cities and villages and development community to vote in favor of looser standards. I spoke to him last week, and he made it clear he hasn't made up his mind. Robbie -- Note that I am consolidating email addresses (personal and work.) Except for City of Madison business and correspondence, please send all email to the address above. From: Eric Westhagen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [Bikies] interesting letter from WiDOT Sec Frank Busalacchi] Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2008 14:35:05 -0600 To: BikiesSubmissions <[email protected]> Dear Robbie Webber, Your optimism reigns supreme in that you must be assuming that new taxes will support new BICYCLE INFRASTRUCTURE? Maybe you believe that if there is a big pie, the bicycle slice will enlarge? Won't the hated sprawl, interstate expansions, divided highways to nowhere gobble up all the new gas tax money? How can you assume otherwise out of hand? Accounting for infrastructure replacements such as the Minneapolis bridge will come from other "capital" funds. Eric Westhagen Robbie Webber wrote: The full letter can be seen here: http://www.madison.com/tct/opinion/letters/271616 Now, it's not all sunshine and light. He's still emphasizing roads too much, but there were some glimmers of hope as well. Most fascinating was [last sentence most crucial]: "During the last 15 years, the federal motor fuel tax that helps support our personal and economic independence has remained stagnant. A federal gas tax increase would provide the interim funding needed to bring our infrastructure into a new century until innovative new revenue streams can be fully developed. Most promising is a vehicle-miles-traveled, user-fee-based system that must clear technological and privacy hurdles." The WiDOT Secretary is suggesting a VMT tax system! Neuman, your mainstream! -- Note that I am consolidating email addresses (personal and work.) Except for City of Madison business and correspondence, please send all email to the address above. --------------------------------- _______________________________________________ Bikies mailing list [email protected] http://www.danenet.org/mailman/listinfo/bikies From: Troy Thiel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [Bikies] Re: Bikies Digest, Vol 47, Issue 17 Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2008 12:48:13 -0800 (PST) To: [email protected] Hello all, Not sure if it can get on the Ped Bike Committee agenda, but it seems to me that the arguments against not having automatic walk cycles are sufficient enough to review the policy. I've never heard of auto drivers demanding that the cycles not be used...it's commonplace in everywhere I've been in the states EXCEPT "pedestrian friendly" (quotes intentional) Madison....and again, is another way that autos can see the timing of lights occurring, meaning that they know the yellow is coming soon if the walk goes to dont walk goes to blinking dont walk...its too expensive to retrofit all lights in town to the timer count down type that some of the more dangerous intersections need...AND...without the Push Button devices that have non respectful sequence issues for those who walk, there would be less operational element that can go wrong, and putting in new lights would cost less as well without those poorly performing options. And Matt's point about the car centric culture getting more props than non auto users (most of us are both) is true in this case. Robbie, you've been on the Council for 5 years now...and your on Ped Bike...how 'bout showing some leadership on this? Seems like a very winnable thing, or at least worthy of introducing as a review item. Best Regards, Troy Thiel From: "Robbie Webber" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [Bikies] Re: Bikies Digest, Vol 47, Issue 17 Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2008 15:20:37 -0600 To: [email protected] On Feb 8, 2008 2:48 PM, Troy Thiel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Not sure if it can get on the Ped Bike Committee agenda, but it seems to me that the arguments against not having automatic walk cycles are sufficient enough to review the policy. [snip] Robbie, you've been on the Council for 5 years now...and your on Ped Bike...how 'bout showing some leadership on this? Seems like a very winnable thing, or at least worthy of introducing as a review item. I have brought it up many times, and have continuing discussions with Traffic Engineering about the timing of many lights - both car oriented and bike/pedestrian oriented - on so many occasions that I lost count. We have discussed it at PBMVC many times. Traffic Engineering is not inclined to delay the cross traffic if there are are no walkers or bicyclists - who need more time to cross than a driver - if there are no walkers and bicyclists present. While we are making progress, the Bikies are correct, the driving public still gets preferential treatment over walkers and bicyclists. Until there are a majority of Madisonians demanding that walkers and bicyclists get the lights to change to aid them without pushing a button, it will remain thus. The vast majority of alders and city staff still get more bitching from drivers than people complaining about needing to push a button. At least our walk button DO work. New York disconnected them decades ago, but never removed the buttons, so people don't realize they don't do anything. Unnoticed by some, we have gotten some lights changed to improve bike/pedestrian access. That was one of my first successes, the first week I took office: getting the light to change for bicyclists on Breese Terrace at University Ave. I am also very proud about getting countdown timers are University and U Bay Dr, since that was a top request from the neighborhood my first six months in office. And those who don't commute by bike, or even some who do, may not realize that most intersections do indeed pick up bikes and change the light appropriately. There are even places where there are specially places sensors that ONLY pick up bikes. (This isn't news to many of the old-line Bikies, but might be news to others.) Let me know if you want a tour of where these are located. Can things be better? Of course! But turning around an oil tanker at sea takes a long time, and I'm not the only one controlling the steering (appropriate analogy intended.) Make sure that all the alders that AREN'T so inclined to make life easier for walkers and bicyclists get as much communication as those who are your allies. Robbie -- Note that I am consolidating email addresses (personal and work.) Except for City of Madison business and correspondence, please send all email to the address above. From: Scott Ellington <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [Bikies] Automatic Walk Cycles Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2008 15:21:57 -0600 To: bikies <[email protected]> On Feb 8, 2008, at 2:48 PM, Troy Thiel wrote: > Not sure if it can get on the Ped Bike Committee agenda, but it > seems to me that the arguments against not having automatic walk > cycles are sufficient enough to review the policy. I think Troy means by "automatic walk cycle" that the walk light comes on every cycle, whether or not a pedestrian pushes the button. The other kind automatically penalizes pedestrians for not arriving quite in time to push the button. The purpose of that button should be to cause the traffic light to change in a timely manner for pedestrians when it would not otherwise (usually at a light controlled by vehicle sensors). Every pedestrian has surely had the experience of arriving when the traffic light just after it has turned green, but the WALK light is not on. Legally, the pedestrian is supposed to push the button and wait for the next cycle. When the traffic light turns green anyway, what possible purpose can there be for the walk light NOT to come on, except to save turning motorists the unspeakable inconvenience of having to wait for a pedestrian who got to the button a little too late? Imagine the furor if it were the other way around: Walk light comes on every cycle, but green light for vehicles only on the cycle AFTER a vehicle arrives at the sensor. Yet that would actually make SENSE from the standpoint of pedestrian safety. One hardly ever hears of a motorist killed by a turning pedestrian. Scott Ellington Madison, Wisconsin USA _______________________________________________ Bikies mailing list [email protected] http://www.danenet.org/mailman/listinfo/bikies
_______________________________________________ Bikies mailing list [email protected] http://www.danenet.org/mailman/listinfo/bikies
