(This first "bite" is the longest ...) If one were to review the role of civil engineer, we could agree that improving the status of humankind is the ethical imperative of the profession. Persons are improved not when their automobile moves through a 2.2 mile stretch of highway faster, but rather when they breathe and enjoy a happy and natural life.
Who, after all, is this freeway "improvement" for? It is for people (that is to say, individual persons). People who naturally exist, breathe, converse, learn and grow within the social fabric and environment we call "life". >From our origins we walked (or otherwise used muscles), then harnessed animals to use their muscles, then ultimately replaced the animals with devices that burned fossil fuels for transport and other work. We are therefore historically and evolutionarily most concerned about our bodies (muscles) and immediate surroundings. These are the true values of people and where we draw satisfaction in life. As politicians, planners, engineers and students, the basis for our service to humankind is then to enable the most basic of human needs: to exist and breathe. The priority of the Verona Road freeway project therefore needs to keep this in mind: the project will ultimately provide support to meet needs and wants of individual people, but most essentially at a scale perceived from the perspective of a human person's respiration and pace. This is the true natural order of things. The natural order when translated to a transportation project is as follows: 1. Safety 2. Social and Environmental Factors 3. Cost 4. Traffic Volume 5. Traffic Speed It is perplexing that the SDEIS/DEIS concludes something different, prioritizing the project this way: 1. Traffic Speed 2. Traffic Volume 3. Safety 4. Social and Environmental Factors 5. Cost So in other words, the SDEIS/DEIS has first assumed that all traffic must travel at speed for a projected volume. Once those parameters are set, then it has been a matter of weighing designs that meet the speed and volume requirements, modifying slightly to mitigate for safety with social and environmental concerns (given a small weight) and, finally, to attempt to reduce overall cost (which it turns out is ridiculously expensive). If the project were to be designed with natural human needs as priority, then safety, social and environmental factors and cost would come before speed and volume. This long introduction brings me to my first comment about the SDEIS/DEIS: It is that a project that is upside-down and backwards in its priorities and sensibilities. Instead, if the Wisconsin Department of Transportation delivered what society asked, it would build our transportation systems to be safe and kind to the social and natural fabric we call life. Only then would engineers consider what could be done, given a budget, to handle a higher volume of motor vehicles at greater speeds. --- "Comments on the SDEIS are encouraged from all members of the public and are due by Friday, December 17, 2010." http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/projects/d1/verona/index.htm These are comments on the supplemental and draft environmental impact statement (SDEIS/DEIS) reports for the Dane County US 18/151 (Verona Road) corridor. I've edited these down to bite size quick reads... --- _______________________________________________ Bikies mailing list [email protected] http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org
