Sorta confused Chuck...lack of Destinations? Do you know that over 90% of our
area's private sector jobs are located outside of the Isthmus? Personally, I
find Middleton's cycling safety setup fantastic...Verona's not bad too...and
perhaps Riley Tavern for Pancakes is THE best destination? (joking...but a
little centralcitycentric aren't we?) Verona btw, had population growth larger
than Madison between 2000-2010.....there's a little destination called Epic...
do I hate sprawl? yes I do, but city anti sprawl "leaders" didn't really affect
much progress and developing job destinations in our center...lots of misses.
Do you know where Sony is now?
________________________________
From: "STRAWSER, Charles" <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2012 1:12 PM
Subject: Re: [Bikies] How Green Is My Isthmus
Arthur said:
“the Isthmus and near east/west sides basically score 100. I think this is
what Scott was referring to by his subject line How Green is My Isthmus – very
green on the map. The edges of the city not so well. I think a lot of this
difference is accounted for by a lack of destinations on the edges of the city,
click on the destination button below the map.”
As Robbie pointed out in the comments, clicking on “bike commuters” gives you a
different map:
http://www.walkscore.com/bike/WI/Madison
And the map of bike commuters is essentially bounded by the beltline, Stoughton
Rd, the bike unfriendly expanse of South Park St/Fish Hatch south of Lake
Wingra, and the grade separated confluence of Highway 30 and East Washington
Ave.
So it’s not just the relative lack of destinations on the edges, or the lower
density of residents there (although both of those play a part, see, e.g.
Midvale Blvd the western boundary of the green on the bike commuters map, which
isn’t so much bike unfriendly as it is lacking in residents and/or
destinations).
A huge factor in what makes the Isthmus and near east and west green, and the
rest red, is the giant, often nearly impervious barriers to cycling and walking
that we’ve built to accommodate cars at the expense of all other road users.
Now it’s time to build preferentially build accommodations for everyone else,
even if that comes at the expense of a bit of delay for the user group we’ve
preferentially accommodated for most of the last century. We can certainly
revisit the issue in another 80 years or so, if necessary.
chuck
_______________________________________________
Bikies mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org
_______________________________________________
Bikies mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org
