Ø  Oh, and one more place WisDOT could cut a few dollars would be the needless 
expansion of I-39/90 from Madison to the Illinois stateline, or as I like to 
call it, the Weekend Reliever. With family in Chicago and occasional Megabus 
trips for business into the Loop, I can tell you the only time that section of 
road is crowded is northbound on Friday afternoon and southbound on Sunday 
afternoon during the summer. What a waste of money!

 

Indeed – I think the Janesville Gazatte actually did a piece on WISDOTs 
overprojections and verified that there are parts of I39/90 that have lower 
traffic levels today than it did 10 years ago:

 

http://www.gazettextra.com/20141004/group_traffic_volume_doesnt_justify_interstate_9039_expansion

 

 

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Robbie 
Webber
Sent: Thursday, February 05, 2015 4:09 PM
To: Matthew Logan
Cc: Mike Neuman; Bikies
Subject: Re: [Bikies] Governor cuts bike funding $7M

 

Matt -

 

I note that the Cap Time 
<http://host.madison.com/ct/news/local/state-debate/state-debate-scott-walker-budget-gets-rapped-praised/article_178b4520-ad41-11e4-a118-f3e647a91979.html>
 s linked to your blog post in their roundup of reactions to the Gov's budget. 
Also, Streetsblog 
<http://streetsblog.net/2015/02/05/scott-walker-wants-to-eliminate-complete-streets-in-wisconsin/>
  did a little piece that linked to your blog. Nicely done.

 

Dave Cieslewicz told me that he was interviewed on Wisconsin Public Radio. I've 
been at work, so haven't heard it. Bike Fed put out an action alert on the hits 
to bike funding in the budget:

http://wisconsinbikefed.org/2015/02/04/governors-budget-hits-biking/

 

 

Oh, and one more place WisDOT could cut a few dollars would be the needless 
expansion of I-39/90 from Madison to the Illinois stateline, or as I like to 
call it, the Weekend Reliever. With family in Chicago and occasional Megabus 
trips for business into the Loop, I can tell you the only time that section of 
road is crowded is northbound on Friday afternoon and southbound on Sunday 
afternoon during the summer. What a waste of money!




Robbie Webber
Transportation Policy Analyst
608-263-9984 (o)

608-225-0002 (c)

[email protected]

All opinions expressed are my own and do not necessarily reflect those of my 
employer or any other group with which I am affiliated.

 

On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 2:42 PM, Matthew Logan <[email protected]> wrote:

My interactions with the Zoo Interchange Staff suggests a savings of $200 
million could be realized by dropping the extra lanes that the City of 
Milwaukee didn’t want added.

My research into WISDOT traffic projection methodology revealed that WISDOT 
staff do not consider accurate estimates to be a priority – they are much more 
concerned about being consistent with Federal guidelines and industry 
standards.  However, at the end of January, AASHTO put out a report of trends 
that in part suggests:

http://www.aashtojournal.org/Pages/NewsReleaseDetail.aspx?NewsReleaseID=1437

The final  <http://traveltrends.transportation.org/Pages/default.aspx#table> 
brief points to slowing growth in commuting due to the aging of the American 
worker and declines in the number of younger people entering the workforce.  
U.S. Census Bureau projections suggest the population in the working age group 
18–64 will see a sharp decline over the next 20 years—approximately 6 million 
new potential workers from 2015 to 2030, in sharp contrast to 26 million during 
the period 2000 to 2012.

In addition to age demographics, the authors point to potential impacts of 
technology and land use decisions that are likely to affect future commuting 
trends. For instance, recent growth of wireless devices allows transit riders 
to work or communicate while on buses or subways, and fast-developing 
technology for autonomous cars and connected vehicles could soon let roadway 
commuters tend to other tasks while their cars drive themselves. "Regardless of 
how these phenomena play out, the boom in commuting growth is behind us, at 
least at the national level," the brief claims.

In spite of some rather significant changes in demographics, the economy, 
technology, and the culture and values of residents, a long-term study of 
available transportation data shows that commuting behaviors have changed 
modestly over the past decade.

 

###

 

This new data suggests there may be room to revise the 50-year traffic 
projections used to justify the expansions.

Additionally, the most recent studies on highway return on investment suggest 
continued declines and we may be at the point where it is more productive to 
leave the money in the hands of taxpayers rather than turn it into more 
concrete:

http://research.upjohn.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1118 
<http://research.upjohn.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1118&context=reports> 
&context=reports

 

Mamuneas addresses the question of the contribution of highways to the national

economy by estimating the value placed on highways by consumers and producers. 
He

finds that from 1949 through 2005, the net rate of return of highways averages 
28.7

percent. He compares this rate with the return on private capital (as reflected 
in interest

rate on the 10-year U.S. Treasury security) averaged over the same time period. 
Finding

that the net rate of return on highways (28.7 percent) is higher than the 
average long-term

interest rate (6.2 percent), he concludes that highways make a contribution to 
the

economy and the country has been underinvested in highway capital stock until 
recently

when the net rate of return fell below the interest rate.

###

 

While there is a growing body of evidence that the value of highways is 
decreasing, few legislators seem aware of the trends.  It is my hope that 
transportation advocates can pick up on this message and spread the word!

From: Mike Neuman [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 2015 10:28 PM
To: Matthew Logan
Cc: Bikies
Subject: Re: [Bikies] Governor cuts bike funding $7M

 

Anyone know how many new road expansions are planned for this or how many miles 
of "new" roads are in the works? Must be a lot of unnecessary highway 
expansions to save that much by not accommodating non-motorized bicycling. No 
wonder they are asking for $1.3 billion in the budget. I like my plan much 
better. It doesn't result in the planet (and all things on it) turning into 
toast. www.allthingsenvironmental.com

 

Mike

 

On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 8:53 AM, Matthew Logan <[email protected]> wrote:

The relevant statute seems to be SS 84.01(35) and Trans 75.02 (which I believe 
is referred to as “complete streets”):

 

http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/projects/state/docs/complete-streets-presentation.pdf

 

 

http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/projects/state/docs/complete-streets-rules.pdf

 

Trans 75.02 When bikeways and sidewalks are required. 

 

(1) Except as provided in this chapter, the authority shall include bikeways 
and sidewalks in all new highway construction and reconstruction projects 
funded in whole or in part from state funds or federal funds appropriated under 
s. 20.395 or 20.866, Stats. 

 

(2) In this chapter, sidewalks and bikeways shall be considered separately. If 
sidewalks and bikeways cannot both be accommodated, consideration shall be 
given to sidewalks before adding bikeways. 

 

(3) Paths can be used to supplement on−road bicycle accommodations. In 
exceptional situations a path may substitute for on− road bicycle 
accommodations if the use is consistent with the department’s Bicycle Facility 
Design Handbook and the department’s Facilities Development Manual and the 
substitution is approved in writing by the secretary’s designee who has 
knowledge of the purpose and design of bicycle and pedestrian accommodations. A 
path may be considered along a controlled access highway, as defined in s. 
990.01 (5r), Stats., having a speed limit of 45 miles per hour or higher

 

(4) The department shall refuse to provide any state funds or federal funds 
appropriated under s. 20.395 or 20.866, Stats., for any highway construction or 
reconstruction project that does not include bikeways and sidewalks required 
under s. 84.01 (35), Stats., and not excepted by this chapter. If an authority 
determines to omit any bikeway or sidewalk under this chapter, the department 
may request from the authority a written justification for the omission and 
shall deny state funds or federal funds appropriated under s. 20.395 or 20.866, 
Stats., for the project if the department determines the omission is not 
justified under this chapter. 

 

(5) Notwithstanding sub. (1), bikeways and sidewalks are not required to be 
included in any highway construction or reconstruction project that is any of 
the following: 

(a) Has a program level scoping document consistent with life cycle 11 of the 
department’s Facilities Development Manual or, for projects undertaken by a 
local unit of government, a similar document as determined by the department, 
in place as of January 1, 2011.

(b) Let for bid that is first advertised before January 1, 2011, or for 
projects for which no bid is advertised or undertaken under a contract signed 
before January 1, 2011. 

(c) Described in a final environmental impact statement that is approved before 
January 1, 2011. 

(d) Documented in an environmental report, as defined in s. Trans 400.04 (10), 
completed before January 1, 2011, that fit the criteria or conditions for 
approval as a categorical exclusion in 23 CFR 771.117, April 1, 2000. (e) The 
subject of a finding of no significant impact made under ch. Trans 400 before 
January 1, 2011.

[ Although Trans 75.04,05, 06, and 07 create exceptions to this requirement for 
circumstances including disproportionate cost, physical constraints, lack of 
need in semi-urban districts, or community unwillingness to maintain. ]

 

 

From: Bikies [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Matthew 
Logan
Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 2015 8:12 AM
To: Bikies
Subject: [Bikies] Governor cuts bike funding $7M

 

“Finally, the Governor recommends several statutory changes including repealing 
the requirement that

the department must construct bicycle and pedestrian facilities on new highway 
construction.

Projected savings from this action are $7,400,000 over the biennium”

http://www.doa.state.wi.us/Documents/DEBF/Budget/Biennial%20Budget/2015-17%20Executive%20Budget/2015-17_Executive_Budget.pdf

page 553.


_______________________________________________
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

 

_______________________________________________
Bikies mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org

Reply via email to