I understand and share everyone's frustration - I also want to echo Chuck Strawser's comments. I was at the same meeting. The problems of communication and execution from the City arise from the City trying to be helpful by accelerating the project to have it done in time for Bike Week, June 6-13. The Bike Fed decided this year to move Bike Week from its usual week in May to June, when the weather is better to market the appeal of bicycling. This was a late surprise (in terms of an engineering project planning timeline) to the City and they moved to be rush the project.
I do agree with India and others that at a minimum: 1) detour signage needs to be positioned where people riding bikes don't need to double back. 2) given the obvious "desire path" being created on the grass, rubber mats would help. This was bound to be a short-term headache no matter what, and we will be happy with the long-term result. Peter On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 10:59 AM, Brian Mink <[email protected]> wrote: > I'm not trying to beat up Tony. He generally does an admirable job. In > this instance the forethought, execution and result: ignoring an > alternative route on Madison's busiest bike route is incomprehensible and I > would argue inexcusable. I encourage Tony to spend and hour between 7:00 > and 8:00 AM along the construction route and watch what is happening. > Cyclists, myself included are either using John Nolen or the grass strip > just inside the curb as an alternative route. The grass will be destroyed > by the time the project has been completed. I think anyone looking at this > before the project could have easily predicted what has happened and just > made a command decision to either close a lane of John Nolen or as I > suggested yesterday, creat a temporary limestone path just to the inside of > the curb. Given the volume of pedestrian and cycle traffic a John Nolen > lane appropriation would likely have been the most prudent course of > action. City engineering staff should never forget that pedestrians and > cyclists are vulnerable users and therefore one ought to take greater care > than ignoring the issue when planning for pedestrian and cycle route > closures. > > Brian Mink > Monona > > > Brian Mink wrote: > > I agree Steve and Melanie. I think Tony's response if frankly a cop out. > Basically says there was not a perfect solution so we opted to do nothing. > I think that is frankly a lame approach to a significant problem. We live > in a world where there is seldom an ideal solution. Heaven help us if we > can implement solutions that are less than perfect. This is precisely why > folks get so frustrated with government, analysts, and policy makers. Most > of us are just fine with a less than ideal solution. We want some attempt > made to solve the problem. One could use Tony's rationalization at every > level of government as an excuse to do nothing. Which is exactly what has > been done. The excuse that the city often closes streets and os not > implement detours is fine for cars because it is no big deal to use you 2-5 > liter engine to go out of your way a few blocks. The attitude in my mind is > very cavalier and I don't think we're comparing apples to apples. > > Brian Mink > Monona, WI > > Steve Goldstein wrote: > > On 5/8/15 12:13 AM, Melanie Foxcroft wrote: > > I think this is another demonstration of why Madison doesn't receive a > "platinum" award for bicycling. This disaster is simply not acceptable. > The double standard of cars vs. bikes is too much. Hopefully city > transportation people will learn from this disaster and do better next time. > > > The "city transportation people" are the traffic engineers who, after > considering the alternatives, have been forced into this decision because > nothing else meets minimum engineering standards. We all see the logic of > Tony's deliberations and conclusions. > > The problem is that an engineering-only approach doesn't solve this > problem and that was the end of the discussion. If there were enough > political pressure, the discussion could have started out with the > *requirement* that the most heavily traveled bike route in the city > remain passable during one of the peak months of biking. If that were the > case, other alternatives might have been on the table --- for example, > staging the project to enable access or closing lanes on John Nolen. > > Many on this list will recall the activism opposing of the closing of the > Law Park path during construction of the convention center achieved partial > success. Tony's sensitivity to the issues shows some things have improved > over the past twenty years, but this disaster shows we need more effective > activism. > > > _______________________________________________ > Bikies mailing > [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
