Thanks Chuck. -india
WeAreAllMechanics.com [email protected] Stay connected- Follow WAAM on Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/We.Are.All.Mechanics> *"How can we learn from our mistakes if we don't first acknowledge them?" * On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 10:30 AM, STRAWSER, Charles <[email protected]> wrote: > I don’t know whether my managers would agree with this or not, and I > haven’t asked. > > So these are my personal opinions, not those of my employer. But these > opinions are informed by my professional knowledge and experience. > > > > This may come as a shock to some of you, but I’m going to defend some of > the city’s decisions here (though not all). > > > > I was in the room five short weeks ago when the assistant city traffic > engineer was clearly shocked to learn from the representative of Wisconsin > Bike Fed that BTWW was going to be scheduled for June instead of May this > year. I understand why Wis Bike Fed decided to reschedule (and in full > disclosure, Bike Fed did the same thing a decade ago when I was the person > in charge of organizing Madison's BTWW, so I am just as guilty). But > radically changing the date of an annual event does play havoc with > construction projects that are scheduled months, if not a year, in advance. > I give the city full credit for scrambling to get this project done BEFORE > BTWW when they were really thrown a curve ball. If they manage to complete > this project, it clearly won't be a home run. But I don't think you could > call it a strike out either. The easiest route (no pun intended) for the > city probably would have been simply to decide to delay the whole thing for > a year. > > > > But I disagree with the city’s decision not to reallocate a lane of John > Nolen to bike traffic. I’m not blaming Tony for that. I think Madison would > be far more unfriendly to bicyclists and pedestrians if not for him and his > work. I personally benefit from his designs every day. As others have > noted, he is working with a paradigm that is not really sustainable (if it > was, we wouldn’t be constantly arguing at the federal, state, and local > levels how to pay for the maintenance of roads we can no longer afford). > > > > Certainly reallocation space on John Nolen would inconvenience motorists, > and there are many more of them than there are bicyclists. But choosing not > to inconvenience motorists for nearly the last century is one reason why > there are so many more motorists. Consider that when University Ave through > campus was rebuilt, there were months when half the capacity of the street > for pedestrians (sidewalk on one side) was eliminated, and ALL the capacity > for bicycles (both EB and WB bike lanes) was eliminated. Yet there were > still three lanes of WB traffic for cars, just as there has been for > decades (whether capacity for transit riders was reduced because buses had > to share one of three lanes of traffic filled with 50,000 cars per day is > debatable). > > 50,000 cars per day on University Ave is a lot. But there are easily > 50,000 pedestrians per day trying to use University Ave as well. And 15,000 > bicyclists. > > So let’s see.. in very rough numbers, University Ave carries 50,000 people > in cars, 50,000 people on foot, 15,000 people on bikes, and an unknown (to > me) number of people in buses. So in very round figures, 43% of Univ Ave > users are in cars, 43% are on foot, and 13% are on bikes (again > disregarding transit, cause, you know, that’s not really transportation > anyway). > > Yet when we had to decide how to allocate scarce space on the street, we > decided to reduce the capacity of the road for people on foot by 50%,reduce > the capacity of the road for people on bikes by 100%, and reduce the > capacity of the road for people in cars by, er, well actually we decided > not to reduce the capacity of the road for people in cars at all, even > though they represent less than half of the road’s users. > > > > Don’t even get me started on so many RailRoads unwillingness to share so > many of the corridors they were given for free by the federal government > 150 years ago with anyone else. > > > > > > Chuck Strawser > > Pedestrian & Bicycle Transportation Planner > > Commuter Solutions > > UW-Madison Transportation Services > > > > Visit our University Bicycle Resource Center at Helen C White: > http://transportation.wisc.edu/transportation/bike_annex.aspx > > > > How are we doing? Take our customer satisfaction survey at > https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/CommSol_CSSurvey > > > > > > > > > > *From:* Bikies [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Brian > Mink > *Sent:* Friday, May 08, 2015 7:17 AM > *To:* GOLDSTEIN, STEVEN > *Cc:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [Bikies] Notice of closure of John Nolen Path in Law Park > > > > 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 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
