I completely agree with Grant on all points. Hindsight is 20-20 and we may as well allow it to improve our vision going forward. -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 Sat, May 9, 2015 at 9:18 AM, Grant Foster <[email protected]> wrote: > I'm also not interested in placing blame, but do agree we've got an > opportunity to do a lot better in the future. > > While I appreciate the wrinkle introduced by the BTTW date change, it > seems that that only impacted the poor, last-minute communication to the > community. Based on that communication ("There will not be a marked > detour as it is assumed that bicyclists and pedestrians will choose the > alternative on-street route that best serves their needs") and everything > I've heard, it sounds like the decision to not accommodate users with any > of the following was independent of the date change: 1) use of part of > John Nolen Dr for path traffic 2) a temporary, alternate path through the > park 3) a marked detour 4) sufficient advance warning as to avoid forcing > users to turn around and significantly back track. *#4 is still needed > and would take a small crew a few hours to complete and should really be in > place before Monday.* > > #1, #2, and #3 all have their pros and cons and I can understand rationale > for and against each of them. As much as I generally support a concept like > #1 and believe it would be the best for path users, I do think the impact > it would have on all users would be tremendous, especially considering the > ingress needed into Monona Terrace. It could also introduce some real > safety issues for all users and I can understand why we don't have it in > place. (I think such an accommodation would have been warranted when the > bridge was replaced last year on the causeway, especially given the > significant impact to path users at that time and the much simpler MV > traffic patterns that would have been interrupted.) > > I also feel strongly that choosing to not do #1, #2, *or *#3 is > insufficient. It should not be ok to close a primary bike artery like this > and expect that cyclists just figure it out for themselves. While the > majority of construction projects may not include a marked detour, the > relative impact of this work on bike/ped traffic is akin to the impact of > the E. Johnson St. work on MVs. I understand the volume of total users is > not equivalent, but this route is as important to our bicycle traffic > infrastructure as E. Johnson is to our MV traffic infrastructure. In this > case, we marked an alternate route AND maintained through access for > traffic. > > If we truly have a commitment to promoting and supporting cycling as a > viable transportation mode, we have to commit to appropriate supports > during construction. As much as a marked detour has been discounted by > some, I do think it was a reasonable provision and would have significantly > decreased the angst and frustration associated with this work. I've been > detouring over the hill since the closure and see a fair number of other > cyclists that I would regularly see on the path during commutes. > > One last opinion that others may not share: if the last-minute scramble > couldn't be accommodated appropriately we shouldn't have made the change. > While it'll be great to roll up to my bratcakes on the new path, I don't > think trading appropriate accommodations during this month+ of major > construction was worth it. I would have rather seen the city stick to plans > and have us move our bratcakes over to Brittingham. > > On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 8:01 PM Larry D Nelson <[email protected]> wrote: > >> As a member of the Bike Fed, I look forward to a response from the Fed >> regarding this issue. I am not interested in the blame game: this needs to >> be avoided in the future. From a project scheduling standpoint, these type >> of issues should be addressed in the 4th quarter of the year prior to >> construction. >> >> >> >> Larry D Nelson >> >> >> >> >> >> *From:* Bikies [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of >> *Spencer >> Gardner >> *Sent:* Friday, May 08, 2015 3:46 PM >> *To:* [email protected] >> >> >> *Subject:* Re: [Bikies] Notice of closure of John Nolen Path in Law Park >> >> >> >> I can’t comment on the execution of the closure as my route doesn’t take >> me through there. But I wonder how many voicing concerns here have >> contacted their alder or the mayor’s office. I’m sure Tony and others >> employed by the city benefit from your feedback, but as Steve rightly >> pointed out this is fundamentally a political problem. Concerns voiced on >> this list are not going to be translated a change of culture unless they >> are also raised through other, more official channels simultaneously. >> >> >> >> *Spencer Gardner* <[email protected]>*, AICP * >> >> Planner >> >> >> >> *Toole* *Design Group* <http://www.tooledesign.com/> >> >> p 608.663.8082 x404 >> >> >> >> *From:* Bikies [mailto:[email protected] >> <[email protected]>] *On Behalf Of *Robert F. Nagel >> *Sent:* Friday, May 08, 2015 3:04 PM >> *To:* Steve Goldstein >> *Cc:* [email protected] >> *Subject:* Re: [Bikies] Notice of closure of John Nolen Path in Law Park >> >> >> >> Steve is right on. And, not to hijack this link, but if it happens, it >> happens, because I think plenty has been said about this problem. >> Meanwhile, what could be part of a solution to this problem seems to have >> fallen on deaf ears. Recently, I posted about the cluster-f-whatever >> between Henry and Bedford streets on West Washington. I do not recall a >> single response to that post. It seems that some lane lines could be >> painted pretty fast that could help create a safe alternative to the John >> Nolen path closure. I'll reprint my old post here: >> >> >> Robert F. Nagel <[email protected]> >> >> Apr 22 >> >> [image: https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/images/cleardot.gif] >> >> [image: https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/images/cleardot.gif]Reply >> >> [image: https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/images/cleardot.gif] >> >> to bikies >> >> [image: https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/images/cleardot.gif] >> >> Does anyone have any insight into what the plans are for three blocks of >> west washington between bedford and henry? There's a broken yellow line >> down the middle of the street. The street is wide enough for a car lane, a >> bike lane, and a parking lane, but because there are no lines painted, cars >> seem to think that it's wide enough for two car lanes and a parking lane. >> It's really the wild west. It's not safe for bikes, peds, or even cars. It >> seems like a little paint would go a long way here. Not sure why it hasn't >> happened yet. It's been like this for years. I've been meaning to complain >> about it here for at least that long, too. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> --- >> >> Robert F. Nagel, Attorney >> >> Law Offices of Robert Nagel >> [email protected] >> www.nagel-law.com >> Thirty on the Square, 10th Floor >> 30 W. Mifflin St., Suite 1001 >> Madison, WI 53703 >> 608-255-1501 office >> 608-255-1504 fax >> 608-438-9501 cell >> >> >> >> On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 7:03 AM, Steve Goldstein <[email protected]> >> 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 >> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> [image: Avast logo] <http://www.avast.com/> >> >> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. >> www.avast.com >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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
![https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/images/cleardot.gif]Reply](https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/images/cleardot.gif]Reply){kind=link}