Dave
On Thursday, May 21, 2015 2:13 PM, Robert F. Nagel <[email protected]>
wrote:
See response from city traffic engineering below.
---
Robert F. Nagel, AttorneyLaw 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
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Dryer, David <[email protected]>
Date: Wed, May 20, 2015 at 2:12 PM
Subject: FW: [Bikies] West Washington
To: "Robert F. Nagel" <[email protected]>
Cc: aaron crandall <[email protected]>
Good AfternoonMr. Nagel You raised some questions about the cross-section of W
Washington Ave. W Washington Ave. (W Wash)operatesas an arterial street and
serves between 12,000 and 19,000 motorists per day—this between Regent St and
Fairchild St. Because we do not have bike lanes or a bike count station on W
Wash I cannot report how many cyclists also share the corridor. Staff have
reviewed the street’s cross-section and operation on previous occasions—this
work was done to determine how traffic facilities could be expanded/maintained
and if bike facilities could be providedwithin the corridor. Attached you will
find the concept sketches. Currently the width of W Wash is 55 feet wide from
face of curb to face of curb and within a right-of-way width of 132 feet.
Parking is provided on both sides of W Wash. The street is--by standards
sufficient for one lane width of motor-vehicle traffic per direction with
parking. At the same time predominantly during peak hours of traffic operation
the street can see traffic operatingas if there aretwo lanes of moving traffic
by direction. At one point in time the City had marked two lanes on each of
the W Wash approaches to its intersections (where parking was removed) but
because the lane lines could not technicallycontinue beyond the intersection
the markings were dropped. Traffic crashes were also reviewed and they would
not be considered excessive in the corridor. The TE Division hasalways hada
desire to improve conditions for cyclists in the corridor. We reviewed several
options: 1) Buffered Bike Lane, one lane of traffic in each direction, no
parking removed,no widening—file name: BUFFEREDBIKELANE.pdf2) Floating Bike
Lane, two traffic lanes by direction and varying by TOD, Parking removed by
direction during peak hours to accommodate second traffic lane,no widening—file
name: WESTWASH_PEAKHOURFLOATING.pdf3) Standard Bike Lane, two lanes of traffic
in each direction, no parking removed,streetwidened into the terrace—file name:
WESTWASH_ULTIMATE.pdf4) Raised Bike Lane, two lanes of traffic in each
direction, no parking removed,streetwidened into the terrace—file name:
WESTWASH_ULTIMATE_RAISED.pdf All options provided bicycle facilities, there
arealso impacts unique to each option-noted below:Option 1 failed, and created
up-stream intersection blockage—gridlock.Option 2, does not necessitate
widening, does require peak hour parking restrictions. It does require the
addition of electronic signing (ITS Components), these signs are used to change
the cross-section by TOD. This is a performance based cross-sectionwith the
least impacton thecorridor & users.Option 3 requires widening into the
terrace.Option 4 provides a raised bike lane and requires widening into the
terrace. Of the four options staff believe option 2 to be the preferred one.
Any project would need authorization of the Common Council, budget authority
and the support of the District Alder. Let me know if there are any questions.
RegardsDavid C. Dryer, P.E. CAPPCity Traffic Engineer and Parking Utility
ManagerCity of Madison, WI 53701
_______________________________________________
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
