Tony, Thank you for the in-depth clarification. Without further contradictory or added information from the other stakeholders, your plan sounds solid to me.
-india WeAreAllMechanics.com [email protected] Stay connected- Follow WAAM on Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/We.Are.All.Mechanics> *Think of something lovely for a moment. * On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 2:54 PM, Fernandez, Anthony via Bikies < [email protected]> wrote: > Thanks Martha, and I want to add a little clarification from my standpoint > as the project engineer for this. > > > > We would not have been proposing this project if we thought that it would > ultimately harm the Occupy Madison site and program. We felt that we had a > good solution using the vacant land that would, in the end, make this a > win-win-win-win. (Occupy – Schoelkopf owners and tenants – biking > community – City). There was potential to make more space available to > Occupy than we would be acquiring for the path while providing fair > compensation (through the eminent domain process) to “make them whole”. We > had discussed this with some of their Board members and thought we had at > least qualified support. > > > > Of course we also wanted to minimize impacts to the Schoelkopf site to > maintain its viability for current and potential uses. We were > coordinating with those owners as well. Taking out a row of their parking > would be a major impact. > > > > We looked carefully to find a good off-street alternative to going between > the Occupy and Schoelkopf sites. In my judgment there is none. There is not > sufficient space to create an acceptable bike facility around the Johnson > St and Third St sides of the Occupy site without acquiring significant > width from the Occupy site on both sides and perhaps having an even more > detrimental impact on their site. It would also provide much worse > geometry for bicyclists, both rounding the corner and entering Third St. > There is also not sufficient space to get a bike path around the west side > of the Schoelkopf building (with necessary clearances from the building and > the street). > > > > The other alternative is to transition bikes into and out of the street > for a couple blocks. This is certainly feasible if there is no alternative, > but not very desirable when we are trying to create facilities that feel > comfortable to a broad range of users. > > > > There were complications to making the Occupy land transfer work and in > reconfiguring their site. In the end it seems that the Occupy leaders > decided they were better off advocating for no change, and we have to > respect that decision. Beyond that there may have been some > misunderstanding due to lack of communication on our part. > > > > At this point I think it makes sense to step back and look at all possible > alternatives. Bottom line is we really want this to work for all the > stakeholders, including Occupy. IMO there was – and maybe still is - a > good solution. > > > > Tony Fernandez > > [email protected] > > voice: 608-266-9219 > > > > *From:* Bikies [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Martha > Laugen via Bikies > *Sent:* Wednesday, January 27, 2016 3:38 PM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [Bikies] Bike path, Tiny houses, etc. > > > > Thanks to all for the dialogue re: bike path. > > > > For what it's worth, a few clarifying points. > > Yes: Madison BCycle's shop, office and vehicles are based here. In order > to serve the community the way we do on the budget we have - we do require > all the space in our current lot for vehicle manuverability. So do other > tenants in the building including businesses that receive delivery via > large box trucks regularly, and customers that arrive via bike, car, > motorcycle and wheelchair. > > > > We do not want to see anyone displaced of course, and are excited about > the path expansion. There is an adjacent parcel of land that is currently > unused here. Could that facilitate Tiny House expansion or bike path > re-routing? I am not the planning expert but the potential is certainly > there. > > > > As for how straightforward the path planning is there - I encourage folks > to inquire w/ city planners, but as someone who bikes there daily, in all > seasons, it is not a straightforward extension of current routes. > Currently, paths suddenly become sidewalk, bikelanes merge with paths or > just disappear, paths cross busy roads at an angle where it's impossible to > see car traffic coming from either direction. From what I've seen of plans, > the proposal makes this interface much safer. > > > > My hope is that no current area residents or business will be compromised > by this - and I'm certainly not sure that's our fate at this time. > > -Martha Laugen, Madison BCycle > > > > > -- > > *Martha C. Laugen, MPH* > > *617.320.9806 <617.320.9806>* > > *[email protected] <[email protected]>* > > _______________________________________________ > 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
