Hey Brian, I think there's some validity to your point, but also think there's a lot to unpack there.
I don't know the senator and I don't know how often or in what ways he rides his bike. Clearly, he's known as a bike-friendly legislator and is at least passionate for cycling broadly. The Bike Fed article states that he "logs about 2,400 miles a year" and "never bikes for less than two hours and he never wants to bother with covering less than about 30 miles". That may be an exaggeration, but it certainly doesn't fit with your description of him as a "daily bicycle commuter". Most daily commuters and transportation cyclists frequently travel less than 30 miles and 2 hours per trip. (I'm a daily commuter with a one-way trip of 8.5 miles and typically log 5,000 - 7,000 miles per year including some recreational riding.) And that point isn't quibbling over details. And it isn't the lead of the Isthmus article through chance. It's essentially asserting, like you have, that the senator has bona fide cycling credentials and that in some way he might have the authority to speak on behalf of people who cycle. Obviously, very individual has their own perspective, but I very much question his perspective as being representative of the group that the contraflow lane was designed for: transportation cyclists who routinely need to access the E. Mifflin St. bike boulevard from the top of State St. I'm confident that the overwhelming majority of those riders DO think the lack of a contraflow lane in this stretch is a big deal and would take issue with his dismissal: “The bikes now go around the Square. I bike around the Square, what’s wrong with that?” He asserts that bicyclists already have ways of traveling west to east downtown, and this lane would only be for two blocks. This again demonstrates a lack of understanding of the situation on the ground. Last year, the city had an online survey that captured what people liked most and least about biking in Madison and a contraflow lane on Mifflin was one of the top ideas voted on by the community. The significant complaints about people riding on the sidewalk through this stretch are the ultimate proof that there's a need for a facility. Acting like it's no big deal and that people can simply go around the capitol is ignorant of the reality. Anyone that has attempted it on a regular basis will find it incredibly inconvenient and laborious and most find an alternate route. Besides needing to travel 3 times the distance, it includes 7 traffic signals that are by design always red to discourage motor vehicle traffic with very significant impact to people on bikes that don't want to break the law. The climb up Carroll is no joke and a huge waste of energy considering you'll have to scrap all that invested energy braking at the bottom of Pinckney. His arguments that this would force bikes to cross traffic or ride against traffic are equally weak. Bikes cross traffic at every intersection and need to do so at the top of state now. Bikes (and cars) ride "against traffic" on every two-way street in the city. The contraflow lane is really just a conversion to a 2-way street with one way restricted to bike travel. That's not a dangerous or novel idea. One of the most revealing quotes is the following: *“Why do bikes have to go against traffic?” he adds. “I don’t see why we have to develop a procedure to exempt bikes from going with the traffic.”* To me this clearly shows the senator's lack of understanding that bikes are traffic. It seems that he is still operating under a deficit mindset that doesn't treat bicycles as vehicles and as traffic. It isn't that uncommon for members of minority groups to accept the assumptions of the majority group, but it also doesn't give me great confidence in the senator's knowledge and passion for creating true complete streets that support movement of people on bikes to get around the city. As to the failure of planners and advocates to convince the group of the value of the plan...I don't believe either had an opportunity. On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 4:19 AM Brian Mink via Bikies < bikies@lists.danenet.org> wrote: > If the planners and advocates could not convince Fred Risser to vote of > this proposal (an avid cyclist, daily bicycle commuter, oldest and most > experienced and bicycle friendly member of the legislator) it likely wasn't > a well thought out or presented proposal. > > Brian Mink > Monona > > Harald Kliems via Bikies <bikies@lists.danenet.org> > February 8, 2016 at 8:47 PM > > In case anybody wants to express their opinion to the members of the > committee that made this decision: > > Sen. Risser: sen.ris...@legis.state.wi.us (608) 238-5008 > Sen Olsen sen.ol...@legis.wisconsin.gov (608) 266-0751 > Sen. Roth sen.r...@legis.wisconsin.gov (608) 266-0718 > Rep. Born rep.b...@legis.wisconsin.gov (608) 266-2540 (888) 534-0039 > Rep. Loudenbeck rep.loudenb...@legis.wisconsin.gov (888) 529-0031 > Rep. Hesselbein rep.hesselb...@legis.wisconsin.gov (608) 266-5340 > > Harald. > > _______________________________________________ > Bikies mailing list > Bikies@lists.danenet.org > http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org > > Robbie Webber via Bikies <bikies@lists.danenet.org> > February 8, 2016 at 8:14 PM > > FYI: > State committee nixes plans for contra-flow bike lane on Capitol Square > http://isthmus.com/news/news/Contra-Flow-Bike-Lane-nixed/ > > I was at a meeting with City staff this afternoon, and they broke the news > to us that i in the story above. So when Mifflin is reconstructed this > year, we aren't getting a west-to-east bike lane. > > However, the reconstruction will bee done in such a way that if the state > ever changes its mind -- maybe some more bike-friendly and more > livable-cities-oriented members of the State Capitol and Executive > Residence Board (who, strangely also control the Capitol grounds and the > one lane on the inner loop that is state property) -- a counterflow lane > could be added at a later time. > > Robbie Webber > Transportation Policy Analyst > 608-263-9984 (o) > 608-225-0002 (c) > rob...@robbiewebber.org > All opinions expressed are my own and do not necessarily reflect those of > my employer or any other group with which I am affiliated. > _______________________________________________ > Bikies mailing list > Bikies@lists.danenet.org > http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org > > > -- > Sent from Postbox > <https://www.postbox-inc.com/?utm_source=email&utm_medium=siglink&utm_campaign=reach> > _______________________________________________ > Bikies mailing list > Bikies@lists.danenet.org > http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org >
_______________________________________________ Bikies mailing list Bikies@lists.danenet.org http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org
