Transportation articles roundup - not just bikes

More articles with a few comments, OK, sometimes quite a bit of commentary.

The Atlantic Cities ran an article titled, Why Cyclists Run Red Lights. I'm not entirely sure the research conclusions for Australia are valid here in the U.S., but at least someone is doing the research.

And the above article also refers to the NY Times article, If Kant Were a New York Cyclist. This article ponders the ethics - not the legality - of running red lights. A nice quote sums up the feelings of many bicyclists with regard to traffic laws:

Laws work best when they are voluntarily heeded by people who regard them as reasonable. There aren’t enough cops to coerce everyone into obeying every law all the time. If cycling laws were a wise response to actual cycling rather than a clumsy misapplication of motor vehicle laws, I suspect that compliance, even by me, would rise.

The Guardian (UK) suggests that demonstrating cycling proficiency be a requirement to get a driver's licence. In general, I think that getting a driver's licence in the U.S. us far too easy. In many countries it is hard and expensive to get a driver's licence and easy to lose it. People take it seriously. It's more like getting a professional certification. Unfortunately, many people in the U.S. consider driving a right instead of a privilege. We require a licence because operating a motor vehicle is dangerous to yourself and others. Maybe if we made it harder to drive we could cut down on the 33,000 people every year that die in motor vehicle crashes.

A New York Times transportation reporter writes about learning to ride a bike for the first time - as an adult. He talks about how he felt he needed to learn for professional reasons. Bicycling has become a controversial and popular topic over the last few years, and he thought he needed to know first-hand how it felt to ride through the streets.

From the other side, a couple years ago I taught an adult (OK an 18-year-old) how to ride a bike for the first time. I didn't write about it at the time because I didn't want to embarrass her, but it was thrilling for both of us when she started pedaling around the streets for the first time.

And make sure to read the comments on the NY Times article. Over 200 so far. Although some complain about rude bicyclists on city streets, a great many talk about the joys of learning to ride as an adult. To many of us who ride, a bicycle gives a certain type of freedom of movement and a feeling close to flying. Seeing someone experience this, or hearing them describe that joy and freedom almost brings tears to my eyes.

Frustrations of air travel push passengers to Amtrak. The NY Times article title says it all. And it makes me want to weep, or maybe throw something, that we also had the chance to have rail service to Minneapolis, Milwaukee and Chicago, and is was all thrown away due to short-sighted thinking and allegiance to the road builders.

The article is about the NE Corridor, the most popular and only profitable service for Amtrak, but I've been seeing enough other articles about pending rail service - run as for-profit companies no less - to make me think rail travel is on the verge of a resurgence. After all, you can work on the train without being told to turn off your phone, computer, or music.

More articles about rail service coming back, and it's sometimes a bit surprising where people have redeveloped an interest in trains:

• Dallas-Houston in 90 minutes. No public money requested.
• Gulf Coast mayors want to bring back Amtrak's  Sunset Limited between Jacksonville and New Orleans.
• LA to Las Vegas in 1 hour 45 min. for $45 say investors in private rail service.
• And even Florida is talking about the Miami-Orlando service again, this time as a private company.

Auto-dependence forces financial and personal sacrifices

Interesting article today on CNNMoney.com. It's all about the financial costs of high gas prices, which may also force personal sacrifices as well.

Boneheaded politics means loss of rail money

Mayor Dave didn't pull any punches today when he held a press conference today in reaction to Governor-elect Scott Walker finally and definitely losing $810 million of federal investment in passenger rail service extending the Hiawatha line from Milwaukee to Madison.

The Mayor also points out that he repeatedly tried to talk to Walker, but was "met with a blank wall." Not even returning the calls from the mayor of the second largest city in the state, and the person you are likely to see frequently, since your offices are within two blocks of each other? What sort of bizarre politics is that? Is this what we can expect from our future governor: the cold shoulder and avoidance of anyone with whom he doesn't agree?

I have to agree with the harsh words of the Mayor, when he said, "the day can't come soon enough when Walker can be referred to as 'the former governor.'"

And right after the decision became final, Talgo made a definitive announcement of its own: They are leaving Milwaukee. Nice going, Walker. Not only did you lose the jobs building the rail line, but you have now turned away a business that would have manufactured trains in Milwaukee and shipped them all over the US. Manufacturing jobs in a depressed city, aren't those exactly the types of jobs we should be trying to attract?

One restaurateur has also decided that his plan to revamp and reopen his current eatery is not a good idea, now that there will be no train passengers coming and going across the street. This same decision will be repeated in other parts of Madison, around an abandoned grocery store in Watertown, and in any community that might have been along the line to the Twin Cities.

Good-bye to construction jobs, redevelopment in downtown areas, manufacturing in a depressed neighborhood in Milwaukee, and better rail lines for freight and the businesses it serves. All so communities in other states can reap those benefits. Wisconsin taxpayers aren't getting a refund on the money they have sent to Washington, DC, they are just sending the money elsewhere. And Wisconsin taxpayers will still have to pay to upgrade freight infrastructure and signaling that is mandated by the federal government. We could have paid for all this while also building the passenger service, but now it is all gone.

I am just sick to my stomach about this. Right after the election, I felt the same way, and then felt for awhile that maybe we had a chance to still make the situation right. Maybe, just maybe Walker would come to his senses and realize that he couldn't afford to throw away thousands of jobs and hundreds of millions of dollars, maybe billions, of additional dollars circulating in the state economy. Has he never heard of the multiplier effect?

When you are stuck in the snow on the way to Milwaukee, Chicago, or the Twin Cities, think about how the trains can get through all sorts of weather will virtually no delays. When you are creeping your way through rush hour traffic, or on your way to the Brewers on I-94, or want to get to downtown Chicago, but end up driving slower than I can bicycle, thank Scott Walker for ruining any chance to getting to those destinations more quickly and efficiently. When people who can't drive or shouldn't drive have no way to come to Madison to visit, imagine what it would be like to have the elderly, people with disabilities, or people who like to drink in our bars to have another transportation option.

The rail haters say, "What about the buses? Can't we just use those?" Sure, if you don't mind the buses moving the same speed as the rest of the traffic. See, trains get their own right of way, so they can bypass all the traffic. And buses hold maybe 50-60 people, while trains can carry hundreds. That means that to carry the same capacity, you would have to put 60-70 buses on the road and that also means 60-70 drivers for those buses, and that's expensive. Buses are just not a solution for a corridor where passengers want fast, reliable, and high capacity service.

I'm not going to write more, because what more is there to say? Maybe I'll be inspired tomorrow.  I don't suppose I'll wake up tomorrow and find out this was all a bad dream, right? No, I thought not.

Economic Development Commission (in)action on rail last night

My email to the EDC today. Thought I'd pass it on.

Dear members of the EDC,

Today I saw an article in The Daily Reporter, and had a few comments.

Wisc-Minn hearings on possible rail routes between Milw and Twin Cities

Dates for meetings at the end of this post. Also note the change of venue for the Madison hearing.

Photo courtesy of Environmental Law and Policy Center

No, rail is not totally dead in Wisconsin. Even though Gov-elect Walker is determined to throw away $810 million of federal investment and thousands of jobs to stop the extension of the Hiawatha service between Milwaukee and Madison, Wisconsin and Minnesota DOT officials are moving forward with a series of meetings to study routes through Wisconsin to Minnesota.

Coming up this week and next these meetings that give us a great chance to show support for rail in Wisconsin. Unfortunately, the info about the meetings is hard to come by and confusing for anyone not already deep in the rail debate. There isn't even any information on the WisDOT web site, and they are running the meetings!

This is my effort to put all the info in one place.

Apart from the $810 million in ARRA money granted to Wisconsin to extend the popular and successful Hiawatha line west from Milwaukee to Madison, there was another project funded - a study of the best route between Milwaukee and the Twin Cities. This was a joint study between the Wisconsin DOT and the Minnesota DOT, but Minnesota is taking the lead. Each state put in $300,000, and the federal government kicked in $600,000, so the study has $1.2 million total.

If the Hiawatha extension moves forward, that is, if Walker allows the Milwaukee-Madison piece to be built, it would seem logical for the MN-Milw route to go through Madison. But there are actually 14 routes being studied, and three of them do not pass through Madison. However, according to today's Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel:

Wisconsin transportation officials don't believe any alignment that excludes Madison would be economically feasible, but the study has to consider all options, said Cari Anne Renlund, executive assistant to Wisconsin Transportation Secretary Frank Busalacchi.

That is why we need to attend these meetings and say that we want rail in Madison. Also, one of the routes being studied is the current Empire Builder route that goes through Columbus, not exactly convenient to Madison, and certainly not likely to bring business or tourists to downtown for Badger games, Taste of Madison, Farmers Market, Art Far on the Square, etc. It's also not going to help business people that want to access the Capitol or campus area by bus, foot or bike. They are looking for a quick, easy way to avoid driving, and a Columbus stop really isn't much help.

However, the Walker has said he might consider using the federal stimulus funds for the Empire Builder. I guess he's willing to hang on to that money, as long as it is for a project that is guaranteed to fail and won't benefit those meddlesome liberals in Madison.

So let's get out to the meetings and show our support for rail in Wisconsin. This is about more than the much-debated Milwaukee-Madison piece. It's about economic development in western Wisconsin and connections to the entire region. Eau Claire and LaCrosse are both eager to have a connection to Madison and the Twin Cities. They know that this will bring investment in their communities and crucial connections to business and people across the Midwest. Minnesota wants a connection to Chicago, and they will push for it, even if they have to go through Iowa instead of Wisconsin. Illinois officials are already looking at that possibility.

Do we really want Wisconsin to be bypassed? Are we going to be the backwater of the upper Midwest, doomed to be off the map as modern transportation moves through other states, loaded with business deals, tourists, and investments? Are we willing to be left off the new interstate system?

Attend one of these meetings, and RSVP via the WISPIRG web site so you can get more information on how we can move rail forward in Wisconsin:

• Tuesday, Nov. 30,  5-7pm: Best Western Riverfront Hotel, LaCrosse
• Wednesday, Dec. 1,  5-7pm: Best Western Trail Lodge, Eau Claire
• Thursday, Dec. 2,  5-7pm: University of Wisconsin, Fond du Lac
• Tuesday, Dec. 7,  5-7pm: WisDOT Southwest Region Office, 2101 Wright Street, Crowne Plaza Hotel, 4402 East Washington Ave, Madison

If you can't make the meetings, but want to submit comments, you can do so until December 29 by sending them to the MN DOT:

praveena.pidaparthi@state.mn.us

Wisconsinites don’t want to pay anything for transportation, neither rail nor roads

While an article in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel indicates that Wisconsinites oppose rail, I think the results merit a little further reflection.

What does Minnesota think of losing their frequent rail connections?

Although many anti-rail folks seem to forget this fact, the Madison-Milwaukee rail project, that Gov-elect Walker is determined to stop, is but one piece of a larger system, one that would run Chicago<-->Milwaukee<-->Madison<-->Twin Cities. If this piece doesn't go through, there is no future link between Madison and Minnesota, or from the Twin Cities to Milwaukee or Chicago, except for the once-a-day Empire Builder, which runs at a relatively slow speed and is often delayed on its way from Seattle.

Trains vs. buses

Short post, because I'm running off to a meeting. Sorry, not my best writing work.


Several people have suggested we don't need the Madison-Milwaukee train because "You can take the bus."


I have a few comments about this. Obviously this completely ignores the fact that the train also goes to Chicago and would be extended to the Twin Cities, not to mention the connections to points in between and cities throughout the Midwest network. And as you see below, there are distinct advantages to trains over buses, both for the individual, the state, and the operator of the service.

My letter to Scott Walker on rail

Although lots of people are calling and emailing Doyle and Walker to support the Madison-Milwaukee extension of rail service, I thought a person, hard copy, snail letter might be a good idea. Below you can see my letter Walker.

Stopping the train: bluff, political maneuver or reality?

This is a rapidly evolving story, so by the time I finishing typing, things may have changed, but here's what we know so far.

Design for new Madison train station

Today Jonathan Zarov interviewed me on WORT about the new train station design that was unveiled Wednesday at the Urban Design Commission (UDC.) He also asked me about whether the new governor could stop the station, and whether there was any chance that the location of the station was still up in the air. (That's a "no" to both questions.)

But when he asked me where people could view the draft design of the station, I realized that digging through the city's web site to find it is pretty tough. So it is linked above for easy reference.

Updates and tidbits on Madison-Milwaukee rail

Last Thursday was the monthly Long Range Transportation Planning Committee meeting. The Wisconsin DOT had promised an update and opportunity to discuss the project at each of our meetings, but they didn't show in July.

Fortunately, the August meeting was much more productive on this front. Paul Trombino, Divisions Operations Director at WisDOT and the point person on the decision to cancel the station in Oconomowoc, came to the meeting a little after 6 PM. He had been delayed by some follow-up work on the Oconomowoc decision. (Was he perhaps being held hostage in his Hill Farms office?) He gave us far more details than we had had in the past, and was very forthcoming in answering questions. This was a great improvement over our disappointment at the no-show in July.

Here's what we learned:

The DOT will own the Madison station. They will also operate the station. This means that the City does not have to budget for the maintenance and operations of the station. This had been a very big question at the July meeting, and neither the DOT nor new mayoral aide Chris Klein - formerly executive assistant to DOT Frank Busalacchi - knew whether the City would be responsible for paying these costs.

Passenger rail runs will not be delayed by freight trains. This is a problem for many Amtrak routes, as freight lines have priority in use of the tracks, and passenger trains often have to wait for freight trains to slowly pass through or maneuver onto sidings before the passenger trains can pass. This will not be the case for the Chicago-Madison trains, and there will be on-time targets that will hold freight lines responsible for making sure the passenger service can get through. This is very important, because freight trains will indeed be using the same tracks as the passenger service.

Corridor construction will start this fall. This won't be happening within the City quite yet, but the work in the more rural segments of the line can be done during the winter. Quite a it of track upgrade and some "land bridges" - crossing of wetlands and other difficult soils - is actually better done in cold weather.

Roll-on/roll-off service will be provided for bicycles. Across the country, this service is being requested on Amtrak and other passenger rail routes. This allows bicycles to be brought onto the train without needing to disassemble the bike or put it in a box. Roll-on/roll-off service allows bicyclists to bike to and from the train easily, which in turn supports the rail service and extends the "passenger shed" - that area of a city where passengers can easily access the train. Generally, there is either an area of the baggage car or an area of each passenger car that has bike racks or hanging hooks where bikes can be secured.

In cities like Madison and Milwaukee, where bicycling is a common and encouraged form of transportation, having a bicycle when you exit the train allows users to get to their final destination or home without needing a car or waiting for the bus. But other communities along the way have been requesting this service so that visitors can access the trails and other recreational destinations directly from the train. This is really great news.

Some amount of "convenient," "reasonably-priced" parking is required for rail passengers in Madison. The reason I put these terms in quotes is because people may have different ideas about what is convenient and what is reasonably priced. I did a little on-line research, and there are lots of Amtrak locations, even on commuter lines, that do not have any overnight parking available. Many others have overnight parking in more remote locations, and the parking closest to the station are fairly pricey hourly spots.

This is a big question still up in the air. Madison's Parking Utility pays all of its costs via user fees - that is, the cost of meters, ramps, staffing of ramps, repair of ramps, and even the capital cost of building new ramps or surface lots is paid for by those that park there. Want more parking? That means the parking rates will likely go up.

The closest ramp to the Madison Station is the Government East ramp, and it is in very bad shape. Regardless of happens with the train, that ramp needs to be rebuilt. Because land in downtown is valuable, and a parking rap is generally not considered a good above-ground use for urban land, the Transit and Parking Commission has stated that it wants to build any new ramp underground, thereby reserving the street front and air rights for retail, residential, hotel, or office uses.

Smart move, but expensive. Going underground is always expensive. Just replacing the existing number of spots - just over 500 - will probably cost well over $50,000 PER SPACE. Yup, the cost of one parking spot is measured in tens of thousands of dollars. I have even heard estimates as high as $75,000 per space. All of that has to be paid for by those parking at meters or in the ramps.

Now the DOT wants cheap, "convenient" parking for train passengers as well. If they expect the City to subsidize parking for train passengers, this undercuts the entire concept of the Parking Utility - that users pay the full cost. So will the DOT chip in some money for those extra spots next door to the station? Or perhaps they will decide that, in order to get less expensive parking, they are willing to have people parking in one of the other, cheaper, less crowded city ramps. That's what other cities do.

A stakeholders group is being set up by the DOT and Mayor to deal with corridor issues within the City. Representatives of neighborhoods along the route, business interests, alders, and other interested parties will be appointed to advise DOT on corridor issues: crossings, safety, noise, aesthetics, lighting, etc. The DOT is not required to follow their recommendations, but they will be very important in providing input and expertise on these issues.

The City and DOT are still considering whether it will be possible to move the railroad tracks that run through Central Park. That would both allow a better use of the land for the park and cut down on the need to cross the tracks between Baldwin and Ingersoll.

The City is applying for a TIGER grant from the federal government in order to build a true multi-modal station, with not just car parking, but also a bike station, transit hub, and public market. TIGER stands for Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery and is part of the Recovery Act. TIGER grants are designed, in the word of the US DOT "...to spur a national competition for innovative, multi-modal and multi-jurisdictional transportation projects that promise significant economic and environmental benefits to an entire metropolitan area, a region or the nation."

Finally, there will be another Public Information Meeting at the new station, AKA the Dept of Administration Bldg, on Tuesday, August 31, 4:30-7:30 PM.

And I must say, the DOT has gotten a lot better about getting information up on their web site. I've worked with, or at least tried to influence DOT projects and  policy for over a decade, and they are generally not known for being the most transparent organization. But they are now putting up news releases, posters from public meetings, maps, and much more. I think this will both help the public get information and give feedback, as well as help the DOT answer critics that claim everything is happening behind closed doors.

I'll try to continue to update information as it becomes available. It's no secret that I think this project is important to the transportation future of Madison and the entire region. I want the DOT to hear the opinions and concerns of the public, but I also want this project to go forward without delay. I think both can easily be achieved.

Good question: Where's the outrage over the proposed I-39 expansion cost?

From today's Cap Times comes a question I've asked quite a bit: "Where are the fiscal conservatives - the ones screaming about the cost of the Madison-Milwaukee rail project - when it comes to road costs?"

Chris Murphy did the research on numbers that I've been meaning to do.

But I am always struck by the opposition to rail based on its price tag when we spend far, far more on roads each year. According to state Department of Transportation figures (see table TR1 on page Roman numeral x), Wisconsin spent more than $1.1 billion last year just on highway rehabilitation and maintenance. Then there was another $323 million on new highway construction and major upgrades and more than $293 million on debt service, much of it likely for roads. All of those figures are separate, by the way, from aids given to municipalities to help pay for their roads and bridges; that's another $557 million and that doesn't count what counties, cities, villages and towns spend themselves on those projects.

 So... let's start a real conversation about the cost of different types of transportation. And don't give me the, "Most people drive, so we should be spending money on roads." B.S. When people have no other choices but to drive, of course they are going to chose that option. If you want to compare how many people use a certain mode, you have to compare driving vs. train in places where their time, cost, and convenience are similar. Perhaps looking at Metra in the Chicago area vs. how many people drive the same route. Or the NE corridor on Amtrak.

When the Madison-Milwaukee line gets up and running - and it will - I think many people will be amazed how many people chose that option over the I-94 drive.

RTA vs. MATC "unelected" officials - be consistent in criticism

One of the criticisms of the RTA seems to be that there is an unelected board with the power to set taxes. Yet people fail to complain about the MATC Board, which is also unelected, and also can levy taxes.

Myths about Madison-Milwaukee rail service - station and train ridership

I've been meaning to write this for some time. It just drives me nuts to see the same myths and misleading information perpetuated in articles and letters to the editor. So this is the first in what will likely be a series of posts about rail, transit, the RTA, and transportation in general.

Of course you can bike with luggage!

On my neighborhood listserv, there has been a debate raging about the best location for the new intercity rail station. (This despite the fact that that decision has already been made.)

One person said she was very happy with the downtown location, because she could easily get there by bike. Another person scoffed at the idea of people carrying their suitcase to the train via bike.

That's when I had to jump in.

I wrote:
OK, I have to defend getting to other modes of travel via bike.

I have biked to the airport with a small backpack or set of panniers. You know, about the size of an airline carry-on. No sweat. I have also taken the bus to the airport many times with a suitcase. Ditto for taking the bus to downtown to catch the Van Galder (to O'Hare.)

Carrying the stuff by bike is really not a big deal, especially if you have a trailer or rack on the back of your bike. However, the bus or bike to the airport is a lesson in inconvenience. Two buses to get from campus to the airport, less than 10 miles away? Insanity! And biking there takes self-confidence on the roads and a knowledge of the back ways that most bicyclists don't have. (Cabs from my house are well over $20 with tip, and for that price, I might as well take the bus to Chicago and avoid one connection.)

However, getting to downtown by bike or bus is definitely easier and less stressful. Obviously, the farther you get into a car-dependent environment, farther from regular bus routes and nice bike options, the less convenient the downtown looks.

But I will gladly trade a bit longer on the bus or train for being stuck on the Beltline or any major arterial during peak hour. One advantage of rail - either within the city or between cities - is that they don't get stuck in traffic. On one memorable Badger Bus trip, I was walking distance from my destination - 84th St in West Allis - but could reach it because we were stuck in Brewers traffic.

What many people forget is that there are already many people traveling from Milwaukee on a semi-regular basis just for day-trips. You would be amazed at the number of people that commute to or from Milwaukee EVERY DAY. Those people aren't carrying anything more than a shoulder bag or laptop. State workers, lobbyists, researchers at the University, private business people, etc. head both ways 2-5 times per week.

I was fine with the station being either downtown or at Yahara Station. As long as it wasn't at the airport, we could have made it work. There were advantages and disadvantages to both urban locations. DOT picked downtown, likely because they already owned the property, which obviously makes moving forward faster and easier.

Whether you agree with the location or not, the decision has been made. If you want rail to succeed - and I think most people in this neighborhood do want it to succeed - our energies can best be spent now in making the location chosen as attractive and accessible as possible.

Go to the public meetings. Ask the DOT questions. Tell them what you think. And keep up with when and how further decisions will be made, because yes, things are going to happen pretty fast. Although I will be the first to criticize the DOT "public input process" in most cases, and I think they could be doing a far better job with this one, I have seen evidence that public input is being considered and incorporated into the plans.

By the way, the Long Range Transportation Plan Committee meets the third Thursday each month, and the DOT has committed to coming and giving us an update on this project each month. This is also an opportunity for public comment, as is true with all city meetings. 5:00 PM in the Municipal Bldg. Rooms may change in the fall, so check the city's web site.

The Council will be getting updates for 1/2 hour before their first meeting of the month: First Tuesday in Aug, Sept, Oct, Nov. At only 1/2 hour, I don't think they are taking public comments, but you can go and listen in. 6:00 PM in the Council Chambers - 2nd floor of the City/County Bldg.

Thanks to John Luton for photos (and for travel advice in Victoria, BC) 

FAQ on intercity rail - Madison 2001

Hey, lookee here, I found an FAQ page on intercity rail between Madison and Milwaukee - with possible extension to the Twin Cities dating back to January/February, 2001! Looks like many of the same questions were asked, studies, and someone attempted to answer them when the city and state were applying for federal funding nine years ago.

For more studies about the current project, see the Wisconsin DOT web site, where they have finally linked everything on one page. OK, the DOT is not all that great about getting information up on their web site. I've complained to them about this before with regard to the Verona Rd project. But at least we have a place to go to see some of the previous information, so we can see that yes, someone actually tried to answer questions before last year.

Heads up, transportation geeks! Tues, May 25 is busy.

For those that care about getting around without a car, or cheaply, or in an environmentally sustainable way, or those that just want to have a choice of transportation modes, the evening of Tuesday, May 25 is going to be a busy night.

The Pedestrian/Bicycle/Motor Vehicle Commission (PBMVC) will hold their annual public hearing on needed capital projects to improve the ped-bike network. The public hearing starts at 6:00 PM in Room 260 of the Madison Municipl Bldg. Also at that meeting will be an update on progress on the Platinum City Report, or "How are we doing and what's next?"

Also on Tuesday, at 6:30 PM at Olbrich Gardens, is a neighborhood meeting arranged my Alder Marsha Rummel about the high speed rail corridor through the East Isthmus. Now that we know that the Madison station will be at/near Monona Terrace, everyone has lots of questions about how this is going to work. Although Marsha would like to keep this focused on the neighborhood, and how the corridor will be managed, this is also the first time the Wisconsin DOT will be available to answer questions on this project.

Last night at the Long Range Transportation Plan Commission, we were supposed to talk about how/where/when the city would/could build a multi-modal station - that is one that would handle intercity buses, local buses, and was friendly to walking, biking, taxis, etc. Of course, the discussion mostly focused on the rail station location, problems, and possibilities. Unfortunately, the answer to many of our questions about the station, train operations, intersections upgrades, multi-modal access, etc. was, "We don't know yet." WisDOT is in charge here, and we don't even know how much say the city will have on many of the decisions.

Wisconsin DOT is not known for having the best public participation process. I have been to many "public hearings," and they often consist of WisDOT staff and consultants standing around boards and posters depicting options for a project and answering questions one-on-one. Then the public is encouraged to write down their comments or submit them on-line. There is rarely a Q&A where everyone in the room can hear the questions that people ask, the answers from WisDOT/consultants, and the comments that others have. This public Q&A is important because many people aren't even sure what questions to ask, and hearing the questions, answers, and comments of others helps them sort through often complex issues.

Finally, for those who live, work, or study in the area of UW Hospital, the west campus, Shorewood Hills, or the west end of the Regent Neighborhood, you may want to know about a meeting on the proposed plans for the intersection of University Ave, University Bay Drive, Campus Drive, and Farley St. The meeting will be held at the Shorewood Hills Village Hall from 5:30 - 7:00 PM. This is a very large, and very multi-modal intersection, with lots of people walking and biking through it, as well as about 50,000 cars per day, many of whom are making turns at the intersection. There is also a very busy bus stop, with over a dozen bus lines stopping there. All these bus rides need to cross the intersection, either in the morning or the evening. All these bus riders are also pedestrians when they cross. The Campus Dr Path also ends here, with many bicyclists trying to connect with routes through Shorewood Hills, or crossing to the south side of University to access the Kendall/Bluff bike route. No matter how you travel, if you need to use this intersection on a regular basis, you should think about submitting comments.

Sorry, no link for this meeting, as it doesn't appear to be on the City of Madison web site or the Village or Shorewood Hills. Also, no link to the plans developed by Strand & Assoc (I think), which, last tome I saw them, were less-than-ideal for non-motorized transportation.

AAA is not a friend of balanced transportation

On a national bicycle-pedestrian advocates list of which I am a member, there was a discussion about the new, separate bike lane planned for Pennsylvania Ave in Washington, DC, as well as several other downtown streets in Washington. These lanes actually remove space from motorized traffic, and AAA put out a press release with a list of concerns.

The press release came from the Mid-Atlantic chapter of AAA, but there followed a long discussion about working with AAA on various projects, whether a boycott of AAA was warranted. and the coordination between the regional chapters and the national office. [If you want to go to the AAA Mid-Atlantic web site, say to comment, you may need to enter a ZIP code for the Mid-Atlantic area. One for the DC area is 20006, or use any ZIP from DE, MD, DC, VA, NJ, or PA.]

Since you may not be able to easily get into the web site, I will paste it below, so you can read it:

REMOVAL OF TRAFFIC LANES ON PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE FOR BIKE LANES DRAWS IRE OF MOTORISTS

 NEW BIKE LANES COULD MAKE A BAD THING WORSE

IN DOWNTOWN WASHINGTON, SAYS AAA

Protected Bike Lane Project Would Remove Six Miles Of Traffic Lane;

New Bike Lanes Won't Entice District Motorists Out Of Cars, AAA Poll Shows

WASHINGTON, D. C.  (Monday, May 3, 2010) – Pennsylvania Avenue has a new look. Over the weekend, D.C. transportation work crews converted two traffic lanes on “America’s Main Street”  into bike lanes, and, as a result, city traffic could become even more congested in downtown Washington and further increase commuter frustration with insufficient road and highway capacity, warns AAA Mid-Atlantic, which is encouraging commuters and District motorists to voice their concerns about the proposal.

 Bike lanes will also be built on four other major streets in the city’s busiest corridor.

 “If you build it, will they come?” It is unlikely the addition of new bike lanes inWashington’s Central Business District will entice most motorists out of their cars or attract more residents to bicycling to work. That’s according to the findings of AAA Mid-Atlantic’slatest survey of District motorists.

  “Given current levels of motor vehicle traffic in downtown D.C. and the depth of frustration with gridlock during daily work trips, many motorists are wondering why this plan made it to the drawing board in the first place,” cautioned John B. Townsend II, AAA Mid-Atlantic’s Manager of Public and Government Affairs.

 “In the minds of many motorists and commuters this plan abounds with problems. Although they understand that a vibrant city like Washington needs to have a healthy mix of bikers, walkers, motorists and mass transit users, they think this plan is counter-intuitive.”

 If given final approval, the pilot bicycle lane project would remove six miles of traffic lanes along five major thoroughfares in the city’s Central Business District, including two traffic lanes on a mile-long stretch of Pennsylvania Avenue, from the White House to the U. S. Capitol building.

  In addition, one lane of automobile traffic in Northwest Washington will be removed from 9th Street, 15th Street, L Street and M Street, under the District Department of Transportation (DDOT) proposal. The 30-day public comment period for the project closes 12 days from now.

 Polling shows some residents already have some misgivings about the proposal.  In fact, 53 percent of District residents say bike lanes and other added bicycle perks will not make them more likely to bicycle to work on a regular basis, the 2010 AAA Transportation Poll ® shows. Even so, 20 percent of surveyed AAA members in the District said the changes would compel them to become regular bicycle commuters.

 “Downtown Washington experienced the worst congestion in the region during the last decade, previous studies by local transportation planners show,” Townsend noted.  

 “If implemented, this plan could make things worse. Lane closures must be approached with extreme caution to avoid excessive traffic delays and the diversion of motorists into neighborhood streets, increasing cut-through traffic in peak periods.”

 “What’s past is prologue,” providing an object lesson about such impacts,  some D.C. motorists and taxi drivers complain. They still point to the impact of the decision 15 years ago to close a two-block stretch of Pennsylvania Avenue in front of the White House that carried 29,000 vehicles a day. 

  As predicted, it increased traffic congestion in downtown Washington during rush hours, some critics grouse. The Secret Service closed the six lane avenue from 15th to 17th streets to motor traffic in the aftermath of the Oklahoma City bombing. Since then, increased security concerns and terror threats have prompted officials to reduce lane width and remove parking spaces around some federal buildings, observed AAA.

 Each inauguration day the 1.2 mile-long stretch of Pennsylvania Avenue down from the United States Capitol building to the White House becomes the “Promenade of Presidents.” It will be retrofitted with a “bicycle facility,” allowing bicyclists to travel down the center median, according to DDOT. Here’s a snapshot of the impacted streets and length of the proposed protected bike lanes:

 o        Pennsylvania Avenue NW from 3rd Street NW to 14th Street NW (1 mile).

o        9th Street NW from Constitution Avenue NW to K Street NW (0.7 mile).

o        15th Street NW from Constitution Avenue NW to W Street NW (2 miles).

o        L Street from 11th Street NW to 25th Street NW (1.3 miles).

o        M Street from 15th Street NW to 29th Street NW (1 mile).

  Under the pilot project, the “barrier-protected” bike lanes will be separated from vehicular traffic by either a lane of parking or buffer zone. Cyclists will still be permitted to travel in regular vehicle travel lanes in Downtown DC.

 “Although bicycling is an increasingly popular way to get to work in the District, the question  is whether the proposal will exacerbate the commute for the vast majority of workers in Downtown Washington, constricting already clogged traffic arterials, and causing even more delays during peak travel periods in the District’s most highly developed area,” the auto club spokesman said.

  “Motorists are concerned that congestion will become even more pronounced because reductions in lane width generally trigger reductions in traffic flow, travel times and capacity. That’s the biggest issue.”

 On average, 2.3 percent of District workers bike to work, according to 2008 data from DDOT. That’s 7,066 bicyclists daily. In contrast, 12 percent walk to work. Even so, 39 percent of employees in the District drive to work alone, while 21 percent ride to their jobs in carpools and vanpools.

 Another 40 percent use some form of mass transit, including Metrorail and Metrobus. Although advocates of bike lanes tout their safety benefits and impact on organizing the flow of traffic, some planners still debate the best approach for adding the lanes to existing roadways, commented Townsend.  

  The proposed bike lane project carries a price tag of $1.2 million and is slated for completion during 2010.  The regional Transportation Planning Board (TPB) has identified the “protected bike lane pilot project” as  one of four “new regionally significant projects” designated for inclusion in the 2010 long-range transportation plan. The 30-day public comment period will end at midnight on Saturday, May 15, 2010. 

  Commuters can submit their comments to the TPB online, or by or by phone at (202) 962-3262 or TDD: (202) 962-3213.  As of Spring 2010, the District boasts a total of 1,200 lane miles, including 44.7 miles of bike lanes and 56 miles of bike trails.  DDOT contends it will evaluate the effectiveness and impacts of the bike lane pilot project before deciding whether to make it permanent.

Several members of the national listserv suggested a boycott of AAA. Others mentioned that AAA in their area had funded helmet give-aways, kids bike classes, and share-the-road messages. There was a bit of back and forth about whether the national office could or should be held responsible for the actions and press releases of the regional offices. There was also discussion of the survey itself, and how AAA appeared to play  with the numbers: The commuter percentages add up to 114.3%; 20% of AAA members said the new bike lanes would entice them to bike to work; even people that might not use the lanes to bike to work might use them for other trips; etc.

Finally, as people debated whether they should boycott their local AAA because of the action of another regionals office, I felt I had to weigh in on why I do not have a AAA membership:

OK, wading in again, here's why I dropped AAA years ago, and why I will not become a member again.

Regardless of what my local chapter or office says, when I sign up as a AAA member, some of that money goes to the national organization. The national office lobbies, and often not in ways that we would like.

It's all fine and good to have share-the-road messages, or give away helmets, or even sponsor LAB classes, but when it comes down to changing the federal/state/local transportation policy, to favor a more balanced transportation system, don't get in their way. Less money for roads and more for transit, walking, and biking? Are you nuts!?

They will play nice if they can get away with sweet (and inexpensive)messages and campaigns, but they will support driving every time, and that means more and bigger roads. Everything else comes second (or third, fourth, or last.)

There is only so much money to go around, and likely less every day. Those few cents we want for better biking? They want those too. Buses and trains? No way, we can't afford those! Pedestrian safety money and complete streets? Only after the big highways get theirs, we'll see if there's any money left over.

When we walk in the door of our state legislature, asking for a change in transportation funding and priorities, or when we ask for a more rational TEA legislation next spring, we better remember who is coming in behind us with buckets of cash. I do not want my money or my name (as a member), used to undo the hard work we have done.

So, no AAA for me, thank you very much. I don't feel like putting any more cash or credibility in their hands.

For those who want the benefits of AAA - roadside assistance, discounts, etc - you can join Better World Club. They will even pick up if your bike gets a flat tire!

Two articles on SE Wisconsin rail. Same paper, different angles.

Does anyone else find this juxtaposition strange? Today's Daily Reporter, a pro-labor union paper carried two stories about SE Wisconsin, both mentioning development and the KRM train, the proposed Kenosha-Racine-Milwaukee train line that would be an extension of the popular Metra line that runs through Chicago's northern suburbs.

That line currently stops in Kenosha, and there is no train service from Racine or Kenosha to Milwaukee. The closest train is in Sturtevant, WI, west of Mt. Pleasant. That is the Hiawatha line that runs six times per day between Chicago and Milwaukee. (And makes money, by the way.)

To relieve congestion on I-94, the KRM was proposed as an alternative, but its future is in doubt, since the Wisconsin Legislature finished it's session without passing taxing authority for the SE Wisconsin RTA.

So today, one article, "Waiting for Change," talks about the transition, actual or possible, or SE Wisconsin to less a manufacturing base and more a series of bedroom communities for Chicago and Milwaukee, especially Chicago.  It prominently mentions the KRM as both a transportation option and a development tool.

And then another article today, "Fighting Over the Railroad," talks about both legislative efforts to pass the RTA legislation and local resistance to kicking in funds.

It also talks about the development that could come with the KRM line, however one commentator misses the point.

“Kenosha has had commuter rail to Chicago for 20-plus years,” Kisley said. “There’s no development there.”

Kisley said his group, along with other taxpayer groups such as the Racine Taxed Enough Already Party, will continue to oppose the project and pressure legislators.

What he fails to see is that the KRM would allow people to travel into Milwaukee, a much shorter trip than Chicago. Sure, as the first article points out, many people are willing to travel all the way from Kenosha to Chicago to get cheaper housing, lower taxes, and lake access. But think what an extension of that same lien would do for Racine and Kenosha if people could quickly and conveniently get to Milwaukee as well.

However, that isn't going to happen for awhile now.

As a former developer, Racine Mayor John Dickert said he experienced an immediate effect when the state Assembly effectively killed the KRM project in 2008. He said he had been working on $40 million worth of developments, only to have the deals fall through because the KRM did not move forward.

Oh, well, I guess Racine and Kenosha just aren't ready to grab the opportunities in front of them.