Bicycle Film Festival returns on October 2, 2025!
Get Tickets

Author: Craig Weinhold

Categories
In Depth

Midvale Bike Lane Survey Review

credit: City of Madison

note: this article is intended for readers familiar with the Midvale Blvd resurfacing project north of Mineral Point Rd

TL;DR:

  • The Midvale resurfacing survey was poorly constructed; its options were not even remotely comparable. City Engineering needs to do better when crafting future surveys.
  • Over a quarter of the written responses offered nothing of substance about the survey questions; many were simply grievances about City projects or the City’s support for bicycling. If these are excluded from the results, options 1 and 3 end up with similar levels of support.
  • Parking removals along Midvale are an inconvenience to residents, but they are not a hardship. All sixty homes have ample off-street parking and most have room to add more. On-street parking is seldom used today due to the high risk of cars being hit.
  • Midvale bike lanes have been in City plans for 50 years and there is proven need for them. Painted lanes are not ideal, but they are an economical improvement until the road is fully reconstructed in 10-15 years.

Resurfacing Background

Midvale Blvd north of Mineral Point Rd is going to be resurfaced in 2026. Compared to reconstruction, resurfacing is relatively low cost since it involves only a new layer of asphalt and painting new lane lines. There may be light curb work done, but the overall road geometry is left alone. By resurfacing in 2026, the City hopes to delay a full reconstruction of Midvale for 10-15 years. A full reconstruction will cost much more and includes stormwater, utilities, curb, medians, sidewalks, bike facilities, etc.

Plans to add bike lanes to Midvale Blvd go back to 1975, but north of Mineral Point Rd the curb-to-curb width does not have space for bike lanes and on-street parking and two vehicle lanes in each direction (the road is wider south of Mineral Point Rd and the City long ago painted a shared bike + parking lane there).

In 2023, the City first explored converting Midvale Blvd parking lanes to bike lanes as a Safe Streets For All (SS4A) project. In late 2024, a combined resurfacing + bike lane project was introduced. Information from those past meetings can be found at the Midvale Blvd Resurfacing & Safety Improvement Project page. In summer 2025, the City sent out a public survey asking for feedback on three options for bike facilities:

  • option 1 paint bike lanes on Midvale Blvd and remove street parking from most of the road.
  • option 2 move bicyclists to a quiet side street and have them cross multi-lane University Ave and Midvale at un-signalized intersections.
  • option 3 make no changes to Midvale, but do make minor improvements to Mineral Point Rd crossings at Segoe Rd and Owen Dr.

This survey had serious flaws. Its three “options” were not remotely equivalent. Option 1 was the rare chance to improve the connectedness of the Hilldale area by executing on 50-year old City plans and complying with long-standing City policies, all while having zero effect traffic and drivers. Options 2 & 3, on the other hand, were minor window-dressing projects on well-established bike routes. In fact, option 3’s improvements were so minor that City engineers have admitted they’re going to do them regardless of what happens with Midvale resurfacing.

Additionally, the options were loaded with technical jargon and diagrams rather than visual renderings. This may account for the large number of respondents (at least 11%) who misunderstood what was being proposed. The survey’s creator also seemed to favor option 3, as evidenced by lopsided “pros and cons” listed for each option.

Finally, surveys like this should not be designed like votes. That skews the way people respond to the survey, and it gives the wrong impression to policy-makers looking at the results. E.g., I support the improvements of option 3, but could not say so when taking the survey because I knew that would throw “votes” towards that option.

The survey generated record-setting amounts of public input – around 2500 responses and 1400 written comments. The results were presented at the Sept 20 Transportation Commission (T.C.) meeting. Below is a summary:

Option 3 was the clear winner in the survey, yet the T.C. voted for option 1 because it was the only one that addressed the City’s long-established area plans and transportation policies. I.e., it was the only option that improved bicycling in the area.

City Alders all spoke and voted strongly against option 1 because the loss of street parking would affect about sixty households. The meeting recording is worth watching (Alders and T.C. discussion happens around the two-hour mark). The Alders will now try to overturn the T.C. recommendation at Common Council. In describing her fight to overturn the T.C. vote, Ald Regina Vidaver cites “the overwhelming opposition of the public” to option 1.

Is that true?   Was there really overwhelming opposition to option 1, bike lanes?  To test this, I and a few volunteers cataloged all 723 written responses from people who listed option 3 as their main choice. Here is the raw spreadsheet for anyone to check the work or do their own analysis. Option 3 was analyzed because it was the option chosen by nearly everyone!  It was chosen by bike-lovers and bike-haters. It was chosen by those wanting to preserve street parking and by those concerned for pedestrian safety. It was chosen by people with detailed and well-considered ideas about traffic engineering, as well as those venting about no-turn-on-red signs. So why was option 3 chosen by so many different factions?

Below is a summary of our findings with select quotes.

Analysis of responses to option 3

Note: the groupings below do not add up to 100% because responses could be counted in more than one grouping.

Only 11% of responses mentioned the actual option 3 improvements

I am really excited about the possibility of these improvements

Option 3 provides an even safer route for an existing route many already take, including middle school students, due to the biking lanes already present on Segoe

Owen Drive is a main pedestrian walking route for children living in the Sunset Village neighborhood as they walk to School (at Queen of Peace or Midvale Elementary). Improving that intersection along with the proposed pedestrian safety improvements to Midvale would make a huge positive impact to the walkability/bikability for residents and commuters alike.

This shows 11% of respondents understood the proposed crossing improvements along Mineral Point Rd at Owen and Segoe. Those improvements are so clearly worthwhile that City Engineers at the T.C. acknowledged they’d go ahead regardless of what happens with Midvale resurfacing.

But the fact that 89% of responses made no mention of the improvements suggests that option 3 was mostly a protest option. I.e., it represented the least change, the least cost, the closest to the status quo. For many who chose option 3, its improvements were beside the point.

28% were openly hostile to any bike facilities and/or past City projects.

And half of them also made negative mention of Segoe’s protected lanes, Whitney Way’s parking removal, BRT lane changes, no-right-turn-on-red signs, and other traffic grievances:

Listen, you pencil-necked bureaucrats, you’re at it again, aren’t you? 

For God’s sake leave Midvale alone and leave something un-f’d up.

Stop harming people who need to drive vehicles in favor of virtue signaling.

The Segoe redo is a disaster for driving and there are virtually no bikes that use it.

11% mistakenly believed option 1 would remove vehicle lanes or erect concrete protected buffers.

I oppose any options that reduce traffic lanes on Midvale

The Option 1 plan seems to mimic what was created on Segoe Rd from University Ave to Regent Street

if you add bike lanes that block cars from being able to pull over to let emergency vehicles though, YOU will have blood on your hands!

This misinformation was common on social media, and probably resulted from the survey’s lack of visual renderings.

To be clear, option 1 adds a simple painted bike lane and does not remove any traffic lanes. They’re not that different from the lanes on University Avenue in that same area.

22% mentioned street parking.

This is the main opposition point: the removal of street parking needed to add bike lanes. This group is discussed in more detail later on. For a third of these responses, parking was their one and only one concern.

Losing parking on Midvale is not fair to homeowners.

People living on Midvale need to be able to have on street parking, don’t take it away as you did on Whitney Way. 

The residents who pay property taxes to the city should take priority over construction projects that will benefit others that do not live there and also decrease those residents’ home values

16% of respondents self-identified as bicyclists.

1% preferred the status quo, 4% would support a bike lane if it were protected (like N. Segoe), and the other 11% felt that since they don’t ride on Midvale, no one else needs to either.

I personally don’t like biking busy streets so that’s why I’m against option

I am a biker and I will always choose a route that is less hazardous than going on Midvale. Even if you make improvements I wouldn’t use them. 

as a biker, I never felt Midvale Blvd was a safe option for bike riding.

6% mentioned cost

It is fiscally irresponsible to undertake another expensive project so close to the recently completed Segoe Rd. project.

The city of Madison would be extremely short sighted to undertake such a large project at the taxpayer’s expense while benefitting only a handful of cyclists.

How can this be in a supposed stretched budget? This mayor overspends my tax money

The survey did not discuss costs, other than mentioning that cost savings was a benefit of option 3. The City budget shows $2.75M to resurface Midvale Blvd and implement all pedestrian crossing upgrades and signal improvements. The cost of the three bike options are not broken out, but an educated guess is $150k for option 1, or $50k for options 2 or 3. I.e., all are less than 5% of the project budget.

To put $2.75M into perspective, consider that Rimrock resurfacing is $1.1M for a similar length and width, while Virginia Terrace resurfacing is $2.6M for a road half as long and half as wide. These projects have a lot of cost variability.

25% were “nanny” responses.

These responses believe they’re looking out for the interests of bicyclists by discouraging them from riding on Midvale. These respondents ignored the many reasons why bicyclists might want or need to take Midvale.

Directing bike traffic to nearby, less-traveled streets looks like a better option that will be safer for both bicyclists and motorists.  

Keep us safe and keep us off Midvale. 

Best move the bikes to neighborhood streets parallel to Midvale.

30% of responses seem to be pure protest votes against the City, against bicycling, or in favor of car-only roads.

This group of responses does not mention street parking, nor do they say anything favorable about safety improvements, alternate bike routes, or crossing improvements. They show little understanding of the resurfacing project nor the options presented by the City engineers. They also show little concern for the problems of the current road (e.g., speed) and for neighbors who live, park, walk, and bike in the area.

This is why people hate you. You and your clipboards, your “community input” meetings where the same three NIMBYs show up to whine.

too.much is spent on idiotic accommodations for bikes.

Construction on Midvale for pedestrians is a waste of money and time

These are valid voices, of course. But are they constructive? Do they deserve the same weight as the other thoughtful comments, especially when many interpret the survey as a democratic vote?

If those 30% of pure protest responses are excluded, the “overwhelming opposition of the public” claim withers and options 1 & 3 are left with similar public support:

The case for bike lanes

Plans for Midvale bike lanes have been firm for fifty years – 1975 Madison Bikeway long-term plan, 2000 Bicycle Transportation Plan (pg 72), 2014 Hoyt Park Neighborhood Plan (pg 63), 2015 Bicycle Transportation Plan (pg 40), and 2024 West Area Plan (pg 24).  Of the sixteen roads identified in 2000 as having the “greatest need for bicycle facilities,” all but Midvale and Gammon have already been addressed.

Real bike usage data (see map below) show that:

  • Bicyclists use Midvale Blvd in high numbers today, even though it has no official bike facility.
  • For bicyclists crossing University Avenue, Midvale Blvd is by far the most popular place to cross in the two miles between Whitney Way and Highland Ave.
  • Of bicyclists traveling north or south of Regent St, slightly more choose Midvale Blvd than the alternate routes on Segoe or Owen.

Segoe and Owen are both excellent bike routes, but they do not serve all riders and all destinations:

  • Midvale is where the shops, groceries, schools, hardware stores, banks, medical offices, restaurants and library all are. Midvale is part of a 15-minute city.
  • Midvale is the shortest and most intuitive connection between the Southwest Path, the University Ave / Shorewood Path, and the Regent / Kendall bike boulevard.
  • Segoe & Owen alternate routes can also be longer, slower, steeper, and require crossing busy Mineral Point Rd, Midvale Blvd, and/or University Avenue without a stoplight. They are also unintuitive to those new to the area, navigating by GPS, or only familiar with major roads.

Below is the biking data from Strava, an activity tracker used by many athletes and commuters. This data is very useful for understanding how popular different routes are, but it is not good for counting the actual number of bicyclists. Click the image for a better view.

The case for on-street parking

Nearly every major road from University Ave to Monroe St has had parking removed or restricted at some point in the past. Here is how Wisconsin State Journal reflected on Regent St rush hour parking removal back in 1960:

This has hurt some merchants and regrettably so, but the council has acted for what it feels to be the greater good.

A policy, to be valid, must be applied impartially. That means Regent St., as well as the many other streets in the city where parking has been restricted.

If the policy isn't applied impartially, then it had better be discarded, and we'd better remove rush hour restrictions from other streets as well...

Every City must weigh the needs of thousands of daily motorists, bicyclists, pedestrians, and bus-riders against the needs of the adjacent landowners. In business districts that lack off-street parking, the economic aspects often win out and influence road designs, as happened on S. Park Street with BRT. In residential districts, especially those with ample off-street parking, the homeowner resistance usually loses out to City policy and plans.

Madison policy has favored transportation over parking since at least the 1950’s, and that policy is now enshrined in the Complete Green Streets modal hierarchy where street parking is dead last compared to all other needs:

source: Complete Green Streets Modal Hierarchy
https://www.cityofmadison.com/transportation/initiatives/complete-green-streets

In the Midvale survey, 161 responses (22%) were in favor of preserving parking, with most comments mentioning the homeowners of the sixty properties south of Regent St:

We have elderly family with mobility issues that will no longer have access to our home.

Removing the Midvale parking will create an inconvenient and dangerous situation for guests and contractors visiting Midvale residences.

Option 1 is unfair to the numerous homeowners on Midvale.  Being completely unable to park on the street outside their homes would be a hardship. 

The City did numerous counts over two years showing that those homeowners rarely use street parking. How does that fact square with the homeowner pleas to preserve parking?

  • An examination of the sixty houses shows that nearly all have garages and at least two off-street parking spaces. Most have yard space to add more parking and some have already done that.
  • All affected homes are less than a block (600′) from off-street parking on quiet side streets.
  • During public meetings in 2023 and in early 2025, multiple residents explained the low street parking rates were due to the fact that cars get hit when they’re parked on the street.
  • Crash data from Community Maps confirms that. It shows 17 crashes with parked cars along Midvale in the past 15 years. For comparison, the similarly long stretches of Regent & Bluff had twelve crashes, Mineral Point Rd had four, Owen had five, and Segoe had zero. Midvale appears to have the highest rate of parked car crashes west of the isthmus.
source: https://transportal.cee.wisc.edu/partners/community-maps/

(That brings up the topic of Midvale Blvd speed and safety that was mentioned by at least 13% of respondents. They were near unanimous that the street is becoming unbearable to live near. All wanted the City to do more to control speeds and reckless driving.)

The homeowner protests are real and sincere, but also a bit hollow given how little they use street parking, how much off-street parking they have, and how hazardous it is to park on the road. I wonder how they feel about nearby Mineral Point Rd where there is practically zero usage of street parking. I also wonder about fairness and impartiality: don’t people who live in no-parking areas of Regent St or Commonwealth or Glenway also have contractors, guests, or elderly family with mobility issues? And most importantly, I wonder if this is really an issue of hardship, or is it one of convenience?

I also wonder if the the public would be so defensive of street parking if this project was adding a motor vehicle lane rather than a bike lane… What would the survey results look like then?

The case for compromise

At the T.C., the project was presented with no room for compromise. That’s a shame because there are options.

For example, empirical and anecdotal data suggest that Midvale bike lanes are needed most between Regent St and University Avenue. That’s the business area around Hilldale Mall with many businesses and apartment buildings. One compromise could be to only add bike lanes on that stretch.

Or consider that Midvale Blvd south of Regent St is a big hill. Since northbound downhill bikers travel faster and are more in need of lane space, another compromise might have a bike lane only in the northbound direction.

Several survey responses suggested widening the Midvale sidewalks into paths, like the path along Hammersley Rd. That’s far too costly for the resurfacing project and would also require tree removals and/or yard encroachment. But if there’s enough buy-in from the homeowners, maybe the Alders could drive this idea forward.

I’m personally not a fan of any of the street compromises, but politics involves concessions. At this point, it’s for the Alders to figure out and they should be thinking about all available options.

I do think City policy statements and minor ordinance changes could also address resistance to parking removal. For example, several people mention the need for short use of the street for deliveries, shuffling cars in the driveway, picking up and dropping off, etc. The City should make it clear that temporary “stopping” and “standing” are allowed along the curb provided the vehicles engage their hazard lights. This is what exactly what delivery drivers do today throughout the city, and it works fine. Some people also mention the need for parking for parties or garage sales; the City could adapt street occupancy permits to allow for such events during non-peak hours.

Last word: Shared bike + parking lanes

Any compromise will likely leave gaps where bike lanes disappear and where bikers will need to ride in unofficial 9′ shared bike + parking lanes that are even narrower than the 10′ shared lanes Midvale has today south of Mineral Point Rd. NACTO frowns on shared bike + parking lanes, but Wisconsin seems to like them. The 2004 Bicycle Facility Design Handbook (pg 2-14) specifies 12′ minimum width while the 2003 Bicycle Planning Guidance (pg 39) specifies 14′.

A design point is the right-side painted line. Where it exists, drivers naturally expect bikers to stay to the right of it. But what happens when that’s not possible? The bikers are the ones who finds themselves in sketchy and uncomfortable situations. At those times, it’d almost be better to NOT have that right-side painted line.

This point brings to mind survey response no. 491:

I observe that the few cyclists who do chose to use  Midvale Boulevard seem to be intentionally making a point.  They either occupy a full  traffic lane, or swerve out into traffic around parked cars.  They seem to be engaged  in dangerous performance art or protest.

I guess one person’s survival skill for navigating bad infrastructure is another person’s performance art!

Categories
Bike News Newsletter Weekly Update

Regent St; Lakeshore path; Big Tent advocacy

Cyclists cruise along the Lakeshore Path

Welcome to the Madison Bikes Newsletter. September is peak bike month as people return to work and 8,000 incoming freshmen drop into our city, many of them with bicycles. Please extra careful, patient, and helpful to the newcomers.

Regent Street (Randall to Park St) reconstruction

The City has just launched its Regent Street reconstruction, with a Public Information Meeting scheduled for Sept 15 and a survey open until Sept 22. Please take the survey! Last year, Madison Bikes community held a bike audit event that was a real eye-opener about just how many bikers use and cross Regent St and frequent the businesses there despite how the street has no bike facilities. It also revealed just how congested and claustrophobic the pedestrian facilities are. Six months ago, business owners announced a pedestrian- and gameday-centric vision for the street. This section of Regent Street is ripe for major improvement!

In semi-related news, last week, the Transportation Commission unanimously voted to test removing rush hour lanes from Willy Street. The test results could change the City’s perspective on what’s possible with arteries like Willy St, Monroe St, and Regent St — streets with 15,000 daily cars, rush hour lanes, dense business districts, large residential populations, poor pedestrian crossings and sidewalks, and no bike facilities.

Lakeshore path – Limnology Bypass

UW is improving the Lakeshore Path where it passes the Limnology Bldg, just west of the Memorial Union. Work begins Sept 2 and lasts until November-ish. During the construction, bikes will detour to the north side, sharing the pedestrian path. Please go slow and be courteous. That path sees 7,500 people a day, making it by far Madison’s busiest path.

Seems simple, right? Take a peek at the years of work behind this!

Big Tent Advocacy

A recent facebook thread asked people to encourage the UW to follow-up on last year’s study of options for paving and lighting Lakeshore Path. The response was animated, and a bit negative, with many saying they wanted no improvements because they liked the gravel path just the way it is. It was a good reminder that bicycle advocacy is a very big tent, and 100 bicyclists likely have 100 different opinions about how to make bicycling better.

We see that also with Midvale Blvd’s resurfacing (survey open until Sept 2). Where some bike advocates see a chance at long-overdue Midvale bike lanes, others are content to write off Midvale and focus on improving other routes.

<soapbox> Differences of opinion are healthy and part of what makes our big tent of bicycling great. But I encourage everyone to always be thinking beyond their own bicycling needs and comfort. Think about people who bike out of necessity, not choice. Think of people who don’t know the back roads and might use google maps for navigation. Think about ways to grow bike ridership. Think about helping people choose biking over driving. Think about routes, lifestyles, seasons, and tolerances other than your own.</soapbox>

The Virtue of Patience

A few weeks ago, we reported that the newly-opened Wilson St cycletrack took seven years to come to fruition. Seven years is how long it took to land on the moon. It’s also how long it took Caeser to conquer Gaul, for Hoover Dam to be built, and for the Beatles to play music together. My first reaction was “Wow, that’s FAST!”

It’s painful how slow and piecemeal bike infrastructure comes together, how strong the headwinds are, how haters point out “it doesn’t connect anywhere!“, and how fickle and easily derailed these projects can be. The Glacial Drumlin connector and North Mendota trails are two high-profile examples of turtle-paced projects. The West Beltline path is another.

Stretching from Whitney Way to High Point Rd, the West Beltline path has been planned since 1997 and has been built in segments over the last 25 years. Its penultimate segment — a short 1000′ link from Zor Shrine Rd to High Point Rd — was just finished and you can now pick it up behind REI. The final segment is planned for 2028. When done, it’ll have taken over 30 years to complete. I think about that and wonder what other projects take nearly half a lifetime to finish? Can anyone imagine any 3-mile road taking 30 years?

This is both a rant and a meditation on what it is to be a bicycle and trail advocate. I look forward to the West Beltline Path ribbon cutting … just three short years from now!

Rapid Fire

September RoundTrip Smart Trips Challenge! Win prizes just by logging your trips (bike, walk, bus, and even carpooling) and playing Bike Bingo

Sunday September 7 from 5 – 6:30pm is the next Bike Advocacy Meetup at Machinery Row Bicycles. (if you’re not too tired after the Ironman)

October 2 Bicycle Film Festival! Last year’s was a gorgeous evening full of community and grooviness. This year promises to be even better.

Interested in plugging into a real-time advocacy feed? Join the Madison Bike Advocacy discord group (this sign up link works until Sept 7).

Nakoma Rd construction is taking longer than expected. Any bets that it’ll be done before winter?

The Tancho Drive Path is kicking off. Path construction is expected in spring 2026.

That’s all for this newsletter. Thanks for reading, have a great week, and enjoy the early fall weather.

As always, you can find an overview of all bike events on our Community Bike Calendar. Email us at info@madisonbikes.org to add your events. And if you value our newsletter and other work, consider donating to Madison Bikes. For construction updates, check out the city’s Bike Madison page.

Thanks to our sponsors who make our events possible!

Categories
Action Alert

Walking Iron Trail Surface

Action

Email a comment to DeSmidt.Alex@danecounty.gov asking that the Walking Iron trail surface be paved.

That’s it — a one line email is enough.

Please make the same request in person if you attend the Dane County Parks and Open Space Plan Open House on Wed April 30, 2-6pm at Lussier Family Heritage Center, 3101 Lake Farm Road.

Background

Walking Iron Phase 2 is a rails-to-trails conversion that will run from the new Wisconsin River Recreational Bridge at Sauk City half way to Mazomanie (red in the map below). A near-future phase (yellow) will bring it into Mazomanie. A distant-future trail will connect from Middleton. Here are current photos of the trail and bridge construction.

The new bridge and some/all of this first phase of the Walking Iron trail will be open to snowmobilers. There is a club snowmobile trail in the area, but the club and DNR haven’t yet figured out where snowmobilers will transition to it (perhaps the black dashed lines on the map, but possibly at other places).

Snowmobilers are adamant that the entire length of the Walking Iron trail have a gravel surface (“crushed aggregate”), similar to the Military Ridge, Glacial Drumlin, and Badger State Trails. The snowmobilers are well-organized and will be making their voices heard.

Walking Iron Trail immediate-term (red, to the P) and near-future (yellow, to Mazomanie)

Detail

I love our limestone/gravel trails and often prefer riding on them. And I know that many bicyclists either prefer gravel or have no real preference. But there are several reasons why I believe Walking Iron trail should be asphalt:

  • This is not a rural recreation trail; this will be an 8-mile regional connector between two growing cities and employment centers. Residential neighborhoods are already springing up along the trail’s route. It will be used year-round for recreation, fitness, and transportation.
  • There is no good asphalt alternative. Hwy 78 is extremely busy and Strava global heatmap shows that bicyclists and runners avoid it like the plague. County Y is better but adds several miles.
  • Paved trails can be safely used in more months of the year, in more weather conditions, by a wider range of activities. They are also ADA-compliant, a requirement of the “TAP” grants used to fund this project.
  • This trail will connect to the Great Sauk State Trail which is paved for 12 miles today and is planned to be paved all the way to Reedsburg. The future trail from Middleton to Mazomanie will almost certainly be paved.
  • Paved trails are durable and require far less maintenance. Gravel is prone to washouts, ruts, soft spots, etc. This is a big deal because much of Walking Iron will be in a marshy area inaccessible to heavy equipment.
Surface damage on Military Ridge Trail, 4/27/2025.

Snowmobiling

Snowmobiling prospects only get bleaker with climate change. In the last decade, nearly half their seasons were one week or less.

In good years with cold temperatures and ample snowpack, gravel or asphalt both serve snowmobiles well. In the more common bad years, a gravel surface might extend the season by an extra muddy day or two, at most.

Asked about snow retention, MTB trail-builder Corey Stelljes says that it “doesn’t vary greatly” between surface types and that the “biggest drivers seems to be having a north facing hillside and shade.” This matches my experience with the Cannonball singletrack trails, where the chip-sealed and crushed limestone sections seem to retain snow equally (only the fully natural section holds snow longer).

The Walking Iron trail largely runs north/south in a wide railroad corridor with little tree cover, exposing it to lethal winter sun for most of the day. The trail surface will not change that. If snowmobilers want to maximize their season, their best tool is to keep to the trees and frozen waterways as their current club trail does.

Categories
Action Alert In Depth

The Tragedies of Sauk Creek Greenway

(disclaimer: this is a personal blog and not an official position of Madison Bikes)

Alder Nikki Conklin recently announced the scuttling of a long-planned North/South path through the Sauk Creek Greenway on Madison’s far west side. This is an unfortunate capitulation. The tragedy isn’t so much the loss of the path, but the way in which it was lost and how it unfairly perpetuates a “Bikes vs Trees” narrative.

If you just want action, jump to Next Steps at the bottom of this painfully-long blog.

I’ve also added a footnote1 with updates and follow-ups since this blog was originally posted.

An area map of planned bike improvements, with the Sauk Creek greenway highlighted

Background

The 26-acre Sauk Creek Greenway snakes from Tree Lane to Old Sauk Rd. There has long been a stormwater project to deal with years of neglect and surges of stormwater from west side development, particularly the parking lots near Menards. The issue became critical after the 2018 floods which resulted in the drowning death of a person in the nearby Chapel Hill-Greentree greenway, an area with many similarities to Sauk Creek. That incident resulted in the $5.9M McKenna Boulevard Flood Mitigation Project.

The Sauk Creek stormwater project’s goals are to stabilize the creek and build a gravel service road similar to the ones in Owen Conservation Park and Pheasant Branch north of Century Ave. The project would also thin the trees according to a soon-to-be-released corridor plan. It’s expected that the City will want to remove all damaged and unhealthy trees, and also many of the less desirable trees that are crowding the more desirable trees. Opinions vary on what is a “desirable” tree, but there’s no doubt the current greenspace is a product of neglect and mesophication, and there isn’t a single healthy oak tree under 80 years old. Unlike Owen, Olin, Hoyt, Picnic Point, and other urban greenspaces, this greenway has never had a volunteer group clearing invasives, burning duff, stemming erosion, maintaining trails, etc.

Throughout the project, neighbors have rightfully expressed concerns about what tree removal will look like, especially after a different tree-thinning exercise a few blocks away seemed excessive:

Past tree clearing near the Sauk Creek greenway.

As far as I can tell, the City departments involved seem to have been responsive, going so far as to inventory the entire 26-acre wood and its 5500 trees, post a list of every public meeting and department involved, publish a community engagement guide, and issue multiple statements to dispel misunderstandings that had arisen. However, throughout the process one can’t help but sense that neighbors seemed more interested in how the project will affect their own properties than the City’s.

Enter the “Friends”

In mid-2022, the “Friends of Sauk Creek” formed. Unlike most “Friends” organizations that help improve our parks and open space, this group’s single goal was to “stop plans to remove 5,500 trees during a reconstruction of Sauk Creek,” i.e., to ensure nothing changes. [Update: their new web site has expanded their mission to include “stop bike paths in the nearby woods.” Their old web site with much of their history is still in google’s cache]. The leaders are nice, intelligent people and they’re passionate about their neighborhoods. But for reasons I can’t explain, their manner of engaging with the City quickly turned belligerent and hostile, and they’ve shown little interest in compromise or finding common ground.2

The group aggressively took the planners to task, demanding details and impacts long before any engineering had been done to provide precise answers. They looked for inconsistencies with what was said by different people in different City departments, jumping on them as signs of malfeasance or secrecy. They apparently filed Freedom of Information Act requests. To this outsider, their treatment of our City officials seemed unfair and unwarranted. Despite all that, a petition they crafted in late 2022 calling for public involvement in tree-clearing decisions was calm, measured and entirely appropriate. It got 373 signatures. I would have happily signed it.

Their true colors were revealed in May 2023 when they rallied to kill a planned youth single-track MTB trail in Walnut Grove Park that would have provided youth recreation similar to the Aldo Leopold Park shred-to-school trails. The trail didn’t endanger a single mature, healthy tree and was environmentally compatible with the park’s existing uses (which include a dog park!). With no environmental reason for their opposition, it’s impossible not to conclude that the “Friends” group is more concerned about the users of the greenway than the health of the greenway. To them, the greenway should remain their own private backyard in perpetuity and anything that brings more people into the area is a threat.

What real “friends” do. Pulling garlic mustard along the Yarmouth Greenway 5/3/2024

During a meeting in July 2023, City planners indicated that the stormwater project may be coordinated with a long-planned North/South path through the greenway. This would mean paving and grading the access road to ADA and NACTO path standards, adding one or more bridges, and connecting the path to the City’s growing All Ages & Abilities bike network. The idea of a path goes back at least to the 2000 bike plan (pg 84) where it was listed as a “third priority” because “suitable on-road routes exist.” The “Friends” group twists that to say that the City had declared the path “wasn’t a priority.” In reality, “third priority” means exactly that and, after 24 years, many of the other “third priority” projects have been completed, including Wingra Creek underpass, Stricker Pond path, a path in Blackhawk Park, the new Starkweather bridge, etc. The path again appeared in the 2015 bike plan on the future map (figure 4-7, pg 39). It also was on the West Area Plan that kicked off in early 2023.

At some point, East/West path connections through the greenway were also added to the West Area Plan. I’m not sure the history of that, but do know that students headed to Memorial High School, Jefferson Middle School, and the Lussier Community Center have expressed a desire for an E/W connection without having to go all the way down to Tree Lane. For some, an E/W connection will eliminate up to a mile of extra travel and avoid having to take busy four-lane Old Sauk Rd. It will also provide a connection to WisDOT’s planned bike/ped beltline bridge just to the west. Even after Alder Conklin capitulated on the N/S path this week, the E/W path remains in the plan and will surely be a continued fight.

Enter the Boogeyman

Once the “Friends” heard about a paved path, they were livid and shifted their attention towards this new boogeyman — the bike path! After all, what better symbol of hatred than a smug, entitled biker?

credit: AI

Their web site soon shouted “City planner describes creek area as biking hub; it could destroy thousands of trees, birds, wildlife.” Taking a lesson from the “see what sticks” playbook, they brainstormed a random assortment of false and exaggerated talking points, listed below (with my rebuttals):

  • “Thousands of trees removed”, “decimate”, “reduced canopy”, etc. (The stormwater project is what will remove trees! A paved path will only require minor additional tree removals for bridges and the E/W path. Engineers will surely try to avoid the healthy, desirable trees.)
  • “Destroy nature”, “harm animals”, etc. (Paths are not a major factor. Studies do show that mountain biking can impact nesting habits of some bird species in wilderness areas. But this is an urban greenway; any animal here is adapted to houses, highways, noise, and the adjacent dog park. Turtles even dig their nests next to paths.)
  • “The path’s impervious surface will leach toxins into our lakes!” (Path asphalt is inert and the path has no gutters or drains for water to reach the lake. All rainwater soaks into the ground a few feet from where it falls. Porous asphalt can also be used, as Fitchburg did along Lacy Rd. Toxins from asphalt largely come from driveway sealants used by homeowners.)
  • “The grade is too steep and the path will be dangerous!” (The grades are nothing that design engineers couldn’t handle; overall it’s much tamer than paths in Yarmouth Crossing and Pheasant Branch Creek.)
  • “Heat-island, climate change!” (The stormwater project is responsible for the extent of tree removal; their thinning will allow the remaining trees to flourish, improving the overall canopy. Plus, if the path can convince even a single person to give up their car or drive less, that can save up to 250 mature trees worth of carbon capture. Biking and walking are climate solutions, not problems!)
  • “The path will be lighted!” (This is not in any plan and is technically challenging. It would only be added if neighbors asked for it. [edit: see footnote 1])
  • “The cost will be $6M! or $7M!” (The City doesn’t have a design detailed enough to know what the cost will be. By the time the stormwater project has rehabilitated the gravel access road, the cost to add asphalt and bridges should be very reasonable with most costs covered by a federal grant.)
  • “Bikers are fast and dangerous” (FUD. See below for why this path would not be a major bike thoroughfare.)
  • “The path doesn’t connect anywhere!” (Never mind the chicken-and-egg fallacy of arguing against paths because of lack of other paths, this path would have immediately connected to bike lanes on Old Sauk Rd and Tree Ln, and it would nearly reach Mineral Point Rd’s new widened sidewalk. The E/W path will connect WisDOT’s planned beltline overpass at Sauk Creek Park.)
  • “The path isn’t needed because there are other routes on Westfield and High Point!” (This is absolutely true for most bicyclists one sees on the roads today. However, it’s estimated that ⅓ of bicyclists only bike where there are comfortable off-street paths. This path could be the difference in whether a family bikes or drives to Swagat for dinner or whether their child can reach Alicia Ashman Library on their own.)

This last point drives me crazy and points to a major failure in City messaging. This path would never have been a major bike hub or bike highway on the order of the Capital City trail or Southwest Commuter Path. Instead, it would be a backyard greenway path similar to ones in Greentree-Chapel Hill, Oak Meadow, Mineral Point Park, Garner Park, and dozens of others. Those are all important bike connections, especially for All Ages and Abilities, but they attract far more walkers, joggers, dog walkers, strollers, and kids than bicyclists. Most path users are from the adjacent neighborhoods.

A typical 5pm in McKee Farms Park. Five walkers, one jogger with dog, and one fisherman on a bike (obscured).

Mobilization strategies

The “Friends” group issued a second petition in Fall 2023 filled with their false talking points, though it moderated its words on tree removal. Curiously, they only got 305 signatures, far less than the 2022 petition. This could have been due to shortness of time, but it might also be due to neighbor fatigue. I’ve spoken with several people in the area including a few who are serious conservationists and, frankly, they’re bewildered by how sideways things have gone and they’re afraid to speak up because of the power the “Friends” group seems to wield.

The Friends of Sauk Creek’s 2023 petition overlayed with the author’s rebuttal

Another pillar of their mobilization strategy was to hound and harass every public servant and every public meeting related to the West Area Plan with emails, public comments, and in-person confrontations. Ald. Conklin’s inbox probably has a thousand messages about it, far more than any human could read, let alone reply to. At the Wisconsin Healthy Communities Summit last week, State Senator Chris Larson advised that one key to successful government advocacy was to “point out the problem without being problematic.” The “Friends” group proves him dead wrong! I recall one technical zoning meeting where an exasperated attendee asked of the barrage of Sauk Creek path comments, “Do these even refer to anything on the agenda?” (they didn’t, but it was a public meeting so there was no stopping it)

It was also agonizing to see how much time and energy the “Friends” group was able to extract from their own members. I’ve read every public comment from a half-dozen meetings. Most are earnest and thoughtful, and many brought up well-researched concerns about project bounds, path routing, grade, erosion, proximity to yards — all issues that would be really helpful during the design phase, had there been one. But so many of the messages also raised the same false and exaggerated talking points. At one meeting, a neighbor with a disability stood in opposition to the path because she couldn’t imagine how an ADA path could navigate the terrain. With the project now scuttled, we’ll never know how engineers would have solved that; but they would have.

A third pillar was the press. By framing this as “David v Goliath,” “neighbors saving trees from uncaring City planners,” or “trees versus bikers”, they got a lot of sympathetic press. Allison Garfield’s excellent Capital Times piece “A Silent Deforestation” gave most coverage to the neighbors, but it was extremely fair in presenting the City’s position. WORT‘s earlier coverage was similarly balanced. Coverage in the Wisconsin State Journal was more lopsided for the “Friends”, and Cap Times editor Paul Fanlund proved himself a sucker for the false messaging, lobbing cheap shots against bicyclists in his opinion piece on zoning changes.

The fourth pillar was to capitalize on the public outcry about proactive zoning, as Fanlund had done. The zoning issue is important and potentially affects the entire city, but it has nothing to do with the local Sauk Creek stormwater project. That didn’t stop a former Common Council candidate from making this FOX news-worthy video that egregiously conflates the two issues.

Navigating the Sauk Creek Greenway is easier than City politics

City Capitulation

The strategy of the “Friends of Sauk Creek” worked. The city is now planning to remove the N/S path from the West Area Plan. This is no big loss for the overall bike network, but it is a tremendous loss for low-stress bicycling since beautiful paths like this are often what get people hooked on biking in the first place. I personally think it’s also a huge loss for the neighborhood, but that’s really for the neighbors to judge.

The biggest tragedy for me as a transportation advocate is that this loss is entirely due to misinformation and bullying. The “Friends of Sauk Creek” apparently feels no shame in their tactics and perhaps this is just a case of local democracy emulating national politics. But that doesn’t make it right. It’s embarrassing to see it succeed in Madison.

Of course, the “Friends” aren’t done. Of course they know the path has little impact on tree removal. They will fight the E/W path that remains in the plan. They will fight the stormwater project later this summer. And, in a couple years, they’ll be fighting the off-street bike paths now planned for High Point and Westfield Rds — paths that will end up costing far more than the greenway path and that will remove parking and disrupt the front yards of the fifty or so home- and condo- owners on those streets.

What’s next?

Madison’s West Area Plan updates and information about all upcoming meetings are posted at https://www.cityofmadison.com/dpced/planning/west-area-plan/3896/. The Sauk Creek path change has two meetings:

  • virtually on Thursday May 30 at 6pm
  • in-person open house at High Point Church on Thursday June 6 from 6-8pm. Fortunately or not, this falls in the middle of Bike Week!

As bicyclists, our goals should be to show overwhelming support for the East/West path and to try to restore the North/South path through the Sauk Creek greenway.

Our success depends almost entirely on helping opposition neighbors to (a) understand that the paths are not responsible for mass tree removal and (b) that paths will be an asset, not a threat, to the neighborhoods, the greenway and the adjacent property owners.

Let’s mobilize with facts and kindness. Let’s help the opposition think about how they might personally benefit from a path. E.g., walking a dog without getting muddy feet or ticks, morning jogs or birding, walking or biking to dinner, sending your child alone to the park or library, and so on. If quality-of-life gains aren’t enough, remind them that a trail will increase property values by 3-5%.

Most importantly, let’s encourage them to go explore the similar greenways to see what paths are really like and how other neighbors use them. Here are four ideal ones to visit:

  • Middleton’s Pheasant Branch Creek path (at Park St, not the larger area north of Century Blvd) is most analogous to Sauk Creek in terms of narrowness, length, and terrain.
  • The Mineral Point Park path from behind Memorial High School to Inner Drive. This is similarly narrow to Sauk Creek but has a concrete stormwater drain.
  • Fitchburg’s paths like Nevan Springs/Buttonbush and Oak Meadow have adjacent houses. Here you can see how homeowners integrate their yards with the paths while maintaining privacy.
  • The Cap City trail west of Fish Hatchery (park at Adesys) is a popular trail so expect a much higher volume of bike traffic. It has steep grades, multiple bridges, and a meandering creek whose banks are reinforced with natural boulders.
  • The gravel maintenance road in Owen Conservation Park from Inner Drive to Forsythia Pl. This is what Sauk Creek’s new maintenance road will look like unpaved. The corridor width is not that different from a paved path.
Gravel maintenance road in Owen Conservation Park

There is a path to saving the path.

  1. Update: Added Mineral Point Park path to the list of suggests greenways to visit. Errata: Although the “Friends” group does not organize it, some Sauk Creek neighbors do independent garlic mustard removal and other woods maintenance. Follow-up: The “Friends” group has not responded to this blog , but instead doubled-down on their misinformation in a May 19 blog. Follow-up: social media discussions about this blog are at Nextdoor and Reddit (and earlier Reddit). A very good policy discussion about paths in Sauk Creek greenway took place in the Dec 13, 2023 meeting of the Madison Transportation Commission (watch here from 1:52:00 to 2:33:45). In it, and also at a June 6 meeting, City engineers said they preferred paths to be lit but that it was very much a design question, decided by public input. ↩︎
  2. To be transparent, I have no first-hand exposure to the Friends of Sauk Creek prior to Fall 2023, so all descriptions of earlier events are based on the public record. There may be other plausible explanations. I welcome the “Friends” or other involved people to help correct the record and point out any mistakes they read in this blog. ↩︎
Categories
Action Alert Bike News In Depth

Mineral Point Road’s “Widened Sidewalk”

(disclaimer: this is a personal blog and not an official position of Madison Bikes)

Update

On 12/5/2023 the Common Council approved the most bike-friendly version of the tree-friendly plans before it. The final path will be 10′ wide for about ⅔ of its length, and 8′ wide for the rest. There will initially be a section of 5′ sidewalk by Nautilus Park (across from Oakwood Village), but the City promises to address that in the next few years.

The path will still be a “camel”, changing width and zig-zagging dozens of times, and with several sections where path and road are uncomfortably close. But it will be a glorious camel that will come to be loved by all! And, at 2.5 miles long it will also be, by far, the longest continuous off-street side path that Madison has ever retrofitted into an existing corridor.

In 1966, the Capital Community Citizens lobbied for a bicycle way on Mineral Point Rd to serve Memorial High School, then under construction. The idea of a “bike lane” or “bike way” was such a foreign concept that one member thought it might be a series of wood planks in the ditch next to the road. Opposition was fierce. “I’ve got problems with bikes on any main thoroughfare in the City of Madison,” the police chief testified. The highway commissioner and public works director were also opposed. One Alder offered a facetious amendment to study lanes for other schools, pointing out the Pandora’s Box they risked opening. 

Nearly 60 years later, Mineral Point Rd is on the verge of finally getting an off-street bike facility. Sort of.

Like the proverbial camel being “a horse designed by committee”, the City’s proposed widened sidewalk (meeting Oct 24, 2023) is unlikely to satisfy any of the interests fighting over it. The route will zig and zag, but still require cutting down plenty of trees. Its width will change seemingly at random from 10′ to 8′ to 5′, with the narrowest and most convoluted points being near intersections and danger spots like the heavily-trafficked Kwik-Trip driveway. Depending on how it’s built, the sidewalk may have a seam down the middle, leading to unevenness from frost heaves. There has also been no reduction in the number of driveways, despite a weak pledge that the City would explore doing that.

The new sidewalk will serve local needs and the High School, and for that I’m grateful. But it’s no transportation corridor and it certainly won’t tempt drivers from their cars. I’m not even sure it would have saved Taylor Dunn, the bicyclist killed last year in the final stretch of an 8-mile commute to his baking job on an e-bike he’d just purchased to save on bus fare.

How did we come to this and how can we prevent this in the future?

The future?

Bus Rapid Transit or Bust

The City’s haste to roll out Bus Rapid Transit is understandable. After decades of analysis paralysis – transportation studies, debates, and failed initiatives – it was imperative that we finally commit to mass transportation able to help Madison’s surging population. We knew the roll-out would not be perfect and that stakeholders would need to make concessions. What we didn’t expect was that those concessions would fall entirely on the shoulders of bicyclists, pedestrians, bus riders, neighborhood groups, and urban forestry. Those interests are now pitted against each other over scraps of pavement while single-occupant vehicles (SOV’s), arguably the root of most of our transportation woes, were virtually unscathed.

No one got the shaft more than the bicycling community. Despite the City painting a deceptively rosy picture of how BRT and bicycling were complimentary, bicycles have essentially been evicted from 2½ miles of East Washington Ave, 2½ miles of Mineral Point Rd, and ½ mile of University Avenue. These were high-stress routes, to be sure, but they were efficient and intuitive, and dedicated lanes helped bikers reach the many businesses that lined them (even during rush hour). As a replacement, the City offered sidepaths and widened sidewalks for Mineral Point Rd and University Avenue, and an uncommitted mish-mash of paths, widened sidewalks, bike boulevards and intersection improvements for East Washington. In the case of Mineral Point Rd, the original promise of a 10′ path soon morphed into an “8-10′ widened sidewalk”, and now it’s in danger of being crooked and having 600′ of normal 5′ sidewalk. For the 2700-3200 blocks of University Avenue, the forthcoming widened sidewalk will be technically illegal to bike on because it abuts businesses like Century House, Bagels Forever and IHOP, violating ordinance 12.76(1).

Suggested bike route improvements near East Washington Ave.

Pedestrians didn’t fare much better. Since 2021, the near-Capitol section of East Washington Ave has seen twelve pedestrian injuries and one fatality, easily crowning it the City’s most dangerous road for pedestrians to cross. Despite that, BRT required the removal of curb bumpouts, a pedestrian safety feature installed a decade earlier. BRT’s center-loading stations will also bring many more pedestrians into the traffic lanes, with some choosing to do it “Frogger” style.

In contrast, motor vehicles feel virtually none of the pain. With the exception of Whitney Way’s road diet (which pre-dated BRT), not a single traffic lane, driveway, or intersection is being shrunk, closed or restricted. The only changes I’m aware of are to turn lanes and traffic signal phases.

In Praise of Trees

The emotional pull of saving trees is undeniable. E.g., anyone taking a ride this fall along Devil’s Lake’s South Shore Drive will feel gut-punched by how many trees were cleared with that road’s recent reconstruction:

South Shore Drive, yesteryear and today. Credit: Skillet Creek Media

But there’s a tremendous difference between quality trees like the glorious oak at Homestead Shoppes or the large stands in Garner Park, and the terrace trees planted over the last five decades. These terrace trees are intended to compliment the road and they’re often on or near sanitary sewers, stormwater drains, and utility lines. They’re limited to species that won’t shower debris onto the roads and whose roots won’t damage curbs or the underground utilities. They are as natural as trees on a golf course or at Disneyland. These trees are indeed infrastructure and, like any other infrastructure, the City must be allowed to make improvements to them.

When thinking about climate and climate action, it’s important to maintain perspective about the real villains and solutions. For example, consider that it takes 80 mature trees to offset the carbon footprint of one electric car, and 250 trees for one gas car1. This means about 200 square miles of forest is needed to absorb the CO2 from drivers who use Mineral Point Rd each day. Meanwhile, a single bicyclist or e-bicyclist with a 12-mile round-trip commute is annually offset by just 3 mature trees.

If quality bike infrastructure helps convince just one driver to take up bicycling, that’s an instant savings of 77 – 247 trees for CO2 absorption alone. Add to that reductions in pollution, the heat islands due to roads and parking spaces, the construction costs, and the daily danger vehicles pose to bikers, peds, and each other, and one can’t help but conclude that quality bicycle infrastructure is part of the climate solution and it deserves everyone’s support.

Where do we go from here?

The City is now focused on North-South BRT, with public input meetings in November 2023. Prepare and SHOW UP. Just as with the East-West BRT meetings in 2021, many of the most critical choices have already been decided and public input will be brushed aside due to the tight timeline. For example, with talk so far focused on the much-needed South Park St redevelopment, I fully expect bicycles to be quietly evicted from 1½ miles of South Fish Hatchery Rd and 1½ miles of Northport Drive. This cannot be allowed to happen.

South Park St could follow this model. Madison Complete Green Streets 2022

Similarly, the rollout of North-South BRT would be a fantastic opportunity to create new bike and ped facilities along Packers Avenue and the eastern part of Northport drive. These would serve the Oscar Mayer redevelopment, the airport, Madison College, the area around the shuttered South Transfer Point, and the neglected north side. So far, there has been little discussion and no budget for any of this.

Speaking of … isn’t it absolutely bonkers that BRT will pass within ½ mile of the airport but not stop? And, if if BRT is so smart with jump queues, connected signaling, and 15-minute intervals, why can’t both directions of BRT use the same lane between stops? (like how trains at Detroit and Minneapolis airports work) I digress…

Independent of BRT, here are a few concrete things I plan to keep front-of-mind at future City meetings:

  • Get the City to stop widening sidewalks or building side paths without also reducing the number of driveways and crossings. The current approach is reckless and endangers bicyclists, as studies show that sidewalk riding is over twice as dangerous as road riding2. With Mineral Point Rd’s north-side widened sidewalk, over half the driveways could be removed without limiting business access. Of particular benefit would be the removal of driveways at Kwik Trip (2x), Capitol Petro, and Culvers.
  • We need an ordinance stating that all major streets get bike lanes regardless of the existence of a nearby path or widened sidewalk, even if that means sacrificing car lanes or on-street parking. It’s tragic how major reconstructions like Monroe St, 2700-3200 University Ave, and Atwood Ave did not get bike lanes while Mineral Point Rd is losing the bike lanes it had. This trend must be stopped.
  • There’s a fine line between protected lanes and Death Star trenches. E.g., the Bassett St protected lane is a both a success and a nightmare. The City really needs to do another protected lane experiment, this time with terraces on both sides. This is very relevant to South Park St.
  • Single-occupancy vehicles (SOV’s) and cross-town traffic on the isthmus are the twin root causes of most of Madison’s transportation headaches. The City should work to increase travel times for cross-town traffic. Brussels did this and within just one year saw a traffic drop of 27% in the city center, plus an “astonishing 36 percent jump in the number of cyclists.” Some ideas to achieve this:
    • High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lane restrictions.
    • Stoplight timing to slow traffic without lowering volume.
    • Asymmetric roads with more outbound capacity than inbound.
    • Turn restrictions to limit shortcuts.

Lastly, it is important that we continue to support Bus Rapid Transit! Despite maybe feeling like we’ve been run over by one, BRT will provide tens of thousands of people a viable alternative to their SOV’s, and that benefits us all.

  1. https://afdc.energy.gov/vehicles/electric_emissions.html and https://www.usda.gov/media/blog/2015/03/17/power-one-tree-very-air-we-breathe ↩︎
  2. https://bicyclesafe.com/ “The Crosswalk Slam” ↩︎
Categories
Action Alert In Depth

The Time is Now for a John Nolen Drive Underpass

(disclaimer: this is a personal blog and not an official position of Madison Bikes)

Last fall, Bicyclist Thomas Heninger was killed as he crossed John Nolen Drive by a distracted driver racing 60+ mph to beat a red light. His death is an exclamation mark on just how dangerous the grade crossings are at North Shore Dr and Broom St. That’s something we bicyclists know all about.

Thankfully just groceries. 2020. Photo: Tom Wilson
Car crossing slip lane against “No right turn” light. Sep 2022. Photo: Kai Mast
Slip lane knock-down. Aug 2019. Photo: Chris Collins

Danger aside, almost more impactful are the daily inconveniences of the grade crossings: tight staging areas, multiple “refuge” islands, lengthy wait times, slip lanes, complex & confusing signaling, uneven railroad tracks, and, of course, the noise and smell of 50,000 daily cars and trucks. To many, the North Shore Dr and Broom St crossings are an ordeal best avoided.

It is time to build an underpass so that bikers and pedestrians can have safe and unimpeded movement between the Lake Monona waterfront and the City’s interior.

An underpass is not a new idea, but it is a challenging one.

Why Now?

  • The City’s John Nolen Drive (JND) Reconstruction project is in full swing, and the concrete poured will shape the causeway and southern Law Park for 30+ years. When City engineers brought up various crossing ideas at a recent public information meeting, the underpass concept received, by far, the most support. If this project moves forward without an underpass, it will be nearly impossible to add one later for reasons explained below.
  • The City itself recommended an underpass as a long-term solution in 2017’s Blair/John Nolen Drive Corridor Study
  • Engineer Ron Shutvet independently researched the technical feasibility of two underpass concepts in the Dane County Master Plan Collaborative 2011 & 2017. His designs are practical and innovative.
  • In the Lake Monona Waterfront Design Challenge, two of the three designs called for underpasses in this area. One called it a top priority. With the next steps of the Challenge, Madison’s JND project engineers will have access to technical and aesthetic expertise of a world-class urban design firm to build an underpass that Madison can be proud of.
  • The City’s long-discussed plan for two-way cycletrack along Wilson Street is now kicking off. That new path will provide the gentlest climb from the lakefront up to Monona Terrace and the Capitol Square. This new path needs a low-stress connection to the path along John Nolen Drive.

What are the Obstacles?

  • Water. A tunnel under today’s John Nolen Drive would be 3.5′ below current lake level and 6′ below the high water of 2018. I’m told it is still possible, but only with careful engineering and costly pumps.
    The workaround is to raise the streets! The City’s 2017 JND/Blair corridor study did just that, raising JND by the bare minimum of 2′. Ron Shutvet’s concepts went farther, raising the streets 6-7′, raising the railroad 4′, and also realigning the tracks. These are not far-fetched ideas. Every part of Law Park’s surface is man-made and both the road and the railroad tracks have changed many times over the last century. There’s no reason we can’t do it again to create a better, safer, and friendlier waterfront.
  • Multiple jurisdictions. Possibly the biggest obstacle is that a tunnel would involve State DOT highway, State DOT Railroad, and the State DNR. To City engineers, such multi-jurisdictional projects are hassles, adding meetings and extending timelines by months or years.
    That’s a poor excuse not to get this done! The City works with the State all the time on Hwy 151 and beltline projects. Passenger rail will require Federal coordination. Just a few years ago, County, State, and Federal agencies successfully worked together to realign the Canadian Pacific railroad tracks near the airport. When the need is there — and the underpass is a top need — multiple jurisdictions can work together to get the job done.
  • Money. An underpass will cost several million dollars, and it is not currently funded. Thanks to the $15M Federal grant secured last month for the John Nolen Drive project, the City now has much more freedom to explore underpass concepts.
    Overall, the underpass cost is also low compared to the value it brings to the City, the Bassett Neighborhood, non-motorized transport, and recreation opportunities. It would immediately become the main way to reach the lakefront from campus or anywhere south or west of the Capitol, shaving minutes off every bike/ped journey. It would also achieve many of the lofty goals of the Lake Monona Waterfront Design Challenge at a fraction of the price.
  • Time. The City hopes to have a final JND causeway design in 2024 and do construction in 2026. An underpass would likely delay that schedule. I feel it’s worth it. As mentioned earlier, if reconstruction proceeds without an underpass, it’s almost certain that none will ever be built.

Does an Underpass Have Other Benefits?

  • Street-level crossings would still be needed but could be engineered to a more car-friendly standard, meaning less delay to drivers, less idling, better air quality, and less acceleration & braking noise.
  • One of Ron Shutvet’s options includes stormwater filtration. All three Lake Monona Waterfront Design Challenge firms also included stormwater management to reduce the amount of pollution reaching Lake Monona.
  • One of Ron Shutvet’s options also realigns the railroad tracks so that Broom St only has a single track crossing instead of two. This simplifies our streets and enlarges Brittingham Park 2.
  • Raising JND where its causeway meets North Shore Drive might allow for higher boat clearance into Monona Bay, which could be helpful during high water events like 2018.
  • The 4-acre “Brittingham Park 2” west of JND with the courts and dog exercise area is difficult to reach and lightly used. An underpass would seamlessly connect it to the lake, increasing its exposure and making it a good place for amenities sought by lakefront visitors such as playgrounds, picnic areas, bathrooms, etc.
  • Although this is a bicycling blog, an underpass would naturally benefit pedestrians of all types and especially people who have mobility challenges. My wheelchair-bound mother lives on West Main St. I pushed her across the Broom St crossing — two traffic islands, six ramps, two sets of railroad tracks with uneven pavement, three signal phases, and cars whizzing by in front and behind us non-stop; I will never do that again.

For an exhaustive list of underpass pros & cons, please see Ron Shutvet’s Master Plan Collaborative document.

Wouldn’t an Overpass be Better?

To clear the railroad tracks, an overpass would need to be 50% longer and almost twice as high as the current bridge over East Washington near Starkweather Creek. It would eat up much of Law Park, block views, have long ramps, and add ½ mile and 30′ of climbing to anyone’s journey. At a JND public information meeting, a majority of attendees said they would take a street-level crossing rather than use such a bridge.

Some attendees did express concern that underpasses can be dark, wet, unsafe places, especially at night. The hope is that any John Nolen Drive underpass will be a showpiece of Madison, acting more of a natural corridor than an out-of-the-way tunnel. The City has experience in this, and underpasses built in the past decade under Verona Rd and Gammon Rd are wide and inviting (see the ride-through videos on YouTube).

Next Steps?

May 2023 is the critical month. My impression is that City Engineers are inclined to keep the overpass concept on the back-burner. It is now up to the City’s Transportation Commission to insist that an underpass be included in the project. Public input can help! Please follow the John Nolen Drive project, take its surveys, and email your thoughts to JNDproject@cityofmadison.com. Please submit comments to the Transportation Commission in advanced of its meeting on Wed May 24, 2023. Also, reach out to your Alders to let them know how important the underpass is, so that they are informed when the project finally comes before them.