Stebben84 wrote:Ninja wrote:That's hilarious.
What's hilarious is that we've now had 2 different article refuting your business loss claims and you've come up with nothing but your opinion. Now that's hilarious.
In my opinion, rain is going to make the ground wet. In my opinion, eliminating half the traffic passing by businesses on Sherman is going to be the end of a lot of businesses on Sherman. This is called common sense. I'm sorry I can't link to an article about it for you.
But for your edification, I'll address your articles. Where should I start? With the article about the NYC DOT study that showed that converting unused parking stalls to a protected (curbed) bike lane in Manhattan had a postiive impact on local business? Are you seriously trying to equate that with the elimination half the traffic lanes on a struggling commercial/commuter corridor in Madison, Wisconsin? That's not even remotely the same thing. There were no traffic lanes eliminated in that study. It focused on replacing unused parking spots with a bike lane in an established, thriving, centralized commercial strip in one of the most densely populated areas of the United States. Nothing about the study or the article is relevant to the discussion of North Sherman. Not even remotely.
Or do you mean the other article about eliminating on-street parking? Again, completely and totally irrelevant. We're not talking about eliminating unecessary parking spots on Sherman, we're talking about eliminating half the traffic lanes. But the second article does make some good points. For example:
So while parking may help an automobile-oriented commercial district better serve its customers, the study suggests that too much parking actually serves to decrease property values as compared to property values surrounding pedestrian-oriented commercial corridors.
Even if we were talking about just eliminating parking spots, the article makes clear that such a response is only appropriate in "pedestrian-oriented commercial corridors," which Sherman obviously is not. And if elimination of parking would hurt a corridor like Sherman, then imagine what the elimination of car traffic in general will accomplish. I don't think your articles say what you think they say.
Neither of those articles ever warranted refutation. In general you people are really, really bad at arguing this situation. You can't even get your story straight as to whether this will have no impact on car traffic, or a totally justified impact on car traffic to be diverted to Packers that will be made up for with shadow bikers and peds who will appear upon completion of the project.
I let the irrelevant articles slide without comment. I also let the snotty little reference to the smoking ban pass earlier in the thread, but the smoking ban did cost Sherman a couple of businesses, so that was a very stupid argument to attempt. And I also let the snotty little reference to Dorn Hardware closing pass earlier in the thread, but that's a example of the incredibly delicate economic situation I'm talking about, which again makes it an extremely stupid argument in favor of harming that economy, even a little bit.
And upon further review, I no longer find it hilarious that people try to frame this situation in dog whistle culture war rhetoric about big, mean, bully businesses. Instead I just think it's sad that people's critical thinking skills can be so easily derailed with that kind of nonsense. This has nothing to do with the liberal/conservative pissing contest that seems to be providing much of the subtext here. But for some reason everything in Madison seems to boil down to that liberal/conservative pissing contest. It's going to be an ugly summer, and I think that will help people become more pragmatic and focused on real urban problems. I just hope it doesn't cost the Northside too much in the meantime, because I suspect a lot of the ugly will be sited here.