Not in contention at Cannes
This is a little film clip I put together this afternoon in an effort to demonstrate that there are some places that need sidewalks before the River Mill Road neighborhood gets one.
It won't win any awards, but maybe it will help us get past the rhetoric.
It won't win any awards, but maybe it will help us get past the rhetoric.
posted by Miles Maguire at 4:05 PM
14 Comments:
Miles Spielberg.
Glad you seem to have so much time on your hands!...But your video makes a wonderful point that the River Mill area needs sidewalks.
Can you imagine the uproar of the residents of River Mill if people began to ride their bikes or trample paths on the public right-of-way?
Yes a large part of what appears to the a front lawn is actually PUBLIC LAND. People could begin to create ruts and generally do damage to the grass by walking or biking on the public right-of-way.
Oh my Gosh...That would be horrible!
I think each and every resident would rather have a nice piece of concrete in front of their home rather than a rutted up old trail. Don't you?
Thanks for the demonstration!
My goodness, that is some very athletic text you have there. Also a very golf-course-y lawn.
I was just beginning to appreciate the unpleasantly busy yet sidewalkless street (I forget the name)in your first example and you were, at that point, dangerously close to MAKING a point. But then...
The viewer becomes aware of strange sounds, TOO aware. The viewer turns the volume up...is it unexplained seismic activity? The grating of the Oshkosh tectonic plate against the Greater Wisconsin Landmass? An approaching meteor? The heavy and doom-laden breathing of an impending council member, hell-bent on snatching your camera and besmirching your lawn? Or - the lawn itself? The collective panting of blade upon blade, fulsome with the frenzied desire of the Universal Will To Become a Prairie and roiling with hatred for your riding mower?
Hard to say, but next time (and there should be a next time) perhaps a wee bit o' music to cover the untoward sounds.
But you should not be ridiculed for making this seminal film. I (along with millions of YouTube loyalists) am totally in favor of all of you Oshpeople running around with cameras. The world clamors for a new shift in the cultural paradigm and Oshies with cameras just might be it.
Recharge those batteries, gird those loins, and get back out there and advance the cause of Visual Snark !
I would speculate the trail is used more on the weekend when people have more "recreational time". I might even speculate further, that Saturday would be a better time to make the film clip on River Mill, since that is when many people are in and out of their garages running errands. This would be a better time to see when the trail is most accessed and the highest traffic would be liklier than a weekday.
I personally used the trail last year and after crossing the boulevard of death by Fratello's, before ever entering River Mill, I noticed at least a dozen people using the trail everytime I went out on a weekend.
Perhaps River Mill seems relatively quiet only because you have just come off the heavily congested arterial road in comparison. In any event, the depiction seems to be somewhat of a confirmation bias based on what my dozen or so cycling experiences have been on the weekends last summer.
As Miles is a resident of River Mills, he certainly is not neutral in his Blog opinions.
I like the idea the first poster made. Would those who live in the River Mill area care if people started trails in the public right-of-way (their front yards)?
Maybe this week I'll take my bike on a little trip across their front lawns and see what type of a reaction I get from them.
Interesting how no one comments on the lack of sidewalks in areas that are clearly busier than River Mill road. I think it is perfectly reasonable to say "put us on the list, but not at the TOP of the list as there is no justification for it.
For the record, I live on a street with sidewalks (and recently had to pay for new sidewalks and streets) so I think I'm pretty unbiased on this issue. I have yet to see any justification for moving River Mills to the TOP of the sidewalk list, so I'm inclined to believe that this is not about "safety" but rather about "revenge".
2:27.
You haven't been reading this thread it appears.
River Mill is the last large area (neighborhood) in the city without walks.
All priorty walks have been completed. The City Manager and his staff now say that finishing this one large area is the next priority.
An thats the way it is...
What I heard at the last Council meeting was the public works director say that about half of the priority projects identified a few years ago had been completed.
So there are other priority areas ahead of River Mill.
As Daniel Patrick Moynihan liked to say, "We're all entitled to our own opinion, but not to our own set of facts" (or words to that effect).
Who did your score, Philip Glass? Noir, for sure. Absolutely hilarious.
While you may not get an Oscar nomination, congrats on your Civic Engagement Award nomination, Miles.
The number of expressive responses to this and other topics support that nomination.
Sorry for the interuption. Please resume the sidewalk/political vendetta debate. It's interesting to me, a leaser who doesn't get to have these problems you "grown-ups" seem to have.
I'm living vicariously through the rest of you. Go, "No sidewalk, at least for this year team." I'm rooting for you.
What I heard the City Manager say was that the priority walks along the main arterials were completed. These were the last of the high priority projects. The City Manager went on to state that both he and his staff felt that the final large continuous area of the River Mill subdivision was the area they looked at next, as the other priorities were accomplished.
As a homeowner in the River Mill area Mr. Maguire, would you rather have sidewalks…or people biking and walking on the public access area of what appears to be your front lawn?
Dear Anon:
There is nothing stopping people from walking (or biking) along the fringe of my lawn. But why should they?
They have a big wide, open, concrete, barely-trafficked street to use. It's perfectly safe.
Since you are so concerned about the public right-of-way in the neighborhood, would you be willing to start a petition to get the city to reimburse us for all these years of maintaining public property? I mean if all that ground should have been covered up with concrete, why have I had to waste all that gas cutting the grass?
There are many streets in our city with low volume traffic that currently have sidewalks. maybe they should be removed and the citizens reimbursed. Sounds pretty stupid doesn't it. Now go back and read the above post. Equally ridiculous logic. The more you try to make the argument against sidewalks the more foolish you sound. Common sense says we need sidewalks in residential areas in our city. For some reason this area was omitted when the sidewalks by Fratello's were put in. Has anyone ever figured out why that happened. maybe a former council member who lives on that street could shed some light on that subject.
Miles,
Now thats just silly. Your comments don't help to justify your position, they just begin to point out what extremes you and your neighbors will use to block putting sidwalks in your neighborhood.
Now regarding the public right-of-way issue.
You Sir begain that debate by airing your video. Those trails were made on public land. Just as similar trails could be made in your front yard on the public right-of-way.
Another silly comment you made:
"Since you are so concerned about the public right-of-way in the neighborhood, would you be willing to start a petition to get the city to reimburse us for all these years of maintaining public property?"
Sir, anyone living in the city has to maintain the city walks and terrace property associated with their home. Both the sidewalk and terrace are PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY. NO ONE who has walks or terrances expects to get reimbursed for maintaining those areas.
I suggest you follow Mr. Delantonio (sp?) and just agree to the walks and don't continue to make yourself sound so childish and silly about this issue.
Of course my comment was silly--it was meant to be.
Lighten up a little bit.
The whole reason for King Esslinger pushing for sidewalks, and Pushover Palmeri agreeing with him was for the alleged reason of safety. How about the safety of people walking in the area of Pick and Save or Piggly Wiggly? Being a "continuous neighborhood" should not be the only or even main criteria for prioritizing sidewalks and if it is those people need their heads examined, pronto. C'mon safety patrol, let's get with the program and focus on more important areas.
Post a Comment
<< Home