12-01-2017, 09:13 AM
I think I might be the only person in the world who doesn't have a "busy life." I mean, I have obligations for my job (which include showing up for it, among other things), but not much else. I do have kids, but they don't do all that much. Swimming lessons and so on. Our rec centre isn't all that far. There's a park around the corner.
Sorry for the digression. Unfortunately, I know that the perfect system probably has to take account other people, and not just me. Oh well!
The median commute in this country is apparently now 7.7km. A commuter on a bike can do that in probably about half an hour around here without worrying too much about getting sweaty or over-exerting himself. I don't really think it's the distances involved.
We've all seen the charts from different parts of the world (some very analogous to here, culturally and otherwise) showing that bicycle commuters and potential commuters fall into a few different categories, the largest being "interested but concerned [about their safety]." These are the people we should be designing the infrastructure for- not the assertive cyclists who are comfortable or even happier in mixed traffic, and not the "no way no how" people who feel that they "have" to drive. If they feel that way, that's okay.
The perception of safety is what's important. We need to stop using paint and start separating cars from traffic. I have coworkers who do bike (who have kids, and probably busy lives, unlike mine), but they're the ones who happen to live right near a trail and can avoid cars for the most part. This is my situation- when I bike, I don't do it because I really like it, I do it because it's cheap and the trail lets me do it in relative safety.
I have other coworkers, on the other hand, who don't live much further away, who might bike at least part of the week during parts of the year, but don't because it would mean spending some time on a street like Victoria or Weber. They openly laugh at things like the green paint force field on Northfield near the expressway onramp, and wonder why we bother with that.
My reasonable and achievable proposal would be to find the most common short-ish (less than the median) commutes in the region, and start installing separated bike paths on them. I'm thinking streets like Weber, Victoria when Highway 7 opens (politically I think that would be possible), Northfield, University, one of either Bridgeport or Erb- and any other four lane street whose traffic volumes could be accommodated with two lanes and a turning lane.
Someone who lives in the suburbs near RIM Park can bike to St. Jacob's. University could easily accommodate real bicycling infrastructure, instead of the line on the road it has now. Something like that should be politically very achievable.
Sorry for the digression. Unfortunately, I know that the perfect system probably has to take account other people, and not just me. Oh well!
The median commute in this country is apparently now 7.7km. A commuter on a bike can do that in probably about half an hour around here without worrying too much about getting sweaty or over-exerting himself. I don't really think it's the distances involved.
We've all seen the charts from different parts of the world (some very analogous to here, culturally and otherwise) showing that bicycle commuters and potential commuters fall into a few different categories, the largest being "interested but concerned [about their safety]." These are the people we should be designing the infrastructure for- not the assertive cyclists who are comfortable or even happier in mixed traffic, and not the "no way no how" people who feel that they "have" to drive. If they feel that way, that's okay.
The perception of safety is what's important. We need to stop using paint and start separating cars from traffic. I have coworkers who do bike (who have kids, and probably busy lives, unlike mine), but they're the ones who happen to live right near a trail and can avoid cars for the most part. This is my situation- when I bike, I don't do it because I really like it, I do it because it's cheap and the trail lets me do it in relative safety.
I have other coworkers, on the other hand, who don't live much further away, who might bike at least part of the week during parts of the year, but don't because it would mean spending some time on a street like Victoria or Weber. They openly laugh at things like the green paint force field on Northfield near the expressway onramp, and wonder why we bother with that.
My reasonable and achievable proposal would be to find the most common short-ish (less than the median) commutes in the region, and start installing separated bike paths on them. I'm thinking streets like Weber, Victoria when Highway 7 opens (politically I think that would be possible), Northfield, University, one of either Bridgeport or Erb- and any other four lane street whose traffic volumes could be accommodated with two lanes and a turning lane.
Someone who lives in the suburbs near RIM Park can bike to St. Jacob's. University could easily accommodate real bicycling infrastructure, instead of the line on the road it has now. Something like that should be politically very achievable.