08-08-2023, 08:27 AM
(08-08-2023, 08:06 AM)nms Wrote:(08-07-2023, 08:23 AM)Acitta Wrote: Current data on cycling behaviour neglects equity-deserving groups
Recognizing the diversity of cycling travel behaviour will improve participation and infrastructure investments
Quote:But a study by researchers from the University of Waterloo found that the census ignores recreational cycling and the trips of older adults, women, service workers, and people who are unstably housed or live with a disability. As a result, the value of cycling in our society is grossly underestimated. In addition, areas and groups lacking resources remain dismissed as a mere data collection gap and have limited access to cycling overall.
Quote:"Investing in infrastructure for leisure cycling, like trails, has been shown to increase participation in utility cycling, like going the grocery store," said Mayers. "We need to challenge the limited belief that investments are only worthwhile if it's for the purpose of going to work."
Much as I love to see new cycling infrastructure around the Region, as much of it is currently designed and built, I am not comfortable with my child using them, especially if they are jammed next to a four-lane road with only a minor barrier between the traffic and the bike lane. When infrastructure planners begin to account for non-commuters, our bike lane network will be that much better.
Ah but won't anyone think of the highway off ramps? Sounding a little anti-prosperity and employment there (at least, according to your mayor).
Full agreement with your point. The metric of "would you think this is safe for your children" is both a good one to separate the othering of adult cyclists in these discussions (i.e. - Joseph St was safe enough already!) and make the compromises that lead to things like Northfield impossible to justify without admitting its a half-measure. Also works for me personally given that I'm literally using them to and from daycare on a daily basis...