Here’s the thing: I would not be doing it — commuting by bicycle — if it were difficult to do. Seriously.

Why is it not difficult? Primarily it is not difficult because I live 3/4 of a mile from my job. I live 3/4 of a mile from my job (in Springfield’s urban core) on purpose – precisely to make bicycling and walking to work (and everywhere else) easy.

And this is why I’m not a big promoter of BBWTWW. I’m not against it; I’m just not on the front lines encouraging anyone to get out there this one week and try bicycle commuting. For far too many people, it is difficult precisely because they live too far from work in car-centric neighborhoods.

Further, the iconography of such weeks are invariably sport cycling-centric. Does that spandex look, and do those racing bicycles, really make novices comfortable with the idea of bicycle commuting? I wonder.

As a promotional and educational exercise, I prefer the 1-mile Solution — the recent topic of my presentation at PechaKucha. A greater number of people, I think, can practice the 1-MS than can commute to work by bicycle. And for those who cannot commute, well, how about keeping a bicycle at work and practicing the 1-MS there? The iconography is of the 1-MS is different, too. Below are two of the photos I used in my PechKucha presentation — at the place where I talk about not making bicycle riding more difficult than it has to be.

Let’s grow participation the easy way. The commuting will come as people gain experience and confidence (and as the suburbs continue to struggle) — and as they reap the benefits of bicycling.

Technorati Tags: 1-mile Solution, bicycle advocacy, bicycle commuting, cycling, utility cycling

But it is clear that many bicycle advocates believe that providing such infrastructure as bicycle lanes, tracks, and separated paths does increase participation. According to recent studies, it’s not entirely clear what the cause-and-effect relationship actually is between infrastructure and participation.

I think it is especially difficult to measure participation across purposes. Bicycle commuting is a particular purpose. Recreation is a particular purpose. Exercise is a particular purpose. Basic transportation ( or utility bicycling) is a particular purpose. It seems to me that each of these purposes has particular constituencies. And some bicyclists — your author, for example — is a member of more than one.

In order to increase participation through infrastructure, transportation planners must first understand infrastructure in the context of particular purposes. That seems like a truism and an interesting technical/engineering puzzle. But, again, I’m not all that interested because I think this may be true: Participation across purposes (but especially the transportation purposes) requires proximity and population density first and traffic education before infrastructure.

I’ve told this story before: When I moved to Springfield from Kansas City I was aware that I was moving to a flat town with a grid street system. I made the conscious decision to live within 2 miles of my job (actually .75 to work and 2.25 to downtown) so that it would be easier to walk and ride a bicycle. If I had chosen instead to live in the southern suburbs, I doubt very seriously that I would be typing these words to you now. I’d be a regular automobile commuter just as I was in Kansas City. Further, when I arrived here I was a novice rider. I had plenty of experience as a kid, so I rode as a child often rides (thankfully I new which side of the street to ride on!). It took a couple of years of before I “grew up” fully and took my proper place in traffic. I had to learn it by doing it, by experiencing it. What allowed that process to occur? Proximity. Living close to my destinations made bicycling an easy choice.

If, instead, I had chosen to live in the suburbs, would bicycle lanes have lured me onto the road? That’s difficult to say. But I doubt it due to the question of proximity.

A better plan for Springfield:

1. Forget bicycle lanes.

2. Keep building greenways (primarily for recreation).

3. Improve the urban core and encourage people and businesses to locate there.

Obviously, this does nothing to encourage suburban residents to ride bicycles for transportation, and — Gadzooks! — it’s decidedly long-term thinking. Methinks $5 gas might encourage suburbanites first to move closer to their primary destinations. From there they may venture onto bicycles.

Technorati Tags: bicycle advocacy, bicycle commuting, bicycle infrastructure, bicycle politics, bicycle trails, cycling, Transportation Planning, Urban Planning, utility cycling

• Motorists works 2 hours each day to pay for a car.
• Bicyclists work 3.8 minutes each day to pay for their bicycles.

(Obviously the costs are different depending upon one’s circumstances. The well-to-do work fewer hours for their cars. The poor work more.)

Yep, getting rid of my car gave me a huge pay raise. And it got me out from behind the wheel sitting in traffic — one of the top things Americans have cited as making them unhappy. It’s also a heath issue — all that sitting and all that stress. Win-win-win for me!

I have said this before: Using a bicycle for basic transportation in Springfield is easy. So easy. OMG it is easy. If it weren’t easy, I might not have stuck with it (because I just assumed it would be hard and that I’d end up driving a lot).

One thing, however: It helps to live close to your major destinations. That’s not a requirement. But if you live in a far-flung suburb surrounded by nothing but large traffic sewers, well, it’s going to be less easy. You can still practice the 1-mile Solution.

Technorati Tags: 1-mile Solution, bicycle advocacy, bicycle commuting, bicycle culture, cycling, green transportation, utility cycling

Some advocates are willing to do almost anything to increase participation — including putting novices in danger.

There’s a “but”: It appears rather clear that the more people who ride bicycles in a given area the safer it is to ride a bicycle on the road (convincing novices that the riding in traffic is already safe requires education). A new study recently published in Environmental Practice reinforces the safety-in-numbers thinking and adds a bonus: More people on bicycles makes the traffic system safer for all road users.

There’s another “but”: It appears that bicycle lanes play a minor role in encouraging people to ride bicycles (hoo-ray for that). This new study suggests that narrow streets, a dense grid pattern, and traffic calming are the real keys in the American context (or, in the case of this study, the California context).

Today I want to discuss one of the findings: intersections per square mile. The study shows that safer, high-cycling cities have more intersections per square mile than do less-safe, low-cycling cities. Safe, high-cycling cities in the study averaged 114.2 intersections per square mile suggesting a dense grid pattern. The following graphic illustrates common street patterns. It’s easy to see why grids have more intersections and why grids would tend to calm traffic.

Now let’s take a look the square mile at the heart of downtown Springfield (defined by me as the area surrounding Park Central Square).

That’s a rough estimation using Google Maps. By my (very rough) count using this map, downtown Springfield has 127 intersections in this square mile. Further, the speed limit is 20 mph on most of the roads you see there (exceptions include Grant, Jefferson, Kimbrough, Benton, and Chestnut Expressway).

The four safest cities in the study share something else with Springfield, but the study does not mention it — and I think it is important: The safest cities are all home to universities — Berkeley, Chico, Davis, and Palo Alto. On this Springfield map, MSU is just off the southeast corner, and OTC and Drury intersect the map to the north and northeast.

I’m only discussing grid density now. But this begs the question: Why, then, has Springfield not achieved the kind of bicycling numbers as, say, Davis, California? We have active advocacy (STAR Team) and a cooperative (even enlightened) public works department and police force. We have encouragement and education programming. While facilities such as bicycle lanes play a minor role according to the study, we have some of those, too. That square mile area has several bicycle lanes plus a growing greenway.

I think one important reason we’re not seeing the kinds of bicycling numbers as those California cities is because there are damned few employers of the kind that attract the creative class (notice the income data in the study). Yes, we have entertainment — mostly at night. Yes, we have a growing number of lofts. Yes, MSU is moving into more and more downtown buildings (e.g. Park Central Square Office Building, Jordan Valley Innovation Center, Brick City). Yes, there are banks and churches and stores and restaurants and other small businesses. But there are precious few large employers who employ highly-skilled, creative people of a kind that MSU, Drury, and OTC attempt to produce.

In short, the reasons to bicycle downtown right now are largely confined to after business hours (re: my first post today).

Our urban challenge (one of many): Encourage more employers of the creative class to move downtown. MSU’s movement into downtown is a great start. Now others must follow. Tax breaks help bring employers. Can we, however, save these breaks for employers that bring high-wage creative jobs to town instead of employers who bring low-wage, low-benefit jobs to town.

Our Urban Challenge Series:

• First in a Series
• Getting Started
• Green Density
• Networks
• Barriers
• Free Parking
• The Good Life
• Cost of Living
• Build It First
• Make It Awesome
• The Euro Thing
• Middle of Nowhere
• Young Professionals
• The Big Disconnect
• Where to Live

Technorati Tags: bicycle advocacy, bicycle commuting, bicycle culture, bicycle infrastructure, bicycle politics, bicycle safety, cycling, pedestrian safety, Springfield Missouri, traffic design, transportation, Transportation Planning, urban design, urban development, Urban Planning

It’s cool to do it for a week. It’s truly epic to keep it up — maybe not everyday, but maybe one or two days per week. Ease your way in. Pretty soon you’ll be selling a car and giving yourself a big $$$ raise. And losing weight. And enjoying your community. And saving the environment.

Technorati Tags: 1-mile Solution, bicycle commuting, bicycle culture, cycling