Who: Joe Kurmaskie, The Metal Cowboy

What: A public talk about bicycling

When: 19 April at 7:00 p.m.

Where: City Utilities Auditorium, 301 E. Central

Click here for the official flyer.

Our new bicycling booklet will also be ready. Bike Smart Springfield replaces the old Drive Less, Live More. Please note, the .pdf linked here does not represent the printed version. The printed version may have minor changes, including a different cover photo. There are no substantive differences between the new printed version and the .pdf.

Technorati Tags: bicycle advocacy, bicycle culture, bicycle education, bicycle politics, bicycle safety, bicycle trails, cycling

Here’s what we have going for us:

Largely flat terrain: Getting around town is not a struggle physically.

Grid street system: You have choices getting from point A to point B, including long stretches of quiet, residential streets.

Marked bicycle routes: Traffic engineers have determined these streets to be easily negotiated by novice bicyclists. Here’s the route map.

Narrow, low-speed, urban core streets: The greater downtown area is a grid of 20-mph streets with widths that encourage bicyclists to control the lane.

Plenty of bicycle parking in the urban core: The city has done an excellent job providing U-racks at popular destinations, including the bicycle corral at Walnut and South.

Need help; we got help: The Star Team of Ozark Greenways published the Drive Less, Live More booklet a few years ago. The new edition, entitled Bike Smart Springfield, will be published this spring. It has lots of advice on bicycling in traffic.

Bicycle education: We have three League Cycling Instructors and one CyclingSavvy Instructor in Springfield who, combined, offer about three traffic bicycling classes per year. We want to increase this.

Police education: PedNet, in Columbia, held a traffic bicycling training class for the Springfield Police Department. The department will now be able to incorporate this modual into its regular officer training.

Programming: If you like group rides and races, we have them. Plus, Bike Bus Walk to Work Week is an annual celebration of alternative transportation.

Miles and miles of greenways: These trails are great for recreational riding.

The LINK: Once this complete streets project is finished, Springfield will have a multimodal corridor that will link the greeways north to south.

Great bicycle shops: No matter where you live, there’s a bicycle shop close to you in Springfield. Check the sidebar for links.

The STAR Team: Our local bicycle-pedestrain advocacy group works hard to keep alternative transportation issues on the forefront of civic concerns.

Bicycle bloggers: Check the sidebar on Carbon Trace

That’s not an exhaustive list

Get out there and ride like you mean it!

Technorati Tags: bicycle advocacy, bicycle culture, bicycle politics, bicycle trails, 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

What changed?

Remember the report by The Network (a group of young professionals attached to the Chamber of Commerce) about how to attract and retain young professionals? Here again were the top four results:

• Expand trails and bike routes for recreation and transportation.
• Enact a smoking ban in bars, restaurants and other public places.
• Improve wages by supporting entrepreneurs and small businesses.
• Address the lack of diversity through increased awareness and support for minority-owned businesses.

Wow. We got top billing. Fantastic.

I believe the city is taking these things seriously. That’s great!

But “trails and bike routes” has apparently been translated into “bicycle lanes.” That’s not necessarily surprising. That term is, as much as anything, a metaphor for “facilities” in the minds regular folks. “Facilities” can be all kinds of helpful and progressive things.

I am not a fan of bicycle lanes in general (click here). So if you ask me if I like bicycle lanes or want to see them painted in Springfield, I’ll tell you “no.” This does not mean all lanes are bad or that I am against all facilities. It means, specifically, that I worry that some lane advocates (not necessarily our bicycle advocates) will promote poor facilities and may push for a law requiring lane use once lanes are painted (thus making bicycling suck for experienced traffic bicyclists).

I think the foundation of a good bicycle system begins with a good transportation system for all road users — one that is equitable for all users. All users should be educated in how to use the road safely and how to share it with a wide range of other users who all have equal rights and responsibilities (and equal expectations of courtesy and civility). Shared use ought to be an ethic promoted and enforced by all users.

Bicycle facilities should not reduce the bicyclist’s level of service, i.e. make it more difficult to get from point A to point B safely and efficiently or to deny access to roads. Facilities should not create traffic conflicts by encouraging bicyclists to ride in places or in ways that put them in danger. And facilities should not contradict the law or sound traffic education, e.g. creating a lane that runs against traffic. Finally, if you create facilities then I believe you (the city) are obligated to maintain them, which means keeping them cleared of debris, snow, and ice.

Progressive facilities should empower people to make the choice to ride a bicycle for transportation by making it efficient and enjoyable, i.e. easy access to destinations and no manufactured conflicts with motorists. Separation is fine as long as it does not create inferiority for the bicyclist compared to other forms of transportation.

The differences between these kinds of facilities are easy to see. Compare, for example, our greenway trails (progressive) to the new bicycle lane on Benton (regressive). (Note: That was an example. I do not mean to suggest that separated greenways are the only form of progressive facility.)

Since Springfield is moving ahead with “bicycle lanes,” I am going to seek out and publish examples of progressive facilities. And I will support such facilities, even when they involve painting lines on the street.

I will also, however, squawk like crazy if we build lanes that create conflicts or put novices in danger. I am unwilling to increase participation at the cost of safety when our roads are already safe.

Technorati Tags: bicycle advocacy, bicycle culture, bicycle education, bicycle infrastructure, bicycle politics, bicycle safety, bicycle trails, cycling, Transportation Planning, Urban and Regional Planning, urban design, Urban Planning, utility cycling

GetAbout Columbia is the city program primarily responsible for the infrastructure. From its website:

In 2006, Columbia, Missouri was selected as one of four communities in the nation to participate in the Federal Highway Administration’s Non-Motorized Transportation Pilot program.

Columbia’s designation as a pilot city came with $22 million in federal funds over a four-year period to help build infrastructure and establish national standards for public awareness and willingness to use active modes of transportation.

A federally commissioned study conducted between September 2006 and January 2007 indicates 88 percent of Columbia residents primarily make trips by auto. An additional 8.6 percent walk as a primary means of transportation and 1.5 percent ride bicycles. For more study information visit the Federal Highway Administration’s website.

The PedNet Coalition is the organization primarily responsible for programming to educate and encourage. PedNet has done much in its 11-year history to increase bicycle and pedestrian participation. Our STAR Team members left Columbia with many interesting ideas. I will post more extensive information about this organization soon.

I was less impressed with the on-road facilities. Just the condition of Columbia’s streets is a bit shocking. And I found several dangerous, wheel-eating storm drains — something that should have been corrected long ago (two highlighted on the video). Take a look. See what you think.

Technorati Tags: bicycle advocacy, bicycle culture, bicycle infrastructure, bicycle politics, bicycle safety, bicycle trails, complete streets, cycling, traffic design, Transportation Planning