Saskatoon Bicycle Plan good for cyclists

Cycling News

Saskatoon Bicycle Plan good for cyclists, motorists and pedestrians

By Darrell Noakes, CAN-BIKE National Examiner
Saskatoon Star-Phoenix, Thursday, January 9, 2003
The following Viewpoint article was published in the Saskatoon Star-Phoenix newspaper, in response to an editorial which ran Saturday, December 21, 2002.

Saskatoon is one of the best cities in Canada for riding a bicycle. Toronto may have received awards as one of the top 10 bicycle-friendly cities in North America, but visitors from that city say that they prefer riding here. Census data prove it, too. Obviously, we're doing something right.

Although some people call it the "bike path" plan, the plan adopted by city council in December is much more comprehensive than a simple "paint and path" approach.

People tend to think of bicycling in terms of paths and bike lanes. They think that cyclists will be safer - and other drivers will be happier - if cyclists are kept off the streets.

Cyclists fare best when they act and are treated as drivers of vehicles. They have fewer crashes. Other drivers know what to expect. Traffic moves more efficiently.

Most people don't realize that facilities intended to separate cyclists from other traffic actually increase the likelihood of collision.

Cyclists using sidewalks, bike lanes and bike-paths have nearly three times as many collisions with automobiles as cyclists using the roadways. If cyclists happen to be using these facilities on the "wrong" side of the road, they are at least 10 times more likely to be injured.

That's because most collisions - and the most serious injuries - happen at intersections. Paths and trails may help cyclists avoid intersections with low probability of collision, but nearly always dump cyclists into traffic where the risk is highest.

Drivers expect to encounter traffic, including bicycles, in predictable places. When you force cyclists to become unpredictable, by encouraging them to use separate facilities and behave as pedestrians, you increase their likelihood of injury.

Some claim that separate facilities help traffic flow more freely. This makes it sound as though other drivers have superior rights to cyclists. Traffic law gives everyone equal rights in the transportation system. When everyone follows the same rules, traffic flows more freely.

For leisure travel, pathways offer a relaxing and serene escape. If you have a destination or purpose to your trip, they rarely take you where you want to go and seldom as efficiently as any roadways in the area.

Claims of reduced automobile use make great arguments for lobbying governments to spend more money on facilities, but they've never been shown to be true. Automobile use rises, and bicycle use does not, regardless of how much effort is put into bicycle facilities. Activists point to increased bicycle traffic in bike lanes, but fail to note that these are the same cyclists that used to ride somewhere else. There may be reasons to build bike lanes, including attracting cyclists from less desirable routes, but increased commitment to bicycling is not one of them. There are other factors that convince people to drive less and cycle more, and the city's new plan addresses these factors realistically.

The comprehensive bicycle plan approved by Saskatoon City Council shows foresight not because of what it says about our city's trail network, but because of its approach to making sure that all aspects of our transportation infrastructure work together to serve the needs of our community. The plan is posted on the City's Web site (www.city.saskatoon.sk.ca).

The fundamental principle of the new bicycle plan is: "Every street is a cycling street." This is more than just a policy statement. Our civic professionals understand how and why people travel, and they know that bicycling improves the quality of life for everyone in the city.

The city's bicycle plan addresses many of the problems that cyclists currently face. It'll also contribute to better interactions among cyclists, pedestrians and motorized traffic. If the plan is well implemented, we'll see more cyclists on the streets, not just on the trails.

Exerpts from the editorial published December 21, 2002:

Bike path plan shows foresight

...Between the city and the Meewasin Valley Authority, Saskatoon's bike trails have been slowly expanding over the past couple of decades and walkways ... have been widened to make it easier and safer for Saskatoon residents to ride their bikes....

That's where the city's extended network of trails comes in. By separating cyclists from drivers, they help prevent serious accidents and increase the comfort level of both. They also ensure traffic flows more freely....

While it is clear that separate and safe bike trails are needed to convince people to consider parking their cars and pedaling their way to work, there will always be a need to move vehicles more efficiently. Traffic already backs up along congested roadways during rush hours, demonstrating the need for more roads and bridges.

Source: www.canada.com/saskatoon
(unfortunately, the editorial no longer is available in the site's archives)

Another article, wrtten by an S-P columnist:

Plan for bicycle amenities receives City's approval
Art Robinson, Special to the Saskatoon Sun, Sunday, January 05, 2003

News index page

Borealis Outdoor Adventure
Home Page

Cycling News
Saskatoon Bicycle Plan good for cyclists, motorists and pedestrians By Darrell Noakes, CAN-BIKE National Examiner Saskatoon Star-Phoenix, Thursday, January 9, 2003 The following Viewpoint article was published in the Saskatoon Star-Phoenix newspaper, in response to an editorial which ran Saturday, December 21, 2002. Saskatoon is one of the best cities in Canada for riding a bicycle. Toronto may have received awards as one of the top 10 bicycle-friendly cities in North America, but visitors from that city say that they prefer riding here. Census data prove it, too. Obviously, we're doing something right. Although some people call it the "bike path" plan, the plan adopted by city council in December is much more comprehensive than a simple "paint and path" approach. People tend to think of bicycling in terms of paths and bike lanes. They think that cyclists will be safer - and other drivers will be happier - if cyclists are kept off the streets. Cyclists fare best when they act and are treated as drivers of vehicles. They have fewer crashes. Other drivers know what to expect. Traffic moves more efficiently. Most people don't realize that facilities intended to separate cyclists from other traffic actually increase the likelihood of collision. Cyclists using sidewalks, bike lanes and bike-paths have nearly three times as many collisions with automobiles as cyclists using the roadways. If cyclists happen to be using these facilities on the "wrong" side of the road, they are at least 10 times more likely to be injured. That's because most collisions - and the most serious injuries - happen at intersections. Paths and trails may help cyclists avoid intersections with low probability of collision, but nearly always dump cyclists into traffic where the risk is highest. Drivers expect to encounter traffic, including bicycles, in predictable places. When you force cyclists to become unpredictable, by encouraging them to use separate facilities and behave as pedestrians, you increase their likelihood of injury. Some claim that separate facilities help traffic flow more freely. This makes it sound as though other drivers have superior rights to cyclists. Traffic law gives everyone equal rights in the transportation system. When everyone follows the same rules, traffic flows more freely. For leisure travel, pathways offer a relaxing and serene escape. If you have a destination or purpose to your trip, they rarely take you where you want to go and seldom as efficiently as any roadways in the area. Claims of reduced automobile use make great arguments for lobbying governments to spend more money on facilities, but they've never been shown to be true. Automobile use rises, and bicycle use does not, regardless of how much effort is put into bicycle facilities. Activists point to increased bicycle traffic in bike lanes, but fail to note that these are the same cyclists that used to ride somewhere else. There may be reasons to build bike lanes, including attracting cyclists from less desirable routes, but increased commitment to bicycling is not one of them. There are other factors that convince people to drive less and cycle more, and the city's new plan addresses these factors realistically. The comprehensive bicycle plan approved by Saskatoon City Council shows foresight not because of what it says about our city's trail network, but because of its approach to making sure that all aspects of our transportation infrastructure work together to serve the needs of our community. The plan is posted on the City's Web site (www.city.saskatoon.sk.ca). The fundamental principle of the new bicycle plan is: "Every street is a cycling street." This is more than just a policy statement. Our civic professionals understand how and why people travel, and they know that bicycling improves the quality of life for everyone in the city. The city's bicycle plan addresses many of the problems that cyclists currently face. It'll also contribute to better interactions among cyclists, pedestrians and motorized traffic. If the plan is well implemented, we'll see more cyclists on the streets, not just on the trails. Exerpts from the editorial published December 21, 2002: Bike path plan shows foresight ...Between the city and the Meewasin Valley Authority, Saskatoon's bike trails have been slowly expanding over the past couple of decades and walkways ... have been widened to make it easier and safer for Saskatoon residents to ride their bikes.... That's where the city's extended network of trails comes in. By separating cyclists from drivers, they help prevent serious accidents and increase the comfort level of both. They also ensure traffic flows more freely.... While it is clear that separate and safe bike trails are needed to convince people to consider parking their cars and pedaling their way to work, there will always be a need to move vehicles more efficiently. Traffic already backs up along congested roadways during rush hours, demonstrating the need for more roads and bridges. Source: www.canada.com/saskatoon (unfortunately, the editorial no longer is available in the site's archives) Another article, wrtten by an S-P columnist: Plan for bicycle amenities receives City's approval Art Robinson, Special to the Saskatoon Sun, Sunday, January 05, 2003 News index page

Borealis Outdoor Adventure Home Page