[frinkprof]

Originally Posted by Table 5

I think what some people always forgot in this debate, is that the inner-city is a lot of people's neighborhood and home. It's not just a place to go to work, or maybe get a drink, and then go away. The people who live here, and drive here, and park here…i.e., people who will be the most affected….are vastly for it. Go ahead and look up how many community associations vastly support it.

This is how people who live in these neighborhoods want to get around to areas that are too far to walk. I'm a huge car guy, but I don't want to always drive to a place 15 blocks away...and I'm sure you don't need me to drive either, taking up a lane and taking up parking space. Being able to bike in a safe and efficient way, yes even if its only for 7-8 months a year, would be amazing.

On this note, I'd like to provide an excerpt from the letter sent to council by the Beltline Transportation Committee, which I'm involved with. I won't post the whole thing so as not to have this post be too long. I'll just give the point-form of advantages that were listed:

- New residential and commercial development is growing our community. Beltline is one of the fastest growing urban districts in Canada - the community can accommodate more than double its current population. [EDITED TO ADD: Population currently just over 20 000, can grow to 50 000] The commercial and retail business sectors are also experiencing growth. A network of cycle tracks would serve the growing number of residents and businesses.

- Cycle tracks would enhance city-wide mobility. Implementing this in Beltline is a key to access both to and from the Centre City. With road and transit access to the Centre City already having great capacity, building high-capacity bicycle infrastructure is a priority. With the high demand for safe routes, the take-up will be tremendous.

- Dedicated cycling infrastructure will provide residents of our community with a convenient and safe way to use their bicycles to live their day to day lives. This includes going to and from work, school, shopping, and social events.

- Segregated cycle routes open these corridors to more than just the most fearless of riders. This makes bicycling within our community more attractive to a wider demographic range. Making bicycling less stressful and dangerous can only enhance Beltline’s desirability. Separating bicycle traffic also makes travelling by automobiles and by foot a safer and less stressful experience.

- Providing safe and comfortable bicycle access to recreational and cultural destinations such as the rivers, parks, Stampede, and events adds value for residents and visitors to Beltline. The corridors selected provide direct or very proximate cycle routes to a good measure of the places and events that make the community a great urban area to choose to live or visit. This would bring existing and especially new cyclists to the area.

- Bicycling has become an icon of urban living and tourism. Beltline’s past, present and future is urban. In the long view, providing a safe and comfortable network of bike routes satiates a strongly growing demand for the urban lifestyle. In an area where public space is at a premium, creating on-road cycle tracks is the best way to provide this area with the bike infrastructure that will allow it to thrive.

Another thought that has been on my mind in the past few days as the "debate" has progressed.

There's this notion that Wards 7 and 8, downtown, Centre City, Inner City, Beltline, etc. "belong to everyone" in that people who don't live here take an interest in it that they wouldn't take for, say Willow Park if they don't live near there. This is, of course, because it is where a lot of people work and a lot of people play. It's the cultural centre of the city, whether it be for sporting events, Stampede, the rivers and entertainment districts. There's plenty of people who never go or only do so 5 times a year but that's extremely uncommon when compared to any other area of the city.

There is something to that, absolutely, and I think a lot of people that live here embrace that to an extent and part of that energy and attractiveness is why they live here in the first place. The thing about that notion is that it can be a double-edged sword.

I think that the idea that Centre City/downtown/Ward 7 and 8, whatever "belong to everyone" should be a reason to invest in it. The numbers present a strong argument for this too, as Centre City (made up of Downtown, West End, East Village, Beltline) accounts for 43% of the property tax revenue for the entire city. You want to take care of the goose that lays the golden egg.

The problem comes when people translate that interest in the area and try to exert undue influence over the area, because it happens to be part of their commute, a sacred cow to them, or whatever. Especially in cases such as this when the residents of the area want something that really doesn't cost much relatively (in this case 2.5% of the capital budget), produces all of the benefits listed above and that results in a manageable sacrifice to automobile travel times.

Many of the councilors that voted against the cycle tracks actually advocate for cycling projects in their wards (with accompanying support from the councilors who supported cycle tracks of course, who also have voted more often than not for other infrastructure in suburban wards). However, when it comes to investing in the same thing in the downtown area, said that they just couldn't, basically because their constituents commute or visit the area and would be inconvenienced. This was true most prevalently for Ward Sutherland, Diane Colley-Urquhart, Ray Jones and Jim Stevenson.

As a good example, Ward 1 councilor Ward Sutherland supported an on-street cycling lane project Bowness Road (in his ward), and was notably moved to do so because the Bowness Community Association supported it. However, even though the same thing is fundamentally true with cycle tracks (community associations support), the principle doesn't apply.

Getting back to the position of the community association, we recognize and embrace our role in city-wide mobility, but also recognize that there needs to be a balance between the interests of local residents and businesses and the interests of the rest of the city. Right now the balance heavily favours commuters.

-------------------------

This post was meant to highlight some of the higher-level cultural and social science-y points. I could get deeper into the hard facts and numbers of the whole thing, whether they be ridership, dollars, cordon counts, etc. but I'll leave that for now. Hopefully someone else takes up that cause if it comes up, I don't sit in front of a computer for work so won't be able to get into it tomorrow.