Comment 92705

By Fred Street (anonymous) | Posted September 27, 2013 at 11:13:18 in reply to Comment 92703

I imagine that would be an opening gambit, and the ratio would be debatable. I just chose 1/6 because of the 15% target. Admittedly, there's grey area in terms of riders, but it would demonstrate municipal commitment toward active transportation.

I think that the basic premise is reasonable and workable. Municipal lots are presumably located in sites that are in-demand and familiar to motorists,a and they would constantly be reminded that alternatives are available, viable, safe and attractive. In terms of shifting people out of cars, it seems like a pretty straight line, and one of the least contentious supports for cycling that I can imagine.

Plus the City is in the driver's seat, as it were, so it's not like ornery private lot owners are blocking process toward that goal. No EAs are needed, AFAIK. If they can identify the funds for racks and/or fencing they can make it happen overnight.

Oh, and summon up the political will. Tick, tock.



Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds