Amen to that. I was tapping out a similar little speech when this arrived. Only
thing I'd add to Robbie is that the Bikies list is populated by mostly male
bike aficianados. For us, the idea of getting a better headlight and slowing
down is probably fine. But if we want to continue improving biking and walking
facilities in order to provide regular people with these choices, with all the
environmental and economic development benefits that follow, then you have to
realize that even the best LED headlight has a very narrow beam, making the
edge of the path seem even darker and creepier -- especially after coming out
of a bright environment at Breese.
While I have sometimes quarreled with city engineers and traffic engineers,
usually when they are called on to do planning, they are excellent designers.
When faced with the question "How can we illuminate the path for users while
not flooding backyards with lights?" I'd be pretty confident in their solution.
I was just in Vancouver for a convention, and the city engineer there brags in
a period when the city added 50,000 people and lots of economic activity, they
actually cut car traffic. Partly it was the increased density that reduced the
need for travel, but they also put a lot of thought and investment into bike,
ped and transit. As in Madison, where bike mode share has climbed dramatically,
in Vancouver people used these low-impact modes as they became safer and more
convenient.
Finally, it's interesting that owls and stargazers can put up with 1,000 miles
of lighted streets, but 3 miles of lighted bike path is a big problem.
________________________________
From: Robbie Webber <[email protected]>
To: Bikies <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2012 11:46 AM
Subject: Re: [Bikies] Sly Delivers Fact-Lite Screed on Bike Path Lighting
Ok, somewhere back in the discussion, and also on our neighborhood listserv - I
live in one of the neighborhoods adjoining this path - people have asked, "Why
is it needed?" There have also been comments about the lack of crime, so
therefore the lights aren't needed. People have also said that the police
didn't ask for lights. I feel I have to comment on this. I'm going to be brief,
because I'm working and don't have time for a long screed.
1. There may not be a history of crime in this area, but there is a history of
people getting mugged on bike/ped paths in general. I guarantee you that the
moment a couple of my neighbors get mugged walking or biking on this path at
night, people will be screaming, "Why are there no lights on this path? It's so
dark and dangerous, and these incidents could have been prevented with more
lights!"
2. As a very well lit and accomplished bicyclist who does not scare easily, I
am hesitant to ride this path at night, or at least certain parts of it that
are more isolated from the neighborhood. There are areas that are sunken and
also bounded by the undeveloped and wooded areas of the cemetery. There's no
one out there, and the darkness kind of creeps me out. There are also non-human
critters that have a tendency to run across the path. I have come close to
hitting several, and that would have landed me in a ditch with no one around.
3. The police never ask for lighting, but they are always in favor of it. If
they had their preference, every area of the city would be lit by flood lights,
and there would be no landscaping where bad elements could hide. They know they
aren't going to get that, and that both landscaping and lighting are community
decisions, so they let the community discussions and process play out. But they
do have their opinions. I have actually spoken to the Captain of the South
District, where this part of the city is located. He thinks the path would be
considerably safer, and the officers would prefer that the path be lit. You'll
never hear that from them, because they will simply say, "It's a community
decision."
4. If we want more people to bike and walk, we have to give them safe places to
bike and walk. And "safe" is often not simply the absence of crime at any point
in history, it is how people feel about the place. I felt very safe in my old
neighborhood in Chicago, despite there being quite a few questionable
characters on the street, because there was a LOT of activity at all hours of
the day and night. Another, much wealthier neighborhood made me feel uneasy
because there was hardly anyone out, and there were no stores open as I walked
home. I know there are plenty of people, especially women, that will not use
that path after dark. Pity, because they want to. In winter, "dark" comes very
early and stays very late in the morning, and that means that many people give
up bike commuting because there's no "safe route."
5. I am not an owl or wildlife expert, but I can tell you that plenty of
wildlife is not bothered by the lighting levels that area planned for this
path. There are nesting owls of various types in the adjacent neighborhoods,
and those streets and houses have much more lighting. There are coyotes and
foxes running around in areas with much higher levels of lighting.
OK, back to work.
Robbie Webber
Transportation Policy Analyst
State Smart Transportation Initiative
www.ssti.us
608-263-9984 (o)
608-225-0002 (c)
[email protected]
_______________________________________________
Bikies mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org
_______________________________________________
Bikies mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org
