breakdown of city funding for street, sidewalk, bike lanes

http://therecord.metrolandwest.com/article/339663

D: great article today!

"A quick look at some of the municipal budgets in this region shows there is no balance to transportation spending. Roads get the overwhelming amount of taxpayer dollars; sustainable transportation -- walking, cycling and transit -- get comparatively little.

This year, Kitchener will spend $17.2 million on roads, $1.6 million on sidewalks and $486,000 on paths and trails.

Cambridge will spend $10.3 million on roads, $225,000 on sidewalks, $204,000 for on-road bike lanes, and $35,000 for off-road trails.

In Waterloo, roads will get $6.9 million, sidewalks $254,000 and bike paths $250,000.

"Let's be honest, the vast majority of money goes into roads," Wellar says.

Waterloo Region is the only municipal government in this region that approaches balanced spending between infrastructure for roads and sustainable transportation -- at least for 2008.

Waterloo Region will spend $92.5 million this year on roads. But it will also spend $81 million on Grand River Transit. It will also spend $1.6 million to build 108 kilometres of sidewalks and bike paths."

D: the car is king, but only cuz cars get the lion-sized share of transit funding.
Funny, my bike doesn't wear out roads or cause potholes.

For a caricature of the 'ugly car-driver' cliche, let us study the local representative.
Fred Snider.
http://therecord.metrolandwest.com/article/301210

"What's with the stupid, idiotic people who ride their bicycles on snowy roads?

Roads are made for vehicles, and cyclists are privileged to use them also. The roads are narrower in the winter because of snowbanks, so cars don't have the room they have in the summer. And roads with snow make it easy for cyclists to lose control and fall.

If they fall they deserve what they get for being stupid -- and no helmet is going to save them -- but how about the poor driver who runs over them? The driver is going to feel guilty when they shouldn't -- not to mention being made late for wherever they were going.

Waterloo Region should stop wasting time and money on useless bylaws (like the pesticide issue and bicycle helmet issue), and outlaw riding a bicycle on snowy/icy roads. Get these idiots off our roads now."

D: as much as reading that makes my blood boil, I will refrain from making comments about Fred himself. Others have already done so for me.
Rather, I will examine the assumptions behind his argument. His position exemplifies the unspoken assumptions about how things ought to be, which closely resemble the status quo, and why the car is king.
1) somehow, snow removal doesn't apply to bike lanes even though they are considered a feature of roads
2) somehow, buffers for snow between road/lane and the sidewalk is 'wasted space'. Heck, why not just use the bike lane?
3) leading back to his initial argument in a charming case of circular logic.

I think we've all seen that at LEAST a buffer of one yard between road/lane and sidewalks is needed to pile snow. My poor old boss from Club Ab was out there every day cleaning the sidewalk adjacent to King Street. Many local businesses were not so conscientious.

Somehow, car-bigots such as Fred just assume that continued neglect of anything but full-width high-speed vehicle lanes which leaves cyclists (and sometimes pedestrians!) nowhere else to go means everyone ought to drive cars.
My newer boss offered that opinion after I got hit by a car. For the record, the snow was cleared and had nothing to do with that. I tried to stay calm when I pointed out that
a) not everybody can afford a car and
b) not every residence has parking for cars.
I live above an old grandfather-claused biz uptown Waterloo. I cannot park here during business hours, making owning a car both expensive and essentially impossible.
It is likely best that I bit my tongue.

I cannot help but think of my Aunt Marian in California. While driving, we passed a cyclist. She muttered, "damn cyclists." Later while walking down the sidewalk there was a cyclist there instead. And once again, the charming tolerant open-minded woman muttered- you guessed it- "damn cyclists". This can be translated to:
1) I drive
2) I walk
3) I don't happen to bike.
4) So screw cyclists.
Of course, she is quite broadly compassionate. She also believes in building a big ditch to drown as many Mexicans sneaking in as possible, as well as withholding organs from people in need of transplants.
Thanks auntie!

Thank you, Fred, for exemplifying everything that wrong with the system, and being the quintessential ugly car driver.

dumb cyclists become hurt cyclists

D: this is for yesterday's post on too-wide parking merges. This one on Northfield is extremely dangerous for the sidewalk. I'd like to see very wide ogives like that across sidewalks banned.

D: is anybody reading this a cop or nurse? I'd be curious which spots result in the most accidents.

Don't assume I am automatically sympathetic with bad cyclists.
Sure, I occasionally break the rules.
For example, I am unwilling to cross the vast swath of Northfield during rush hour on a left hand turn onto Kumpf Drive. You see, I'm not suicidal.
If there was a place to take refuge mid lane I would.
I walk my bike across the crosswalk at Parkside, then cycle along that sidewalk. Sorry.

Conversely, I nearly got taken out by a cyclist last summer. I had right of way on Regina behind uptown on the way home. I had lotsa blinky lights. He came gunning on a hi-G turn off a side street without looking or slowing down at all. He missed me by a second.
Had he struck my bike, we would have had Words.

Here are a coupla Darwin Award candidates locally:

http://news.therecord.com/article/260918
"

A 64-year-old Kitchener man died yesterday afternoon after he fell off his bicycle.

Police said the man and another individual were riding their bicycles on the sidewalk on Strasburg Road near Bleams Road at about 5 p.m. when they encountered a pedestrian.

It's believed the man swerved to avoid the pedestrian, losing control of his bicycle, Waterloo regional police said.

He fell off, striking his head. He was not wearing a helmet."

http://news.therecord.com/article/274689
"CAMBRIDGE

An 18-year-old Cambridge cyclist has been charged with going through a red light in connection with a collision in Cambridge last month.

The crash occurred around 7:25 p.m. Oct. 31. The cyclist was westbound on Pinebush Road. The driver of a pickup truck was heading south on Franklin Boulevard at the same time.

The two collided in the intersection.

The cyclist was taken to the Cambridge Memorial Hospital with serious internal injuries. He was later transported to Hamilton General Hospital.

Waterloo regional police said the cyclist was wearing dark clothing and had no light on his bicycle."

http://news.therecord.com/article/257688

"MOUNT FOREST

A 23-year-old Palmerston cyclist is in serious condition in a London hospital after he was struck by a transport truck Tuesday morning on Highway 6.

The collision occurred shortly after 6:15 a.m. when the truck, travelling north on the highway just past Mount Forest, struck the cyclist who was also travelling north, Wellington OPP said.

Adrian Joseph Evans, the cyclist, was transported to hospital in Mount Forest and later airlifted to Victoria Hospital in London. He is listed in serious but stable condition, police said.

The truck driver, a 41-year-old Burlington man, was not injured.

Police said Evans was wearing dark clothing at the time. No charges have been laid in connection with the crash."

D: I selected cases where there was fault and a lack of safety on the part of the cyclists.

The theme is clear. No helmets, no lights, dark clothing at night, sometimes wrong lane or on the sidewalk.

I see these cyclists on King at night. They have slick 1000 buck racing frames, wear spandex, have an low-drag helmet ... and no 20 dollar bike light. Wow.
It's not like they lack the cash!

Not a popular opinion, but if one must ride at night, use the sidewalk if you have no light.

Sure, it's illegal- but you won't get as dead.

D: I talked to my bud about riding on the Highway on the tiny sliver of pavement on the outside of the lane. He pointed out that a transport truck with heavy uneven load can swing the trailer up to 2' side to side. I have a mountain bike so go onto the gravel when I hear a truck coming.

A meter-wide edge for cyclists sure would be nice.

D: tomorrow, just to balance the tables, we will talk about cyclist renegade advocates protesting car-is-king culture.

wide ogive parking lots danger

D: this is a nasty traffic pinch point. It is bad for walkers and cyclists.
It is by the sports complex on Father David Bauer Drive.
When events are getting out, there is a steady stream of cars that pour out with rolling stops. Perhaps they are trying to be courteous to the drivers behind them. Nonetheless, this stretch is very dangerous on foot or bike during such times. The sidewalk is behind a fence visibility barrier for most of the road. However, there is 10-20' of visibility - if they look...

I am sure the occasional cop car parked nearby would fix that.

D: there is a similar traffic pinch point for pedestrians on Northfield.
The mall on the corner of King and Northfield has a liquor store.
I'll snap a pic on the way to work today.
I have nearly been smacked there repeatedly.
That spot has traffic spilling out onto Northfield.
The sidewalk is recessed from the street about 10'. On the bright side, it didn't get buried by the snow plow this winter.
On the down side, the parking lot exit and entrance lanes have a gradual long rounded ogive shape. Cars have a habit of beginning to accelerate prior to the sidewalk.
Most drivers don't look specifically for pedestrians, being intent on oncoming traffic.
You see the problem?
I'd like to see broad parking lot exit lanes with very gradual curves banned.
I don't want cars to be able to gun their engines near the sidewalks.
I know it is nice to merge with traffic at speed, but just having the nearby stop light on Northfield turn on occasionally would take care of that.
This is rolling stop heck for pedestrians.

I always said I thought the two most lethal martial art moves were the no-blind-spot-check and the rolling-stop. Cars can be 2000 pound martial art practitioners. Ouch.

road construction - build it and you will need to keep building

I live in Waterloo. I wrote our local newspaper in response to the following.


http://news.therecord.com/article/248928
Jeff Outhit:

"September 29, 2007

JEFF OUTHIT
RECORD STAFF

The cost of a new Highway 7 between Kitchener and Guelph has soared to $300 million, and may exceed $400 million by the time it's completed.

...

The new road -- 18 kilometres long -- will cut a 100-metre swath through the countryside, north of the current two-lane highway.

It will displace five businesses and 11 homes. It will span the Grand River, bisect a wetland, and consume 144 hectares of farmland, affecting more than a dozen farms."

D: My response:

"The Record has covered plans to expand highways and parking for automobiles. Absent from the discussion is any consideration of carpool lanes. Despite studies showing that high-occupancy-vehicle (HOV) lanes carry more people faster, none of the political parties are backing this.

The phenomenon of "slugging," which has drivers picking up strangers travelling to the same destination to qualify for HOV lanes shows just how successful this idea can be.

Build new highways, and in a decade we'll just have to build more. Convert existing lanes for HOV use, and the fines will render this approach self-funding.

Instead the community's leaders wish to spend a huge amount of money -- money which supports a regressive fiscal policy being of benefit only to people who can afford cars."

http://www.nationalpost.com/news/canada/story.html?id=256918

In 1992, 68% of Canadians aged 18 and older drove everywhere, according to a new report from Statistics Canada.

By 1998, that proportion was 70%.

In 2005, the most recent year for which numbers are available, 74% of Canadians were full-time drivers.

Biking and walking rates, meanwhile, declined to 19% in 2005 from 26% in 1992...

Canadian cities are sprawling almost unchecked, he said, and the search for affordable housing has pushed many people to the outskirts where an automobile may be the only realistic transportation option."

D: Depressing, indeed. By the time such concepts as public transit and bike lanes are discussed, we can see that the battle is already half over. All the ace cards are in the hands of drivers.

D: Leading to... smog days!
http://www.cbc.ca/health/story/2005/06/14/smog-oma050714.html

"The damaging effects of breathing smog could contribute to 5,800 premature deaths in Ontario this year, the Ontario Medical Association said Tuesday."

But is it? http://news.therecord.com/article/276887

It now turns out government forecasters are wrong most of the time when they predict poor air.

Only 13 of 40 local smog days since 2006 have had poor air quality, environment records reveal. A pollution index shows there was never poor air during 27 of 40 smog days.

D: a good first step - free bus on smog days.

http://www.region.waterloo.on.ca/web/region.nsf/$All/E6677789A1F22F2785256ED8004E46D9?OpenDocument

Region offers free transit on first smog advisory day in August

Waterloo Region – In an effort to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and improve air quality, Grand River Transit (GRT) in cooperation with Region of Waterloo Public Health will provide free transit on the first smog advisory day in August.

The objective of this pilot initiative is to increase public awareness about the link between transportation choices and air quality. Motorists will be urged to leave their vehicles at home and ride transit free in an effort to encourage wise transportation choices on smog days.

“Public transit is a great defense against climate change,” said Regional Chair Ken Seiling. “A free transit initiative is just one way we are working to enhance our public transportation system and improve air quality in Waterloo Region.”

Waterloo Region often experiences extended periods of smog and poor air quality. Traveling by public transit creates 65 per cent fewer greenhouse gas emissions than traveling by car, making it a “green” transportation alternative.

D: I have air quality reports sent to my e-mail. I avoid hard cardio training during smog alerts.
http://www.airqualityontario.com/alerts/signup.cfm

D: a summary of the last decade or so of Ontario air quality alerts.
http://www.airqualityontario.com/press/smog_advisories.cfm

D: In summary, we encourage remote sprawling suburbs. Cheap vehicle fuel (relative to societal cost) encourages folks to commute from out of town to their workplace.
We may not associate these indirect health costs to motor vehicles, but suburbs are very unhealthy.

http://www.thestar.com/News/GTA/article/272582
"Toronto's inner suburbs are the urban epicentre of an obesity and diabetes epidemic that is shortening lives and threatens to overwhelm our health-care system, says a groundbreaking study to be released today."

D: whence cometh the suburban sprawl?
http://multinationalmonitor.org/mm2003/03october/october03corp1.html

Sprawl and Its Discontents
"Suburban sprawl" usually refers to development patterns with low density and a lack of mixed-use (for example, no apartments above stores), a lack of transportation options (forcing everyone to drive to work), strict separation of residential from non-residential property, and job growth in newer suburbs with job decline in older areas (both the core city and older suburbs).

Sprawl causes increased dependence on automobiles and longer average commuting times, deteriorating air quality, and rapid consumption of open space in outlying areas. It also causes disinvestment of central city infrastructure and services, and strains city budgets at the core (due to a declining tax base) and in some suburbs (because of hyper-growth at the edge).

The decentralization of jobs in manufacturing, wholesale and retail means work becomes scarce for low-skilled workers who are concentrated at the core. Since the suburbs lack affordable housing (often due to exclusionary zoning) and public transit fails to reach many suburban jobs, sprawl effectively cuts central city residents off from regional labor markets. That means greater concentrations of poverty for residents of core areas...

http://www.financialpost.com/analysis/columnists/story.html?id=b42fe4e0-eeed-4e64-a127-123d5afebe35&k=61625

A Toronto megalopolis, 150 kilometres in girth, will be born of the Ontario provincial budget announced this week. The budget's big-ticket transportation projects will drive this outcome through measures that will undermine public transit in the city while accelerating suburban sprawl in the Greater Toronto Area and beyond.

The Toronto subway system, rather than being expanded in the city's highly populated and underserved downtown areas, will instead be revamped to serve as a commuter rail line, extending to a rural highway in a regional municipality north of Toronto. The province expects as many as 100,000 extra suburban trips will be made daily on the new subsidized service, giving a big boost to suburban development.

D: our taxes and fiscal policy favour urban sprawl. Urban sprawl is unfriendly to public transit. It favours cars.

D: so there we have it. Build lotsa roads for car drivers from the suburbs, which are in turn encouraged through other monetary means.
I am NOT saying we should give up on alternative transportation, despite this heavy emphasis on long commutes and distant, low-density residential zones.
Since this blog is primarily about transportation, I will focus more exclusively on more immediate and practical concerns.

Tomorrow I will discuss road features that are bike/bus/walk friendly.

cars are not cost effective

D: if it sounds like I am anti-car, well that is probably true.
I have spent my life as a pedestrian and cyclist.
I have been nearly kneecapped so many times at crosswalks it just isn't funny.
I have been cut off with great visibility so many times cycling on the road, ditto.
I have ended up on one car hood at a crosswalk. All the time in the world, great visibility - and she guns it. I sometimes imagine that crosswalks are what the army calls a 'kill zone' - an area where one herds the foe to slaughter them, rather than a safe crossing.

Cars are not cost effective. Drivers explain to me that they pay fees for their cars and licenses, plus taxes, so they are paying their way. I hate to burst their bubble (no actually I don't).
They don't.
I need to introduce a term from economics here. The term is negative externality.
That is a negative drawback of a product/service that is not paid in the price tag.
That does not mean nobody pays it. Somebody does. Collectively, via government taxes or lost productivity to an individual, we all do.

There are 2 main costs that motor vehicles incur:
1) health costs (and related loss of productivity/disability) from accidents
2) health costs from the pollution that combustion motors produce.
The actual manufacture of the vehicle produces a significant fraction of the vehicle's overall pollution, but we will address that another day. I already have those numbers.

Anyway, let's look at the breakdown.
From the Medical Journal of Australia:
"In Australia, pedestrian injury is the leading cause of death among
1-14-year-olds.1 In 2000, 38 child pedestrians in this age
group died and about 1140 (29 per 100 000) were
hospitalised, often with lengthy stays, because of injuries sustained
when hit by a vehicle." I imagine our numbers are similar.

From http://www.davidsuzuki.org/:
"Estimates of the number of preventable premature deaths, mainly among
senior citizens, caused annually by air pollution in Canada range from
5,900 to 16,000. The most recent study by the federal government
estimated 5,900 premature deaths annually in eight major cities.

“In a country that cherishes its health care system, we offer weaker
protection from air pollution than the U.S., Australia, or the European
Union,” says David Boyd, report author and Trudeau Scholar"

D: both the old and the young suffer. Pollution is linked to asthma in kids, BTW.

http://www.americanheart.org/presenter.jhtml?identifier=4419

"A 1994 report on the adverse effects of particulate air pollution, published in the Annual Reviews of Public Health, noted a 1 percent increase in total mortality for each 10 mg/m³ increase in particulate matter. Respiratory mortality increased 3.4 percent and cardiovascular mortality increased 1.4 percent. More recent research suggests that one possible link between acute exposure to particulate matter and sudden death may be related to sudden increases in heart rate or changes in heart rate variability.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has declared that "tens of thousands of people die each year from breathing tiny particles in the environment.""

http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/injury-bles/ebuic-febnc/index-eng.php

"In 1995 preventable injuries cost Canadians $8.7 billion or $300 for every citizen. Falls accounted for $3.6 billion or more than 40 per cent of the total amount. Motor vehicle crashes cost almost $1.7 billion or 20 per cent of the $8.7 billion."

"

Preventing motor vehicle crashes

Wearing seat belts and installing air bags can reduce motor vehicle injuries by 61 per cent. Drinking and driving is responsible for about 40 per cent of all fatal motor vehicle crashes. It is estimated that mortality can be reduced by 20 per cent through a reduction in drunk driving. Reducing speed limits by 10 km an hour could lead to a 15 per cent decrease in mortality, with the number of deaths lowered and severity of injury reduced.

With a 10 per cent reduction in crashes caused by poor road design and maintenance, and based on the assumption that 20 per cent of those injured end up in hospital, there would be 1,100 fewer deaths each year. By implementing a prevention strategy based on buckling up, driving sober, slowing down and looking first on the roads, there would also be 2,800 fewer hospitalizations, 19,000 fewer injuries treated outside a hospital setting and over 750 fewer injuries leading to permanent disability. The net savings to Canadians amount to over $500 million annually."

http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/ewh-semt/air/out-ext/effe/health_effects-effets_sante_e.html
"A recent study examined the economic value of reducing the health effects of air pollution by introducing cleaner vehicles and fuels in Canada. This study found that the economic value of avoiding these health effects was $24 billion over a period of 24 years, compared to a cost of $6 billion to implement the program. This methodology has been used by Health Canada and Environment Canada in a number of initiatives to examine the benefits of control measures..."

http://www.tc.gc.ca/roadsafety/stats/overview/2004/menu.htm
"

There were 2,778 deaths due to motor vehicle traffic collisions in the year 2001 - a rate of 8.9 deaths per 100,000 population.^1,2 In 2000-2001 there were 24,403 hospital admissions for traffic-related injuries, corresponding to a rate of 79 hospitalizations per 100,000 population.³ Many victims are young and traffic collisions are a leading cause of premature death and long term disability.

Since Canada has one of the highest per capita vehicle ownership rates in the world, it is not surprising that vehicle occupants account for approximately three quarters of all road users killed and seriously injured each year. The remaining victims are vulnerable road users: pedestrians, motorcyclists and bicyclists.¹ When health care costs, property losses and other factors are considered, the economic cost of traffic collisions to Canadians is as high as $25 billion annually."

D: pretty staggering, huh?

Note there are 2 separate themes here. One is the heavy use of motor vehicles, the other is the pollution they emit from their combustion engines.

Of course, plugging a hybrid into a wall for electricity still produces combustion if that power source is a coal plant!

I have not even touched upon wear and tear of road infrastructure from use.

A gallon of gasoline produces of 20 pounds of CO2. I produce 1 pound by living a day, and maybe 2 if I bike hard that day.
I produce what pollution the food required to be made. Since modern agriculture can be called the science of turning oil and land into food, this is quite a lot still.
For example, a typical North American diet requires as much petroleum to produce as a typical commuter car uses in a year.
However, if I consume a bit more food per day cycling, these equations still greatly favour me.

In summary, society foots the majority of the bill that vehicle drivers incur.
If these costs were factored into gasoline prices at the pump, imagine how much it would be!
Please note that owning a car that is left in the garage does not emit combustion pollutants. Such a car still made pollution simply by being made, though.

In case you didn't guess, I am all for making vehicle drivers pay the actual cost to society of operating their motor vehicles.
Cars are not cost effective.

how walking, biking and taking the bus are linked

We had record snowfall this winter.

The Record online is a treasure trove of local sentiment on this subject!
" Kitchener is the centre of the snow controversy, presumably because the city recently boosted fines for property owners who don't clear snow off their sidewalks within 24 hours of a snowfall. The fine now for a snow-covered sidewalk on a regular lot is $300. It increases to $500 for wider properties or corner lots."

D: Folks that use the bus then use the sidewalk. Uptown Waterloo, for a whole week, I got on and off the bus on a huge heap of compacted slick snow. If I was old or decrepit, I would have feared for my safety. I had an older gentleman beg me to delay the driver so he could wade through the uncleared snow to another bus. I heard many stories like that.
Taking a bus is not viable unless the mount/dismount areas, and nearby sidewalks are all clear.
Some mount/dismount areas lacked concrete to step out onto. Many were cleared only sporadically. A bus service without a related snow removal service is a problem.
Even on King Street/Waterloo, there were long periods this winter when they were nearly impassable in spots.

Everybody wins from good service from the bus system, from cleared and available sidewalks, from bike lanes. Including car drivers! Think about it. The more sidewalks and bike lanes, the more people bike or walk or take the bus. This means less drivers, less cars, less traffic- and less traffic congestion. The remaining drivers get to work easier and faster.

The industrial section of Waterloo I work in has no sidewalks. I walk on the road with heavy transport trucks. When nearby factories are getting out, the rolling stops are dangerous too.
I am curious why this stretch of low-wage factories assumes everybody will drive.
We all cut down the nearby hill rather than walking 2 extra blocks for Kumpf Drive.
I am curious why steps could not be put in near the overpass.

This is not restricted to industrial sectors. Regina, with poles in the middle of sidewalks, are of no use to parents with baby strollers. My friend J was honked at for walking on the street with her toddler- but she had no choice.
Clearing sidewalks entails more than a narrow path, with one foot placed in front of the other.

Uptown Waterloo wishes to attract customers. Well, folks with strollers and who have fragile bones and bad balance will stay home if they feel getting there will involve an obstacle course!

Not supporting bike and bus and sidewalks means more traffic. Everybody loses.
With good city planning, everybody wins.
D.

Tomorrow I will review the actual cost of car pollution to society,once the negative externalities of accident costs and pollution health costs are factored in. The answer might surprise you!