Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I definitely believe you, it still defies my belief that there is such a thing as schools banning their students from biking to school.
Hi nei--
I just now jumped into this conversation, but... what?
I'd be shocked and appalled to hear of a school that didn't want its' kids to bike to school. After all the talk about trying to get kids healthier, eating better, and getting into better shape I can hardly imagine a better way to get kids exercising than to burn 200 calories each way to and from school.
I'm part of a group that rides monthly in packs of 400-800 and it has illicited similar responses from onlookers. The onlooker reaction breakdown is something like this: 90% thrilled, 5% angry, 5% concerned.
Taking the other side (slightly) for a bit, I can understand why some get annoyed at large rides. It also turns the mantra "share the road" into "hog the road". But a pack of 400 is more like a parade than a regular riding group.
Taking the other side (slightly) for a bit, I can understand why some get annoyed at large rides. It also turns the mantra "share the road" into "hog the road". But a pack of 400 is more like a parade than a regular riding group.
Indeed it is, and that's the distinction. We are very mindful to minimize any traffic delay and often have police support (who are sent the route in advance).
How much of this can be attributed to school consolidation? Fewer schools mean kids are going to have to travel farther to their schools, especially high school students. Some of those kids are going to be bused.
My son's high school was a 20 drive from home. He should walk this??
In most cases traveling to school by car or bus is much more convenient (i.e. faster) than walking, and in many cases the neighborhoods close to the schools have "low walkability". Add in the fearmongering about crime and kidnapping, and you have a recipe for that 12% figure.
Although, I would also cite the lack of a real bicycling infrastructure in most of the U.S. and Canada as a reason for the high car/bus ridership rates. Walking is impractical in suburbia, but biking 3 miles to a school wouldn't be that difficult. Quite a few suburbanites fall into that category. The problem is that the infrastructure isn't bicycle-friendly. A real bicycling infrastructure would entail a dense network of bicycle paths that take straightforward routes and are segregated from the high-traffic high-speed arterial roads. Many American cities are painting bicycle lanes on otherwise hostile roads, and that doesn't really cut it. So, the bottom line is that even most suburbanites could use a bicycle to get to school if the infrastructure was in place.
It should also be noted that it's not as if the typical road is heavenly for car drivers. Too often the roads aren't wide enough to accommodate all the traffic (leading to congestion), people have to sit still at traffic lights for what seems like an eternity, and too often speed limits are set at mediocre levels such as 45 mph, often for such reasons as pedestrian safety*, and too often there are 20 mph school zones with no pedestrians in them. So, the roads are very hostile to pedestrians, but at the same time car drivers are frustrated. If the roads were really car-friendly, all the arterial roads would be four-lane limited-access roads with 70 mph speed limits. At least then cars could flow comfortably, and pedestrians could be accommodated by separate infrastructure (an ideal system IMO).
*Yeah right. In my experience as a pedestrian, once the traffic flow passed 30 mph it was pretty much all the same in terms of hostility and safety (like, really hostile). 45 mph traffic might as well be flowing at 80 mph as far as pedestrians are concerned. A dedicated bridge or underpass intimidates me a whole lot less than crossing 4 or 6 lanes of traffic, even if that traffic is flowing at slow speeds.
Almost all suburbs in Canada have sidewalks though. While adults aren't suppose to ride their bikes on sidewalks, kids can. Streets without sidewalks are almost always very very low traffic side streets like culs de sacs.
I think most kids in Canada live less than 1 mile from a public elementary school in the suburbs, maybe around 0.5 miles on average, and the distance to Catholic schools and high schools would be maybe around double. That means most kids should live within walking distance. There are some cases where they might have to cross arterial roads, but I think that's prety rare, I would estimate something like 30-60% of kids live within a 20 minute walk of school where the walk doesn't involve crossing an arterial. Yet only 12% walk...
A real bicycling infrastructure would entail a dense network of bicycle paths that take straightforward routes and are segregated from the high-traffic high-speed arterial roads.
A full grade-separated network of bicycle paths isn't going to happen; it just isn't practical. Even the European nations known for bicycling (Netherlands, Denmark) don't have that.
Its sad the way communities are built around the car now.
In 50 years car culture will seem completely foreign and people will wonder what the hell were we thinking
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
