Red Deer's expressway won't arrive by express

I share some of city councillor Paul Harris's skepticism about the proposed 20^th Avenue expressway. Although experience in both Edmonton and Calgary shows that a ring road on the edge of the city does indeed improve traffic movement, I just don't see Red Deer ever needing a six-lane route.

Experience also shows that whenever a major project such as this is undertaken, it's far cheaper when the land for the route has been set aside in advance. Witness the upheaval and astounding land acquisition costs for any city trying to retro-fit LRT routes into existing neighbourhoods.

But as a person descending the slope into curmudgeonhood, my vision doesn't extend to a Red Deer of 300,000 by 2040, at which time current planning models suggest a six-lane fast corridor around the city would be a good idea.

(Just the same, and as an aside, if Red Deer ever does reach a population of a quarter-million-plus, then would it be OK to spend tax money on a covered 50-metre swimming pool?)

On balance, though, my vote is to trust the council majority and plan for the need, and to have capacity to build infrastructure if and when need arises.

Even if we do not ever need a full six-lane expressway, we'll find that green space is never a waste. We'll have one of the most pleasant, four-lane ring roads (with anoff-road cycle route, of course, complete with its own on and off-ramps) in the province.

Here's a factor that both Harris and I might wonder if planners considered: the driving habits of our aging population by 2040.

In the United States, where such stats are kept, the total miles being driven have been dropping. Adjusting for population growth, through both recession and recovery, the distance people travel each year by car has been steadily declining. The trend has held for seven years now.

There could be any number of explanations for this, and they all relate to Canada.

Adjusted for inflation, new cars have never been cheaper, but the ability of the much-punished middle class to afford one has steadily dropped. And the costs of operation — gasoline, insurance and repairs — have risen greatly.

As well, the pace of urbanization has grown. Small towns well outside city commuter range are struggling, as the migration to much more efficient large cities continues.

Large cities provide transportation alternatives that make personal driving less desirable and less needed, so people drive less.

Also, as baby boomers retire on fixed incomes, more cars will just spend more time in the garage, and less time on the streets. From my own experience, if you don't need to drive to work every day, you don't need to drive that much at all — particularly if you live in a neighbourhood where most other errands can be easily achieved by walking or cycling.

I believe a combination of all these factors will mitigate against Red Deer needing a six-lane expressway. But I've been wrong about other things, so I'm glad city council is planning now, to avoid much more expensive solutions in the event we ever do such an expressway.

Speaking of the future and of transportation, I was drawn to the May edition of the Alberta Motor Association's member magazine, Westworld.

This edition contains an article on urban cycling, and definitions of the various types of bike lanes, plus safety instructions for both drivers and cyclists on all forms.

What caught my eye was a report on their annual member survey. The AMA has thousands of members, and can provide a representative insight on personal transportation and travel habits of Alberta drivers.

Here's what they found about urban cycling:

• 57 per cent of respondents (car drivers) also own bikes;

• 41 per cent self-describe as active cyclists;

• 55 per cent (and higher among younger Albertans) say they want to use their bikes more as regular transportation, rather than simply for recreation or physical exercise;

• 37 per cent say they feel safe sharing the streets as cyclists, while 59 per cent say they feel safe sharing the streets as drivers.

My reading of this says bike commuters are not the tiny minority some people say they are. These numbers also say cyclists could be a major part of the plurality of commuters, if safety issues could be addressed. (Cyclists are up to 14 times more likely to be seriously hurt or killed in a collision, compared to car occupants.)

If we're driving less and cycling more in both the present and the future, it makes sense to plan — and spend money — to make it safe. It's a lot cheaper than building expressways.

Follow Greg Neiman's blog at readersadvocate.blogspot.ca