was successfully added to your cart.
News

Survey Interpretation

By January 22, 2020 No Comments

Towards the end of 2019, C4C issued a survey.  In combination with board deliberation and other factors, the survey contributed to the decision making process of where and how to direct C4C’s 2020 programs and work.

In terms of concrete items, the below is a summary of C4C’s 2020 jobs.  With the exception of item number one, these are in no particular order.  Number one, however, is C4C’s primary goal.

  1. Obtaining funding to commission a feasibility study for a Boulder – Lyons “bikeway.”
  2. Examining the application of the balance of funds remaining from C4C’s Boulder County – Regional Air Quality Control (RAQC) grant.
  3. Continue to collaborate with the County on the deployment of the variable message board from April to November.
  4. General advocacy for bicycling infrastructure, usually with Boulder County and the City.  C4C could improve its relationship with CDOT.
  5. Supporting good legislation for bicycling like State Bills 20-061 and 20-065.
  6. Supporting C4C’s victim outreach volunteer who offers general or simply moral support to bicyclists injured in crashes with autos.
  7. Paying for the seasonal porta-potty in Jamestown again.
  8. Partnering with the bicycling industry to better represent the breadth of the community.
  9. Combining #itcouldbeme with C4C’s communications and operations.
  10. Advocating for bicycling funding in the probable 2020 County sales tax issue but doing so on a reasonable and targeted basis related, ultimately, to funding completion of bicycling infrastructure.

More subjectively, there were lots of comments in the open ended comment sections of the survey.  Below are responses to notable comments.  These also are in no particular order.

  • Regarding the signage project idea, “C4C should work with county to commission a more comprehensive approach of creating an inventory of signage along all corridors with high cycling traffic. Use best practices and overall goal of improving signage on all high traffic/dangerous areas.”  This comment sums up the intention of the idea.  But, quantitatively the idea got a middling response.  Thus, this idea went to a secondary priority.
  • Regarding reaching out to bike shops and local industry, this was well supported quantitatively and qualitatively with two notes.  One, focus should be on safety.  The board of C4C agrees and it’s stated clearly in C4C’s mission.  This is a fundamental concept on which there is agreement internally and externally.  For example, the County reports getting comments from drivers seeking better bicycling infrastructure because the drivers are ‘scared’ to operate their vehicles in proximity to bicyclists.  Two, that C4C tends to have relatively wealthy donors and is not diverse enough.  The C4C board agrees.  Alternatively, C4C is doing the best it can, with what it’s got, where it is, and for the time being.
  • Paper Brochures.  There are pluses and minuses so C4C is going ahead with this on a measured basis.
  • Communicating dangerous areas to transportation departments.  It’s surprising how much C4C does this on a constant basis.  Alternatively, it’s surprising how little good it does in the context of public policy and infrastructure which is more than a little difficult to affect let alone change.  Like so many things in life, if one wants this to change, one has to invest (money) in it.  Conversely, this is related to C4C’s focus on the Boulder – Lyons bikeway concept.  The bikeway has a systemic benefits for safety and other principles.
  • Injured Cyclist Support.  C4C’s board and staff oversee and support (we’re working to better support) one volunteer who themselves was struck by an auto to support bicyclists injured in a crash.  This has to be done through official channels that protect patient privacy.  It’s been particularly impressive to hear from victims that the gesture itself, some connection to the community, and evidence of care and concern mattered to them during their experience.
  • Digitizing Bicycle Friendly Driver / Driver Friendly Bicyclist Content.  Bicycle Colorado has taken the lead on this.  None the less, C4C is looking at ways to contribute funding to the project.  The utility aspect of this concept is substantial.  Without exaggerating, it could pilot the ability to scale content to reach millions and adapt content to a wide variety of applications from diversion classes, to commercial drivers, to insurance company applications, to license refresher courses, and so on.  C4C and Bicycle Colorado are aligned on this.
  • A C4C Ride Event.  These responses seemed bifurcated between ‘sounds fun’ and ‘I’m warning you that is more work than you want to take on and I know that from significant experience.’  There’s no large scale imminent action on this item.  Alternatively, Wednesday Night Velo / Sprints for Safer Cycling is new and coming in February.
  • Support for A Hands Free Device Bill.  This was heavily supported in the survey.  Some comments went so far as to support even more restrictive laws and those comments were reasonable in tone and objective in support.  This year’s bill is the fourth time such a bill has been introduced.  C4C has thrown its support behind Bicycle Colorado which has a far more sophisticated and stronger legislative lobbying apparatus.  It’s worth noting that Senator Mike Foote introduced this bill last time and we’re lucky to have Senator Foote.  He is a reasonable, thoughtful, persistent, and firm but gentle lawmaker who listens attentively.
  • C4C Should Adopt A Section of Road.  Supported in the survey but passively, this idea went to a secondary or tertiary level of priority.
  • Getting Bicycle Friendly Driver Content into Driving Schools.  Thumbs up on this one and it’s on the to-do list.
  • Funding for An Extra Duty Officer in Boulder County.  Currently neither the State Patrol nor the Boulder County Sheriff really has a budget for enforcement in Boulder County.  Survey responses indicated an array of opinions perhaps summed up as mild confusion on the subject.  There is data to support that enforcement makes a positive difference.  None the less, quantitatively this idea was relatively low so it’s going lower on C4C’s to-do list.  Briefly, imagine rolling through Nelson Road at 63rd and 65th and seeing a State Trooper or Sheriff’s Deputy a couple times a week.  It seems like after seeing an officer for a week or two, folks would start paying more attention.
  • Seeking Funding for A Feasibility Study for A Bikeway between Boulder And Lyons.  This is C4C’s main operational and funding focus for 2020.  It’s a long term goal that, hopefully, is part of a longer process to realize not just such a facility but more systemic engineering and policy favorable to bicycling.  Regarding a comment about a bike facility between Boulder and Golden, C4C has been told that Jefferson County is working on this.  Regarding including Longmont, the 119 project has a bike facility in the design and C4C is advocating for funding for its construction via 2020 County sales tax renewal.  CDOT is also planning work on 66 between Longmont and Lyons but there’s only a limited bike facility in the plan and C4C’s conversation with some of the planners was not encouraging.  Regarding use by mountain bikers, one of the key segments will intersect with City OSMP and servicing recreational access to open spaces like Joder Ranch is critical to satisfying strict OSMP requirements.  Regarding the once failed feeder canal path concept, C4C sees it as it appears in the County Transportation Master Plan as a great companion recreational corridor whereas the Boulder – Lyons bikeway would be more for commuting, road bicyclists, or mountain bike access.
  • Support for Better Funding for The Boulder County Transportation Master Plan.  C4C would love to see the TMP better funded in general.  We’re just beginning conversations about which specific projects we’d like included in a 2020 sales tax renewal.  In those conversations we’re careful to point out the collective value of our proposed projects so that they serve the public that funds the work.  By the way, here’s an interesting opinion stated in the comment section for this item, “We are already taxed enough and concepts like Complete Streets and Vision Zero are flawed ideals that violate sound traffic engineering principles that actually make streets more dangerous to cyclists.”

General Comments

  • “Cyclists who do not heed traffic rules should be ticketed and required to take instruction on how to ride safely in traffic” or “C4C should put thought/effort into means of discouraging bad behavior by those cyclists who give us all a reputation we do not want. There is enough hostility without further provoking drivers.”  C4C supports the driver friendly bicyclist half of BFD/DFB education.
  • “Love the portable signage on highway 36. Maybe one could go in town in busy areas like Folsom for commuters. ”  That location is in the City and C4C works mostly with the County.  Community Cycles does great work in the City.  Plus, the City has an admittedly incremental but substantially scaled Vision Zero effort that is ongoing.
  • “Expand partnerships and communication with other advocacy nonprofits like Community Cycles and Bicycle Longmont.”  C4C has a good relationship with Community Cycles.  Bicycle Longmont does not seem to fully exist.  C4C tried contacting them and got no response.
  • “Keep up the good work! I would love to get some reporting on the success of the things that have been done the past few years. For example, what impacts have come from the moveable traffic signs?”  Good question.  Even the County admits, measuring the effects of the variable message board is hard if not impossible.  In an age of data, the limitations of measuring remain.  Here’s a summary of what C4C has done, here and here.  Much of C4C’s work corresponds to the great work the County does in terms of crash data.  That same data has informed C4C’s focus on a Boulder – Lyons bikeway.
  • “Need lower speed limit on Boulder County Roads. 50 mph on a road with a narrow shoulder is dangerous/deadly.”  Agreed.  AASHTO standards objectively prove the observation.  The problem is that reducing speed limits overnight is not going to happen.  Consequently, C4C returns to its long-term, systemic goals and work.

Thanks for taking C4C’s survey.  Now, C4C is off to work for 2020.

Matt Muir, C4C Operations Manager

matt@c4community.org