Although Greeley, Colorado and San Angelo, Texas are about the same size and have about the same demographics, there's a world of difference between the bike and pedestrian infrastructure in the two communities.
I'm very familiar with both Greeley and San Angelo, having lived here until 1982, then in Greeley through 2000 and back here for the past 15 years.
Through 1982, both Greeley and San Angelo had exactly the same bike-pedestrian infrastructure - almost nothing. Since that time, Greeley has developed an impressive and expanding network of bike-pedestrian lanes and paths while San Angelo lags far behind with very little non-motorized transportation infrastructure.
The two cities have very similar demographics. San Angelo's population is approximately 97,000 with 56% between the ages of 18 and 65, 14% over the age of 65 and a median household income of $42,385.
I'm very familiar with both Greeley and San Angelo, having lived here until 1982, then in Greeley through 2000 and back here for the past 15 years.
Through 1982, both Greeley and San Angelo had exactly the same bike-pedestrian infrastructure - almost nothing. Since that time, Greeley has developed an impressive and expanding network of bike-pedestrian lanes and paths while San Angelo lags far behind with very little non-motorized transportation infrastructure.
The two cities have very similar demographics. San Angelo's population is approximately 97,000 with 56% between the ages of 18 and 65, 14% over the age of 65 and a median household income of $42,385.
The data are similar for Greeley with a population of just under 97,000, 66% of the
population between the ages of 18 and 65, 11 % over the age of 65 and a median
household income of $46,272. Both cities also have very similar ethnic
distributions. 
There are more similarities - both cities have
bike-pedestrian plans, they are both located in an area surrounded by flat-to
rolling agricultural land, neither city is located on an interstate highway,
rivers run through both communities, and both Greeley and San Angelo are home
to a junior college and a university.
In two important areas, however, these communities are vastly different. While San Angelo has an estimated obesity rate of about 30%, Greeley comes in almost 10 points lower at 20.5%. That obesity rate difference can arguably be attributed at least partially to Greeley's philosophy regarding bike-pedestrian infrastructure vs. what exists in San Angelo.
San Angelo's Bike-Pedestrian Plan as initially developed back in the mid 2000s, but there has been very little significant implementation of the plan. Other than a few sidewalks near schools or around parks and an update of the area along the downtown River Trail, the amount of (and quality of) non-motorized transportation and recreation infrastructure our community hasn't changed much since 1982.
Our city officials would argue that the 3.9 million dollar Red Arroyo Trail currently being constructed will provide four miles of wide concrete multi-use paths, but even when that project is completed our oasis in the desert will have very little 'real' bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure such as off-street bike paths throughout the city, sidewalks and marked bike lanes on streets.
In contrast, Greeley has an extensive network of paved off-street bike and pedestrian trails include 21 miles of paved trails that parallel the Poudre River and connect to similar trails in neighboring cities, 6 miles of paved trails through the Sheep Draw area and 85 miles of marked on-street bike lanes.
These trail and bike lanes meander through
subdivisions and connect many key locations such as schools and businesses, and
bike routes throughout the community are marked with both signs and on-street
marking making it possible to easily find a route for commuting or exercising.
Wesley Hood, a traffic engineer with the City of Greeley, says many major streets in that city have been developed to conform with 'Complete Street' design criteria that allows for safe travel by those walking, bicycling, driving automobiles, riding public transportation, or delivering goods.
"The trend in our area is for more non-motorized forms of transportation", says Hood. "In Greeley, this includes both wide sidewalks and marked on-street bike lanes along many major arterials enabling residents to safely make their way across the city on a bike or by foot."
Hood also notes that the city has seen a significant reduction in accidents involving cyclists or pedestrians on the streets that have been redesigned to serve cyclists and pedestrians in addition to serving motor vehicles.
So, why the difference? What prompted Greeley to develop a great network of bike-pedestrian infrastructure while San Angelo continues to simply update a plan that's been on the shelf for years?
The best answer to that question may lie with the respective goals of each city's Bike-Pedestrian plans and more importantly, Greeley's philosophy of serving local residents' needs instead of focusing more on infrastructure to attract out-of-town visitors.
Although San Angelo's Bike-Pedestrian plan (sanangelompo.org/plans.php) uses terms such as "improving bicycle access, mobility and safety, improving pedestrian access, mobility and safety and enhancing San Angelo for tourism, economic development, and as a healthy place to live", the real focus on infrastructure upgrades in San Angelo appears to be focused on the 'tourism and economic development' aspects of the plan.
In two important areas, however, these communities are vastly different. While San Angelo has an estimated obesity rate of about 30%, Greeley comes in almost 10 points lower at 20.5%. That obesity rate difference can arguably be attributed at least partially to Greeley's philosophy regarding bike-pedestrian infrastructure vs. what exists in San Angelo.
San Angelo's Bike-Pedestrian Plan as initially developed back in the mid 2000s, but there has been very little significant implementation of the plan. Other than a few sidewalks near schools or around parks and an update of the area along the downtown River Trail, the amount of (and quality of) non-motorized transportation and recreation infrastructure our community hasn't changed much since 1982.
Our city officials would argue that the 3.9 million dollar Red Arroyo Trail currently being constructed will provide four miles of wide concrete multi-use paths, but even when that project is completed our oasis in the desert will have very little 'real' bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure such as off-street bike paths throughout the city, sidewalks and marked bike lanes on streets.
In contrast, Greeley has an extensive network of paved off-street bike and pedestrian trails include 21 miles of paved trails that parallel the Poudre River and connect to similar trails in neighboring cities, 6 miles of paved trails through the Sheep Draw area and 85 miles of marked on-street bike lanes.
These trail and bike lanes meander through
subdivisions and connect many key locations such as schools and businesses, and
bike routes throughout the community are marked with both signs and on-street
marking making it possible to easily find a route for commuting or exercising.Wesley Hood, a traffic engineer with the City of Greeley, says many major streets in that city have been developed to conform with 'Complete Street' design criteria that allows for safe travel by those walking, bicycling, driving automobiles, riding public transportation, or delivering goods.
"The trend in our area is for more non-motorized forms of transportation", says Hood. "In Greeley, this includes both wide sidewalks and marked on-street bike lanes along many major arterials enabling residents to safely make their way across the city on a bike or by foot."
Hood also notes that the city has seen a significant reduction in accidents involving cyclists or pedestrians on the streets that have been redesigned to serve cyclists and pedestrians in addition to serving motor vehicles.
So, why the difference? What prompted Greeley to develop a great network of bike-pedestrian infrastructure while San Angelo continues to simply update a plan that's been on the shelf for years?
The best answer to that question may lie with the respective goals of each city's Bike-Pedestrian plans and more importantly, Greeley's philosophy of serving local residents' needs instead of focusing more on infrastructure to attract out-of-town visitors.
Although San Angelo's Bike-Pedestrian plan (sanangelompo.org/plans.php) uses terms such as "improving bicycle access, mobility and safety, improving pedestrian access, mobility and safety and enhancing San Angelo for tourism, economic development, and as a healthy place to live", the real focus on infrastructure upgrades in San Angelo appears to be focused on the 'tourism and economic development' aspects of the plan.
In contrast, Greeley's plan (greeleygov.com/activities/greeley-bikes)
is based on a philosophy that focuses on their residents. Their plan states "Build
a safe and efficient bicycling network and support facilities that serves the
needs of all types of bicyclists, connecting residential Greeley to the
University, recreational trails, downtown, retail centers, and local services,
promote bicycling as a healthy and inexpensive transportation alternative, and
establish a city division under public works to maintain and expand the city
bicycle program." It should also be noted that almost all of their
'bicycling network and support facilities' also serve runners and walkers.
A recent report titled 'Building Bike-Friendly Communities Is Good for Economies' http://tinyurl.com/oa6arkt) notes the important of having infrastructure that supports healthy lifestyles: "Cities whose residents ride, run, walk, and participate in other activities have increased economic growth and productivity compared to areas with more sedentary citizens. These bike-friendly communities also have higher levels of mental health and wellbeing."
I hope San Angelo's city leaders will read that report and I also encourage then to take a summer vacation to Greeley to examine what that community has accomplished.
